Riemann moduli spaces are quantum ergodic

Dean Baskin; Jesse Gell-Redman; Xiaolong Han

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 29 references

Riemann moduli spaces are quantum ergodic

T0 review · 3 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 The paper proves that Riemann moduli spaces with the Weil-Petersson metric are quantum ergodic: a density-one subsequence of Laplacian eigenfunctions equidistributes in phase space whenever $3g+n\ge 4$.

desk verdict Quantum ergodicity for Weil-Petersson Laplacians is new and likely correct, but the proof of the main variance estimate has an unaddressed identity-term issue. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.06949 v2 pith:VXG2FVIV submitted 2019-08-19 math.AP math.DGmath.SP

Dean Baskin , Jesse Gell-Redman , Xiaolong Han This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.APmath.DGmath.SP MSC 58J5032G1553D2537A2558J40

keywords quantumergodicityWeil-PeterssonmetricRiemannmodulispaceLaplacianeigenfunctionsergodicgeodesicflowsingularspacesEgorovtheoremlocalWeyllaw

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 proves that the Riemann moduli spaces $M_{g,n}$ -- the spaces of complex structures on a genus-$g$ surface with $n$ marked points -- are quantum ergodic when equipped with the Weil-Petersson metric, for every stable pair with $3g+n \geq 4$. Quantum ergodicity here means that a density-one subsequence of Laplacian eigenfunctions becomes equidistributed: for any compactly supported zero-order pseudodifferential operator $A$, the matrix elements $\langle A\varphi_{j_k},\varphi_{j_k}\rangle$ converge to the normalized Liouville average of the principal symbol of $A$. This matters because $M_{g,n}$ is incomplete and has a singular boundary, so the standard quantum-ergodicity theorems for closed manifolds and billiards do not apply directly. The paper obtains the result by isolating structural and analytic hypotheses that suffice for the classical 'local Weyl law plus Egorov plus ergodicity' strategy, and then verifying those hypotheses for the moduli spaces.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is the standard quantum-ergodicity chain, adapted to a singular space by three tools. The local Weyl law (Lemma 2.1) converts spectral sums of matrix elements into Liouville integrals of principal symbols. A supplement to Egorov's theorem (Theorem 2.5) controls the quantum evolution $e^{-itP}Ae^{itP}$ by the classical flow $\Phi_t$ whenever the wavefront set of $A$ lies in the permissible set $X_T$, where the geodesic flow is defined up to time $T$; the error from replacing the evolved operator by the transported symbol is a compact operator, not just a smoothing one. A heat-kernel smoothing lemma (Lemma 2.3) shows that $\chi\sqrt{\Delta}\chi$ is a pseudodifferential operator away from the singular locus and that operators crossing the singular set are compact. Ergodicity of the flow on $X_\infty$ then forces the time average of the symbol to its Liouville average, and a microlocal cutoff $E_\epsilon$ handles the part of phase space near the singular flowout.

What would settle it

Compute, in a model crossing-cusp-edge neighborhood for the Weil-Petersson metric, the wave kernel $\cos(t\sqrt{\Delta})$ applied to a compactly supported function away from the divisor: if for arbitrarily small $t$ the kernel reaches the singular locus, then finite speed of propagation fails, and the local Weyl law used in Lemma 2.1 would need a different proof. Alternatively, find any space satisfying (S1)-(S3) and (A1)-(A5) where the chosen self-adjoint Laplacian lacks finite speed and check whether the local Weyl law still holds.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Weil-Petersson Laplacian on the regular part $M_{g,n,\mathrm{reg}}$ is quantum ergodic with respect to the natural self-adjoint extension described in [JMMV14]. Concretely, for every orthonormal basis of eigenfunctions there is a density-one subsequence whose matrix elements converge to the Liouville average of the principal symbol, for all zero-order pseudodifferential operators with compact support in the interior; Theorem 4.1 extends this to operators regular across the orbifold singularities. The proof does not require a full pseudodifferential calculus on the singular space: it works away from the singular locus and uses heat-kernel smoothing to make the few ingredients that touch the singular set compact. The dynamical input is the ergodicity of the Weil-Petersson geodesic flow on a full-measure set, and the spectral input is the Weyl law and self-adjointness from [JMMV14].

