On the Novikov problem for dihedral symmetry potentials

A.Ya. Maltsev

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 40 references

On the Novikov problem for dihedral symmetry potentials

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A dihedral-symmetric quasiperiodic potential has open level lines at a single energy value.

desk verdict Maltsev proves a plausible and useful single-energy theorem for dihedral-symmetric quasiperiodic potentials, but the proof's central intersection claims are asserted rather than proved. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.07657 v1 pith:LOITLEI4 submitted 2025-05-12 math-ph math.MP

A.Ya. Maltsev This is my paper · ORCID

classification math-phmath.MP

keywords NovikovproblemquasiperiodicfunctionslevellinesdihedralsymmetryD_nopenquasicrystalschaotic

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

Novikov's problem asks when the level sets V(x,y)=ε of a quasiperiodic function on the plane contain lines that run off to infinity. This paper treats quasiperiodic potentials—restrictions to a plane of periodic functions in higher dimension—that carry a dihedral symmetry D_n, n≥3, the symmetry of a regular n-gon with n mirror axes through one center. The paper claims that under a completely irrational embedding and a uniformly bounded gradient, such a potential can have open level lines only at one energy ε0, never over an interval of energies. If that is right, every level line at ε≠ε0 is closed, with diameters bounded by a constant D(ε) that grows without bound as ε approaches ε0. The single-level property is exactly what separates chaotic potentials, which resemble random plane potentials, from topologically regular ones.

What carries the argument

The central object is the decomposition of the plane by the n symmetry axes through the common center O into 2n sectors, together with the assertion that an open non-singular level line cannot meet both boundary rays of one sector. That sector lemma forces every open line to be representable by curves γ1 and γ2 inside each sector, one at each of two putative energy levels E1<E2. The contradiction is generated by dense return of integer shifts: because the embedding is completely irrational, a ray in the plane winds densely on the torus, so an integer shift O′ of O can be placed within δ < (E2−E1)/C of a chosen ray. Shifting the identical level-line picture by the small vector of length δ brings the E2-curve into a region where the gradient bound makes its value exceed E1, contradicting the fixed E1-curve there; situation B repeats the same argument with a perpendicular strip. The dihedral symmetry supplies the identical copies needed for every sector and every shifted plane.

What would settle it

A concrete test: construct or numerically search for a D_n-symmetric quasiperiodic potential (n ≥ 3, completely irrational embedding, bounded gradient) whose level set at two different energies E1 < E2 each contains an unbounded connected component. Even simpler: look for one open nonsingular level component that meets both rays bounding a symmetry sector while remaining unbounded away from the center; its existence would falsify the sector lemma and with it the theorem.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that for the whole family of phase-shifted potentials V(r,a) obtained from a D_n-symmetric reference potential, the interval of energies supporting open level lines collapses to a single point: ε1=ε2=ε0. To show this it assumes the reference potential is the restriction of a periodic function on a completely irrational plane, has bounded gradient, and has only generic singularities. The proof rules out two non-singular open level lines at energies E1<E2 by exploiting the symmetry axes: each open line must lie inside a single sector or be symmetric about one axis, giving curves γ1 and γ2 in every sector that run to infinity. The paper then chooses an integer shift of the symmetry center whose separation δ from a sector ray satisfies δ < (E2−E1)/C, so the shifted copy of the level-line picture is close enough that the gradient bound turns the E2-level into a value strictly above E1 on the original plane—contradicting the existence of the E1-line. Consequently every open level line of every V(r,a) in the family can occur only at ε0, and all levels ε≠ε0 are closed with a common diameter bound.

Load-bearing premise

The whole proof rests on the unproved sector lemma: an open non-singular level line cannot meet both boundary rays of a symmetry sector, because reflection symmetry would allegedly close it around the common center—if a D_n potential ever had an open component crossing two adjacent rays without closing, the argument collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Every D_n-symmetric quasiperiodic potential in the covered family has no open level lines for any ε ≠ ε0; all its level lines there are closed curves with diameters bounded by a common constant D(ε).
The bound D(ε) diverges as ε → ε0, and at ε0 the potential must show either open level lines or closed level lines of arbitrarily large size, by the general theory the paper invokes.
The one-energy property is shared by every phase-translated potential V(r,a), not just the exact-symmetry plane, because the interval of open-line energies is common to the whole family.
Potentials covered by the theorem include quasicrystal-type symmetries with arbitrary number of quasiperiods, including 5-fold symmetry, where approximation by periodic potentials of the same symmetry is impossible.
Such potentials are classed as chaotic rather than topologically regular, making their level-line behaviour closer to random plane potentials than to periodic ones.

