Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 60 references

On the restriction maps of the Fourier and Fourier-Stieltjes algebras over locally compact groupoids

T0 review · 2 major / 6 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 The paper's main theorem: on étale groupoids, every Fourier function on an isotropy subgroup extends to the whole groupoid.

desk verdict Useful groupoid restriction-map paper with a real but likely patchable gap in the proof of the main A(G) surjectivity theorem. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.14624 v1 pith:F6ESDWXQ submitted 2024-11-21 math.FA

Joseph DeGaetani , Mahya Ghandehari This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.FA MSC 43A3046J9922A22
keywords locallycompactgroupoidsFourieralgebraFourier-StieltjesrestrictionmapisotropysubgroupétalegroupoidHLSpropertyFD
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 studies restriction maps that take functions in the Fourier algebra $A(G)$ (the norm closure of compactly supported coefficients of the left regular representation) or the Fourier-Stieltjes algebra $B(G)$ of a locally compact groupoid $G$ and restrict them to an isotropy subgroup $G^u_u$. Its central claim is that for étale groupoids this restriction map on $A(G)$ is surjective: every Fourier function on an isotropy subgroup has a Fourier extension to the whole groupoid. For $B(G)$, surjectivity is proved for transitive groupoids with a continuous section and for group bundles with discrete unit space, while an HLS-groupoid analysis shows that surjectivity of the restriction map forces property FD on the fiber at infinity, yielding examples where the map is not surjective. These results matter because surjective restriction maps pass hereditary Banach-algebra properties upward, so non-amenability or absence of a bounded approximate identity in an isotropy subgroup obstructs the corresponding property in $A(G)$.

What carries the argument

The central object is the isotropy restriction map $R^u\colon \phi\mapsto \phi|_{G^u_u}$, with $G^u_u$ the isotropy subgroup at the unit $u$. The load-bearing mechanism for Theorem 3.7 is the restricted left regular representation $\sigma$ acting on $L^2(G^u)$, a fiber of the left regular Hilbert field: because $G$ is étale, $G^u$ is discrete, so $L^2(G^u)$ splits as $\bigoplus_{v:G^u_v\neq\emptyset} L^2(G^u_v)$, and each summand is unitarily equivalent to $L^2(G^u_u)$ via the shift $z\mapsto z\gamma_v$. Hence $\sigma\cong \bigoplus L_{G^u_u}$, where $L_{G^u_u}$ is the left regular representation of the isotropy group, and this identifies the coefficient space of $\sigma$ with $A(G^u_u)$; a standard extension result for continuous sections of Hilbert fields then supplies preimages in $A(G)$. For the Fourier-Stieltjes surjectivity results, the machinery is a representation built on a constant Hilbert field by conjugating the given isotropy representation with a continuous section of the range map, and in the HLS case it is weak containment of the fiber-at-infinity representation by the finite-quotient representations.