Load-bearing premise

The proof's load-bearing premise is that the chosen self-adjoint Laplacian has finite speed of propagation, so that the wave kernel $\cos(t\sqrt{\Delta})$ keeps the localized operator $A\cos(t\sqrt{\Delta})A^*$ away from the singular locus for small times; this property is used in the local Weyl law but is not listed among the structural or analytic assumptions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For every smooth domain $\Omega$ compactly contained in the interior, the mass $\int_\Omega |\varphi_{j_k}|^2$ converges to $\operatorname{Vol}(\Omega)/\operatorname{Vol}(M)$, so the eigenfunctions spread evenly.
The classical ergodicity of the Weil-Petersson geodesic flow now has a spectral counterpart: stationary quantum states equidistribute in phase space.
The theorem's hypothesis list is a template: any singular space satisfying (S1)-(S3) and (A1)-(A5) is quantum ergodic, and the paper verifies the list for hyperbolic surfaces with conic singularities as a second example.
Because the Weyl law holds for the natural extension, the equidistribution statement is basis-independent: every orthonormal basis of eigenfunctions has such a density-one subsequence.
Theorem 4.1 broadens the class of admissible observables to orbifold-regular pseudodifferential operators, so the result also governs measurements that touch the orbifold singularities.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper establishes density-one equidistribution but gives no rate; whether the moduli-space Laplacian has quantum unique ergodicity (no exceptional subsequences at all) or admits scarred subsequences remains open.
If the unstated finite-speed condition holds for the natural extension, the same proof should apply to other crossing-cusp-edge orbifolds, not only moduli spaces, since the spectral ingredients from [JMMV14] are stated for that whole class.
The Egorov supplement in Theorem 2.5 is stated abstractly in terms of flow-defined sets, so it may be reusable for any incomplete space whose geodesic flow is ergodic off a measure-zero set.

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

The key fact: this paper proves quantum ergodicity for the Weil–Petersson Laplacian on Riemann moduli spaces, which is genuinely new, and the proof nearly works—but there is a gap in the main variance estimate that needs fixing.

What is good: the abstract framework is clean and appropriately general; the Egorov theorem for singular spaces (Theorem 2.5) is of independent interest. The applications rest on solid prior results: Burns–Masur–Wilkinson ergodicity, Ji–Mazzeo–Müller–Vasy spectral theory, and Wolpert's measure-zero exceptional set. The conic-surface corollary is a nice bonus.

The main soft spot is in the proof of Theorem 1.2. To estimate (3.2), the authors define B_{ε,T} = ⟨Aε − αε⟩*_T ⟨Aε − αε⟩_T and invoke Lemma 2.5 to replace it by ~B_{ε,T}. But Lemma 2.5 requires compactly supported Schwartz kernel, and Aε − αε I contains the identity term αε I, whose kernel is on the diagonal and not compact in M×M. So the Egorov replacement is unjustified as written. This is repairable: expand the square and handle the constant term separately, using the fact that the eigenfunctions are normalized. The paper does not do that, so the variance estimate is incomplete.

Two smaller issues: Lemma 2.1 uses finite speed of propagation for the wave propagator, but finite speed is not among the assumptions; the JMMV extension likely has it, but it should be checked. Also, the claim that ⋂_{ε>0} Uε = X_{2T} is only true up to measure zero; this is harmless.

Bottom line: the result is probably correct, the architecture is the standard Zelditch–Zworski one, and the missing pieces are technical. This is exactly the kind of paper a good journal should referee; I would send it out with a request to close the variance gap and verify finite speed.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper establishes quantum ergodicity for the Weil-Petersson Laplacian on Riemann moduli spaces M_{g,n} in the stable range, proving that a density-one subsequence of eigenfunctions equidistributes in the cosphere bundle for zero-order pseudodifferential operators with kernels compactly supported in the interior. The argument is organized through an abstract theorem (Theorem 1.2) for singular spaces satisfying structural assumptions (S1)-(S3) and analytic assumptions (A1)-(A5), following the Zelditch-Zworski strategy: a local Weyl law, an Egorov theorem adapted to compactly supported operators, a microlocal cutoff to the long-lived set X_{2T+\epsilon}, and ergodicity of the geodesic flow. The assumptions are then verified for moduli spaces using results of Ji-Mazzeo-M\"uller-Vasy, Wolpert, and Burns-Masur-Wilkinson, and for hyperbolic surfaces with conic singularities.

