Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 42 references

On Relative Biexactness of Amalgamated Free Product von Neumann Algebras

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Amalgamated free products of injective von Neumann algebras are biexact relative to their common amalgam, and biexact outright when the amalgam is mixing.

desk verdict The relative biexactness theorems are real and likely correct, but the advertised upgrade to genuine biexactness under mixing rests on a new definition that needs more work before I'd trust it. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.19508 v2 pith:5I6LBYGB submitted 2025-05-26 math.OA

Kai Toyosawa , Zhiyuan Yang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.OA MSC 46L1046L54
keywords biexactvonNeumannalgebrasamalgamatedfreeproductrelativebiexactnesssmall-at-infinityboundarymixingsubalgebrasinjectivesubalgebraabsorptionKurosh-typedecomposition
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 asks when an amalgamated free product of von Neumann algebras inherits biexactness, a structural finiteness property that in the group case controls how subalgebras sit inside a larger algebra. Its central result is that if several injective von Neumann algebras share an injective subalgebra $B$ with faithful normal conditional expectations, then the amalgamated free product is biexact relative to $B$, and if $B$ is “mixing” in each factor and the factors are separable, the product is biexact outright. In the tracial weakly exact case, the product is at least biexact relative to the family of factors, which yields a decomposition theorem for arbitrary subalgebras into properly proximal, amenable, and relatively amenable parts. The proof works through a Toeplitz-Pimsner algebra built from the free-product Hilbert space; this lets the paper prove the required nuclearity without any assumption on states, so the result covers non-$\sigma$-finite algebras.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the Toeplitz-Pimsner algebra $T(H)$ associated with a $C^*$-correspondence over $A_1\oplus A_2$, where $A_i$ is an ultraweakly dense $C^*$-subalgebra of $M_i$. A creation operator $T$ on the free-product Hilbert space encodes the interleaving of the two factors, and the gauge-invariant uniqueness theorem identifies $C^*(A_1\oplus A_2, T)$ with $T(H)$; a u.c.p. map $\Phi$ then sends words in $T$ and the $A_i$'s into the reduced amalgamated free product. This factorization proves that the inclusion of the reduced free product into a free product of basic constructions is nuclear in the appropriate relative sense. The small-at-infinity boundary $S_X(M)$ and the “mixing” condition (Definition 5.4) are the objects that convert this nuclearity into relative and then genuine biexactness.

What would settle it

Find two separable injective von Neumann algebras $M_1$, $M_2$ sharing a mixing amalgam $B$ for which the operator $e_B x J y J e_B$ for some $x,y\in M$ falls outside $K^{\infty,1}(M)$; this would violate the key step of Lemma 5.5 and thereby the upgrade to Corollary 1.7. A simpler check is whether Definition 5.4 restricted to tracial $M$ is equivalent to the standard mixing condition: any tracial pair that is mixing classically but not under Definition 5.4 would refute the paper's implicit equivalence.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that amalgamation preserves biexactness in the relative sense: for injective $M_1,\dots,M_n$ with common injective $B$ and faithful normal conditional expectations, the amalgamated free product $M=M_1 *_B \cdots *_B M_n$ is biexact relative to $B$ (Theorem 1.3). It also claims that in the weakly exact tracial case the same product is biexact relative to the collection $\{M_1,\dots,M_n\}$ whenever $B$ is injective (Corollary 1.2), and that when each $M_i$ is separable injective and $B$ is mixing in each factor, $M$ itself is biexact (Corollary 1.7). On top of these biexactness statements, the paper proves structural decomposition and subalgebra absorption theorems, including a Kurosh-type uniqueness result for free products of weakly exact nonamenable non-properly proximal II$_1$ factors.

