Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

Fourier transform of nonlinear images of self-similar measures: qualitative aspects

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-06-27 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read Analytic nonlinear images of self-similar measures have polynomial Fourier decay.

desk verdict The paper gets polynomial Fourier decay for analytic nonlinear images of self-similar measures and applies it to conjugate self-conformal measures, but the uniformity on the exceptional frequency set is the part that needs close checking. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.09743 v1 pith:IC6M76MK submitted 2026-06-08 math.DS math.CA

Amlan Banaji , Han Yu This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.DSmath.CA
keywords Fourierdecayself-similarmeasuresanalyticmapsLojasiewiczinequalityself-conformaliteratedfunctionsystemsfractal
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 that when an analytic map f from R^k to R^d is nonlinear enough that its graph avoids lying in any affine hyperplane, and the self-similar measure mu on R^k is not supported on an affine hyperplane, the pushforward measure under f has Fourier transform decaying at a polynomial rate. The argument proceeds by first proving a uniform Lojasiewicz-type inequality that holds for all self-similar measures, then combining it with the known decay of the Fourier transform of mu outside a small exceptional set of frequencies. The same conclusion applies to self-conformal measures on the complex plane arising from analytic iterated function systems that are conjugate to linear ones. A reader would care because polynomial Fourier decay controls the distribution of the measure at large scales and connects questions about regularity of fractal measures to properties of their images under analytic maps.

What carries the argument

Uniform Lojasiewicz-type inequality for self-similar measures, which bounds how close the measure can get to the zero set of an analytic function and transfers Fourier decay from the original measure to its image.

What would settle it

An explicit analytic map f whose graph avoids affine hyperplanes, a self-similar measure mu not supported on a hyperplane, and a sequence of frequencies going to infinity at which the Fourier transform of the image measure fails to decay polynomially.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

If f is analytic on R^k, its graph does not lie in an affine hyperplane in R^{k+d}, and mu is not supported in an affine hyperplane in R^k, then the image measure has polynomial Fourier decay. Key steps in the proof include establishing a uniform Lojasiewicz-type inequality for self-similar measures, and using the decay of the Fourier transform of mu outside a very small exceptional set of frequencies. As an application, polynomial Fourier decay holds for self-conformal measures on C for a large class of complex analytic IFSs which are not self-similar but are conjugate to a linear IFS via an analytic map.

Load-bearing premise

A uniform Lojasiewicz-type inequality holds for self-similar measures, combined with Fourier decay of mu outside a very small exceptional set of frequencies.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The image measure under such an f inherits at least some positive polynomial rate of Fourier decay.
  • Self-conformal measures on the plane arising from analytic conjugacies to linear systems satisfy the same decay.
  • The result covers maps that are nonlinear but still real-analytic, beyond the linear and conformal cases treated earlier.
  • The exceptional frequencies where the original measure may lack decay form a set of small measure that can be controlled uniformly.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The method could apply to other classes of measures once a comparable uniform Lojasiewicz inequality is available.
  • Polynomial Fourier decay of the image may combine with other assumptions to yield dimension or absolute continuity statements for the image measure.
  • The conjugacy argument suggests that analytic changes of coordinates preserve the decay property for a range of conformal systems in the plane.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims to prove that if f: R^k → R^d is real-analytic, its graph is not contained in any affine hyperplane of R^{k+d}, and the self-similar measure μ on R^k is not supported on an affine hyperplane, then the pushforward f_*μ has polynomial Fourier decay. The argument proceeds by establishing a uniform Lojasiewicz-type inequality for self-similar measures and combining it with the known polynomial decay of the Fourier transform of μ outside a very small exceptional set E of frequencies. An application yields polynomial decay for self-conformal measures arising from a large class of complex-analytic IFSs that are analytically conjugate to linear ones.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the work extends existing Fourier-decay results for self-similar measures to their nonlinear analytic images and supplies a new tool (uniform Lojasiewicz control) that may be useful for other questions about fractal measures. The application to non-self-similar self-conformal measures on the plane is a concrete advance. No machine-checked proofs or fully parameter-free derivations are present.

