Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 51 references

Stochastic Stokes origami: folds, cusps and skyrmionic facets in random polarisation fields

T0 review · 3 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 A random polarisation field's Stokes map to the Poincaré sphere is generically folded into facets whose boundaries are folds and cusps, the paper argues.

desk verdict The patch/facet picture of random Stokes maps is a fresh idea, but the paper's headline statistics are self-contradictory and need a major correction before the results can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.18232 v1 pith:BDAKPHKQ submitted 2024-11-27 physics.optics math-phmath.MP

Kerr Maxwell , Mark R Dennis This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticsmath-phmath.MP
keywords PoincarésphererandompolarisationfieldStokesmapjacobianfoldandcuspsingularitiesskyrmionictexturesorigamimanifoldpercolation
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

The paper argues that a generic random transverse polarisation field, such as polarisation speckle, is secretly a folded map rather than an unstructured one. The normalised Stokes map S from the plane to the Poincaré sphere is a generic smooth map between surfaces, so its only singularities are fold lines—the crease lines where the jacobian $\rho$ vanishes—and cusp points where fold lines meet; the connected regions where $\rho$ keeps its sign, called patches, map to oriented facets on the sphere with positive or negative solid angle. The paper derives the exact probability density $P(\rho)=K_2^{-1}(1+|\rho|/K_2)^{-3}$ for isotropic Gaussian random fields, whose heavy tails come from low-intensity regions where polarisation changes extremely fast, a polarisation analogue of superoscillations. It then proposes that the plane with the folded area form $\rho(x,y)\,dx\wedge dy$ is an origami manifold whose template encodes how patches nest and glue, and presents numerical evidence that patch networks follow two-dimensional percolation scaling. A sympathetic reader would care because this gives random light a skyrmion-like, quasiparticle structure without any designed beam, and connects polarisation singularities to singularity theory, percolation, and symplectic topology.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the jacobian $\rho$ of the Stokes map, the Skyrme density of the polarisation texture. It is the coefficient of the folded area form $\rho(x,y)\,dx\wedge dy$; its zero set is the crease lines, its sign labels the patches, its integral over a patch is the facet's solid angle, and its stationary structure locates the pleat points that map to cusps. Whitney's fold-and-cusp theorem supplies the generic singularity classification that organises this geometry, and the Gaussian random-wave ensemble supplies the statistical distribution of $\rho$.

What would settle it

One decisive check is to simulate many isotropic Gaussian random transverse fields, compute $\rho = S\cdot\partial_x S\times\partial_y S$ on a fine grid, and histogram it: the paper predicts $P(\rho)=K_2^{-1}(1+|\rho|/K_2)^{-3}$, so a tail that decays faster than $|\rho|^{-3}$, or a convergent second moment of $\rho$, would falsify the statistical claim. A geometric falsifier is a generic realisation whose crease set contains a transverse self-intersection or an endpoint that is neither a fold nor a cusp, which would contradict the claimed Whitney structure.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that every generic random transverse polarisation field carries a well-defined patch/facet decomposition of the Skyrme type. In an isotropic Gaussian random superposition of transverse plane waves, the jacobian of the Stokes map, $\rho = S\cdot\partial_x S\times\partial_y S = \nabla\phi\times\nabla Z\cdot e_z$, is a signed scalar whose zero set forms crease lines; $\operatorname{sign}(\rho)$ labels the patches of the plane, and each patch maps to a facet on the Poincaré sphere subtending a solid angle given by $\int \rho$ over the patch. The statistical distribution of $\rho$ is sign-symmetric with $P(\rho)=K_2^{-1}(1+|\rho|/K_2)^{-3}$, so the mean absolute density is the second spectral moment $K_2$ while all higher moments diverge, reflecting superoscillatory low-intensity regions. The paper identifies the preimages of folds as crease lines and the preimages of cusps as pleat points, gives a local normal form for a crease with a pleat point, and estimates the densities of crease lines and pleat points numerically. Finally, it proposes that $(\mathbb{R}^2, \rho(x,y)\,dx\wedge dy)$ can be read as an origami manifold, with facets corresponding to Delzant polytopes in an origami template, while explicitly noting that more work is needed to make that identification fully rigorous.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a random polarisation speckle field is a generic smooth map between two surfaces, so its only singularities are folds and cusps; the origami-template extension additionally assumes the crease lines foliate into oriented circles over a compact base, a condition the paper leaves unverified.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every random speckle pattern has a patch–facet decomposition, so partial skyrmionic coverings of the Poincaré sphere are generic, not design-dependent.
  • The exact law $P(\rho)=K_2^{-1}(1+|\rho|/K_2)^{-3}$ predicts that the average absolute skyrmionic charge density in a random field is $K_2$ and that rare low-intensity regions dominate the covered solid angle.
  • Measurable densities follow from the analysis: crease-line density is close to the L-line density, and pleat-point density is roughly 1.79 times the density of fixed-polarisation points.
  • Patch areas show scaling consistent with two-dimensional percolation, making polarisation speckle a candidate laboratory system for percolation critical phenomena.
  • Because the description depends only on the jacobian, it is invariant under rotations of the Poincaré sphere and applies equally to maps from tori and to higher-dimensional polarisation fields.

