Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 31 references

Dynamics and Topology of Conformally Anosov Contact 3-Manifolds

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Conformally Anosov Reeb flows force contact rigidity in dimension 3.

desk verdict Solid new main theorem on conformally Anosov Reeb flows; the curvature corollaries hinge on an unpublished source and need a public proof. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.07990 v1 pith:KADXP2PO submitted 2019-08-21 math.GT math.DSmath.SG

Surena Hozoori This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.GTmath.DSmath.SG MSC 57R1737D3053D10
keywords conformallyAnosovflowReebcontact3-manifoldtightstructureConley-ZehnderindexdynamicstopologyChern-Hamiltonenergy
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

Conformally Anosov flows are much less rigid than Anosov flows in general: they exist on the 3-sphere and on the 3-torus. This paper shows that the picture changes when the flow is required to be a Reeb flow of a contact form. Its main theorem states that a closed connected oriented 3-manifold admitting a conformally Anosov Reeb vector field must carry a contact structure that is universally tight and irreducible, has 2-torsion Euler class, has only hyperbolic periodic Reeb orbits, and has every contractible periodic orbit with Conley–Zehnder index zero. Such a manifold cannot admit an exact symplectic cobordism to the standard contact 3-sphere, and as a consequence the 3-sphere itself admits no conformally Anosov contact structure. The paper also converts a curvature bound on a compatible Riemannian metric into genuine Anosovity of the Reeb field, giving a Riemannian-geometric route to the same topological conclusions and restricting where the Chern–Hamilton energy can have nowhere-Reeb-invariant critical metrics.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the invariant plane field splitting $\xi=E^s\oplus E^u$ of a conformally Anosov Reeb flow, with $E^u$ exponentially expanded and $E^s$ exponentially contracted along the flow; a conformally Anosov flow is one with a continuous invariant splitting $TM=E^s\oplus E^u\oplus\langle X\rangle$ and exponential growth of the ratio between the two directions. The proof uses three mechanisms. First, the existence of the line subbundle $E^u$ is combined with a line-bundle criterion to conclude $2e(\xi)=0$. Second, because the splitting is flow-invariant, the linearized return map along each periodic orbit has two distinct real eigenvalues, so all periodic orbits are hyperbolic. Third, for a contractible orbit $\gamma$, the paper takes a Seifert surface $\Sigma_1$, lifts to the orientation double cover $\Sigma_2\to\Sigma_1$ of $E^u|_{\Sigma_1}$, and uses the resulting trivialization to see the linearized flow as a path with positive real eigenvalues, giving $\mu_{CZ}^{\Sigma_2}(\gamma^2)=0$; the trivialization-change formula and the iteration rule $\mu_{CZ}(\gamma^2)=2\mu_{CZ}(\gamma)$ for hyperbolic orbits then force $\mu_{CZ}(\gamma)=0$. Here $\mu_{CZ}$ is the Conley–Zehnder index, the integer measuring the total rotation of the linearized Reeb flow along a periodic orbit. In the Riemannian half, a curvature formula expresses $k(e,X_\alpha)$ and $\mathrm{Ricci}(X_\alpha)$ through $\alpha$-Jacobi fields, so the assumed upper bound on $\alpha$-sectional curvature becomes a definite rate of growth along the stable and unstable directions, upgrading conformal Anosovity to Anosovity.

