Uniform bounds on harmonic Beltrami differentials and Weil-Petersson curvatures

Martin Bridgeman; Yunhui Wu

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Uniform bounds on harmonic Beltrami differentials and Weil-Petersson curvatures

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 For any finite-area hyperbolic surface with systole at most $2\epsilon_2$, the Weil-Petersson Ricci curvature at $X$ exceeds $-4/\operatorname{sys}(X)$.

desk verdict Solid, genuinely new bounds on Weil-Petersson curvature near the boundary of moduli space; the main theorems look right, but the written proof has a fixable threshold gap caused by the reuse of the symbol ε2 for two different constants. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02535 v1 pith:YK77NVBV submitted 2019-08-07 math.DG math.GT

Martin Bridgeman , Yunhui Wu This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.DGmath.GT MSC 30F6053C2132G15

keywords uniformboundsharmonicBeltramidifferentialsWeil-Peterssoncurvaturetotalscalarmodulispacesystoleinjectivityradiushyperbolicsurfaces

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 proves uniform, topology-independent bounds on how large a harmonic Beltrami differential can be at a point in terms of its Weil-Petersson norm and the local injectivity radius. The key estimate is $|\mu(z)|^2 \le \|\mu\|_{WP}^2/\operatorname{inj}(z) \le 2\|\mu\|_{WP}^2/\operatorname{sys}(X)$ wherever the injectivity radius is at most the Margulis constant $\epsilon_2$. From this it derives lower bounds on Weil-Petersson Ricci and scalar curvature: $\operatorname{Ric}_{WP}(\mu)>-4/\operatorname{sys}(X)$ and $\operatorname{Sca}_{WP}(X)>-(4/\operatorname{sys}(X))(3g-3+n)$ for surfaces with short systole. These bounds have the optimal $-1/\operatorname{sys}$ growth as systole tends to zero. Combined with a known estimate on the moduli-space integral of $1/\operatorname{sys}$, the paper concludes that the average total Weil-Petersson scalar curvature over moduli space is uniformly comparable to $-g$ as genus grows.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is a refinement of collar estimates for holomorphic quadratic differentials. Around each short geodesic the lifted differential is split into a Laurent series $\varphi=\varphi_-+\varphi_0+\varphi_+$; the constant term is controlled by the $L^2$ mass of the collar, while the nonconstant parts satisfy maximum-principle bounds with exponential decay in the injectivity radius. The refined statement, Proposition 3.3, yields a function $G(r)$ whose $\sqrt{r}\,G(r)$ stays below about $0.914$ for $r\le\epsilon_2$; together with a known pointwise bound for larger radii this gives Proposition 1.1. A separate orthonormal-frame lemma converts the pointwise bound into a uniform upper bound on $\sum_i |\mu_i(z)|^2$ over an orthonormal basis, and the curvature formula recalled in Section 2, with the positive self-adjoint operator $D=-2(\Delta-2)^{-1}$, turns that sum into the Ricci and scalar curvature inequalities.

