Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Asymptotically rigid mapping class groups of infinite graphs

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A new family of graph Houghton groups has finiteness properties exactly controlled by the number of ends of the underlying graph.

desk verdict New Houghton-type groups with a strong presentation and non-commensurability results, but the central finiteness theorem rests on an unproved connectivity result that needs to be supplied or made precise before the paper is fully convincing. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.21264 v1 pith:5HESZGA6 submitted 2025-08-28 math.GT math.GR

Thomas Hill , Sanghoon Kwak , Brian Udall , Jeremy West This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.GTmath.GR MSC 20F6557M0720F28
keywords asymptoticallyrigidmappingclassgroupsgraphHoughtonfinitenesspropertiestypeF_n/FP_nStein–FarleycubecomplexesdoubledhandlebodiesAut(F_n)non-commensurability
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 introduces countable subgroups of the mapping class group of a locally finite infinite graph, called graph Houghton groups, together with their doubled handlebody analogues. The central claim is that finite-ended examples with r ends accumulated by loops (or, for handlebodies, by genus) are of type F_{r-1} but not of type FP_r, and that the Cantor-ended examples are of type F∞. The finiteness bound is proved by a group action on a Stein–Farley cube complex and Brown's criterion, with descending links analyzed through piece complexes and tethered handle complexes. The paper also gives an explicit finite presentation for the pure graph Houghton group with at least three ends, shows this group contains Aut(F_n) for every n, and proves that graph and doubled handlebody Houghton groups are not commensurable with classical, braided, surface, or handlebody Houghton groups. A sympathetic reader would care because these are explicit, finitely presentable dense subgroups of 'big' mapping class groups whose finiteness properties can be read off the end space of the graph.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is a Stein–Farley cube complex X (and its doubled handlebody analogue X), whose vertices are equivalence classes [Z,f] of suited subgraphs Z of the rigidified graph together with a group element f; edges and cubes record nesting of suited subgraphs. The group acts by left multiplication, the complexity function h([Z,f]) = rank(π1(Z)) is a discrete Morse function, and Brown's criterion turns high connectivity of descending links into finiteness properties. Descending links are analyzed through the piece complex P(Z,Q) of a compact doubled handlebody with boundary spheres and the injective tethered handle complex TH1(Z,Q); complete join maps (in the sense of Hatcher–Wahl

What would settle it

Find a doubled handlebody Z with rk(π1(Z)) ≥ 4k+4 and at least k+2 boundary spheres whose injective tethered handle complex TH1(Z,Q) is not k-connected—for example, a non-null-homotopic k-sphere in the complex. Because Theorem 5.20 is the only unproved input in the Brown's criterion chain, such a complex would invalidate the proof of Theorem 1.1 (though not necessarily the statement).

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is a rigidity-to-finiteness dictionary for infinite graphs: once a rigid structure (a finite core plus tails that are copies of a fixed rank-h graph) is fixed, the asymptotically rigid mapping class group B(g,h,r) has the same finiteness type as the classical Houghton group H_r. For r < ∞ ends, all accumulated by loops, B(g,h,r) is of type F_{r-1} but not of type FP_r; when the end space is a Cantor set, the asymptotically rigid subgroup is of type F∞. The proof runs through a Stein–Farley cube complex on which the group acts; Brown's criterion reduces the task to showing descending links are (r-2)-connected, which is achieved by identifying the links