Reading between the lines

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

  • I would expect the same fold/cusp analysis to organise momentum-space Stokes maps in topological photonics, where the Chern number is the degree; local folds and facet rearrangements cannot change that integer, so the patch picture gives a geometric way to see why the invariant is stable.
  • The divergent higher moments of $\rho$ imply that the solid angle of a randomly selected finite facet has no well-defined variance; experiments comparing facet areas will therefore show slow, sample-dependent convergence unless conditioned on intensity.
  • If the origami-template conditions are eventually verified, the Delzant-polytope data would provide a combinatorial label for random polarisation textures; a testable consequence is that facet images should obey the template's vertex-gluing rules, which could be checked from measured Stokes fields.
  • The crease lines, being higher-order singularities independent of special polarisation states, are plausible organisers for C-point creation and annihilation events, playing the role that $\Omega=0$ lines play for vortex-loop topology in scalar waves.
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. The paper studies a random transverse optical polarization field as a continuous Stokes map S: R^2 → S^2, and analyses the Jacobian determinant ρ of this map. It claims that the zero lines ρ=0 are fold preimages ('crease lines'), that rank-zero points on these lines are cusp preimages ('pleat points'), and that connected components of constant sign of ρ ('patches') map to 'facets' on the Poincaré sphere. The paper further proposes a statistical distribution for ρ, Eq. (14), reports numerically estimated densities for crease lines and pleat points, discusses percolation of the patches, and sketches an interpretation in terms of origami manifolds with Delzant polytopes. The central geometric picture is clearly presented and supported by a local model, but the quantitative statistical application contains a concrete error, and the origami-manifold conclusions rely on unverified conditions that the paper itself acknowledges.