What would settle it

Concrete observation: for the HLS groupoid built from $SL_n(\mathbb{Z})$ with $n\ge 3$, Theorem 4.6 predicts that the restriction map $B(G)\to B(SL_n(\mathbb{Z}))$ is not surjective, because $SL_n(\mathbb{Z})$ is known to lack property FD. If one could exhibit any coefficient function in $B(SL_n(\mathbb{Z}))$ that nevertheless extends to an element of $B(G)$, the theorem would be false. On the Fourier-algebra side, the decisive check is whether some coefficient $\Lambda_{F,G}$ of the left regular representation, with bounded continuous sections $F,G$, fails to lie in $A(G)$; such a coefficient would invalidate the preimage step, so the paper's proof of Theorem 3.7 would not establish the claimed surjectivity.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Theorem 3.7: if $G$ is a locally compact Hausdorff étale groupoid and $u\in G^{(0)}$, then $R^u_{A(G)}\colon A(G)\to A(G^u_u)$ is surjective. The proof restricts the left regular representation $\Lambda$ of $G$ to the isotropy group $G^u_u$, proves that the restricted representation is unitarily equivalent to a direct sum of copies of the left regular representation of $G^u_u$, and then lifts each coefficient of the latter to a coefficient $\Lambda_{F,G}$ of $\Lambda$ using bounded continuous sections of the left regular Hilbert field. On the Fourier-Stieltjes side, the paper proves surjectivity for transitive groupoids admitting a continuous section (Theorem 4.1) and for group bundles with discrete unit space (Proposition 4.2). It also proves a necessary condition for HLS groupoids, the group bundles built from a discrete group and a nested sequence of finite-index normal subgroups with a ray topology: if $R_{B(G)}\colon B(G)\to B(G_\infty)$ is surjective, then $G_\infty$ has property FD, meaning every unitary representation is weakly contained in the family of representations factoring through finite quotients (Theorem 4.6). Since $SL_n(\mathbb{Z})$ for $n\ge 3$ lacks property FD, this produces HLS groupoids for which the Fourier-Stieltjes restriction map is not surjective. The final application decomposes $A(G)$ and $B(G)$ as $c_0$- and $\ell^\infty$-direct sums of fiber algebras for group bundles with discrete unit space.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that every coefficient function of the groupoid's left regular representation obtained from bounded continuous sections of the Hilbert field belongs to the Fourier algebra $A(G)$, even though the paper notes it is unknown whether $A(G)$ contains the full coefficient space; if some such coefficient lies outside $A(G)$, the preimage construction in the proof of Theorem 3.7 collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every étale groupoid, each Fourier function on an isotropy subgroup admits an extension to a Fourier function on the whole groupoid.
  • If an isotropy subgroup of an étale groupoid is non-amenable, then $A(G)$ has no bounded approximate identity; and failures of amenability, weak amenability, or contractibility in $A(G^u_u)$ force the same failure in $A(G)$.
  • For transitive groupoids with a continuous section, every Fourier-Stieltjes function on an isotropy subgroup extends to the whole groupoid; the same holds for group bundles with discrete unit space.
  • For group bundles with discrete unit space, $B(G)$ is isometrically isomorphic to the $\ell^\infty$-direct sum of the fiber algebras and $A(G)$ to their $c_0$-direct sum.
  • For HLS groupoids, surjectivity of the Fourier-Stieltjes restriction map forces property FD on the fiber at infinity, so HLS groupoids built from $SL_n(\mathbb{Z})$, $n\ge3$, have non-surjective restriction maps.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the unproved inclusion of all left-regular coefficients into $A(G)$ is filled in, Theorem 3.7 would give a groupoid-level route from non-amenability of any single isotropy group to absence of a bounded approximate identity, extending the classical group theorem for Fourier algebras to étale groupoids.
  • The same coefficient-lifting strategy may transfer to the measurable groupoid Fourier-algebra setting, where measurability rather than continuity could make the extension step easier; the paper does not pursue that setting.
  • For group bundles with discrete unit space, the box decomposition suggests that questions about multipliers or derivations on $A(G)$ reduce fiberwise; one could test whether the isometric isomorphism preserves the multiplier algebra, which the paper does not discuss.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies, for locally compact Hausdorff groupoids G equipped with a Haar system, the restriction maps from the Fourier algebra A(G) and the Fourier-Stieltjes algebra B(G) to the Fourier and Fourier-Stieltjes algebras of an isotropy subgroup G^u_u. The main results are: Proposition 3.4 (the restriction maps are continuous contractive algebra homomorphisms); Theorem 3.7 (surjectivity of A(G) → A(G^u_u) for étale G); Theorems 4.1 and Proposition 4.2 (surjectivity of B(G) → B(G^u_u) for transitive groupoids with a continuous section and for group bundles with discrete unit space); Theorem 4.6 and Corollary 4.7 (a necessary condition for surjectivity for HLS groupoids in terms of property FD, with SL_n(Z), n ≥ 3, giving non-surjective examples); Corollary 3.11 (hereditary Banach-algebra obstructions); and Proposition 5.1/Corollary 5.5 (box decompositions B(G) ≅ ℓ∞-⊕ B(G_t) and A(G) ≅ c_0-⊕ A(G_t)). The paper is clearly organized and systematically follows the known group-theoretic analogues. The chief concern, detailed below, is that the proof of the central Theorem 3.7 relies on a membership assertion for A(G) that is not established and is in fact false for a simple étale groupoid.

