Profinite rigidity and geometric convergence

Yu Huang

REVIEW 2 major objections 7 minor 29 references

Profinite rigidity and geometric convergence

T0 review · 2 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read If a sequence of finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds is profinitely rigid term-by-term and converges geometrically to a limit manifold, the limit is profinitely rigid too.

desk verdict A promising new open-closed reduction for profinite rigidity, but the main theorem leans entirely on an unpublished preprint. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.02234 v1 pith:3UFVVYC3 submitted 2025-01-04 math.GT math.GR

Yu Huang This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.GTmath.GR MSC 57K3257K1020E18

keywords profiniterigidityhyperbolic3-manifoldsgeometrictopologyDehnfillingbubble-drillingflow-acoannularlinkcomplementsWhitehead

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 proves that profinite rigidity behaves well under geometric limits: if a sequence of finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds converges geometrically to a limit manifold and each term is profinitely rigid, then the limit is also profinitely rigid. Because every cusped hyperbolic 3-manifold is the geometric limit of its closed Dehn fillings, a cusped manifold inherits rigidity from infinitely many of its fillings. The paper uses this to build a large family of profinitely rigid cusped manifolds by bubble-drilling fibered hyperbolic manifolds, with a checkable hyperbolicity criterion called flow-acoannularity. Concrete consequences include profinite rigidity of the Whitehead link complement, the Borromean ring complement, and a specific 5-chain link complement in the 3-sphere.

What carries the argument

The machinery is geometric topology on the space of finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds, together with Dehn-filling compatibility of profinite isomorphisms. A sequence converges geometrically to $M$ when, after choosing basepoints, its members are increasingly bilipschitz over larger and larger balls; by Proposition 3.3, any convergent sequence is eventually a sequence of Dehn fillings of the limit along filling coefficients tending to infinity. The paper's central objects are bubble-drilled manifolds, obtained by removing neighborhoods of essential simple closed curves that lie on fiber surfaces of a surface bundle over the circle, and flow-acoannular bubbles, a combinatorial condition saying that no two lifts of the bubbles cobound a fiber-transversal annulus without another bubble lift crossing it. The flow-acoannular condition is what lets the proof rule out essential tori in the drilled manifold, so the drilled manifold is hyperbolic.

What would settle it

Exhibit two finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds $M$ and $N$ with isomorphic profinite completions but for which some Dehn-filled completion of $M$ is profinitely isomorphic to no Dehn-filled completion of $N$; this would falsify the input theorem [Xu24, Theorem A] that Theorem 3.5 depends on. Equivalently, find a sequence of profinitely rigid hyperbolic manifolds geometrically converging to a non-rigid limit with no compatible profinite Dehn-filling maps.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is Theorem 3.5: the set of finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds that are profinitely rigid in the class of compact orientable 3-manifolds without boundary spheres is closed in the geometric topology. The proof takes a cusped limit manifold $M$, expresses the approximating manifolds as Dehn fillings of $M$, and uses the cited result [Xu24] that any profinite isomorphism from $M$ to another cusped hyperbolic manifold $N$ induces a homeomorphism of boundary tori and profinite isomorphisms of all corresponding Dehn fillings. Since the approximating manifolds are rigid, the filled copies of $N$ are homeomorphic to the filled copies of $M$, so $N$ and $M$ are the same geometric limit and hence homeomorphic. The paper then packages this with a bubble-drilling construction (Theorem 4.5): drilling essential curves called bubbles from a fibered hyperbolic manifold yields a profinitely rigid manifold if the drilled manifold is hyperbolic and all fibered manifolds of the same fiber type are rigid. It proves hyperbolicity for drilled manifolds via a flow-acoannularity condition (Theorem 5.4), and applies the whole chain to the Whitehead link, Borromean rings, and a 5-chain link.

