Over-rotation intervals of bimodal interval maps

Alexander Blokh; Sourav Bhattacharya

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 35 references

Over-rotation intervals of bimodal interval maps

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read One formula lists every bimodal over-twist pattern.

desk verdict Solid explicit classification of N-bimodal over-twist patterns, but the proof outsources the key certification step to the companion preprint [BB19] and leaves a limiting argument for Z_f to the reader. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.07635 v1 pith:CEWHDU5W submitted 2019-08-20 math.DS

Sourav Bhattacharya , Alexander Blokh This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.DS MSC 37E0537E1537E45

keywords over-rotationnumberpairover-twistpatternN-bimodalmaprotationintervalperiodicorbitwellbehavedforcing

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 aims to show that for N-bimodal interval maps — continuous maps whose graph rises, then falls, then rises again between a unique fixed point and one maximum and one minimum — the left endpoint of the over-rotation interval is a classical rotation number of an auxiliary monotone lift, and to list every forcing-minimal periodic pattern of each rotation number. It constructs, from any such map f, a discontinuous degree-one lift F_f and then a continuous non-decreasing lower-bound function G_f whose Poincaré rotation number equals that left endpoint rho_f. The endpoint is realized on a minimal invariant set Z_f: a periodic orbit whose pattern is an over-twist when rho_f is rational, and a Cantor set otherwise. The paper then writes down, for each rational p/q, all N-bimodal over-twist patterns explicitly, and it extends the same lifting construction to a broader class of piecewise-monotone maps it calls well behaved.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is a two-step transfer from the interval to the line. A discontinuous conjugacy sigma_f flips the part of [0,1] to the right of the fixed point a_f, producing a map g_f with the same over-rotation numbers as f; g_f is then lifted to a degree-one map F_f of the real line, and the lower envelope G_f(x) = inf{F_f(y) : y >= x} is the continuous non-strictly increasing function that carries the argument. Because G_f is monotone, every point has the same classical rotation number, and the property that F_f is 'eventually increasing' — for a dense set of levels there is a rightmost intersection with the graph — guarantees that G_f is continuous. The set Y_f, the union of intervals from which trajectories never enter the flat spots where G_f differs from F_f, localizes the minimal set Z_f. For the classification, the explicit permutations Pi_{r,p,q} encode the placement of the q orbit points among the four regions of Y_f: r points shift right by p, p points flip onto the right end, p points flip onto the left end, and q-2p-r points shift left.

What would settle it

Take the P-linear N-bimodal map realizing one of the listed permutations Pi_{r,p,q} and compute its over-rotation interval by iterating a point whose trajectory stays in Y_f; the paper predicts the interval is exactly [p/q, 1/2], so any wider interval would refute the endpoint claim. Alternatively, exhibit an N-bimodal over-twist pattern of over-rotation number p/q that is not gamma_{p/q} and not among the Pi_{r,p,q}; that would falsify the completeness of the classification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For every N-bimodal interval map f, the left endpoint rho_f of the over-rotation interval [rho_f, 1/2] coincides with the classical rotation number of the continuous monotone lift G_f, and it is assumed on a minimal f-invariant set Z_f contained in an explicitly described union Y_f of subintervals. When rho_f = p/q is rational, Z_f is a periodic orbit of period q whose over-rotation pair is the coprime pair (p,q), whose map is canonically conjugate to the rotation by p/q on one of its cycles, and whose pattern is an over-twist; when rho_f is irrational, Z_f is a Cantor set and f restricted to Z_f is at most two-to-one semi-conjugate to an irrational circle rotation. Combining this with the criterion that a convergent pattern with coprime over-rotation pair whose P-linear map has over-rotation interval exactly [p/q, 1/2] is an over-twist, the paper concludes that the N-bimodal over-twist patterns of over-rotation number p/q are exactly the unimodal pattern gamma_{p/q} and the bimodal permutations Pi_{r,p,q} for r = 1, ..., q-2p-1, with the remaining cases reducing to flips of the unimodal pattern.

