Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Ideal G{\aa}rding polynomials

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A Gårding polynomial is 'ideal' when every derivative has a convex positivity component—and this paper proves that condition is equivalent to concavity, log-concavity, and Lorentzian localized homogenization.

desk verdict Introduces a plausible new class between stable and Gårding with a substantial structure theorem, but the main equivalence leans on an unproven dichotomy in Section 9 and on the companion preprint [24]. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.16832 v1 pith:J4WXUXCH submitted 2026-07-18 math.CO math.APmath.CAmath.OCmath.PR

Hao Fang , Biao Ma This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.COmath.APmath.CAmath.OCmath.PR
keywords idealGårdingpolynomialsrealstableLorentzianPitman–Stanleypolytopespolarizationconcavitylinearpreservers
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 introduces ideal Gårding polynomials, the subclass of Gårding polynomials whose distinguished positivity components (Gårding components) are convex and remain so under all partial derivatives. Its main theorem says that for a degree-d Gårding polynomial f, the following are equivalent: f is ideal; every nontrivial derivative satisfies (∂^α f)^(1/deg) concave on its component; every nontrivial derivative is log-concave there; and every localized homogenization is Lorentzian. The paper proves that ideal Gårding polynomials are preserved under polarization, satisfy closure properties under positive affine maps, products, and directional derivatives, and admit a linear preserver theory. It also gives a universal model for univariate Gårding polynomials via monotone root sequences and Pitman–Stanley polytopes, which yields quotient concavity and Newton–Maclaurin-type inequalities. A sympathetic reader should care because this places a strictly larger class than real stable polynomials inside the Lorentzian framework while retaining its robust structure theory.

What carries the argument

Central machinery: the universal quotient q_d(br)=p_d/∂_-p_d for univariate Gårding polynomials, realized via Pitman–Stanley polytopes as the volume/mixed-volume ratio Ψ_d. The paper proves Ψ_d is concave (equivalently superadditive) on Γ+_d and q_d is concave and nonincreasing in each root coordinate. This concavity-plus-monotonicity is then transported fibrewise: for ideal f(x,y), each root r_i(x) of ∂_y^i f is convex, hence f/∂_y f = q_d(y, r_0(x),…, r_{d-1}(x)) is concave on C_{∂_y f}. That quotient concavity is the load-bearing step for polarization.

What would settle it

Numerically test the key superadditivity inequality of Theorem 6.3: for random positive a,b in Γ+_d with d=3,4, check whether Ψ_d(a+b) ≥ Ψ_d(a) + Ψ_d(b), where Ψ_d = Vol(Ξ_d)/Vol_{d−1}(Ξ_d,Δ_1). A single violation would destroy the concavity of the universal quotient and with it the polarization theorem.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The core discovery is that imposing recursive convexity on Gårding components does not dismantle the Gårding structure theory. Theorem 1.3 equates ideality (all C_{∂^α f} convex) with: (∂^α f)^(1/deg) concave on C_{∂^α f}; log ∂^α f concave there; and H_{x0}∂^α f Lorentzian. The technical engine is a universal model of univariate Gårding polynomials as volumes of Pitman–Stanley polytopes; its universal quotient q_d is concave and coordinatewise decreasing, and this fibrewise yields the quotient concavity f/∂_y f used to prove polarization.