Significance. If the proof is completed, the result is a substantial extension of quantum ergodicity to an incomplete, singular space of central geometric interest. The abstract framework in Theorem 1.2 is a useful contribution in its own right, and the verification of the assumptions in Section 4 is clear and grounded in established work. There is no circularity: ergodicity, spectral theory, and Weyl law are taken from independent sources. However, as written, the proof of the key variance estimate in Section 3 contains a gap that must be repaired, and Lemma 2.1 relies on an unstated finite-propagation hypothesis. These issues are localized and seem repairable, so the central claim remains plausible.

major comments (3)

[Section 3, Eqs. (3.5)-(3.6)] The replacement of B_{\epsilon,T} by \tilde B_{\epsilon,T} is not justified by Lemma 2.5 because A_{\epsilon} - \alpha_{\epsilon} I does not have compactly supported Schwartz kernel: the identity term \alpha_{\epsilon} I is supported on the diagonal. Lemma 2.5 requires supp \kappa_A \subset M_\epsilon \times M_\epsilon and concludes that \tilde A(t) has compactly supported kernel, so it cannot be applied to A_{\epsilon} - \alpha_{\epsilon} I. Consequently the claimed principal symbol of \tilde B_{\epsilon,T}, namely |(1/2T)\int(\sigma_0(A_\epsilon)\circ\Phi_t - \alpha_\epsilon)dt|^2, is not the symbol of any compactly supported pseudodifferential operator, since it equals |\alpha_\epsilon|^2 outside the compact support of \sigma_0(A_\epsilon)\circ\Phi_t. The local Weyl law in (3.6) therefore cannot be applied to \tilde B_{\epsilon,T} as written. This gap is repairable by expanding B_{\epsilon,T} as \langle A_\epsilon\rangle_T^*\langle A_\epsilon\rangle_T - \alpha_\epsilon(\langle A_\epsilon\rangle_T + \langle A_\epsilon\rangle_T^*) + \alpha_\epsilon^2 I, applying Lemma 2.5 only to \langle A_\epsilon\rangle_T, and treating the identity term separately in the local Weyl law. This separation is absent from the manuscript, so the variance estimate (3.2) is not fully proved as written.
[Lemma 2.1] The proof of Lemma 2.1 invokes finite speed of propagation to conclude that A cos(t\sqrt{\Delta})A^* has kernel supported away from the singular locus for small |t|. Finite speed is not listed among the structural assumptions (S1)-(S3) or the analytic assumptions (A1)-(A5), and it is not automatic for every self-adjoint extension with core C_0^\infty(M). For the moduli application the JMMV extension is a natural choice and likely has this property, but the general theorem is not established without it. The authors should either add a finite-speed hypothesis to (A1)-(A5) or explicitly verify finite speed for the extensions used in Sections 4 and 5 before Lemma 2.1 is used.
[Section 3, definition of U_epsilon and the assertion before (3.3)] The statement that \bigcap_{\epsilon>0} U_\epsilon = X_{2T} is not justified and, as written, is false for points with T_q = 2T: such a point lies in X_{2T}, but for every \epsilon>0 the time t = T_q satisfies |t| < 2T+\epsilon and at that time the flow point has distance zero from the singular locus, so q \notin U_\epsilon. Membership in the intersection actually requires the trajectory to keep positive distance from P on intervals that grow as \epsilon shrinks, so the intersection is closer to X_\infty. Since this equality is used to show that the cutoff symbols tend to 1 on X_{2T}, the proof needs a more careful statement, for example equality up to a set of Liouville measure zero, or a limiting argument that only requires convergence almost everywhere.

minor comments (3)

