Rigid properties of generalized $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics

Fanqi Zeng

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 32 references

Rigid properties of generalized $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Compact generalized τ-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics satisfying any of four curvature conditions are forced to be harmonic-Einstein.

desk verdict A competent quasi-Einstein rigidity extension to the Ricci-harmonic setting, with a genuine proof gap in Theorem 1.2 that a serious referee should catch. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.00691 v1 pith:3UDZP3DL submitted 2019-08-02 math.DG

Fanqi Zeng This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.DG MSC 53C2153C25

keywords generalizedτ-quasiRicci-harmonicmetricharmonic-Einsteinrigidpropertygaptheoremτ-Bakry-EmeryRiccitensorquasiscalarcurvatureflow

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper studies compact solutions of the generalized $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic system, a coupled system on a manifold with a map and a potential function that generalizes Einstein metrics and arises from the Ricci-harmonic flow. The author's aim is to prove rigidity: under a sign condition on one weighted integral, under a range condition on the parameter $\rho$, or under a small curvature-gap condition, the system forces the potential to be constant and the map to be harmonic, i.e. the solution is harmonic-Einstein. Four theorems give such criteria, with the sharpest gap statement saying that a compact $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metric with constant $\lambda>0$ is harmonic-Einstein exactly when a weighted $L^2$ norm of $\nabla f$ attains its theoretical lower bound. The value of the result is that it gives checkable conditions under which the only compact solutions of a broad coupled system are the trivial harmonic-Einstein ones.

What carries the argument

The proof is carried by the self-adjoint weighted Laplacian $\Delta_{\tau,f} = \Delta - \frac{1}{\tau}\langle \nabla f, \nabla \cdot\rangle$ and by the identities it induces. Lemma 2.1 gives $\Delta_{\tau,f} f = m\lambda - R_\varphi$ together with Bochner-type formulas for $\nabla R_\varphi$ and $\Delta R_\varphi$; Lemma 3.1 converts the non-positivity of $\int \langle\nabla R_\varphi,\nabla f\rangle e^{-f/\tau}dv$ into the vanishing of $\mathrm{Ric}_\varphi - R_\varphi g/m$ and of $\tau_g\varphi$. For the gap theorems, the key identity is Lemma 2.4: $R_\varphi + \frac{\tau-1}{\tau}|\nabla f|^2 - (m-\tau)\lambda = \varrho e^{2f/\tau}$, which implies the pointwise comparison $\frac{\tau-1}{\tau}|\nabla f|^2 \le (R_\varphi)_{\max} - R_\varphi$. Combining this comparison with the integrated Bochner formula produces the gap inequality and, under a small pointwise curvature gap, the integral bound that contradicts the hypothesis of Theorem 1.4.

