Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Rigidity results for free boundary hypersurfaces in initial data sets with boundary

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two rigidity theorems: near a free boundary hypersurface, the geometry is forced into a warped or Einstein product splitting.

desk verdict Two credible free-boundary extensions of known rigidity theorems; Theorem B's equality case leans on omitted proofs, but the conditional verdict is fair. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.09433 v1 pith:YM4WSHKR submitted 2025-02-13 math.DG gr-qc

Deivid de Almeida , Abraão Mendes This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.DGgr-qc MSC 53C2153C4253C80
keywords freeboundaryhypersurfacesmarginallyoutertrappedsurfacesinitialdatasetsrigiditytheoremssplittingYamabeinvariantdominantenergyconditionscalarcurvature
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 two rigidity theorems for compact free boundary hypersurfaces, submanifolds that meet the ambient boundary orthogonally, in Riemannian manifolds and initial data sets with boundary. The first extends a known splitting result: under a scalar curvature lower bound, a mean curvature bound on $\Sigma$, no positive-scalar-curvature metric with minimal boundary, and a weak outermost condition, an outer neighborhood must be the warped product $[0,\delta)\times\Sigma$ with metric $dt^2+e^{2\epsilon t}h$, where $h$ is Ricci-flat and the boundary is totally geodesic. The second gives a sharp volume lower bound for stable, weakly outermost free boundary MOTS, marginally outer trapped surfaces, of dimension $n\ge3$ with negative Yamabe invariant, under the dominant energy condition, the boundary dominant energy condition, and $n$-convexity of $K$. Equality forces the neighborhood to be a product $dt^2+h$ with an Einstein slice of scalar curvature $-2c$ and totally geodesic boundary, together with $K=a(t)\,dt^2$, $\mu=-c$, $J=0$, and saturated boundary energy. The upshot is that boundary conditions do not weaken the rigidity familiar from closed horizons and minimal hypersurfaces; sharp splitting and volume comparisons persist in the free boundary setting.

What carries the argument

The machinery centers on free boundary MOTS and their stability operator. For a two-sided free boundary hypersurface with null mean curvature $\theta_+$, the first variation under a normal deformation $\varphi N$ is $\partial_t\theta_+=L\varphi+(-\tfrac12\theta_+^2+\theta_+\tau)\varphi$, where $L$ is the stability operator with a Robin boundary condition coming from the free boundary condition. Lemma 2.1, imported from the second author's earlier work, is the engine that converts a positive solution of $Lu\ge0$ with boundary inequality into Ricci-flatness and a totally geodesic boundary. Lemma 3.1 produces a nearby free boundary hypersurface with strictly negative null mean curvature by a free boundary null mean curvature flow, which is what upgrades 'weakly outermost' to an actual MOTS condition. Proposition 4.1 feeds the stability inequality into the Yamabe invariant $\sigma_{1,0}(\Sigma,\partial\Sigma)$, and Lemma 4.4, also imported, supplies the foliation by constant-null-mean-curvature leaves that carries the equality case of Theorem B.

What would settle it

One concrete way to disprove Theorem B would be to construct an explicit initial data set with boundary containing a free-boundary stable MOTS that satisfies all hypotheses and has volume below $(|\sigma_{1,0}(\Sigma,\partial\Sigma)|/(2c))^{n/2}$; even a numerical example would settle the sharpness of the bound. A second test is to run the free boundary null mean curvature flow (3.1) for $\epsilon=1$ on a nontrivial compact free-boundary hypersurface and check whether the asserted short-time existence and $\theta_+<0$ conclusion persist.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claims are Theorem A and Theorem B. Theorem A states that if $(M,g)$ is a Riemannian manifold with boundary, $\Sigma$ is a compact free boundary hypersurface, $R_M\ge-n(n+1)\epsilon$, $H_{\partial M}\ge0$, $H_\Sigma\le n\epsilon$, $\Sigma$ admits no metric of positive scalar curvature with minimal boundary, and $\Sigma$ is locally weakly outermost with respect to $H_0=n\epsilon$, then an outer neighborhood of $\Sigma$ is isometric to $[0,\delta)\times\Sigma$ with metric $dt^2+e^{2\epsilon t}h$, where $h=g|_\Sigma$ is Ricci-flat with totally geodesic boundary. Theorem B states that for $n\ge3$, a compact free boundary stable, weakly outermost MOTS with $\sigma_{1,0}(\Sigma,\partial\Sigma)<0$ in an initial data set with boundary, satisfying $\mu-|J|\ge-c$, the boundary dominant energy condition, and $n$-convexity of $K$ on the outer region $M_+$, has $\operatorname{vol}(\Sigma)\ge(|\sigma_{1,0}|/(2c))^{n/2}$; equality forces the existence of an outer neighborhood with product metric $dt^2+h$, $\Sigma$ Einstein with scalar curvature $-2c$ and totally geodesic boundary, $K=a(t)\,dt^2$, $\mu=-c$, $J=0$, and the boundary dominant energy condition saturated along $V\cap\partial M$. The authors also prove Proposition 4.1, which supplies these volume estimates at the level of stable MOTS before the outermost assumption is used.