[Remark after Corollary 2.2] The remark refers to the 'local Weyl law in Lemma 2.2', but the statement is Corollary 2.2.
[Section 4.1, proof of Theorem 4.1] The sentence 'Hence any full density subsequence of eigenfunctions of (M',\pi^*g_WP) contains a full density subsequence of eigenfunctions coming from the \tilde E^S_\lambda' requires justification: a density-one subset of a union need not have positive density inside a subset that itself has density 1/|S|. The intended argument likely needs a separate quantum-ergodicity statement on the invariant subspace. There is also a typo in the same proof: 'the conclusion fo Theorem 1.1' should be 'the conclusion of Theorem 1.1'.
[Section 3, after Eq. (3.4)] The phrase 'Because \alpha(R_\epsilon A) \to 0' appears to be a typo; the symbol \sigma_0(R_\epsilon A) \to 0 is what is needed, since \alpha was previously defined as the integral of a symbol.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper's inputs are independent prior results and the new Egorov theorem is proved directly.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained relative to its stated assumptions. Theorem 1.2 assumes structural assumptions (S1)-(S3) and analytic assumptions (A1)-(A5), including ergodicity of the geodesic flow, a Weyl law, and measure-zero exceptional set; it then proves a local Weyl law and an Egorov theorem and applies the Zelditch-Zworski variance argument. For the moduli-space application, each input is cited from independent prior work without author overlap: ergodicity (A5) from Burns-Masur-Wilkinson [BMW12], self-adjointness and Weyl asymptotics (A2)-(A3) from Ji-Mazzeo-Muller-Vasy [JMMV14], and the measure-zero flowout statement (A4) from Wolpert [Wol03] as used in [BMW12]. The Egorov theorem (Theorem 2.5) is stated and proved in Section 2, not assumed or imported. No fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is invoked from the authors' own prior work, and no ansatz is smuggled in via self-citation. The only notable concern is a possible technical gap in applying Egorov to the operator A_epsilon - alpha_epsilon I, whose identity term lacks compactly supported kernel, but that is a correctness or rigor issue rather than circularity. The paper's conclusion is not equivalent to its inputs by construction, so the circularity score is 0.

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

The paper introduces no free parameters and no new physical or geometric entities. Its central claim rests on a list of structural and analytic hypotheses (S1-S3, A1-A5), which are then verified for the examples using established theorems. The only unlisted assumption I found is finite speed of propagation, which is used but not stated as a hypothesis.

assumptions (7)

standard math Pseudodifferential calculus and classical symbol expansions on the regular part of M, as in Hormander's treatise.
Used throughout Sections 2 and 3 to define principal symbols, microsupport, and the local Weyl law.
standard math Local Weyl law for compact manifolds as in Sogge's Theorem 5.2.3, applied to compactly supported operators away from the singular locus.
Invoked in Lemma 2.1 and Corollary 2.2 to get distributional convergence of matrix elements.
domain assumption Finite speed of propagation for the wave propagator of the chosen self-adjoint Laplacian extension.
Used implicitly in Lemma 2.1 to ensure A cos(t sqrt(Delta)) A* remains supported away from the singular set for small t; not listed among (S1)-(S3) or (A1)-(A5).
domain assumption The Weil-Petersson geodesic flow on M_{g,n} is ergodic and defined almost everywhere (Burns-Masur-Wilkinson and Wolpert).
Used to verify assumptions (A4) and (A5) in Section 4, giving the dynamical input for quantum ergodicity.
domain assumption The Weil-Petersson Laplacian on M_{g,n,reg} has a natural self-adjoint extension with compact resolvent and Weyl asymptotics (Ji-Mazzeo-Muller-Vasy).
Used to verify assumptions (A2) and (A3), which provide the discrete spectrum and spectral counting needed in the proof.
domain assumption M_{g,n} is a good orbifold, so a finite group action on a smooth complex manifold resolves it (Looijenga, Pikaart-de Jong).
Used in Section 4.1 to pass from the orbifold M_{g,n} to the smooth resolved space M' for Theorem 4.1.
domain assumption The Weil-Petersson metric has polyhomogeneous expansion near the divisors, with the model form (4.1) coming from Masur, Wolpert, Liu-Sun-Yau, Yamada, Mazzeo-Swoboda, Melrose-Zhu.
Used in Section 4 to verify the structural assumptions (S1)-(S3) and the volume finiteness (A1).