Load-bearing premise

The whole upgrade to genuine biexactness rests on the new definition of a mixing subalgebra for general von Neumann algebras and on the approximation argument in Lemma 5.5; if this definition does not behave like the classical tracial mixing condition, Corollary 1.7 could fail even though the relative biexactness theorems survive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the main theorems hold, every finite von Neumann subalgebra $N$ of an amalgamated free product of injective algebras either embeds into the amalgam $B$ or has amenable relative commutant (Corollary 4.18).
  • In the tracial weakly exact case, arbitrary subalgebras decompose into a properly proximal part, an amenable part, and parts amenable relative to each factor (Theorem 1.4).
  • Free products of weakly exact nonamenable non-properly proximal II$_1$ factors have a unique Kurosh-type decomposition, up to unitary conjugacy and permutation of the factors (Corollary 1.6).
  • When $B$ is mixing in each factor, the whole amalgamated free product is biexact, so the lamplighter Bernoulli crossed product example gives a concrete family of genuine biexact algebras beyond the group case.
  • The relative biexactness conclusions do not require $\sigma$-finiteness or the existence of a state, unlike earlier free-product biexactness results.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If Definition 5.4 of “mixing” is shown to match the classical tracial notion in full generality, Corollary 1.7 would extend to a wider class of non-tracial inclusions, not just separable injective ones; the paper only verifies the needed approximation in limited cases.
  • The Toeplitz-Pimsner mechanism is likely to prove relative biexactness for other amalgamated constructions, such as free products over finite-dimensional amalgams or crossed products by amalgamated actions, where the same creation-operator words remain tractable.
  • A natural test of the upgrade method is whether it can be run with a boundary piece generated by a single non-mixing subalgebra; if the small-at-infinity boundary is too large, the projection decomposition in Theorem 5.14 would fail.
  • The Kurosh-type result suggests that free-product factors with all factors weakly exact, nonamenable, and non-properly proximal admit a prime-like decomposition, and one could ask whether the non-proper-proximality assumption can be relaxed to mere non-biexactness.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proves relative biexactness results for amalgamated free product (AFP) von Neumann algebras. Its main theorems are: (1) when M1,...,Mn are weakly exact tracial von Neumann algebras with a common injective amalgam B and trace-preserving conditional expectations, the AFP is biexact relative to {M1,...,Mn} (Corollary 1.2); (2) when the Mi are injective and B is a common subalgebra with faithful normal conditional expectations, the AFP is biexact relative to B (Theorem 4.17/1.3); and (3) when the Mi are separable injective and B is mixing in each Mi, the AFP is genuinely biexact (Corollary 5.23/1.7). The paper also derives structural decomposition and absorption theorems for tracial von Neumann algebras (Theorem 1.4) and a Kurosh-type rigidity result (Corollary 1.6). The proofs use a Toeplitz-Pimsner algebra construction to factor the inclusion of the reduced AFP into an amalgamated free product of basic constructions, followed by computations of small-at-infinity boundaries.

