Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 29 references

Cyclotomic Expansion of Generalized Jones Polynomials

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 The paper proves an explicit, integral cyclotomic expansion for the two-parameter generalized colored Jones polynomial, with universal determinant coefficients.

desk verdict Two-parameter cyclotomic expansion for DAHA-deformed Jones polynomials with a clean Macdonald-polynomial specialization at t2=1; the main technical lemma is asserted rather than proved and the printed boundary condition (1.11) is self-contradictory, but the structure is credible and worth refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.04415 v2 pith:I7BBY4DS submitted 2019-08-12 math.QA math.RT

Yuri Berest , Joseph Gallagher , Peter Samuelson This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.QAmath.RT MSC 57K1417B3733D52
keywords cyclotomicexpansioncoloredJonespolynomialdoubleaffineHeckealgebraKauffmanbracketskeinmoduleHabiropolynomialsMacdonaldintegralityuniversalsl2invariant
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 the two-parameter deformation of the colored Jones polynomial introduced in earlier work of two of the authors is completely determined by knot-independent universal coefficients together with the same knot data that appear in the classical expansion of the Jones polynomial. Working under their earlier conjecture that the Kauffman bracket skein module of a knot complement carries an action of a rank-one double affine Hecke algebra, they prove that each generalized Jones polynomial $J_n^K(q,t_1,t_2)$ can be written as a finite sum $\sum_{i=1}^n \widetilde c_{n,i-1}(q,t_1,t_2)H_{i-1}^K(q)$, where the $H_{i-1}^K(q)$ are the integral Laurent polynomials of Habiro's classical cyclotomic expansion and the $\widetilde c$'s are given by an explicit determinant generating function. The coefficients lie in $\mathbb Z[q^{\pm1},t_1^{\pm1},t_2^{\pm1}]$, so the generalized Jones polynomials are integral as well. Since the formula itself does not refer to the conjecture, it makes sense for an arbitrary knot and can be read as evidence that the conjecture holds for all knots. When one deformation parameter is set to $1$, the coefficients are identified with ratios of Macdonald polynomials of type $A_1$, giving closed formulas for knots whose Habiro polynomials are known.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the generating function $F(U,\lambda)=\sum_{n\ge0}\sum_{p\in\mathbb Z}a_{n,p}U^p\lambda^n$ for the coefficients $a_{n,p}$ defined by the recurrence (1.10)-(1.11). The functional equation $F(U,\lambda)(Y_{t_1,t_2}+Y_{t_1,t_2}^{-1}-\lambda-\lambda^{-1})=U^{-1}-U$, with $Y_{t_1,t_2}$ the Dunkl-Cherednik operator of the double affine Hecke algebra acting on Laurent polynomials, encodes the recurrence in closed form. Evaluating at $U=-q^{2N}$ converts this equation into a triangular linear system, and Cramer's rule on the truncated system produces the determinant generating function for the generalized cyclotomic coefficients. The Chebyshev polynomials of the second kind connect the operator $S_{n-1}(Y_{t_1,t_2}+Y_{t_1,t_2}^{-1})$ in the definition of the generalized Jones polynomial to the $U^p-U^{-p}$ basis in which the coefficients are read off.