Load-bearing premise

The argument for closedness rests on the cited preprint theorem [Xu24] that any profinite isomorphism between cusped finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds transfers to all their Dehn fillings; if that theorem fails for even one cusped pair, the proof of Theorem 3.5 and the rigidity corollaries built on it no longer go through.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Cusped finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds are profinitely rigid as soon as closed hyperbolic 3-manifolds, closed non-arithmetic hyperbolic 3-manifolds, or closed fibered hyperbolic 3-manifolds are (Corollary 3.7).
If a cusped hyperbolic manifold has infinitely many profinitely rigid Dehn fillings along one cusp, then the manifold itself is profinitely rigid.
Bubble-drilling fibered hyperbolic manifolds with flow-acoannular bubbles produces new profinitely rigid cusped hyperbolic manifolds, including examples with arbitrarily many cusps.
The Whitehead link complement, the Borromean ring complement, and a specific 5-chain link complement in $S^3$ are profinitely rigid in the relevant class (Theorem 6.1).
Large Dehn twists about a flow-acoannular sequence of curves preserve pseudo-Anosov monodromy (Corollary 5.5).

Reading between the lines

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

A testable extension would be to check the flow-acoannular criterion directly from monodromy data, such as the fibration's veering structure, which could systematically enumerate cusped hyperbolic link complements whose rigidity follows from this construction.
If a future proof of profinite rigidity for closed hyperbolic 3-manifolds appears, this paper's Corollary 3.7 turns it automatically into a proof for all cusped finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds, making the closed case the only remaining bottleneck.
The closedness theorem is a general transfer principle: it would apply to any rigidity property that is inherited by Dehn fillings and respects geometric convergence, not only to profinite rigidity.
One could probe the limits of the method by searching for two distinct cusped hyperbolic manifolds whose systems of Dehn-filled profinite completions coincide, which would violate the input theorem [Xu24] and indicate that the closedness theorem needs a different proof.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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

The bubble-drilling construction and the closedness theorem are genuinely new, and the examples are concrete. The paper's main risk is not internal logic but the load-bearing citation: Theorem 3.5 rests entirely on [Xu24, Thm A]. The stress-test note got this right. If that preprint has a gap or a hidden hypothesis, the central claim collapses. To the paper's credit, it is transparent about the dependency rather than hiding it, and every step after the citation is standard and correctly applied.

What the paper does well: Theorem 3.5 (closedness under geometric convergence), Theorem 4.5 (bubble-drilling reduction), and Theorem 5.4 (flow-acoannular hyperbolicity criterion) are new tools, not repackaged literature. The proof of Theorem 4.5 is clean and the examples—Whitehead link, Borromean rings, 5-chain link—are explicit and checkable. Corollary 3.7, reducing cusped rigidity to closed rigidity, is a useful observation even if conditional.

Soft spots, in proportion. First, the Xu24 dependency is real but not a defect of this paper per se; it is the normal state of affairs in this area. A referee will want to confirm that Xu's theorem applies in the needed generality, including the case of multiple cusps. Second, Section 5's proof of Theorem 5.4 has compressed topological arguments, especially the torus-versus-annulus dichotomy near the end. It reads plausible, but a careful referee should ask for more detail. Third, the four-punctured-sphere examples depend on [CW23], another unpublished preprint. None of these are fatal; they are the usual hazards of a fast-moving field.

There is no circularity and no fitting. The paper reduces rigidity to independently known results and verifies hyperbolicity via its own criterion. The internal logic is sound conditional on the cited preprints.

Bottom line: a serious contribution that deserves a proper refereeing. The editor should explicitly ask the referee to scrutinize the Xu24 dependency and the Section 5 details, but the paper should not be desk-rejected. I'd bring it to a reading group and would cite the bubble-drilling construction in my own work, though I would wait for Xu24 to mature before relying on Theorem 3.5.

Referee Report

2 major / 7 minor

Summary. This paper studies profinite rigidity of finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds. The main result, Theorem 3.5, asserts that the class of finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds that are profinitely rigid in the class of compact orientable 3-manifolds without boundary spheres is closed in the geometric topology. The proof uses a theorem of Xu [Xu24] to convert a profinite isomorphism of a geometric limit into profinite isomorphisms of all Dehn fillings, thereby transferring rigidity from approximating fillings to the limit. The author then introduces a 'bubble-drilling' construction and, under a flow-acoannularity condition, proves a hyperbolicity criterion for the drilled manifolds. Combining these tools, the paper proves profinite rigidity for many cusped hyperbolic manifolds, including the Whitehead link complement, the Borromean rings complement, and a specific 5-chain link complement.