Load-bearing premise

The recursive definition of Gårding polynomials and the structural facts inherited from the authors' companion paper—component condition, preservation under positive affine maps and polarization, the Rayleigh property, and the monotone-root-sequence representation of univariate Gårding polynomials—are taken as given; the quotient concavity and polarization theorems build directly on them.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every positive real stable polynomial is ideal Gårding, and ideal Gårding polynomials are preserved under polarization and strictly positive affine pullbacks (Theorem 8.1 and Theorem 11.1).
  • Localized homogenizations of ideal Gårding polynomials are Lorentzian, so the class supplies new Lorentzian examples, including eigen-polynomials of nonnegative matrices and their M-matrix variants.
  • Newton–Maclaurin-type inequalities hold for all Gårding polynomials: directional derivative sequences satisfy the refined bound (D_v^j f)^2 ≥ (ℓ-j+1)/(ℓ-j) (D_v^{j-1} f)(D_v^{j+1} f), recovering the classical Newton–Maclaurin inequality when f is an elementary symmetric polynomial.
  • A linear operator whose symbol is an ideal Gårding polynomial with nonnegative coefficients preserves ideal Gårding polynomials, in both multi-affine and general settings.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If Theorem 1.3(6) holds as stated, ideal Gårding polynomials form a unified source of fully nonlinear elliptic operators of Hessian type in which ellipticity and convexity coexist; the quotient concavity of f/∂_y f may directly yield PDE estimates for subequations modeled on these polynomials.
  • The Pitman–Stanley volume model suggests a probabilistic reading: univariate Gårding polynomials are generating functions of nested simplices, and the quotient concavity may correspond to Brunn–Minkowski-type inequalities for conditional volumes that are not available for general convex bodies.
  • The binary-relation results (ideal domination and ideal position) are asserted to be identical to those in the companion paper; supplying those proofs would make the linear preserver theorem fully self-contained and could give a convexity-aware analogue of interlacing for hyperbolic polynomials.
  • A testable algorithmic consequence of the equivalence (1)⇔(6): given a Gårding polynomial, one could numerically verify ideality by checking M-convex support plus the Hessian condition for every localized homogenization.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper introduces ideal Gårding polynomials, a subclass of Gårding polynomials whose distinguished Gårding components are required to be convex and remain convex under all partial derivatives. The main structure theorem (Theorem 1.3) asserts that this condition is equivalent to: being a pullback of a multi-affine ideal Gårding polynomial; having a polarization that is multi-affine ideal Gårding; having every derivative quotient (∂^α f)^{1/deg} concave on the corresponding component; having log ∂^α f concave; and having all localized homogenizations H_{x0}∂^α f Lorentzian. The paper also gives a universal univariate model via Pitman–Stanley polytopes and monotone root sequences, establishes quotient concavity, proves closure and polarization theorems, and develops a linear preserver theory. The main analytic engine is the concavity of the universal quotient, transferred fibrewise in Section 7, which then powers the polarization theorem and the Lorentzian characterization.

Significance. If the main theorems are correct, the paper substantially extends the structure theory of Gårding polynomials while imposing convexity, placing the class strictly between real-stable and Lorentzian polynomials. The universal univariate model via Pitman–Stanley polytopes is elegant and yields concrete volume interpretations. The paper contains no fitted parameters and makes falsifiable, precise structural claims. The self-contained proof of Theorem 6.3 (concavity of the Pitman–Stanley quotient) is a clear contribution. However, the manuscript relies heavily on the companion paper [24] for foundational facts, and several load-bearing results in Section 9 are asserted without proof under the claim that the proofs are 'identical to [24]'. Because the relations ◀ and ≺≺ are defined using convexity of quotients, this transfer is not automatic and must be verified. The paper is plausible and likely fixable, but the current manuscript leaves an essential part of the proof infrastructure unverified.

