Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 41 references

The limit cone and bounds on the growth indicator function

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that a discrete subgroup whose limit cone avoids two distinct Weyl-chamber facets (with simple roots in different opposition orbits) has growth indicator bounded by ρ, and consequently the representation L²(Γ\G) is tempere

desk verdict A genuinely new cone-geometric criterion for ψΓ ≤ ρ, with a proof that is coherent but leans heavily on an unverified co-authored preprint. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.06996 v2 pith:BYCP42ZM submitted 2025-11-10 math.RT math.GRmath.SP

Lasse Lennart Wolf This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.RTmath.GRmath.SP MSC 22E4022E4658C40
keywords growthindicatorfunctionlimitconetemperedrepresentationsAnosovsubgroupscriticalexponentsjointspectrumWeylchamberoppositioninvolution
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 establishes a geometric criterion for slow growth of discrete subgroups in higher-rank semisimple Lie groups. It proves that if the limit cone — the asymptotic cone of the Cartan projections of group elements — misses two facets of the positive Weyl chamber whose defining simple roots are not interchanged by the opposition involution, then the growth indicator function $\psi_\Gamma$ is bounded above by the half-sum of positive roots $\rho$. That inequality is already known to be equivalent to temperedness of $L^2(\Gamma\backslash G)$, so the new content is a purely geometric sufficient condition. The result applies to any I-Anosov subgroup whose defining set of simple roots contains at least two roots in distinct opposition orbits, giving a broad new class of tempered locally symmetric spaces.

What carries the argument

The argument runs through the modified critical exponent $\delta'_\mu = \sup_{v \in L_\Gamma} \frac{(\psi_\Gamma - \rho)(v)}{\mu(v)}$ and the critical functional $\mu_\Gamma$, the unique $\iota$-invariant functional in the positive chamber minimizing the normalized exponent. The load-bearing identity, taken from a companion preprint, equates the spectral convex-hull radius $\theta_\mu$ (the smallest $t$ such that the real parts of the joint spectrum lie in $t \cdot \operatorname{conv}(W\mu)$) with $\max(0, \delta'_\mu)$ for every $\iota$-invariant $\mu$. That identity converts the analytic question about $\psi_\Gamma$ into a location question for $\mu_\Gamma$: the supremum of $\mu_\Gamma/\mu$ must be attained inside the modified limit cone $L'_\Gamma$. Facet avoidance then forces $\mu_\Gamma$ onto a specific ray spanned by $\omega_\alpha + \iota\omega_\alpha$, and two such

What would settle it

To falsify Theorem 1.1, construct a discrete subgroup whose limit cone avoids two facets with $\alpha \neq \iota\beta$ but whose growth indicator exceeds $\rho$ on some vector — a direct counterexample. A more targeted check: for a rank-two group such as $SL_3(\mathbb{R})$ and a non-tempered subgroup, compute $\theta_\mu$ and $\delta'_\mu$ for some $\iota$-invariant functional $\mu$; if $\theta_\mu \neq \max(0, \delta'_\mu)$, the imported spectral identity fails and the proof collapses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central theorem states: if $L_\Gamma \setminus \{0\}$ is disjoint from two facets $F_\alpha$ and $F_\beta$ with $\alpha \neq \beta$ and $\alpha \neq \iota\beta$, then $\psi_\Gamma(v) \leq \rho(v)$ for every $v$ in the positive Weyl chamber. With the previously established equivalence between $\psi_\Gamma \leq \rho$ and temperedness, this gives temperedness of $L^2(\Gamma\backslash G)$. The proof introduces the modified indicator $\psi'_\Gamma = \psi_\Gamma - \rho$ and a critical functional $\mu_\Gamma$; under the two-facet assumption, any point where $\psi'_\Gamma > 0$ would force the direction of maximal modified growth to lie simultaneously on two distinct rays, contradicting uniqueness. Hence $\psi'_\Gamma \leq 0$ everywhere. As a corollary, every I-Anosov subgroup with at least two simple roots in distinct opposition orbits has $\psi_\Gamma \leq \rho$, and when o