Reading between the lines

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

If the sector lemma fails for some other finite symmetry group, say a cyclic group without mirror axes, the same contradiction cannot start; testing whether the single-energy conclusion survives for non-dihedral fixed-point groups would show whether the mirror structure is essential.
A practical consequence not drawn in the paper is that in a quasicrystal with fivefold dihedral symmetry, transport governed by open level lines would switch on only at the single energy ε0, so magnetotransport across the plane could show an abrupt threshold; computing how D(ε) diverges near ε0 would give a predicted broadening scale.
The proof relies only on the density of one integer-shifted ray and mirror copies, so a plausible generalisation is that any quasiperiodic potential with a single fixed point and at least one mirror line of symmetry satisfies the one-energy property; verifying this on a non-dihedral reflection group would be a direct test.

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

Short version: the result is a real extension of the Novikov-problem literature, and the high-level strategy is right. But the written proof has two unproved geometric steps, and the load-bearing one is the intersection claim in situations A and B. I'd still send it out, but the referee should demand those gaps be closed before publication.

What's new: prior work [39] handled superpositions of two periodic potentials with a common rotational symmetry. This paper covers arbitrary D_n-symmetric potentials with arbitrary N, including the 5-fold quasicrystal case that cannot be approximated by symmetric periodic potentials. That is a genuine extension.

What's good: the comparison argument is clean. Pick an integer shift of the plane so close to the original that the gradient bound (II.1) forces the shifted level-E2 curve to lie above E1. If it intersects the original level-E1 curve, contradiction. The choices of delta and the dense winding of L and P are standard. The reliance on [15,18] for the interval structure is legitimate; the self-citations are to independently published work, not a hidden assumption.

Soft spots: the sector lemma, that an open non-singular level line cannot cross both rays of a sector, is plausible but only gestured at. I'm less worried about that, since a fixed-point argument should work. The bigger issue is the stress-test concern: in situation A, 'either γ1 intersects σh[γ′2] or γ2 intersects σh[γ′1]' is asserted without proof. Entering the shifted sector's boundary ray does not by itself force a crossing with the internal curves. Same in situation B, where 'it is easy to see' is doing real work. If those intersections can fail for a legitimate D_n-symmetric potential, the theorem is not proved by this argument. The singularity assumption (only multiple saddles or isolated extrema) is also stated without discussion.

If the intersection lemmas are true, the theorem goes through. I don't see circularity; it's a genuine contradiction argument. But the paper as written has a genuine gap at its center. I'd still engage: this is the right class of potentials and the right strategy, and a day of work might produce the missing topological lemma.

Recommendation: accept for peer review, with instructions to the referee to focus on the intersection claims. If those hold up, it's a solid addition to the Novikov-problem literature.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies Novikov's problem for quasiperiodic potentials on the plane that are invariant under a dihedral group D_n, n ≥ 3, under a completely irrational embedding and a bounded gradient condition. The main claim is that for such potentials, open level lines can occur only at a single energy value ε = ε0; at every other energy all level lines are closed, with diameters bounded by a constant D(ε) that diverges as ε → ε0. The proof is by contradiction: assuming open nonsingular level lines at two energies E1 < E2, the author uses the dihedral symmetry to isolate unbounded curves γ1 and γ2 in each sector, then uses density of certain rays/lines under the irrational embedding to translate a copy of a neighboring sector close to the original one. A Lipschitz comparison then purports to force a contradiction at an intersection of a level-E1 curve with a translated level-E2 curve. The paper concludes that the energy interval [ε1, ε2] must collapse to a point and that chaotic open level lines occur only at a single energy.

