Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Generalized $q$-dimensions of measures on nonautonomous fractals

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes that the generalized (Lq) dimensions of measures supported on nonautonomous fractals are governed by critical values of weighted singular-value sums, and proves exact formulas for nonautonomous similar sets and for…

desk verdict Solid upper bounds and a likely correct similar-set formula, but the advertised random affine lower bound rests on a false imported lemma and needs substantive repair. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.17298 v1 pith:4MG7L4DD submitted 2024-11-26 math.DS math.CA

Yifei Gu , Jun Jie Miao This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.DSmath.CA MSC 28A8037C45
keywords generalizedq-dimensionsnonautonomousattractorssingularvaluefunctionalmostself-affinesetsrandomtranslationsLq-spectrumMoran
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

Generalized q-dimensions measure the fluctuation of a probability measure at small scales. This paper asks what they are for the natural measures sitting on nonautonomous fractals—attractors of iterated function systems whose contraction ratios, and even the number of contractions, change from level to level, so ergodic-theoretic tools are unavailable. The paper's claim is that, for large q at least, these dimensions are pinned by a single critical value: the threshold s where the weighted sums $\sum \psi^s(T_u)^{1-q} \mu(C_u)^q$ over all cylinder words change from summable to divergent, with $\psi^s$ the singular value function of the accumulated linear parts. The authors establish this as a universal upper bound for all nonautonomous affine sets, as an exact formula for nonautonomous similar sets with strong separation, and as an almost-sure formula for affine sets whose translations are randomly perturbed (q>1) or chosen from a finite set (1

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the singular value function $\psi^s(T)$, defined as the product of the first $m-1$ singular values of $T$ times the $m$-th singular value raised to $s-m+1$ (with $s>d$ handled by the determinant power). The critical exponents $d^-_q$ and $d^+_q$ are defined by requiring the weighted sums $\sum \psi^s(T_u)^{1-q}\mu(C_u)^q$ over cylinder sets to be summable or lim-sup bounded; these sums act as the effective entropy of the nonautonomous system. For the lower bounds, the proof uses the multienergy kernel $\psi^s(u_1,\ldots,u_n,v)$, formed by multiplying $\psi^s$ at the vertices of the join set of the words, together with a hierarchy of join-class estimates (Propositions 5.2–5.4) that convert the singular-value weights of a tree into volume estimates for $r$-balls under random translations.

What would settle it

Simulate or compute both sides of Lemma 5.1 for a two-level nonautonomous affine system in $R^{2}$ whose translation distribution is absolutely continuous but has an unbounded density concentrated near a point, and check whether the ratio $E(|\Pi(u)-\Pi(v)|^{-s}|\mathcal{F})/\psi^s(T_{u\wedge v})$ is bounded uniformly over pairs (u,v); an unbounded ratio would disprove the existence of the constant C and invalidate the almost-sure formula.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central discovery is Theorem 2.9: for a nonautonomous affine set with i.i.d. random translations (each absolutely continuous with respect to Lebesgue measure), and for any q>1, almost surely $\underline{D}_q(\mu_\omega)=\min\{d^-_q,d\}$, where $d^-_q=\sup\{s:\sum_{k=1}^\infty\sum_{u\in\Sigma^k}\psi^s(T_u)^{1-q}\mu(C_u)^q<\infty\}$. Alongside it stands Theorem 2.4, giving two-sided formulas for nonautonomous similar sets under strong separation: $\underline{D}_q(\mu_\omega)=\min\{d^-_q,d\}$ and $\overline{D}_q(\mu_\omega)=\min\{d^+_q,d\}$. The paper also proves that these critical values are universal upper bounds for all nonautonomous affine sets (Theorem 2.8), and, for the finite-translation family, obtains the lower bound for $1<q\le 2$ (Theorem 2.12), with the identical-Ξ case extended to $q\ge 1$ (Corollary 2.11).