Significance. If the statistical statements are corrected, the paper gives a useful and original singularity-theoretic description of random polarization textures: it connects Whitney fold/cusp theory to the Skyrme-density viewpoint and makes a falsifiable prediction for the heavy-tailed distribution of the Jacobian. The local model of Eq. (10) is a clean, checkable demonstration of the cusp normal form in a polarization context, and the numerical density estimates, although approximate, provide concrete numbers that can be compared with future experiments or simulations. The paper is honest about the exploratory status of the origami-manifold section, which is a strength, but that section's conclusions are not yet established. Overall the manuscript's core geometric message is sound and deserving of publication after the statistical and framing issues are fixed.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4, sentence after Eq. (14)] The statement that 'the fraction of the area where |ρ| > K2 is 75% of the plane, and where |ρ| > 4K2 is 36% of the plane' is inconsistent with Eq. (14). From Eq. (14), P(|ρ| > aK2) = 2∫_{aK2}^{∞} K2^{-1}(1+|ρ|/K2)^{-3} dρ = (1+a)^{-2}, which gives 25% for a=1 and 4% for a=4. The printed values 75% and 36% equal instead the fractional contribution of these regions to ⟨|ρ|⟩, namely 2∫_{a}^{∞} u(1+u)^{-3} du. Please correct both the numbers and the interpretation; the superoscillation narrative should be rephrased accordingly. Note that after the correction the claim is actually more striking: a small area fraction (25%) carries most (75%) of the mean topological charge density.
  2. [§4, Eq. (14)] Equation (14) is introduced as 'straightforward to show' by 'direct application of the methods in [8,33,34]', but no derivation is given. Since this equation is the only analytic statistical result in the paper and is the basis for the quantitative claims in this section, please provide a derivation in an appendix or a precise pointer to where the result appears. This is particularly important because the same section contains the numerical misapplication described above, and the reader needs to be able to check the normalization and the algebraic tail.
  3. [§5, definition of origami manifold and template] The origami-manifold interpretation requires that the null foliation of the folded symplectic form integrate to oriented circle fibres over a compact base. For the random fields studied here, the crease lines percolate across the plane (as shown in Figure 6c and discussed in §4), so the finite-loop/compact-base condition is not satisfied in general. The manuscript partly acknowledges this ('subject to some technicalities', 'More work is needed'), but the subsequent statements about Delzant polytopes and the origami template are phrased as consequences. Please explicitly label the origami-manifold and Delzant-polytope description as a conjecture or proposal for future work, and make the conditional statement 'if the origami conditions are verified' clear in the text.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4, sentence after Eq. (14)] Typo: '36% if the plane' should read '36% of the plane'.
  2. [§3.1] Typo: 'correspnds' should be 'corresponds' in the sentence about large values of ρ.
  3. [Figure 6 caption] The caption states that the histograms are 'fitted to a straight line of −187/91 given by percolation theory', but no fitting procedure, fit range, or uncertainty is reported; please add these details so the 'plausible agreement' can be assessed.
  4. [References] Reference [45] lists 'Macdeff D and Salamon D'; the correct spelling is 'McDuff'.
  5. [Abstract and Discussion] The term 'polarisation skyrmionic anyons' is introduced without a definition or a concrete criterion distinguishing them from ordinary patches. Please define the term or soften the claim, since as written it is suggestive but not well specified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the patch/facet/fold/cusp construction is self-contained, and the main statistical result is a cited parameter-free calculation rather than a reduction to its inputs.

full rationale

The central geometric claim is not circular. The paper defines the Stokes jacobian as rho = grad(phi) x grad(Z) . e_z, and the identifications of rho = 0 with fold preimages (crease lines) and of the pleat-point condition with cusps follow from the rank-1/rank-0 degeneration of the map S:R^2->S^2, not from any fitted output. 'Patches' are defined as connected components of sign(rho), so the patch/facet association is a definitional consequence, not a prediction obtained by fitting. The one imported quantitative ingredient is Eq. (14), which the paper attributes to 'direct application of the methods in [8,33,34]' and the superoscillation calculation of [30]. This is a genuine self-citation burden, since those references share authors with the present paper, but it is a parameter-free calculation from the stated Gaussian random-field model and is not defined in terms of the patches or facets it is then used to interpret. It is therefore at most a minor self-citation, not a circular reduction. Section 5 also explicitly states 'More work is needed' before identifying (R^2, rho dx wedge dy) with an origami manifold; the unverified compact-base/oriented-circle-fibre condition is an acknowledged gap rather than a smuggled ansatz. Separately, the printed claim that the fraction of area with |rho|>K2 is 75% and with |rho|>4K2 is 36% is arithmetically inconsistent with Eq. (14), which gives 25% and 4%; that is a correctness error, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard singularity theory and Gaussian random field assumptions, plus one unverified technical assumption for the origami interpretation. No free parameters are fitted to data; K2 is an input of the random field model. The only invented entity is the speculative anyon label, which has no independent evidence.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The random field in Eq. (1) is statistically stationary, rotationally symmetric, and ergodic, so spatial averages equal ensemble averages.
    Invoked in Section 4 for replacing spatial averages by ensemble averages; standard for Gaussian random fields but not proven for the specific quantities such as patch areas and densities.
  • domain assumption The Stokes map S is a generic smooth map, so Whitney's fold and cusp classification applies.
    Used throughout Section 3 to justify crease lines and pleat points as the only generic singularities of the map.
  • domain assumption The sign domains of rho (and of Re Ex, S3) belong to the 2D percolation universality class of Bogomolny and Schmit, with scaling exponent -187/91.
    Used in Section 4 to interpret the domain-size histograms; this is an external hypothesis, not proven here.
  • ad hoc to paper (R^2, rho dx dy) satisfies the folded symplectic and origami manifold conditions, with null foliation integrating to circle fibres over a compact base.
    Assumed in Section 5 to import the origami template and Delzant polytope machinery; the paper itself flags that this requires more work.
  • domain assumption The joint statistics of the Gaussian field and its derivatives are such that Eq. (14) follows by direct application of methods in references [8,33,34].
    This unstated derivation is the basis for the central statistical result; no proof is included in the paper.
invented entities (1)
  • Polarisation skyrmionic anyons
    purpose: Suggested particle-like interpretation of finite patches with nonzero facet solid angle in random polarization fields.
    Introduced in Section 6 as a speculative 'might be productive' interpretation; no new measurement or falsifiable prediction is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stochastic Stokes origami: folds, cusps and skyrmionic facets in random polarisation fields." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BDAKPHKQ