major comments (2)
  1. [proof of main theorem (Lojasiewicz step)] The argument for polynomial (rather than merely sub-polynomial) decay of the Fourier transform of f_*μ rests on integrating the decay of ˆμ outside the exceptional set E against a uniform Lojasiewicz lower bound on |f(x)·ξ| for x in supp(μ). The manuscript does not appear to supply a quantitative estimate on the measure of E in successive annuli that is strong enough to absorb the possible deterioration of the Lojasiewicz constant near critical points of f; see the key steps described after the statement of the main theorem.
  2. [§ on exceptional frequencies] The non-degeneracy assumptions (graph of f not affine, μ not supported on affine hyperplane) rule out the trivial zero case but do not automatically guarantee that the exceptional set E can be chosen independently of the analytic function f when the IFS has overlaps. A concrete counter-example or a sharper estimate on the distribution of E would be needed to close the gap.
minor comments (2)
  1. [preliminaries] Notation for the exceptional set E and the Lojasiewicz constant should be introduced once and used consistently; at present the same symbol appears with slightly different meanings in different paragraphs.
  2. [application section] The statement of the application to self-conformal measures would benefit from an explicit list of the analytic IFSs to which the result applies (e.g., a short table of admissible contraction ratios and phases).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and valuable comments, which help clarify the quantitative aspects of our arguments. We address each major comment below and will incorporate revisions to make the estimates explicit.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [proof of main theorem (Lojasiewicz step)] The argument for polynomial (rather than merely sub-polynomial) decay of the Fourier transform of f_*μ rests on integrating the decay of ˆμ outside the exceptional set E against a uniform Lojasiewicz lower bound on |f(x)·ξ| for x in supp(μ). The manuscript does not appear to supply a quantitative estimate on the measure of E in successive annuli that is strong enough to absorb the possible deterioration of the Lojasiewicz constant near critical points of f; see the key steps described after the statement of the main theorem.

    Authors: The uniform Lojasiewicz inequality is derived from the self-similar structure of μ and holds with constants depending only on the IFS and the analyticity radius of f. The exceptional set E has measure decaying polynomially in annuli by the known decay properties of ˆμ, which is strong enough to compensate for the controlled deterioration of the Lojasiewicz constant near critical points (as the critical set has measure zero under the non-degeneracy). However, we agree that making the constants and the absorption explicit would strengthen the presentation. We will add a quantitative lemma on the measure of E in annuli and its interaction with the Lojasiewicz bound in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§ on exceptional frequencies] The non-degeneracy assumptions (graph of f not affine, μ not supported on affine hyperplane) rule out the trivial zero case but do not automatically guarantee that the exceptional set E can be chosen independently of the analytic function f when the IFS has overlaps. A concrete counter-example or a sharper estimate on the distribution of E would be needed to close the gap.

    Authors: The exceptional set E is determined solely by the linear self-similar measure μ and its Fourier decay properties, which are independent of f. The non-degeneracy conditions ensure that the pushforward does not introduce new degeneracies, allowing E to be chosen uniformly for f in a fixed analytic class (even with overlaps in the IFS). We will add a clarifying remark and a short argument showing independence from f, along with a reference to the distribution of E from the linear case. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; derivation adds independent analytic conditions and inequalities

full rationale

The paper's central claim establishes polynomial Fourier decay for images of self-similar measures under nonlinear analytic maps by proving a new uniform Lojasiewicz-type inequality for such measures and combining it with existing Fourier decay results outside a small exceptional frequency set. No step reduces by construction to fitted inputs, self-definitions, or load-bearing self-citations; the non-degeneracy conditions on f and μ supply independent content, and the uniformity result is derived rather than assumed from prior overlapping work. The argument is self-contained against external benchmarks for the new components.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard properties of self-similar measures, real-analytic functions, and Fourier transforms; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption Self-similar measures satisfy standard scaling and invariance properties under iterated function systems.
    Invoked implicitly as background for the measures μ under study.
  • standard math Real-analytic maps admit Taylor expansions and satisfy Lojasiewicz inequalities in the classical sense.
    Used to establish the uniform version for self-similar measures.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fourier transform of nonlinear images of self-similar measures: qualitative aspects." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IC6M76MK

@misc{pith2026260609743,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fourier transform of nonlinear images of self-similar measures: qualitative aspects},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IC6M76MK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.09743}
}
abstract

The goal of this paper is to establish polynomial Fourier decay for images of self-similar measures $\mu$ on $\mathbb{R}^k$ under sufficiently nonlinear real-analytic maps $f \colon \mathbb{R}^k \to \mathbb{R}^d$. For example, we prove that if $f$ is analytic on $\mathbb{R}^k$, its graph does not lie in an affine hyperplane in $\mathbb{R}^{k+d}$, and $\mu$ is not supported in an affine hyperplane in $\mathbb{R}^k$, then the image measure has polynomial Fourier decay. Key steps in the proof include establishing a uniform Lojasiewicz-type inequality for self-similar measures, and using the decay of the Fourier transform of $\mu$ outside a very small exceptional set of frequencies. As an application of our results, we prove polynomial Fourier decay for self-conformal measures on $\mathbb{C}$ for a large class of complex analytic IFSs which are not self-similar but are conjugate to a linear IFS via an analytic map.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.09743 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Structure of the paper. 2. Preliminaries and background literature 2.1. General notation. We use Vinogradov and Bachmann–Landau notation: given real or complex-valued functions f, g we write f ≪ g or f = O(g) to mean |f| ⩽ C|g| pointwise for some constant C > 0, and write f ≍ g if f ≪ g and g ≪ f. Subscripts may indicate parameters that the implicit constants are allowed to depend on. Given x ∈ R k and r > 0, the op… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Quantitative flatness and obstructions in Fourier analysis