What would settle it

Test inequality (5.6) on a compact $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metric with non-constant $f$, $\lambda>0$, and $\tau>1$: it is an explicit comparison of two weighted integrals, so a single metric that satisfies $R_\varphi\ge m(m-1)\lambda/(m+\tau-1)$ and $\frac{\tau-1}{\tau}|\nabla f|^2\le (R_\varphi)_{\max}-R_\varphi$ yet violates the integral comparison would invalidate the gap theorem. A cleaner test is to search numerically for a compact non-harmonic-Einstein solution with $(R_\varphi)_{\max}-m\lambda$ no larger than the right-hand side of (1.8); Theorem 1.3 would then be false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that harmonic-Einstein metrics are the only compact solutions in several natural parameter regimes of the generalized $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic equations. For $m\ge 3$, if $\int_M \langle \nabla R_\varphi, \nabla f \rangle e^{-f/\tau} dv \le 0$, then the trace-free part of $\mathrm{Ric}_\varphi$ and the tension field $\tau_g\varphi$ both vanish, so the metric is harmonic-Einstein. For the $(\tau,\rho)$-special case, Theorem 1.2 delimits the range of $\rho$: $\rho\ge 1/m$ forces harmonic-Einstein, and $\rho=1/(2(m-1))$ with $\tau\ge1$ does as well, while the intermediate range leaves at most one alternative bound on $R_\varphi$. For the $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic case with constant $\lambda$, Theorem 1.3 establishes the gap inequality $(R_\varphi)_{\max} - m\lambda \le (\tau-1)\bigl(\frac{2}{m(m+\tau-1)}+\frac{1}{\tau}\bigr)\frac{1}{V_{\tau,f}}\int |\nabla f|^2 e^{-f/\tau} dv$, with equality forcing harmonic-Einstein, and Theorem 1.4 gives a pointwise lower-bound version under the technical restriction $\tau>64m$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise for the sharp gap theorem is that the comparison (5.6), quoted as following from the lower bound on $R_\varphi$ and the pointwise $|\nabla f|^2$ bound, is correct; if that estimate is wrong, Theorem 1.3 has no support.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For any compact generalized $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metric with $m\ge3$, the sign condition $\int_M \langle\nabla R_\varphi,\nabla f\rangle e^{-f/\tau}dv\le0$ is enough to conclude that the potential is constant and the map is harmonic.
In the $(\tau,\rho)$ family, the parameter range $\rho\ge1/m$ or $\rho=1/(2(m-1))$ with $\tau\ge1$ leaves no room for non-trivial compact solutions; the only possible non-trivial solutions live in two complementary bands with explicit alternative bounds on $R_\varphi$.
For compact $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics with constant $\lambda>0$ and $\tau>1$, the gap between $(R_\varphi)_{\max}$ and $m\lambda$ is controlled by the weighted $L^2$ norm of $\nabla f$; a metric with non-constant $f$ must have a gap strictly above that bound.
A pointwise lower bound $\mathrm{Ric}_\varphi\ge(1-\delta)\lambda g$ with $\delta$ smaller than the ratio of the weighted $L^2$ norm of $\nabla f$ to $3m\tau\lambda V_{\tau,f}$ forces harmonic-Einstein when $\tau>64m$.
The if-and-only-if form of the gap inequality gives a certificate: a compact solution is harmonic-Einstein exactly when the left and right sides of the inequality agree.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The threshold $\tau>64m$ in Theorem 1.4 looks like a technical artifact of the diameter and arctangent estimates; a sharper version of Lemma 5.2 might lower it, and one can numerically probe model warped-product examples to see how far it can be relaxed.
The method suggests that the sign condition in Theorem 1.1 could be replaced by a pointwise lower bound on $\mathrm{Ric}_\varphi$ of the type used in Theorem 1.4, producing additional rigidity results with more geometric hypotheses.
Because the central identity (2.24) holds whenever $\lambda$ is constant, the same gap mechanism should apply to almost Ricci-harmonic solitons with $\lambda=\lambda(x)$ satisfying a monotonicity condition, a direction the paper only notes in passing.
One can test sharpness of the Theorem 1.3 gap by building a non-trivial compact solution and checking whether equality in the pointwise bound (5.3) occurs at a single point; the proof predicts that equality at two points forces $f$ to be constant.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear colleague,

Short version: this paper is a competent extension of quasi-Einstein rigidity to the coupled Ricci-harmonic setting, and most of the geometry is sound. The real problem is the proof of Theorem 1.2, where the branch logic is off. The theorem statements may be true, but the written argument does not establish them.

What is new: the coupled system with a map phi and the tension-field equation is a genuine generalization of the quasi-Einstein results. Theorem 1.1's integral condition is clean, and the integral formula in Lemma 3.1 is derived from first principles. There is no circularity: the only external imports are standard identities and Wang's lower bound from [26], which are cited bounds, not outputs of this paper.

The soft spots, in order of severity:

First, Theorem 1.2(2) and (3) contain a real branch error. In part (2), for mu <= 0, equation (4.5) gives an upper bound on (R_phi)_max that is exactly the stated alternative. The nonconstancy of R_phi gives (R_phi)_max > m mu / (1 - m rho), which is compatible with that interval when mu < 0. The proof needs a case split, not a contradiction. Part (4) is worse: saying it follows from (2) and (3) does not hold, because those alternatives are conditioned on opposite signs of mu. A referee should ask the author to fill this in.

Second, Lemma 3.1 and Theorem 1.1 cancel a factor (tau - 1)/tau. The statement allows tau > 0; for tau = 1 the derivation collapses. Either add tau > 1 or give a separate argument. This is minor if tau > 1 was intended, but as written it is a gap.