Load-bearing premise

The proof of the almost-sure lower bound depends on Lemma 5.1, a conditional expectation inequality imported from the authors' own unpublished preprint; if that inequality fails outside its stated hypotheses—for instance for translation distributions with unbounded density or for non-i.i.d. choices—the formula in Theorem 2.9 does not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every nonautonomous similar attractor satisfying strong separation, the generalized q-dimensions of any projected measure are explicitly given by the critical values $\min\{d^-_q,d\}$ and $\min\{d^+_q,d\}$; when the two critical values agree, $D_q(\mu_\omega)$ exists.
  • For nonautonomous affine sets with random translations, the lower generalized q-dimension is almost surely $\min\{d^-_q,d\}$ for q>1, and the paper upgrades the earlier almost-self-affine result from q>1 to q>=1 when the linear parts are identical.
  • For self-affine sets built with finitely many allowed translations and contraction norms below 1/2, the formula $D_q(\mu_a)=\min\{d_q,d\}$ holds for $1\le q\le 2$ for Lebesgue-almost every translation vector.
  • The upper bound $\overline{D}_q(\mu_\omega)\le\min\{d^+_q,d\}$ holds with no separation or randomness assumption, so the critical value is a universal ceiling for nonautonomous affine measures.
  • For Bernoulli measures, Proposition 2.6 reduces the critical values to products over levels of $\sum_{j=1}^{n_i} c_{i,j}^{s(1-q)} p_{i,j}^q$, making the dimensions computable directly from contraction ratios and weights.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If Theorem 2.9 is correct, the lower generalized q-dimension of a random nonautonomous affine measure is a geometric quantity controlled by the linear part and the cylinder masses alone, independent of the fine details of the translation law once it is absolutely continuous; this suggests the same critical-sum formula may extend to other families of random non-conformal fractals.
  • The proof's dependence on the conditional expectation inequality in Lemma 5.1, imported from the authors' unpublished preprint, means the almost-sure upper bound should be read as conditional on that lemma; checking whether the inequality survives for translation laws with density zero sets or non-i.i.d. choices would delimit the theorem's true scope.
  • One could test the formula numerically on a simple nonautonomous system with slowly varying contraction ratios, where $d^-_q$ and $d^+_q$ differ, and compare $\underline{D}_q(\mu_\omega)$ to $\min\{d^-_q,d\}$ almost surely; agreement would support the conjecture that the lower generalized dimension is always the summability threshold.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper defines critical values d_q^- and d_q^+ via sums of cylinder weights and singular value functions for nonautonomous iterated function systems, and claims to determine the lower and upper generalized q-dimensions of the projected measures. For general nonautonomous attractors the authors prove upper bounds (Theorem 2.1) and, under a gap separation condition, matching lower bounds (Theorem 2.2). For nonautonomous similar sets with strong separation they give the formula D_q = min{d_q^-, d} (Theorem 2.4). For nonautonomous affine sets they prove upper bounds (Theorem 2.8) and then treat two special classes: random translations (Theorem 2.9) and finitely many translations (Theorem 2.12). The central new lower-bound results for random nonautonomous affine sets rest on Lemma 5.1, which is imported from the authors' unpublished preprint [22].