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Riemann moduli spaces are quantum ergodic." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VXG2FVIV

@misc{pith2026190806949,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Riemann moduli spaces are quantum ergodic},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VXG2FVIV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.06949}
}

abstract

In this note we show that the Riemann moduli spaces $M_{g, n}$ equipped with the Weil--Petersson metric are quantum ergodic for $3g+n \geq 4$. We also provide other examples of singular spaces with ergodic geodesic flow for which quantum ergodicity holds.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

[1]

Lectures on spaces of nonpositive curvature , volume 25 of DMV Seminar

Werner Ballmann. Lectures on spaces of nonpositive curvature , volume 25 of DMV Seminar . Birkh\" a user Verlag, Basel, 1995. With an appendix by Misha Brin

work page 1995
[2]

Burns, H

K. Burns, H. Masur, and A. Wilkinson. The W eil- P etersson geodesic flow is ergodic. Ann. of Math. (2) , 175(2):835--908, 2012

2012
[3]

Colin de Verdi\`ere

Y. Colin de Verdi\`ere. Ergodicit\' e et fonctions propres du laplacien. Comm. Math. Phys. , 102(3):497--502, 1985

work page 1985
[4]

Spectral geometry of singular R iemannian spaces

Jeff Cheeger. Spectral geometry of singular R iemannian spaces. J. Differential Geom. , 18(4):575--657 (1984), 1983

work page 1984
[5]

Ergodic properties of eigenfunctions for the D irichlet problem

Patrick G\' e rard and \' E ric Leichtnam. Ergodic properties of eigenfunctions for the D irichlet problem. Duke Math. J. , 71(2):559--607, 1993

work page 1993
[6]

Gil and Gerardo A

Juan B. Gil and Gerardo A. Mendoza. Adjoints of elliptic cone operators. Amer. J. Math. , 125(2):357--408, 2003

2003
[7]

The analysis of linear partial differential operators

Lars H\" o rmander. The analysis of linear partial differential operators. IV . Classics in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2009. Fourier integral operators, Reprint of the 1994 edition

work page 2009
[8]

The analysis of linear partial differential operators

Lars H \"o rmander. The analysis of linear partial differential operators. III . Classics in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2007. Pseudo-differential Operators, Reprint of the 1994 edition

work page 2007

Show all 29 references

[9]

On resonances generated by conic diffraction

Luc Hillairet and Jared Wunsch. On resonances generated by conic diffraction. Preprint, arXiv:1706.07869, 2017

2017 arXiv
[10]

Spectral theory for the W eil- P etersson L aplacian on the R iemann moduli space

Lizhen Ji, Rafe Mazzeo, Werner M\"uller, and Andras Vasy. Spectral theory for the W eil- P etersson L aplacian on the R iemann moduli space. Comment. Math. Helv. , 89(4):867--894, 2014

2014
[11]

Operators of F uchs type, conical singularities, and asymptotic methods , volume 136 of Teubner-Texte sur Math

Matthias Lesch. Operators of F uchs type, conical singularities, and asymptotic methods , volume 136 of Teubner-Texte sur Math. B.G. Teubner, Stuttgart, Leipzig, 1997

1997
[12]

Smooth D eligne- M umford compactifications by means of P rym level structures

Eduard Looijenga. Smooth D eligne- M umford compactifications by means of P rym level structures. J. Algebraic Geom. , 3(2):283--293, 1994

1994
[13]

Good geometry on the curve moduli

Kefeng Liu, Xiaofeng Sun, and Shing-Tung Yau. Good geometry on the curve moduli. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. , 44(2):699--724, 2008

2008
[14]

Extension of the W eil- P etersson metric to the boundary of T eichmuller space

Howard Masur. Extension of the W eil- P etersson metric to the boundary of T eichmuller space. Duke Math. J. , 43(3):623--635, 1976

1976
[15]

Robert C. McOwen. Point singularities and conformal metrics on R iemann surfaces. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 103(1):222--224, 1988

1988
[16]

Edith A. Mooers. Heat kernel asymptotics on manifolds with conic singularities. J. Anal. Math. , 78:1--36, 1999

1999
[17]

Asymptotics of the W eil- P etersson metric

Rafe Mazzeo and Jan Swoboda. Asymptotics of the W eil- P etersson metric. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN , (6):1749--1786, 2017

2017
[18]

Boundary Behaviour of Weil–Petersson and Fibre Metrics for Riemann Moduli Spaces

Richard Melrose and Xuwen Zhu. Boundary Behaviour of Weil–Petersson and Fibre Metrics for Riemann Moduli Spaces . International Mathematics Research Notices , 11 2017

