Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 38 references

Selfless C*-correspondences, operator valued C*-probability spaces and completely positive maps

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Selflessness is extended from states to C*-correspondences and completely positive maps, yielding a new proof of the O_infinity-absorption theorem.

desk verdict A real extension of selflessness to correspondences and cp maps with strong applications; the core is sound, but it leans heavily on unpublished preprints and has a few citation slips. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.20361 v1 pith:WGTP4W7H submitted 2026-07-22 math.OA

David Gao , Marius Junge , Srivatsav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli , Gregory Patchell , Leonel Robert This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.OA MSC 46L0546L3546L5346L55
keywords selflessC*-algebrasC*-correspondencescompletelypositivemapsconditionalexpectationssemicircularsystemsamalgamatedfreeproductsO_infinity-stabilityultrapowertraces
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

This paper extends the notion of a 'selfless' C*-algebra—originally defined for a C*-algebra equipped with a state—to arbitrary C*-correspondences equipped with a real structure, and then to completely positive maps and conditional expectations. The authors establish that this relative selflessness behaves well under standard constructions such as tensor products, reduced free products, corners, and crossed products, and that it forces strong structural consequences on the underlying algebra. In particular, a separable unital C*-algebra carrying a weakly Toeplitz selfless relatively nuclear completely positive map must absorb the Cuntz algebra O_infinity, which recovers the classical O_infinity-absorption theorem as a special case. The same machinery produces new examples of selfless C*-algebras, new MF algebras from amalgamated free products of groups, and shows that ultrapowers of algebras admitting a weakly selfless unital cp map have no 'phantom' traces.

What carries the argument

The central object is a C*-correspondence with real structure, (H,K), and its associated semicircular C*-algebra S(H,K): the C*-algebra generated by A and self-adjoint semicircular elements s_v = ℓ_v + ℓ_v^* for v in K, inside the Toeplitz-Pimsner algebra of H, together with the vacuum conditional expectation E onto A. Selflessness of (H,K) is defined by the positive existential embeddability of (A; coefficient maps) into (S(H,K); coefficient maps ∘ E). The engine of the paper is the isomorphism S_{C1}(Ȟ2,Ǩ2) ≅ S_A(H1⊕H2,K1⊕K2) ≅ S_A(H1,K1) *_A S_A(H2,K2), which identifies the iteration of semicircular algebras with an amalgamated free product; this identity is what carries selflessness fr

What would settle it

Produce a specific C*-correspondence with real structure (H,K) over a non-injective C*-algebra for which the canonical map from S_A(H1⊕H2,K1⊕K2) onto S_A(H1,K1) *_A S_A(H2,K2) is not isometric (or not surjective); that would disprove Lemma 3.7 and break Theorem 3.8, so (H⊕H,K⊕K) could fail to be selfless even though (H,K) is selfless. A more targeted computation: check whether the vacuum expectation on S_A(H1⊕H2) separates points in the same way as the iterated expectation E_1◦Ě_2; any mismatch is a direct falsifier.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that 'selflessness' is not intrinsically about states: for a C*-correspondence H over A with a real structure K, the pair (H,K) is called selfless when the embedding of A (together with its coefficient maps) into the C*-algebra of A-valued semicircular elements generated by K is positively existential. Specializing to the KSGNS correspondence of a completely positive map φ reproduces selfless cp maps, and for a conditional expectation E:A→B, selflessness is exactly the statement that the first-factor embedding A → A *_B (B⊗C) into an amalgamated reduced free product is existential for some nontrivial C*-probability space C. The load-bearing