What would settle it

Compute the expansion for $n=3$ directly: using the explicit action (2.13) of $X,Y,s$ on $\mathbb C[U^{\pm1}]$ and the formula for the Dunkl-Cherednik operator, expand $(U-U^{-1})S_2(Y_{t_1,t_2}+Y_{t_1,t_2}^{-1})$ in the basis $U^p-U^{-p}$, and compare the three resulting coefficients with the values of $a_{3,1},a_{3,2},a_{3,3}$ produced by (1.10)-(1.11); any mismatch refutes Lemma 3.3 and therefore the determinant formula.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.2: for a knot satisfying the conjectural DAHA action, the generalized Jones polynomial equals $\sum_{i=1}^n \widetilde c_{n,i-1}(q,t_1,t_2)H_{i-1}^K(q)$, with $H_{i-1}^K(q)$ the Habiro polynomials of $K$ and with coefficients $\widetilde c_{n,i-1}$ independent of $K$. The coefficients are defined by the generating function $\sum_{n\ge0}\widetilde c_{n,i-1}(q,t_1,t_2)\lambda^n = \det(B_{2i}(q,t_1,t_2;\lambda))/\prod_{N=1}^{2i-1}\gamma_N$, where $B_{2i}$ is an explicit $2i\times 2i$ matrix whose entries are built from q-integers and the parameters $t_1,t_2$. The authors prove that the resulting coefficients are Laurent polynomials in $q,t_1,t_2$, so combined with Habiro's theorem this implies $J_n^K(q,t_1,t_2)\in\mathbb Z[q^{\pm1},t_1^{\pm1},t_2^{\pm1}]$ for every $n$. In the specialization $t_2=1$, the coefficients reduce to ratios of Macdonald polynomials of type $A_1$; and the same coefficients give a quantum-group interpretation, $J_n^K(q,t_1,t_2)=\widehat{J}^K[\widetilde V_n]$, where $\widehat{J}^K$ is the evaluation of the universal $\mathfrak{sl}_2$ invariant and $[\widetilde V_n]=\sum_{p=1}^n(-1)^{n+p}a_{n,p}[V_p]$ in the representation ring.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation relies on the unproved assertion in Lemma 3.3 that the coefficients obtained by expanding $(U-U^{-1})S_{n-1}(Y_{t_1,t_2}+Y_{t_1,t_2}^{-1})$ in the basis $U^p-U^{-p}$ are exactly the numbers $a_{n,p}$ defined by the recurrence (1.10)-(1.11); the paper leaves the verification as a 'lengthy but straightforward' induction, and every later formula depends on it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any knot satisfying the conjecture, the generalized Jones polynomial is an integral Laurent polynomial in $q,t_1,t_2$, not merely a rational function.
  • The right-hand side of the expansion is well defined for every knot, so the formula makes sense independently of whether the conjectural DAHA action has been established for that knot.
  • Setting $t_1=t_2=1$ recovers Habiro's classical cyclotomic expansion of the colored Jones polynomial, with the classical cyclotomic coefficients.
  • When $t_2=1$, the generalized coefficients are explicit ratios of Macdonald polynomials, giving closed formulas for knots whose Habiro polynomials are known, such as the unknot and the figure-eight knot.
  • The representation-theoretic formula identifies the generalized Jones polynomial with the value of the universal $\mathfrak{sl}_2$ invariant on a deformed representation class, interpolating between the ordinary colored Jones invariants.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One could take the right-hand side of the expansion as the definition of a generalized Jones polynomial for every knot, postponing the conjecture; numerical checks for knots not known to satisfy the conjecture would then test whether the DAHA action is really needed for the invariant's existence.
  • The determinant form of the coefficients may make the large-$n$ asymptotics of $J_n^K(q,t_1,t_2)$ tractable, and if a volume-conjecture-type limit exists away from $t_1=t_2=1$, the explicit formula gives a concrete starting point for computing it.
  • The explicit Macdonald-polynomial formula suggests a comparison test for other DAHA-theoretic or refined Jones invariants of algebraic knots, a connection the paper states is still unclear.
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

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper studies a three-variable generalization of the colored Jones polynomials, J_n^K(q,t1,t2), introduced in earlier work via an action of the double affine Hecke algebra on Kauffman bracket skein modules. The main theorem states that, assuming Conjecture 2.12 for a knot K, J_n^K(q,t1,t2) can be written as a finite sum of universal coefficients \tilde c_{n,i-1}(q,t1,t2) times the classical Habiro polynomials H_{i-1}^K(q), where the coefficients are given by a determinant generating function. The paper further proves integrality of these coefficients, derives an explicit formula in terms of type A1 Macdonald polynomials when t2=1, and gives an interpretation of J_n^K(q,t1,t2) through the universal sl2 invariant applied to certain classes [\tilde V_n]. The specialization t1=t2=1 recovers Habiro's theorem for the classical colored Jones polynomials.