major comments (3)
  1. [§9, Theorems 9.6–9.10] The proofs of Theorem 9.6 and Lemmas/Propositions 9.7–9.10 are omitted, with the statement that they are identical to results in [24]. This is not a routine transfer: the relations ◀ and ≺≺ are defined here using convexity of quotients ∂^α f/∂^α g and g/f on the relevant Gårding components, a condition not present in the domination relation of [24]. Theorem 9.6 is used in Lemma 10.1 to obtain h11≺≺h10 and h11≺≺h01, and Proposition 9.10 is then used to sum them; this feeds Theorem 10.2, Theorem 11.1, and ultimately Theorem 1.3. A proof, or at least a precise step-by-step reduction showing that the [24] arguments preserve quotient convexity, is required. As written, a central pillar of the paper is unverified.
  2. [§12, Theorem 12.5 / Theorem 12.1(4)] Theorem 12.1(4) states that every localized homogenization H_{x0}∂^α f is Lorentzian for every x0∈C_{∂^α f}. The proof says '(1)⇒(4) is due to Theorem 12.5', but Theorem 12.5 is stated only for Hf with f∈I_+. The missing reduction is: translate by x0 and use Lemma 3.1 to obtain g_x0(t)=∂^α f(x0+t)∈I_+, and then H_{x0}∂^α f = H(g_x0). This step should be made explicit. In the proof of Theorem 12.5 the sentence 'It remains only to treat A direct Taylor expansion' is incomplete; moreover, the Hessian is checked only at (0,0), so the author should explicitly note that the relevant quadratic polynomials are homogeneous and therefore have constant Hessian. Without that remark, the verification of the Lorentzian Hessian condition on the whole positive orthant is not apparent.
  3. [§7, Lemma 7.2] The equality C_{∂^i_y f} = {(x,y) : x∈D_i, y>r_i(x)} is asserted in a single sentence. The preceding Corollary 2.4 only shows that each fibre ∂^i_y f(x,·) is univariate Gårding; it does not by itself identify the global distinguished component as the epigraph of r_i over D_i. Since the convexity of r_i is used in Theorem 7.3 and hence in the polarization theorem (Theorem 8.1), the authors should either prove this fibrewise description or cite a specific statement in [24] that does so.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Definitions 1.1 and 2.1] When ∂_i f ≡ 0, the expression C_{∂_i f} is not defined. The intersection should be over those i with ∂_i f not identically zero, or an explicit convention for C_0 should be introduced.
  2. [Lemma 6.1] The conclusion is written as ∫_{a+b}^{α+β} dz/h(z) ≤ max(...), but the proof and application use ∫_{α+β}^{a+b} dz/h(z). The bounds are reversed in the statement; please correct.
  3. [Eq. (6.6), §6.2] The orientation of the integral in the formula for ψ(t,a) is unclear as printed: it appears to be ∫_{a1}^t, but the subsequent reasoning uses ∫_t^{a1}. Please clarify the sign/orientation.
  4. [Theorem 6.6, second case] The domain notation b ∈ R_{>0} × Γ+_{d-2} is not consistent with the coordinates b_i = r_{i-1} − r_i, which may vanish on the boundary of U_d^{(1)}. It should likely be R_{>0} × R_{\ge0}^{d-2}, with continuity used to extend concavity.
  5. [Definition 9.4] The convention '0≺≺g≺≺0' seems to be a typo; it presumably means 0≺≺g and g≺≺0 for any g∈I, but as written it is confusing.
  6. [Theorem 12.5, proof] The sentence 'It remains only to treat A direct Taylor expansion at the origin gives' is grammatically incomplete and should be rewritten as a proper claim with a displayed equation and an explicit statement that the Hessian of a homogeneous quadratic is constant.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The main equivalence in Theorem 1.3 is genuinely derived, but the proof chain leans on the same authors' companion [24] for foundational facts, and the Section 9 binary-relation dichotomy is a load-bearing theorem whose proof is skipped by citing [24] even though the relations are convexity-enhanced and not literally treated there.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 9, Theorem 9.6 (used in Lemma 10.1, Theorem 10.2, Theorem 11.1, and then in Theorem 1.3 and Proposition 12.2)]
    "The proof of the following Theorem is identical to similar results in [24]. We skip the proof. Theorem 9.6. Let h(x, y) = f(x)y + g(x) with f, g be nontrivial. Then h(x, y) ∈ I_{n+1}[x, y] if and only if exactly one of the following holds: (1) f ∈ I and −g ◀ f; (2) f, g ∈ I and f ≺≺ g."

    The relations ◀ and ≺≺ are introduced in this paper (Definitions 9.1 and 9.4) and explicitly add convexity of quotient functions to the earlier domination relation of [24]; they are not identical to the previous notions. Yet the dichotomy theorem is asserted with no proof, only the claim that it is 'identical to similar results in [24]', and the remaining lemmas of Section 9 are also 'the same as in [24] and omitted'. This dichotomy feeds Proposition 9.10, which is used in Lemma 10.1, the multi-affine linear preserver theorem (Theorem 10.2), and the closure properties in Theorem 11.1 that are invoked in the proof of Theorem 1.3 and Proposition 12.2. Thus a central, convexity-sensitive result is supported only by an unverified self-citation rather than by an exhibited reduction to a previou

  2. uniqueness imported from authors [Section 5.1 and Theorem 7.3]
    "Furthermore, up to a positive constant multiple, a univariate Gårding polynomial with the root sequence r is uniquely determined by (5.1). ... By the universal representation of univariate Gårding polynomials, f(x, y) = c(x)p_d(br(x, y)), ∂_y f(x, y) = c(x)∂_− p_d(br(x, y))."