Load-bearing premise

The list of over-twist patterns is complete only if the companion paper's theorem is correct: a convergent periodic pattern whose linear representative has coprime over-rotation pair and over-rotation interval exactly [p/q, 1/2] must be an over-twist.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For an N-bimodal map, the left endpoint rho_f is computable as the unique chi-rotation number of any point whose trajectory stays in the set Y_f, so the endpoint no longer requires inspecting the whole map.
If rho_f is rational, the minimizing orbit is an over-twist with coprime over-rotation pair, and the map on that orbit is conjugate to a circle rotation, making the endpoint dynamically meaningful rather than merely numerical.
If rho_f is irrational, the endpoint is realized on a Cantor minimal set, and the over-rotation interval still has the forced structure [rho_f, 1/2].
For each rational p/q there are exactly q-2p-1 strictly bimodal oriented over-twist patterns, and these, together with the unimodal pattern, account for all N-bimodal over-twists.
The same lower-envelope construction works for every well behaved map, so the mechanism for locating the left endpoint extends to a larger class of piecewise-monotone interval maps.

Reading between the lines

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

The construction yields a finite procedure: from the branch points of an N-bimodal map one can locate Y_f and then read off rho_f from a single trajectory, so numerical experiments on families of maps could test the formula before any forcing theory is invoked.
Whether 'eventually increasing' is also necessary for continuity of the lower envelope is not addressed; checking examples of multimodal maps that fail the condition could reveal whether the method extends beyond well behaved maps.
The distinct permutations Pi_{r,p,q} for fixed p,q are natural candidates for the leaves of a forcing poset; if one verifies directly with the oriented graph construction that no two of them force each other, the over-twist status would follow without invoking the companion theorem.
For small p and q one can compute the P-linear map's over-rotation interval directly and compare it with the predicted [p/q, 1/2], providing a concrete computational check of the classification.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Look, the core of this paper is a genuine, explicit classification. The permutation family Π_{r,p,q} from Eq. (4.2), the count q−2p−1, and the fact that r=0 reproduces the known unimodal over-twist pattern γ_{p/q} give a clean, citable answer for N-bimodal maps. The lifting construction — a monotone lower bound G_f beneath the lifted map F_f — is the right tool, and the two-sided inequality ρ′_f ≤ ρ_f and ρ_f ≤ ρ′_f is sound. If you work in combinatorial dynamics, this is a useful result.

The soft spot is exactly where the stress-test points. The step that certifies the constructed patterns as over-twists is imported from the same authors' companion preprint [BB19]. Theorem 4.1 is quoted, not proved, and its hypotheses are not verified in detail: convergence of the pattern of Z_f is asserted rather than shown, and the interval property [ρ_f, 1/2] for the Z_f-linear map is claimed with the proof left to the reader. This is load-bearing. If Theorem 4.1 fails or does not apply to N-bimodal maps, Corollary 4.2 — and the whole classification — collapses. I have no reason to think the companion is wrong, but the submission should either prove that theorem, verify its hypotheses here, or state clearly that the classification is conditional.

A second gap, smaller but real: the rational flat-spot case in the proof of Theorem 3.2. The sentence 'the limiting transition is legitimate' is exactly where a wrong argument could hide. The minimal set Z_f is central to everything, and a few more lines would settle it. The well-behaved extension (Theorem 5.5) is sketchier — 'literally repeat the arguments' is doing real work — but that section is a bonus, so I rate it minor-to-moderate. Also, the paper never explicitly constructs N-bimodal maps realizing each Π_{r,p,q}; it shows only that any N-bimodal over-twist must have one of these forms. For these permutations the realization is likely automatic, but it should be stated. Minor.

The citation pattern is not a problem. Self-citation to [BB19] is appropriate; the issue is simply that the cited theorem is not in the submission.

Who is this for? People interested in rotation theory for interval maps, especially the combinatorial classification of over-twist patterns. The paper deserves a serious referee, but the referee must see the companion or the authors must supply the proof. I would not desk-reject it; I would send it out with the instruction that Theorem 4.1's role be checked. If that checks out, the paper is publishable with modest revisions. I'd cite it once the dependency is integrated; not before.

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies over-rotation intervals for bimodal interval maps of N-type and for a newly introduced class called well behaved maps. For an N-bimodal map f the authors construct a discontinuous degree-one lifting F_f and a continuous non-decreasing lower bound G_f ≤ F_f, and claim in Theorem 3.2 that the classical rotation number of G_f equals the left endpoint ρ_f of the over-rotation interval of f, and that ρ_f is realized on a minimal invariant set Z_f which is either a periodic orbit (with coprime over-rotation pair) or a Cantor set. Section 4 then gives a classification of N-bimodal over-twist patterns: the unimodal pattern γ_{p/q} together with patterns Π_{r,p,q} for r = 1, …, q − 2p − 1, with the proof relying on Theorem 4.1 quoted from the companion preprint [BB19]. Section 5 extends the construction to well behaved piecewise-monotone maps, proving that the lower bound function is continuous and stating an analogue of Theorem 3.2 plus a criterion for well behaved over-twist patterns. The paper also claims an algorithm for determining the left endpoint of the over-rotation interval by checking points whose orbits stay in an explicitly defined set Y_f.