Load-bearing premise

The proof leans on an equality, imported from a companion preprint, between the spectral convex-hull radius and the maximum of zero and the modified critical exponent; if that equality has a gap, the main theorem inherits it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the limit cone avoids two opposite-orbit facets, then L²(Γ\G) is tempered; this is the paper's main consequence via the existing ψ_Γ ≤ ρ equivalence.
  • Every I-Anosov subgroup with at least two simple roots in distinct opposition orbits has slow growth, with no additional assumptions on the limit set.
  • When exactly one facet is avoided and ψ_Γ is not already bounded by ρ, the fastest-growing direction of the modified indicator is the unique ι-invariant unit vector orthogonal to all other simple roots; this determines the maximal growth direction.
  • For Zariski-dense subgroups, the paper locates an explicit point of the joint spectrum — the functional (max(0,δ')v'_Γ, ·) — and shows every real part of the joint spectrum lies on one side of the hyperplane it defines.
  • The paper also derives bounds on the usual critical exponents and, via the limit-set template, on the Hausdorff dimension of the limit set in the associated parabolic quotient.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The two-facet condition is likely stronger than needed: the proof already relaxes it to the modified limit cone L'_Γ avoiding the facets, and one could test whether a single avoided facet plus a growth bound on the opposite side yields the same conclusion.
  • If the imported spectral identity were proved by independent means, Theorem 1.1 would give a self-contained route to temperedness for relatively Anosov subgroups and for the few remaining open cases of the full-flag conjecture (the Lie algebras sl₃ over R, C, H and e₆⁻²⁶).
  • The mechanism suggests a general template: purely combinatorial data about where the limit cone sits inside the Weyl chamber can force analytic spectral properties. This might extend to other spectral gaps, such as absence of embedded eigenvalues or bounds on the base of the joint spectrum.
  • A natural test is to ask whether a single facet avoidance plus the requirement that two roots be in the same opposition orbit (e.g., the product-of-rank-one case) could still force ψ_Γ ≤ ρ; the paper's optimality discussion suggests it can fail, but the boundary cases are not fully classified.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies Quint's growth indicator function ψΓ for a discrete subgroup Γ of a real semisimple Lie group G. The main theorem, Theorem 1.1, states that if the limit cone LΓ avoids two facets Fα and Fβ with α ≠ β and α ≠ ιβ, then ψΓ ≤ ρ, which in turn implies that L²(Γ\G) is tempered via [LWW25, Cor. 1.3]. The proof introduces a spectral functional µΓ and connects it to the modified critical exponents through the identity θµ = max(0, δ'_µ) from [LWW25, Thm. 1.1]. The paper also proves a sharp structural result for the maximal growth direction (Theorem 1.3), describes ψΓ on the support of µΓ (Theorem 1.4), and gives spectral consequences (Theorem 1.5), with applications to I-Anosov subgroups and to examples such as SO₀(2,n).

Significance. If the results are correct, this is a significant advance: it gives a clean geometric criterion for temperedness of locally symmetric spaces from the position of the limit cone, considerably strengthening earlier results for Hitchin and Borel Anosov subgroups and yielding an optimal statement for I-Anosov subgroups with two roots in distinct opposition orbits. The proof strategy — reducing the problem to the spectral functional µΓ and then using a derivative argument on the Weyl chamber — is elegant and the internal line from Proposition 4.3 to Corollary 4.7 is coherent. However, the central claim depends on the imported equality θµ = max(0, δ'_µ) from the co-authored preprint [LWW25], which is not proved or independently verified here, and the self-contained Lemma 3.1 has a flawed strict-convexity proof. The significance is therefore conditional on [LWW25] and on a repair of Lemma 3.1.