What would settle it

Find a closed contact 3-manifold with a conformally Anosov Reeb vector field whose contact structure is either overtwisted, reducible, or exact-cobordant to $(S^3,\xi_{\mathrm{std}})$; the theorem predicts this is impossible. A more local falsifier is a conformally Anosov Reeb flow with a contractible periodic orbit whose Conley–Zehnder index with respect to a disk trivialization is not zero. For the curvature branch, compute the curvature formula of Theorem 3.4 on an explicit compatible metric and check whether the displayed identity for $k(e,X_\alpha)$ and $\mathrm{Ricci}(X_\alpha)$ holds; one counterexample would remove Theorem 3.7's support.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 4.1. If $(M,\xi)$ is a contact 3-manifold and $X_\alpha$ is an associated Reeb vector field that is conformally Anosov, then $2e(\xi)=0$ in $H^2(M;\mathbb Z)$, every periodic Reeb orbit is non-degenerate and hyperbolic, every contractible periodic orbit has Conley–Zehnder index zero, and $(M,\xi)$ is universally tight, irreducible, and admits no exact symplectic cobordism to $(S^3,\xi_{\mathrm{std}})$ (a symplectic manifold with a Liouville vector field inducing the contact forms on both boundary components). The paper's framing is that relaxing Anosovity to conformal Anosovity removes few of the contact-topological consequences, even though contractible periodic orbits are no longer forbidden. The argument goes through the invariant splitting $\xi=E^s\oplus E^u$: the unstable line subbundle gives the Euler-class constraint, the preservation of the splitting makes all return maps hyperbolic, and a double-cover trivialization trick computes the Conley–Zehnder index of any contractible orbit and finds it to be zero. The curvature results promote a known curvature-to-conformal-Anosovity implication to full Anosovity, using a characterization of $\alpha$-sectional and Ricci curvature in terms of $\alpha$-Jacobi fields.

Load-bearing premise

The curvature half of the paper depends on a formula stated without proof and sourced to an unpublished manuscript, so if that formula is wrong the curvature-driven claims fall; the main dynamical theorem does not rely on it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The 3-sphere admits no conformally Anosov contact structure, because its only tight contact structure is the standard one and the theorem forbids every alternative.
  • A compatible metric satisfying the paper's upper bound on $\alpha$-sectional curvature makes the Reeb field Anosov, so the contact structure is universally tight, irreducible, and not exact-cobordant to the standard contact 3-sphere.
  • On overtwisted, reducible, or exact-cobordant-to-standard-$S^3$ contact manifolds, every critical compatible metric for the Chern–Hamilton energy must have at least one point where $L_{X_\alpha}g=0$; nowhere-Reeb-invariant critical metrics cannot exist.
  • Conformally Anosov Reeb flows have no elliptic periodic orbits: every closed Reeb orbit is hyperbolic, with stable and unstable directions equal to the invariant line fields.
  • The Euler class of the contact plane field is 2-torsion in any conformally Anosov contact 3-manifold, a necessary existence condition independent of the choice of Reeb field.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The parity fact noted but not developed in the paper, that a periodic orbit's Conley–Zehnder index is even or odd according to the orientability of the stable line field along the orbit, could be promoted to a $\mathbb Z/2$-valued invariant distinguishing conformally Anosov contact structures.
  • A natural test of the proof mechanism is whether the same line-field-and-iteration argument extends to the higher-dimensional setting the paper announces, where the role of line bundles would be taken by codimension-one stable and unstable subbundles.
  • The theorem leaves open which of the many conformally Anosov flows on $T^3$ are Reeb flows; the zero-Euler-class and hyperbolic-orbit constraints give concrete filters for the known bi-contact examples.
  • If the unpublished curvature formula behind Theorem 3.7 is verified, the curvature inequality could be tested numerically on explicit models such as unit tangent bundles of hyperbolic surfaces, possibly yielding new examples where Anosov Reeb flows arise from curvature rather than geodesic flow.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies conformally Anosov Reeb flows on closed contact 3-manifolds. The main theorem (Theorem 4.1) states that if (M,ξ) is a conformally Anosov contact 3-manifold and X_α is an associated Reeb vector field, then 2e(ξ)=0, all periodic Reeb orbits are hyperbolic, every contractible periodic orbit has Conley-Zehnder index zero, and (M,ξ) is universally tight, irreducible, and admits no exact cobordism to (S^3,ξ_std). The proof uses the invariant stable/unstable line splitting to trivialize the contact bundle over a double cover of a Seifert surface, then applies a theorem of Hofer and Hofer-Wysocki-Zehnder. The paper also gives a curvature condition on compatible metrics that implies Anosovity (Theorem 3.7), relying on a characterization of curvature quantities from the author's unpublished manuscript [23], and derives corollaries for tightness and for Chern-Hamilton critical metrics.