Third, the reader flagged inequality (5.6). I checked it directly: expanding the difference between the two sides and using the lower bound on R_phi together with (5.3) gives a nonnegative remainder, so the estimate is valid. But the paper does not show the algebra. That is a presentation issue, not a fatal one.

Who this is for: people working on quasi-Einstein metrics or Ricci-harmonic solitons. It is not a breakthrough, but it is a useful generalization. The proof of Theorem 1.2 needs revision, and the tau = 1 edge case should be handled. If those are fixed, I would be comfortable seeing it published.

My recommendation: send it to a serious referee. The branch error is substantial enough that the paper should not be accepted as is, but the underlying ideas are plausible and the remaining results are likely correct.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies compact generalized τ-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics, defined by Ric_{f,τ} − α∇φ⊗∇φ = λg together with τgφ = ⟨∇φ,∇f⟩. The main results are: Theorem 1.1, an integral criterion (non-positivity of ∫⟨∇Rφ,∇f⟩e^{-f/τ}dυ) forcing the metric to be harmonic-Einstein; Theorem 1.2, rigidity alternatives for the special (τ,ρ)-quasi Ricci-harmonic case depending on ρ and μ; and Theorems 1.3 and 1.4, gap theorems for τ-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics with λ>0, one involving a weighted L²-bound of |∇f| and the other a pointwise lower bound on Ricφ. The proofs use weighted Bochner-type identities, maximum-principle arguments, and a scalar-curvature lower bound quoted from [26].

Significance. The paper addresses a natural extension of known rigidity results for quasi-Einstein metrics and Ricci-harmonic solitons. The weighted integral formulas (3.1), (5.1)–(5.3) are derived from first principles, no parameters are fitted, and the gap estimates are explicit. The subject is appropriate for a differential-geometry journal, and the results, if fully justified, would be a useful contribution to the rigidity theory of weighted Riemannian manifolds with maps. The main reservations are proof gaps that appear repairable rather than fatal.

major comments (4)

[Section 3, proof of Theorem 1.1] The equality case of (3.1) gives Ricφ = (Rφ/m)g and τgφ = 0, but the paper then states 'completing the proof' without showing that f is constant, which is required for the metric to be harmonic-Einstein. With Ricφ trace-free, the first equation in (1.1) becomes ∇²f − (1/τ)df⊗df = (λ − Rφ/m)g, a quasi-Einstein-type Hessian equation. The compactness rigidity for such equations is nontrivial and must either be proved or explicitly cited for τ>0.
[Section 4, proof of Theorem 1.2(2), equations (4.5)-(4.6)] For μ≤0 the displayed interval is mμ/(1−mρ) ≤ (Rφ)max ≤ m(m−1)μ/[τ+(m−1)(1−mρ)]. The subsequent nonconstant argument gives only (Rφ)max > mμ/(1−mρ), which is the left endpoint of that interval, not a contradiction. The proof must be split into cases: μ>0 yields a genuine contradiction and hence harmonic-Einstein; μ=0 forces Rφ≡0; μ<0 yields exactly the theorem's first alternative.
[Section 4, proof of Theorem 1.2(3), equations (4.7)-(4.8)] The same branch error occurs in the minimum-point argument. For μ>0 the nonconstant argument gives only (Rφ)min < mμ/(1−mρ), which is compatible with the interval m(m−1)μ/[τ+(m−1)(1−mρ)] ≤ (Rφ)min ≤ mμ/(1−mρ); hence it does not prove constancy. The correct conclusion for μ>0 is the stated alternative Rφ ≥ m(m−1)μ/[τ+(m−1)(1−mρ)], and the contradiction is only valid for μ≤0.
[Section 5, equation (5.6)] The first displayed lower bound in (5.6), with coefficient 2+m − (3τ+m−1)/(τ(m+τ−1)), is not a consequence of (5.2) and the cited lower bound Rφ ≥ m(m−1)λ/(m+τ−1). For example, m=3 and τ=2 give that coefficient as 4, whereas the correct coefficient obtained from (5.2) is (τ−1)(2/(m+τ−1)+m/τ) = 2. The final inequality in (5.6) is nevertheless valid after this correction, and the proof of Theorem 1.3 can be repaired, but the derivation as printed is invalid.