major comments (3)
  1. [§1.4, Eq. (1.3); also §3.2, Prop. 3.3, Prop. 4.3, Thm. 4.4] The decisive identity θµ = max(0, δ'_µ) is imported from [LWW25, Thm. 1.1], a preprint co-authored by the present author. It is not proved here and is the only bridge between the spectral functional µΓ and the growth indicator ψ'_Γ. The proof of Theorem 1.1 inherits any gap in this identity, especially for the boundary functional µ = ωα + ιωα used in Theorem 4.4. The paper should either include a proof of (1.3), provide an independent verification of the cases needed here, or state the main theorems as conditional on [LWW25].
  2. [Lemma 3.1] The proof of strict convexity is arithmetically wrong. Strict convexity of F(µ) = ∥µ∥δ'_µ requires F(sµ1+(1−s)µ2) < sF(µ1)+(1−s)F(µ2). The proof instead establishes c∥sµ1+(1−s)µ2∥ < δ'_µ1∥µ1∥ + δ'_µ2∥µ2∥, with no s and 1−s weights on the right. In the equal-δ, equal-norm case this reduces to ∥v∥ < 2, which is trivial, whereas strict convexity would require ∥v∥ < 1. Thus the uniqueness of the minimizing ray for µΓ, used in §3.1 to define µΓ, is not justified by the given proof. The argument must be repaired or the uniqueness must be obtained from the spectral definition.
  3. [Proposition 4.3] The passage from upper semicontinuity of ψ'_Γ to the existence of v0∈a+ attaining sup ψ'_Γ(v)/µ(v) is not justified as stated: a+ is noncompact and the quotient need not be upper semicontinuous at points where µ(v) = 0. In the application to Theorem 4.4, Lemma 4.2 supplies λ ∈ int L*Γ, so the issue is removable, but the proposition is stated for arbitrary µ ∈ a*Her+ and needs a compactness/positivity argument. Please either add such an argument or restrict the statement to µ positive on LΓ.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Before Theorem 1.1] The sentence 'Since LΓ ⊆ L′Γ we obtain Theorem 1.1' has the inclusion reversed: by definition L′Γ ⊆ LΓ. The theorem follows from the correct inclusion, so this is a typo, but it should be fixed.
  2. [Proposition 3.3] The notation 'on aHer+' and 'on a*Her+' is confusing: the inequality for the infimum of δ'_µ µ is evaluated on ι-invariant vectors in a, not on covectors. Please clarify the notation.
  3. [§2.2] The definition of the growth indicator function is recalled, but the property ψΓ is positively homogeneous of degree 1 is not stated explicitly. It would help the reader verify the homogeneity arguments in §3 and §4.
  4. [Example after Prop. 4.8] The text refers to 'Figure 4' and the manuscript contains a 'Figure 1' caption; the figure numbering and placement should be checked.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Theorem 1.1 is load-bearing on the self-cited equality θμ = max(0, δ′μ) from [LWW25, Theorem 1.1], not proved or independently checked in this paper.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 1.4, equation (1.3); used in Propositions 3.3, 4.3 and Theorem 4.4]
    "One main result in [LWW25] is the following. Theorem ([LWW25, Theorem 1.1]). (1.3) ∀µ ∈ a∗+ with ιµ = µ : θµ = max(0, δ′µ). If ψΓ ̸≤ρ, (1.3) implies that max_{v∈LΓ} (ψΓ−ρ)(v)/µ(v) = θµ ..."

    The spectral radius θµ is defined in §1.4/§3.2 from the joint spectrum via conv(W μΓ), while δ′µ is the modified critical exponent defined from ψΓ. The equality θµ = max(0, δ′µ) is the only bridge that lets the paper replace spectral suprema by growth-indicator quantities and identify μΓ with the maximal-growth direction. This bridge is not proved here; it is imported verbatim from [LWW25, Theorem 1.1], a preprint co-authored by the present author (Lutsko–Weich–Wolf). Proposition 4.3 then asserts sup_{v∈a+} μΓ(v)/μ(v) = sup_{v∈a+} ψ′Γ(v)/μ(v), and Theorem 4.4 uses this to force μΓ onto the ray ωα+ιωα, giving Theorem 1.1. This is not a definitional loop: the target inequality ψΓ ≤ ρ is not assumed in [LWW25, Theorem 1.1]. But the central derivation is load-bearing on a self-cited, non-forma