Significance. If the proof is completed, the paper would provide an explicit, universal cyclotomic expansion for a natural DAHA-deformed family of Jones polynomials, extending Habiro's theorem and yielding integrality for arbitrary knots without assuming Conjecture 2.12. The t2=1 specialization is concrete enough to compute examples, and the quantum-group interpretation via \tilde V_n is conceptually appealing. The derivation is structural rather than fitted: no parameters are determined by data, and the displayed specialization to t1=t2=1 reproduces known formulas, which supports the plausibility of the main claim. However, the manuscript currently leaves a load-bearing recurrence lemma and several determinant reductions unproved, so the significance is conditional on filling these gaps.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 1, Eq. (1.11)] Condition (1.11) as printed is internally inconsistent: it sets a_{1,1}=1 and simultaneously a_{n,p}=0 for n \geq p, which forces a_{1,1}=0. The recurrence (1.10) also gives a_{2,2}=A_2, which is nonzero in general, so the intended triangular support is p \leq n, i.e. a_{n,p}=0 for p>n (possibly with an explicit convention for a_{0,p}). Because the generating function F(U,\lambda), the functional equation (3.13), and the linear system (3.17) all depend on this triangularity, the boundary condition must be corrected and its consequences re-examined.
  2. [Section 3.2, Lemma 3.3] The proof of Lemma 3.3 is not supplied: the text states that showing the coefficients in expansion (3.4) satisfy (1.10)-(1.11) is 'a lengthy but straightforward induction' and leaves it as an exercise. This lemma is the bridge between the DAHA action and the recurrence; through equation (3.6), the universal coefficients \tilde c_{n,i-1} and hence the determinant generating function (1.4) depend on it. This is not a presentation detail, and the main theorem cannot be verified without a complete proof of this lemma.
  3. [Section 3.2, Proof of Theorem 1.2] After the linear system (3.17) is written, the proof says only that solving by Cramer's Rule 'formally' yields the determinant formula (1.4) with the matrix B_{2i}. The reduction from the infinite system to this finite matrix is not displayed, and the first row of B_{2i} containing the coefficients \alpha_k^{(i)} is introduced without derivation. Please provide the intermediate linear algebra: identify the finite subsystem, show how the coefficients in Lemma 3.5 account for the first row, and display the determinant identity that leads directly to (1.4).
  4. [Section 3.3, Lemma 3.10] The proof of Lemma 3.10 is only a sketch: it describes a sequence of row and column operations and ends with 'by a straightforward computation' that the resulting matrix is \bar B_i. Since formula (3.22) for G_i(\lambda) and therefore Theorem 1.4 rest on this determinant identity, the induction needs to be written out in full or replaced by a rigorous symbolic verification for arbitrary i.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.2, Lemma 3.6] The displayed formula for Y^{-1}_{t1,t2} appears to have an unbalanced parenthesis, reading 'Y^{-1}_{t1,t2} = t1Y^{-1} - a(X^{-1})Y^{-1} - s) - \bar t1 s' in the text; please correct this typo.
  2. [Section 3.2, Lemma 3.5] In the displayed definition of P^{(i)}(X), the second factor in the product appears to contain a typo: it should presumably be (q^{2k}X - q^{-2k}X^{-1}) rather than (q^{2k}X - q^{-2k}X^{-2k}).