Significance. If the main claims are correct, this is a substantial contribution: it extends Ozawa's and Ding--Peterson's relative biexactness technology to amalgamated free products of von Neumann algebras, works without assuming σ-finiteness, and yields new subalgebra rigidity results. The Toeplitz-Pimsner approach to nuclear embeddings in this setting is a promising and nontrivial tool. The paper is careful about many technical points, such as relative tensor products for non-σ-finite algebras and the definition of the small-at-infinity boundary. However, the advertised upgrade to genuine biexactness for mixing amalgams rests on a new definition of mixing (Definition 5.4) and on Lemma 5.5, whose proof is only sketched and contains a questionable reduction. The relative biexactness theorems themselves are largely independent of that upgrade and appear well supported. The main open issue is therefore localized but load-bearing for Corollary 1.7.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.2, Definition 5.4 and Lemma 5.5] The definition of mixing in Definition 5.4 uses membership in K∞,1(M), the closure of compact operators in the M-M and M′-M′ topologies, rather than membership in K(L2M). In the tracial case K∞,1(M) is generally larger than K(L2M) (see [DEP23, Proposition 3.6]), so this definition is weaker than the classical compactness criterion quoted at the start of Section 5.2. The paper neither proves that Definition 5.4 agrees with the classical notion in the tracial case nor identifies where the difference is immaterial. Consequently Corollary 1.7 is a statement about a new notion, and the examples in the introduction do not automatically transfer to the classical notion of mixing.
  2. [Section 5.2, Lemma 5.5] The proof of Lemma 5.5, which is the pivotal step for Corollary 5.23, is only sketched and contains a reduction that does not appear correct as written. After assuming i1=in=j1=jm=2, the proof asserts eM1x1⋯xnJ y1⋯ymJ(eM1−eB)=0 and then replaces eM1 by eB on the right. For a word beginning with M2, however, eM1λ(x1)⋯=0, so the displayed identity, even if it holds, does not justify the next equality; the case where the word begins with M1 is not reconciled with the reduction to i1=2. The subsequent claim that eB(x1Jy1J)eBT eB(xnJynJ)eB belongs to K∞,1(M) for all T is also justified only by an ideal-theoretic argument, without the convergence estimates needed to pass from K∞,1(M2) to K∞,1(M). Since Corollaries 5.6, 5.7, and 5.23 depend on this lemma, the upgrade from relative biexactness to genuine biexactness is not fully established.
  3. [Section 4.1, Proposition 4.9] The proof of Proposition 4.9 is the heart of Theorem 4.1, but the key multiplicative-domain verification is deferred: the text says one applies 'the same argument as in the proof of [Toy25, Theorem 3.2]' and then gives computations only for T2(T∗)2 and u. The displayed calculations show agreement of Φ♯∗◦π◦Ψ with the canonical inclusion on elements of Ai, but the assertion that this places the generators in the multiplicative domain of the composition is not demonstrated in the manuscript. Because all later relative biexactness results rely on Theorem 4.1, this step should be reproduced in full, or the precise theorem from [Toy25] should be stated and its hypotheses checked explicitly.
  4. [Section 5.4, Theorem 5.14 and Corollary 5.19] Theorem 5.14 is proved by saying that it 'essentially follows from the proof of [DKE24, Theorem 1.1]' and then giving a sketch. The final part of the sketch constructs projections fi and concludes that ∨i fi = f0⊥; this conclusion requires the fi to be central and mutually orthogonal, which is asserted but not shown. Similarly, the proof of Corollary 5.19 compresses a substantial rigidity argument involving the flip automorphism and [IPP08, Theorem 1.1] into a few sentences. These arguments may be correct, but the amount of omitted detail is large for statements that are advertised as applications of the main theorems.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 1, first paragraph] There is a typo: 'adapts [DP23, Theorem 5.10] to the the setting of amalgamated free product' should read 'to the setting'.
  2. [Section 2.2, first paragraph] The Jones basic construction is described as 'the von Neuamm subalgebra'; this should be 'von Neumann subalgebra'.
  3. [Section 5.2, beginning] The paper mentions that the usual requirement in the definition of mixing that un be unitary can be omitted, citing [CFM13, Theorem 3.3], but it does not explain how Definition 5.4 relates to this criterion in the tracial case; a short remark would help the reader.
  4. [Section 5.3, Proposition 5.15] Proposition 5.15 is stated and said to follow by the same proof as [Din25, Proposition 4.2], but it is not used later. Either give the proof or state explicitly that it is included for completeness.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the core relative-biexactness theorems are proved from the stated injectivity/weak-exactness hypotheses via independently published Toeplitz-Pimsner machinery; the biexactness upgrade rests on a new non-tracial mixing definition whose proof is sketched, but this is a correctness risk, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central claims do not reduce to their own inputs by construction. Theorem 4.17 (Theorem 1.3) is proved by combining Corollary 4.10 and Proposition 4.16; Corollary 4.10 in turn applies Theorem 4.1, whose proof uses the Toeplitz-Pimsner correspondence and lemmas from [Toy25]. Although [Toy25] is a paper by the first author, it is an independently published JFA article, and the cited lemmas are parameter-free tools with assumptions that do not include the target biexactness conclusion. This is legitimate external support, not a self-citation chain that smuggles in the result. Proposition 4.14 and Lemma 4.12 derive Condition (A) from the tracial hypothesis and do not assume relative biexactness. The same holds for the weakly exact tracial Corollary 1.2. The only delicate step is Corollary 1.7 / Theorem 5.23, which upgrades relative biexactness to genuine biexactness using the new Definition 5.4 of mixing and the sketched Lemma 5.5. If the new definition is not equivalent to the classical tracial mixing property, or if the approximation argument in Lemma 5.5 has a gap, then Corollary 1.7 may fail even though the relative biexactness theorems survive. That is a genuine correctness risk, correctly flagged by a skeptical reader, but it is not circularity: the theorem asserts a nontrivial implication from an explicitly stated hypothesis to a different conclusion, and the proof does not assume the conclusion or define the hypothesis in terms of the conclusion. No fitted parameters are renamed as predictions, no known empirical pattern is repackaged as a new theorem, and no uniqueness theorem from the authors' prior work is invoked to forbid alternatives. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted; the paper is pure mathematics without numerical constants. The main external inputs are standard facts in W*-correspondence theory and operator algebras (accepted as axioms in the field) plus two paper-specific conditions: Condition (A) in Definition 4.11 and the non-tracial mixing Definition 5.4. The proofs also invoke the gauge-invariant uniqueness theorem for Toeplitz-Pimsner algebras and the structure theory of biduals from [DEP23, DP23].