Significance. The main idea is attractive and potentially powerful. If Theorem 3.5 is correct, it provides a general mechanism to propagate profinite rigidity from closed or fibered hyperbolic manifolds to cusped manifolds, and Corollary 3.7 reduces the cusped problem to closed cases. The bubble-drilling construction yields explicit new examples of profinitely rigid link complements, and the flow-acoannular criterion is a concrete, checkable condition. The paper is clearly written and the overall strategy is convincing conditional on the cited results. However, the proof of the central theorem depends entirely on an unpublished preprint, and the proof of the hyperbolicity criterion contains several abbreviated topological arguments; these issues need to be resolved before the results can be considered fully established.

major comments (2)

[Section 3.2, Theorem 3.5] The proof of Theorem 3.5 uses Theorem 1.1, quoted from [Xu24, Theorem A], as its only bridge from a profinite isomorphism of cusped hyperbolic manifolds to profinite isomorphisms of all Dehn fillings. This result is an arXiv preprint (arXiv:2412.05229) that is not proved in the present manuscript. All subsequent steps in the proof are standard, but Theorem 3.5 and its consequences (Theorem 4.5 and Theorem 6.1) would collapse if [Xu24, Theorem A] is false or has hidden hypotheses. The author should either supply a proof of the needed statement, cite a published version, or explicitly state the results as conditional on [Xu24]. A similar concern applies to the use of [ACWM24] in the proof of Corollary 3.7(3), which is also an arXiv preprint.
[Section 5, proof of Theorem 5.4] The proof of Theorem 5.4 contains several abbreviated topological steps. In case (II)(ii), the claim that the closure of the lifted bubble eϱ is disjoint from Ũ is derived from Lemma 5.9 in a way that is not immediate: Lemma 5.9 requires two lifts to have identical accumulative ends at the ideal boundary, and it is not shown that a nonempty intersection of closures in H3 ∪ S^2∞ forces this. Additionally, the statement that (H3, cls(eϱ)) is homeomorphic to the standard pair (B^3, diameter) needs justification for a quasi-geodesic arc rather than an actual geodesic. These gaps need to be filled before Theorem 5.4 can be regarded as proven.

minor comments (7)

[Section 3.2, proof of Theorem 3.5] The Dehn filling vectors are first denoted β(i) and then γ(i) in the same paragraph; the notation should be unified.
[Figure 1 caption] 'Borreanmean ring' is a typo for 'Borromean ring'; in the abstract and Theorem 6.1, 'Borromean ring' should be 'Borromean rings'.
[Acknowledge] The acknowledgment section is titled 'Acknowledge'; it should be 'Acknowledgments'.
[Theorem 1.1] Some displayed equations, e.g., in the statement of Theorem 1.1, appear corrupted in the arXiv source (’π1Mγ∼= ◊π1Nh(γ)); the typesetting should be checked.
[Section 5, proof of Theorem 5.4, case (I)] The phrase 'cylinder drilling finitely many disjoint straight lines on levels' should be clarified (e.g., 'solid cylinder') and the assertion that the complement is homeomorphic to the interior of a handlebody should be justified or referenced.
[Definition 5.2] The flow-acoannular condition is stated for indices k < l; the wording should make clear that any two distinct indices can be ordered, and 'positive geometric intersection number' refers to the isotopy class of the curve.
[Introduction and Corollary 3.7] The reliance on the preprints [Xu24] and [ACWM24] should be flagged in the introduction so that the reader knows which parts of the paper are conditional on unpublished work.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular reasoning found; the derivation is a genuine reduction to independent external rigidity and hyperbolicity results.