What would settle it

Evaluate $m(r)=\min(\sqrt{r}\,G(r),\sqrt{r}\,C(r))$ on the interval $(\log(3)/2,\,\sinh^{-1}(1))$. Proposition 3.3(5) requires the resulting constant to stay at or below $1$ so that $\|\varphi(z)\|\le \|\varphi\|_2/\sqrt{r(z)}$; if any $r$ in that interval gives a value above $1$, or if an explicit quadratic differential attains the larger value, the pointwise bound and hence Theorems 1.3 and 1.7 fail. The proof displays the graph only on $(0,\log(3)/2]$, so a direct computation on the missing interval settles the issue.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the $L^\infty$ norm of a harmonic Beltrami differential is controlled by its $L^2$ (Weil-Petersson) norm through the local injectivity radius, with constants that do not depend on genus or number of punctures. The sharp form is Proposition 1.1: if $\operatorname{sys}(X)\le 2\epsilon_2$, then every $\mu$ satisfies $|\mu(z)|^2\le \|\mu\|_{WP}^2/\operatorname{inj}(z)\le 2\|\mu\|_{WP}^2/\operatorname{sys}(X)$ at all points with $\operatorname{inj}(z)\le\epsilon_2$. The main application is Theorem 1.3: under the same systole assumption, $\operatorname{Ric}_{WP}(\mu)>-4/\operatorname{sys}(X)$ for unit vectors, and $\operatorname{Sca}_{WP}(X)>-(4/\operatorname{sys}(X))(3g-3+n)$. Because this rate matches the known reciprocal-systole curvature blowup near the boundary of moduli space, the bound is optimal in its growth order. The paper also shows Theorem 1.7: the average total Weil-Petersson scalar curvature over moduli space is uniformly comparable to $-g$ as genus goes to infinity.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the pointwise inequality $|\mu(z)|^2\le \|\mu\|_{WP}^2/\operatorname{inj}(z)$ for every point of injectivity radius at most $\epsilon_2$. The written proof of the collar estimate Proposition 3.3(5) is stated only up to a smaller threshold $\log(3)/2$, while Proposition 1.1 uses the same symbol $\epsilon_2$ up to $\sinh^{-1}(1)$; the proof does not explicitly cover the intermediate injectivity radii, so the curvature conclusions rest on a step the text does not fully supply.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The pointwise bound and its constants are independent of $g$ and $n$, so the curvature lower bounds hold uniformly across all finite-area moduli spaces with $3g+n>5$; earlier results of this shape either depended on genus or required the systole to be smaller than a type-dependent constant.
The lower bound $\operatorname{Ric}_{WP}(\mu)>-4/\operatorname{sys}(X)$ has optimal growth: near a short geodesic the holomorphic sectional curvature is known to behave like $-3/(\pi\ell_\alpha)$, so no bound with a slower blowup than $-1/\operatorname{sys}$ is possible.
The scalar bound of order $-(3g-3+n)/\operatorname{sys}(X)$ on the thin part upgrades, through integration, to a two-sided comparability $\int_{\mathcal M_g}\operatorname{Sca}_{WP}\,dX \asymp -g\,\operatorname{Vol}_{WP}(\mathcal M_g)$ as $g\to\infty$.
The short-systole assumption cannot be removed: there exist large-genus surfaces whose injectivity radius grows like $\log g$, and for them uniform negative upper bounds on sectional curvature block the reciprocal-systole lower bound.
A direct corollary is a constant lower bound on sectional curvature when one direction fixes the lengths of all short geodesics: for $\mu\ne 0$ in that perpendicular subspace and any $v$, $K_{WP}(\mu,v)>-4$.

Reading between the lines

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

Editorial inference: the threshold mismatch is likely repairable by applying the known pointwise ball estimate directly on the intermediate interval $[\log(3)/2,\sinh^{-1}(1)]$; if that repair works, the stated theorems stand, but the printed proof needs the extra line to be complete.
Editorial inference: the same Laurent-splitting collar analysis could be adapted to hyperbolic surfaces with geodesic boundary or cone singularities, where collar widths depend on boundary length, giving sup-norm bounds and curvature consequences for the corresponding moduli spaces; the paper does not pursue this.
Editorial inference: the average-curvature result is an average over moduli space with Weil-Petersson measure; it does not say a typical random surface has scalar curvature comparable to $-g$ pointwise, since the thin part may dominate the average. A finer question left open is whether the comparability has a sharp leading constant.
Editorial inference: numerical constants in the proof (for example $3.3394$ in place of $4$ in the Ricci bound) suggest the universal constants are not optimal; a direct optimization of $H(r)$ and the orthonormal-frame bound could produce tighter curvature constants without changing the argument.

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

Read this one. The paper proves uniform-in-topology pointwise bounds for harmonic Beltrami differentials in terms of injectivity radius, and uses them to get the optimal -1/sys lower bounds for WP Ricci and scalar curvature on the thin part, plus the new result that the average total scalar curvature over Mg is comparable to -g. That last item had been open, and the proof is short and clean once you have the curvature bounds.

The main technical work is in Section 3. The authors refine Wolpert's collar analysis with explicit constants, improving both Wolpert's surface-dependent threshold and Teo's non-optimal growth rate. The constants are explicit, the argument is mostly self-contained, and the external references used as inputs (Teo's Lemma 3.1, Tromba/Wolpert curvature formulas, Mirzakhani's volume estimate) are appropriate. The one self-citation, to Wolf-Wu, is used only in remarks to show the thin-part assumption cannot be removed. That is honest.

The soft spots are real but manageable.

