The Unipotent Chabauty-Kim-Kantor Method for Relative Completions

David Corwin; Sa'ar Zehavi

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

The Unipotent Chabauty-Kim-Kantor Method for Relative Completions

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 A dimension inequality between global Galois cohomology and a de Rham period domain forces finiteness of S-integral points on curves, and under Bloch–Kato the inequality holds for genus at least two and modular curves with enough…

desk verdict A substantial technical advance that closes the structural gaps in Kantor's unification, whose finiteness applications rest on a Bloch-Kato hypothesis that is stated too broadly and should be isolated as a special-case conjecture. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.18846 v1 pith:JSH42KVR submitted 2024-11-28 math.NT math.AG

David Corwin , Sa'ar Zehavi This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.NTmath.AG MSC 11G3014G0511F8014F30

keywords relativecompletionChabauty–KimmethodLawrence–VenkateshBloch–KatoconjectureKodaira–Parshinfamilyp-adicperiodmapDiophantinefinitenessSelmerschemes

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 develops a variant of the Chabauty–Kim method in which the usual unipotent completions are replaced by the unipotent radical of a relative completion built from the monodromy of a Kodaira–Parshin family. Its central claim is that if the dimension of a global unipotent Bloch–Kato Selmer scheme plus the dimensions of the Hodge and Frobenius fixed parts is strictly smaller than the dimension of the de Rham moduli space, then the S-integral points in a fixed Galois-representation class inside a residue disk are cut out by a nonzero analytic function and are finite. The authors close the gaps left by the earlier relative-completion approach: they prove representability of the relevant Selmer schemes as algebraic spaces, construct compatible finite-type motivic quotients, and prove that the p-adic period map is analytic and Zariski dense. Under a strong Bloch–Kato conjecture and a semisimplicity theorem for the relevant Galois representations, they conclude finiteness of S-integral points for every curve of genus at least two and for modular curves with enough Eisenstein classes, giving a new conditional proof of the classical finiteness theorems. The interest is that this is the first unification in which the dimension inequality itself, rather than an extra conjecture in p-adic Hodge theory, is shown to imply Diophantine finiteness.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the relative completion $G$ of the étale, de Rham, and crystalline fundamental groups with respect to the monodromy representation $\rho:\pi_1\to R$ attached to the relative cohomology of a Kodaira–Parshin family: $G$ is a pro-algebraic extension of the reductive group $R$ by a pro-unipotent group $U$, and the paper works with the unipotent radical $U$ rather than with the usual unipotent completion. The argument is carried by three pieces of machinery: compatible finite-type motivic quotients $U_n$ built from Galois-stable finite direct summands of $U_{\mathrm{ab}}$ so that the inverse limit recovers $U$; the unipotent Bloch–Kato Selmer schemes $H^1_f(G_T,U_n^{\mathrm{ét}})$, representable as algebraic spaces when the graded pieces have no invariants; and the v-adic period map sending a point $x$ to its de Rham path torsor, whose analyticity is proved by parallel transport along the universal Gauss–Manin connection and whose Zariski density is reduced to the complex period map via relative Malcev completion theory. The Bloch–Kato logarithm places the image of S-integral points in the Selmer scheme inside the de Rham double quotient, and the dimension inequality guarantees a nonzero function vanishing on that image.