    The universal representation of univariate Gårding polynomials by monotone root sequences is imported from the same authors' companion [24, Section 9.2] rather than reproved here. It is the key identification used in Theorem 7.3 to represent f/∂_y f as the universal quotient q_d, and Theorem 7.3 is the main analytic input for the polarization theorem (Theorem 8.1) and for Theorem 12.5. This is a load-bearing uniqueness/representation theorem from the authors' own prior work; if the companion result were incomplete, the fibre quotient concavity and hence the polarization step in Theorem 1.3 would be unsupported. This is not an equation-level reduction, but it is a significant self-citation dependency.

full rationale

The paper does not fit parameters, rename a known result, or make a prediction that is forced by its own input. The central content — Theorem 1.3 — is a genuine derivation: Definition 1.1 introduces a new recursive convexity condition, and the proof chain proceeds through Pitman–Stanley volume interpretation, universal quotient concavity, fibre quotient concavity, partial polarization, closure properties, 1/d-concavity, and Lorentzian homogenization. Each of these steps has independent mathematical content and no step reduces to the statement being proved. The main circularity burden is the reliance on the same authors' companion [24] for the definition of Gårding polynomials, preservation theorems, Rayleigh property, and the univariate MRS/universal representation. Some of this is ordinary prior-work dependence and would not by itself raise the score above 2. However, Section 9's Theorem 9.6 is load-bearing and its proof is skipped with the assertion that it is 'identical' to [24], even though the binary relations here incorporate convexity of quotients and therefore are not literally covered by the earlier domination relation. This unproved dichotomy is used to prove the linear preserver theorem and the closure properties that enter Theorem 1.3 and Proposition 12.2. That raises the score to 4: there is real self-citation dependence at a structural point, but the central claim still has independent content and is not equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Pure mathematics; no free parameters. The paper draws on standard results (Brunn–Minkowski, Bochner's tube theorem, Brascamp–Lieb, Brändén–Huh Lorentzian theory) and on the authors' own prior framework of Gårding polynomials (Def. 2.1, Theorem 2.3, Theorem 2.5, the MRS characterization and universal representation) from the unpublished preprint [24]. No new physical or geometric entities are postulated; 'ideal Gårding polynomials' are a definitional class, not an unexplained entity.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Definition 2.1: Gårding polynomials and the Gårding component are as defined in [24]; the class G satisfies the listed preservation properties (Theorem 2.3) and Rayleigh property (Theorem 2.5).
    Throughout the paper the authors lift the entire theory of Gårding polynomials from their own unpublished preprint [24]; no proof is reproduced here.
  • domain assumption Univariate Gårding polynomials are exactly those with a monotone root sequence, and any such polynomial is uniquely determined by its root sequence via the iterated integrals (5.1) (or (5.3)).
    Quoted as known from [24, Section 9.2] and used in the universal quotient theory (Sections 5–7).
  • standard math Brunn–Minkowski theorem: for convex bodies K, L, Vol(K+L)^{1/d} >= Vol(K)^{1/d} + Vol(L)^{1/d}.
    Used in Corollary 5.3 to prove concavity of P_d^{1/d}.
  • standard math Bochner's tube theorem: a holomorphic function on a tube domain extends to the tube over the convex hull.
    Used in Proposition 4.3 and Theorem 4.4 to show convexity of Gårding components of stable and eigen-polynomials.
  • standard math Lorentzian polynomial theory: homogeneous polynomials with nonnegative coefficients are Lorentzian iff all derivatives are log-concave on the positive orthant, and smooth limits of Lorentzian polynomials are Lorentzian.
    Theorem 12.4 cited to [12, 1, 2, 3]; used in Theorems 12.1 and 12.5.
  • standard math Brascamp–Lieb style inequalities (Lemmas 6.1, 6.2) as proved in the paper itself.
    Proved in Section 6.1; standard real-analysis tools.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Ideal G{\aa}rding polynomials." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/J4WXUXCH

@misc{pith2026260716832,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Ideal G\aarding polynomials},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/J4WXUXCH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.16832}
}
read the original abstract

We introduce ideal G{\aa}rding polynomials, a convexity-enhanced subclass of G\aa{}rding polynomials whose G{\aa}rding components are recursively convex under partial differentiation. This class strictly contains real stable polynomials and, after translation and homogenization, lies in the Lorentzian class. Our main result is that ideal G{\aa}rding polynomials still admit a robust structure theory despite this additional convexity: they are preserved under polarization, satisfy natural closure properties, and support a linear preserver theory. A key contribution of this paper is a universal model for univariate G{\aa}rding polynomials, described by monotone root sequences and equivalently by volume polynomials of Pitman--Stanley polytopes. We establish quotient concavity, and Newton--Maclaurin type inequalities, which leads to the polarization theorem, and suggests further connections with convex geometry and Lorentzian polynomials.