full rationale

The paper's chain of claims is not circular. Theorem 3.5 is proved by taking a geometric limit M of profinitely rigid manifolds M_i, assuming a profinite isomorphism π̂1M ≅ π̂1N, and then using [Xu24, Theorem A] to transfer the isomorphism to Dehn fillings M_{γ(i)} and N_{h(γ(i))}. The profinite rigidity of each M_i is an input, not a consequence of the conclusion for M, and the transfer theorem [Xu24] is an external result by a different author, not a self-citation. The subsequent applications (Theorems 4.5 and 6.1) combine that closedness theorem with externally established rigidity of once-punctured torus and four-punctured sphere bundles ([BRW17], [CW23]) and with a self-contained hyperbolicity criterion (Theorem 5.4) whose proof uses standard 3-manifold topology and Thurston's uniformization, not the target conclusion. Hyperbolicity of the concrete link complements is checked either by direct citation to Thurston/Maclachlan-Reid or by the paper's own flow-acoannular criterion. No fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, no quantity is defined in terms of the result it is used to prove, and no load-bearing self-citation chain is present. The only notable fragility is the reliance of Theorem 3.5 on the unpublished preprint [Xu24]; that is a correctness/completeness risk, not a circularity, and therefore does not raise the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on established theorems in 3-manifold topology (Thurston, Wilton-Zalesskii, Mostow-Prasad) and on two load-bearing recent preprints: [Xu24] for the Dehn-filling profinite rigidity transfer, and [CW23] for the rigidity condition used in examples. No free parameters or invented entities appear. The most fragile premise is [Xu24] Theorem 1.1.

assumptions (8)

domain assumption Theorem 1.1 of [Xu24]: profinite isomorphism between cusped finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds induces boundary homeomorphism and profinite isomorphisms of all Dehn fillings.
The key step in the proof of Theorem 3.5; [Xu24] is a recent preprint whose validity the paper assumes without proof.
standard math Wilton-Zalesskii results (Prop 2.2): profinite completion determines hyperbolicity and number of cusps.
Established in [WZ17a, WZ17b, WZ19]; used to show a profinite counterpart N is hyperbolic with the same number of cusps.
standard math Thurston hyperbolic Dehn surgery theorem (Prop 2.3).
Used to ensure sufficiently long Dehn fillings of a cusped hyperbolic manifold are hyperbolic and have prescribed thick parts.
standard math Characterization of geometric convergence via Dehn fillings (Prop 3.3).
Standard consequence of [BP92] and [Lac19]; used to represent geometric limits as Dehn fillings.
standard math Mostow-Prasad rigidity.
Used in Lemma 3.4 (uniqueness of geometric limit) and in Corollary 3.7 to identify covers by degree.
domain assumption BRW17 and CW23: profinite rigidity of fibered hyperbolic 3-manifolds with fiber a once-punctured torus or four-punctured sphere.
Provides condition (RC) for the examples in Theorem 6.1; [BRW17] is published, [CW23] is an arXiv preprint.
domain assumption ACWM24 Theorem 4.1 and Agol's virtual fibering theorem.
Used only in Corollary 3.7 to reduce cusped rigidity to closed rigidity; [ACWM24] is a 2024 arXiv preprint.
standard math Thurston hyperbolization for 3-manifolds with boundary (Thu82, Mor84).
Final step of Theorem 5.4: irreducibility, boundary-incompressibility, no Seifert fibration and no essential tori imply a finite-volume hyperbolic structure.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Profinite rigidity and geometric convergence." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3UFVVYC3

@misc{pith2026250102234,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Profinite rigidity and geometric convergence},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3UFVVYC3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.02234}
}

read the original abstract

In this paper, we prove that profinitely rigid finite-volume hyperbolic manifolds form a closed set under geometric topology. This observation implies the profinite rigidity of a large family of cusped hyperbolic manifolds via bubble-drilling construction. The core of the proof is a strong criterion that is used to verify when bubble-drilled manifolds are hyperbolic. This family includes many link complements, such as the Whitehead link complement and the Borromean ring complement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.02234 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Three links noted in Theorem 6.1. They are the Whitehead link, the Borreanmean ring, the specific 5-chain link, from left to right respectively. The examples in Theorem 6.1 follow from a general bubble-drilling construction. The construction begins from a compact, orientable, fibered 3-manifold M with a fixed fiber structure Σ → M → S 1 . An essential simple closed curve β in M is called a bubble if it lies on a fib… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Annuli foliation of a solid torus after removing highest and lowest two small arches. With a slight abuse of notation, the boundary of a bubble-drilled manifold produced by drilling is also called a bubble. Each bubble can be equipped with a canonical meridianlongitude system (mi , li). To be precise, the distinguished longitude li around a bubble is the normal direction of the bubble in the fiber surface it occupi… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** A bubbled-drilled manifold homeomorphic to Whitehead link complement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: A bubbled-drilled manifold homeomorphic to Borromean ring complement (1) The origin manifold M is the figure-eight knot complement. It is well known that the figure-eight knot complement is a hyperbolic once-punctured torus bundle over S 1 , whose fiber surface is illu…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: The drilled-manifold illutrated left is homeomorphic to a 5-chain link complement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