What would settle it

For a modular curve with enough Eisenstein classes, say $Y_1(4)$, fix an auxiliary prime $p$ and a finite set $S$, and compute $\dim H^1_f(\mathbb{Q},\mathrm{Sym}^{2n}V)$ for increasing $n$: if any of these dimensions is at least $n-\#T-3$, Proposition 5.38 fails and the claimed finiteness proof does not go through for that data. Conversely, if the dimension inequality holds but the zero locus of the pulled-back analytic function contains infinitely many S-integral points in one representation class inside a residue disk, the central implication of Theorem 4.42 would be false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms: replacing the unipotent completion with the unipotent radical of the relative completion of the fundamental group, taken with respect to the monodromy representation attached to a Kodaira–Parshin family, makes the Chabauty–Kim box-cutter diagram work with representable objects. For a compatible system of finite-type quotients $U_n$, the main theorem states that if $\dim H^1_f(G_T,U_n^{\mathrm{ét}}) + \dim F^0G_n^{\mathrm{dR}} + \dim G_n^{\mathrm{dR},\varphi=1} < \dim G_n^{\mathrm{dR}}$, then over an étale cover of a residue disk there is a nonzero analytic function vanishing on the S-integral points whose Kodaira–Parshin Galois representation is isomorphic to that of the base point; hence that subset is finite. Under the Bloch–Kato conjecture that $H^1_f(\mathbb{Q},M)=0$ for every p-adic $G_{\mathbb{Q}}$-module of non-negative weight, the dimension inequality is proved for curves of genus at least two and for modular curves with enough Eisenstein classes. Together with a semisimplicity theorem for the relevant Galois representations, this yields $\#X(\mathbb{Z}[1/S])<\infty$ for those curves.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the strong Bloch–Kato conjecture that $H^1_f(\mathbb{Q},M)=0$ for every p-adic Galois module of non-negative weight; if it fails for one of the symmetric powers of the Kodaira–Parshin representation, the dimension inequality is not established and the finiteness conclusion does not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For every curve of genus at least two, and for modular curves with enough Eisenstein classes, the method yields $\#X(\mathbb{Z}[1/S])<\infty$ conditionally on Bloch–Kato and semisimplicity of the relevant Galois representations.
Within a fixed residue disk and a fixed Galois-representation class, S-integral points are contained in the zero locus of a nonzero analytic function on an étale cover, so the set is finite and in principle computable to any p-adic precision.
The dimension inequality is a purely numerical criterion involving dimensions of a Selmer scheme and a de Rham period domain, so it can be checked for a given curve without first constructing the analytic function.
Because the unipotent Bloch–Kato Selmer schemes are representable as algebraic spaces, the method removes the ad hoc p-adic Hodge-theoretic conjectures that the earlier approach needed.
All hyperbolic curves admitting a Kodaira–Parshin family are covered, including modular curves and the thrice-punctured line; punctured elliptic curves are the remaining unaddressed class.

Reading between the lines

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

Because $U$ is recovered as the inverse limit of the $U_n$, a numerical check of the dimension inequality for a small finite-type quotient of a concretely given curve would produce an explicit analytic function cutting out S-integral points, suggesting a route to effective computation.
The quotient $G/[U,U]$ gives a relative Chabauty–Skolem method that is linear in the sense of classical Chabauty–Skolem; if the Eisenstein-class construction is made unconditional, this could give a new path to effective finiteness for the thrice-punctured line and other modular curves.
The residual-pseudorepresentation stratification from the earlier approach is designed to work residue disk by residue disk without the semisimplicity theorem, so a stratified version of the present method might yield unconditional finiteness statements in settings where the dimension inequality is known.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Candid take: this is the first real attempt at unifying Chabauty-Kim and Lawrence-Venkatesh that actually addresses the structural gaps in Kantor's thesis. The density theorem for the v-adic period map (4.22), the representability of the unipotent Selmer stack (Chapter 3), and the clean dimension-inequality-to-finiteness implication (4.42) are genuinely new and are the right technical moves. Credit where due: the authors are transparent about what is conjectural and what is not, and the core implication is carefully structured.

