Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

$\mathcal{Z}$-stable Graph Algebras

T0 review · 4 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A new graph condition, 'distinct detours,' is shown to be equivalent to Z-stability of the associated C*-algebra when the graph is acyclic or has finitely many ideals, and to pureness in general for row-finite graphs.

desk verdict The distinct detours condition is a genuinely nice idea and the necessity proof works, but the sufficiency proof of Theorem A rests on a false approximation assertion; the main theorems are not established as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.02760 v2 pith:N7THDFGG submitted 2025-11-04 math.OA

Gregory Faurot This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.OA MSC 46L05
keywords distinctdetoursgraphC*-algebraZ-stabilityJiang–SualgebrapurenessCondition(K)row-finiteToms–Winterconjecture
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 a combinatorial condition on directed graphs called 'distinct detours': every simple infinite path (or path from a source) must have a detour that uses an edge not on the path. It proves that for a countable row-finite graph, this condition is equivalent to the graph C*-algebra tensoring with the Jiang–Su algebra Z without changing, provided the graph is acyclic or the algebra has finitely many ideals. Together with Condition (K), distinct detours is shown equivalent to the algebra being pure in the Cuntz-semigroup sense, which verifies the generalized Toms–Winter conjecture for these cases. If the proposed conjecture holds, Z-stability of graph algebras would be a purely graph-theoretic property.

What carries the argument

The central object is the 'distinct detours' condition, a divisibility-type property on vertex projections. The proof machinery combines two tools: (1) a corner-wise reduction showing C*(E) is D-stable iff each corner p_v C*(E)p_v is D-stable; (2) a construction of approximately central matrix-unit systems for M2⊕M3 inside corners, using nondegenerate inclusions of finite entrance-complete in-trees, so that the Robert–Tikuisis criterion (two full orthogonal elements in the central sequence algebra) applies. Lemmas 2.5–2.8 build these matrix units from paths in the graph.

What would settle it

Compute whether C*(E) is Z-stable for the acyclic graph with two sources u_1, u_2 each having an edge to v_0, and edges v_n→v_{n-1} for n≥1 (an infinite ray). This graph has distinct detours. If its C*-algebra has an elementary subquotient or fails to be Z-stable, Theorem A(a) is false; if not, the density step survives this test.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that 'distinct detours' is the right combinatorial shadow of Z-stability for graph C*-algebras. For a row-finite graph E, C*(E)⊗Z ≅ C*(E) if and only if every simple path that is either infinite or starts at a source has a detour containing an edge not on the path, under the hypotheses of Theorem A (acyclic or finitely many ideals). In the finite-graph case this reduces to Condition (K) plus having no sources. The paper further proves that Condition (K) plus distinct detours is equivalent to C*(E) being pure, and conjectures this is exactly Z-stability.

Load-bearing premise

The proof of Theorem A(a) assumes, without proof, that for each finite subset of the corner p_v C*(E)p_v one can find a finite entrance-complete in-tree whose corner approximates that subset within 1/2^n; if this density statement fails, the constructed approximately central matrix units may not exist.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For acyclic row-finite graphs, C*(E)⊗Z ≅ C*(E) is now equivalent to having no elementary subquotients, giving a graph-theoretic proof of a known result about AF algebras.
  • For graph algebras with finitely many ideals, Z-stability is characterized entirely by distinct detours, and the generalized Toms–Winter conjecture holds in this class.
  • For finite graphs, Z-stability, O_infinity-stability, absence of elementary subquotients, and Condition (K)+no sources all coincide.
  • If Conjecture 4.1 holds, Z-stability of any row-finite graph algebra is decidable by checking two graph-theoretic conditions.
  • The pureness equivalence (Theorem C) gives a large new class where pureness and Z-stability may coincide, matching the generalized conjecture.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The unproved assertion in the proof of Theorem A(a) — that arbitrary finite subsets of a corner can be approximated by corners of finite entrance-complete in-trees — is likely repairable by a density argument using row-finiteness and the Cuntz–Krieger relations, but it is the spot to check first.
  • The conjecture, if true, would imply a graph-theoretic algorithm for Z-stability: check Condition (K) and distinct detours, both of which are finite-time verifiable on finite graphs.
  • The distinct-detours condition may be equivalent to a known divisibility property of the Murray–von Neumann semigroup of the graph algebra, which would connect the combinatorial condition to K-theoretic invariants.
  • For non-row-finite graphs, Remark 4.2 suggests a modification involving cycles through infinite receivers; testing whether that amended condition is necessary and sufficient would be a natural extension.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a graph-theoretic condition called "distinct detours" and claims it characterizes Z-stability of graph C*-algebras under additional hypotheses. Theorem A asserts that for a countable row-finite graph that is either acyclic or has C*(E) with finitely many ideals, the following are equivalent: distinct detours, Z-stability of C*(E), and absence of elementary subquotients. Theorem B gives a finite-graph characterization, and Theorem C asserts that Condition (K) plus distinct detours is equivalent to C*(E) being pure. The paper also proposes a conjecture extending these equivalences to all row-finite graphs. The proofs rely on approximations by finite in-trees, composition series for ideals, and several recent results on pure C*-algebras.