Load-bearing premise

The proof of the main finiteness theorem depends on Theorem 5.20, which asserts that injective tethered handle complexes of doubled handlebodies are highly connected under rank and boundary-sphere bounds; the paper states this follows as in the surface case but does not carry out the induction.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every r ≥ 2, B(g,h,r) and its doubled handlebody counterpart are finitely generated, and for r ≥ 3 finitely presented; no finite classifying space exists with finitely many r-cells, so the type exactly matches H_r.
  • When the end space is a Cantor set, the asymptotically rigid mapping class group is of type F∞, extending the finite-end result to a natural 'big' limit.
  • The pure graph Houghton group PBr, r ≥ 3, has an explicit finite presentation and contains a copy of Aut(F_n) for every n; this makes PBr one concrete finitely presented group housing all Aut(F_n).
  • The graph and doubled handlebody Houghton groups are not commensurable with the classical, braided, surface, or handlebody Houghton groups, so the graph construction genuinely enlarges the Houghton family.
  • PBr is one-ended for r ≥ 2, has solvable word problem, fails the Tits alternative, and its BNSR-invariants coincide with those of the ordinary and surface Houghton groups; the Dehn function remains an open upper-bound problem.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural test: use the explicit presentation of PBr as an algorithmic normal form for elements of Aut(F_n) and for end-periodic graph maps; success would give computational access to dynamics that the paper only raises as an open question.
  • The non-commensurability result suggests that the 'Houghton phenomenon'—finiteness type F_{r-1} but not FP_r—is not a commensurability invariant of the underlying space but a common feature of many rigid structures; quasi-isometry classification (Question 3.1) would be the sharper invariant to pursue.
  • One could try to close the Dehn function gap by tracking the quasi-isometry constants in the exponential upper bound for Aut(F_m), since the paper shows the missing ingredient is control of those constants for its particular generating set.
  • If Theorem 5.20's unproved induction collapses, a weakened theorem might still hold with modified bounds on rank or number of boundary components; checking the bad-simplex links in the doubled handlebody setting would separate the method's robustness from the present formulation.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper introduces asymptotically rigid mapping class groups of locally finite infinite graphs and their associated doubled handlebodies, and studies the resulting 'graph Houghton groups' and 'doubled handlebody Houghton groups'. The main results are: Theorem 1.1, finiteness properties F_{r-1} but not FP_r for graphs/doubled handlebodies with r finitely many ends all accumulated by loops/genus, and F_∞ for a Cantor set of ends; Theorem 1.2, non-commensurability of graph and doubled handlebody Houghton groups with classical, braided, surface, and handlebody Houghton groups; and Theorem 1.3, an explicit finite presentation of the pure graph Houghton group P B_r for r ≥ 3. The paper also studies ends, the Tits alternative, BNSR-invariants, the word problem, and the Dehn function, and gives a stable homology result in the Cantor case.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a natural and valuable contribution: it extends the Houghton-group phenomenon to asymptotically rigid mapping class groups of graphs, gives a concrete new family of groups with explicit presentations, and proves they are not commensurable with previously known Houghton-type groups. The paper is notably transparent about its limitations: Theorem 5.20 is deferred to an analogy with [ABKL23], Theorems 8.4 and 8.5 are stated without proof, and Section 8.4 explicitly records a failed strategy for bounding the Dehn function. This honesty is a strength, but those deferrals are load-bearing for the main theorem and must be addressed.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.4, Theorem 5.20] The proof of Theorem 1.1 runs through Brown's criterion; condition (c) is supplied by Corollary 5.22, which relies on Theorem 5.15, which in turn relies on Theorem 5.20. The proof of Theorem 5.20 is not contained in the paper: it says 'This follows as in the proof of [ABKL23, Theorem 5.7]' and 'we do not repeat it here.' The earlier remark in §5.1 explicitly says that bad simplices are skipped because they are used only in proving Theorem 5.20. Since adapting from the surface setting to doubled handlebodies with boundary spheres is precisely where the rank and boundary-count bounds and the good-link identification must be checked, this is a load-bearing gap. Please provide the full induction or a detailed reduction, not just an analogy.
  2. [§8.3, Theorems 8.4 and 8.5] Theorems 8.4 and 8.5 are stated as results, but Section 8.3 contains no proof. The sentence 'with occasional modifications, the entire analysis of [TW24, Section 3 & 4] can be carried out unchanged' is insufficient to establish the BNSR-invariant statement in this new setting. Either provide the proof or explicitly present these as conditional claims/conjectures.