  3. [Section 3.3, Theorem 1.4] The notation c_{i,i-1} is used in equation (3.26) before the classical cyclotomic coefficient has been defined with that particular paired index; please define c_{i,i-1} explicitly at that point.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity found; the cyclotomic expansion is derived algebraically from the DAHA action and Habiro's theorem, with the main caveats being an unproved recurrence (Lemma 3.3) and an inconsistent printed boundary condition, both verification gaps rather than circular steps.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained in the sense required for circularity analysis. The generalized Jones polynomial is defined, conditionally on the authors' Conjecture 2.12 from [BS16], by the DAHA-family pairing (2.14). Lemma 3.1 shows the extended pairing is H-balanced under that hypothesis, and Corollary 3.2 rewrites the invariant with the DAHA operator on the left. The expansion (3.4) of (U-U^{-1})S_{n-1}(Y_{t1,t2}+Y^{-1}_{t1,t2}) in the basis U^p-U^{-p} is a purely algebraic expansion; the identification of its coefficients with the recursively defined numbers (1.10)-(1.11) is the content of Lemma 3.3, which the paper explicitly leaves as an exercise: 'This can be done by a lengthy but straightforward induction (in n)... We leave this calculation as an exercise for the reader.' This is a verification gap, not a circular reduction: the recurrence is not assumed equal to the target formula, and the determinant formula (1.4) is obtained by actually solving the linear system (3.17) derived from the functional equation (3.13). No quantity is fitted to generalized-Jones data, and the universal coefficients ~c_{n,i-1} are compared only with the external Habiro theorem (1.1). The t2=1 specialization is obtained by matching a standard Macdonald generating function identity, and the t=1 limit correctly reproduces the classical cyclotomic coefficients, which is an independent consistency check. The dependence on Conjecture 2.12 is an explicitly stated hypothesis and is not used to prove the conjecture; the paper even claims formula (1.3) makes sense for arbitrary knots, so the self-citation is not load-bearing evidence. One additional manuscript-level flag: boundary condition (1.11) as printed, 'a_{1,1}=1, a_{n,0}=0, a_{n,p}=0 (n>=p)', is internally inconsistent at (n,p)=(1,1); the intended support is almost certainly p<=n with a separate a_{0,p} convention or an inequality typo. This is a correctness risk for the recurrence and for everything built on it, but it is not a circularity. Overall, no step reduces by construction to its own input; the paper earns a low score for a minor non-load-bearing self-citation only.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation takes the open [BS16] conjecture as a hypothesis and builds on Habiro's theorem. The deformation variables t1 and t2 are formal parameters, not fitted quantities, and no new physical or algebraic entities are postulated.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Conjecture 2.12 of [BS16]: the double affine Hecke algebra H_{q,(t1,t2,1,1)} preserves the nonsymmetric skein module of every knot complement after localization.
    This is the hypothesis under which the generalized Jones polynomials are defined and Theorem 1.2 is proved. The paper notes it is verified for some knot families but open in general.
  • standard math Habiro's cyclotomic expansion theorem, including the Lawrence universal sl2 invariant theorem.
    Used to replace the classical colored Jones polynomials by Habiro polynomials and to prove integrality. The paper does not reprove this external theorem.
  • domain assumption Generic parameters: q, t1, and t2 are treated as formal variables or generic complex values so that denominators such as {2}, q^{2k}-q^{-2k}, and Macdonald normalization factors are invertible.
    The determinant formulas and Macdonald polynomial formulas divide by these factors. Special values of the parameters are not analyzed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cyclotomic Expansion of Generalized Jones Polynomials." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/I7BBY4DS