Now the soft spots. The finiteness applications in Chapter 5 depend on two big external inputs. The first is Faltings' semisimplicity (Fact 1.7), which is a component of the very theorem being re-proved. The authors acknowledge this and reframe the goal as an effective route rather than a standalone reproof, which is fair enough. The second is Conjecture 5.4, a blanket Bloch-Kato vanishing for all p-adic G_Q-modules of non-negative weight. I read the stress-test note claiming this conjecture is false as stated. The specific counterexample given there does not land cleanly: the Kummer map injects E(Q) into H^1_f of the Tate module V_p(E), not into H^1_f of H^1_et(E), so the identification in the note is off. But the underlying worry is legitimate. Conjecture 5.4 is stronger than anything standard, and depending on weight conventions, examples like S-unit classes can give nonzero H^1_f(Q, Q_p(1)). The paper only needs vanishing for a specific list of modules, namely the (Gr_{k'}U_m)^*(1) and Sym^{2n}V systems that appear in Claims 5.24 and 5.40. Those should be isolated as an explicit special-case Bloch-Kato conjecture, with a check that no known elliptic/symmetric-power counterexamples invalidate them. As written, the blanket Conjecture 5.4 is a liability.

Other than that, the main architecture looks sound. The density proof via reduction to Hain and Lawrence-Venkatesh is plausible, and the dimension-theoretic argument in 4.42 is clean. The proofs are long, highly technical, and not machine-checked, so an expert referee should scrutinize the asymptotic bounds in Chapter 5.

Bottom line: this paper deserves a serious referee. It is written for specialists in Chabauty-Kim, Lawrence-Venkatesh, and effective Diophantine finiteness, and it does real work. I would bring it to our reading group and I would cite it if I worked in this area. Send it to peer review, but with a clear request to fix the statement of Conjecture 5.4 and to state the needed vanishing as a special-case conjecture.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a unification of the Chabauty–Kim and Lawrence–Venkatesh methods through the relative completion of fundamental groups, in the spirit of Kantor's thesis. The authors introduce unipotent Bloch–Kato Selmer schemes attached to the unipotent radical of the relative completion, prove analyticity and étale-local Zariski density of the v-adic period map, and establish a central implication (Theorem 4.42): a dimension inequality between the global Selmer scheme and the de Rham moduli space implies finiteness of the S-integral points within a fixed Galois-representation isomorphism class. They then show that for curves of genus at least two and for many modular curves, the relevant dimension inequality follows from a strong form of the Bloch–Kato conjecture. Taking Faltings' semisimplicity as an input, they obtain a conditional proof that X(Z[1/S]) is finite.

Significance. If the framework can be made to work, it would provide the first unified Chabauty–Kim/Lawrence–Venkatesh formalism in which a dimension inequality directly yields Diophantine finiteness, and it would extend Kantor's representability and density results to all curves of genus at least two. The paper contains substantial technical contributions: the proof of density of the p-adic period map by reduction to Hain's complex period map, the construction of compatible finite-type motivic quotients of the relative completion, and a careful treatment of the Bloch–Kato logarithm on unipotent torsors. These parts are valuable and appear to be internally sound. However, the advertised applications rest on two heavy assumptions: a Bloch–Kato conjecture that is false as stated, and Faltings' semisimplicity, which is itself a core component of the theorem being reproved. The significance is therefore conditional, and the paper's headline claims need to be scoped accordingly.

major comments (3)

