Conformal transformations of the pseudo-Riemannian metric of a homogeneous pair

Kotaro Kawai

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 34 references

Conformal transformations of the pseudo-Riemannian metric of a homogeneous pair

T0 review · 2 major / 4 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 The paper proves a warped-product isometry for homogeneous pairs and uses it to reduce conformal metric geometry to level-set geometry.

desk verdict A genuinely useful splitting theorem, but the metric-completion theorem as printed is wrong due to a misprinted integrand; worth refereeing after a one-line fix. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.01648 v2 pith:MFLOY34I submitted 2019-08-05 math.DG

Kotaro Kawai This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.DG MSC 58B2053C2958D1751F99

keywords homogeneouspairwarpedproductconformaltransformationmetriccompletionEbinG2modulispacepseudo-HessianmanifoldofRiemannianmetrics

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 homogeneous pairs: a pseudo-Riemannian metric $g$ and a positive function $f$ on a manifold with a free positive-scaling action, linked by the identities $m_\lambda^*g=\lambda^\alpha g$, $m_\lambda^*f=\lambda^\alpha f$, and $g(P,\cdot)=df$. Its central claim is that every conformally transformed metric $(v\circ f)g$ is isometric to a warped product built from a single level set of $f$, via the explicit map $\psi(r,y)=m((r/l)^{1/\alpha},y)$. This reduces curvature, geodesics, and metric completions of the conformal metric to the geometry of one level set, and the paper derives explicit formulas for each. The payoff is a unified treatment of moduli spaces of $G_2$-structures, Riemannian metrics, $\mathrm{Spin}(7)$-structures, and Hessian cone metrics, including a generalization of the Clarke-Rubinstein Ebin-metric completion result and the statement that the two canonical Riemannian metrics on the $G_2$ moduli space have different metric completions.

What carries the argument

The central object is the homogeneous pair $(g,f)$ of degree $\alpha$, defined by $m_\lambda^*g=\lambda^\alpha g$, $m_\lambda^*f=\lambda^\alpha f$, and $g(P,\cdot)=df$ for the scaling vector field $P$. The load-bearing identity is the isometry $\psi(r,y)=m((r/l)^{1/\alpha},y)$ of Theorem 3.3, which turns $(M,(v\circ f)g)$ into a warped product over the level set $(M_l,g_l)$. All later results pass through this warped-product structure: the curvature formulas, the geodesic solutions, and the metric-completion classification of Theorem 3.23 all read off the one-dimensional factor and the level-set geometry.

What would settle it

For a concrete two-dimensional homogeneous pair such as the flat Hessian cone $f(x,y)=x^2+y^2$ with $v(r)=r^{-1}$, compute the actual Cauchy completion of the conformal metric and compare it with the cylinder, cone, or suspension predicted by Theorem 3.23; any mismatch would falsify the classification, and the same test can be run on the $G_2$ moduli space once its level-set geometry is computed.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the discovery is Theorem 3.3: for a homogeneous pair $(g,f)$ of degree $\alpha$, each level set $M_l=f^{-1}(l)$ is a smooth submanifold carrying the pulled-back metric $g_l$, and the map $\psi:\mathbb{R}_{>0}\times M_l\to M$, $(r,y)\mapsto m((r/l)^{1/\alpha},y)$, is an isometry from $\left(\mathbb{R}_{>0}\times M_l,\, v(r)\left(\frac{1}{\alpha r}dr^2+\frac{r}{l}g_l\right)\right)$ to $(M,(v\circ f)g)$. Because this is a warped product with a one-dimensional base, the paper can solve the geodesic equations explicitly for $v(r)=r^\beta$, give sectional curvature formulas and bounds, and classify the metric completion of $(M,(v\circ f)g)$ as a cylinder, a cone, or a suspension of the completion of the level set. The author's intended reading is that this is the common mechanism behind previous cone and Hessian splittings and behind the conformal-deformation results for the Ebin metric; the $G_2$-moduli-space completion contrast is presented as a direct corollary.