Significance. If the proof is correct, the result is a substantial extension of the single-energy property of chaotic level lines from the N = 3 case and from the two-layer superposition case to all dihedral-symmetric quasiperiodic potentials with an arbitrary number of quasiperiods. This is directly relevant to quasicrystal models, for example those with fivefold symmetry, where approximation by periodic potentials of the same symmetry is not available. The paper formulates a clean falsifiable statement and uses a natural strategy combining dihedral symmetry, dense windings, and Lipschitz comparison. The main weakness is that several load-bearing topological intersection claims are stated without proof; these are not merely presentation issues and must be addressed before the result can be accepted.

major comments (3)

[Section II, after Fig. 4] The 'sector lemma' is stated without proof: 'An open non-singular level line (II.3) cannot intersect both rays bounding any of the sectors S_i at once (otherwise, by reflection symmetry, it must be a closed level line going around the point O).' This assertion is load-bearing: it is the only argument that every open level line either crosses a single symmetry ray or lies entirely in one sector, and it is what guarantees the existence of the curves γ1 and γ2 in each sector. The reasoning given is not sufficient: an unbounded connected level component that crosses two adjacent rays need not, by reflection symmetry alone, close around O; a topological argument is required. Please supply a rigorous proof (for instance, via the induced action of reflection on the component or a fixed-point argument), since without this lemma the reduction to the sector S1 on which the entire contradiction is built collapses.
[Section II, situation A (Fig. 8)] The assertion 'In this case, either γ1 intersects σ_h[γ′_2] or γ2 intersects σ_h[γ′_1]' is not proved and does not follow from the hypothesis that γ1 or γ2 meets the shifted boundary ray σ_h[l′_2]. A curve entering the shifted sector through a boundary ray can continue to infinity while remaining between that boundary ray and the internal curves, without intersecting either σ_h[γ′_1] or σ_h[γ′_2]. The Lipschitz comparison (II.1), (II.4), (II.5) only produces a contradiction at an actual intersection point; without such a point the argument has no force. A complete topological argument for this intersection alternative is needed.
[Section II, situation B (Fig. 10)] The statement 'It is easy to see that with a suitable choice of the point X ... we can ensure the intersection of the curves σ_q[γ∗_2] and σ_q[γ∗_1] with the curves γ1 and γ2' is another unproved intersection claim, with the same load-bearing role as in situation A. The density of the line P in the torus gives many admissible integer shifts X, but density alone does not guarantee that the shifted curves intersect the fixed unbounded curves γ1 and γ2; placing a sector near the strip Γ does not by itself place its internal curves across the target curves. Moreover, the intersection must be stable under the small perturbation q (|q| ≤ δ), which is not addressed. This step is the decisive one for the contradiction, and it must be proved rigorously.

minor comments (5)

[Abstract and Introduction] The abstract states the result for 'two-dimensional potentials of dihedral symmetry' without listing the standing hypotheses of a completely irrational embedding and a bounded gradient; these hypotheses should appear in the abstract or the statement of the main result.
[Section II, Fig. 10] In situation B the notation γ1, γ2 is reused for the curves in the shifted plane Π(a), although earlier the primed notation γ′1, γ′2 was used for analogous curves; this is confusing and should be made consistent.
[Section II, Eq. (II.3)] The choice of nonsingular energies E1, E2 should be justified, for example by Sard's theorem or a transversality argument; the proof relies on the level lines (II.3) being smooth non-singular curves.
[Section II, final paragraph] The closing paragraph asserts that the sizes of closed level lines of all potentials V(r,a) at ε ≠ ε0 are limited by one constant D(ε); this uniformity over the whole family should be justified by a citation or a brief argument, since it does not follow immediately from the single-energy statement for V(r,0).
[Throughout] There are several typographical artifacts ('q uasiperiodic', 'aﬃne', 'stripes') and the paper has no numbered theorems; the authors should proofread carefully and consider adding theorem statements.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the dihedral single-energy theorem is a new contradiction argument, and the cited interval results are independent lemmas rather than restatements of the conclusion.