Significance. If the proof of Theorem 4.1 is correct, it is a substantial contribution: it shows that conformally Anosov Reeb flows, although abundant as general flows, retain contact-topological rigidity comparable to Anosov Reeb flows. The main theorem is checkable from the preprint: the line-subbundle argument for 2e(ξ)=0, the hyperbolicity of return maps, and the Conley-Zehnder index computation over the orientation double cover are coherent and use standard tools. The paper also gives a clean statement that S^3 admits no conformally Anosov contact structures. The curvature-based Theorem 3.7 is potentially valuable, but it is not fully supported in this manuscript because its key identities are quoted from an unpublished source.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.1, Theorem 3.4] The curvature identities for k(e,X_α) and Ricci(X_α) are stated in Theorem 3.4 and attributed to the author's unpublished manuscript [23], cited as 'available upon request.' No proof is given in the submitted text. Theorem 1.7, Corollary 1.8, and Corollary 1.10 all depend on these identities, so those results cannot be verified from the paper alone. The author should either include a complete proof of Theorem 3.4 in the manuscript or replace [23] with a published reference; otherwise the curvature consequences should be removed or explicitly marked as conditional.
  2. [Section 3.2, proof of Theorem 3.7] The step 'by Proposition 2.15 and the following discussion, X_α is conformally Anosov, since ⟨e1,X_α⟩ and ⟨e2,X_α⟩ are positive and negative contact structures' is not justified in the text. The proof should show that the line fields e1,e2 are globally defined from Remark 3.5 and that the positive/negative contact condition for the two plane fields follows from the curvature inequality, for instance from the displayed derivative ∂/∂t g(e_i(t),∇_{e_i(t)}X_α)>0. As written, this is a gap in the proof of Anosovity from curvature.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section 4, proof of Theorem 4.1, part 3] The sentence 'Since [γ]=0∈H2(M)' should read 'Since [γ]=0∈H1(M)'.
  2. [Section 3.2, proof of Theorem 3.7] In the growth estimate, the displayed implication after the logarithmic derivative should conclude g(ẽ(t),ẽ(t)) > e^{Ct} g(ẽ(0),ẽ(0)) (or equivalently |ẽ(t)| > e^{Ct/2}|ẽ(0)|), not 'g(ẽ(t),∇ẽ(t)X_α)>e^{Ct}'.
  3. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors in names and terminology, for example 'Mitumatsu' and 'Ansov' in the introduction and 'Peronne' in reference [5]; these should be corrected.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Main topological theorem is self-contained and non-circular; the curvature corollaries rely on the author's own unpublished Theorem 3.4.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 3.1 (Theorem 3.4), used in Theorem 3.7 and Corollaries 1.8/1.10; reference [23]]
    "To prove the above theorem, we will use a new characterization of certain curvature quantities, derived by the author in [23]. ... Theorem 3.4. ... Moreover, Ricci(Xα) := k(e,Xα)+k(Je,Xα) = 2·G(ξ) = θ′2/2 − 2·g(e,∇eXα)2 − 2·(g(Je,∇eXα)−θ′/2)2."

    The curvature-based results advertised in the abstract and Section 3 are not proved in this paper: the identities for k(e,Xα) and Ricci(Xα) are imported from the author's own unpublished manuscript [23], cited as 'In preparation, available upon request.' Without a public proof, Theorem 3.7 and Corollaries 1.8 and 1.10 depend on an unverifiable self-citation. This is not a by-construction reduction to the target conclusions, but it is load-bearing for the geometric claims. The main dynamical-topological Theorem 4.1 does not use Section 3.