Significance. If correct, the paper would provide a useful combinatorial criterion for Z-stability and pureness in a broad class of graph algebras, with direct bearing on the Generalized Toms–Winter Conjecture. The proposed condition of distinct detours is natural and the overall program is well motivated. However, the manuscript contains a simple counterexample to Theorem A case (b) and to Theorem C, and the proof of Theorem A case (a) rests on a false density assertion. These are not mere presentation issues; they invalidate the main theorems as stated. The paper cannot be accepted in its present form.

major comments (4)
  1. [Theorem A, case (b); Section 3] The statement of Theorem A case (b) is false. Let E be the graph with one vertex v and one loop e. Then E is row-finite and C*(E) is isomorphic to C(T), which has only two ideals, so case (b) applies. Since E is finite and has no sources, the author's own observation before Theorem B implies that E trivially has distinct detours. Moreover, C(T) has no elementary subquotients: C(T) is simple and not isomorphic to K(H). But C(T) is not Z-stable. Thus (i) and (iii) hold while (ii) fails. The proof's assertion that C*(E) having finitely many ideals implies Condition (K) is incorrect: C(T) is a simple graph algebra with finitely many ideals and fails Condition (K).
  2. [Theorem C; Section 4] The same one-vertex, one-loop graph disproves the equivalence (ii) => (i) in Theorem C. It satisfies (ii): C(T) has no elementary subquotients. It satisfies distinct detours vacuously, since there is no simple path in E^{≤∞}. But it fails Condition (K), since the vertex on the cycle has only one return path. The proof states that failure of Condition (K) "produces a subquotient stably isomorphic to C(T). This subsequently yields an elementary subquotient." The final step is wrong: C(T) (and also C(T)⊗K) is simple and non-elementary, so it does not yield an elementary subquotient. Theorem C is therefore false as stated.
  3. [Proof of Theorem A, case (a); density assertion after defining F_n] The sentence "For each n, we may find an entrance-complete finite in-tree (F_n,v) such that the distance between F_n and p_v L_C(F_n)p_v is less than 1/2^n" is load-bearing and is not justified. In fact the asserted density is false. Consider the row-finite acyclic graph with vertices a_n,b_n (n∈Z) and edges a_n→a_{n-1}, a_n→b_{n-1}, b_n→a_{n-1}, b_n→b_{n-1}. This graph has distinct detours. Let v=a_0, μ=a_2→a_1→a_0, ν=a_2→b_1→a_0, and u=s_μ s_ν^*. Any entrance-complete finite in-tree containing both μ and ν would give a_2 two outgoing edges, contradicting the tree property; any tree missing one of these paths cannot contain u in its corner, and the element u is not approximable by such a corner. Thus the approximation step, and with it the proof of (i)⇒(ii) for acyclic graphs, collapses.
  4. [Lemma 2.7; Theorem A, case (a), (iii)=> (i)] Two further problems affect the proof of Theorem A case (a). First, the construction in Lemma 2.7 does not preserve the in-tree property: adding all edges r^{-1}(F_n^0) can give a single vertex two outgoing edges. In the graph described above, if F_0 contains a_1→a_0, then F_1 contains both a_2→a_1 and a_2→b_1, so F_1 is not a tree. Second, the proof asserts that (iii)⇒(i) "was proven in Lemma 2.4," but Lemma 2.4 proves only that Z-stability implies distinct detours. It does not show that absence of elementary subquotients implies distinct detours. An additional argument would be needed to upgrade the ideal I constructed in Lemma 2.4 to an elementary subquotient in the acyclic case.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Proof of Theorem A, case (a)] The notation F_n is used both for a finite subset of p_v C*(E)p_v and for an entrance-complete finite in-tree. This overloading is confusing and should be fixed.
  2. [Proof of Theorem B] The sentence "If v has a source" appears to be a typo; it should presumably read "If v is a source" or "If E has a source v."