    math.CA 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    Develops a quantitative flatness framework to obstruct Fourier restriction, L^p-improving, and Fourier decay estimates for measures, applied to bound Fourier dimensions of surfaces, curves, Patterson-Sullivan measures...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Algom, Y

    A. Algom, Y. Chang, M. Wu and Y.-L. Wu,Van der Corput and metric the- orems for geometric progressions for self-similar measures, Math. Ann.393 (2025), 183–214. 9, 10, 40

    2025

  2. [2]

    Algom, F

    A. Algom, F. Rodriguez Hertz and Z. Wang,Pointwise normality and Fourier decay for self-conformal measures,Adv. Math.393(2021), 108096. 10

    2021

  3. [3]

    Algom, F

    A. Algom, F. Rodriguez Hertz and Z. Wang,Logarithmic Fourier decay for self-conformal measures,J. Lond. Math. Soc.106(2022), 1628–1661. 10

    2022

  4. [4]

    Algom, F

    A. Algom, F. Rodriguez Hertz and Z. Wang,Polynomial Fourier decay and a cocycle version of Dolgopyat’s method for self conformal measures, preprint, arXiv:2306.01275, (2023). 10, 36, 41

    work page arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    Algom, F

    A. Algom, F. Rodriguez Hertz and Z. Wang,Spectral gaps and Fourier decay for self-conformal measures in the plane, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. (to appear), arXiv:2407.11688v3. 4, 5, 11, 34, 36, 37, 41

    work page arXiv

  6. [6]

    Algom and O

    A. Algom and O. Khalil,L 2-flattening of self-similar measures on non- degenerate curves,preprint, arXiv:2507.07321v1 (2025). 9, 12, 14, 37 FOURIER DECAY OF NONLINEAR IMAGES 43

    work page arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Baker and A

    S. Baker and A. Banaji,Polynomial Fourier decay for fractal measures and their pushforwards, Math. Ann.392(2025), 209–261. 9, 10, 15

    2025

  8. [8]

    Baker and A

    S. Baker and A. Banaji,Self-similar and self-conformal measures with slow Fourier decay,preprint, arXiv:2602.05593, (2026). 40

    work page arXiv 2026

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Baker, O

    S. Baker, O. Khalil and T. Sahlsten,Fourier decay fromL2-flattening,preprint, arXiv:2407.16699v3, (2024). 10, 11, 15, 41

    2024

  2. [10]

    Banaji and H

    A. Banaji and H. Yu,Quantitative Fourier decay for nonlinear images of self- similar measures,preprint, arXiv:2503.07508v1, (2025). 5, 9, 11, 13, 16, 17, 36, 40, 41

    2025 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Baker and T

    S. Baker and T. Sahlsten,Spectral gaps and Fourier dimension for self- conformal sets with overlaps, preprint, arXiv:2306.01389, (2023). 10, 41

    2023

  4. [12]

    Bárány, K

    B. Bárány, K. Simon and B. Solomyak,Self-similar and self-affine sets and measures, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 276, American Mathe- matical Society (2023). 7

    2023

  5. [13]

    Bénard, W

    T. Bénard, W. He and H. Zhang,Khintchine dichotomy for and Schmidt esti- mates for self-similar measures onRd, J. Amer. Math. Soc.36(2026), 587–623. 13

    2026

  6. [14]

    Bourgain and S

    J. Bourgain and S. Dyatlov.Fourier dimension and spectral gaps for hyperbolic surfaces,Geom. Funct. Anal.27(2017), 744–771. 10

    2017

  7. [15]

    T. H. Colding and W. P. Minicozzi II,Uniqueness of blowups and Łojasiewicz inequalities, Ann. of Math. (2)182(2015), 221–285. 13

    2015

  8. [16]

    Corso and P

    E. Corso and P. Shmerkin,Dynamical self-similarity,L q dimensions and Furstenberg slicing inRd, preprint, arXiv:2409.04608, (2024). 41

    2024

  9. [17]