Load-bearing premise

The entire construction depends on every level set $f^{-1}(l)$ being a smooth submanifold carrying a pseudo-Riemannian metric (and, in infinite-dimensional settings, on the induced distance being a genuine metric); if a level set is not smooth, the warped-product isometry and the completion classification do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Sectional curvature of $(v\circ f)g$ is controlled by the level set: if $(M_l,g_l)$ has constant sectional curvature, explicit choices of $v$ make $(v\circ f)g$ constant-curvature, and for $\dim M=2$ there is a two-parameter family of such conformal deformations.
Geodesics of $f^\beta g$ are obtained explicitly from geodesics of $(M_l,g_l)$: for $\beta\neq-1$ the radial part is a quadratic function of time, and for $\beta=-1$ the radial part is exponential, with the level-set geodesic reparametrized by a computable integral.
The metric completion of $(M,(v\circ f)g)$ is homeomorphic to a cylinder of $M_l$ when $\int \sqrt{v(q)}/q$ diverges at both ends; to a cone with one collapsed end when it converges at one end and the conformal factor vanishes there; and to a suspension when it converges at both ends.
For the space of Riemannian metrics, the completion of $\mathcal{M}$ with respect to $(v\circ f)g_E$ is identified with the Clarke-Rubinstein spaces for infinitely many $v$, giving infinitely many conformal deformations of the Ebin metric with strictly smaller completion.
The two canonical Riemannian metrics on the $G_2$ moduli space have different metric completions: the $h_2$ completion is a cylinder over the level-set completion, while the $g_{L^2}$ completion is a cone over it, so $h_2$ has fewer degenerate points.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper leaves implicit that the suspension case of Theorem 3.23 gives a practical strategy for constructing compact moduli completions: choose $v$ so both ends of the radial factor collapse, yielding a suspension of the level-set completion, compact whenever the level-set completion is compact.
Because Lemma 3.7 makes $(v\circ f)g$ isometric to a reciprocal conformal factor, every completion or curvature statement automatically transfers from $v$ to $r\mapsto r^{-2}v(1/r)$; a testable consequence is that the Ebin-metric completions for $p<1$ and its reciprocal conformal factor must be isometric.
The author speculates that the $G_2$ level-set completion may be described by measurable semi-positive $G_2$-structures; one could try to test whether the analytic-stability viewpoint from Kähler geometry carries over to the $G_2$ setting, but this is not established in the paper.

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

This paper introduces homogeneous pairs and shows that conformal deformations of such metrics are warped products. That is the real contribution. The splitting theorem (Theorem 3.3) is correct, cleanly proved, and generalizes Loftin and Totaro. The curvature and geodesic formulas are standard but carefully assembled, and the applications to the Ebin metric and G2 moduli space are attractive. I believe the author knows the relevant literature; the build on Clarke, CR2, Loftin, and Totaro is explicit and appropriate.

The soft spot is serious but concrete: Theorem 3.23, the metric-completion classification, is false as stated. Equation (3.9) defines T-hat with sqrt(v(q))/q, but substituting Remark 3.6 into Theorem 2.27's T(r) = integral of sqrt(k w(q))/q dq gives sqrt(v(q))/sqrt(q) in the integrand. This is not a cosmetic difference. For v=1 the printed formula gives T0=-infinity and a cylinder completion, while the correct T0 is finite and the completion adds a collapsed point at r=0. For v(r)=1/r the printed theorem does not even recover the Clarke-Rubinstein p=1 result, which the paper claims to generalize. So Theorem 3.23 and the related Theorem 5.11 need a correction, and the applications in Section 5 should be rechecked. The fix is immediate—replace q with sqrt(q) in (3.9)—but the paper as submitted is not correct in its headline application.

The infinite-dimensional regularity question is a softer concern. The author flags it in Remark 3.5, and for the main examples (Ebin metric, G2 moduli) the splitting or completion results are already known or plausible by other means. I would not block the paper on that; the misprinted integrand is the real issue.

Who is this for? Differential geometers working on moduli spaces, Hessian metrics, or spaces of Riemannian metrics. It deserves a serious referee: the central idea is good, the core proof is sound, and the flaw is a typo waiting to be fixed. I would accept this into the review process, with a clear request that the author correct (3.9) and verify the consequences. After that repair, this is a solid paper worth having.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the notion of a homogeneous pair (g,f) of degree α on a (possibly infinite-dimensional) manifold M with a free R_{>0}-action, where g is a pseudo-Riemannian metric and f is a positive homogeneous function satisfying g(P,·)=df. Theorem 3.3 splits M isometrically as a warped product R_{>0}×_{M_l} with respect to any conformal deformation (v∘f)g. Using a general analysis of warped products in Section 2, the paper then derives explicit formulas for sectional curvature, geodesics, convexity of f, and, in the positive-definite case, the metric completion of (M,(v∘f)g) in terms of the level set M_l. Applications include: an infinite family of conformal deformations of the Ebin metric on the space of Riemannian metrics (Section 5.3.2), and the statement that the two canonical Riemannian metrics on the G₂ moduli space have different metric completions (Corollary 5.2).