@misc{pith2026241118232,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stochastic Stokes origami: folds, cusps and skyrmionic facets in random polarisation fields},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BDAKPHKQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.18232}
}
read the original abstract

We consider the jacobian of a random transverse polarisation field, from the transverse plane to the Poincar\'e sphere, as a Skyrme density partially covering the sphere. Connected domains of the plane where the jacobian has the same sign -- patches -- map to facets subtending some general solid angle on the Poincar\'e sphere. As a generic continuous mapping between surfaces, we interpret the polarisation pattern on the sphere in terms of fold lines (corresponding to the crease lines between neighbouring patches) and cusp points (where fold lines meet). We perform a basic statistical analysis of the properties of the patches and facets, including a brief discussion of the percolation properties of the jacobian domains. Connections with abstract origami manifolds are briefly considered. This analysis combines previous studies of structured skyrmionic polarisation patterns with random polarisation patterns, suggesting a particle-like interpretation of random patches as polarisation skyrmionic anyons.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.18232 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Random crumpling of a planar sheet wrapped around a sphere. (a) Cutaway of a 2-sided sheet randomly wrapping around a sphere forming a complicated folding pattern. The sheet colour changes at the fold lines: light blue when the upper side faces outwards, and dark blue when the lower side faces outwards. (b) When the sheet is flattened out, it forms a network of light and dark blue patches, meeting along crease lines… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Random polarisation field. (a) shows 4λ × 4λ of the isotropic random polarisation field described in the text around Eq. (1), with fixed transverse wavenumber k = 2π/λ, and λ the transverse wavelength. There is a polarisation ellipse at each r = (x, y) point in the transverse plane, with size proportional to total intensity S0. Regions of RH elliptic polarisation (yellow) are separated from LH polarisation (cream) b… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Creases, patches and facets of the random polarisation field. (a) shows the same plot as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Model cusp field of Equation (10). (a) shows the polarisation ellipse field, the contours of α and Z (blue), the L line and crease line, and a system of x, y grid lines (pink). The pleat point is at the origin. (b) shows the (S2, S3) plane tangent to S = (1, 0, 0), the…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Finite area patches and corresponding facets. (a) shows the previously plotted random field area, with patches 1,2,3,4 highlighted, patches 1,2,3 are negative, and patch 4 is positive. (b) shows the corresponding facets, with facet 2 much larger than the others, coveri…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Large-scale areas of the same random field, demonstrating percolating domains. In each case, the positive-negative domains of some sign-symmetric function f(x, y) associated with the random polarisation field are plotted over 400λ 2 . In each case the random domains of…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The origami structure of a generic Stokes map. (a) A generic random Stokes map consists of nested regions of the plane (topologically disks or annuli) which take on distinct values of sign(ρ). Regions of positive/negative sign(ρ) are coloured light/dark blue, as in pre…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bliokh K Y, Karimi E, Padgett M J, Alonso M A et al 2023 Roadmap on structured waves J. Opt. 25 103001