full rationale

The paper proves its main claim by contradiction: it assumes open level lines in a whole interval (E1,E2) and derives a contradiction using reflection symmetry, denseness of integer shifts, and Lipschitz bounds. No parameter is fitted to the target conclusion, and the assertion that open lines occur only at eps0 is not used as an input. The prior results [15,18] are cited only to guarantee that the energy interval is common to the family and that existence on an interval propagates in the phase parameter a; those results are published theorems about general quasiperiodic functions, not restatements of the dihedral theorem. The geometric assertions about non-intersection of sector boundaries and about forced intersections between shifted curves are proof obligations; if invalid they are correctness gaps, not circularity, because they are neither definitions of the target property nor consequences of assuming it. There is no step in which an equation is defined in terms of the desired result, and no fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction. Self-citations appear, but none is the sole support for a premise equivalent to the conclusion. Therefore no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No parameters are fitted to data; the proof is analytic. The main external inputs are the standard Novikov interval theorems and regularity assumptions. The only paper-specific postulate is the sector lemma, which is load-bearing and unproved. No new entities are introduced.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption Complete irrationality of the embedding: the plane Π is not contained in any rational hyperplane and contains no rational 1D directions.
Invoked in Section II to guarantee the ray L and line P wind densely on the torus after factorization, so integer shifts can be placed near them. This is a standard assumption in Novikov's problem, not proved here.
domain assumption Smoothness and uniform gradient bound |∇f(z)|≤C.
Used in inequalities (II.4) and in the final contradiction to bound the change of f under shifts of length δ. Treats regularity as an input.
domain assumption Singularities of the potential are only multiple saddles or isolated minima/maxima.
Stated 'for simplicity' after (II.1). Used to justify choosing nonsingular levels E1,E2. This excludes some degenerate critical point configurations without a proof that they are irrelevant.
domain assumption Prior interval theorems: open level lines of the family V(r,a) occur in a connected interval [ε1,ε2]; if ε2>ε1 the open lines occur for all shifts a.
Taken from references [9,15,18]. Used to reduce the claim to proving ε1=ε2 for V(r,0) and to conclude closed lines at ε≠ε0. Not rederived.
ad hoc to paper Sector lemma: an open non-singular level line cannot intersect both rays bounding any sector.
Stated without proof after Fig. 4. It is the structural premise that enforces the γ-curve decomposition in every sector; this is the weakest point of the paper.
standard math Reflection symmetry maps level sets to level sets at the same energy and preserves connected components up to symmetry.
Used throughout to replicate curves γ1,γ2 across sectors and to produce the half-strip Γ*.
domain assumption Exact dihedral symmetry D_n (n≥3) of V(r,0).
The theorem's hypothesis; the proof uses n axes through O to split the plane into sectors and to replicate level curves by symmetry.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the Novikov problem for dihedral symmetry potentials." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LOITLEI4

@misc{pith2026250507657,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the Novikov problem for dihedral symmetry potentials},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LOITLEI4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.07657}
}

abstract

We consider Novikov's problem of describing level lines of quasiperiodic functions on a plane for two-dimensional potentials of dihedral symmetry. It is shown that quasiperiodic potentials of this type can have open level lines only at a single energy level $\, \epsilon = \epsilon_{0} \, $, which brings them close to random potentials on a plane.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.07657 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: General form of a “chaotic” level line of a quasiperio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** FIG. 4: Possible form of open level lines (II.3) (schematica [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (5 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5: Curves [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7: Sector [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8: Intersection of the curves [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: FIG. 9: Strips [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_9.png]

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: FIG. 10: Intersection of the curves [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

[39]

On the Novikov problem for superposition of periodic potentials

A.Ya. Maltsev, On the Novikov problem for superposi- tion of periodic potentials, arXiv:2409.09759

work page Pith review arXiv
[1]

Novikov, The Hamiltonian formalism and a many- valued analogue of Morse theory, Russian Math

S.P. Novikov, The Hamiltonian formalism and a many- valued analogue of Morse theory, Russian Math. Surveys 37 (5), 1-56 (1982)

work page 1982
[2]

Zorich, A problem of Novikov on the semiclassi- cal motion of an electron in a uniform almost rational magnetic ﬁeld., Russian Math