  3. [§7.2, Theorem 7.4] Theorem 7.4, the stable homology computation, is stated with a proof sketch that says 'after making the appropriate modifications, the proof of [DZ25, Theorem 6.4] can be directly adapted.' The adaptation is not described. Since this is a standalone theorem, the proof should be supplied or the statement should be downgraded to a conjecture.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Theorem 1.3] The phrase 'in each case, 2 ≤ i < j ≤ n' should use r instead of n; the symbol n is not defined in the statement.
  2. [Notation 2.9 / Theorem 1.1] The same symbol B(g,h,r) is used for both the graph Houghton group and the doubled handlebody Houghton group. Although Remark 2.6 introduces calligraphic notation, the theorem statements do not consistently use it. Please add a clarifying sentence in Theorem 1.1 or in Notation 2.9.
  3. [§3.2 and Figure 10] Typo: 'Genovois' should be 'Genevois'; the Figure 10 caption uses 'Stein–Farely' instead of 'Stein–Farley'.
  4. [§8.4] The section title promises a Dehn-function result, but the section ends with an open question and a statement that no bound is obtained. Consider retitling the section or making the open status explicit in the first sentence.
  5. [Lemma 2.7] The proof says the kernel contains all finite products of sphere twists and no infinite products, but the forward inclusion is only implicit. Please spell out why every element of the kernel of Ψ_B is a finite product of sphere twists.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derivation is self-contained except for external cited theorems; the main proof gap (Theorem 5.20) is an omitted proof, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central finiteness proof (Theorem 1.1) applies Brown's criterion to Stein–Farley complexes. The descending-link connectivity is imported from Theorem 5.20, which is not proved in the paper: "This follows as in the proof of [ABKL23, Theorem 5.7]" and "we do not repeat it here." This is a verifiability gap and a load-bearing external citation, but it is not circular: [ABKL23] shares no authors with this paper, and the connectivity of TH_1(Z,Q) is not defined in terms of the F_{r-1} conclusion being proved. Similarly, Section 5.1 explicitly skips "the discussion of bad simplices" because they are only used in the same external proof; again a delegation, not a self-referential equation. The self-citations that do occur—[DHK23]/[DHK25] for flux maps and the unique finite-index subgroup SAut_infty, [Uda24] for the sphere-twist kernel of Map(M_Gamma)->Map(Gamma), and [TW24] for BNSR-invariant computations—are prior results with their own stated assumptions; none is fitted to the present paper's conclusions, and none renames a conclusion as a hypothesis. The commensurability proof also uses [She25] and [ABKL23, Cor 1.3] as independent inputs. No parameter is fitted and no 'prediction' is equivalent by construction to an input. The presentation theorem uses [AFV08] externally. The admitted gap in Section 8.4 (no analog of [Lee12, Lemma 4.3]) is an honest limitation, not circularity. Therefore: no circular steps.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's results rest on prior theorems from the literature, most importantly the flux map of DHK25, the Udall surjection for doubled handlebodies, and the Brown's criterion connectivity machinery. Two items, especially the connectivity of the tethered handle complex, are deferred to cited work without full proof. No free parameters or invented physical entities.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Proper homotopy classification of locally finite graphs by (E(Γ), E_ℓ(Γ)) and rank (ADMQ90).
    Used to justify the standard model and rigid structures of Γ_r in Section 2.
  • domain assumption Flux map short exact sequence for PMap(Γ_n) from [DHK25, Theorem B].
    Used in Proposition 4.3 to identify the kernel of the flux map restricted to P B(g,h,r) with Map_c(Γ_r).
  • standard math Brown's criterion for finiteness properties (Theorem 5.1, from [ABKL23]).
    Main technical engine for Theorem 1.1.
  • standard math Presentation of Aut(F_n) by Armstrong-Forrest-Vogtmann [AFV08, Theorem 1].
    Used to build the presentation of P B_r in Theorem 1.3.
  • domain assumption Laudenbach/Udall theorem: Ψ: Map(M_Γ) → Map(Γ) is surjective with kernel Twists(M_Γ) [Uda24, Theorem 1.1].
    Relates graph and doubled handlebody Houghton groups; used in Lemma 2.7.
  • standard math Complete join connectivity results of Hatcher-Wahl [HW10, Proposition 3.5] and Aramayona-Bux-Flechsig-Petrosyan-Wu [ABF+24].
    Used to lift connectivity of piece complexes to descending links.
  • domain assumption Connectivity of the injective tethered handle complex for doubled handlebodies, deferred to the argument of [ABKL23, Theorem 5.7].
    This is the main unproved ingredient in Section 5.4; the paper says the induction is similar and does not repeat it.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Asymptotically rigid mapping class groups of infinite graphs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5HESZGA6