Significance. If the main results are correct, the paper makes a substantial contribution to rotation theory for interval maps: it gives an explicit, computable description of N-bimodal over-twist patterns, a concrete algorithm for the left endpoint of the over-rotation interval for a natural class of bimodal maps, and a plausible extension to a broader class of polymodal maps. The explicit formulas (4.1) and (4.2) and the emphasis on a monotone lower-bound lifting G_f are strong and useful features of the paper. However, the significance is presently conditional: the central classification rests on an external companion theorem that is neither proved nor fully verified in the current text, and several key steps in the proofs of Theorems 3.2 and 5.5 are explicitly left to the reader. The paper therefore cannot be accepted in its present form, although the main ideas appear promising and the gaps seem fillable.

major comments (4)

[Section 4, Theorem 4.1 and Corollary 4.2] The statement that the pattern of Z_f is an over-twist pattern depends entirely on Theorem 4.1 of the companion preprint [BB19], which is quoted but not proved or included in this submission. Moreover, the two hypotheses of Theorem 4.1 are not verified in detail: convergence of the pattern of Z_f is not explicitly established, and the key assertion that the Z_f-linear map has over-rotation interval exactly [ρ_f, 1/2] is justified only by the sentence "This shows that the following theorem [BB19] applies" after Theorem 3.2. Since Corollary 4.2, Lemma 4.3 and Corollary 5.6 all inherit this dependency, the central classification of N-bimodal over-twist patterns is conditional on an unverified external statement. Please include a complete proof of Theorem 4.1 in this paper or make the companion preprint part of the refereed submission, and spell out the verification of its hypotheses for Z_f.
[Section 3.2, Theorem 3.2, rational flat-spot case] In the proof of Theorem 3.2, the case where the periodic orbit A_f of the circle map passes through an endpoint of a flat spot is handled by choosing y very close to b and then passing to a limit periodic orbit Z_f of ψ_f(y). The existence of this limiting periodic orbit, its over-rotation pair being coprime, and the property that the Z_f-linear map has over-rotation interval [ρ_f, 1/2] are asserted but not proved; the final paragraph says the "remaining claims ... are left to the reader." These facts are load-bearing because they supply precisely the input needed for Theorem 4.1, so the proof needs to be completed rather than deferred.
[Section 5, Theorem 5.5 and Corollary 5.6] The proof of Theorem 5.5 shows that F_f is eventually increasing and hence that G_f is continuous, but then states that "the remaining arguments literally repeat the arguments in the last part of the proof of Theorem 3.2 and are left to the reader." In the well behaved setting the map has a more general discontinuity structure and a canonical inverse h_f is introduced, so the transfer of the minimal-set construction from the N-bimodal case is not literally immediate and needs a full proof. Corollary 5.6 also relies on Theorem 4.1 and on arguments from Corollary 4.2 and Lemma 4.3, and the "if and only if" claim would require an explicit realization argument showing that every cycle P with P⊂Y_{f_P} is indeed an over-twist pattern.
[Section 4, Lemma 4.3] In the proof of Lemma 4.3, the assertion that Z_f is disjoint from P is unsupported. From the failure of P⊂Y_f it does not follow that P and the set Z_f constructed in Theorem 3.2 are disjoint; all that follows is that P has a point outside Y_f. The subsequent claim that π forces a different pattern γ of the same over-rotation pair requires this disjointness, and hence the proof does not yet establish that every N-bimodal over-twist pattern must have the form Π_{r,p,q} or γ_{p/q}. Please supply a direct argument that Z_f cannot coincide with P in the case P⊄Y_f, or restructure the proof.

minor comments (3)