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Existence of faithful normal conditional expectations Ei : Mi -> B.
    Assumed in all main theorems (Theorems 1.1, 1.3, 4.1, 4.17).
  • domain assumption B is injective when Mi are weakly exact (Section 4.2, Cor 1.2).
    Needed for Lemma 3.1 to get Mi-nuclear embedding into the basic construction; the paper notes injectivity is essential.
  • domain assumption Traciality and trace preservation tau_i o E_i = tau_i for the weakly exact case (Prop 4.15).
    Used in Lemma 4.12 to prove Condition (A).
  • ad hoc to paper Condition (A): eB<M,eB> is contained in the C-M closure of eBM.
    Introduced in Definition 4.11; the proof only covers tracial or finite-dimensional B, and the paper conjectures it holds more broadly.
  • standard math The gauge-invariant uniqueness theorem for Toeplitz-Pimsner algebras ([BO08, Theorem 4.6.18]).
    Used to identify C*(A1+A2,T) with T(H) in Lemma 4.3.
  • standard math Standard tracial von Neumann algebra facts and W*-correspondence theory.
    Throughout Sections 2 and 3; includes Kaplansky density theorem, polar decomposition, n.s.f. weights, relative tensor products.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On Relative Biexactness of Amalgamated Free Product von Neumann Algebras." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5I6LBYGB

@misc{pith2026250519508,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On Relative Biexactness of Amalgamated Free Product von Neumann Algebras},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5I6LBYGB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.19508}
}
abstract

Given weakly exact tracial von Neumann algebras $M_{1}, M_{2}$ with a common injective amalgam $B$, we prove that the amalgamated free product $M_{1}\overline{*}_{B}M_{2}$ is biexact relative to $\{M_{1},M_{2}\}$. In the case where $ M_1 $ and $M_2$ are injective, we further show that $M_{1}\overline{*}_{B}M_{2}$ is biexact relative to the amalgam $B$, and if $B$ is mixing in each of $M_1$ and $M_2$, $M_{1}\overline{*}_{B}M_{2}$ itself is biexact. As applications, we derive structural decomposition results and subalgebra absorption theorems for amalgamated free product von Neumann algebras, extending those previously known in the group case.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2, 309--341

    Claire Anantharaman-Delaroche, Amenable correspondences and approximation properties for von N eumann algebras , Pacific Journal of Mathematics 171 (1995), no. 2, 309--341

    work page 1995

  2. [2]

    2, 277--294

    Charles A Akemann, The general S tone- W eierstrass problem , Journal of Functional Analysis 4 (1969), no. 2, 277--294

    work page 1969

  3. [3]

    Claire Anantharaman and Sorin Popa, An introduction to II _1 factors , preprint 8 (2017)

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    R\'emi Boutonnet and Cyril Houdayer, Amenable absorption in amalgamated free product von N eumann algebras , Kyoto J. Math. 58 (2018), no. 3, 583--593. 3843391