Significance. If the main results are correct, the paper provides a genuinely useful unifying framework: the splitting theorem, the curvature and geodesic formulas, and the completion theorem would apply simultaneously to Hessian cones, the G₂ moduli space, the Spin(7) moduli space, and the space of Riemannian metrics. The proofs of the warped-product geometry in Section 2 are detailed and largely checkable, and the derivation of Theorem 3.3 from the three defining equations of a homogeneous pair is clean. The paper also correctly identifies and respects the subtleties of infinite-dimensional Riemannian geometry, explicitly recalling Michor–Mumford examples and Clarke's completion theorem for the Ebin metric. However, as printed, the metric-completion results contain a specific integrand error in Eq. (3.9). Since metric completion is one of the two headline applications, this error is load-bearing and must be corrected before the paper can be accepted.

major comments (2)

[Section 3.4, Eq. (3.9); Theorem 2.27; Remark 3.6] The definition of \widehat T in Eq. (3.9) uses the wrong radial length. By Remark 3.6, the metric (v∘f)g corresponds to the warped product g(w) in (2.15) with k=l/α and w(r)=rv(r)/l. Theorem 2.27's length parameter is T(r)=∫^r √(k w(q))/q dq, which equals α^{-1/2}∫^r √(v(q))/√q dq. The paper instead sets \widehat T(r)=∫^r √(v(q))/q dq, missing the factor 1/√q. This changes the finiteness of \widehat T_0 and \widehat T_∞ and hence changes the case in Theorem 3.23 and all downstream corollaries. For example, for v=1 the printed \widehat T is log r, giving case (1) (a cylinder with no degenerate endpoint), whereas the correct T is proportional to √r, so T_0 is finite and case (2) applies: the completion adds a collapsed endpoint. Applying this to the Ebin metric in Theorem 5.11, the printed formula would give \widehat M_{finite,+} for v=1, contradicting Clarke's theorem (Theorem 5.8), which identifies the completion with \widehat M_{finite}. For v(r)=1/r, the printed formula gives \widehat T_0=-∞, \widehat T_∞∈R and lim_{r→0} rv(r)=1, so no case of Theorem 5.11 applies; the correct formula gives \widehat T_0=-∞ and \widehat T_∞=∞, recovering the p=1 case of Clarke–Rubinstein. The intended correction is immediate from Theorem 2.27, but as printed Theorem 3.23 and Theorem 5.11 are false.
[Theorem 3.3(1) and Remark 3.5] Theorem 3.3 is stated for possibly infinite-dimensional manifolds, and part (1) concludes that each level set M_l is a submanifold because (df)_x≠0. The proof invokes the implicit function theorem, which is not valid for general Fréchet manifolds; the author acknowledges this in Remark 3.5. Since Theorem 5.11 applies Theorem 3.3 to the Fréchet space of Riemannian metrics, the statement should be qualified: either restrict the general theorem to finite-dimensional manifolds, or explicitly rely on the known splitting theorems of Freed–Groisser and Gil-Medrano–Michor in the infinite-dimensional application. As written, the universal infinite-dimensional claim in Theorem 3.3(1) is unsupported.

minor comments (4)