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Nye J F 1983 Lines of circular polarization in electromagnetic wave fields Proc R Soc Lond A 389 279–290

    work page 1983

  3. [3]

    Nye J F and Hajnal J V 1987 The wave structure of monochromatic electromagnetic radiation Proc R Soc Lond A 409 21–36

    work page 1987

  4. [4]

    Nye J F 1999 Natural Focusing and Fine Structure of Light (Bristol: IOP Publishing)

    work page 1999

  5. [5]

    Berry M V and Dennis M R 2001 Polarization singularities in isotropic random vector waves Proc R Soc Lond A 457 141–155

    work page 2001

  6. [6]

    Berry M V 2001 Geometry of phase and polarization singularities, illustrated by edge diffraction and the tides Proc SPIE 4403 1-12

    work page 2001

  7. [7]

    Freund I 2001 Poincar´ e vortices Opt Lett 26 1996–1998

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    Dennis M R 2002 Polarization singularities in paraxial vector fields: morphology and statistics Opt Commun 213 201–222

    work page 2002

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    Freund I, Mokhun A I, Soskin M S, Angelsky O V and Mokhun I I 2002 Stokes singularity relations Opt Lett 27 545–547

    2002

  2. [10]

    Angelsky O, Mokhun A, Mokhun I, and Soskin M 2002 The relationship between topological characteristics of component vortices and polarization singularities Opt Commun 207 57–65

    2002

  3. [11]

    Flossmann F, O’Holleran K, Dennis, M R and Padgett M J 2008 Polarization singularities in 2D and 3D speckle fields Phys Rev Lett 100 203902

    2008

  4. [12]

    Burresi M, Engelen R J P, Opheij A et al 2009 Observation of polarization singularities at the nanoscale Phys Rev Lett 102 033902

    2009

  5. [13]

    Dennis M R, O’Holleran K and Padgett M J 2009 Singular optics: optical vortices and polarization singularities Prog Opt 53 293–363

    2009

  6. [14]

    Angelsky O V, Mokhun I I, Bekshaev A Y, Zenkova C Y and Zheng J 2023 Polarization singularities: Topological and dynamical aspects Front Phys 11 1147788

    2023

  7. [15]

    Brosseau C 1998 Fundamentals of Polarized Light: A Statistical Optics Approach, 2nd edition (Wiley)

    1998

  8. [16]

    Goodman J W 2020 Speckle Phenomena in Optics , 2nd edition (SPIE press)

    2020

  9. [17]

    Beckley A M, Brown T G and Alonso M A 2010 Full Poincar´ e beamsOptics Express 18 10777–10785

    2010

  10. [18]

    Gao S, Speirits F C, Castellucci F, Franke-Arnold S, Barnett S M and G¨ otte J B 2020 Paraxial Skyrmionic beams Phys Rev A 102 053513; Erratum Phys Rev A 104 049901(E)

    2020

  11. [19]

    Sugic D, Droop R, Otte E, Ehrmanntraut D, Nori F, Ruostekoski J, Denz C and Dennis M R 2021 Particle- like topologies in light Nature Commun 12 6785

    2021

  12. [20]

    Shen Y, Zhang Q, Shi P, Du L, Yuam X, Zayats A V 2024 Optical skyrmions and other topological quasiparticles of light Nature Photonics 18 15–24

    2024

  13. [21]

    Whitney H 1955 On singularities of mappings of Euclidean spaces. I. Mappings of the plane into the plane Ann Math 62 374–410

    1955

  14. [22]

    Porteous I R 2001 Geometric Differentiation: For the Intelligence of Curves and Surfaces Second Edition (Cambridge University Press)

    2001

  15. [23]

    Poston T and Stewart I 1978 Catastrophe Theory and Its Applications (Pitman Publishing Ltd)

    1978

  16. [24]

    Berry M V and Upstill C 1980 Catastrophe optics: morphologies of caustics and their diffraction patterns Prog Opt 18 257–346

    1980

  17. [25]

    Berry M V 1981 Singularities in waves and rays, in Les Houches Session XXV - Physics of Defects (eds Balian R, Kl´ eman M and Poirier J-P) 453–543 (North-Holland)