@misc{pith2026250821264,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Asymptotically rigid mapping class groups of infinite graphs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5HESZGA6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.21264}
}
read the original abstract

We introduce and study asymptotically rigid mapping class groups of certain infinite graphs. We determine their finiteness properties and show that these depend on the number of ends of the underlying graph. In a special case where the graph has finitely many ends, we construct an explicit presentation for the so-called pure graph Houghton group and investigate several of its algebraic and geometric properties. Additionally, we show that the graph Houghton groups are not commensurable with other known Houghton-type groups, namely the classical, surface, braided, handlebody, and doubled handlebody Houghton groups, demonstrating that this graph-based construction defines a genuinely new class of groups.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.21264 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The graph Γ3 with a (4, 1)-rigid structure. Note the core C is required to contain the center point x0. Such a decomposition, along with a choice of markings, is called a (g, h)-rigid structure on Γr if they satisfy the following conditions: • All subgraphs in the decomposition have disjoint interiors, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The suited subgraph Z on the left is a defining graph for the product of loop shifts f = h2h3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. A (2, 2)-rigid structure on MΓ4 = B ∪ B′ . of S. The sphere twist TS is defined as TS(p) = ( (ℓ(t) · x, t) if p = (x, t) ∈ N id if p /∈ N where ℓ(t) · x denotes the action of ℓ(t) ∈ SO(3) on x ∈ S ∼= S 2 ⊂ R 3 . We denote by Twists(MΓ) the closure of the subgroup of Map(MΓ) generated by compositions of (isotopy classes of) sphere twists on finite collections of disjoint isotopy classes of spheres. Theorem 2.5 ([Uda2… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (1) is obtained by restricting the action of a mapping class to its surface boundary (see [DZ25, Section 1.5] for details); (2) is induced by taking the double of the map; (3) follows from [TW24, Section 5]; (4) is induced by retraction; (5) is the map in Lemma 2.7 and…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The surface Σ3 is shown with the core tree T3 in red and the homotopy equivalent graph Γ3 in blue. The bold dots represent the punctures of Σ3, and gray dotted lines illustrate the rigid struc￾ture on Σ3. The puncture shifts h2, h3, and g are also indicated. Among thes…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The graph Γ2 and its core C. The loops are labeled a i j , where i indicates which component of Γ2 \ C they are in. The shift h ∈ B2 translates the loops to the right by one click as shown. Proposition 4.3. The flux map Φ restricts to P B(g, h, r) ⊂ PMap(Γr) with the f…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Label the ends of Γ3 as e1, e2, and e3. For i = 2, 3, let hi be the loop shift out of e1 and into ei . The figure above illustrates how the commutator [h2, h3] induces the loop swap σ. Now we return to establishing the finite generation of Br for r ≥ 3. This is similar…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Let e1, . . . , er be the ends of Γr and for i = 2, . . . , r, let hi denote the loop shift from e1 to ei . The star graph C is in red, and the edge labeled by Ci is the one contained in the complementary component of the middle point of the star graph with the end ei …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The (nr+r−1)-transpositions s i j ’s which, with τ 1 1 , gener￾ate the subgroup of Aut(Frn) that inverts and permutes generators. These transpositions simplify the expressions used to define the group relations. Denote by I r n = {(i, j) | 1 ≤ i ≤ r, 0 ≤ j ≤ n−1} \ {(1…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The Stein–Farely cube complex X associated to B3 is 3-dimensional, and a 3-cube of it is illustrated above. For simplicity, we take f = Id and suppress the notation to [Z] = [Z,Id], etc. Clearly Br preserves the cubical structure, and h extends to a Br-invariant com￾p…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: For the doubled handlebody Z = M3,3, we illustrate a part of the piece complex involving the spheres T1, T2, T3, and T4 pictured above. Here Q = ∂Z. Note that every vertex of X can be sent by an element of Br to one of the form [Z,Id], so it suffices to analyze the de…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: For the doubled handlebody Z = M4,2, we illustrate a part of the tethered handle complex, T H(Z, Q), involving the teth￾ered handles T1, T2, T3 and T4 pictured above. Here Q = ∂Z. While the tether of T3 appears to intersect the tethers of T2 and T4, the tethers are re…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: A (0, 1)-rigid structure on Γ3 engulfing a (2, 3)-rigid structure. Note that loop shifts induce cyclic permutations of pieces of the (0, 1)-rigid structure; that is, a shift into end n induces the permutation 1n 7→ 2 n 7→ 3 n 7→ 1 n . neighborhood of an end, an f ∈ P …
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: A (0, 1, 2, 2)-rigid structure on the blooming Cantor tree graph. Theorem 7.2. For all d > 1 and r ≥ 1, the group Bd,r is of type F∞. The proof of Theorem 7.2 does not extend directly to the groups Bd,r(g, h), and the finiteness properties in this generality remain op…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Anderson, Javier Aramayona, and Kenneth J