[Section 5, Conjecture 5.4] Conjecture 5.4 is false as stated. It asserts H^1_f(Q, M)=0 for every p-adic G_Q-module M of non-negative weight that is unramified outside finitely many places and de Rham at p. Let E/Q be an elliptic curve of positive rank and let M=H^1_et(E_\bar Q, Q_p), with p a prime of good reduction. Then M has weight 1, is unramified outside the conductor, and is crystalline at p, and the Kummer map gives an injection E(Q)⊗Q_p → H^1_f(Q, V_p(E)). Thus H^1_f(Q, M) is nonzero. This is load-bearing: the proofs of Claims 5.24 and 5.40 invoke Conjecture 5.4 via Remark 5.23 to force X^2_T(Gr_{k'}U^et_m)=0 and X^2_T(U^et_n)=0, which are the pivotal bounds for the dimension inequalities in Theorems 5.5 and 5.36. The authors should replace Conjecture 5.4 with an explicit special-case conjecture restricted to the specific modules actually used, namely (Gr_{k'}U^et_m)^*(1) for the genus ≥2 case and Sym^{2n}V for the modular case, and should state any known evidence or absence of counterexamples for those modules.
[Section 1.4, Fact 1.7 and Remark 1.8] The deduction of #X(Z[1/S])<∞ from the finiteness of the sets ]b[∩X(Z[1/S])^{∼b} requires Faltings' Semisimplicity (Fact 1.7), which is itself a deep part of the very theorem the paper aims to reprove. The authors acknowledge this in Remark 1.8, but the abstract and Theorem 1.3 say this 'provides an alternative proof that #X(Z[1/S])<∞'. As written, the proof of finiteness is conditional on Faltings' semisimplicity, so the claim of an 'alternative proof' should be qualified as a proof conditional on a theorem at least as deep as the target. The authors should clearly separate the genuinely new conditional framework, which is valuable, from the additional classical input needed to pass from isomorphism-class finiteness to global finiteness.
[Section 5.1, Proposition 5.17 and Claim 5.28] The dimension bound for H^1_f(G_T, U^et_{k,m}) in Proposition 5.17 is stated with a constant C_m depending on m that is not made explicit, and the final step of Claim 5.28 requires choosing m so large that the right-hand side of (87) is positive and then k large. This is plausible, but the argument would be clearer if the authors indicated how C_m grows with m and verified that the required inequalities can be simultaneously satisfied for a fixed quotient of the relative completion. As it stands, the existence of a single compatible system of finite-type pushouts satisfying (49) is asserted after taking m and k 'large enough' without a fully quantified discussion.

minor comments (4)

[Section 1.3] The phrase 'eluded to above' should be 'alluded to above'.
[Section 2.2, Definition 2.14] The definition of a Kodaira–Parshin family uses 'positive dimensional smooth proper relative scheme', but the factorization Y → Y' → X with Y → Y' a relative abelian scheme is introduced only later in Section 1.4; the definition in 2.14 would be clearer if it included the factorization directly.
[Section 5.2, Notation 5.35] In Notation 5.35, the condition 'S is a set of primes containing the divisors of N(Γ)' is followed by 'T := S ∪ {p}' with p not in S; it would be helpful to state explicitly that p is a prime of good reduction for the universal family, as is done in the genus ≥2 case.
[Appendix A.1.2] In the de Rham realization, the notation 'L^{et} := R^1_{dR} f_* 1_{Y_v}' appears to be a typo: the superscript should be 'dR' rather than 'et'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central dimension-inequality-to-finiteness implication is self-contained; reliance on Faltings semisimplicity is an explicit conditional premise rather than a disguised import.

full rationale

The main new content, Theorem 1.1 / Theorem 4.42, derives an analytic function vanishing on the S-integral points in a fixed Galois-representation class from an explicit dimension inequality, using the Bloch-Kato logarithm, the v-adic period map, étale-local Zariski density, and Weierstrass preparation. This implication does not assume finiteness or any equivalent of the target theorem. The later applications (Theorems 5.5 and 5.36) condition explicitly on the Bloch-Kato conjecture, and the paper says so at every use, e.g. 'Conditioned on the Bloch-Kato conjecture' and 'The Bloch-Kato conjecture is used in our bound on dim X^2_T.' No parameter is fitted to the set being predicted, and no load-bearing step reduces to the authors' own prior work. The one premise that might look circular is Fact 1.7, Faltings' Semisimplicity, used to go from finiteness within each isomorphism class to finiteness of all S-integral points; however, the paper openly identifies this reliance in Remark 1.8 and explicitly says it does not regard reproving finiteness as its goal. That is an external conditional input, not a definitional equivalence or a self-citation chain. A separate correctness risk, not circularity, is that Conjecture 5.4 as stated—H^1_f(Q,M)=0 for every p-adic G_Q-module of non-negative weight—is false for the Tate module of a positive-rank elliptic curve; the applications would need the vanishing restricted to the specific symmetric-power modules actually used. This does not undermine the self-contained nature of the core dimension-inequality implication.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central results are conditional on the Bloch-Kato conjecture and import Faltings' semisimplicity; the finite-type quotient construction introduces non-canonical choices (level k, symmetric power m, Eisenstein index n) that are tuned to make the dimension inequalities hold. No new physical entities are postulated; the new cohomological objects are defined and proven within the paper.