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. Liouville Rigidity for Real and Complex Degenerate Hessian Equations

    math.AP 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Bounded entire viscosity solutions of Hessian inclusion equations are constant precisely when the admissible set is Liouville admissible.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [24]

    G ˚ arding polynomials

    Hao Fang and Biao Ma. “G ˚ arding polynomials”. 2026. arXiv:2604. 27755

    2026

  2. [1]

    Log-Concave Polynomials, I: Entropy and a Deterministic Approximation Algorithm for Counting Bases of Matroids

    N. Anari, S. O. Gharan, and C. Vinzant. “Log-Concave Polynomials, I: Entropy and a Deterministic Approximation Algorithm for Counting Bases of Matroids”. In:Duke Math. J.170.16 (2021), pp. 3459–3504. issn: 0012-7094

    2021

  3. [2]

    Log-concave polynomials II: High-dimensional walks and an FPRAS for counting bases of a matroid

    N. Anari, K. K. Liu, S. O. Gharan, and C. Vinzant. “Log-concave polynomials II: High-dimensional walks and an FPRAS for counting bases of a matroid”. In:Ann. Math. (2)199.1 (2024), pp. 259–299. issn: 0003-486x

    2024

  4. [3]

    Log-Concave Polynomials Iii: Mason’s Ultra-Log-Concavity Conjecture for Inde- pendent Sets of Matroids

    N. Anari, K. K. Liu, S. O. Gharan, and C. Vinzant. “Log-Concave Polynomials Iii: Mason’s Ultra-Log-Concavity Conjecture for Inde- pendent Sets of Matroids”. In:Proc. Am. Math. Soc152.5 (2024), pp. 1969–1981.issn: 0002-9939

    2024

  5. [4]

    Plemmons.Nonnegative matrices in the mathematical sciences

    Abraham Berman and Robert J. Plemmons.Nonnegative matrices in the mathematical sciences. English. Vol. 9. Class. Appl. Math. Philadel- phia, PA: SIAM, 1994.isbn: 0-89871-321-8

    1994

  6. [5]

    Salomon Bochner and William Ted Martin.Several complex variables. English. Vol. 10. Princeton Math. Ser. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1948

    1948

  7. [6]

    Applications of stable polynomials to mixed determinants:: Johnson’s conjectures, unimodality, and sym- metrized Fischer products

    J. Borcea and P. Br¨ and´ en. “Applications of stable polynomials to mixed determinants:: Johnson’s conjectures, unimodality, and sym- metrized Fischer products”. In:Duke Math. J.143.2 (2008), pp. 205– 223.issn: 0012-7094

    2008

  8. [7]

    Polya-Schur master theorems for circu- lar domains and their boundaries

    J. Borcea and P. Br¨ and´ en. “Polya-Schur master theorems for circu- lar domains and their boundaries”. In:Ann. Math. (2)170.1 (2009), pp. 465–492.issn: 0003-486x

    2009

Show all 56 references
  1. [8]

    Multivariate P´ olya-Schur classification problems in the Weyl algebra

    J. Borcea and P. Br¨ and´ en. “Multivariate P´ olya-Schur classification problems in the Weyl algebra”. In:Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3)101.1 (2010), pp. 73–104.issn: 0024-6115,1460-244X

    2010

  2. [9]

    The Lee–Yang and P´ olya–Schur programs. I: Linear operators preserving stability

    Julius Borcea and Petter Br¨ and´ en. “The Lee–Yang and P´ olya–Schur programs. I: Linear operators preserving stability”. English. In:Invent. Math.177.3 (2009), pp. 541–569.issn: 0020-9910

    2009

  3. [10]

    Negative dependence and the geometry of polynomials

    Julius Borcea, Petter Br¨ and´ en, and Thomas M. Liggett. “Negative dependence and the geometry of polynomials”. English. In:J. Am. Math. Soc.22.2 (2009), pp. 521–567.issn: 0894-0347. REFERENCES 42