Significance. If Theorem 3.7 were established, it would be a valuable groupoid analogue of Herz's restriction theorem, and the hereditary-property criteria of Corollary 3.11 would give practical obstructions to amenability-type properties of A(G). The Fourier-Stieltjes portion of the paper is largely independent of this gap and appears sound: Theorems 4.1 and 4.2 are proved by explicit preimage constructions, and Theorem 4.6 yields falsifiable predictions (failure of surjectivity for HLS groupoids built from SL_n(Z), n ≥ 3) in the spirit of the Lubotzky-Shalom theory. The box-decomposition results of Section 5 are also natural and useful. However, the gap in Theorem 3.7 is load-bearing: the paper's own Remark 2.15 records that the identification of A(G) with the full coefficient space of the left regular representation is open, and the proof of Claim 3.8 silently assumes exactly that identification. As a consequence the main theorem and the statements that depend on it (Corollary 3.11, and the citation in Corollary 5.5) are not established as written.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3, Claim 3.8 (proof of Theorem 3.7)] The proof of Claim 3.8 assumes that the coefficient Λ_{F,G} of the left regular representation, with F and G the bounded continuous sections produced by [18, Proposition 10.1.10], belongs to A(G). This does not follow from Definition 2.12, where A(G) is the B(G)-closure of the algebra generated by coefficients Λ_{f,g} with f,g ∈ C_c(G); Proposition 10.1.10 provides no compact support and no approximability by compactly supported coefficients, and Remark 2.15 explicitly records that the equality of the closure-based and full coefficient-space definitions is unknown for general groupoids. The membership assertion is not merely unproved: it is false for a simple étale groupoid. Take G = ⊔_{n∈ℕ} ℤ, the group bundle over the discrete unit space ℕ (every point of G is open, so G is étale), and fix u ∈ ℕ. The function F(n,k) = δ_{k0} is a bounded continuous section of the left regular field through δ_0 ∈ L²(G^u), and one computes Λ_{F,F}(n,k) = δ_{k0} for every n. Under the isometric isomorphism Φ: B(G) → ℓ∞-⊕_{n}B(ℤ) of Proposition 5.1, Φ(Λ_{F,F}) = (δ_0, δ_0, ...), which is a constant nonzero sequence and so does not lie in c_0-⊕_{n}A(ℤ) ≅ A(G). Hence Λ_{F,F} ∉ A(G), and the preimage construction in Claim 3.8 does not produce elements of A(G). Consequently the summability estimate Σ‖Λ_{F_n,G_n}‖_{A(G)} ≤ Σ‖f_n‖₂‖g_n‖₂ is unjustified, and the surjectivity of R^u: A(G) → A(G^u_u) in Theorem 3.7, and everything that depends on it (Corollary 3.11), is left unproved.