- The ε2 notation collision is the most important. The Margulis constant is ε2 = sinh^{-1}(1). But in Section 3.1 the authors redefine ε2 = log(3)/2, a smaller number, and Proposition 3.3 Part (5) proves the bound ||φ(z)|| ≤ ||φ||2/√r(z) only for that smaller threshold. Proposition 1.1 then invokes Part (5) for all inj(z) ≤ ε2 (Margulis). The intermediate range is not covered as written. It is easily covered: Teo's bound plus monotonicity of √r C(r) gives the desired inequality up to the larger constant (√ε2' C(ε2') ≈ 0.809 < 1). But the text does not say this, so the written proof has a genuine threshold gap.

- There is also an internal contradiction about H(r) = G(r)√r. The proof of Part (5) says H is monotonically decreasing; Remark 3.6 says it is monotonically increasing. One of those is a typo, and the actual behavior (increasing from 1/√π) is consistent with the later claim, but as written it is inconsistent.

- A few numerical bounds, such as m(r) ≤ 0.9137 and m'(r) ≤ 1.2333, are justified by plots rather than analytic proofs. That is a defensible choice in a paper like this, but a referee should ask for the verification data or an analytic argument.

- Minor: Lemma 3.8 says C(ε2)=1.0917, which is actually the value at the smaller ε2; the paper refers to a "third named author" though there are two; Remark 4.3's bound looks fine.

None of this undermines the central conclusions. The theorems appear correct, and the main gap is fixed in a few lines. I would send this out for review, with a request to resolve the ε2 conflict and clean up the monotonicity statement. For anyone working on Weil-Petersson geometry, this is a useful paper to have.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proves uniform pointwise bounds on harmonic Beltrami differentials on finite-area hyperbolic surfaces in terms of the Weil-Petersson norm and the injectivity radius, without dependence on genus or number of cusps (Proposition 1.1). It applies these bounds to show that for surfaces with systole at most 2ε2, the Weil-Petersson Ricci curvature is greater than −4/sys(X), the scalar curvature is greater than −(4/sys(X))(3g−3+n), and uniform bounds hold for directions perpendicular to the span of short geodesic length derivatives. The paper then combines the scalar curvature lower bound with Mirzakhani's integral identity to prove that the average total Weil-Petersson scalar curvature over moduli space is comparable to −g as genus grows.

Significance. If the results stand, they advance the quantitative understanding of Weil-Petersson geometry in the thin part of moduli space: the pointwise bound improves Wolpert's asymptotically optimal estimate by making the constant independent of topology, and the curvature lower bounds have the optimal 1/sys(X) growth as the systole tends to zero, complementing Teo's earlier bounds. The application to total scalar curvature, linking an average of curvature to −g, is a clean and notable consequence of the combination with Mirzakhani's theorem. The paper is self-contained and provides explicit constants; however the proof relies on several numeric inequalities justified by inspection of plots rather than analytic proof, and on a threshold-alignment argument that is not written.

major comments (3)

[Sections 3.1–3.3 and Eq. (4.3)] The symbol ε2 is used with two different values: the Margulis constant sinh^{-1}(1) in the Introduction, Proposition 1.1 and Theorem 4.2, and ε2' = log(3)/2 immediately before Proposition 3.3. Proposition 3.3 Part (5) is stated and proved for r(z) ≤ ε2', but Proposition 1.1 invokes Part (5) for all z with inj(z) ≤ ε2 = sinh^{-1}(1). For points with ε2' < inj(z) ≤ ε2, the written proof supplies no bound. The gap is fillable: Lemma 3.1 (Teo) gives ||φ(z)|| ≤ C(r)||φ||_2, and √r C(r) is decreasing with value ≈0.8091 at ε2', so the desired ||φ(z)|| ≤ ||φ||_2/√r holds on the intermediate interval; but as written this argument is absent. The same gap propagates into (3.14) and into the bound (4.3) used in Theorem 4.2. The two constants should be renamed, or the intermediate-range argument inserted.
[Section 3.1, proof of Proposition 3.3 Part (5)] The inequalities 'C(x)√x is monotonically decreasing with C(ε2)√ε2 = .8091', 'H(r) = G(r)√r is monotonically decreasing', and 'm(r) ≤ m0 = .9137 (see figure 1)' are central to the bound (3.13), hence to Proposition 1.1, Corollary 3.5 and Theorem 4.2. As written they are justified by computation or by a plot rather than by a proof. Because these numeric constants are load-bearing, the authors should either give a short analytic argument for the monotonicity and the maximum value, or provide machine-checkable code and precise definitions of the evaluated quantities.
[Section 3.4, Lemma 3.8] The bound m'(r) ≤ 1.2333 'by computation (see figure 2)' is also used to derive the uniform bound ||µ(z)|| ≤ √2 ||µ||_2. This is another load-bearing numerical assertion that rests on visual inspection; it should be backed by an explicit analytic estimate or a verifiable computation.