    James W. Anderson, Javier Aramayona, and Kenneth J. Shackleton. A simple criterion for non-relative hyperbolicity and one-endedness of groups. arXiv preprint arXiv:0504271 , 2005

    work page 2005

  2. [2]

    Groups of proper homotopy equivalences of graphs and N ielsen R ealization

    Yael Algom - Kfir and Mladen Bestvina. Groups of proper homotopy equivalences of graphs and N ielsen R ealization. In Topology at infinity of discrete groups , volume 812 of Contemp. Math. , pages 1--31. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2025

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Asymptotic mapping class groups of C antor manifolds and their finiteness properties

    Javier Aramayona, Kai-Uwe Bux, Jonas Flechsig, Nansen Petrosyan, and Xiaolei Wu. Asymptotic mapping class groups of C antor manifolds and their finiteness properties. Rev. Mat. Iberoam. , 40(6):2003--2072, 2024. With an appendix by Oscar Randal-Williams

    work page 2003

  4. [4]

    Leininger

    Javier Aramayona, Kai-Uwe Bux, Heejoung Kim, and Christopher J. Leininger. Surface H oughton groups. Mathematische Annalen , Nov 2023

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Leininger

    Javier Aramayona, George Domat, and Christopher J. Leininger. Isomorphisms and commensurability of surface H oughton groups. J. Group Theory , 27(5):1129--1141, 2024

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Ayala, E

    R. Ayala, E. Dominguez, A. M\' a rquez, and A. Quintero. Proper homotopy classification of graphs. Bull. London Math. Soc. , 22(5):417--421, 1990

    work page 1990

  7. [7]

    Asymptotic mapping class groups of closed surfaces punctured along Cantor sets

    Javier Aramayona and Louis Funar. Asymptotic mapping class groups of closed surfaces punctured along Cantor sets. Moscow Mathematical Journal , 2017

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    A presentation for Aut (F_n)

    Heather Armstrong, Bradley Forrest, and Karen Vogtmann. A presentation for Aut (F_n) . J. Group Theory , 11(2):267--276, 2008

    work page 2008

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    Finiteness conditions on groups and quasi-isometries

    Juan M Alonso. Finiteness conditions on groups and quasi-isometries. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra , 95(2):121--129, 1994

    1994

  2. [10]

    Morse theory and finiteness properties of groups

    Mladen Bestvina and Noel Brady. Morse theory and finiteness properties of groups. Invent. Math. , 129(3):445--470, 1997

    1997

  3. [11]

    The T its alternative for Out (F_n)

    Mladen Bestvina, Mark Feighn, and Michael Handel. The T its alternative for Out (F_n) . I . D ynamics of exponentially-growing automorphisms. Ann. of Math. (2) , 151(2):517--623, 2000

    2000

  4. [12]

    Solvable subgroups of Out ( F _n) are virtually abelian

    Mladen Bestvina, Mark Feighn, and Michael Handel. Solvable subgroups of Out ( F _n) are virtually abelian. Geometriae Dedicata , 104(1):71--96, 2004