full rationale

The paper contains no fitted-parameter circularity and no prediction that is, by construction, identical to its input: the facet-avoidance assumption LΓ∩{0} disjoint from Fα,Fβ is genuinely different from the conclusion ψΓ ≤ ρ. The internal chain from equation (1.3) to Theorem 1.1 is coherent, and the use of upper semicontinuity to attain the supremum in Proposition 4.3 is a technical concern, not a circular one. Similarly, the two occurrences of the inclusion 'LΓ ⊆ L′Γ' are reversed as written (the intended direction L′Γ ⊆ LΓ is clear from the definition L′Γ = {v ∈ LΓ : ψΓ(v) > ρ(v)}); this is a typographical/mathematical slip, not circularity. The substantial issue is self-citation: the central equality (1.3) is imported from [LWW25, Theorem 1.1], a preprint on which the present author is a co-author. It is not reproved, formalized, or independently verified in this manuscript, and it is the sole bridge connecting the spectral object θμ to the growth-side object δ′μ. That makes the main theorem load-bearing on prior co-authored work. However, the cited theorem has independent mathematical content and is not the same as the conclusion of Theorem 1.1, so this is not a definitional loop or a forced prediction. Under the scale, this warrants a 4: substantive self-citation with the central claim still having independent content beyond the cited result.

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

No data-fitting parameters enter the construction: µΓ is defined either by infima of modified critical exponents or by intersections of convex hulls of the joint spectrum. The load-bearing external input is the co-authored spectral theorem [LWW25, Thm 1.1]; this creates a self-citation burden, not a definitional circularity. No new physical or mathematical entities are postulated.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption [LWW25, Thm 1.1]: θµ = max(0, δ'µ) for all ι-invariant µ ∈ a*_+
    Imported spectral theorem, not proved here; used in Prop 3.3 and Prop 4.3 to convert spectral convex-hull radii into modified critical exponents.
  • domain assumption [LWW25, Cor 1.3]: ψΓ ≤ ρ is equivalent to temperedness of L²(Γ\G)
    Used in Cor 4.7 to pass from ψΓ ≤ ρ to temperedness and spectral conclusions.
  • domain assumption Joint-spectrum description (2.2) from [WW24]
    Used to relate the joint spectrum to the spectrum of invariant differential operators and in Prop 3.5.
  • domain assumption Tent property and finiteness of δ'µ for µ in the interior of the dual limit cone ([KMO24, Thm 2.5, Lemma 2.4])
    Used in Lemma 4.2 to guarantee δ'_{ωα} and δ'_{ωα+ιωα} are finite.
  • domain assumption Zariski density of Γ, or equivalently concavity of ψΓ, for uniqueness of the maximal growth direction
    Assumed in Thm 1.3, 1.4 and Prop 3.4; the paper explicitly notes it can be replaced by concavity of ψΓ.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The limit cone and bounds on the growth indicator function." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BYCP42ZM

@misc{pith2026251106996,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The limit cone and bounds on the growth indicator function},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BYCP42ZM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.06996}
}
abstract

Given a real semisimple Lie group $G$ with finite center and a discrete subgroup $\Gamma \subset G$ whose limit cone is disjoint from two facets of the Weyl chamber we show that Quint's growth indicator function $\psi_\Gamma$ is bounded by the half sum of positive roots $\rho$, i.e. it has slow growth, implying that the representation $L^2(\Gamma \backslash G)$ is tempered. In particular, this holds for each $I$-Anosov subgroup provided that $I$ contains at least two distinct simple roots that are not interchanged by the opposition involution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.06996 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Visualisation of Proposition 4.8 for G = SO0(2, n). µΓ must be contained in conv(W(ρ−Θ)) (green). If µΓ ∈ R≥0ωα2 , then the maximal δ ′ ωα2 is so that µΓ = δ ′ ωα2 ωα2 = ρ − Θ. There is no Γ-independent improvement since conv(W(ρ−Θ)) and conv(W δ′ ωα2 ωα2 ) (brown) coincide in this extremal case. Contrarily, if µΓ ∈ R≥0ωα1 , then conv(W δ′ ωα1 ωα1 ) (orange) is always smaller than conv(W(ρ − Θ)) as µΓ = δ ′ ωα1 ωα1 … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Anker and H.-W