[1]

Simply transitive geodesics and omnipotence of lattices in PSL$(2,\mathbb{C})$

Ian Agol, Tam Cheetham-West, and Yair Minsky. Simply transitive geodesics and omnipotence of lattices in PSL(2, C ) . arXiv preprint , 2024. arXiv:2409.08418v1

work page Pith review arXiv 2024
[2]

The virtual H aken conjecture (with an appendix by I an A gol, D aniel G roves and J ason M anning)

Ian Agol. The virtual H aken conjecture (with an appendix by I an A gol, D aniel G roves and J ason M anning). Documenta Mathematica , 18, 2013

work page 2013
[3]

Bowditch

Brian H. Bowditch. The C annon-- T hurston map for punctured-surface groups. Mathematische Zeitschrift , 255:35--76, 2007

work page 2007
[4]

Lectures on Hyperbolic Geometry

Riccardo Benedetti and Carlo Petronio. Lectures on Hyperbolic Geometry . Universitext. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 1st edition, 1992

work page 1992
[5]

Bridson, Alan W

Martin R. Bridson, Alan W. Reid, and Henry Wilton. Profinite rigidity and surface bundles over the circle. Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society , 49(5):831--841, 2017

work page 2017
[6]

Canary, D.B.A

R.D. Canary, D.B.A. Epstein, and P.L. Green. Notes on notes of T hurston . London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, 2006

work page 2006
[7]

Limite d'ensembles et g \'e om \'e trie des nombres

Claude Chabauty. Limite d'ensembles et g \'e om \'e trie des nombres. Bulletin de la Soci \'e t \'e math \'e matique de France , 78:143--151, 1950

work page 1950
[8]

Profinite rigidity and hyperbolic four-punctured sphere bundles over the circle

Tamunonye Cheetham-West. Profinite rigidity and hyperbolic four-punctured sphere bundles over the circle. arXiv preprint , 2023. arXiv:2308.00266v3

work page Pith review arXiv 2023

Show all 29 references

[9]

Torus bundles not distinguished by TQFT invariants

Louis Funar. Torus bundles not distinguished by TQFT invariants. Geometry & Topology , 17(4):2289--2344, 2013

2013
[10]

Repr \'e sentations lin \'e aires et compactification profinie des groupes discrets

Alexander Grothendieck. Repr \'e sentations lin \'e aires et compactification profinie des groupes discrets. Manuscripta mathematica , 2:375--396, 1970

1970
[11]

Some 3-manifold groups with the same finite quotients

John Hempel. Some 3-manifold groups with the same finite quotients. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.3509v2 , 2014

2014 arXiv
[12]

Hodgson, G

Craig D. Hodgson, G. Robert Meyerhoff, and Jeffrey R. Weeks. Surgeries on the W hitehead Link Yield Geometrically Similar Manifolds , pages 195--206. De Gruyter, Berlin, Boston, 1992

1992
[13]

Isometry transformations of hyperbolic 3-manifolds

Sadayoshi Kojima. Isometry transformations of hyperbolic 3-manifolds. Topology and its Applications , 29(3):297--307, 1988

1988
[14]

Every knot has characterising slopes

Marc Lackenby. Every knot has characterising slopes. Mathematische Annalen , 374(1):429--446, 2019

2019
[15]

Finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds are almost determined by their finite quotient groups

Yi Liu. Finite-volume hyperbolic 3-manifolds are almost determined by their finite quotient groups. Inventiones mathematicae , 231(2):741--804, 2023

2023
[16]

Minsky, Juan Souto, and Samuel J

Christopher Leininger, Yair N. Minsky, Juan Souto, and Samuel J. Taylor. Weil-- P etersson translation length and manifolds with many fibered fillings. Advances in Mathematics , 376:107457, 2021

2021
[17]

On T hurston's uniformization theorem for three-dimensional manifolds

John Morgan. On T hurston's uniformization theorem for three-dimensional manifolds. The Smith Conjecture , pages 37--125, 1984

1984
[18]

Colin Maclachlan and Alan W. Reid. The arithmetic of hyperbolic 3-manifolds , volume 219. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