  2. [Introduction, Section 1.1; Remark 3.10] Section 1.1 claims that 'the result of Theorem 3.7 holds more generally for any locally compact groupoid admitting a Haar system that satisfies Condition (*)', and Remark 3.10 repeats this. The proof of Theorem 3.7 does not establish this generality. Claim 3.9 uses the étale condition in two ways that Condition (*) does not imply: the fibers G^u must be discrete so that L²(G^u) is the orthogonal direct sum ⊕_v L²(G^u_v) over the units, and the Haar system must consist of counting measures so that the operators U_v f(z) = f(zγ_v) are isometries. The unimodularity relaxation suggested in Remark 3.10 still leaves the direct-sum decomposition unaddressed for groupoids with non-discrete fibers. Either the missing argument for the general case should be supplied, or the introduction and Remark 3.10 should be revised to state the étale hypothesis (or a hypothesis making the fibers discrete and the Haar system counting) as the actual scope of the theorem.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§3, Claim 3.8] The equality ‖F‖_Δ = ‖f‖₂ (and likewise for G) is attributed to [18, Proposition 10.1.10], but that proposition guarantees a continuous section through a given vector and does not by itself prescribe the section norm; the norm control used later in the summability estimate needs a separate (and easy) argument, so this should be proved or cited precisely.
  2. [§5, Corollary 5.5] The proof invokes Theorem 3.7 to assert surjectivity of R^t: A(G) → A(G_t), but a group bundle with discrete unit space need not be étale (its fibers are arbitrary locally compact groups), so the hypotheses of Theorem 3.7 need not be satisfied. The surjectivity citation is in fact unnecessary for the conclusion: the chain Φ(A(G)) = c_0-⊕A(G_t) follows from Definition 2.12, Proposition 5.1, and the standard fact that the sup-norm closure of the algebraic direct sum ⊕A_c(G_t) in ℓ∞-⊕B(G_t) is c_0-⊕A(G_t). The citation should be removed and the argument rewritten accordingly.
  3. [§4.3, Proposition 4.4] The approximating functions ψ_m are defined for x ∈ G_m but then evaluated at z ∈ G_∞; the notation should be clarified, and the text should state explicitly that each ψ_n is the function z ↦ (π_n ∘ q_n)_{ξ(n),ξ(n)}(z) on G_∞.
  4. [§4.3, Remark 4.5] The standard fact that every finitely generated residually finite group admits an approximating sequence is cited to the authors' own in-preparation paper [17]; a published reference should be used.
  5. [§3, Proposition 3.4] The inclusion C_c(G^u_u) ∩ B(G^u_u) ⊆ A(G^u_u) is asserted without reference; in the group case this is a classical theorem of Eymard [20] (see also [31]), and a citation should be provided.
  6. [Various] There are several presentation issues: in Definition 2.4 the range map is printed as 'r : G → G' and should read 'r : G → G^(0)'; in Proposition 4.2 the word 'restriciton' appears; and in the proof of Corollary 5.5 the same notation Φ(A_c(G)) with an overline is used ambiguously for the image of the closure and the closure of the image.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central arguments are self-contained derivations, and the only self-citation is a non-load-bearing aside.