A.V. Zorich, A problem of Novikov on the semiclassi- cal motion of an electron in a uniform almost rational magnetic ﬁeld., Russian Math. Surveys 39 (5), 287-288 (1984)

work page 1984
[3]

Dynnikov, Proof of S.P

I.A. Dynnikov, Proof of S.P. Novikov’s conjecture for th e case of small perturbations of rational magnetic ﬁelds, Russian Math. Surveys 47:3, 172-173 (1992)

work page 1992
[4]

Tsarev, private communication, 1992-1993

S.P. Tsarev, private communication, 1992-1993

work page 1992
[5]

Dynnikov, Proof of S.P

I.A. Dynnikov, Proof of S.P. Novikov’s conjecture on the semiclassical motion of an electron, Math. Notes 53:5, 495-501 (1993)

work page 1993
[6]

Geometric Study of Foli- 7 ations

A.V. Zorich., Asymptotic Flag of an Orientable Measured Foliation on a Surface., Proc. “Geometric Study of Foli- 7 ations”., (Tokyo, November 1993), ed. T.Mizutani et al. Singapore: World Scientiﬁc Pb. Co., 479-498 (1994)

work page 1994
[7]

Dynnikov., Surfaces in 3-torus: geometry of plane sections., Proc

I.A. Dynnikov., Surfaces in 3-torus: geometry of plane sections., Proc. of ECM2, BuDA, 1996

work page 1996

Show all 40 references

[8]

Dynnikov., Semiclassical motion of the electron

I.A. Dynnikov., Semiclassical motion of the electron. A proof of the Novikov conjecture in general position and counterexamples., Solitons, geometry, and topology: on the crossroad, Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2, 179, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1997, 45-73

1997
[9]

Dynnikov, The geometry of stability regions in Novikov’s problem on the semiclassical motion of an elec- tron, Russian Math

I.A. Dynnikov, The geometry of stability regions in Novikov’s problem on the semiclassical motion of an elec- tron, Russian Math. Surveys 54:1, 21-59 (1999)

1999
[10]

Novikov, A.Y

S.P. Novikov, A.Y. Maltsev, Topological quantum char- acteristics observed in the investigation of the conduc- tivity in normal metals, JETP Letters 63 (10), 855-860 (1996)

1996
[11]

Novikov, A.Y

S.P. Novikov, A.Y. Maltsev, Topological phenomena in normal metals, Physics-Uspekhi 41:3, 231-239 (1998)

1998
[12]

Maltsev, S.P

A.Ya. Maltsev, S.P. Novikov., Quasiperiodic function s and Dynamical Systems in Quantum Solid State Physics., Bulletin of Braz. Math. Society , New Series 34:1 (2003), 171-210

2003
[13]

Maltsev, S.P

A.Ya. Maltsev, S.P. Novikov., Dynamical Systems, Topology and Conductivity in Normal Metals in strong magnetic ﬁelds., Journal of Statistical Physics 115:(1-2) (2004), 31-46

2004
[14]

Maltsev, S.P

A.Ya. Maltsev, S.P. Novikov, Topological integrabili ty, classical and quantum chaos, and the theory of dynami- cal systems in the physics of condensed matter, Russian Math. Surveys , 74 (1), 141-173 (2019)

2019
[15]

Dynnikov, A.Ya

I.A. Dynnikov, A.Ya. Maltsev, S.P. Novikov, Geometry of quasi-periodic functions on the plane, Russian Math. Surveys 77 : 6, 1061–1085 (2022), arXiv:2306.11257

2022 arXiv
[16]

Novikov, Levels of quasiperiodic functions on a plane, and Hamiltonian systems, Russian Math

S.P. Novikov, Levels of quasiperiodic functions on a plane, and Hamiltonian systems, Russian Math. Surveys , 54 (5) (1999), 1031-1032

1999
[17]

Dynnikov, S.P

I.A. Dynnikov, S.P. Novikov, Topology of quasi-period ic functions on the plane, Russian Math. Surveys , 60 (1) (2005), 1-26

2005
[18]

Maltsev, On the Novikov problem with a large number of quasiperiods and its generalizations, Proceed- ings of the Steklov Institute of Mathematics, 2024, Vol