minor comments (3)

[Section 3.4] The line 'Recall that C(ε2) = 1.0917' is inconsistent with the value C(ε2) = 0.7439 used in Lemma 3.4 and with the numerical value needed for the Margulis constant; this appears to be a holdover from the smaller ε2. Please correct.
[Remark 4.3] The formula '>−−3×3.3394/...' contains a typo; it should read '> −3×3.3394/...'.
[Section 2.2] The phrase 'The third named author in [18]' should be 'the second author' or 'Y. Wu', since the paper has two authors.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circularity in the main derivation: the pointwise and curvature bounds follow from external estimates and explicit curvature formulas, while the only self-citations are non-load-bearing and the epsilon-2 threshold gap is a fillable correctness issue rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

The main derivation is self-contained. Proposition 3.3 and Lemma 3.4 derive pointwise bounds for holomorphic quadratic differentials from Teo's Lemma 3.1, the collar/cusp geometry of hyperbolic surfaces, and explicit Laurent-decomposition estimates; no parameter is fitted and no target inequality is assumed. Proposition 1.1 is then a direct application of these bounds to harmonic Beltrami differentials. The curvature lower bounds in Theorem 4.2 combine the pointwise bound (4.3) with the curvature inequality (2.3), itself quoted from Wolpert and Tromba, and the constants are explicit numerical maxima; there is no fitted input renamed as a prediction. The average scalar-curvature result in Section 5 uses Mirzakhani's independent growth theorem together with Theorem 4.2, so it is not circular. The only self-citations (Wolf-Wu [13], and Wu's own [18]/[19]) occur in remarks on optimality and in background bounds (2.1)/(2.5); none of these is used in the proof of the main theorems, so they are not load-bearing. One written-proof concern should be flagged: Section 3.1 locally redefines epsilon_2 = log(3)/2 = sinh^{-1}(1/sqrt(3)), while Proposition 1.1 uses the Margulis constant epsilon_2 = sinh^{-1}(1); the proof of Proposition 1.1 invokes Proposition 3.3 Part (5) without covering injectivity radii between the two constants. This is a fillable gap via Teo's bound and monotonicity of sqrt(r)*C(r), not a circular reduction. Accordingly the circularity score is 1.

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

The central claims depend only on standard theorems of Teichmuller theory (Tromba-Wolpert curvature formula, Teo's pointwise bound, Gardiner formula, Mirzakhani volume asymptotics) and on explicit universal constants. No constants are fitted to data or chosen ad hoc; the paper computes explicit bounds.

assumptions (7)

standard math Tromba-Wolpert curvature formula (Theorem 2.1): R_{ijkl} = ∫ D(μ_i μ_j)(μ_k μ_l) dA + ∫ D(μ_i μ_l)(μ_k μ_j) dA
Foundation for all curvature computations in Sections 4 and 5.
standard math Teo's pointwise bound (Lemma 3.1): ||φ(z)|| ≤ C(r(z)) ||φ||_2 with C as in (3.1)
Used in the thick part, cusp, and collar estimates, and for the intermediate injectivity radius regime.
standard math Collar Lemma and collar injectivity radius identity sinh(r(z)) = sinh(L/2) cosh(d(z,γ))
Controls the thin part decomposition and the Laurent expansion analysis in Section 3.1.
standard math Gardiner formula for geodesic length derivatives (used in Lemma 3.8): ⟨dL_α, μ⟩ = 0 forces the constant Fourier coefficient a_0 of the lifted differential to vanish
Shows that directions in P(X)^⊥ have no φ^0 component in the collar.
standard math Mirzakhani's theorem (Theorem 5.1): ∫_{M_g} 1/sys(X) dX ≍ Vol_WP(M_g) as g→∞
Converts the thin part integral of 1/sys into the total WP volume in the proof of Theorem 5.2.
standard math Global upper bound of Wolpert and Tromba: Sca_WP(X) ≤ -(3/(4π))(3g-2) for all X ∈ M_g
Provides the upper bound in the comparison of average total scalar curvature.
standard math Wolf-Wu [13] large-systole curvature lower bound used in Remarks 1.5 and 4.6
Self-cited external result showing the thin-part assumption cannot be removed; not an input to the main derivations.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Uniform bounds on harmonic Beltrami differentials and Weil-Petersson curvatures." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YK77NVBV