free parameters (4)

k (descending central series level) = chosen even and large enough (Claim 5.28)
Introduced ad hoc to make dim U^dR_{k,m} large enough for inequality (87). Not data-fitted; a construction parameter.
m (symmetric power degree) = chosen odd and > 4C (Claim 5.28)
Introduced to control ratios dim F^0/dim and Selmer dimension bounds in Chapter 5; specifically m > 4C where C depends on #T and constants.
n (Eisenstein quotient index) = n > #T + 3 (Proposition 5.38)
In the modular curve case, the Eisenstein quotient U_n = (Sym^{2n}V)(2n+1) is chosen with n large enough to satisfy the dimension inequality (94).
I' (finite set of irreducible representations) = I' = {Sym^m V} in the genus >= 2 case
Choice of finite-type quotient U_{I'} in Notations 2.28 and 5.10; non-canonical choice of direct summand in Claim 2.23 affects the tower of quotients.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption Bloch-Kato conjecture: H^1_f(Q, M)=0 for p-adic G_Q-modules M of non-negative weight (Conjecture 5.4).
Used in Claims 5.24 and 5.40 to show dim X^2_T(Gr_{k'}U^et_m)=0 and dim X^2_T(U^et_n)=0, which are essential for bounding dim H^1_f(G_T,U). Without this, the dimension inequality (1) is not established for genus >= 2 or modular curves.
domain assumption Faltings' semisimplicity: for all x in X(Z[1/S]), the G_T-representation rho_x is semisimple (Fact 1.7).
Used to pass from finiteness of points in a single isomorphism class ~b to finiteness of all S-integral points; this is a deep theorem, itself a component of the theorem being conditionally re-proved (Remark 1.8).
domain assumption Finiteness of isomorphism classes of semisimple p-adic G_T-representations of fixed weight and dimension (Theorem 3.2, after Faltings and Lawrence-Venkatesh).
Used in Section 1.4 to reduce to finitely many classes rho_x; necessary for the deduction of #X(Z[1/S]) < infinity.
domain assumption Existence of Kodaira-Parshin families with full symplectic monodromy for curves of genus g >= 2 (Theorem 2.15 after Lawrence-Venkatesh) and for modular curves (universal elliptic curve).
Defines the relative completion data; full monodromy is required for semisimplicity and for the structure of U_ab (Fact 2.27, Proposition 2.18).
standard math Semisimplicity of Kodaira-Parshin objects R^1 f_* 1 in etale, de Rham, and crystalline categories (Proposition 2.18, proven in Appendix A.2).
Underlies the reductive quotient R and the thick tensor category construction; the proof relies on Artin comparison, Olsson, and Kneser.
standard math Weight-monodromy conjecture for abelian varieties, proved by Grothendieck and Deligne (cited as Conjecture 5.27).
Used in Claim 5.25 to show that non-potential good reduction implies V is impure, giving bounds on H^0(G_l, ...).
standard math Representability of Selmer schemes under H^0(G, Gr_i U^et)=0 (Proposition 3.23, attributed to Kim09, Proposition 2).
Basis for representing unipotent Selmer schemes as affine schemes.

invented entities (3)

Unipotent Bloch-Kato Selmer schemes H^1_f(G,U^et)
purpose: Containers for global and local integral points via the restricted Kummer map (Proposition 3.20), replacing Kantor's non-representable Selmer stacks.
Defined in this paper; representability is proven internally, but there is no external empirical handle.
Admissible de Rham torsors (modified from Kantor's definition)
purpose: Objects classified by the de Rham double quotient [G^{dR,phi=1}\G^{dR}/F^0G^{dR}]; used to define the period map and Bloch-Kato logarithm.
A sharpened definition rather than a new physical or empirical entity.
Relative Chabauty-Skolem method (quotient G/[U,U])
purpose: A specialization combining Chabauty-Skolem and Lawrence-Venkatesh; applied to modular curves with Eisenstein classes.
New methodological specialization, with no external falsifiable handle.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Unipotent Chabauty-Kim-Kantor Method for Relative Completions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JSH42KVR