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is Lemma 3.7's identification of the iterated semicircular algebra S_{C1}(Ȟ2,Ǩ2) with the amalgamated free product S_A(H1,K1) *_A S_A(H2,K2); the entire chain from selflessness of (H,K) to selflessness of ℓ²(H), and hence to the cp-map stability theorems, collapses if this isomorphism fails in the C*-algebraic (as opposed to von Neumann algebraic) setting.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A separable unital C*-algebra admitting a weakly Toeplitz selfless relatively nuclear completely positive map is O_infinity-stable; in particular, every separable nuclear purely infinite simple algebra absorbs O_infinity.
  • A separable unital C*-algebra admitting a weakly selfless real relatively nuclear cp map is Z-stable.
  • If a group with the PHP property acts by approximately inner automorphisms on a unital C*-algebra, the crossed-product expectation is selfless; tensor products and reduced free products of selfless objects are again selfless.
  • If G is an MF group and H≤G is amenable, the doubled amalgamated free product G *_H G is MF.
  • If A admits a weakly selfless unital completely positive map, then every bounded trace on the ultrapower A^U is a limit trace: A^U has no phantom traces.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One can read the theory as evidence that relative selflessness is the correct noncommutative-probability analog of 'infinite dividedness': where a selfless state forces the Dixmier property and simpleness, a weakly selfless map forces weaker ideal/trace regularity. The authors state this interaction is future research; a natural test is whether weakly selfless maps characterize algebras with stric
  • The Toeplitz-selfless criterion for O_infinity-stability may be checkable on examples beyond the theorem's scope, e.g., on C*-algebras of groups acting on strongly self-absorbing algebras, since approximately inner actions are exactly the ones the PHP crossed-product argument can absorb.
  • The absence of phantom traces was proved for bounded traces; a plausible extension, not proved here, is that the same conclusion holds for all tracial functionals on A^U when A is exact and admits a weakly selfless unital cp map.
  • Since the main permanence theorem reduces selflessness of ℓ²(H) to selflessness of H, the theory suggests that 'eventual' properties (holding for a correspondence after taking infinite direct sums) might be the right stability notion in the non-separable or non-normal setting.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a theory of selflessness for C*-correspondences with real structures, specializing it to completely positive maps and conditional expectations. The main claims are: (1) a workable notion of selflessness for pairs (H,K) that is stable under direct sums and weak containment; (2) a corresponding notion of weak selflessness for cp maps, with consequences such as approximate selfadjoint-innerness and the absence of phantom traces on ultrapowers; (3) permanence results for tensor products, free products, and crossed products; and (4) applications including new examples of selfless C*-algebras, MF amalgamated free products, and a new proof of Kirchberg's O_∞-absorption theorem via relative nuclearity. The central formal engine is Lemma 3.7, which identifies iterated semicircular algebras with amalgamated free products, and Theorem 3.8, which passes selflessness to the infinite direct sum ℓ²(H,K).

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper substantially broadens Robert's selflessness from states to operator-valued settings, providing a unified framework with strong structural consequences: weak selflessness forces approximate selfadjoint-innerness and controls traces on ultrapowers, while weak Toeplitz selflessness, combined with relative nuclearity, yields Z- and O_∞-stability. The advertised new proof of Kirchberg's O_∞-stability theorem and the MF results for amalgamated free products are conceptually interesting and would be significant contributions. The paper also contains many detailed proofs of permanence properties and gives explicit credit to the prior work it builds on. Its main weakness is that several load-bearing steps are cited from unpublished preprints or asserted without full justification, which makes independent verification harder.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3, Lemma 3.7] The identification S_{C1}(H̃2,K̃2) ≅ S_A(H1⊕H2,K1⊕K2) is proved via an explicit Fock-space unitary, but the second isomorphism S_A(H1⊕H2,K1⊕K2) ≅ S_A(H1,K1) ∗_A S_A(H2,K2) is imported from [4, Theorem 2.4] and the restriction to the semicircular subalgebras is asserted. Theorem 3.8, Definition 4.1, and all downstream weak-selflessness results depend on this step. The paper should explicitly justify, or give a precise reference for, the claim that the image of S_A(H1⊕H2,K1⊕K2) under the Toeplitz isomorphism is exactly the reduced amalgamated free product of the two semicircular subalgebras with the vacuum expectation. I believe the statement is true, but the proof as written is too terse for a step on which the paper's engine rests.
  2. [Section 7, Theorem 7.3] The proof of (i)⇒(ii) and (v)⇒(vi) relies on Pisier's strong convergence [26, Theorem 7.1] (or [11, Corollary 1.2]) and on Gould's dichotomy [12], both unpublished preprints. These are load-bearing: they are used to pass from an arbitrary free complement to C_r*(F∞) and to O∞, respectively. The paper should either state these results explicitly, prove the needed special cases, or clearly mark the equivalence as conditional on the preprints. As written, a referee cannot fully verify Theorem 7.3 without retrieving and trusting unpublished sources.
  3. [Section 8, Theorem 8.7 (and Section 7, Theorem 7.8(ii))] The proof of Theorem 8.7 uses 'by Blanchard-Dykema' to embed A∗_B A into A'∗_B A', and Theorem 7.8(ii) invokes a 'corners version of Blanchard-Dykema', but no reference is given for either statement. The embedding is essential for the MF Corollary 8.8. Please provide the exact reference or a proof. Also, Corollary 8.6 depends on a specific theorem of Ozawa [25, Theorem 3]; the paper should state precisely what is borrowed from [25], since the wording 'the proof of [25, Theorem 3]' is not self-contained.
minor comments (5)
  1. [References] Reference [31] is listed as Schafhauser, but the text attributes a conjecture to Hayes. Please correct the citation or the reference list.
  2. [Section 2, Lemma 2.2] The proof begins 'See also [11]' but then gives a self-contained argument. Please clarify whether Lemma 2.2 is proved here or taken from [11].
  3. [Section 7, Definition 7.1] The phrase 'with C ≠ C' is confusing; likely one side should be a different symbol or the sentence should be rephrased.
  4. [Section 7, Theorem 7.3(ii)] The clause 'where C can be any of C_r*(F∞), (C([-2,2]))^{*∞}' is ambiguous. Please clarify that the existential embedding holds for each choice of C listed.
  5. [Section 2] Minor typos: 'C∗-correspondence' sometimes lacks the space, and a few other spacing issues appear. A careful proofread would help.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The claimed new proof of Kirchberg's O∞-absorption theorem imports the target theorem at the final step: Corollary 8.4(ii) cites [30] to conclude A⊗O∞≅A from an O∞-central-sequence embedding, so the advertised Kirchberg corollary is not derived from the new machinery alone.