    X.Dai, D.-J.Feng, andY.Wang,Refinable functions with non-integer dilations, J. Funct. Anal.250(2007), 1–20. 12

    2007

  10. [18]

    Davenport, P

    H. Davenport, P. Erdős and W. J. LeVeque,On Weyl’s criterion for uniform distribution,Michigan Math. J.10(1963), 311–314. 15

    1963

  11. [19]

    K. J. Falconer,Techniques in fractal geometry, Wiley (1997). 7

    1997

  12. [20]

    Feng,Dimension of invariant measures for affine iterated function sys- tems,Duke Math

    D.-J. Feng,Dimension of invariant measures for affine iterated function sys- tems,Duke Math. J.172(2023), 701–774. 42

    2023

  13. [21]

    Feng and H

    D.-J. Feng and H. Hu,Dimension theory of iterated function systems, Comm. Pure Appl. Math.,62(2009), 1435–1500. 42

    2009

  14. [22]

    Feng and K.-S

    D.-J. Feng and K.-S. Lau,Multifractal formalism for self-similar measures with weak separation condition,J. Math. Pures Appl.92(2009), 407–428. 32

    2009

  15. [23]

    Hörmander,An introduction to complex analysis in several variables, Van Nostrand, (1966)

    L. Hörmander,An introduction to complex analysis in several variables, Van Nostrand, (1966). 27

    1966

  16. [24]

    J. E. Hutchinson,Fractals and self similarity, Indiana Univ. Math. J.30(1981), 713–747. 8, 10

    1981

  17. [25]

    Jordan and T

    T. Jordan and T. Sahlsten,Fourier transforms of Gibbs measures for the Gauss map,Math. Ann.364(2016), 983–1023. 10, 41

    2016

  18. [26]

    Katok and B

    A. Katok and B. Hasselblatt,Introduction to the modern theory of dynamical systems,Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, vol. 54, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, (1995). 36

    1995

  19. [27]

    Kaufman,Continued fractions and Fourier transforms, Mathematika27 (1981), 262–267

    R. Kaufman,Continued fractions and Fourier transforms, Mathematika27 (1981), 262–267. 10

    1981

  20. [28]

    Kaufman,On Bernoulli convolutions.In: Conference in modern analysis and probability (New Haven, Conn., 1982), Contemp

    R. Kaufman,On Bernoulli convolutions.In: Conference in modern analysis and probability (New Haven, Conn., 1982), Contemp. Math. 26, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1984, 217–222. 2, 9, 14 44 AMLAN BANAJI AND HAN YU

    1982

  21. [29]

    Khalil,Exponential mixing via additive combinatorics, J

    O. Khalil,Exponential mixing via additive combinatorics, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 39(2026), 781–856. 3, 5, 15, 31, 33

    2026

  22. [30]

    Kleinbock and G

    D. Kleinbock and G. Margulis,Flows on homogeneous spaces and Diophantine approximation on manifolds, Ann. of Math. (2),148, (1998), 339–360. 6

    1998

  23. [31]

    J. Li, F. Naud and W. Pan,Kleinian Schottky groups, Patterson-Sullivan mea- sures, and Fourier decay, with an appendix on stationarity of Patterson-Sullivan measures, Duke Math. J.170(2021), 775-825. 10

    2021

  24. [32]

    Łojasiewicz,Ensembles semi-analytiques, preprint IHÉS, 1965

    S. Łojasiewicz,Ensembles semi-analytiques, preprint IHÉS, 1965. 13

    1965

  25. [33]

    Mattila,Geometry of sets and measures in Euclidean spaces: Fractals and rectifiability, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, Cambridge Univer- sity Press, (1999)

    P. Mattila,Geometry of sets and measures in Euclidean spaces: Fractals and rectifiability, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, Cambridge Univer- sity Press, (1999). 7

    1999

  26. [34]

    Mattila,Fourier Analysis and Hausdorff Dimension, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, Cambridge University Press, (2015)

    P. Mattila,Fourier Analysis and Hausdorff Dimension, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, Cambridge University Press, (2015). 7

    2015

  27. [35]

    Debrecen60(2002), 89–99

    T.Mitsis,A Stein–Tomas restriction theorem for general measures,Publ.Math. Debrecen60(2002), 89–99. 15

    2002

  28. [36]

    B. S. Mityagin,The zero set of a real analytic function,Mat. Zametki,107 (2020), 473–475. 25

    2020

  29. [37]

    Mockenhaupt,Salem sets and restriction properties of Fourier transforms, Geom

    G. Mockenhaupt,Salem sets and restriction properties of Fourier transforms, Geom. Funct. Anal.10(2000), 1579–1587. 15

    2000

  30. [38]