    2004

  5. [13]

    The T its alternative for Out (F_n)

    Mladen Bestvina, Mark Feighn, and Michael Handel. The T its alternative for Out (F_n) . II . A K olchin type theorem. Ann. of Math. (2) , 161(1):1--59, 2005

    2005

  6. [14]

    James Belk, Francesco Fournier - Facio, James Hyde, and Matthew C. B. Zaremsky. Boone--Higman embeddings of Aut (F_n) and mapping class groups of punctured surfaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.21882 , 2025

    2025 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Boone and Graham Higman

    William W. Boone and Graham Higman. An algebraic characterization of groups with soluble word problem. J. Austral. Math. Soc. , 18:41--53, 1974

    1974

  8. [16]

    Kenneth S. Brown. Finiteness properties of groups. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra , 44(1):45--75, 1987

    1987

  9. [17]

    Moduli of graphs and automorphisms of free groups

    Marc Culler and Karen Vogtmann. Moduli of graphs and automorphisms of free groups. Inventiones mathematicae , 84(1):91--119, 1986

    1986

  10. [18]

    Degenhardt

    F. Degenhardt. Endlichkeitseigeinschaften gewisser gruppen von zöpfen unendlicher ordnung. University of Frankfurt , 2000. PhD Thesis

    2000

  11. [19]

    Coarse geometry of pure mapping class groups of infinite graphs

    George Domat, Hannah Hoganson, and Sanghoon Kwak. Coarse geometry of pure mapping class groups of infinite graphs. Adv. Math. , 413:Paper No. 108836, 57, 2023

    2023

  12. [20]

    Surfaces proper homotopy equivalent to graphs and their D ehn- N ielsen- B aer maps

    Ryan Dickmann, Hannah Hoganson, and Sanghoon Kwak. Surfaces proper homotopy equivalent to graphs and their D ehn- N ielsen- B aer maps. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.20877 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Generating Sets and Algebraic Properties of Pure Mapping Class Groups of Infinite Graphs

    George Domat, Hannah Hoganson, and Sanghoon Kwak. Generating Sets and Algebraic Properties of Pure Mapping Class Groups of Infinite Graphs . Annales Henri Lebesgue , 8:373--416, 2025

    2025

  14. [22]

    Finiteness properties of asymptotically rigid handlebody groups

    Sergio Domingo-Zubiaga. Finiteness properties of asymptotically rigid handlebody groups. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.05787 , 2025

    2025 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Homological and finiteness properties of picture groups

    Daniel Farley. Homological and finiteness properties of picture groups. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society , 357(9):3567--3584, 2005

    2005

  16. [24]

    An infinite genus mapping class group and stable cohomology

    Louis Funar and Christophe Kapoudjian. An infinite genus mapping class group and stable cohomology. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 287(3):787–804, February 2009

    2009

  17. [25]

    L. Funar. Braided H oughton groups as mapping class groups. An. Ştiinţ. Univ. Al. I. Cuza Iaşi. Mat. (N.S.) , 52(2):229--240, 2007

    2007

  18. [26]

    Asymptotically rigid mapping class groups, I : Finiteness properties of braided T hompson’s and H oughton’s groups

    Anthony Genevois, Anne Lonjou, and Christian Urech. Asymptotically rigid mapping class groups, I : Finiteness properties of braided T hompson’s and H oughton’s groups. Geometry & Topology , 26(3):1385–1434, August 2022

    2022

  19. [27]

    M. Gromov. Asymptotic invariants of infinite groups. In Geometric group theory, V ol.\ 2 ( S ussex, 1991) , volume 182 of London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. , pages 1--295. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1993

    1991

  20. [28]

    G. Higman. Subgroups of finitely presented groups. Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A , 262:455--475, 1961

    1961

  21. [29]

    Large-scale geometry of pure mapping class groups of infinite-type surfaces

    Thomas Hill. Large-scale geometry of pure mapping class groups of infinite-type surfaces. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society , 153(06):2667--2680, 2025

    2025

  22. [30]