Significance. If the main theorems are correct, the paper gives a natural parameter-free description of generalized q-dimensions for a broad class of nonautonomous fractals, extending Falconer's almost self-affine results to a nonautonomous setting; the critical values d_q^- and d_q^+ are defined by convergence of intrinsic cylinder sums, and the upper-bound arguments genuinely compare those sums with mesh sums, so there is no circular fitting of parameters. The combinatorial join-class machinery in Section 5 is a serious adaptation of Falconer's approach to nonautonomous trees. However, the lower-bound claims for the random-translation model and for the homogeneous-ratio similar case are currently not supported by valid proofs: the key Lemma 5.1 is both unproved and, under the paper's stated hypotheses, false, and the proof of Proposition 2.6 contains an incorrect cut-set assertion.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 5, Lemma 5.1] Lemma 5.1 is not proved in this paper; it is cited to the unpublished preprint [22], yet it is the engine of Proposition 5.2 and therefore of the almost-sure lower bound in Theorem 2.9. More seriously, the lemma is false under the hypotheses stated in Section 2.3, where each translation distribution P_u is only assumed to be absolutely continuous with respect to Lebesgue measure. In d=1, take T_{k,i}=1/2 for all k,i and let the translations be iid with density f(t)=c|t|^{-1/2} on a neighborhood of 0 (absolutely continuous but unbounded). For u,v with u∧v=∅, take F to be the sigma-field generated by all translations except ω_{u_1}, and arrange the fixed translations so that the deterministic part of Π_ω(u)-Π_ω(v) is 0. Then the conditional expectation equals c ∫ |t|^{-1/2}|t|^{-s} dt, which is infinite for non-integral s=3/4, while the right-hand side C/ψ_s(T_{u∧v}) is finite. Thus the asserted uniform bound fails exactly in the regime used by Theorem 2.9. A bounded-density (or uniform absolute-continuity) hypothesis would be needed, together with a self-contained proof, before Theorem 2.9 can be accepted as stated.
  2. [Section 3, proof of Proposition 2.6] The proof of Proposition 2.6 asserts that for each u∈Σ*(s,r) of maximal length K_1, 'it is clear that u^{-}j∈Σ*(s,r) for all j∈{1,...,n_{K_1}}'. This is false: since c_{u^{-}j}=c_{u^{-}}c_{K_1,j}, the condition c_{u^{-}j}≤r is equivalent to c_{K_1,j}≤r/c_{u^{-}}, which need not hold for every child j of u^{-}, even though c_{u}=c_{u^{-}}c_{K_1,w_{K_1}}≤r. For example, if r/c_{u^{-}}<c_{K_1,j}<1 for some j, then u^{-}j∉Σ*(s,r). Because this incorrect assertion is used to derive the simplified expressions (2.15)-(2.18), the proof of Proposition 2.6 is incomplete, and consequently Corollary 2.7, which depends on those expressions, is not established by the given argument. A corrected proof would need to sum over the actual maximal elements of the cut set rather than over all children of a maximal word.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5, proof of Proposition 5.2] The line 'E(|Π_ω(u_1)-Π_ω(u_2)|^{-s}...|Π_ω(u_n)-Π_ω(v)|^{-s}) = E(E(X_1...X_n|F_n)|F_n)' is a typo; the right-hand side should be E(E(X_1...X_n|F_n)), not the nested conditional expectation with the same sigma-field twice.
  2. [Section 3] The notation u^{-}j is never defined in the paper; it appears to mean the word obtained by appending the letter j to u^{-}, but the notation is ambiguous and should be defined explicitly.
  3. [Throughout] There are numerous typographical errors, including 'mutltifractal' in Section 1.1, 'nonautonommous' in Sections 2.1 and 2.3, 'generlized' at the start of Section 5, and inconsistent accenting of names such as Rényi and Barański; a careful proofreading pass is needed.
  4. [Section 6, proof of Theorem 2.12] The change of variables in equation (6.22) is not fully explained: after defining y=a_1-a_2+H(a), the treatment of a_2,...,a_τ as independent variables and the domain of integration for the Jacobian should be stated explicitly so that the application of Lemma 6.1 is transparent.
  5. [Section 5, Lemma 5.1] The lemma should specify that the inequality holds almost surely with respect to the underlying product measure, and the dependence of the constant C on the hypotheses (e.g., on any boundedness or moment condition on the densities) should be stated; otherwise the inequality is not a well-defined pointwise assertion.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Theorem 2.9's lower bound is carried by Lemma 5.1, imported from the authors' own unpublished preprint [22]; the rest of the dimension formulas are not circular.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 5, Lemma 5.1 (used in Proposition 5.2 and Theorem 2.9)]
    "Lemma 5.1. Let s be non-integral such that 0 < s < d. Then there exists a constant C >0 such that E(|Πω(u) − Πω(v)|−s | F) ≤ C/ψs(Tu∧v), for all u, v ∈ Σ∞, u ⁄= v, where F = σ{ωu : u ∈ Λ} for any subset Λ of Σ∗ such that v|k+1, v|k+2, ... ∈ Λ and u|k+2, u|k+3, ... ∈ Λ but u|k+1 ∉ Λ, where |u ∧ v| = k. The following conclusion is proved in [22], and the version of almost self-affine set is proved by Falconer in [10]."

    This lemma is the engine of Proposition 5.2: the proof applies it n times via the tower property. Proposition 5.2 is then used to prove Theorem 2.9's almost-sure lower bound Dbar_q(μω) ≥ d^-_q. The lemma is not proved in the paper; it is imported from [22], the authors' own unpublished preprint ('Y. Gu and J. J. Miao. Dimension theory of nonautonomous iterated function systems, preprint'). The central random-translation result therefore rests on a load-bearing self-citation. Moreover, under the stated hypothesis that each Pu is absolutely continuous, an unbounded density (e.g., f(t)=c|t|^{-1/2} near 0) can make the conditional expectation infinite while the right-hand side is finite, so the imported lemma is doing substantive unverified work and cannot be treated as a harmless reference.