full rationale

The core derivation chain for Theorem 4.1 is self-contained. Part (1) follows because the conformally Anosov splitting gives a line subbundle Eu of ξ, and Kobayashi's theorem gives 2e(ξ)=0. Part (2) follows from the invariant splitting and area-preserving return maps, since a real hyperbolic return with |λ|=1 would force the identity or negative identity map, contradicting expansion. Part (3) uses the double cover of a Seifert surface to trivialize ξ over γ2, the positivity of the hyperbolic return path, 2e(ξ)=0 to compare 2-chains, and the iteration formula to conclude µCZ(γ)=0. Part (4) is a direct contradiction with the external Hofer/HWZ theorem 2.12. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no conclusion is assumed in the definition of conformally Anosov. The only circularity-adjacent issue is the dependence of the curvature corollaries on the author's own unpublished Theorem 3.4; that is a missing-support/self-citation concern, not a by-construction circularity, and it leaves Theorem 4.1 unaffected. Score 4 reflects the load-bearing self-citation for the Section 3 results while acknowledging the independent content of the main theorem.

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

The main theorem draws on standard external theorems: the Hofer-Wysocki-Zehnder obstruction, the Conley-Zehnder index axioms and iteration formula, Kobayashi's line-subbundle criterion, and the Eliashberg-Thurston/Mitsumatsu characterization of conformally Anosov flows. The definition of a conformally Anosov contact structure (E^s⊕E^u=ker α) is a domain assumption delimiting the theorem's scope. The curvature part of the paper additionally imports Theorem 3.4 from the author's own unpublished work, which has no independent public support. No free parameters or invented entities appear.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Hofer-Wysocki-Zehnder theorem (Theorem 2.12): overtwisted, reducible, or exact-cobordant-to-(S^3,ξ_std) contact 3-manifolds have a contractible unknotted periodic Reeb orbit with μ_CZ = 2 or μ_CZ ∈ {2,3}.
    Central external result used to obtain the contradiction in Theorem 4.1(4).
  • standard math Conley-Zehnder index axioms and the iteration formula μ(γ^m) = m·μ(γ) for hyperbolic orbits (Remarks 2.9, 2.11).
    Used to compute the index of the double cover of a periodic orbit in Theorem 4.1(3).
  • standard math Kobayashi's line-subbundle criterion: a 2-plane bundle admits a line subbundle iff 2e = 0.
    Gives 2e(ξ)=0 from the stable or unstable line field in Theorem 4.1(1).
  • standard math Eliashberg-Thurston / Mitsumatsu bi-contact characterization of conformally Anosov flows (Proposition 2.15).
    Identifies positive and negative contact structures from the splitting; used in the proof of Theorem 3.7.
  • domain assumption Definition 2.17: a conformally Anosov vector field is contact only when E^s ⊕ E^u = ker α.
    The theorem's scope is exactly this aligned case; the paper's claims are conditioned on this definition.
  • ad hoc to paper Theorem 3.4 of [23] (author's unpublished manuscript) giving explicit formulas for k(e,X_α) and Ricci(X_α).
    Black-box curvature characterization, not proved in this preprint, load-bearing for Theorem 3.7 and Corollaries 1.8, 1.10.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamics and Topology of Conformally Anosov Contact 3-Manifolds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KADXP2PO

@misc{pith2026190807990,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamics and Topology of Conformally Anosov Contact 3-Manifolds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KADXP2PO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.07990}
}
abstract

We provide obstructions to the existence of conformally Anosov Reeb flows on a 3-manifold that partially generalize similar obstructions to Anosov Reeb flows. In particular, we show $\mathbb{S}^3$ does not admit conformally Anosov Reeb flows. We also give a Riemannian geometric condition on a metric compatible with a contact structure implying that a Reeb field is Anosov. From this we can give curvature conditions on a metric compatible with a contact structure that implies universal tightness of the contact structure among other things.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.07990 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Conformally Anosov flows An Anosov vector field X can similarly be defined as a vector field which preserves a continuous splitting TM = Es ⊕ Eu ⊕ hXi and ||dφt (v)|| ≥ A1e C1t ||v|| for any v ∈ E u ||dφt (u)|| ≤ A2e −C2t ||u|| for any u ∈ E s , where φ t is the flow of X and C1, C2, A1 and A2 are some positive constants. Prototypical examples of Anosov flows are geodesic flows on UTΣ, where Σ is a hyperbolic surfac… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Splitting of ξ when LXα g 6= 0 and regions with alternating signs of g(e, ∇eXα) It can be seen that if ξ is a contact structure and g a compatible Riemannian metric, we will have H(ξ) = −divg(Xα) = 0, while we show in [23] that G(ξ) can be interpreted as the Ricci curvature of Xα: Theorem 3.4. Let (M3 , ξ) be a contact 3-manifold and g a compatible Riemannian metric. Then for any unit vector e ∈ ξ, the sectional cur… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Dynamics of contact structures admitting a compatible metric with negative [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [23]