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the combinatorial condition is defined independently of Z-stability, and the load-bearing uses of prior work are external published theorems rather than the paper's own conclusions.

full rationale

I traced the derivation chain. Definition 2.3 defines 'distinct detours' purely combinatorially; Lemma 2.4 proves the necessary direction (Z-stable ⇒ distinct detours) directly using hereditarity and ideal/Z-stability permanence, not by assuming the target. The sufficient direction in Theorem A case (a) constructs approximate matrix units from entrance-complete in-trees (Lemmas 2.5–2.8) and invokes Robert–Tikuisis [29, Theorem 1.2]; the output (Z-stability) is not used as an input anywhere. The proof does contain an unproved density claim ('For each n, we may find an entrance-complete finite in-tree ... such that the distance ... is less than 1/2^n'), and a skeptic argues it is false; however, that is a correctness/validity issue, not a circularity, because the claim is not an equation forcing the conclusion nor a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. Theorem A case (b) is an extension argument using Theorem A case (a) and standard permanence; no circular step. Theorem B partly depends on [17, Section 3, Theorem C] by the same author (with Schafhauser), and Theorem C depends on [17, Theorem A] and [3,37,38]; these are prior published results with independent proofs, not the present paper's own conclusions used as inputs, so they count as external evidence. No self-definitional, fitted-input, uniqueness-imported, or ansatz-smuggled step is present. Score 0.

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

Pure proof-based paper; no fitted constants or numeric parameters. The burden is carried by standard operator-algebra results, recently published purity results, and the new distinct detours definition.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Z-stability is permanent under ideals, quotients, hereditary subalgebras, direct limits, and stable isomorphism (Toms–Winter, Theorem 1.3 and [40]).
    Used throughout to move Z-stability between corners, ideals, and quotients (Lemma 2.4, Theorem A, Theorem B, Corollaries 2.10–2.11).
  • domain assumption A separable unital C*-algebra with finite nuclear dimension is Z-stable iff its central sequence algebra contains two full orthogonal elements ([29, Theorem 1.2]).
    The main sufficient-direction engine in Theorem A, case (a); the approximately central matrix units are built to satisfy this criterion.
  • standard math For row-finite graphs, gauge-invariant ideals correspond bijectively to hereditary saturated subsets, and under Condition (K) every ideal is gauge-invariant (Theorems 1.12 and 1.14).
    Used to decompose C*(E) into a composition series in Theorem A, case (b) and to pass distinct detours through subquotients in Lemma 3.1.
  • domain assumption Subquotients of graph algebras with Condition (K) are (stably) isomorphic to graph algebras of quotient subgraphs ([34, Theorem 5.1]).
    Needed in Theorem C to reduce an arbitrary simple AF subquotient to a graph algebra to which Theorem A, case (a) applies.
  • domain assumption Cited purity criteria: no elementary subquotients implies nowhere scattered ([38]); Condition (K) plus finite nuclear dimension and the Global Glimm Property implies pure via [37, Proposition 7.4] and [3, Theorem 6.5].
    Theorem C's equivalence with pureness is proved by concatenating these external results; the paper does not re-derive them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of $\mathcal{Z}$-stable Graph Algebras." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/N7THDFGG