@misc{pith2026241118846,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Unipotent Chabauty-Kim-Kantor Method for Relative Completions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JSH42KVR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.18846}
}

read the original abstract

Kantor's Thesis was the first step in unifying the Chabauty-Kim and Lawrence-Venkatesh methods via relative completion. In this work, we refine Kantor's approach by addressing its limitations, achieving the first unification where a dimension inequality between local and global Galois cohomology implies Diophantine finiteness for curves. This results in a new conditional proof of Faltings' and Siegel's theorems and introduces a novel p-adic analytic method for computing rational points on hyperbolic curves, offering advantages over the Chabauty-Kim and Lawrence-Venkatesh approaches. Our technical contributions are threefold. First, we establish the density of Kantor's p-adic period map. Second, our method applies to all curves of genus g >= 2, extending beyond the specific modular curves considered in Kantor's thesis. Third, we resolve the representability problem for Kantor's global Selmer stack. Previously, Kantor's method required additional conjectures in p-adic Hodge theory to represent his Selmer stack--a priori a rigid analytic stack--in a category with a suitable dimension theory. We overcome this by replacing the unipotent completions used in Kim's framework with the unipotent radicals of Kantor's relative completions, derived from monodromy representations associated with the relative cohomology of a Kodaira-Parshin family. Kantor's method is a step toward the Effective Faltings Problem, which seeks not only to establish finiteness of rational points on hyperbolic curves but to compute them explicitly. While the Lawrence-Venkatesh method is unconditional, it has not yet been made effective for any curve. In contrast, the Chabauty-Kim method, though conditional, has been made effective in various settings. Our Unipotent Chabauty-Kim-Kantor method addresses key challenges in Kantor's program and highlights its potential for both theoretical and computational advances.

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

Modular Chabauty: Effective S-Integral Point Computation On Curves with Elliptic Fibrations
math.NT 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A modular-period-map variant of Chabauty computes all S-integral points on elliptic-fibred curves, including Y1(N) and the S-unit equation, in seconds.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

14 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Torsion homologique et s ections rationnelles

[Gro58] Alexandre Grothendieck. “Torsion homologique et s ections rationnelles”. In: Séminaire Claude Cheval- ley 3 (1958), pp. 1–29. [Art66] Michael Artin. “The étale topology of schemes”. In: Proc. Internat. Congr. Math.(Moscow,

work page 1958
[3]

On the descending central series of g roups with a single deﬁning relation

1970, pp. 437–443. [Lab70] John P Labute. “On the descending central series of g roups with a single deﬁning relation”. In: Journal of Algebra 14.1 (1970), pp. 16–23. [Che77] Kuo-Tsai Chen. “Iterated path integrals”. In: Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 83.5 (1977), pp. 831–879. [Mil80] James S Milne. Etale cohomology (PMS-33) . Princeton uni...

work page 1970
[4]

1992, pp. 429–464. [Wei94] Charles A Weibel. An introduction to homological algebra

work page 1992
[7]

Relative completions and the coho mology of linear groups over local rings

1998, pp. 47–92. [Knu02] Kevin P Knudson. “Relative completions and the coho mology of linear groups over local rings”. In: Journal of the London Mathematical Society 65.1 (2002), pp. 183–203. [Kim05] Minhyong Kim. “The motivic fundamental group of the projective line minus three points and the theorem of Siegel”. In: Inventiones mathematicae 161.3 (2005)...

work page 2002
[944]