@misc{pith2026190804415,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cyclotomic Expansion of Generalized Jones Polynomials},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/I7BBY4DS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.04415}
}
abstract

In previous work of the first and third authors, we proposed a conjecture that the Kauffman bracket skein module of any knot in $S^3$ carries a natural action of the rank 1 double affine Hecke algebra $SH_{q,t_1, t_2}$ depending on 3 parameters $q, t_1, t_2$. As a consequence, for a knot $K$ satisfying this conjecture, we defined a three-variable polynomial invariant $J^K_n(q,t_1,t_2)$ generalizing the classical colored Jones polynomials $J^K_n(q)$. In this paper, we give explicit formulas and provide a quantum group interpretation for the generalized Jones polynomials $J^K_n(q,t_1,t_2)$. Our formulas generalize the so-called cyclotomic expansion of the classical Jones polynomials constructed by K.\ Habiro: as in the classical case, they imply the integrality of $J^K_n(q,t_1,t_2)$ and, in fact, make sense for an arbitrary knot $K$ independent of whether or not it satisfies our earlier conjecture. When one of the Hecke deformation parameters is set to be 1, we show that the coefficients of the (generalized) cyclotomic expansion of $J^K_n(q,t_1)$ are determined by Macdonald orthogonal polynomials of type $A_1$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.04415 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Framed skein relations where the diagrams represent embeddings of annuli which are identical outside of the oriented 3-ball represented by the dotted circle. Definition 2.1 ([Prz91]). The Kauffman bracket skein module of an oriented 3- manifold M is the quotient vector space Kq(M) := L(M)/L ′ (M). It contains a canonical element ∅ ∈ Kq(M) corresponding to the empty link. Remark 2.2. If F is a surface, we will often … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Yuri Berest and Peter Samuelson, Double affine H ecke algebras and generalized J ones polynomials , Compos. Math. 152 (2016), no. 7, 1333--1384. 3530443

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Algebra 500 (2018), 644--690

    , Affine cubic surfaces and character varieties of knots, J. Algebra 500 (2018), 644--690. 3765471

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Ivan Cherednik and Ivan Danilenko, D AHA and iterated torus knots , Algebr. Geom. Topol. 16 (2016), no. 2, 843--898. 3493410

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    319, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005

    Ivan Cherednik, Double affine H ecke algebras , London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, vol. 319, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005. 2133033 (2007e:32012)

    work page 2005

  5. [5]

    , Jones polynomials of torus knots via DAHA , Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN (2013), no. 23, 5366--5425. 3142259

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    Sabin Cautis, Joel Kamnitzer, and Scott Morrison, Webs and quantum skew H owe duality , Math. Ann. 360 (2014), no. 1-2, 351--390. 3263166

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    Charles Frohman and R a zvan Gelca, Skein modules and the noncommutative torus, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 352 (2000), no. 10, 4877--4888. MR1675190 (2001b:57014)

    work page 2000

  8. [8]

    Stavros Garoufalidis and Thang T. Q. L \^e , Asymptotics of the colored J ones function of a knot , Geom. Topol. 15 (2011), no. 4, 2135--2180. 2860990

    work page 2011

Show all 29 references
  1. [9]

    Eugene Gorsky and Andrei Negut, Refined knot invariants and H ilbert schemes , J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 104 (2015), no. 3, 403--435. 3383172

    2015

  2. [10]

    Kazuo Habiro, Bottom tangles and universal invariants, Algebr. Geom. Topol. 6 (2006), 1113--1214. 2253443

    2006

  3. [11]

    , A unified W itten- R eshetikhin- T uraev invariant for integral homology spheres , Invent. Math. 171 (2008), no. 1, 1--81. 2358055 (2009b:57020)

    2008

  4. [12]

    R. M. Kashaev, The hyperbolic volume of knots from the quantum dilogarithm, Lett. Math. Phys. 39 (1997), no. 3, 269--275. 1434238

    1997

  5. [13]

    Kauffman, State models and the J ones polynomial , Topology 26 (1987), no

    Louis H. Kauffman, State models and the J ones polynomial , Topology 26 (1987), no. 3, 395--407. 899057

    1987

  6. [14]

    Lesky, and Ren\' e F

    Roelof Koekoek, Peter A. Lesky, and Ren\' e F. Swarttouw, Hypergeometric orthogonal polynomials and their q -analogues , Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2010, With a foreword by Tom H. Koornwinder. 2656096

    2010

  7. [15]