  1. other [Section 8, Corollary 8.4(ii) proof; invoked by Corollary 8.6 [Kirchberg's O∞-stability theorem]]
    "To prove (ii), apply Theorem 8.3 (ii) with B=A, E= id A, and ψ=ϕ. This yields a unital embedding O∞ → A′ ∩A U . Since A is separable, A⊗ O∞ ∼= A [30]."

    Corollary 8.6 is explicitly labelled '[Kirchberg's O∞-stability theorem]' and its proof says 'By the previous corollary, A ∼= A⊗ O∞.' The previous corollary's proof obtains that conclusion by citing [30] (Rørdam–Størmer), the standard reference containing Kirchberg's O∞-absorption theorem. Thus the paper's advertised new proof of Kirchberg's theorem does not derive O∞-stability from the new selflessness machinery: the machinery only yields the unital embedding O∞→A′∩A^U, and the crucial implication from this embedding to A⊗O∞≅A is imported from the very theorem the paper claims to reprove. The final advertised result therefore reduces, at its final step, to an externally supplied theorem equivalent to the target result, rather than being a self-contained derivation.

full rationale

Apart from the Kirchberg-corollary issue, the paper's framework is largely self-contained and does not exhibit the usual circularity patterns. The core definitions are new, the main permanence results are proved in the text, and the imported identifications (e.g., Lemma 3.7's use of [4, Theorem 2.4] for Toeplitz amalgamated free products, and Shlyakhtenko's A-valued semicircular construction) come from external prior work, not from the present authors' self-citations. Self-citations such as [11] for Toeplitz exactness are not load-bearing because the needed lemma is proved in the paper and an external alternative ([26]) is also cited. There are no fitted parameters, no definitional circularity, and no renaming of a known result as a new prediction. However, the central advertised application, the 'conceptually new proof of Kirchberg's O∞-absorption theorem', is partially circular: Corollary 8.4(ii) concludes A⊗O∞≅A from an O∞-central-sequence embedding by citing [30], the standard reference for Kirchberg's O∞-absorption theorem, and Corollary 8.6 then invokes Corollary 8.4(ii) to obtain Kirchberg's theorem. This means the specific O∞-stability claim is not proved from the new machinery alone; the conclusion of the theorem being reproved is used as a cited lemma at the final step. The rest of the paper's results, including the Z-stability corollary and the MF free-product applications, are not affected by this circularity and appear to be genuinely new derivations from the framework.