minor comments (4)

[Title] The title contains a typo: 'PROPER TIES' should be 'PROPERTIES'.
[Section 5, proof of Theorem 1.3] The step 'Hence f is constant' after equality in (5.9) should explicitly state that equality in the integrated chain forces pointwise equality in (5.3), which then makes the right-hand side of (2.24) constant.
[Section 5.2] The phrase 'Myers theorem' should be 'Myers' theorem'.
[Throughout] The notation V_{τ,f} is used in Theorem 1.3 before it is defined; a brief definition immediately after (1.8) would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation chain found: integral formulas are proved from the defining equations, the only imported curvature bound is an independent prior result, and self-citations are contextual, not load-bearing. Two proof gaps are correctness issues, not circularity.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained rather than circular. Lemmas 2.1-2.3 start from the defining systems (1.1)-(1.3) and use only traces, divergences, the contracted Bianchi identity, the Ricci identity, and self-adjointness of Delta_{tau,f}; the target property 'f constant / harmonic-Einstein' is never inserted as an assumption. Lemma 3.1 is an integral identity, and Theorem 1.1 follows by the positivity of its left-hand side, with no fitted parameter being used. Theorem 1.2 uses only the pointwise maximum/minimum principle applied to identities (2.19)-(2.20). In Section 5, identity (5.3) is proved from (2.24), which is itself proved in Lemma 2.4 from Lemmas 2.1-2.2, and the lower bound R_phi >= m(m-1)lambda/(m+tau-1) used in (5.6) is quoted from Wang [26], an independent paper whose stated assumptions do not include the target result. The self-citations present ([17] Huang-Zeng in Remark 3.1 and [31] Zeng in the related-work paragraph) are background remarks only and are not load-bearing. No fitted input is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work. Two non-circular proof gaps should be noted for completeness. First, in the proof of Theorem 1.2(2), Section 4: for mu < 0, the displayed interval gives m mu/(1-m rho) <= (R_phi)_max <= m(m-1) mu/[tau+(m-1)(1-m rho)], and the strict inequality (R_phi)_max > m mu/(1-m rho) obtained from (4.2) is compatible with that interval, so the written 'contradiction' is not valid; the proof should accept the theorem's stated alternative. Second, in the proof of Theorem 1.1, Lemma 3.1 only yields Ric_phi trace-free and tau_g phi = 0; the final sentence jumps to 'harmonic-Einstein' without an additional argument that f is constant, as required by definition (1.6). These are completeness or correctness concerns, not circularity, and do not change the score.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fit to data; α, ρ, μ, λ, and τ are part of the definitions. The proofs rest on standard identities and on Wang's quoted lower bound for τ-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics used in Theorem 1.3.

assumptions (3)

standard math Contracted second Bianchi identity and Ricci identity for the Hessian
Used in Lemma 2.1 to derive equations (2.2) and (2.3).
standard math Maximum principle and Myers theorem for compact manifolds with Ricφ ≥ (1−δ)λg
Used in Lemma 5.2 and Theorem 1.4 to bound diameter and extrema.
standard math Wang's lower bound Rφ ≥ m(m−1)/(m+τ−1)λ for τ-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics with τ>1
Imported from [26] in Theorem 1.3's proof; not proven in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Rigid properties of generalized $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3UDZP3DL

@misc{pith2026190800691,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Rigid properties of generalized $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3UDZP3DL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.00691}
}

abstract

In this paper, we study compact generalized $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics. In the first part, we explore conditions under which generalized $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics are harmonic-Einstein and give some characterization results for it. In the second part, we obtain some rigidity results for compact $(\tau, \rho)$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics which are special case of generalized $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics. In the third part, we shall give two gap theorems for compact $\tau$-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics by showing some necessary and sufficient conditions for the metrics to be harmonic-Einstein.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

[26]

L. F. Wang, On quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fennic Math. 41 (2016) 417-437

work page 2016
[1]