    Ricci curvature, Reeb vector fields and contact 3-manifolds

    Hozoori, Surena. Ricci curvature, Reeb vector fields and contact 3-manifolds. In preparation, available upon request

    work page

  2. [1]

    Geodesic flows on closed Riemannian manifolds of negative cur- vature

    Anosov, Dmitry Victorovich. Geodesic flows on closed Riemannian manifolds of negative cur- vature. Trudy Matematicheskogo Instituta Imeni VA Steklova 90 (1967): 3-210

    work page 1967

  3. [2]

    Classification of regular and non-degenerate projectively Anosov flows on three-dimensional manifolds

    Asaoka, Masayuki. Classification of regular and non-degenerate projectively Anosov flows on three-dimensional manifolds. Journal of Mathematics of Kyoto University 46.2 (2006): 349-356

    work page 2006

  4. [3]

    Homotopy classes of total foliations and bi-contact structures on three-manifolds

    Asaoka, Masayuki, Emmanuel Dufraine, and Takeo Noda. Homotopy classes of total foliations and bi-contact structures on three-manifolds. arXiv preprint arXiv:0706.1879 (2007)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2007

  5. [4]

    Riemannian geometry of contact and symplectic manifolds

    Blair, David E. Riemannian geometry of contact and symplectic manifolds. Springer Science & Business Media, 2010

    work page 2010

  6. [5]

    Blair, David E., and D. Peronne. Conformally Anosov flows in contact metric geometry. Balkan Journal of Geometry and Its Applications 3.2 (1998): 33-46

    work page 1998

  7. [6]

    Hamilton

    Chern, Shiing-Shen, and Richard S. Hamilton. On Riemannian metrics adapted to three- dimensional contact manifolds. Arbeitstagung Bonn 1984. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1985. 279-308

    work page 1984

  8. [7]

    Cioba, A., and C. Wendl. Unknotted Reeb orbits and nicely embedded holomorphic curves (2016). Preprint arXiv 1609

    work page 2016

Show all 31 references
  1. [8]

    Classification of overtwisted contact structures on 3-manifolds

    Eliashberg, Yakov. Classification of overtwisted contact structures on 3-manifolds. Inventiones mathematicae 98.3 (1989): 623-637

    1989

  2. [9]

    Contact 3-manifolds twenty years since J

    Eliashberg, Yakov. Contact 3-manifolds twenty years since J. Martinet’s work. Annales de l’institut Fourier. Vol. 42. No. 1-2. 1992

    1992

  3. [10]

    Givental, and Helmut Hofer

    Eliashberg, Yakov, A. Givental, and Helmut Hofer. Introduction to symplectic field theory. Visions in mathematics. Birkhuser Basel, 2000. 560-673. 15

    2000

  4. [11]

    Thurston

    Eliashberg, Yakov, and William P. Thurston. Confoliations. Vol. 13. American Mathematical Soc., 1998

    1998

  5. [12]

    Introductory lectures on contact geometry

    Etnyre, John B. Introductory lectures on contact geometry. arXiv preprint math/0111118 (2001)

    2001 arXiv

  6. [13]

    On symplectic cobordisms

    Etnyre, John B., and Ko Honda. On symplectic cobordisms. Mathematische Annalen 323.1 (2002): 31-39

    2002

  7. [14]