2017
[19]

Pikaart and A

M. Pikaart and A. J. de Jong. Moduli of curves with non-abelian level structure. In The moduli space of curves ( T exel I sland, 1994) , volume 129 of Progr. Math. , pages 483--509. Birkh\"auser Boston, Boston, MA, 1995

1994
[20]

A. I. S nirel man. Ergodic properties of eigenfunctions. Uspehi Mat. Nauk , 29(6(180)):181--182, 1974

1974
[21]

Christopher D. Sogge. Hangzhou lectures on eigenfunctions of the L aplacian , volume 188 of Annals of Mathematics Studies . Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2014

2014
[22]

The moduli space of curves and its tautological ring

Ravi Vakil. The moduli space of curves and its tautological ring. Notices Amer. Math. Soc. , 50(6):647--658, 2003

2003
[23]

On the W eil- P etersson geometry of the moduli space of curves

Scott Wolpert. On the W eil- P etersson geometry of the moduli space of curves. Amer. J. Math. , 107(4):969--997, 1985

1985
[24]

Scott A. Wolpert. Geometry of the W eil- P etersson completion of T eichm\"uller space. In Surveys in differential geometry, V ol.\ VIII ( B oston, MA , 2002) , volume 8 of Surv. Differ. Geom. , pages 357--393. Int. Press, Somerville, MA, 2003

2002
[25]

Scott A. Wolpert. Behavior of geodesic-length functions on T eichm\" u ller space. J. Differential Geom. , 79(2):277--334, 2008

2008
[26]

Scott A. Wolpert. Families of R iemann surfaces and W eil- P etersson geometry , volume 113 of CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics . Published for the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC; by the American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2010

2010
[27]

On the geometry of W eil- P etersson completion of T eichm\" u ller spaces

Sumio Yamada. On the geometry of W eil- P etersson completion of T eichm\" u ller spaces. Math. Res. Lett. , 11(2-3):327--344, 2004

2004
[28]

Uniform distribution of eigenfunctions on compact hyperbolic surfaces

Steven Zelditch. Uniform distribution of eigenfunctions on compact hyperbolic surfaces. Duke Math. J. , 55(4):919--941, 1987

1987
[29]

Ergodicity of eigenfunctions for ergodic billiards

Steven Zelditch and Maciej Zworski. Ergodicity of eigenfunctions for ergodic billiards. Comm. Math. Phys. , 175(3):673--682, 1996

1996

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Lectures on spaces of nonpositive curvature , volume 25 of DMV Seminar

Werner Ballmann. Lectures on spaces of nonpositive curvature , volume 25 of DMV Seminar . Birkh\" a user Verlag, Basel, 1995. With an appendix by Misha Brin

work page 1995

[2] [2]

Burns, H

K. Burns, H. Masur, and A. Wilkinson. The W eil- P etersson geodesic flow is ergodic. Ann. of Math. (2) , 175(2):835--908, 2012

2012

[3] [3]

Colin de Verdi\`ere

Y. Colin de Verdi\`ere. Ergodicit\' e et fonctions propres du laplacien. Comm. Math. Phys. , 102(3):497--502, 1985

work page 1985

[4] [4]

Spectral geometry of singular R iemannian spaces

Jeff Cheeger. Spectral geometry of singular R iemannian spaces. J. Differential Geom. , 18(4):575--657 (1984), 1983

work page 1984

[5] [5]

Ergodic properties of eigenfunctions for the D irichlet problem

Patrick G\' e rard and \' E ric Leichtnam. Ergodic properties of eigenfunctions for the D irichlet problem. Duke Math. J. , 71(2):559--607, 1993

work page 1993

[6] [6]

Gil and Gerardo A

Juan B. Gil and Gerardo A. Mendoza. Adjoints of elliptic cone operators. Amer. J. Math. , 125(2):357--408, 2003

2003

[7] [7]

The analysis of linear partial differential operators

Lars H\" o rmander. The analysis of linear partial differential operators. IV . Classics in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2009. Fourier integral operators, Reprint of the 1994 edition

work page 2009

[8] [8]

The analysis of linear partial differential operators

Lars H \"o rmander. The analysis of linear partial differential operators. III . Classics in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2007. Pseudo-differential Operators, Reprint of the 1994 edition

work page 2007