[Throughout] There are several typographical errors, including "covergent" in Theorem 4.1, "oTf" in the proof of Theorem 5.5, "Nonlineraity" in reference [Blo94], "Case and Case 2" in Section 3.1, and "Y_f = K1(f)∪K2(f)∪K2(f)∪K3(f)∪K4(f)" with K2(f) repeated in the paragraph before equation (4.2).
[Section 1.3, Theorem 1.5] The statement of Theorem 1.5 says "there exists η∈N" but the preceding definition defines the set M, not N; the symbol should be η∈M.
[Section 5, Definition 5.1] In Definition 5.1 the assumption that the minimum and maximum of f are 0 and 1 is introduced with "Without loss of generality," but it is not explained why this normalization preserves the properties defining well behaved maps or the over-rotation interval; a brief justification would help.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 7.0 of 10

The central certification that the constructed Z_f patterns are over-twists is delegated to the same authors' companion preprint [BB19]; the completeness and enumeration claims inherit this unverified self-citation.

self citation load bearing [Section 4, Theorem 4.1 and Corollary 4.2; also Section 5, Corollary 5.6]
"We use results of [BB19] to deduce then that the pattern of x′ is an over-twist. ... Theorem 4.1 ([BB19]). Let P be a cycle of covergent pattern π such that the P-linear map f has the over-rotation interval [ρ(P ), 1/2] ... Then the pattern π is over-twist. ... By Theorem 4.1 it follows that the pattern of Zf is an over-twist pattern."

The paper's central classification step—that the periodic orbit Z_f has an over-twist pattern, and therefore that the q−2p−1 enumeration in Section 4 is a classification of N-bimodal over-twist patterns—is not derived in this paper. It is reduced to Theorem 4.1 of [BB19], a same-day companion preprint by the same two authors. The theorem is quoted but not proved here, and it is not machine-checked or otherwise independently verified in the submission. Corollary 4.2, Lemma 4.3, and Corollary 5.6 all inherit this dependency, so the central claim rests on a load-bearing self-citation rather than on a self-contained argument.

full rationale

The construction of G_f and the equality ρ'_f = ρ_f in Theorem 3.2 are genuine new content: the inequality G_f ≤ F_f together with monotonicity of G_f yields the two bounds that pin ρ'_f to the left endpoint ρ_f, and the minimal set Z_f is constructed from the monotone circle semiconjugacy rather than assumed. However, the step that turns Z_f into an over-twist pattern is not self-contained: it invokes Theorem 4.1 from the authors' own companion preprint [BB19], and that same theorem is what allows Corollary 4.2 and Corollary 5.6 to certify the listed patterns as over-twists. Without that certification, the paper's enumeration gives candidate permutations, not a proved classification of all N-bimodal over-twist patterns. This is a load-bearing self-citation rather than a fitted-parameter or definitional circularity, so the score is substantial but not maximal.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 4 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted; the paper is a pure mathematics classification. The load-bearing input is the prior theory of over-rotation numbers (Blokh-Misiurewicz, Blokh) and the companion preprint [BB19]; the latter is the main external dependency. The objects G_f, Z_f, Y_f and the class of well behaved maps are explicit constructions defined in the paper, not empirical postulates.

assumptions (5)

standard math Theorem 1.4 (Blokh-Misiurewicz): the ordering on over-rotation pairs is a forcing order for interval maps.
Used throughout, e.g., to establish that over-twist patterns have coprime over-rotation pairs (Section 4) and to derive Sharkovsky-type consequences.
standard math Theorem 1.8 (Blokh): for piecewise-monotone maps with rho_f != 0 there is an invariant measure and a generic point with I_{f,chi} = {rho_f}.
Used in Theorem 3.2 to show rho'_f belongs to I_f, giving one direction of the equality rho'_f = rho_f.
ad hoc to paper Theorem 4.1 (Bhattacharya-Blokh companion preprint [BB19], arXiv:1908.06145): a convergent pattern with coprime over-rotation pair whose P-linear map has over-rotation interval [rho(P),1/2] is an over-twist.
The central tool for certifying that the patterns built in Section 4 are over-twists and that the classification is complete; the preprint is not part of this submission.
domain assumption N-bimodal maps are required to satisfy f(M)=1 and f(m)=0 with a unique fixed point between turning points (Definition 3.1).
This normalization is used explicitly in the construction of g_f, F_f, G_f in Section 3.
domain assumption Well behaved maps satisfy f(x)>a_f on [M_f,a_f] and f(x)<a_f on [a_f,m_f] (Definition 5.1).
The condition is introduced to guarantee that the lower-bound function G_f is continuous (Theorem 5.5), and it defines the scope of the generalized results.