Abolarinwa, Gap theorems for compact almost Ricci-ha rmonic solitons, Internat

A. Abolarinwa, Gap theorems for compact almost Ricci-ha rmonic solitons, Internat. J. Math. 30 (2019) 1950040, 7 pp

work page 2019
[2]

A. L. Besse, Einstein manifolds. Ergebnisse derMathema tik und ihrerGrenzgebiete (3), vol. 10. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1987)

work page 1987
[3]

Barros, E

A. Barros, E. Ribeiro Jr., Characterizations and integr al formulae for generalized m-quasi-Einstein metrics, Bull. Braz. Math. Soc. (N.S.) 45 ( 2014) 325-341

work page 2014
[4]

Cao, Recent progress on Ricci soliton, Adv

H.-D. Cao, Recent progress on Ricci soliton, Adv. Lect. M ath. (ALM) 11 (2009) 1-38

work page 2009
[5]

J. Case, Y. J. Shu, G. Wei, Rigidity of quasi-Einstein met rics, Diﬀerential Geom. Appl. 29 (2011) 93-100

work page 2011
[6]

Catino, Generalized quasi-Einstein manifolds with h armonic Weyl tensor, Math

G. Catino, Generalized quasi-Einstein manifolds with h armonic Weyl tensor, Math. Z. 271 (2012) 751-756

work page 2012
[7]

Y. H. Deng, A note on generalized quasi-Einstein manifol ds, Math. Nachr. 288 (2015) 1122-1126

work page 2015

Show all 32 references

[8]

Eells, J

J. Eells, J. Sampson, Harmonic mappings of Riemannian ma nifolds, Am. J. Math. 86 (1964) 109-169

1964
[9]

Fern´ andez-L´ opez, E

M. Fern´ andez-L´ opez, E. Garc ´ ıa-R ´ ıo, Some gap theorems for gradient Ricci solitons, Int. J. Math. 23 (2012) 1250072

2012
[10]

H. X. Guo, R. Philipowski, A. Thalmaier, On gradient sol itons of the Ricci-harmonic ﬂow, Acta Math. Sin. (Engl. Ser.) 31 (2015) 1798-1804

2015
[11]

C. He, P. Petersen, W. Wylie, On the classiﬁcation of war ped product Einstein met- rics, Comm. Anal. Geom. 20 (2012), 271-312

2012
[12]

Z. J. Hu, D. H. Li, J. Xu, On generalized m-quasi-Einstein manifolds with constant scalar curvature, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 432 (2015) 733-743

2015
[13]

Z. J. Hu, D. H. Li, S. J. Zhai, On generalized m-quasi-Einstein manifolds with con- stant Ricci curvatures, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 446 (2017) 843- 851

2017
[14]

B. Ma, G. Huang, Lower bounds for the scalar curvature of noncompact gradient solitons of List’s ﬂow, Arch. Math. (Basel) 100 (2013) 593-5 99

2013
[15]

Huang, Y

G. Huang, Y. Wei, The classiﬁcation of ( m, ρ )-quasi-Einstein manifolds, Ann. Global Anal. Geom. 44 (2013) 269-282

2013
[16]

Huang, H

G. Huang, H. Li, On a classiﬁcation of the quasi-Yamabe g radient solitons, Methods Appl. Anal. 21 (2014) 379-389

2014
[17]

Huang, F

G. Huang, F. Zeng, A note on gradient generalized quasi- Einstein manifolds, J. Geom. 106 (2015) 297-311

2015
[18]

Huang, Integral pinched gradient shrinking ρ-Einstein solitons, J

G. Huang, Integral pinched gradient shrinking ρ-Einstein solitons, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 451 (2017) 1045-1055

2017
[19]

M¨ uller, The Ricci Flow Coupled with Harmonic Map Hea t Flow

R. M¨ uller, The Ricci Flow Coupled with Harmonic Map Hea t Flow. Ph.D thesis, ETH Z¨ urich, 2009. Available at http://e-collection.library.ethz.ch//view/eth:41938

2009
[20]