    Robion Kirby and Paul Melvin, The 3 -manifold invariants of W itten and R eshetikhin- T uraev for sl (2, C ) , Invent. Math. 105 (1991), no. 3, 473--545. 1117149 (92e:57011)

    1991

  8. [16]

    Greg Kuperberg, Spiders for rank 2 L ie algebras , Comm. Math. Phys. 180 (1996), no. 1, 109--151. 1403861

    1996

  9. [17]

    R. J. Lawrence, A universal link invariant using quantum groups, Differential geometric methods in theoretical physics ( C hester, 1988), World Sci. Publ., Teaneck, NJ, 1989, pp. 55--63. 1124415

    1988

  10. [18]

    , A universal link invariant, The interface of mathematics and particle physics ( O xford, 1988), Inst. Math. Appl. Conf. Ser. New Ser., vol. 24, Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1990, pp. 151--156. 1103138

    1988

  11. [19]

    Gregor Masbaum, Skein-theoretical derivation of some formulas of H abiro , Algebr. Geom. Topol. 3 (2003), 537--556. 1997328

    2003

  12. [20]

    186 (2001), no

    Hitoshi Murakami and Jun Murakami, The colored J ones polynomials and the simplicial volume of a knot , Acta Math. 186 (2001), no. 1, 85--104. 1828373

    2001

  13. [21]

    Math., vol

    Hitoshi Murakami, An introduction to the volume conjecture, Interactions between hyperbolic geometry, quantum topology and number theory, Contemp. Math., vol. 541, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2011, pp. 1--40. 2796626

    2011

  14. [22]

    Stokman, Askey- W ilson polynomials: an affine H ecke algebra approach , Laredo L ectures on O rthogonal P olynomials and S pecial F unctions, Adv

    Masatoshi Noumi and Jasper V. Stokman, Askey- W ilson polynomials: an affine H ecke algebra approach , Laredo L ectures on O rthogonal P olynomials and S pecial F unctions, Adv. Theory Spec. Funct. Orthogonal Polynomials, Nova Sci. Publ., Hauppauge, NY, 2004, pp. 111--144. 208...

    2004

  15. [23]

    Alexei Oblomkov, Double affine H ecke algebras of rank 1 and affine cubic surfaces , Int. Math. Res. Not. (2004), no. 18, 877--912. 2037756 (2005j:20005)

    2004

  16. [24]

    Przytycki, Skein modules of 3 -manifolds , Bull

    J \'o zef H. Przytycki, Skein modules of 3 -manifolds , Bull. Polish Acad. Sci. Math. 39 (1991), no. 1-2, 91--100. 1194712 (94g:57011)

    1991

  17. [25]

    N. Yu. Reshetikhin and V. G. Turaev, Ribbon graphs and their invariants derived from quantum groups, Comm. Math. Phys. 127 (1990), no. 1, 1--26. 1036112 (91c:57016)

    1990

  18. [26]

    Siddhartha Sahi, Nonsymmetric K oornwinder polynomials and duality , Ann. of Math. (2) 150 (1999), no. 1, 267--282. 1715325 (2002b:33018)

    1999

  19. [27]

    Sikora and Bruce W

    Adam S. Sikora and Bruce W. Westbury, Confluence theory for graphs, Algebr. Geom. Topol. 7 (2007), 439--478. 2308953 (2008f:57004)

    2007

  20. [28]

    Peter Tingley, A minus sign that used to annoy me but now I know why it is there (two constructions of the J ones polynomial) , Proceedings of the 2014 M aui and 2015 Q inhuangdao conferences in honour of V aughan F . R . J ones' 60th birthday, Proc. Centre Math. Appl. Austral...

    2014

  21. [29]

    Turaev, Skein quantization of P oisson algebras of loops on surfaces , Ann

    Vladimir G. Turaev, Skein quantization of P oisson algebras of loops on surfaces , Ann. Sci. \' E cole Norm. Sup. (4) 24 (1991), no. 6, 635--704. 1142906

    1991

Pith tools

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