invented entities (4)

Lower-bound degree-one lifting G_f
purpose: A continuous non-decreasing function G_f <= F_f whose classical rotation number equals the left endpoint rho_f of the over-rotation interval; it is the main tool for computing rho_f.
G_f is defined explicitly by formulas (3.3)/(3.5) and (5.2) from f; its existence is proved, not postulated. There is no empirical handle outside the paper; its defining property is the theorem itself.
Minimal invariant set Z_f
purpose: The set on which the left endpoint rho_f is realized; a periodic orbit of over-twist pattern if rho_f rational, a Cantor set if irrational.
Z_f is constructed in Theorem 3.2/5.5 via semi-conjugacy; its properties are the conclusion, so no external evidence.
Class of well behaved maps
purpose: A class of piecewise-monotone interval maps on which the lifting construction and the characterization of over-twist patterns extend.
A definition introduced to make the construction work; it is not an empirical postulate.
Admissible region Y_f
purpose: The union of intervals (K1-K4 in the bimodal case; L1 union L2 in the well-behaved case) that contains Z_f; computing over-rotation sets of points whose trajectories stay in Y_f yields rho_f.
Explicitly defined in terms of f; its role is to locate the minimizing orbit.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Over-rotation intervals of bimodal interval maps." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CEWHDU5W

@misc{pith2026190807635,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Over-rotation intervals of bimodal interval maps},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CEWHDU5W}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.07635}
}

read the original abstract

We describe all possible bimodal over-twist patterns. In particular, we give an algorithm allowing one to determine what the left endpoint of the over-rotation interval of a given bimodal map is. We then define a new class of polymodal interval maps called well behaved, and generalize the above results onto well behaved maps.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.07635 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** An N-bimodal map f in case d2(f) is not defined 1 X' 0 af 1 X Y Y' y=x f(1) f(0) af Mf d1(f) mf [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Construction of the map Ff for an Nbimodal map f in Case 1 0 af 1 1+af 2 1 2 f Ff KEY y=x 1+af af The last step in this series of maps is a continuous map Gf : R → R [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (8 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Construction of the map Ff for an Nbimodal map f in Case 2 y=x 1 0 1 2 2 f Ff KEY af af 1+af 1+af On each [n, n + 1], n ∈ Z the map Gf : R → R will now be defined as follows: Gf (x) =    n + af if n ≤ x ≤ n + Mf Ff (x) if n + Mf ≤ x ≤ n + d1(f) Ff (…

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Construction of the map Gf for an Nbimodal map f in Case 2 y=x 1 0 1 2 2 Gf f Ff KEY af af 1+af 1+af In what follows we will consider the relation of the classical Poincar´e rotation numbers of points of the real line under Ff and over-rotation numbers of points of [0…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: The set Yf , shown in dotted line, for the N-bimodal map f in Case 1 f(1) af ' Mf 1 1 y=x X' X Y Y' 0 f(0) af af'' af d1(f) d2(f) mf [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_7.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: The Unimodal over-twist pattern γ 2 7 x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 af x6 x7 q-2p=3 p=2 p=2 To study over-twist patterns which are strictly bimodal, we set the restriction r ≥ 1 and s ≥ 1. Then, r ∈ {1, 2, . . . , q − 2p − 1}. Clearly, for each fixed value of r from the set {1, 2, . …

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: The Bimodal over-twist pattern Γ3, 3 11 x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 x7 x8 x9 x10 x11 r=3 af p=3 p=3 s=2 Finally, consider the case when f(0) ≥ af . Then, by Theorem 3.2, the set Zf = P is a periodic orbit contained in Yf = [Mf , d1(f)] ∪ [af , mf ] ∪ [a 00 f , 1]. In such a cas…

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: gives an example of a well behaved map [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_11.png]

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: Construction of the map gf for the well behaved continuous map f 0 1 1 af af Now we construct the graph of the map gf on the interval [af , 1]. (1) Apply the horizontal σ 0 f to the entire graph of f on the interval [af , 1]. Define hf : [af , 1] → [0, 1] by hf (x) = …

**Figure 13.** Figure 13: The remaining arguments literally repeat the arguments in the last part of the proof of Theorem 3.2 and are left to the reader. Call a pattern π well behaved if any cycle P of pattern π gives rise to a well behaved P-linear map fP = f. Theorem 5.5, together with the a…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