@misc{pith2026190802535,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Uniform bounds on harmonic Beltrami differentials and Weil-Petersson curvatures},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YK77NVBV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02535}
}

abstract

In this article we show that for every finite area hyperbolic surface $X$ of type $(g,n)$ and any harmonic Beltrami differential $\mu$ on $X$, then the magnitude of $\mu$ at any point of small injectivity radius is uniform bounded from above by the ratio of the Weil-Petersson norm of $\mu$ over the square root of the systole of $X$ up to a uniform positive constant multiplication. We apply the uniform bound above to show that the Weil-Petersson Ricci curvature, restricted at any hyperbolic surface of short systole in the moduli space, is uniformly bounded from below by the negative reciprocal of the systole up to a uniform positive constant multiplication. As an application, we show that the average total Weil-Petersson scalar curvature over the moduli space is uniformly comparable to $-g$ as the genus $g$ goes to infinity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.02535 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Plot of H(r) and √ rC(r) on (0, 2] 3.2. Cusp neighborhoods. We now consider the cusp neighborhoods of X ∈ Mn g . Then each cusp c gives a cover π : ∆∗ → X where ∆∗ = {z | 0 < |z| < 1}. The hyperbolic metric on ∆∗ is ρ(z) = −1/|z| log |z|. By the Collar Lemma (see [3, Chapter 4]), c has a collar Cc which lifts to Ac = {z | 0 < |z| < e−π} with π injective on Ac. Furthermore as Cc is embedded, the injectivity radius f… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Plot of 2F(r) and C(r) on (0, 2] Therefore kφ(z)k 6 √ (3.23) 2 · kφk2 and proving the first inequality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_2.png] view at source ↗

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

The vanishing rate of Weil-Petersson sectional curvatures
math.DG 2019-08 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The Weil-Petersson sectional curvature on moduli space is bounded above by a negative constant times the seventh power of the product of small geodesic lengths, with examples indicating the optimal exponent is three.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

19 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Barrett and J

D. Barrett and J. Diller. Contraction Properties of the Poincar´ e Series Operator. Michigan Math. J. 43(1996), 519–538

work page 1996
[2]

Buser and P

P. Buser and P. Sarnak, On the period matrix of a Riemann surface of large genus, Invent. Math. 117 (1994), no. 1, 27-56. With an appendix by J. H. Conway and N. J. A. Sloane

work page 1994
[3]

Buser, Geometry and spectra of compact Riemann surfaces, Modern Birkh¨ auser Classics

, P. Buser, Geometry and spectra of compact Riemann surfaces, Modern Birkh¨ auser Classics. Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2010

work page 2010
[4]

Huang, Asymptotic ﬂatness of the Weil-Petersson metric on Teichm¨ uller space, Geom

Z. Huang, Asymptotic ﬂatness of the Weil-Petersson metric on Teichm¨ uller space, Geom. Dedicata 110 (2005), 81-102

work page 2005
[5]

Huang, The Weil-Petersson geometry on the thick part of the moduli space of Riemann surfaces, Proc

Z. Huang, The Weil-Petersson geometry on the thick part of the moduli space of Riemann surfaces, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 135:10 (2007), 3309-3316 (electronic)

work page 2007
[6]

Imayoshi and M

Y. Imayoshi and M. Taniguchi, An introduction to Teichm¨ uller spaces, Springer- Verlag, Tokyo, 1992. 279pp

work page 1992
[7]

K. Liu, X. Sun and S. T. Yau, Good Geometry on the Curve Moduli, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 44:2 (2008), 699-724

work page 2008
[8]

Mirzakhani, Growth of Weil-Petersson volumes and random hyperbolic surfaces of large genus

M. Mirzakhani, Growth of Weil-Petersson volumes and random hyperbolic surfaces of large genus. J. Diﬀerential Geom. 94 (2013), 267-300

work page 2013

Show all 19 references

[9]

Schumacher, Harmonic maps of the moduli space of compact Riemann surfaces, Math

G. Schumacher, Harmonic maps of the moduli space of compact Riemann surfaces, Math. Ann. 275:3 (1986) 455-466

1986
[10]

L. P. Teo, The Weil-Petersson geometry of the moduli space of Riemann surfaces, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 137:2 (2009) 541-552. 24 MARTIN BRIDGEMAN AND YUNHUI WU