The Chabauty-Kim Method for Relative Completions

[DC20] Ishai Dan-Cohen and David Corwin. “The polylog quoti ent and the Goncharov quotient in compu- tational Chabauty–Kim theory II”. In: Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 373.10 (2020), pp. 6835–6861. [Kan20] Noam Kantor. “The Chabauty-Kim method for relative completions”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.10725 (2020). [Lan20] Aaron Landesm...

work page Pith review arXiv 2020
[1966]

On the diﬀerentiation of de Rham cohomology classes with respect to parameters

1966, pp. 44–56. [KO68] Nicholas M Katz and Tadao Oda. “On the diﬀerentiation of de Rham cohomology classes with respect to parameters”. In: Journal of Mathematics of Kyoto University 8.2 (1968), pp. 199–213. [Del70] Pierre Deligne. Théorie de Hodge . Institut des Hautes Etudes Scientiﬁques,

work page 1968
[1980]

Endlichkeitssätze für abelsche Va rietäten über Zahlkörpern

[Fal83] Gerd Faltings. “Endlichkeitssätze für abelsche Va rietäten über Zahlkörpern”. In: Inventiones mathe- maticae 73 (1983), pp. 349–366. [Fal86] Gerd Faltings. “Finiteness theorems for abelian va rieties over number ﬁelds”. In: Arithmetic geometry. Springer, 1986, pp. 9–26. [BT87] François Bruhat and Jacques Tits. “Groupes algébriq ues sur un corps lo...

work page 1983
[1994]

On the semi-simplicity of the $U_p$-operator on modular forms

[CE96] Robert F Coleman and Bas Edixhoven. “On the semi-simp licity of the U _p-operator on modular forms”. In: arXiv preprint alg-geom/9611013 (1996). [Hai98] Richard M Hain. “The Hodge de Rham theory of relative Malcev completion”. In: Annales scientiﬁques de l’Ecole normale supérieure . Vol

work page Pith review arXiv 1996

Show all 14 references

[2006]

Ramiﬁcation theory f or varieties over a perfect ﬁeld

[KS08] Kazuya Kato and Takeshi Saito. “Ramiﬁcation theory f or varieties over a perfect ﬁeld”. In: Annals of mathematics (2008), pp. 33–96. [Bel09] Joel Bellaiche. “An introduction to the conjecture of Bloch and Kato”. In: Lectures at the Clay Mathematical Institute summer Sch...

2008
[2011]

On ℓ-adic pro-algebraic and relative pro- ℓ fundamental groups

[Pri11] Jonathan P Pridham. “On ℓ-adic pro-algebraic and relative pro- ℓ fundamental groups”. In: The Arith- metic of Fundamental Groups: PIA 2010 . Springer, 2011, pp. 245–279. [DM12] Pierre Deligne and JS Milne. “Tannakian categories” . In: Lecture Notes in Matehmatics (2012...

2012
[2013]

Analytic families of ﬁnite-s lope Selmer groups

[Pot13] Jonathan Pottharst. “Analytic families of ﬁnite-s lope Selmer groups”. In: Algebra & Number Theory 7.7 (2013), pp. 1571–1612. [Bos14] Siegfried Bosch. Lectures on formal and rigid geometry . Vol

2013
[2014]

Graded and ﬁltered ﬁber functors on T annakian categories

[Zie15] Paul Ziegler. “Graded and ﬁltered ﬁber functors on T annakian categories”. In: J. Inst. Math. Jussieu 14.1 (2015), pp. 87–130. issn: 1474-7480. doi: 10.1017/S1474748013000376. url: https://doi.org/10.1017/S14 [Hai16] Richard Hain. “The Hodge–de Rham theory of modular g...

2015 arXiv
[2017]

Rankin–Eisenstein classes and explicit reci- procity laws

[KLZ17] Guido Kings, David Loeﬄer, and Sarah Livia Zerbes. “ Rankin–Eisenstein classes and explicit reci- procity laws”. In: Camb. J. Math. 5.1 (2017), pp. 1–122. [Wan18] Carl Wang-Erickson. “Algebraic families of Galois representations and potentially semi-stable pseu- dodefo...