full rationale

The paper contains no fitted parameters, no data-fitting, and no definitional identification of the target result with its inputs. The main surjectivity theorems are proved directly from the definitions of B(G) and A(G), the left regular representation, and external results (Dixmier, Herz, Eymard, Kaniuth-Lau, Bekka/Lubotzky-Shalom). The only self-citation is [17], the authors' in-preparation paper, cited in Remark 4.5 for the elementary fact that every finitely generated residually finite group admits an approximating sequence. That fact is not the central claim, is immediately verifiable from residual finiteness and finite generation, and is not used to force any theorem. The proof of Theorem 3.7 does contain a substantive gap: after extending f,g in L^2(G^u) to bounded continuous sections F,G via [18, Proposition 10.1.10], the proof asserts R^u_{A(G)}(Lambda_{F,G}) = sigma_{f,g}, but Definition 2.12 defines A(G) as the closure of coefficients from compactly supported functions, and Remark 2.15 explicitly records that equality with the full coefficient space of the left regular representation is open. Thus the membership Lambda_{F,G} in A(G) is unproved. This is a correctness gap, not circularity: the conclusion is not baked into Definition 2.12, no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no load-bearing step reduces to a self-citation chain. The derivation is therefore self-contained in the sense relevant to the circularity analysis.

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

The paper introduces no new free parameters or invented entities. It relies on the established groupoid Fourier algebra framework, standard harmonic analysis theorems, and one unproved membership assertion about A(G) that is load-bearing for Theorem 3.7.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Fourier and Fourier-Stieltjes algebras of groupoids are defined via Paterson's continuous Hilbert bundle approach [45], with A(G) as the closure of the algebra generated by compactly supported coefficients.
    The paper adopts this definition throughout, and all surjectivity claims are relative to it.
  • domain assumption For étale groupoids, the canonical Haar system consists of counting measures.
    Assumption 2.13 sets this, and it is used in Lemma 3.1 and Claim 3.9 to ensure restricted measures are Haar and the maps U_v are isometric.
  • ad hoc to paper Every coefficient Λ_{F,G} of the left regular representation with bounded continuous sections F,G belongs to A(G).
    Invoked in Claim 3.8 without proof to show preimages of σ_{f,g} lie in A(G). The paper's Remark 2.15 states the equivalence of definitions is unknown in general, making this a load-bearing unproved assumption.
  • standard math Standard theorems used include Herz's surjectivity of group restriction maps [26], Leptin's theorem on bounded approximate identities [34], Kaniuth-Lau weak containment results [31], and Bekka's result on SL_n(Z) lacking property FD [6].
    These are unproved background results from the literature that the paper relies on without proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the restriction maps of the Fourier and Fourier-Stieltjes algebras over locally compact groupoids." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/F6ESDWXQ

@misc{pith2026241114624,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the restriction maps of the Fourier and Fourier-Stieltjes algebras over locally compact groupoids},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/F6ESDWXQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.14624}
}
read the original abstract

The Fourier and Fourier-Stieltjes algebras over locally compact groupoids have been defined in a way that parallels their construction for groups. In this article, we extend the results on surjectivity or lack of surjectivity of the restriction map on the Fourier and Fourier-Stieltjes algebras of groups to the groupoid setting. In particular, we consider the maps that restrict the domain of these functions in the Fourier or Fourier-Stieltjes algebra of a groupoid to an isotropy subgroup. These maps are continuous contractive algebra homomorphisms. When the groupoid is \'{e}tale, we show that the restriction map on the Fourier algebra is surjective. The restriction map on the Fourier-Stieltjes algebra is not surjective in general. We prove that for a transitive groupoid with a continuous section or a group bundle with discrete unit space, the restriction map on the Fourier-Stieltjes algebra is surjective. We further discuss the example of an HLS groupoid, and obtain a necessary condition for surjectivity of the restriction map in terms of property FD for groups, introduced by Lubotzky and Shalom. As a result, we present examples where the restriction map for the Fourier-Stieltjes algebra is not surjective. Finally, we use the surjectivity results to provide conditions for the lack of certain Banach algebraic properties, including the (weak) amenability and existence of a bounded approximate identity, in the Fourier algebra of \'{e}tale groupoids.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.14624 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An intertwining morphism between H :“ ptHtutPT , Γq and G :“ ptGtutPT , Γ 1 q. As in the case of group representations, the direct sums and tensor products of G-Hilbert bundles are themselves G-Hilbert bundles [45, pg 7]. Let H and K be two continuous Hilbert fields over the topological space G p0q , and ̟ and ̺ be representations of G on H and G respectively. Equip the continuous Hilbert field H ‘ K with linear act… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Vadim Alekseev and Martin Finn-Sell, Non-amenable principal groupoids with weak containment , Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2018 (2018), no. 8, 2332–2340. MR 3801485

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Gilbert Arsac, Sur l’espace de Banach engendré par les coefficients d’une rep résentation unitaire, Publ. Dép. Math. (Lyon) 13 (1976), no. 2, 1–101. MR 444833

    work page 1976

  3. [3]

    Bade, Philip C

    William G. Bade, Philip C. Jr. Curtis, and H. Garth Dales, Amenability and weak amenability for Beurling and Lipschitz algebras , Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 55 (1987), no. 2, 359–377. MR 896225

    work page 1987

  4. [4]

    Erik Bédos and Roberto Conti, The Fourier-Stieltjes algebra of a C˚ -dynamical system, Internat. J. Math. 27 (2016), no. 6, 1650050, 50. MR 3516977

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    , Fourier theory and C˚ -algebras, J. Geom. Phys. 105 (2016), 2–24. MR 3504149

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    11 (1999), no

    Mohammed El Bachir Bekka, On the full C˚ -algebras of arithmetic groups and the congruence subgroup problem, Forum Math. 11 (1999), no. 6, 705–715. MR 1725593

    work page 1999

  7. [7]