[Section 2, opening] The phrase “such as the the sectional curvature” contains a duplicated definite article; it should read “such as the sectional curvature”.
[Section 5.3.2, proof of Proposition 5.10] In the sentence “The vector field P generated by the canonical R_{>0}-action on MSpin(7) is given by P_g=g”, the target space should be M, the space of Riemannian metrics, not MSpin(7).
[Remark 2.26] The example function S(x) is not smooth, and the remark says it “may be replaced” with a smooth approximation; this should be phrased as the existence of a smooth function with the same behavior, rather than as an actual replacement of S within the displayed formula.
[Section 3.4, Theorem 3.23] After Eq. (3.9) is corrected, the conditions “lim_{r→0} rv(r)=0” and “lim_{r→∞} rv(r)=0” should be re-derived from the corresponding conditions on w(r) in Theorem 2.27; while the present form happens to match w(r)=rv(r)/l up to the positive constant l, the proof should make this bookkeeping explicit to avoid further confusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the homogeneous-pair splitting theorem is a direct computation from the definitions, and the later curvature, geodesic, and completion results are substitutions into the general warped-product theory in Section 2.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is not circular. Theorem 3.3 constructs the warped-product isometry explicitly from the homogeneous-pair hypotheses (m_lambda^* g = lambda^alpha g, m_lambda^* f = lambda^alpha f, and g(P, .) = df) by computing the pullback of (v circle f)g and evaluating the metric on the radial and level directions; no target result is assumed in the hypotheses. The subsequent sectional-curvature, geodesic, and metric-completion statements are obtained by substituting v(r) into the general formulas of Section 2, which are proved independently for warped products of the form g(w). The applications in Section 5 use external results such as Clarke's completion theorem for the Ebin metric and the Freed-Groisser/Gil-Medrano-Michor splitting as stated inputs; they are not used to define the conclusions of the homogeneous-pair theory. The paper contains no load-bearing self-citations, no fitted parameters renamed as predictions, and no uniqueness theorem imported from the author's prior work. The reviewer-noted defect in equation (3.9), concerning the radial length in the metric-completion classification, is a mathematical correctness issue rather than circularity: it does not make the claimed result equivalent to its inputs by construction. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or fitted constants. The paper's contribution is a definition (homogeneous pair) and theorems built from standard warped-product geometry. It relies on several external theorems from the literature for examples and on regularity assumptions in infinite dimensions.

assumptions (5)

standard math O'Neill's warped product curvature and geodesic formulas (Lemma 2.1, 2.2)
Used as the starting point for all curvature and geodesic computations in Section 2.
domain assumption Existence of a free R_{>0}-action and the homogeneous pair conditions (3.1)-(3.3)
This is the central definition; all results are conditional on such a structure existing.
domain assumption For metric completion, g is positive definite and the induced pseudometric d_g is a metric
Explicitly assumed in Section 3.4; needed because infinite-dimensional Riemannian metrics can have vanishing pseudometric ([MM]).
domain assumption Level sets M_l are submanifolds
Proved using the implicit function theorem in finite dimensions; assumed without proof in infinite dimensions (Remark 3.5).
standard math External results on the moduli spaces: Joyce's local homeomorphism for G2 and Spin(7), Clarke's completion theorem for the Ebin metric, Loftin/Totaro splitting
Used as black boxes to identify examples and base completions.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Conformal transformations of the pseudo-Riemannian metric of a homogeneous pair." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MFLOY34I

@misc{pith2026190801648,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Conformal transformations of the pseudo-Riemannian metric of a homogeneous pair},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MFLOY34I}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.01648}
}

abstract

We introduce a new notion of a homogeneous pair for a pseudo-Riemannian metric $g$ and a positive function $f$ on a manifold $M$ admitting a free $\mathbb{R}_{>0}$-action. There are many examples admitting this structure. For example, (a) a class of pseudo-Hessian manifolds admitting a free $\mathbb{R}_{>0}$-action and a homogeneous potential function such as the moduli space of torsion-free $G_2$-structures, (b) the space of Riemannian metrics on a compact manifold, and (c) many moduli spaces of geometric structures such as torsion-free ${\rm Spin}(7)$-structures admit this structure. Hence we provide the unified method for the study of these geometric structures. We consider conformal transformations of the pseudo-Riemannian metric $g$ of a homogeneous pair $(g, f)$. Showing that the pseudo-Riemannian manifold $(M, (v \circ f) g)$, where $v: \mathbb{R}_{>0} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}_{>0}$ is a smooth function, has the structure of a warped product, we study the geometric structures such as the sectional curvature, geodesics and the metric completion (if $g$ is positive definite) w.r.t. $(v \circ f) g$ in terms of those on the level set of $f$. In particular, (1) we can generalize the result of Clarke and Rubinstein about the metric completion of the space of Riemannian metrics w.r.t. the conformal transformations of the Ebin metric, and (2) two canonical Riemannian metrics on the $G_2$ moduli space have different metric completions.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