    2009

  4. [11]

    Polynomials with the half-plane property and matroid theory

    P. Br¨ and´ en. “Polynomials with the half-plane property and matroid theory”. In:Adv. Math.216 (2007)

    2007

  5. [12]

    Lorentzian polynomials

    Petter Br¨ and´ en and June Huh. “Lorentzian polynomials”. In:Ann. Math. (2)192.3 (2020), pp. 821–891.issn: 0003-486X

    2020

  6. [13]

    On extensions of the Brunn- Minkowski and Pr´ ekopa-Leindler theorems, including inequalities for log concave functions, and with an application to the diffusion equa- tion

    Herm Jan Brascamp and Elliott H Lieb. “On extensions of the Brunn- Minkowski and Pr´ ekopa-Leindler theorems, including inequalities for log concave functions, and with an application to the diffusion equa- tion”. In:J. Funct. Anal.22.4 (1976), pp. 366–389.issn: 0022-1236

    1976

  7. [14]

    The Dirichlet prob- lem for nonlinear second order elliptic equations, III: Functions of the eigenvalues of the Hessian

    Luis Caffarelli, Louis Nirenberg, and Joel Spruck. “The Dirichlet prob- lem for nonlinear second order elliptic equations, III: Functions of the eigenvalues of the Hessian”. In:Acta Math.155 (1985), pp. 261–301

    1985

  8. [15]

    An equation of Monge-Amp` ere type in conformal geometry, and four- manifolds of positive Ricci curvature

    Sunyung A. Chang, Matthew J. Gursky, and Paul C. Yang. “An equation of Monge-Amp` ere type in conformal geometry, and four- manifolds of positive Ricci curvature”. In:Ann. of Math. (2)155.3 (2002), pp. 709–787

    2002

  9. [16]

    On the pre- scribingσ 2 curvature equation onS 4

    Sunyung A. Chang, Zhengchao Han, and Paul C. Yang. “On the pre- scribingσ 2 curvature equation onS 4”. In:Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ.40.3 (2011), pp. 539–565

    2011

  10. [17]

    A Liouville problem for the sigma-2 equation

    Sunyung A. Chang and Yu Yuan. “A Liouville problem for the sigma-2 equation”. In:Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst.28.2 (2010), p. 659.issn: 1078-0947

    2010

  11. [18]

    The J-equation and the supercritical deformed Hermitian– Yang–Mills equation

    Gao Chen. “The J-equation and the supercritical deformed Hermitian– Yang–Mills equation”. In:Invent. Math.225 (2021), pp. 529–602

    2021

  12. [19]

    A variational theory of the Hessian equation

    Kaiseng Chou and Xujia Wang. “A variational theory of the Hessian equation”. In:Comm. Pure Appl. Math.54.9 (2001), pp. 1029–1064. issn: 0010-3640

    2001

  13. [20]

    Convergence of the J-flow on toric manifolds

    Tristan C Collins and G´ abor Sz´ ekelyhidi. “Convergence of the J-flow on toric manifolds”. In:J. Differ. Geom.107.1 (2017), pp. 47–81

    2017

  14. [21]

    A numerical criterion for generalised Monge-Ampere equations on projective manifolds

    Ved V Datar and Vamsi Pritham Pingali. “A numerical criterion for generalised Monge-Ampere equations on projective manifolds”. In: Geom. Funct. Anal.31.4 (2021), pp. 767–814

    2021

  15. [22]

    On a class of fully nonlinear flows in K¨ ahler geometry

    Hao Fang, Mijia Lai, and Xinan Ma. “On a class of fully nonlinear flows in K¨ ahler geometry.” In:J. Reine Angew. Math.2011.653 (2011), pp. 189–220.issn: 00754102

    2011

  16. [23]

    On a fully nonlinear elliptic equation with differential forms

    Hao Fang and Biao Ma. “On a fully nonlinear elliptic equation with differential forms”. In:Adv. Math.454 (2024), p. 109867.issn: 0001- 8708

    2024

  17. [25]

    Liouville Rigidity for Real and Complex Degenerate Hessian Equations

    Hao Fang, Biao Ma, and Jinyang Wu. “Liouville Rigidity for Real and Complex Degenerate Hessian Equations”. 2026. REFERENCES 43