2013
[19]

Finite index subgroups in profinite groups

Nikolay Nikolov and Dan Segal. Finite index subgroups in profinite groups. Comptes Rendus Mathematique , 337(5):303--308, 2003

2003
[20]

Alan W. Reid. Profinite rigidity. In Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians—Rio de , volume 2, pages 1193--1216, 2018

2018
[21]

On fibering certain 3-manifolds

John Stallings. On fibering certain 3-manifolds. Topology of 3-manifolds and related topics , pages 95--100, 1962

1962
[22]

Thurston

William P. Thurston. Three dimensional manifolds, K leinian groups and hyperbolic geometry. 1982

1982
[23]

Thurston

William P. Thurston. The geometry and topology of three-manifolds: With a preface by Steven P. Kerckhoff , volume 27. American Mathematical Society, 2022

2022
[24]

Profinite rigidity for S eifert fibre spaces

Gareth Wilkes. Profinite rigidity for S eifert fibre spaces. Geometriae Dedicata , 188(1):141--163, 2017

2017
[25]

The congruence subgroup property for mapping class groups and the residual finiteness of hyperbolic groups

Henry Wilton and Alessandro Sisto. The congruence subgroup property for mapping class groups and the residual finiteness of hyperbolic groups. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.00556 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[26]

Distinguishing geometries using finite quotients

Henry Wilton and Pavel Zalesskii. Distinguishing geometries using finite quotients. Geometry & Topology , 21(1):345--384, 2017

2017
[27]

Pro- p subgroups of profinite completions of 3-manifold groups

Henry Wilton and Pavel Zalesskii. Pro- p subgroups of profinite completions of 3-manifold groups. Journal of the London Mathematical Society , 96(2):293--308, 2017

2017
[28]

Profinite detection of 3-manifold decompositions

Henry Wilton and Pavel Zalesskii. Profinite detection of 3-manifold decompositions. Compositio Mathematica , 155(2):246--259, 2019

2019
[29]

Profinite rigidity witnessed by D ehn fillings of cusped hyperbolic 3-manifolds

Xiaoyu Xu. Profinite rigidity witnessed by D ehn fillings of cusped hyperbolic 3-manifolds. arXiv preprint , 2024. arXiv:2412.05229v1

2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Simply transitive geodesics and omnipotence of lattices in PSL$(2,\mathbb{C})$

Ian Agol, Tam Cheetham-West, and Yair Minsky. Simply transitive geodesics and omnipotence of lattices in PSL(2, C ) . arXiv preprint , 2024. arXiv:2409.08418v1

work page Pith review arXiv 2024

[2] [2]

The virtual H aken conjecture (with an appendix by I an A gol, D aniel G roves and J ason M anning)

Ian Agol. The virtual H aken conjecture (with an appendix by I an A gol, D aniel G roves and J ason M anning). Documenta Mathematica , 18, 2013

work page 2013

[3] [3]

Bowditch

Brian H. Bowditch. The C annon-- T hurston map for punctured-surface groups. Mathematische Zeitschrift , 255:35--76, 2007

work page 2007

[4] [4]

Lectures on Hyperbolic Geometry

Riccardo Benedetti and Carlo Petronio. Lectures on Hyperbolic Geometry . Universitext. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 1st edition, 1992

work page 1992

[5] [5]

Bridson, Alan W

Martin R. Bridson, Alan W. Reid, and Henry Wilton. Profinite rigidity and surface bundles over the circle. Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society , 49(5):831--841, 2017

work page 2017

[6] [6]

Canary, D.B.A

R.D. Canary, D.B.A. Epstein, and P.L. Green. Notes on notes of T hurston . London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, 2006

work page 2006

[7] [7]

Limite d'ensembles et g \'e om \'e trie des nombres

Claude Chabauty. Limite d'ensembles et g \'e om \'e trie des nombres. Bulletin de la Soci \'e t \'e math \'e matique de France , 78:143--151, 1950

work page 1950

[8] [8]

Profinite rigidity and hyperbolic four-punctured sphere bundles over the circle

Tamunonye Cheetham-West. Profinite rigidity and hyperbolic four-punctured sphere bundles over the circle. arXiv preprint , 2023. arXiv:2308.00266v3

work page Pith review arXiv 2023