full rationale

The critical values d^-_q and d^+_q are defined directly from cylinder sums (2.27)-(2.28)/(2.13)-(2.14) as convergence/divergence thresholds; they are not fitted to the observed generalized q-dimensions. The upper-bound theorems (2.1, 2.8) compare r-mesh moment sums to these cylinder sums via Jensen/power inequalities, and the separated nonautonomous similar cases (2.2, 2.4) are proved internally. Section 6's finitely-many-translations theorem uses Falconer's external Lemma 6.1. The only load-bearing self-citation is Lemma 5.1: it supplies the conditional-expectation estimate needed for Proposition 5.2 and hence for the almost-sure lower bound in Theorem 2.9. It is neither proved here nor supported by an independent machine-checked or external source, and the paper's stated absolute-continuity hypothesis does not by itself guarantee the bound. Thus the headline random-translation formula depends on an unverified self-citation chain. Since the theorem's formula is not defined in terms of the desired dimension and the rest of the argument is a genuine comparison of cylinder sums to mesh sums, the circularity is localized and not a by-construction reduction; score 6.

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

No free parameters are fitted: contraction ratios, probabilities, and matrices are model inputs, and the critical values d_q are derived outputs. The main assumptions are uniform separation of contraction ratios away from 0, separation conditions, and probabilistic hypotheses on translations; the most fragile is Lemma 5.1, imported from the authors' unpublished preprint.

assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption c_* = inf c_{k,j} > 0 and c^* = sup c_{k,j} < 1
    Used throughout Section 3 to give uniform bounds on |J_u| and on overlaps of r-cubes with basic sets; stated before equation (2.13).
  • domain assumption Contractions satisfy |S_{k,i}(x)-S_{k,i}(y)| <= c_{k,i}|x-y|, with lower Lipschitz bounds when needed
    Definition of nonautonomous structure (1.6) and Theorems 2.1 through 2.4.
  • domain assumption Affine maps T_{k,i} are nonsingular with 0 < alpha_- <= alpha_+ < 1
    Assumption (2.25), needed for singular value function estimates in Section 4.
  • domain assumption Gap separation condition or strong separation condition for exact formulas
    Used in Theorems 2.2 and 2.4 to control overlaps of r-cubes with basic sets.
  • domain assumption Random translations omega_u are iid with absolutely continuous distribution, or translations are drawn from a finite set with sup||T||<1/2
    Probabilistic hypotheses in Sections 5 and 6, for Theorems 2.9 and 2.12.
  • ad hoc to paper Lemma 5.1: E(|Pi_omega(u)-Pi_omega(v)|^{-s} | F) <= C / psi^s(T_{u wedge v})
    Cited to the authors' unpublished preprint [22]; not proved here, and it powers Theorem 2.9.
  • standard math Falconer's integral bound: int_{B(0,rho)} dx / |Tx|^s <= C / psi^s(T)
    Imported from Falconer [10], used in Theorem 2.12.
  • standard math Kingman subadditive ergodic theorem
    Used in Corollary 2.11 to obtain almost sure limits of psi^s(T_{u|k})^{-1} p_{u|k}.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Generalized $q$-dimensions of measures on nonautonomous fractals." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4MG7L4DD

@misc{pith2026241117298,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Generalized $q$-dimensions of measures on nonautonomous fractals},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4MG7L4DD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.17298}
}
abstract

In the paper, we study the generalized $q$-dimensions of measures supported by nonautonomous attractors, which are the generalization of classic Moran sets and attractors of iterated function systems. First, we estimate the generalized $q$-dimensions of measures supported on nonautonomous attractors, and we provide dimension formulas for generalized $q$-dimensions of measures supported on nonautonomous similar attractor under certain separation conditions. Next, we investigate the generalized $q$-dimensions of measures supported on nonautonomous affine sets and obtain the upper bounds. Finally, we study two variations of nonautonomous affine sets and obtain their dimension formulas for $q\geq 1 $.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Smoothness of random self-similar measures on the line and the existence of interior points

    math.DS 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    If the symbolic local dimension is >1 and the perturbation has Fourier decay, the random self-similar measure has an almost-surely Hölder continuous density, implying the random fractal contains an interior point almo...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [22]

    Gu and J

    Y. Gu and J. J. Miao. Dimension theory of nonautonomous iterat ed function systems, preprint

    work page

  2. [1]

    Barral and M

    J. Barral and M. Mensi. Gibbs measures on self-affine Sierpinski c arpets and their singularity spectrum, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 27, 1419–1443, 2007

    work page 2007

  3. [2]

    Barral and D-J

    J. Barral and D-J. Feng. Multifractal formalism for almost all se lf-affine measures, Commun. Math. Phys. 318, 473–504, 2013

    work page 2013

  4. [3]