A.Ya. Maltsev, On the Novikov problem with a large number of quasiperiods and its generalizations, Proceed- ings of the Steklov Institute of Mathematics, 2024, Vol. 325, pp. 163–176, arXiv:2309.01475

2024 arXiv
[19]

Maltsev, S.P

A.Ya. Maltsev, S.P. Novikov, Open level lines of a su- perposition of periodic potentials on a plane, Annals of Physics 447(Pt.2), 169039 (2022)

2022
[20]

Zorich., Finite Gauss measure on the space of in- terval exchange transformations

A.V. Zorich., Finite Gauss measure on the space of in- terval exchange transformations. Lyapunov exponents., Annales de l’Institut Fourier 46:2, (1996), 325-370

1996
[21]

Anton Zorich., On hyperplane sections of periodic sur- faces., Solitons, Geometry, and Topology: On the Cross- road, V. M. Buchstaber and S. P. Novikov (eds.), Trans- lations of the AMS, Ser. 2, vol. 179, AMS, Providence, RI (1997), 173-189

1997
[22]

Anton Zorich., Deviation for interval exchange transf or- mations., Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems 17, (1997), 1477-1499

1997
[23]

Pseudoperiodic Topology

Anton Zorich., How do the leaves of closed 1-form wind around a surface., “Pseudoperiodic Topology”, V.I.Arnold, M.Kontsevich, A.Zorich (eds.), Translations of the AMS, Ser. 2, vol. 197, AMS, Providence, RI, 1999, 135-178

1999
[24]

De Leo, Existence and measure of ergodic leaves in Novikov’s problem on the semiclassical motion of an elec- tron., Russian Math

R. De Leo, Existence and measure of ergodic leaves in Novikov’s problem on the semiclassical motion of an elec- tron., Russian Math. Surveys 55:1 (2000), 166-168

2000
[25]

ergodic di- rections

R. De Leo, Characterization of the set of “ergodic di- rections” in Novikov’s problem of quasi-electron orbits in normal metals., Russian Math. Surveys 58:5 (2003), 1042-1043

2003
[26]

De Leo., Topology of plane sections of periodic poly- hedra with an application to the Truncated Octahedron., Experimental Mathematics 15:1 (2006), 109-124

R. De Leo., Topology of plane sections of periodic poly- hedra with an application to the Truncated Octahedron., Experimental Mathematics 15:1 (2006), 109-124

2006
[27]

Frontiers in Number Theory, Physics and Geometry. Vol. 1: On ran- dom matrices, zeta functions and dynamical systems

Anton Zorich., Flat surfaces., in collect. “Frontiers in Number Theory, Physics and Geometry. Vol. 1: On ran- dom matrices, zeta functions and dynamical systems”; Ecole de physique des Houches, France, March 9-21 2003, P. Cartier; B. Julia; P. Moussa; P. Vanhove (Editors), Spr...

2003
[28]

De Leo, I.A

R. De Leo, I.A. Dynnikov, An example of a fractal set of plane directions having chaotic intersections with a ﬁxed 3-periodic surface., Russian Math. Surveys 62:5 (2007), 990-992

2007
[29]

Dynnikov, Interval identiﬁcation systems and pla ne sections of 3-periodic surfaces., Proceedings of the Steklov Institute of Mathematics 263:1 (2008), 65-77

I.A. Dynnikov, Interval identiﬁcation systems and pla ne sections of 3-periodic surfaces., Proceedings of the Steklov Institute of Mathematics 263:1 (2008), 65-77

2008
[30]

De Leo, I.A

R. De Leo, I.A. Dynnikov., Geometry of plane sections of the inﬁnite regular skew polyhedron {4, 6 | 4}., Geom. Dedicata 138:1 (2009), 51-67

2009
[31]

Skripchenko., Symmetric interval identiﬁcation sy s- tems of order three., Discrete Contin

A. Skripchenko., Symmetric interval identiﬁcation sy s- tems of order three., Discrete Contin. Dyn. Sys. 32:2 (2012), 643-656

2012
[32]

Skripchenko., On connectedness of chaotic sections of some 3-periodic surfaces., Ann

A. Skripchenko., On connectedness of chaotic sections of some 3-periodic surfaces., Ann. Glob. Anal. Geom. 43 (2013), 253-271

2013
[33]

Dynnikov, A

I. Dynnikov, A. Skripchenko., On typical leaves of a mea - sured foliated 2-complex of thin type., Topology, Ge- ometry, Integrable Systems, and Mathematical Physics: Novikov’s Seminar 2012-2014, Advances in the Mathe- matical Sciences., Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2, 234, e...