    Tristan Bice, Representing structured semigroups on étale groupoid bundl es, J. Aust. Math. Soc. 114 (2023), no. 1, 1–49. MR 4533452

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Rogier Bos, Continuous representations of groupoids, Houston J. Math. 37 (2011), no. 3, 807–844. MR 2844451

    work page 2011

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Heinrich Brandt, Über eine Verallgemeinerung des Gruppenbegriffes , Math. Ann. 96 (1927), no. 1, 360–366. MR 1512323

    1927

  2. [10]

    2, 433–452

    Jonathan Brown, Lisa Orloff Clark, Cynthia Farthing, an d Aidan Sims, Simplicity of algebras associated to étale groupoids , Semigroup Forum 88 (2014), no. 2, 433–452. MR 3189105

    2014

  3. [11]

    Yemon Choi and Mahya Ghandehari, Weak and cyclic amenability for Fourier algebras of con- nected Lie groups , J. Funct. Anal. 266 (2014), no. 11, 6501–6530

    2014

  4. [12]

    , Weak amenability for Fourier algebras of 1-connected nilpot ent Lie groups, J. Funct. Anal. 268 (2015), no. 8, 2440–2463

    2015

  5. [13]

    Noncom- mut

    Johannes Christensen, The structure of KMS weights on étale groupoid C˚ -algebras, J. Noncom- mut. Geom. 17 (2023), no. 2, 663–691. MR 4592883

    2023

  6. [14]

    Alain Connes, On the cohomology of operator algebras , J. Funct. Anal. 28 (1978), no. 2, 248–253. MR 493383

    1978

  7. [15]

    Michael Cowling and Paul Rodway, Restrictions of certain function spaces to closed subgroups o f locally compact groups, Pacific J. Math. 80 (1979), no. 1, 91–104. MR 534697

    1979

  8. [16]

    Garth Dales, Banach algebras and automatic continuity , London Mathematical Society Mono- graphs

    H. Garth Dales, Banach algebras and automatic continuity , London Mathematical Society Mono- graphs. New Series, vol. 24, The Clarendon Press, Oxford Uni versity Press, New York, 2000, Oxford Science Publications. MR 1816726

    2000

  9. [17]

    Joseph DeGaetani and Mahya Ghandehari, On the Fourier algebra of HLS groupoids , in prepara- tion

  10. [18]

    15, North-Holl and Pub- lishing Co., Amsterdam-New York-Oxford, 1977, Translated from the French by Francis Jellett

    Jacques Dixmier, C˚ -algebras, North-Holland Mathematical Library, Vol. 15, North-Holl and Pub- lishing Co., Amsterdam-New York-Oxford, 1977, Translated from the French by Francis Jellett. MR 0458185 20

    1977

  11. [19]

    Pitts, Characterizing groupoid C˚ -algebras of non-Hausdorff étale groupoids, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol

    Ruy Exel and David R. Pitts, Characterizing groupoid C˚ -algebras of non-Hausdorff étale groupoids, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 2306, Springer, Cham, [ 2022] ©2022. MR 4510931

    2022

  12. [20]

    Pierre Eymard, L’algèbre de Fourier d’un groupe localement compact , Bull. Soc. Math. France 92 (1964), 181–236. MR 228628

    1964

  13. [21]

    Martin Finn-Sell, Fibred coarse embeddings, a-T-menability and the coarse analogue of the Novikov conjecture, J. Funct. Anal. 267 (2014), no. 10, 3758–3782. MR 3266245

    2014

  14. [22]

    Brian Forrest, Amenability and derivations of the Fourier algebra , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 104 (1988), no. 2, 437–442

    1988

  15. [23]

    Forrest and Volker Runde, Amenability and weak amenability of the Fourier algebra , Math

    Brian E. Forrest and Volker Runde, Amenability and weak amenability of the Fourier algebra , Math. Z. 250 (2005), no. 4, 731–744. MR 2180372

    2005

  16. [24]

    Mahya Ghandehari, Amenability properties of Rajchman algebras , Indiana Univ. Math. J. 61 (2012), no. 3, 1369–1392. MR 3071703