    Tightness in contact metric 3- manifolds

    Etnyre, John B., Rafal Komendarczyk, and Patrick Massot. Tightness in contact metric 3- manifolds. Inventiones mathematicae 188.3 (2012): 621-657

    2012

  8. [15]

    Quantitative Darboux theorems in contact geometry

    Etnyre, John, Rafal Komendarczyk, and Patrick Massot. Quantitative Darboux theorems in contact geometry. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 368.11 (2016): 7845- 7881

    2016

  9. [16]

    Contact Anosov flows on hyperbolic 3-manifolds

    Foulon, Patrick, and Boris Hasselblatt. Contact Anosov flows on hyperbolic 3-manifolds. Ge- ometry & Topology 17.2 (2013): 1225-1252

    2013

  10. [17]

    An introduction to contact topology

    Geiges, Hansjrg. An introduction to contact topology. Vol. 109. Cambridge University Press, 2008

    2008

  11. [18]

    The Conley-Zehnder index for a path of symplectic matrices

    Gutt, Jean. The Conley-Zehnder index for a path of symplectic matrices. arXiv preprint arXiv:1201.3728 (2012)

    2012 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Pseudoholomorphic curves in symplectizations with applications to the Wein- stein conjecture in dimension three

    Hofer, Helmut. Pseudoholomorphic curves in symplectizations with applications to the Wein- stein conjecture in dimension three. Inventiones mathematicae 114.1 (1993): 515-563

    1993

  13. [20]

    The Dynamics on Three-Dimensional Strictly Convex Energy Surfaces

    Hofer, H., et al. The Dynamics on Three-Dimensional Strictly Convex Energy Surfaces. Annals of Mathematics, vol. 148, no. 1, 1998, pp. 197289. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/120994

    1998

  14. [21]

    Unknotted periodic orbits for Reeb flows on the three-sphere

    Hofer, Helmut, Kris Wysocki, and Eduard Zehnder. Unknotted periodic orbits for Reeb flows on the three-sphere. Topological Methods in Nonlinear Analysis 7.2 (1996): 219-244

    1996

  15. [22]

    Holomorphic curves in contact dynamics

    Hofer, Helmut, Markus Kriener. Holomorphic curves in contact dynamics. Proceedings of Sym- posia in Pure Mathematics. Vol. 65. AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY, 1999

    1999

  16. [24]

    Principal fibre bundles with the 1-dimensional toroidal group

    Kobayashi, Shoshichi. Principal fibre bundles with the 1-dimensional toroidal group. Tohoku Mathematical Journal, Second Series 8.1 (1956): 29-45

    1956

  17. [25]

    Index theory for symplectic paths with applications

    Long, Yiming. Index theory for symplectic paths with applications. Vol. 207. Birkhuser, 2012

    2012

  18. [26]

    Anosov flows and non-Stein symplectic manifolds

    Mitsumatsu, Yoshihiko. Anosov flows and non-Stein symplectic manifolds. Annales de l’institut Fourier. Vol. 45. No. 5. 1995

    1995

  19. [27]

    Regular projectively Anosov flows with compact leaves

    Noda, Takeo. Regular projectively Anosov flows with compact leaves. Annales de l’institut Fourier. Vol. 54. No. 2. 2004

    2004

  20. [28]

    Torsion and conformally Anosov flows in contact Riemannian geometry

    Perrone, Domenico. Torsion and conformally Anosov flows in contact Riemannian geometry. Journal of Geometry 83.1-2 (2005): 164-174. 16

    2005

  21. [29]

    Anosov flows

    Plante, Joseph F. Anosov flows. American Journal of Mathematics 94.3 (1972): 729-754

    1972

  22. [30]

    The second fundamental form of a plane field

    Reinhart, Bruce L. The second fundamental form of a plane field. Journal of differential ge- ometry 12.4 (1977): 619-627

    1977

  23. [31]

    Chern-Hamiltons conjecture and K-contactness

    Rukimbira, Philippe. Chern-Hamiltons conjecture and K-contactness. Houston J. Math 21.4 (1995): 709-718. 17

    1995

Pith tools

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