    J.-P. Anker and H.-W. Zhang. Bottom of the L^2 spectrum of the L aplacian on locally symmetric spaces. Geom. Dedicata , 216(1):Paper No. 3, 12, 2022

    2022

  2. [2]

    Y. Benoist. Actions propres sur les espaces homog\`enes r\' e ductifs. Ann. of Math. (2) , 144(2):315--347, 1996

    1996

  3. [3]

    Y. Benoist. Asymptotic properties of linear groups. Geom. Funct. Anal. , 7(1):1--47, 1997

    1997

  4. [4]

    Burger, A

    M. Burger, A. Iozzi, F. Labourie, and A. Wienhard. Maximal representations of surface groups: symplectic Anosov structures. Pure Appl. Math. Q. , 1(3):543--590, 2005

    2005

  5. [5]

    Benoist and T

    Y. Benoist and T. Kobayashi. Tempered reductive homogeneous spaces. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) , 17(12):3015--3036, 2015

    2015

  6. [6]

    Benoist and T

    Y. Benoist and T. Kobayashi. Tempered homogeneous spaces III . J. Lie Theory , 31(3):833--869, 2021

    2021

  7. [7]

    Benoist and T

    Y. Benoist and T. Kobayashi. Tempered homogeneous spaces II . In Dynamics, geometry, number theory---the impact of M argulis on modern mathematics , pages 213--245. Univ. Chicago Press, 2022

    2022

  8. [8]

    Benoist and T

    Y. Benoist and T. Kobayashi. Tempered homogeneous spaces IV . J. Inst. Math. Jussieu , 22(6):2879--2906, 2023

    2023

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    Benoist and S

    Y. Benoist and S. Liang. On the rate of exponential decay of coefficients on homogeneous spaces. Preprint, arXiv :2507.02469 [math. GR ] (2025), 2025

    2025

  2. [10]

    Burelle and N

    J.-P. Burelle and N. Treib. Schottky presentations of positive representations. Math. Ann. , 382(3-4):1705--1744, 2022

    2022

  3. [11]

    Cowling, U

    M. Cowling, U. Haagerup, and R. Howe. Almost L^2 matrix coefficients. J. Reine Angew. Math. , 387:97--110, 1988

    1988

  4. [12]

    Corlette

    K. Corlette. Hausdorff dimensions of limit sets I. Invent. Math. , 102(3):521--542, 1990

    1990

  5. [13]

    Canary, T

    R. Canary, T. Zhang, and A. Zimmer. Cusped H itchin representations and A nosov representations of geometrically finite F uchsian groups. Adv. Math. , 404:Paper No. 108439, 67, 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    Dey and M

    S. Dey and M. Kapovich. Patterson- S ullivan theory for Anosov subgroups. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. , 375(12):8687--8737, 2022

    2022

  7. [15]

    S. Dey, D. Kim, and H. Oh. Ahlfors regularity of P atterson- S ullivan measures of A nosov groups and applications. arXiv:2401.12398 , 2024

    2024

  8. [16]

    Dey and H

    S. Dey and H. Oh. Deformations of Anosov subgroups: limit cones and growth indicators. J. Lond. Math. Soc., II. Ser. , 112(3):35, 2025. Id/No e70280

    2025

  9. [17]

    Edwards, M

    S. Edwards, M. Lee, and H. Oh. Anosov groups: local mixing, counting and equidistribution. Geom. Topol. , 27(2):513--573, 2023

    2023

  10. [18]

    Elstrodt

    J. Elstrodt. Die R esolvente zum E igenwertproblem der automorphen F ormen in der hyperbolischen E bene. I . Math. Ann. , 203:295--300, 1973

    1973

  11. [19]

    Elstrodt

    J. Elstrodt. Die R esolvente zum E igenwertproblem der automorphen F ormen in der hyperbolischen E bene. II . Math. Z. , 132:99--134, 1973

    1973

  12. [20]

    Elstrodt

    J. Elstrodt. Die R esolvente zum E igenwertproblem der automorphen F ormen in der hyperbolischen E bene. III . Math. Ann. , 208:99--132, 1974

    1974

  13. [21]