    2012

  17. [25]

    Uffe Haagerup, All nuclear C˚ -algebras are amenable , Invent. Math. 74 (1983), no. 2, 305–319. MR 723220

    1983

  18. [26]

    Carl Herz, Harmonic synthesis for subgroups , Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 23 (1973), no. 3, 91–123. MR 355482

    1973

  19. [27]

    Ross, Abstract harmonic analysis

    Edwin Hewitt and Kenneth A. Ross, Abstract harmonic analysis. Vol. II: Structure and analysis for compact groups. Analysis on locally compact Abelian gro ups, Die Grundlehren der mathema- tischen Wissenschaften, vol. Band 152, Springer-Verlag, N ew York-Berlin, 1970. MR 262773

    1970

  20. [28]

    Nigel Higson, Vincent Lafforgue, and Georges Skandalis , Counterexamples to the Baum-Connes conjecture, Geom. Funct. Anal. 12 (2002), no. 2, 330–354. MR 1911663

    2002

  21. [29]

    Baojie Jiang, Jiawen Zhang, and Jianguo Zhang, Quasi-locality for étale groupoids , Comm. Math. Phys. 403 (2023), no. 1, 329–379. MR 4645718

    2023

  22. [30]

    Barry Edward Johnson, Cohomology in Banach algebras , Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society, vol. No. 127, American Mathematical Society, Prov idence, RI, 1972. MR 374934

    1972

  23. [31]

    Lau, Fourier and Fourier-Stieltjes algebras on locally com- pact groups, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol

    Eberhard Kaniuth and Anthony T. Lau, Fourier and Fourier-Stieltjes algebras on locally com- pact groups, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 231, American M athematical Society, Providence, RI, 2018. MR 3821506

    2018

  24. [32]

    Julian Kranz, Amenability for actions of étale groupoids on C˚ -algebras and Fell bundles , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 376 (2023), no. 7, 5089–5121. MR 4608439

    2023

  25. [33]

    Hun Hee Lee, Jean Ludwig, Ebrahim Samei, and Nico Spronk , Weak amenability of Fourier algebras and local synthesis of the anti-diagonal , Adv. Math. 292 (2016), 11–41. MR 3464018

    2016

  26. [34]

    Horst Leptin, Sur l’algèbre de Fourier d’un groupe localement compact , C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. A-B 266 (1968), A1180–A1182. MR 239002

    1968

  27. [35]

    Liukkonen and Michael W

    John R. Liukkonen and Michael W. Mislove, Symmetry in Fourier-Stieltjes algebras , Math. Ann. 217 (1975), no. 2, 97–112. MR 420148

    1975

  28. [36]

    Viktor Losert, On weak amenability of Fourier algebras , https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.13955, 2023. 21

    2023 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Math., vol

    Alexander Lubotzky and Yehuda Shalom, Finite representations in the unitary dual and Ramanu- jan groups, Discrete geometric analysis, Contemp. Math., vol. 347, Am er. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2004, pp. 173–189. MR 2077037

    2004

  30. [38]

    A. I. Mal’cev, On faithful representations of infinite groups of matrices , Matematicheskii Sbornik 8 (1940), 405–422, English translation in American Mathematical Society Translations (2) 45 (1965), 1–18

    1940

  31. [39]

    Hiroki Matui, Homology and topological full groups of étale groupoids on t otally disconnected spaces, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 104 (2012), no. 1, 27–56. MR 2876963

    2012

  32. [40]

    , Long exact sequences of homology groups of étale groupoids , Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 42 (2022), no. 11, 5239–5271. MR 4483992

    2022

  33. [41]

    McMullen, Extensions of positive-definite functions , Memoirs of the American Mathe- matical Society, vol

    John R. McMullen, Extensions of positive-definite functions , Memoirs of the American Mathe- matical Society, vol. No. 117, American Mathematical Socie ty, Providence, RI, 1972. MR 445229

    1972

  34. [42]

    Sergey Neshveyev and Gaute Schwartz, Non-Hausdorff étale groupoids and C˚ -algebras of left cancellative monoids, Münster J. Math. 16 (2023), no. 1, 147–175. MR 4563262