    B´ ar´ any and M

    B. B´ ar´ any and M. Hochman and A. Rapaport. Hausdorff dimension of planar self-affine sets and measures. Invent. Math. 216, 601–659, 2019

    work page 2019

  5. [4]

    Bara´ nski

    K. Bara´ nski. Hausdorff dimension of the limit sets of some planar g eometric constructions. Adv. Math. 210, 215–245, 2007

    work page 2007

  6. [5]

    Barral and D-J

    J. Barral and D-J. Feng. On multifractal formalism for self-simila r measures with overlaps. Math. Z. 298, no.1-2, 359–383, 2021

    work page 2021

  7. [6]

    T. Bedford. Crinkly curves, Markov partitions and box dimensions in sel f-similar sets . PhD thesis, University of Warwick, 1984

    work page 1984

  8. [7]

    Cawley and R.D

    R. Cawley and R.D. Mauldin. Multifractal decomposition of Moran fr actals, Adv. Math. 92, 196–236, 1992

    work page 1992

Show all 50 references
  1. [8]

    Das, and D

    T. Das, and D. Simmons. The Hausdorff and dynamical dimensions o f self-affine sponges: a dimension gap result. Invent. Math. 210, 85–134, 2017

    2017

  2. [9]

    K. J. Falconer. Fractal Geometry-Mathematical Foundations and Applicati ons. John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2nd edt, 2003

    2003

  3. [10]

    K. J. Falconer. The Hausdorff dimension of self-affine fractals. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 103, 339–350, 1988

    1988

  4. [11]

    K. J. Falconer. The dimension of self-affine fractals. II. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 111, 169–179, 1992

    1992

  5. [12]

    K. J. Falconer. Generalized dimensions of measures on self-affin e sets, Nonlinearity 12, 877–891, 1999

    1999

  6. [13]

    K. J. Falconer. Generalized dimensions of measures on almost se lf-affine sets. Nonlinearity 23, 1047–1069, 2010

    2010

  7. [14]

    K. J. Falconer. J. M. Fraser. and L. D. Lee. Lq-spectra of measures on planar non-conformal attractors. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 41, 3288–3306, 2021

    2021

  8. [15]

    K. J. Falconer and J. Miao. Dimensions of self-affine fractals and multifractals generated by upper triangular matrices. Fractals 15, 289–99, 2007

    2007

  9. [16]

    Feng and Y

    D.-J. Feng and Y. Wang. A class of self-affine sets and self-affine measures, J. Fourier An. App. 11 , 107–124, 2005

    2005

  10. [17]

    J. M. Fraser. On the Lq-spectrum of planar self-affine measures, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 368, 5579–620, 2016

    2016

  11. [18]

    J. M. Fraser. and T. Kempton. On the Lq-dimensions of measures on Hueter-Lalley type self- affine sets. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 146, no.1, 161–173, 2018

    2018

  12. [19]

    Fraser, L

    J. Fraser, L. D. Lee, I. D. Morris and H. Yu. Lq-spectra of self-affine measures: closed forms, counterexamples, and split binomial sums, Nonlinearity 34, 6331–6357, 2021

    2021

  13. [20]

    Grassberger

    P. Grassberger. Generalised dimension of strange attractor s, Phys. Rev. Lett. A 97 227-230, 1983. GENERALIZED q-DIMENSIONS OF MEASURES ON NONAUTONOMOUS FRACTALS 43

    1983

  14. [21]

    Gu and J

    Y. Gu and J. J. Miao. Dimensions of a class of self-affine Moran set s J. Math. Anal. Appl. 513, 126210, 2022

    2022

  15. [23]

    T. C. Halsey, M. H. Jensen, L. P. Kadanoff, I. Procaccia and B. J. Shraiman. Fractal measures and their singularities: The characterization of strange sets, Phys. Rev. A33, 1141–1151, 1986

    1986

  16. [24]

    Hua and W

    S. Hua and W. Li. Packing dimension of generalized Moran sets. Progr. Natur. Sci. (English Ed.) 6, 148–152, 1996

    1996

  17. [25]

    Hentschel and I

    H. Hentschel and I. Procaccia. The infinite number of generalis ed dimensions of fractals and strange attractor, Physica D 8, 435-444, 1983

    1983

  18. [26]

    Jensen, L

    M. Jensen, L. Kadanoff, A. Libchaber, I. Procaccia, and J. St avans. Global Universality at the Onset of Chaos: Results of a Forced Rayleigh-B´ enard Experiment Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 2798, 1985

    1985

  19. [27]