2017
[2024]

Polylogarithmic motivic Chabauty-Kim for P1\{ 0, 1,∞}: the geometric step via resultants

url: https://www.math.purdue.edu/~tongliu/seminar/Perfectoid/monod.pdf. [Jar+24] David Jarossay, David T-BG Lilienfeldt, Francesc o Maria Saettone, Ariel Weiss, and Sa’ar Zehavi. “Polylogarithmic motivic Chabauty-Kim for P1\{ 0, 1,∞}: the geometric step via resultants”. In: ar...

2024

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Torsion homologique et s ections rationnelles

[Gro58] Alexandre Grothendieck. “Torsion homologique et s ections rationnelles”. In: Séminaire Claude Cheval- ley 3 (1958), pp. 1–29. [Art66] Michael Artin. “The étale topology of schemes”. In: Proc. Internat. Congr. Math.(Moscow,

work page 1958

[2] [3]

On the descending central series of g roups with a single deﬁning relation

1970, pp. 437–443. [Lab70] John P Labute. “On the descending central series of g roups with a single deﬁning relation”. In: Journal of Algebra 14.1 (1970), pp. 16–23. [Che77] Kuo-Tsai Chen. “Iterated path integrals”. In: Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 83.5 (1977), pp. 831–879. [Mil80] James S Milne. Etale cohomology (PMS-33) . Princeton uni...

work page 1970

[3] [4]

1992, pp. 429–464. [Wei94] Charles A Weibel. An introduction to homological algebra

work page 1992

[4] [7]

Relative completions and the coho mology of linear groups over local rings

1998, pp. 47–92. [Knu02] Kevin P Knudson. “Relative completions and the coho mology of linear groups over local rings”. In: Journal of the London Mathematical Society 65.1 (2002), pp. 183–203. [Kim05] Minhyong Kim. “The motivic fundamental group of the projective line minus three points and the theorem of Siegel”. In: Inventiones mathematicae 161.3 (2005)...

work page 2002

[5] [944]

The Chabauty-Kim Method for Relative Completions

[DC20] Ishai Dan-Cohen and David Corwin. “The polylog quoti ent and the Goncharov quotient in compu- tational Chabauty–Kim theory II”. In: Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 373.10 (2020), pp. 6835–6861. [Kan20] Noam Kantor. “The Chabauty-Kim method for relative completions”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.10725 (2020). [Lan20] Aaron Landesm...

work page Pith review arXiv 2020

[6] [1966]

On the diﬀerentiation of de Rham cohomology classes with respect to parameters

1966, pp. 44–56. [KO68] Nicholas M Katz and Tadao Oda. “On the diﬀerentiation of de Rham cohomology classes with respect to parameters”. In: Journal of Mathematics of Kyoto University 8.2 (1968), pp. 199–213. [Del70] Pierre Deligne. Théorie de Hodge . Institut des Hautes Etudes Scientiﬁques,

work page 1968

[7] [1980]

Endlichkeitssätze für abelsche Va rietäten über Zahlkörpern

[Fal83] Gerd Faltings. “Endlichkeitssätze für abelsche Va rietäten über Zahlkörpern”. In: Inventiones mathe- maticae 73 (1983), pp. 349–366. [Fal86] Gerd Faltings. “Finiteness theorems for abelian va rieties over number ﬁelds”. In: Arithmetic geometry. Springer, 1986, pp. 9–26. [BT87] François Bruhat and Jacques Tits. “Groupes algébriq ues sur un corps lo...

work page 1983

[8] [1994]

On the semi-simplicity of the $U_p$-operator on modular forms

[CE96] Robert F Coleman and Bas Edixhoven. “On the semi-simp licity of the U _p-operator on modular forms”. In: arXiv preprint alg-geom/9611013 (1996). [Hai98] Richard M Hain. “The Hodge de Rham theory of relative Malcev completion”. In: Annales scientiﬁques de l’Ecole normale supérieure . Vol

work page Pith review arXiv 1996