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    R\' e mi Boutonnet, Adrian Ioana, and Jesse Peterson, Properly proximal groups and their von N eumann algebras , Ann. Sci. \' E c. Norm. Sup\' e r. (4) 54 (2021), no. 2, 445--482. 4258166

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    Brown and Narutaka Ozawa, C^* -algebras and finite-dimensional approximations , Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol

    Nathanial P. Brown and Narutaka Ozawa, C^* -algebras and finite-dimensional approximations , Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 88, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2008. 2391387

    2008

  7. [7]

    164, Cambridge University Press, 2018, pp

    Joan Bosa, Gabriele Tornetta, and Joachim Zacharias, Open projections and suprema in the C untz semigroup , Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, vol. 164, Cambridge University Press, 2018, pp. 135--146

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Math 19 (2013), 343--366

    Jan Cameron, Junsheng Fang, and Kunal Mukherjee, Mixing subalgebras of finite von N eumann algebras , New York J. Math 19 (2013), 343--366

    work page 2013

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Alain Connes, Noncommutative geometry , Academic Press, 1994

    1994

  2. [10]

    Changying Ding, Srivatsav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, and Jesse Peterson, Properly proximal von N eumann algebras , Duke Math. J. 172 (2023), no. 15, 2821--2894. 4675043

    2023

  3. [11]

    Changying Ding, A unique C artan subalgebra result for B ernoulli actions of weakly amenable groups , Journal of Functional Analysis (2025), 110852

    2025

  4. [12]

    Changying Ding and Srivatsav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, Structure of relatively biexact group von N eumann algebras , Comm. Math. Phys. 405 (2024), no. 4, Paper No. 104, 19. 4733336

    2024

  5. [13]

    Changying Ding and Jesse Peterson, Biexact von neumann algebras, arXiv:2309.10161 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Daniel Drimbe, Measure equivalence rigidity via s-malleable deformations, Compos. Math. 159 (2023), no. 10, 2023--2050. 4629453

    2023

  7. [15]

    Fowler, Paul S

    Neal J. Fowler, Paul S. Muhly, and Iain Raeburn, Representations of C untz- P imsner algebras , Indiana Univ. Math. J. 52 (2003), no. 3, 569--605. 1986889

    2003

  8. [16]

    II , Ann

    Liming Ge, Applications of free entropy to finite von N eumann algebras. II , Ann. of Math. (2) 147 (1998), no. 1, 143--157. 1609522

    1998

  9. [17]

    Cyril Houdayer and Yusuke Isono, Unique prime factorization and bicentralizer problem for a class of type III factors , Adv. Math. 305 (2017), 402--455. 3570140

    2017

  10. [18]

    thesis, Paris 7, 2007

    Cyril Houdayer, Sur la classification de certaines alg \`e bres de von N eumann , Ph.D. thesis, Paris 7, 2007

    2007

  11. [19]

    Cyril Houdayer and Yoshimichi Ueda, Rigidity of free product von N eumann algebras , Compos. Math. 152 (2016), no. 12, 2461--2492. 3594283

    2016

  12. [20]

    Yusuke Isono and Amine Marrakchi, Tensor product decompositions and rigidity of full factors, Ann. Sci. \'Ec. Norm. Sup\'er. (4) 55 (2022), no. 1, 109--139. 4411859

    2022

  13. [21]

    Adrian Ioana, Cartan subalgebras of amalgamated free product II _1 factors , Ann. Sci. \'Ec. Norm. Sup\'er. (4) 48 (2015), no. 1, 71--130, With an appendix by Ioana and Stefaan Vaes. 3335839

    2015

  14. [22]

    200 (2008), no

    Adrian Ioana, Jesse Peterson, and Sorin Popa, Amalgamated free products of weakly rigid factors and calculation of their symmetry groups, Acta Math. 200 (2008), no. 1, 85--153. 2386109

    2008

  15. [23]

    Yusuke Isono, Weak exactness for C^ -algebras and application to condition ( AO ) , J. Funct. Anal. 264 (2013), no. 4, 964--998. 3004955