    1981

  18. [26]

    Berry M V and Dennis M R 2007 Topological events on wave dislocation lines: birth and death of loops, and reconnection J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 40 65–74

    2007

  19. [27]

    Ozawa T, Price H M, Amo A, Goldman N et al 2019 Topological photonics Rev Mod Phys 91 015006

    2019

  20. [28]

    Manton N and Sutcliffe P 2004 Topological solitons (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)

    2004

  21. [29]

    Dennis M R 2008 Polarization singularity anisotropy: determining monstardom Opt Lett 33 2572–2574

    2008

  22. [30]

    Dennis M R, Hamilton A C and Courtial J 2008 Superoscillation in speckle patterns, Optics Letters 33 (2008) 2976–2978

    2008

  23. [31]

    Berry M, Zheludev N, Aharonov Y, Colombo F, et al 2019 Roadmap on superoscillations J. Opt. 21 053002

    2019

  24. [32]

    Longuet-Higgins M S 1957 The statistical analysis of a random, moving surface Phil Trans R Soc A 249 321– 387

    1957

  25. [33]

    Berry M V and Dennis M R 2000 Phase singularities in Stochastic Stokes origami: folds, cusps and skyrmionic facets in random polarisation fields 14 isotropic random waves Proc R Soc Lond A 456 2059– 2079

    2000

  26. [34]

    Dennis M R 2007 Nodal densities of planar gaussian random waves Eur Phys J: Spec Top 145 191–210

    2007

  27. [35]

    Berry M V 2002 Statistics of nodal lines and points in chaotic quantum billiards: perimeter corrections, fluctuations, curvature J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 35 3025– 3038

    2002

  28. [36]

    O’Holleran K, Flossmann F, Dennis M R and Padgett M J 2009 Methodology for imaging the 3D structure of singularities in scalar and vector optical fields J. Opt. A 11 094020

    2009

  29. [37]

    Bogomolny E and Schmit 2002 Percolation model for nodal domains of chaotic wave functions Phys Rev Lett 88 114102

    2002

  30. [38]

    Adler R J 1981 The Geometry of Random Fields (Wiley)

    1981

  31. [39]

    Cannas da Silva A, Guillemin V, Pires A R 2011 Symplectic Origami Int Math Res Notes 2011 4252–93

    2011

  32. [40]

    Cannas da Silva A, Guillemin V and Woodward C 2000 On the unfolding of folded symplectic structures Math Res Lett 7 35–53

    2000

  33. [41]

    Holm D D 2011 Geometric Mechanics Part I: Dynamics and Symmetry (World Scientific Publishing)

    2011

  34. [42]

    Atiyah M F 1982 Convexity and commuting Hamiltonians Bull Lond Math Soc 14 1–15

    1982

  35. [43]

    Guillemin V and Sternberg S 1982 Convexity properties of the moment mapping Inv Math 67 491–513

    1982

  36. [44]

    Delzant T 1988 Hamiltoniens p´ eriodiques et images convexes de l’application moment Bull Soc Math France 116 315–339

    1988

  37. [45]

    Macdeff D and Salamon D 2017 Introduction to Symplectic Topology, (Oxford University Press)

    2017

  38. [46]

    Pissara Pires A R 2010 Origami manifolds PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

    2010

  39. [47]

    De Angelis L, Alpeggiani F, Kuipers L 2018 Spatial bunching of same-index polarization singularities in two- dimensional random vector waves Phys Rev X 8 041012

    2018

  40. [48]

    Cilibrizzi P, Sigurdsson H, Liew T, et al 2016 Half-skyrmion spin textures in polariton microcavities Phys Rev B 94 045315

    2016

  41. [49]

    Houghton C J and Krusch S 2001 Folding in the Skyrme model J Math Phys 42 4079–4100

    2001

  42. [50]

    Foster D and Krusch S 2013 Negative baryon density and the folding structure of the B = 3 skyrmion J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 46 265401

    2013

  43. [51]

    Milnor J W and Stasheff J D 1974 Characteristic classes (Princeton University Press)

    1974

Pith tools

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