[1]

Amari and H

S. Amari and H. Nagaoka, Methods of information geometry, Translations of Mathematical Monographs 191, AMS, Oxford, Univ. Press

work page
[2]

N. Ay, J. Jost, H.V. L\^e and L. Schwachh\"ofer, Information geometry, Springer, Cham, 2017

work page 2017
[3]

Bauer, P

M. Bauer, P. Harms, P.W. Michor, Sobolev metrics on the Riemannian manifold of all Riemannian metrics, J. Differential Geom. 94 (2013), 187--208

work page 2013
[4]

Clarke, The metric geometry of the manifold of Riemannian metrics over a closed manifold, Calc

B. Clarke, The metric geometry of the manifold of Riemannian metrics over a closed manifold, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 39 (2010), 533--545

work page 2010
[5]

Clarke, The Riemannian L^2 topology on the manifold of Riemannian metrics, Ann

B. Clarke, The Riemannian L^2 topology on the manifold of Riemannian metrics, Ann. Glob. Anal. Geom. 39 (2011), 131--163

work page 2011
[6]

Clarke, The completion of the manifold of Riemannian metrics, J

B. Clarke, The completion of the manifold of Riemannian metrics, J. Differential Geom. 93 (2013), 203--268

work page 2013
[7]

Clarke, Geodesics, distance, and the CAT(0) property for the manifold of Riemannian metrics, Math

B. Clarke, Geodesics, distance, and the CAT(0) property for the manifold of Riemannian metrics, Math. Z. 273 (2013), 55--93

work page 2013
[8]

Clarke an Y

B. Clarke an Y. A. Rubinstein, Ricci flow and the metric completion of the space of K\"ahler metrics, Amer. J. Math. 135 (2013), 1477--1505

work page 2013

Show all 34 references

[9]

Clarke an Y

B. Clarke an Y. A. Rubinstein, Conformal deformations of the Ebin metric and a generalized Calabi metric on the space of Riemannian metrics, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar\'e Anal. NonLin\'eaire 30 (2013), 251--274

2013
[10]

Dubrovin, On Almost Duality for Frobenius Manifolds, Amer

B. Dubrovin, On Almost Duality for Frobenius Manifolds, Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. 212 (2004), 75--132

2004
[11]

Freed, D

D.S. Freed, D. Groisser, The basic geometry of the manifold of Riemannian metrics and of its quotient by the diffeomorphism group, Mich. Math. J. 36 (1989), 323--344

1989
[12]

Gil-Medrano, P.W

O. Gil-Medrano, P.W. Michor, The Riemannian manifold of all Riemannian metrics, Q. J. Math. 42 (1991), 183--202

1991
[13]

Grigorian and S.-T

S. Grigorian and S.-T. Yau, Local geometry of the G_2 moduli space, Commun. Math. Phys. 287 (2009), 459--488

2009
[14]

Grigorian, Moduli spaces of G_2 manifolds, Rev

S. Grigorian, Moduli spaces of G_2 manifolds, Rev. Math. Phys. 22 (2010), 1061--1097

2010
[15]

Hitchin, The moduli space of special Lagrangian submanifolds, Ann

N. Hitchin, The moduli space of special Lagrangian submanifolds, Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. 25 (1997), 503--515

1997
[16]

Hitchin, The geometry of three-forms in six and seven dimensions, J

N. Hitchin, The geometry of three-forms in six and seven dimensions, J. Differential Geom. 55 (2000), 547--576

2000
[17]

Huybrechts, Products of harmonic forms and rational curves, Doc

D. Huybrechts, Products of harmonic forms and rational curves, Doc. Math. 6 (2001), 227--239

2001
[18]

D. D. Joyce, Compact 8-manifolds with holonomy Spin (7) , Invent. Math. 123 (1996), 507--552

1996
[19]

D. D. Joyce, Compact Riemannian 7-manifolds with holonomy G_2 . I, J. Differential Geom. 43 (1996), 291--328

1996
[20]

D. D. Joyce, Compact manifolds with special holonomy, Oxford Mathematical Monographs, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000

2000
[21]

Karigiannis, Deformations of G _2 and Spin (7) -structures on Manifolds, Canad

S. Karigiannis, Deformations of G _2 and Spin (7) -structures on Manifolds, Canad. J. Math. 57 (2005), 1012--1055

2005
[22]