[1]

Adler, A

R. Adler, A. Konheim, and M. McAndrew, Topological entropy, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 114 (1965), 309--319

work page 1965
[2]

Alseda, J

L. Alseda, J. Llibre, and M. Misiurewicz, Badly ordered cycles of circle maps, Pacific J. Math. 184 (1998), 23--41

work page 1998
[3]

Alsed\` a , J

Ll. Alsed\` a , J. Llibre and M. Misiurewicz, Combinatorial Dynamics and Entropy in Dimension One, Advanced Series in Nonlinear Dynamics (2nd edition) 5 (2000), World Scientific Singapore (2000)

work page 2000
[4]

Alsed\`a, J

Ll. Alsed\`a, J. Llibre, F. Ma\ nosas and M. Misiurewicz, Lower bounds of the topological entropy for continuous maps of the circle of degree one, Nonlinearity 1(1988), 463--479

work page 1988
[5]

Auslander, Y

J. Auslander, Y. Katznelson, Continuous maps of the circle without periodic points, Israel J. of Math. 32 (1979), 375--381

work page 1979
[6]

67 (1987), 111--127

S.Baldwin, Generalisation of a theorem of Sharkovsky on prbits of continous real valued functions, Discrete Math. 67 (1987), 111--127

work page 1987
[7]

Very badly ordered cycles of interval maps

S. Bhattacharya, A. Blokh, Very badly ordered cycles of interval maps, preprint arXiv:1908.06145 (2019)

work page Pith review arXiv 2019
[8]

Block, J

L. Block, J. Guckenheimer, M. Misiurewicz and L.-S. Young, Periodic points and topological entropy of one-dimensional maps, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics 819 (1980), 18--34

work page 1980

Show all 35 references

[9]

Blokh, On transitive mappings of one-dimensional branched manifolds, (Russian), In: Differential-difference equations and problems of mathematical physics (Russian), Akad

A. Blokh, On transitive mappings of one-dimensional branched manifolds, (Russian), In: Differential-difference equations and problems of mathematical physics (Russian), Akad. Nauk Ukrain. SSR, Inst. Mat., Kiev (1984), 3–-9

1984
[10]

I, (Russian), Teor

, Dynamical systems on one-dimensional branched manifolds. I, (Russian), Teor. Funktsii Funktsional. Anal. i Prilozhen. 46(1986), 8--18; translation in J. Soviet Math. 48 (1990), no. 5, 500–-508

1986
[11]

II, (Russian), Teor

, Dynamical systems on one-dimensional branched manifolds. II, (Russian), Teor. Funktsii Funktsional. Anal. i Prilozhen. 47 (1987), 67--77; translation in J. Soviet Math. 48 (1990), no. 6, 668–-674

1987
[12]

III, (Russian), Teor

, Dynamical systems on one-dimensional branched manifolds. III, (Russian), Teor. Funktsii Funktsional. Anal. i Prilozhen. 48 (1987), 32--46; translation in J. Soviet Math. 49 (1990), no. 2, 875-–883

1987
[13]

, On Rotation Intervals for Interval Maps, Nonlineraity 7(1994), 1395--1417

1994
[14]

, The Spectral Decomposition for One-Dimensional Maps, Dynamics Reported 4 (1995), 1--59

1995
[15]

, Rotation Numbers, Twists and a Sharkovsky-Misiurewicz-type Ordering for Patterns on the Interval, Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems 15(1995), 1--14

1995
[16]

, Functional Rotation Numbers for One-Dimensional Maps, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 347(1995), 499--514

1995
[17]

Blokh, M

A. Blokh, M. Misiurewicz, A new order for periodic orbits of interval maps, Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Sys. 17(1997), 565-574

1997
[18]

, Rotating an interval and a circle, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 351(1999), 63--78

1999
[19]

Blokh, K

A. Blokh, K. Snider, Over-rotation numbers for unimodal maps, Journal of Difference Equations and Aplications 19(2013), 1108--1132

2013
[20]

Bobok, Twist systems on the interval, Fund

J. Bobok, Twist systems on the interval, Fund. Math. 175(2002), 97--117

2002
[21]

Bobok and M

J. Bobok and M. Kuchta X-minimal orbits for maps on the interval, Fund. Math. 156(1998), 33--66

1998
[22]