@misc{pith2026251102760,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: $\mathcalZ$-stable Graph Algebras},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/N7THDFGG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.02760}
}
abstract

We introduce a divisibility-type condition for directed graphs that is necessary for $\mathcal{Z}$-stability of the corresponding graph $C^*$-algebra. We prove that this condition is sufficient if either the graph $E$ has no cycles or the algebra $C^*(E)$ has finitely many ideals. Under the further assumption that $E$ is a finite graph, we provide a complete characterization of $\mathcal{Z}$-stability of $C^*(E)$. We conjecture that our divisibility condition and Condition (K) are equivalent to $\mathcal{Z}$-stability of the graph algebra. We prove that it is equivalent to $C^*(E)$ being pure, verifying the Generalized Toms--Winter Conjecture for graph algebras with finitely many ideals.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Nuclear dimension, pure infiniteness and real rank for higher rank graph $C^*$-algebras

    math.OA 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Non-simple higher-rank graph algebras that are purely infinite with zero-dimensional ideal lattice are O∞-stable and have nuclear dimension one.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Algebra293 (2005), no

    Gene Abrams and Gonzalo Aranda Pino,The Leavitt path algebra of a graph, J. Algebra293 (2005), no. 2, 319–334. MR 2172342

    2005

  2. [2]

    Williams,Nuclear dimension of groupoidC ∗-algebras with large abelian isotropy, with applications toC ∗-algebras of directed graphs and twists, (arXiv:2412.10241)

    Astrid an Huef and Dana P. Williams,Nuclear dimension of groupoidC ∗-algebras with large abelian isotropy, with applications toC ∗-algebras of directed graphs and twists, (arXiv:2412.10241)

    arXiv

  3. [3]

    Ramon Antoine, Francesc Perera, Hannes Thiel, and Eduard Vilalta,PureC ∗-algebras, (arXiv:2406.11052)

    arXiv

  4. [4]

    P. Ara, M. A. Moreno, and E. Pardo,NonstableK-theory for graph algebras, Algebr. Repre- sent. Theory10(2007), no. 2, 157–178. MR 2310414

    2007

  5. [5]

    Math.6(2000), 307–324

    Teresa Bates, David Pask, Iain Raeburn, and Wojciech Szyma´ nski,TheC ∗-algebras of row- finite graphs, New York J. Math.6(2000), 307–324. MR 1777234

    2000

  6. [6]

    1, London Math

    Bruce Blackadar,Comparison theory for simpleC ∗-algebras, Operator algebras and appli- cations, Vol. 1, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., vol. 135, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1988, pp. 21–54. MR 996438

    1988

  7. [7]

    Christian B¨ onicke and Kang Li,Nuclear dimension of subhomogeneous twisted groupoidC ∗- algebras and dynamic asymptotic dimension, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN (2024), no. 16, 11597–11610. MR 4788711

    2024

  8. [8]

    Math.401(2022), Paper No

    Joan Bosa, James Gabe, Aidan Sims, and Stuart White,The nuclear dimension ofO ∞-stable C∗-algebras, Adv. Math.401(2022), Paper No. 108250, 51. MR 4392219

    2022

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Brown,Stable isomorphism of hereditary subalgebras ofC ∗-algebras, Pacific J

    Lawrence G. Brown,Stable isomorphism of hereditary subalgebras ofC ∗-algebras, Pacific J. Math.71(1977), no. 2, 335–348. MR 454645

    1977

  2. [10]

    Brown and Narutaka Ozawa,C ∗-algebras and finite-dimensional approxima- tions, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol

    Nathanial P. Brown and Narutaka Ozawa,C ∗-algebras and finite-dimensional approxima- tions, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 88, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2008. MR 2391387

    2008

  3. [11]