M¨ uller, Ricci ﬂow coupled with harmonic map ﬂow, Ann

R. M¨ uller, Ricci ﬂow coupled with harmonic map ﬂow, Ann . Sci. ´Ec. Norm. Sup´ er. 45 (2012) 101-142. RIGID PROPERTIES OF GENERALIZED τ-QUASI RICCI-HARMONIC METRICS 23

2012
[21]

Shin, On the classiﬁcation of 4-dimensional ( m, ρ )-quasi-Einstein manifolds with harmonic Weyl curvature, Ann

J. Shin, On the classiﬁcation of 4-dimensional ( m, ρ )-quasi-Einstein manifolds with harmonic Weyl curvature, Ann. Global Anal. Geom. 51 (2017) 3 79-399

2017
[22]

Tadano, Gap theorems for Ricci-harmonic solitons, A nn

H. Tadano, Gap theorems for Ricci-harmonic solitons, A nn. Global Anal. Geom. 49 (2016) 165-175

2016
[23]

M. B. Williams, Results on coupled Ricci and harmonic ma p ﬂows, Adv. Geom. 15 (2015) 7-26

2015
[24]

G. Wu, S. Zhang, Volume growth of shrinking gradient Ric ci-harmonic soliton, Results Math. 72 (2017) 205-223

2017
[25]

L. F. Wang, Rigid properties of quasi-almost-Einstein metrics, Chin. Ann. Math. Ser. B 33 (2012) 715-736

2012
[27]

L. F. Wang, On f -non-parabolic ends for Ricci-harmonic metrics, Ann. Glob al Anal. Geom. 51 (2017) 91-107

2017
[28]

L. F. Wang, On gradient quasi-Einstein solitons, J. Geo m. Phys. 123 (2018) 484-494

2018
[29]

L. F. Wang, Gap results for compact quasi-Einstein metr ics, Sci. China Math. 61 (2018) 943-954

2018
[30]

F. Yang, J. Shen, Volume growth for gradient shrinking s olitons of Ricci-harmonic ﬂow, Sci. China Math. 55 (2012) 1221-1228

2012
[31]

Zeng, Rigidity of τ-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics, Indian J

F. Zeng, Rigidity of τ-quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics, Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 4 9 (2018) 431-449

2018
[32]

Zhu, On the relation between Ricci-harmonic soliton s and Ricci solitons, J

M. Zhu, On the relation between Ricci-harmonic soliton s and Ricci solitons, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 447 (2017) 882-889. School of Mathematics and Statistics, Xinyang Normal Unive rsity, Xinyang, 464000, P.R. China E-mail address : fanzeng10@126.com

2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [26]

L. F. Wang, On quasi Ricci-harmonic metrics, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fennic Math. 41 (2016) 417-437

work page 2016

[2] [1]

Abolarinwa, Gap theorems for compact almost Ricci-ha rmonic solitons, Internat

A. Abolarinwa, Gap theorems for compact almost Ricci-ha rmonic solitons, Internat. J. Math. 30 (2019) 1950040, 7 pp

work page 2019

[3] [2]

A. L. Besse, Einstein manifolds. Ergebnisse derMathema tik und ihrerGrenzgebiete (3), vol. 10. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1987)

work page 1987

[4] [3]

Barros, E

A. Barros, E. Ribeiro Jr., Characterizations and integr al formulae for generalized m-quasi-Einstein metrics, Bull. Braz. Math. Soc. (N.S.) 45 ( 2014) 325-341

work page 2014

[5] [4]

Cao, Recent progress on Ricci soliton, Adv

H.-D. Cao, Recent progress on Ricci soliton, Adv. Lect. M ath. (ALM) 11 (2009) 1-38

work page 2009

[6] [5]

J. Case, Y. J. Shu, G. Wei, Rigidity of quasi-Einstein met rics, Diﬀerential Geom. Appl. 29 (2011) 93-100

work page 2011

[7] [6]

Catino, Generalized quasi-Einstein manifolds with h armonic Weyl tensor, Math

G. Catino, Generalized quasi-Einstein manifolds with h armonic Weyl tensor, Math. Z. 271 (2012) 751-756

work page 2012

[8] [7]

Y. H. Deng, A note on generalized quasi-Einstein manifol ds, Math. Nachr. 288 (2015) 1122-1126

work page 2015