    2026

  18. [26]

    Some inequalities about mixed volumes

    M. Fradelizi, M. Meyer, and A. Giannopoulos. “Some inequalities about mixed volumes”. In:Israel Journal of Mathematics135.1 (2003), pp. 157– 179.issn: 1565-8511

    2003

  19. [27]

    An inequality for hyperbolic polynomials

    L. G ˚ arding. “An inequality for hyperbolic polynomials”. In:J. Math. Mech.8 (1959)

    1959

  20. [28]

    On a Local Version of the Aleksandrov-Fenchel Inequality for the Quermassintegrals of a Convex Body

    A. Giannopoulos, M. Hartzoulaki, and G. Paouris. “On a Local Version of the Aleksandrov-Fenchel Inequality for the Quermassintegrals of a Convex Body”. In:Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 130.8 (2002), pp. 2403–2412.issn: 00029939, 10886826

    2002

  21. [29]

    A class of curvature type equa- tions

    Pengfei Guan and Xiangwen Zhang. “A class of curvature type equa- tions”. In:Pure Appl. Math. Q.17.3 (2021), pp. 865–907.issn: 1558- 8599,1558-8602

    2021

  22. [30]

    Hyperbolic polynomials and interior point methods for convex programming

    Osman G¨ uler. “Hyperbolic polynomials and interior point methods for convex programming”. English. In:Math. Oper. Res.22.2 (1997), pp. 350–377.issn: 0364-765X

    1997

  23. [31]

    A formal Riemannian struc- ture on Conformal classes and uniqueness for theσ 2-Yamabe prob- lem

    Matthew J. Gursky and Jeffrey Streets. “A formal Riemannian struc- ture on Conformal classes and uniqueness for theσ 2-Yamabe prob- lem”. In:Geom. Topol.22.6 (2018), pp. 3501–3573

    2018

  24. [32]

    Van der Waerden/Schrijver-Valiant like conjectures and stable (aka hyperbolic) homogeneous polynomials: one theorem for all

    Leonid Gurvits. “Van der Waerden/Schrijver-Valiant like conjectures and stable (aka hyperbolic) homogeneous polynomials: one theorem for all”. In:Electron. J. Combin.15.1 (2008), Research Paper 66, 26. issn: 1077-8926

    2008

  25. [33]

    Dirichlet duality and the nonlinear Dirichlet problem

    F. Reese Harvey and H. Blaine Lawson Jr. “Dirichlet duality and the nonlinear Dirichlet problem”. In:Comm. Pure Appl. Math.62.3 (2009), pp. 396–443.issn: 0010-3640,1097-0312

    2009

  26. [34]

    G ˚ arding’s theory of hyper- bolic polynomials

    F. Reese Harvey and H. Blaine Lawson Jr. “G ˚ arding’s theory of hyper- bolic polynomials”. In:Comm. Pure Appl. Math.66.7 (2013), pp. 1102– 1128.issn: 0010-3640,1097-0312

    2013

  27. [35]

    Calibrated geometries

    Reese Harvey and H. Blaine Lawson Jr. “Calibrated geometries”. In: Acta Math.148 (1982), pp. 47–157.issn: 0001-5962,1871-2509

    1982

  28. [36]

    A second order estimate for complex Hessian equations on a compact K¨ ahler manifold

    Zuoliang Hou, Xi–Nan Ma, and Damin Wu. “A second order estimate for complex Hessian equations on a compact K¨ ahler manifold”. In: Mathematical research letters17.3 (2010), pp. 547–561

    2010

  29. [37]

    Convexity estimates for mean curvature flow and singularities of mean convex surfaces

    Gerhard Huisken and Carlo Sinestrari. “Convexity estimates for mean curvature flow and singularities of mean convex surfaces”. In:Acta Math.183.1 (1999), pp. 45–70.issn: 0001-5962,1871-2509

    1999

  30. [38]

    On the general notion of fully nonlinear second-order elliptic equations

    N. V. Krylov. “On the general notion of fully nonlinear second-order elliptic equations”. In:Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.347.3 (1995), pp. 857– 895.issn: 0002-9947,1088-6850. REFERENCES 44

    1995

  31. [39]