    Edwards and H

    S. Edwards and H. Oh. Temperedness of L^2( G) and positive eigenfunctions in higher rank. Comm. Amer. Math. Soc. , 3:744--778, 2023

    2023

  14. [22]

    Fr a czyk and H

    M. Fr a czyk and H. Oh. Zariski-dense non-tempered subgroups in higher rank of nearly optimal growth. to appear in J. Reine Angew. Math. , 2025

    2025

  15. [23]

    Glorieux, D

    O. Glorieux, D. Monclair, and N. Tholozan. Hausdorff dimension of limit sets for projective Anosov representations. J. \'E c. Polytech., Math. , 10:1157--1193, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    Helgason

    S. Helgason. Differential geometry, Lie groups, and symmetric spaces , volume 80 of Pure Appl. Math. Academic Press, New York, NY, 1978

    1978

  17. [25]

    Helgason

    S. Helgason. Groups and geometric analysis: integral geometry, invariant differential operators, and spherical functions . Pure and applied mathematics. Academic Press, 1984

    1984

  18. [26]

    Kim, Y.N

    D.M. Kim, Y.N. Minsky, and H. Oh. Tent property of the growth indicator functions and applications. Geom. Dedicata , 218(1):18, 2024. Id/No 14

    2024

  19. [27]

    A.W. Knapp. Representation theory of semisimple groups. An overview based on examples , volume 36 of Princeton Math. Ser. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1986

    1986

  20. [28]

    Kassel and N

    F. Kassel and N. Tholozan. Sharpness of proper and cocompact actions on reductive homogeneous spaces. Preprint, arXiv :2410.08179 [math. GR ] (2024), 2024

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Leuzinger

    E. Leuzinger. Critical exponents of discrete groups and L^2 -spectrum. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 132(3):919--927, 2004

    2004

  22. [30]

    Lee and H

    M. Lee and H. Oh. Dichotomy and measures on limit sets of A nosov groups. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN , 2024(7):5658--5688, 10 2023

    2024

  23. [31]

    Christopher Lutsko, Tobias Weich, and Lasse L. Wolf. Polyhedral bounds on the joint spectrum and temperedness of locally symmetric spaces. Preprint, arXiv :2402.02530 [math. RT ] (2025), 2025

    2025 arXiv

  24. [32]

    H. Oh. Uniform pointwise bounds for matrix coefficients of unitary representations and applications to K azhdan constants. Duke Math. J. , 113(1):133--192, 2002

    2002

  25. [33]

    Patterson

    S.J. Patterson. The limit set of a F uchsian group. Acta Math. , 136(3-4):241--273, 1976

    1976

  26. [34]

    Potrie and A

    R. Potrie and A. Sambarino. Eigenvalues and entropy of a Hitchin representation. Invent. Math. , 209(3):885--925, 2017

    2017

  27. [35]

    Pozzetti, A

    M.B. Pozzetti, A. Sambarino, and A. Wienhard. Anosov representations with Lipschitz limit set. Geom. Topol. , 27(8):3303--3360, 2023

    2023

  28. [36]

    J.-F. Quint. Divergence exponentielle des sous-groupes discrets en rang sup \'e rieur. Comment. Math. Helv. , 77:563--608, 2002

    2002

  29. [37]

    Sambarino

    A. Sambarino. Hyperconvex representations and exponential growth. Ergodic Theory Dyn. Syst. , 34(3):986--1010, 2014

    2014

  30. [38]

    A. Weber. Heat kernel bounds, P oincar\' e series, and L^2 spectrum for locally symmetric spaces. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. , 78(1):73--86, 2008

    2008

  31. [39]

    Weich and L

    T. Weich and L. L. Wolf. Absence of principal eigenvalues for higher rank locally symmetric spaces. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 403(3):1275--1295, 2023

    2023

  32. [40]

    Weich and L

    T. Weich and L. L. Wolf. Temperedness of locally symmetric spaces: The product case. Geom. Dedicata , 218(76), 2024

    2024

  33. [41]

    L. L. Wolf and H.-W. Zhang. L^2 -spectrum, growth indicator function and critical exponent on locally symmetric spaces . Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 152:5445--5453, 2024

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.