    2023

  35. [43]

    Oty, Fourier-Stieltjes algebras of r-discrete groupoids, J

    Karla J. Oty, Fourier-Stieltjes algebras of r-discrete groupoids, J. Operator Theory 41 (1999), no. 1, 175–197. MR 1675192

    1999

  36. [44]

    Alan L. T. Paterson, Groupoids, inverse semigroups, and their operator algebras , Progress in Mathematics, vol. 170, Birkhäuser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA , 1999. MR 1724106

    1999

  37. [45]

    , The Fourier algebra for locally compact groupoids , Canad. J. Math. 56 (2004), no. 6, 1259–1289. MR 2102633

    2004

  38. [46]

    Walter, Fourier-Stieltjes algebras of locally compact groupoids , J

    Arlan Ramsay and Martin E. Walter, Fourier-Stieltjes algebras of locally compact groupoids , J. Funct. Anal. 148 (1997), no. 2, 314–367. MR 1469344

    1997

  39. [47]

    Renault, The ideal structure of groupoid crossed product C˚ -algebras, J

    Jean N. Renault, The ideal structure of groupoid crossed product C˚ -algebras, J. Operator Theory 25 (1991), no. 1, 3–36, With an appendix by Georges Skandalis. M R 1191252

    1991

  40. [48]

    , The Fourier algebra of a measured groupoid and its multipliers , J. Funct. Anal. 145 (1997), no. 2, 455–490. MR 1444088

    1997

  41. [49]

    , Groupoid cocycles and derivations , Ann. Funct. Anal. 3 (2012), no. 2, 1–20. MR 2948385

    2012

  42. [50]

    Pedro Resende, étale groupoids and their quantales , Adv. Math. 208 (2007), no. 1, 147–209. MR 2304314

    2007

  43. [51]

    MR 4727501

    Emily Riehl, Category theory in context , Aurora Dover Modern Math Originals, Dover Publica- tions, Inc., Mineola, NY, 2016. MR 4727501

    2016

  44. [52]

    MR 1874893

    Volker Runde, Lectures on amenability , 1774 (2002), xiv+296. MR 1874893

    2002

  45. [53]

    Volker Runde and Nico Spronk, Operator amenability of Fourier-Stieltjes algebras , Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 136 (2004), no. 3, 675–686. MR 2055055

    2004

  46. [54]

    A. K. Seda, Haar measures for groupoids , Proc. Roy. Irish Acad. Sect. A 76 (1976), no. 5, 25–36. MR 427598 22

    1976

  47. [55]

    Aidan Sims, Gábor Szabó, and Dana Williams, Operator algebras and dynamics: groupoids, crossed products, and Rokhlin dimension , Advanced Courses in Mathematics. CRM Barcelona, Birkhäuser/Springer, Cham, [2020] ©2020, Lecture notes fr om the Advanced Course held at Centre de R...

    2020

  48. [56]

    Nico Spronk, Operator weak amenability of the Fourier algebra , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 130 (2002), no. 12, 3609–3617. MR 1920041

    2002

  49. [57]

    91, Polish Aca d

    , Amenability properties of Fourier algebras and Fourier-Stielt jes algebras: a survey , Ba- nach algebras 2009, Banach Center Publ., vol. 91, Polish Aca d. Sci. Inst. Math., Warsaw, 2010, pp. 365–383. MR 2777488

    2009

  50. [58]

    Rufus Willett, A non-amenable groupoid whose maximal and reduced C˚ -algebras are the same , Münster J. Math. 8 (2015), no. 1, 241–252. MR 3549528

    2015

  51. [59]

    Williams, Haar systems on equivalent groupoids , Proc

    Dana P. Williams, Haar systems on equivalent groupoids , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. Ser. B 3 (2016), 1–8. MR 3478528

    2016

  52. [60]

    241, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2019

    , A tool kit for groupoid C˚ -algebras, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 241, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2019. MR 39 69970 23

    2019

Pith tools

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