    2013

  16. [24]

    , On bi-exactness of discrete quantum groups, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN (2015), no. 11, 3619--3650. 3373062

    2015

  17. [25]

    u rich, 1994), Birkh\

    Eberhard Kirchberg, Exact C ^* -algebras, tensor products, and the classification of purely infinite algebras , Proceedings of the I nternational C ongress of M athematicians, V ol. 1, 2 ( Z \" u rich, 1994), Birkh\" a user, Basel, 1995, pp. 943--954. 1403994

    1994

  18. [26]

    Alexey Kuzmin, C CR and CAR algebras are connected via a path of C untz- T oeplitz algebras , Comm. Math. Phys. 399 (2023), no. 3, 1623--1645. 4580530

    2023

  19. [27]

    Bojan Magajna, A topology for operator modules over W^* -algebras , J. Funct. Anal. 154 (1998), no. 1, 17--41. 1616512

    1998

  20. [28]

    , C^* -convex sets and completely bounded bimodule homomorphisms , Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 130 (2000), no. 2, 375--387. 1750836

    2000

  21. [29]

    192 (2004), no

    Narutaka Ozawa, Solid von N eumann algebras , Acta Math. 192 (2004), no. 1, 111--117. 2079600

    2004

  22. [30]

    , A K urosh-type theorem for type II_1 factors , Int. Math. Res. Not. (2006), Art. ID 97560, 21. 2211141

    2006

  23. [31]

    89, Polish Acad

    , A comment on free group factors, Noncommutative harmonic analysis with applications to probability II , Banach Center Publ., vol. 89, Polish Acad. Sci. Inst. Math., Warsaw, 2010, pp. 241--245. 2730894

    2010

  24. [32]

    William L Paschke, Inner product modules over C^* -algebras , Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 182 (1973), 443--468

    1973

  25. [33]

    Sorin Popa, Markov traces on universal J ones algebras and subfactors of finite index , Invent. Math. 111 (1993), no. 2, 375--405. 1198815

    1993

  26. [34]

    , On a class of type II _1 factors with B etti numbers invariants , Ann. of Math. (2) 163 (2006), no. 3, 809--899. 2215135

    2006

  27. [35]

    I , Invent

    , Strong rigidity of II_1 factors arising from malleable actions of w -rigid groups. I , Invent. Math. 165 (2006), no. 2, 369--408. 2231961

    2006

  28. [36]

    Dimitri Shlyakhtenko, Some estimates for non-microstates free entropy dimension with applications to q -semicircular families , Int. Math. Res. Not. (2004), no. 51, 2757--2772. 2130608

    2004

  29. [37]

    Takesaki, Theory of operator algebras

    M. Takesaki, Theory of operator algebras. II , Encyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences, vol. 125, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003, Operator Algebras and Non-commutative Geometry, 6. 1943006

    2003

  30. [38]

    Kai Toyosawa, Weak exactness and amalgamated free product of von N eumann algebras , J. Funct. Anal. 288 (2025), no. 4, Paper No. 110759, 20. 4833744

    2025

  31. [39]

    Yoshimichi Ueda, Amalgamated free product over C artan subalgebra , Pacific J. Math. 191 (1999), no. 2, 359--392. 1738186

    1999

  32. [40]

    Stefaan Vaes, Normalizers inside amalgamated free product von N eumann algebras , Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 50 (2014), no. 4, 695--721. 3273307

    2014

  33. [41]

    D. V. Voiculescu, K. J. Dykema, and A. Nica, Free random variables, CRM Monograph Series, vol. 1, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1992, A noncommutative probability approach to free products with applications to random matrices, operator algebras and harmonic an...

    1992

  34. [42]

    29--Sept

    Dan Voiculescu, Symmetries of some reduced free product C^* -algebras , Operator Algebras and their Connections with Topology and Ergodic Theory: Proceedings of the OATE Conference held in Bu s teni, Romania, Aug. 29--Sept. 9, 1983, Springer, 2006, pp. 556--588

    1983

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.