    PDE13(2020), no

    Jorge Castillejos and Samuel Evington,Nuclear dimension of simple stably projectionless C∗-algebras, Anal. PDE13(2020), no. 7, 2205–2240. MR 4175824

    2020

  4. [12]

    Math.224(2021), no

    Jorge Castillejos, Samuel Evington, Aaron Tikuisis, Stuart White, and Wilhelm Win- ter,Nuclear dimension of simpleC ∗-algebras, Invent. Math.224(2021), no. 1, 245–290. MR 4228503

    2021

  5. [13]

    MR 360322

    Narsingh Deo,Graph theory with applications to engineering and computer science, Prentice- Hall Series in Automatic Computation, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1974. MR 360322

    1974

  6. [14]

    Drinen and M

    D. Drinen and M. Tomforde,TheC ∗-algebras of arbitrary graphs, Rocky Mountain J. Math. 35(2005), no. 1, 105–135. MR 2117597

    2005

  7. [15]

    Elliott, Zhuang Niu, Luis Santiago, and Aaron Tikuisis,Decomposition rank of approximately subhomogeneousC ∗-algebras, Forum Math.32(2020), no

    George A. Elliott, Zhuang Niu, Luis Santiago, and Aaron Tikuisis,Decomposition rank of approximately subhomogeneousC ∗-algebras, Forum Math.32(2020), no. 4, 827–889. MR 4116643

    2020

  8. [16]

    Samuel Evington, Abraham C. S. Ng, Aidan Sims, and Stuart White,Nuclear dimension of extensions of commutativeC ∗-algebras by Kirchberg algebras, Math. Z.310(2025), no. 4, Paper No. 89, 28. MR 4920021

    2025

  9. [17]

    Gregory Faurot and Christopher Schafhauser,Nuclear dimension of graphC ∗-algebras with condition (K), Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.152(2024), no. 10, 4421–4435. MR 4806388

    2024

  10. [18]

    Operator Theory92(2024), no

    Ruaridh Gardner and Aaron Tikuisis,The nuclear dimension of extensions of commuta- tiveC ∗-algebras by the compact operators, J. Operator Theory92(2024), no. 2, 331–348. MR 4849098

    2024

  11. [19]

    Jacob v. B. Hjelmborg,Purely infinite and stableC ∗-algebras of graphs and dynamical sys- tems, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems21(2001), no. 6, 1789–1808. MR 1869070 16 GREGORY F AUROT

    2001

  12. [20]

    Jeong and Gi Hyun Park,GraphC ∗-algebras with real rank zero, J

    Ja A. Jeong and Gi Hyun Park,GraphC ∗-algebras with real rank zero, J. Funct. Anal.188 (2002), no. 1, 216–226. MR 1878636

    2002

  13. [21]

    Xinhui Jiang and Hongbing Su,On a simple unital projectionlessC ∗-algebra, Amer. J. Math. 121(1999), no. 2, 359–413. MR 1680321

    1999

  14. [22]

    Christopher Phillips,Embedding of exactC ∗-algebras in the Cuntz algebraO 2, J

    Eberhard Kirchberg and N. Christopher Phillips,Embedding of exactC ∗-algebras in the Cuntz algebraO 2, J. Reine Angew. Math.525(2000), 17–53. MR 1780426

    2000

  15. [23]

    Systems19(1999), no

    Alex Kumjian and David Pask,C ∗-algebras of directed graphs and group actions, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems19(1999), no. 6, 1503–1519. MR 1738948

    1999

  16. [24]

    Math.184(1998), no

    Alex Kumjian, David Pask, and Iain Raeburn,Cuntz–Krieger algebras of directed graphs, Pacific J. Math.184(1998), no. 1, 161–174. MR 1626528

    1998

  17. [25]

    Alex Kumjian, David Pask, Iain Raeburn, and Jean Renault,Graphs, groupoids, and Cuntz– Krieger algebras, J. Funct. Anal.144(1997), no. 2, 505–541. MR 1432596

    1997

  18. [26]