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

No free parameters or empirical constants are present. The central claims rest on standard operator-algebraic constructions and several cited theorems, mostly from prior work of the same authors or from preprints. The strongest external reliance is on Toeplitz exactness, strong convergence, Ozawa's theorem, and a missing Blanchard–Dykema reference.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption All C*-algebras are unital and all *-homomorphisms are unital.
    Stated at the start of §2; every construction (KSGNS, tensor products, free products) assumes it.
  • standard math Shlyakhtenko's A-valued semicircular algebra S(H,K) and its vacuum expectation exist and have the stated universal/amalgamated free-product properties.
    Imported from [33] and [4]; the definition of selfless cp maps and Lemma 3.7 rely on this.
  • domain assumption Toeplitz exactness (Lemma 2.2) holds for ultrapowers of Toeplitz-Pimsner algebras.
    Stated as Lemma 2.2, proof sketched and attributed to [11]; used in Theorems 3.8, 4.5, 4.6.
  • domain assumption Strong convergence / free exactness for reduced amalgamated free products (Pisier [26], Gao–Kunnawalkam Elayavalli [11]).
    Used in Theorem 7.3 to iterate existential embeddings; without it the equivalence of selfless expectations and cp maps breaks.
  • domain assumption Ozawa's theorem: simple purely infinite C*-algebras are completely selfless (and Toeplitz selfless).
    Used in Corollary 8.6 to feed the O_infinity-stability argument; [25, Theorem 3].
  • domain assumption Gould's dichotomy for selfless C*-probability spaces (purely infinite or stable rank one).
    Used in Theorem 7.3 to produce a purely infinite embedding; [12].
  • domain assumption Blanchard–Dykema corner/free-product permanence result.
    Invoked in Theorems 7.8(ii) and 8.7, but the reference is missing from the bibliography; this is a load-bearing black box.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Selfless C*-correspondences, operator valued C*-probability spaces and completely positive maps." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WGTP4W7H

@misc{pith2026260720361,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Selfless C*-correspondences, operator valued C*-probability spaces and completely positive maps},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WGTP4W7H}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.20361}
}
abstract

We develop a general theory of selflessness for C*-correspondences, with several applications. Specializing this theory to completely positive maps, in particular to conditional expectations, gives rise to a novel notion of relative selflessness. Among applications, the machinery developed here yields new examples of selfless C*-algebras, for instance among minimal tensor products and reduced crossed products, new examples of MF C*-algebras arising as reduced amalgamated free products, a conceptually new proof of Kirchberg's $\mathcal{O}_{\infty}$-absorption theorem, and the lack of ``phantom'' traces on ultrapowers.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 9 linked inside Pith

  1. [11]

    Toeplitz exactness for strong convergence

    David Gao and Srivatsav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli. Toeplitz exactness for strong convergence. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.14106, 2026

    arXiv 2026

  2. [26]

    Strong convergence for reduced free products.arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.3186, 2012

    Gilles Pisier. Strong convergence for reduced free products.arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.3186, 2012

    arXiv 2012

  3. [12]

    The selfless dichotomy.arxiv:2606.09654, 2026

    Miles Gould. The selfless dichotomy.arxiv:2606.09654, 2026

    arXiv 2026

  4. [25]

    Proximality and selflessness for groupC ∗-algebras, 2025

    Narutaka Ozawa. Proximality and selflessness for groupC ∗-algebras, 2025

    2025

  5. [31]

    Finite-dimensional approximations of certain amalgamated free products of groups.Groups, Geometry, and Dynamics, 20(2):607–615, 2026

    Christopher Schafhauser. Finite-dimensional approximations of certain amalgamated free products of groups.Groups, Geometry, and Dynamics, 20(2):607–615, 2026

    2026

  6. [1]

    Strict comparison in reduced groupC ∗-algebras.Invent

    Tattwamasi Amrutam, David Gao, Srivatsav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, and Gregory Patchell. Strict comparison in reduced groupC ∗-algebras.Invent. Math., 242(3):639–657, 2025

    2025

  7. [2]

    Traces on ultrapowers ofC ∗-algebras.Journal of Functional Analysis, 286(7):Paper No

    Ramon Antoine, Francesc Perera, Leonel Robert, and Hannes Thiel. Traces on ultrapowers ofC ∗-algebras.Journal of Functional Analysis, 286(7):Paper No. 110329, 2024

    2024

  8. [3]

    Non-solutions to mixed equations in acylindrically hyperbolic groups coming from random walks.Arch

    Henry Bradford and Alessandro Sisto. Non-solutions to mixed equations in acylindrically hyperbolic groups coming from random walks.Arch. Math., 126(3):223–234, 2026

    2026

Show all 38 references
  1. [4]