    Kopreski, Rebecca Rechkin, George Shaji, and Brian Udall

    Thomas Hill, Michael C. Kopreski, Rebecca Rechkin, George Shaji, and Brian Udall. Automorphisms of the sphere complex of an infinite graph. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.06531 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    The first cohomology of a group with permutation module coefficients

    CH Houghton. The first cohomology of a group with permutation module coefficients. Archiv der Mathematik , 31:254--258, 1978

    1978

  24. [32]

    Isoperimetric inequalities for automorphism groups of free groups

    Allen Hatcher and Karen Vogtmann. Isoperimetric inequalities for automorphism groups of free groups. Pacific Journal of Mathematics , 173(2):425--441, 1996

    1996

  25. [33]

    Homology stability for outer automorphism groups of free groups

    Allen Hatcher and Karen Vogtmann. Homology stability for outer automorphism groups of free groups. Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 4:1253--1272, 2004

    2004

  26. [34]

    Stabilization for mapping class groups of 3-manifolds

    Allen Hatcher and Nathalie Wahl. Stabilization for mapping class groups of 3-manifolds. Duke Mathematical Journal , 155(2), November 2010

    2010

  27. [35]

    Relative train tracks and endperiodic graph maps

    Yan Mary He and Chenxi Wu. Relative train tracks and endperiodic graph maps. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.13401 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    D. L. Johnson. Embedding some recursively presented groups. In Groups S t. A ndrews 1997 in B ath, II , volume 261 of London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. , pages 410--416. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1999

    1997

  29. [37]

    Topologie de la dimension trois: homotopie et isotopie , volume 12

    Fran c ois Laudenbach. Topologie de la dimension trois: homotopie et isotopie , volume 12. Soci \'e t \'e math \'e matique de France, 1974

    1974

  30. [38]

    Geometry of H oughton's groups

    Sang Rae Lee. Geometry of H oughton's groups . ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2012. Thesis (Ph.D.)--The University of Oklahoma

    2012

  31. [39]

    End- P eriodic T rain T rack M aps and D ynamics on F ree-by- C yclic G roups

    Ruth Meadow - MacLeod. End- P eriodic T rain T rack M aps and D ynamics on F ree-by- C yclic G roups . ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2024. Thesis (Ph.D.)--Temple University

    2024

  32. [40]

    Algebraic and topological properties of big mapping class groups

    Priyam Patel and Nicholas Vlamis. Algebraic and topological properties of big mapping class groups. Algebraic & Geometric Topology , 18(7):4109–4142, December 2018

    2018

  33. [41]

    Coarse geometry of topological groups , volume 223 of Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics

    Christian Rosendal. Coarse geometry of topological groups , volume 223 of Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2022

    2022

  34. [42]

    Normal Closure of Finite Subgroups of Aut(F_n) and Out(F_n)

    Jiayi Shen. Normal Closure of Finite Subgroups of Aut(F_n) and Out(F_n) . PhD thesis, Notre Dame, 2025

    2025

  35. [43]

    On torsion-free groups with infinitely many ends

    John R Stallings. On torsion-free groups with infinitely many ends. Annals of Mathematics , 88(2):312--334, 1968

    1968

  36. [44]

    Groups of piecewise linear homeomorphisms

    Melanie Stein. Groups of piecewise linear homeomorphisms. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society , 332(2):477--514, 1992

    1992

  37. [45]

    BNSR -invariants of surface H oughton groups

    Noah Torgerson and Jeremy West. BNSR -invariants of surface H oughton groups. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.04941 , 03 2024

    2024

  38. [46]

    The sphere complex of a locally finite graph

    Brian Udall. The sphere complex of a locally finite graph. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.07976 , 07 2024

    2024 arXiv

  39. [47]

    On the -invariants of generalized T hompson groups and H oughton groups

    Matthew CB Zaremsky. On the -invariants of generalized T hompson groups and H oughton groups. International Mathematics Research Notices , 2017(19):5861--5896, 2017

    2017

  40. [48]

    The BNSR -invariants of the H oughton groups, concluded

    Matthew CB Zaremsky. The BNSR -invariants of the H oughton groups, concluded. Proceedings of the Edinburgh Mathematical Society , 63(1):1--11, 2020

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.