Chenciner, J.-M

A. Chenciner, J.-M. Gambaudo and C. Tresser Une remarque sur la structure des endo\-morphismes de degr\'e 1 du cercle, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, S\'er I Math. 299 (1984), 145--148

1984
[23]

Denker, C

M. Denker, C. Grillenberger, K. Sigmund, Ergodic theory on compact spaces, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 527(1976) Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York

1976
[24]

Ito, Rotation sets are closed, Math

R. Ito, Rotation sets are closed, Math. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 89(1981), 107--111

1981
[25]

J.Milnor and W.Thurston, On Iterated Maps on the Interval, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin 1342(1988), 465--520

1988
[26]

Misiurewicz, Periodic points of maps of degree one of a circle, Ergod

M. Misiurewicz, Periodic points of maps of degree one of a circle, Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 2(1982) 221--227

1982
[27]

, Formalism for studying periodic orbits of one dimensional maps, European Conference on Iteration Theory (ECIT 87), World Scientific Singapore (1989), 1--7

1989
[28]

, Combinatorial Patterns for maps of the interval, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 456(1990)

1990
[29]

Misiurewicz and K

M. Misiurewicz and K. Ziemian, Rotation Sets for Maps of Tori, J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 40(1989) 490--506

1989
[30]

Newhouse, J

S. Newhouse, J. Palis, F. Takens Bifurcations and stability of families of diffeomorphisms, Inst. Hautes \'Etudes Sci. Publ. Math. 57(1983), 5--71

1983
[31]

Poincar\'e, Sur les courbes d\'efinies par les \'equations diff\'erentielles, Oeuvres completes, 1 137--158, Gauthier-Villars, Paris (1952)

H. Poincar\'e, Sur les courbes d\'efinies par les \'equations diff\'erentielles, Oeuvres completes, 1 137--158, Gauthier-Villars, Paris (1952)

1952
[32]

Rhodes, C

F. Rhodes, C. Thompson, Rotation numbers for monotone functions on the circle, J. London Math. Soc. 34(1986), 360--368

1986
[33]

A. N. Sharkovsky, Coexistence of the cycles of a continuous mappimg of the line into itself, Ukraine Mat. Zh. 16(1964), 61--71 (Russian)

1964
[34]

A. N. Sharkovsky, Coexistence of the cycles of a continuous mapping of the line into itself, Internat. J. Bifur. Chaos Appl. Sci. Engrg. 5(1995), 1263--1273

1995
[35]

Ziemian, Rotation sets for subshifts of finite type, Fundam

K. Ziemian, Rotation sets for subshifts of finite type, Fundam. Math. 146(1995), 189--201

1995

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Adler, A

R. Adler, A. Konheim, and M. McAndrew, Topological entropy, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 114 (1965), 309--319

work page 1965

[2] [2]

Alseda, J

L. Alseda, J. Llibre, and M. Misiurewicz, Badly ordered cycles of circle maps, Pacific J. Math. 184 (1998), 23--41

work page 1998

[3] [3]

Alsed\` a , J

Ll. Alsed\` a , J. Llibre and M. Misiurewicz, Combinatorial Dynamics and Entropy in Dimension One, Advanced Series in Nonlinear Dynamics (2nd edition) 5 (2000), World Scientific Singapore (2000)

work page 2000

[4] [4]

Alsed\`a, J

Ll. Alsed\`a, J. Llibre, F. Ma\ nosas and M. Misiurewicz, Lower bounds of the topological entropy for continuous maps of the circle of degree one, Nonlinearity 1(1988), 463--479

work page 1988

[5] [5]

Auslander, Y

J. Auslander, Y. Katznelson, Continuous maps of the circle without periodic points, Israel J. of Math. 32 (1979), 375--381

work page 1979

[6] [6]

67 (1987), 111--127

S.Baldwin, Generalisation of a theorem of Sharkovsky on prbits of continous real valued functions, Discrete Math. 67 (1987), 111--127

work page 1987

[7] [7]

Very badly ordered cycles of interval maps

S. Bhattacharya, A. Blokh, Very badly ordered cycles of interval maps, preprint arXiv:1908.06145 (2019)

work page Pith review arXiv 2019

[8] [8]

Block, J

L. Block, J. Guckenheimer, M. Misiurewicz and L.-S. Young, Periodic points and topological entropy of one-dimensional maps, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics 819 (1980), 18--34

work page 1980