    Brown, Kenneth J

    Nathanial P. Brown, Kenneth J. Dykema, and Dimitri Shlyakhtenko. Topological entropy of free product automorphisms.Acta Mathematica, 189(1):1–35, 2002

    2002

  2. [5]

    C ∗-Algebras and Finite-Dimensional Ap- proximations, volume 88

    Nathanial Patrick Brown and Narutaka Ozawa. C ∗-Algebras and Finite-Dimensional Ap- proximations, volume 88. American Mathematical Soc., 2008

    2008

  3. [6]

    Dykema and Dimitri Shlyakhtenko

    Kenneth J. Dykema and Dimitri Shlyakhtenko. Exactness of Cuntz–PimsnerC ∗-algebras. Proceedings of the Edinburgh Mathematical Society, 44(2):425–444, 2001

    2001

  4. [7]

    Model theory ofC ∗-algebras.Mem

    Ilijas Farah, Bradd Hart, Martino Lupini, Leonel Robert, Aaron Tikuisis, Alessandro Vignati, and Wilhelm Winter. Model theory ofC ∗-algebras.Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 271(1324):viii+127, 2021

    2021

  5. [8]

    Selfless reduced free products and graph products ofC ∗-algebras.arXiv:2510.24675, 2025

    Felipe Flores, Mario Klisse, M ´ ıche´ al´O Cobhthaigh, and Matteo Pagliero. Selfless reduced free products and graph products ofC ∗-algebras.arXiv:2510.24675, 2025

    2025

  6. [9]

    Pureness and stable rank one for reduced twisted groupC ∗-algebras of certain group extensions

    Felipe Flores, Mario Klisse, M ´ ıche´ al´O Cobhthaigh, and Matteo Pagliero. Pureness and stable rank one for reduced twisted groupC ∗-algebras of certain group extensions. arXiv:2601.19758, 2026

    2026 arXiv

  7. [10]

    Self- less reduced amalgamated free products and hnn extensions.arXiv:2604.06982, 2026

    David Gao, Srivatsav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, Gregory Patchell, and Lizzy Teryoshin. Self- less reduced amalgamated free products and hnn extensions.arXiv:2604.06982, 2026

    2026 arXiv

  8. [13]

    Sur la propri´ et´ e de Dixmier pour lesC∗-alg` ebres.C

    Uffe Haagerup and L´ aszl´ o Zsid´ o. Sur la propri´ et´ e de Dixmier pour lesC∗-alg` ebres.C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris S´ er. I Math., 298(8):173–176, 1984

    1984

  9. [14]

    Relative nuclearity forC ∗-algebras andKK-equivalences of amalgamated free products.Journal of Functional Analysis, 271(7):1868–1902, 2016

    Kei Hasegawa. Relative nuclearity forC ∗-algebras andKK-equivalences of amalgamated free products.Journal of Functional Analysis, 271(7):1868–1902, 2016

    1902

  10. [15]

    Selfless inclusions ofC ∗-algebras.arXiv:2510.13398, 2025

    Ben Hayes, Srivatsav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, Gregory Patchell, and Leonel Robert. Selfless inclusions ofC ∗-algebras.arXiv:2510.13398, 2025

    2025

  11. [16]

    Selfless reduced free prod- uct C∗-algebras.https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.13265, 2025

    Ben Hayes, Srivatsav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, and Leonel Robert. Selfless reduced free prod- uct C∗-algebras.https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.13265, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  12. [17]

    Christopher Phillips

    Ilan Hirshberg and N. Christopher Phillips. An isomorphism theorem for infinite reduced free products, 2026

    2026

  13. [18]

    Existential closedness and the structure of bimodules of II 1 factors.Journal of Functional Analysis, 286(4):Paper No

    Adrian Ioana and Hui Tan. Existential closedness and the structure of bimodules of II 1 factors.Journal of Functional Analysis, 286(4):Paper No. 110264, 2024

    2024

  14. [19]

    Embedding of the operator spaceOHand the logarithmic ‘little Grothendieck inequality’.Invent

    Marius Junge. Embedding of the operator spaceOHand the logarithmic ‘little Grothendieck inequality’.Invent. Math., 161(2):225–286, 2005

    2005

  15. [20]

    OnC ∗-algebras associated withC ∗-correspondences.Journal of Functional Analysis, 217(2):366–401, 2004