Karigiannis and N

S. Karigiannis and N. C. Leung, Hodge Theory for G_2 -manifolds: Intermediate Jacobians and Abel-Jacobi Maps, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 99 (2009), 297--325

2009
[23]

Karigiannis, C

S. Karigiannis, C. Lin, and J. Loftin, Octonionic-algebraic structure and curvature of the Teichm\"uller space of G_2 manifolds, in preparation
[24]

Kobayashi and K

S. Kobayashi and K. Nomizu, Foundations of Differential Geometry, Vol I, Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1963

1963
[25]

Kriegl and P

A. Kriegl and P. W. Michor, The Convenient Setting of Global Analysis, Math. Surveys Monogr. 53, AMS, Providence, RI, 1997

1997
[26]

Lang, Introduction to differentiable manifolds Second edition, Universitext

S. Lang, Introduction to differentiable manifolds Second edition, Universitext. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2002

2002
[27]

Loftin, Affine spheres and K\"ahler-Einstein metrics, Math

J. Loftin, Affine spheres and K\"ahler-Einstein metrics, Math. Res. Lett. 9 (2002), 425--432

2002
[28]

Magn\'usson, The geometry of K\"ahler cones, arXiv:1211.6934

G. Magn\'usson, The geometry of K\"ahler cones, arXiv:1211.6934

arXiv
[29]

P. W. Michor and D. Mumford, Vanishing geodesic distance on spaces of submanifolds and diffeomorphisms, Doc. Math. 10 (2005), 217--245

2005
[30]

O'Neill, Semi-Riemannian Geometry with Applications to Relativity, Academic Press, New York, 1983

B. O'Neill, Semi-Riemannian Geometry with Applications to Relativity, Academic Press, New York, 1983

1983
[31]

Shima, The Geometry of Hessian Structures, World Scientific, Singapore, 2007

H. Shima, The Geometry of Hessian Structures, World Scientific, Singapore, 2007

2007
[32]

Totaro, The curvature of a Hessian metric, Internat

B. Totaro, The curvature of a Hessian metric, Internat. J. Math. 15 (2004), 369--391

2004
[33]

Trenner and P

T. Trenner and P. M. H. Wilson, Asymptotic curvature of moduli spaces for Calabi-Yau threefolds, J. Geom. Anal. 21 (2011), 409--428

2011
[34]

P. M. H. Wilson, Sectional curvatures of K\"ahler moduli, Math. Ann. 330 (2004), 631--664

2004

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Amari and H

S. Amari and H. Nagaoka, Methods of information geometry, Translations of Mathematical Monographs 191, AMS, Oxford, Univ. Press

work page

[2] [2]

N. Ay, J. Jost, H.V. L\^e and L. Schwachh\"ofer, Information geometry, Springer, Cham, 2017

work page 2017

[3] [3]

Bauer, P

M. Bauer, P. Harms, P.W. Michor, Sobolev metrics on the Riemannian manifold of all Riemannian metrics, J. Differential Geom. 94 (2013), 187--208

work page 2013

[4] [4]

Clarke, The metric geometry of the manifold of Riemannian metrics over a closed manifold, Calc

B. Clarke, The metric geometry of the manifold of Riemannian metrics over a closed manifold, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 39 (2010), 533--545

work page 2010

[5] [5]

Clarke, The Riemannian L^2 topology on the manifold of Riemannian metrics, Ann

B. Clarke, The Riemannian L^2 topology on the manifold of Riemannian metrics, Ann. Glob. Anal. Geom. 39 (2011), 131--163

work page 2011

[6] [6]

Clarke, The completion of the manifold of Riemannian metrics, J

B. Clarke, The completion of the manifold of Riemannian metrics, J. Differential Geom. 93 (2013), 203--268

work page 2013

[7] [7]

Clarke, Geodesics, distance, and the CAT(0) property for the manifold of Riemannian metrics, Math

B. Clarke, Geodesics, distance, and the CAT(0) property for the manifold of Riemannian metrics, Math. Z. 273 (2013), 55--93

work page 2013

[8] [8]

Clarke an Y

B. Clarke an Y. A. Rubinstein, Ricci flow and the metric completion of the space of K\"ahler metrics, Amer. J. Math. 135 (2013), 1477--1505

work page 2013