2012 arXiv
[34]

Dynnikov, A

I. Dynnikov, A. Skripchenko., Symmetric band com- plexes of thin type and chaotic sections which are not actually chaotic., Trans. Moscow Math. Soc. , Vol. 76, no. 2, 2015, 287-308

2015
[35]

A vila, P

A. A vila, P. Hubert, A. Skripchenko., Diﬀusion for chaotic plane sections of 3-periodic surfaces., Inventiones mathematicae, October 2016, Volume 206, Issue 1, pp 109–146

2016
[36]

A vila, P

A. A vila, P. Hubert, A. Skripchenko., On the Hausdorﬀ dimension of the Rauzy gasket., Bulletin de la societe mathematique de France , 2016, 144 (3), pp. 539 - 568

2016
[37]

Maltsev, S.P

A.Ya. Maltsev, S.P. Novikov., The Theory of Closed 1-Forms, Levels of Quasiperiodic Functions and Trans- port Phenomena in Electron Systems., Proceedings of the Steklov Institute of Mathematics 302, 279-297 (2018)

2018
[38]

Ivan Dynnikov, Pascal Hubert, Alexandra Skripchenko, Dynamical Systems Around the Rauzy Gasket and Their Ergodic Properties, International Mathematics Research Notices IMRN 2022, 1-30 (Published online), arXiv 2011.15043

2022 arXiv
[40]

Le Thang Tu Quoc, S. A. Piunikhin, V. A. Sadov, The geometry of quasicrystals, Russian Mathematical Surveys 48 : 1 (1993), 37–100

1993

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [39]

On the Novikov problem for superposition of periodic potentials

A.Ya. Maltsev, On the Novikov problem for superposi- tion of periodic potentials, arXiv:2409.09759

work page Pith review arXiv

[2] [1]

Novikov, The Hamiltonian formalism and a many- valued analogue of Morse theory, Russian Math

S.P. Novikov, The Hamiltonian formalism and a many- valued analogue of Morse theory, Russian Math. Surveys 37 (5), 1-56 (1982)

work page 1982

[3] [2]

Zorich, A problem of Novikov on the semiclassi- cal motion of an electron in a uniform almost rational magnetic ﬁeld., Russian Math

A.V. Zorich, A problem of Novikov on the semiclassi- cal motion of an electron in a uniform almost rational magnetic ﬁeld., Russian Math. Surveys 39 (5), 287-288 (1984)

work page 1984

[4] [3]

Dynnikov, Proof of S.P

I.A. Dynnikov, Proof of S.P. Novikov’s conjecture for th e case of small perturbations of rational magnetic ﬁelds, Russian Math. Surveys 47:3, 172-173 (1992)

work page 1992

[5] [4]

Tsarev, private communication, 1992-1993

S.P. Tsarev, private communication, 1992-1993

work page 1992

[6] [5]

Dynnikov, Proof of S.P

I.A. Dynnikov, Proof of S.P. Novikov’s conjecture on the semiclassical motion of an electron, Math. Notes 53:5, 495-501 (1993)

work page 1993

[7] [6]

Geometric Study of Foli- 7 ations

A.V. Zorich., Asymptotic Flag of an Orientable Measured Foliation on a Surface., Proc. “Geometric Study of Foli- 7 ations”., (Tokyo, November 1993), ed. T.Mizutani et al. Singapore: World Scientiﬁc Pb. Co., 479-498 (1994)

work page 1994

[8] [7]

Dynnikov., Surfaces in 3-torus: geometry of plane sections., Proc

I.A. Dynnikov., Surfaces in 3-torus: geometry of plane sections., Proc. of ECM2, BuDA, 1996

work page 1996