2009
[11]

A. J. Tromba, On a natural algebraic aﬃne connection on the space of almost complex structures and the curvature of Teichm¨ uller space with respect to its Weil-Petersson metric, Manuscripta Math. 56:4 (1986) 475-497

1986
[12]

Wolf, The Weil-Petersson Hessian of length on Teichm¨ uller space,J

M. Wolf, The Weil-Petersson Hessian of length on Teichm¨ uller space,J. Diﬀerential Geom. 91:1 (2012), 129-169

2012
[13]

Wolf and Y

M. Wolf and Y. Wu, Uniform bounds for Weil-Petersson curvatures, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 117 (2018), no. 5, 10411076

2018
[14]

Wolpert, Chern forms and the Riemann tensor for the moduli space of curves, Invent

S. Wolpert, Chern forms and the Riemann tensor for the moduli space of curves, Invent. Math. 85 (1986:1), 119-145

1986
[15]

Wolpert, Behavior of geodesic-length functions on Teichm¨ uller space,J

S. Wolpert, Behavior of geodesic-length functions on Teichm¨ uller space,J. Diﬀeren- tial Geom. 79:2 (2008), 277-334

2008
[16]

Published for the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC; by the American Mathematical So- ciety, Providence, RI, 2010

S .Wolpert, Families of Riemann surfaces and Weil-Petersson geometry, CBMS Re- gional Conference Series in Mathematics, 113. Published for the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC; by the American Mathematical So- ciety, Providence, RI, 2010. viii+118 pp

2010
[17]

Wolpert, Geodesic-length functions and the Weil-Petersson curvature tensor, J

S. Wolpert, Geodesic-length functions and the Weil-Petersson curvature tensor, J. Diﬀerential Geom. 91:2 (2012), 321–359

2012
[18]

Wu, The Riemannian sectional curvature operator of the Weil-Petersson metric and its application, J

Y. Wu, The Riemannian sectional curvature operator of the Weil-Petersson metric and its application, J. Diﬀerential Geom. 96:3 (2014), 507–530

2014
[19]

Wu, On the Weil-Petersson curvature of the moduli space of Riemann surfaces of large genus, Int

Y. Wu, On the Weil-Petersson curvature of the moduli space of Riemann surfaces of large genus, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2017, no. 4, 1066-1102. (M. B.) Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Ma 02467, USA E-mail address: bridgem@bc.edu (Y. W.) Tsinghua University, Haidian District, B...

2017

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Barrett and J

D. Barrett and J. Diller. Contraction Properties of the Poincar´ e Series Operator. Michigan Math. J. 43(1996), 519–538

work page 1996

[2] [2]

Buser and P

P. Buser and P. Sarnak, On the period matrix of a Riemann surface of large genus, Invent. Math. 117 (1994), no. 1, 27-56. With an appendix by J. H. Conway and N. J. A. Sloane

work page 1994

[3] [3]

Buser, Geometry and spectra of compact Riemann surfaces, Modern Birkh¨ auser Classics

, P. Buser, Geometry and spectra of compact Riemann surfaces, Modern Birkh¨ auser Classics. Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2010

work page 2010

[4] [4]

Huang, Asymptotic ﬂatness of the Weil-Petersson metric on Teichm¨ uller space, Geom

Z. Huang, Asymptotic ﬂatness of the Weil-Petersson metric on Teichm¨ uller space, Geom. Dedicata 110 (2005), 81-102

work page 2005

[5] [5]

Huang, The Weil-Petersson geometry on the thick part of the moduli space of Riemann surfaces, Proc

Z. Huang, The Weil-Petersson geometry on the thick part of the moduli space of Riemann surfaces, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 135:10 (2007), 3309-3316 (electronic)

work page 2007

[6] [6]

Imayoshi and M

Y. Imayoshi and M. Taniguchi, An introduction to Teichm¨ uller spaces, Springer- Verlag, Tokyo, 1992. 279pp

work page 1992

[7] [7]

K. Liu, X. Sun and S. T. Yau, Good Geometry on the Curve Moduli, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 44:2 (2008), 699-724

work page 2008

[8] [8]

Mirzakhani, Growth of Weil-Petersson volumes and random hyperbolic surfaces of large genus

M. Mirzakhani, Growth of Weil-Petersson volumes and random hyperbolic surfaces of large genus. J. Diﬀerential Geom. 94 (2013), 267-300

work page 2013