    Hyperbolic polynomials, interlacers, and sums of squares

    Mario Kummer, Daniel Plaumann, and Cynthia Vinzant. “Hyperbolic polynomials, interlacers, and sums of squares”. In:Math. Program. 153.1 (2015), pp. 223–245

    2015

  32. [40]

    On the convexity of general inverseσ k equations

    Chao-Ming Lin. “On the convexity of general inverseσ k equations”. English. In:J. Funct. Anal.285.7 (2023), p. 59.issn: 0022-1236

    2023

  33. [41]

    Chao-Ming Lin.On the Solvability of General Inverseσ k Equations

  34. [42]

    Corrigendum to

    Chao-Ming Lin. “Corrigendum to ”On the convexity of general inverse σk equations” [J. Funct. Anal. 285(7) (2023) 110038]”. In:J. Funct. Anal.286.11 (2024), p. 110398.issn: 0022-1236

    2023

  35. [43]

    Interlacing families II: Mixed characteristic polynomials and the Kadison-Singer problem

    A. W. Marcus, D. A. Spielman, and N. Srivastava. “Interlacing families II: Mixed characteristic polynomials and the Kadison-Singer problem”. In:Ann. Math. (2)182.1 (2015), pp. 327–350.issn: 0003-486x

    2015

  36. [44]

    Inter- lacing families I: Bipartite Ramanujan graphs of all degrees

    Adam W. Marcus, Daniel A. Spielman, and Nikhil Srivastava. “Inter- lacing families I: Bipartite Ramanujan graphs of all degrees”. In:Ann. of Math. (2)182.1 (2015), pp. 307–325

    2015

  37. [45]

    Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2003

    Kazuo Murota.Discrete Convex Analysis. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2003

    2003

  38. [46]

    Hyperbolicity and stable polynomials in combina- torics and probability

    Robin Pemantle. “Hyperbolicity and stable polynomials in combina- torics and probability”. English. In:Current developments in math- ematics, 2011. Papers based on selected lectures given at the con- ference, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA, November 2011. Somerville, M...

    2011

  39. [47]

    A Polytope Related to Empir- ical Distributions, Plane Trees, Parking Functions, and the Associa- hedron

    Jim Pitman and Richard P. Stanley. “A Polytope Related to Empir- ical Distributions, Plane Trees, Parking Functions, and the Associa- hedron”. In:Discrete & Computational Geometry27 (2002), pp. 603– 634

    2002

  40. [48]

    Dually Lorentzian Polynomials

    Jan Ross, Hendrik S¨ uss, and Thomas Wannerer. “Dually Lorentzian Polynomials”. In:Monatsh. Math.208 (2025), pp. 495–524

    2025

  41. [49]

    Rigidity for general semiconvex entire solutions to the sigma-2 equation

    Ravi Shankar and Yu Yuan. “Rigidity for general semiconvex entire solutions to the sigma-2 equation”. In: (2021)

    2021

  42. [50]

    Jian Song.Nakai-Moishezon criterions for complex Hessian equations

  43. [51]

    Fully non-linear elliptic equations on compact Hermitian manifolds

    G´ abor Sz´ ekelyhidi. “Fully non-linear elliptic equations on compact Hermitian manifolds”. In:J. Differ. Geom.109.2 (2018), pp. 337–378

    2018

  44. [52]

    Conformally invariant Monge-Amp` ere equations: global solutions

    Jeff A. Viaclovsky. “Conformally invariant Monge-Amp` ere equations: global solutions”. In:Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.352.9 (2000), pp. 4371– 4379.issn: 0002-9947. REFERENCES 45

    2000

  45. [53]

    Multivariate stable polynomials: theory and ap- plications

    David G. Wagner. “Multivariate stable polynomials: theory and ap- plications”. English. In:Bull. Am. Math. Soc., New Ser.48.1 (2011), pp. 53–84.issn: 0273-0979

    2011

  46. [54]

    Global solutions to special Lagrangian equations

    Yu Yuan. “Global solutions to special Lagrangian equations”. In:Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.134.5 (2006), pp. 1355–1358.issn: 0002-9939,1088- 6826. Email address:hao-fang@uiowa.edu Department of Mathematics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52246, USA Email address:bma@math.ecnu.ed...

    2006

  47. [2020]

    arXiv:2012.07956 [math.DG]

    2012 arXiv

  48. [2023]

    arXiv:2310.05339 [math.DG]

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.