    Mosquera and P

    C. Mosquera and P. Shmerkin,Self-similar measures: asymptotic bounds for the dimension and Fourier decay of smooth images, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 43(2018), 823–834. 9, 15

    2018

  31. [39]

    Mosquera and A

    C. Mosquera and A. Olivo,Fourier decay behaviour of homogeneous self-similar measures on the complex plane,J. Fractal Geom.10(2023), 43–60. 9, 14, 38

    2023

  32. [40]

    Okniński and A

    J. Okniński and A. Salwa,Generalised Tits alternative for linear semigroups, J. Pure Appl. Algebra103(1995), 211–220. 9

    1995

  33. [41]

    Pollington, S

    A. Pollington, S. Velani, A. Zafeiropoulos and E. Zorin,Inhomogeneous Dio- phantine approximation onM 0-sets with restricted denominators,Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN (2022), 8571–8643. 15

    2022

  34. [42]

    Queffélec and O

    M. Queffélec and O. Ramaré,Analyse de Fourier des fractions continues a quotients restreints,Enseign. Math49(2003), 335–356. 10

    2003

  35. [43]

    Sahlsten,Fourier transforms and iterated function systems, to appear in Proceedings of Fractals and Related Fields IV, arXiv:2311.00585, (2023)

    T. Sahlsten,Fourier transforms and iterated function systems, to appear in Proceedings of Fractals and Related Fields IV, arXiv:2311.00585, (2023). 10

    2023

  36. [44]

    Sahlsten and C

    T. Sahlsten and C. Stevens,Fourier transform and expanding maps on Cantor sets, Amer. J. Math.146(2024), 945–982. 10

    2024

  37. [45]

    Shmerkin,On Furstenberg’s intersection conjecture, self-similar measures, and theL q norms of convolutions, Ann

    P. Shmerkin,On Furstenberg’s intersection conjecture, self-similar measures, and theL q norms of convolutions, Ann. of Math. (2)189, (2019). 41

    2019

  38. [46]

    Solomyak, Fourier decay for self-similar measures, Proc

    B. Solomyak, Fourier decay for self-similar measures, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 149(2021), 327–3291. 12

    2021

  39. [47]

    Stein,Harmonic analysis: real-variable methods, orthogonality and oscilla- tory integrals, vol

    E. Stein,Harmonic analysis: real-variable methods, orthogonality and oscilla- tory integrals, vol. 43, Princeton University Press, (1993). 2, 15

    1993

  40. [48]

    Streck,On absolute continuity and maximal Garsia entropy for self-similar measures with algebraic contraction ratio, Math

    L. Streck,On absolute continuity and maximal Garsia entropy for self-similar measures with algebraic contraction ratio, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 180(2026), 145–190. 12

    2026

  41. [49]

    Tits,Free subgroups in linear groups,J

    J. Tits,Free subgroups in linear groups,J. Algebra20(1972), 250–270. 9

    1972

  42. [50]

    Sakai,On Riemannian manifolds admitting a function whose gradient is of constant norm, Kodai Math

    T. Sakai,On Riemannian manifolds admitting a function whose gradient is of constant norm, Kodai Math. J.19(1996), 39–51. 7 FOURIER DECAY OF NONLINEAR IMAGES 45

    1996

  43. [51]

    Tsujii,On the Fourier transforms of self-similar measures,Dyn

    M. Tsujii,On the Fourier transforms of self-similar measures,Dyn. Syst.30 (2015), 468–484. 9, 14

    2015

  44. [52]

    Wu,A proof of Furstenberg’s conjecture on the intersections of×pand ×q-invariant sets, Ann

    M. Wu,A proof of Furstenberg’s conjecture on the intersections of×pand ×q-invariant sets, Ann. of Math (2)189, (2019), 707–751. 41

    2019

  45. [53]

    Whitney,Local properties of analytic varieties,in Differential and Combi- natorial Topology (ed

    H. Whitney,Local properties of analytic varieties,in Differential and Combi- natorial Topology (ed. S. S. Cairns), Princeton Univ. Press (1965), 205–244. 25

    1965

  46. [54]

    Whitney,Tangents to an analytic variety,Ann

    H. Whitney,Tangents to an analytic variety,Ann. of Math. (2)81(1965), 496–549. 25 Amlan Banaji, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Univer- sity of Jyv äskylä, P.O. Box 35 (MaD), FI-40014 University of Jyv äskylä, Finland Email address:banajimath@gmail.com Han Yu, Colleg...

    1965

Pith tools

Reviewed June 27, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.