    Jordan, M

    T. Jordan, M. Pollicott, and K. Simon. Hausdorff dimension for ra ndomly perturbed self- affine attractors. Comm. Math. Phys. 207, 519–544, 2007

    2007

  20. [28]

    Kenyon and Y

    R. Kenyon and Y. Peres. Measures of full dimension on affine-inv ariant sets, Ergodic Theory Dyn. Syst. 16, 307–323, 1996

    1996

  21. [29]

    J. King. The singularity spectrum for general Sierpinski carpe ts, Adv. Math. 116, 1-8, 1995

    1995

  22. [30]

    Kolossv´ ary

    I. Kolossv´ ary. TheLq spectrum of self-affine measures on sponges, J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 108, no.2, 666–701, 2023

    2023

  23. [31]

    S. P. Lalley and D. Gatzouras. Hausdorff and box dimensions of c ertain self-affine fractals. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 41, 533–568, 1992

    1992

  24. [32]

    Lau and S.-M

    K.-S. Lau and S.-M. Ngai, Lq-spectrum of the Bernoulli convolution associated with the golden ratio, Studia Math. 131, 225–251, 1998

    1998

  25. [33]

    Lau and S.-M

    K.-S. Lau and S.-M. Ngai, Multifractal measures and a weak sepa ration condition, Adv. Math. 141, 45-96, 1999

    1999

  26. [34]

    McMullen

    C. McMullen. The Hausdorff dimension of general Sierpi´ nski ca rpets. Nagoya Math. J. 96:1–9, 1984

    1984

  27. [35]

    J. J. Miao and X. Wu. Generalized q-dimension of measures on Heisenberg self-affine sets in the Heisenberg group, Nonlinearity 28, no. 8, 2939–2957, 2015

    2015

  28. [36]

    P. A. Moran. Additive functions of intervals and Hausdorff meas ure. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 42, 15–23, 1946

    1946

  29. [37]

    I. D. Morris. On Falconer’s formula for the generalized R´ enyi d imension of a self-affine measure. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 42, no.1, 227–238, 2017

    2017

  30. [38]

    A dimension result arising from the Lq-spectrum of a measure, Proc

    S-M Ngai. A dimension result arising from the Lq-spectrum of a measure, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 125, 2943–51,1997

    1997

  31. [39]

    Y. B. Pesin. Dimension Theory in Dynamical Systems University of Chicago Press, 1997

    1997

  32. [40]

    A. R´ enyi. Dimension, entropy and information, Trans. 2nd Prague Conf. on Information Theory, Stat. Decision Functions, and Random Processes, 545–556, 1957

    1957

  33. [41]

    A. R´ enyi. On measures of entropy and information, Proc. 4th Berkeley Sympos. Math. Statist. and Prob., Vol. I, University of California Press, Berkeley-Los Ange les, Calif., 547–561, 1960

    1960

  34. [42]

    R. Riedi. An Improved Multifractal Formalism and Self-Similar Meas ures, Journal of Mathe- matical Analysis and Applications , 189(2), 462–490, 1995

    1995

  35. [43]

    L. Olsen. A multifractal formalism, Adv. Math. 116, 82-196, 1995

    1995

  36. [44]

    L. Olsen. Self-affine multifractal Sierpi´ nski sponges in Rd, Pacific J. Math. 183, 143-199, 1998

    1998

  37. [45]

    Peres and B

    Y. Peres and B. Solomyak. Existence of Lq dimensions and entropy dimensions for self-conformal measures, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 49, 1603-1621, 2000

    2000

  38. [46]

    H. Qiu, Q. Wang and S. Wang, Lq-spectra of graph-directed planar non-conformal measures, Nonlinearity 37, no. 9, Paper No. 095003, 25 pp., 2024

    2024

  39. [47]

    Solomyak

    B. Solomyak. Measure and dimensions for some fractal families, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 124, 531-546, 1998

    1998

  40. [48]

    J. Steele. Kingman’s subadditive ergodic theorem, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e 25, 93-98, 1989

    1989

  41. [49]

    Z. Wen. Mathematical Foundation of Fractal Geometry . Shanghai Scientific and Technological Education Publishing House, 2000

    2000

  42. [50]

    Z. Wen. Moran sets and Moran classes. Chinese Sci. Bull. 46, 1849–1856, 2001. 44 YIFEI GU AND JUN JIE MIAO Department of Mathematics, East China Normal University, N o. 500, Dongchuan Road, Shanghai 200241, P. R. China Email address : 52275500012@stu.ecnu.edu.cn Department of ...

    2001

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.