    J.163(2014), no

    Hiroki Matui and Yasuhiko Sato,Decomposition rank of UHF-absorbingC ∗-algebras, Duke Math. J.163(2014), no. 14, 2687–2708. MR 3273581

    2014

  19. [27]

    103, Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC; by the American Mathe- matical Society, Providence, RI, 2005

    Iain Raeburn,Graph algebras, CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics, vol. 103, Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC; by the American Mathe- matical Society, Providence, RI, 2005. MR 2135030

    2005

  20. [28]

    Rieffel,Induced representations ofC ∗-algebras, Advances in Math.13(1974), 176–

    Marc A. Rieffel,Induced representations ofC ∗-algebras, Advances in Math.13(1974), 176–

    1974

  21. [29]

    Leonel Robert and Aaron Tikuisis,Nuclear dimension andZ-stability of non-simpleC ∗- algebras, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.369(2017), no. 7, 4631–4670. MR 3632545

    2017

  22. [30]

    Mikael Rørdam,The stable and the real rank ofZ-absorbingC ∗-algebras, Internat. J. Math. 15(2004), no. 10, 1065–1084. MR 2106263

    2004

  23. [31]

    entropy in operator algebras, Encylopaedia Math

    Mikael Rørdam and Erling Størmer,Classification of nuclearC ∗-algebras. entropy in operator algebras, Encylopaedia Math. Sci., Oper. Alg. Non-commut. Geom, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2002

    2002

  24. [32]

    J.55(1987), no

    Jonathan Rosenberg and Claude Schochet,The K¨ unneth theorem and the universal coefficient theorem for Kasparov’s generalizedK-functor, Duke Math. J.55(1987), no. 2, 431–474. MR 894590

    1987

  25. [33]

    Math.272(2015), 96–123

    Efren Ruiz, Aidan Sims, and Mark Tomforde,The nuclear dimension of graphC ∗-algebras, Adv. Math.272(2015), 96–123. MR 3303230

    2015

  26. [34]

    Represent

    Efren Ruiz and Mark Tomforde,Ideals in graph algebras, Algebr. Represent. Theory17 (2014), no. 3, 849–861. MR 3254772

    2014

  27. [35]

    Schafhauser,Cuntz-Pimsner algebras, crossed products, andK-theory, J

    Christopher P. Schafhauser,Cuntz-Pimsner algebras, crossed products, andK-theory, J. Funct. Anal.269(2015), no. 9, 2927–2946. MR 3394625

    2015

  28. [36]

    Andr´ e Schemaitat,The Jiang-Su algebra is strongly self-absorbing revisited, J. Funct. Anal. 282(2022), no. 6, Paper No. 109347, 39. MR 4360358

    2022

  29. [37]

    Hannes Thiel and Eduard Vilalta,The Global Glimm Property, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.376 (2023), no. 7, 4713–4744. MR 4608430

    2023

  30. [38]

    Noncommut

    ,Nowhere scatteredC ∗-algebras, J. Noncommut. Geom.18(2024), no. 1, 231–263. MR 4705669

    2024

  31. [39]

    Ann.358(2014), no

    Aaron Tikuisis,Nuclear dimension,Z-stability, and algebraic simplicity for stably projec- tionlessC ∗-algebras, Math. Ann.358(2014), no. 3-4, 729–778. MR 3175139

    2014

  32. [40]

    Toms and Wilhelm Winter,Strongly self-absorbingC ∗-algebras, Trans

    Andrew S. Toms and Wilhelm Winter,Strongly self-absorbingC ∗-algebras, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.359(2007), no. 8, 3999–4029. MR 2302521

    2007

  33. [41]

    Math.187 (2012), no

    Wilhelm Winter,Nuclear dimension andZ-stability of pureC ∗-algebras, Invent. Math.187 (2012), no. 2, 259–342. MR 2885621

    2012

  34. [42]

    Wilhelm Winter and Joachim Zacharias,The nuclear dimension ofC ∗-algebras, Adv. Math. 224(2010), no. 2, 461–498. MR 2609012 Department of Mathematics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 Email address:faurot.3@osu.edu

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.