    Takeshi Katsura. OnC ∗-algebras associated withC ∗-correspondences.Journal of Functional Analysis, 217(2):366–401, 2004. 38 D. GAO, M. JUNGE, S. KUNNA W ALKAM ELAYA V ALLI, G. PATCHELL, AND L. ROBERT

    2004

  16. [21]

    Infinite non-simpleC ∗-algebras: absorbing the Cuntz algebrasO ∞.Adv

    Eberhard Kirchberg and Mikael Rørdam. Infinite non-simpleC ∗-algebras: absorbing the Cuntz algebrasO ∞.Adv. Math., 167(2):195–264, 2002

    2002

  17. [22]

    Some remarks on decay in countable groups and amalgamated free products.arXiv:2509.08754, 2025

    Srivatsav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, Gregory Patchell, and Lizzy Teryoshin. Some remarks on decay in countable groups and amalgamated free products.arXiv:2509.08754, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  18. [23]

    Christopher Lance.HilbertC ∗-modules: A toolkit for operator algebraists, volume 210 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series

    E. Christopher Lance.HilbertC ∗-modules: A toolkit for operator algebraists, volume 210 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, 1995

    1995

  19. [24]

    Dixmier approximation and symmetric amenability forC ∗-algebras.Jour- nal of the Mathematical Society of Japan, 66(2):609–623, 2014

    Narutaka Ozawa. Dixmier approximation and symmetric amenability forC ∗-algebras.Jour- nal of the Mathematical Society of Japan, 66(2):609–623, 2014

    2014

  20. [27]

    Strict comparison for twisted groupC ∗- algebras.arXiv:2505.18569, 2025

    Sven Raum, Hannes Thiel, and Eduard Vilalta. Strict comparison for twisted groupC ∗- algebras.arXiv:2505.18569, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Classification of inductive limits of 1-dimensional NCCW complexes.Advances in Mathematics, 231(5):2802–2836, 2012

    Leonel Robert. Classification of inductive limits of 1-dimensional NCCW complexes.Advances in Mathematics, 231(5):2802–2836, 2012

    2012

  22. [29]

    Selfless C ∗-algebras.Adv

    Leonel Robert. Selfless C ∗-algebras.Adv. Math., 478:Paper No. 110409, 28, 2025

    2025

  23. [30]

    Entropy in Opera- tor Algebras, volume 126 ofEncyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences

    Mikael Rørdam and Erling Størmer.Classification of Nuclear C*-Algebras. Entropy in Opera- tor Algebras, volume 126 ofEncyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2002

    2002

  24. [32]

    Some applications of freeness with amalgamation.Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 500:191–212, 1998

    Dimitri Shlyakhtenko. Some applications of freeness with amalgamation.Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 500:191–212, 1998

    1998

  25. [33]

    Dimitri Shlyakhtenko.A-valued semicircular systems.Journal of Functional Analysis, 166(1):1–47, 1999

    1999

  26. [34]

    Toms and Wilhelm Winter

    Andrew S. Toms and Wilhelm Winter. Strongly self-absorbingC ∗-algebras.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 359(8):3999–4029, 2007

    2007

  27. [35]

    Selfless reducedC ∗-algebras of linear groups.arXiv:2602.10616, 2026

    Itamar Vigdorovich. Selfless reducedC ∗-algebras of linear groups.arXiv:2602.10616, 2026

    2026 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Dan-Virgil Voiculescu, Kenneth J. Dykema, and Alexandru Nica.Free Random Variables: A Noncommutative Probability Approach to Free Products with Applications to Random Matrices, Operator Algebras, and Harmonic Analysis on Free Groups, volume 1 ofCRM Monogr. Ser.Amer. Math. Soc....

    1992

  29. [37]

    424 ofMemoirs of the American Mathematical Society

    Yasuo Watatani.Index forC ∗-subalgebras, volume 83, no. 424 ofMemoirs of the American Mathematical Society. American Mathematical Society, 1990

    1990

  30. [38]

    An extreme boundary of acylindrically hyperbolic groups.arXiv:2511.16400, 2025

    Wenyuan Yang. An extreme boundary of acylindrically hyperbolic groups.arXiv:2511.16400, 2025. Department of Mathematics, University of Maryland, College Park, 4176 Campus Dr, College Park, MD 20742 Email address:sriva@umd.edu URL:https://sites.google.com/view/srivatsavke Mathe...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.