Load-bearing premise

The proof depends on an imported, unproved lemma saying that near the surface one can slice space into free-boundary layers each with the same constant null expansion; if that slicing, or the short-time existence of the auxiliary flow used for case $\epsilon=1$, fails, the equality conclusions are unsupported.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Corollary 3.2 makes the rigidity global on the outer end: if $(M,g)$ is complete, $(M_+,g|_{M_+})$ is isometric to $([0,\infty)\times\Sigma, dt^2+e^{2\epsilon t}h)$.
  • The examples of Section 3 show that omitting condition (3) of Theorem A destroys the conclusion for $\epsilon=0$ and $\epsilon=1$, and omitting condition (4) destroys it for $\epsilon=1$.
  • Theorem B yields a sharp volume bound for free-boundary apparent horizons: stable, weakly outermost MOTS cannot be arbitrarily small when the energy density dominates the current and $K$ is $n$-convex.
  • In the equality case of Theorem B the initial data is rigid in an outer neighborhood: the metric is a product with an Einstein slice, the extrinsic curvature is purely radial, and all energy inequalities are saturated.
  • Proposition 4.1 also proves an analogous boundary volume estimate: under $\mu+J(N)\ge0$ and a boundary energy gap $\bar c$, one gets $\operatorname{vol}(\partial\Sigma)\ge(|\sigma_{0,1}(\Sigma,\partial\Sigma)|/(2\bar c))^{(n-1)}$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural next test, not undertaken here, is whether Proposition 4.1(2) admits the same equality rigidity as Theorem B; one would expect a product splitting with $\Sigma$ having a boundary of constant mean curvature and the boundary energy condition saturated.
  • The theorem suggests a free-boundary version of Penrose-type inequalities: for initial data satisfying dominant energy, the area of a free-boundary apparent horizon should be controlled by the boundary contribution, with equality only in the rigid, time-symmetric, radial-$K$ configuration described by Theorem B.
  • The unproved imported foliation in Lemma 4.4 is the point most worth checking; if the constant-null-mean-curvature foliation or the simplicity of the zero eigenvalue fails for some initial data, the equality conclusion of Theorem B may still hold but requires a different argument.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper establishes two rigidity theorems for compact free boundary hypersurfaces in initial data sets with boundary. Theorem A extends the Galloway--Jang scalar-curvature splitting theorem to the free boundary setting: under R_M ≥ -n(n+1)ε, H_∂M ≥ 0, H_Σ ≤ nε, a topological non-existence condition, and local weak outerness with respect to H_0 = nε, a neighborhood of Σ is isometric to a warped product [0,δ) × Σ with metric dt² + e^{2εt}h, where (Σ,h) is Ricci-flat with totally geodesic boundary. Theorem B extends the Barros--Cruz/Mendes volume estimate to free boundary stable MOTS: for n ≥ 3, if Σ is a compact free boundary stable, weakly outermost MOTS with σ_{1,0}(Σ,∂Σ) < 0, and μ - |J| ≥ -c, the boundary dominant energy condition, and n-convexity of K hold on M_+, then vol(Σ) ≥ (|σ_{1,0}|/(2c))^{n/2}; equality forces a product neighborhood dt² + h, an Einstein slice with scalar curvature -2c and totally geodesic boundary, K = a(t)dt², μ = -c, J = 0, and saturation of the boundary dominant energy condition. The proofs adapt the Galloway--Jang method for Theorem A and the Mendes method for Theorem B, with auxiliary propositions giving volume estimates and infinitesimal rigidity.

Significance. If the technical lemmas are supplied or properly verified, the results are significant and natural extensions of known rigidity statements to the free boundary and MOTS settings. The DEC/BDEC verification for K = -εg, the stability argument via the first eigenvalue, the volume estimate in Proposition 4.1, and the equality analysis in Proposition 4.2 are coherent and contain no evident algebraic error. The paper also provides concrete examples showing the necessity of some hypotheses. However, the equality case of Theorem B depends on two substantial lemmas whose proofs are omitted, and Theorem A depends on a short-time existence assertion that is not proved. These are verification gaps rather than demonstrated contradictions, but they are load-bearing and should be addressed before publication.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4, Lemmas 4.3 and 4.4] The equality case of Theorem B rests on Lemma 4.4, which asserts the existence of a neighborhood foliation by free boundary hypersurfaces Σ_t with constant null mean curvature θ_+(t), metric g = φ²dt² + h_t, and boundary condition ∂φ/∂ν_t = II_∂M(N_t,N_t)φ. Its proof is omitted as 'entirely analogous' to Lemma 3.6 of [32], and Lemma 4.3, the simplicity of λ = 0 for L and L* with the Robin boundary conditions B and B*, is likewise deferred. These lemmas are not cosmetic: the subsequent argument defines f = θ_+, η, ρ, and ξ from this foliation, applies Lemma 2.9, and uses weak outerness to conclude θ_+ ≡ 0. Without a constant-θ_+ foliation, the equality case has no neighborhood in which to run the analysis, so conclusions (1)--(4) of Theorem B do not follow. Since the present hypotheses only give μ - |J| ≥ -c rather than the full DEC used in parts of [32], the authors should either include complete proofs or formulate and verify a precise theorem from [32] that applies verbatim.
  2. [Section 3, Lemma 3.1, Eq. (3.1)] Short-time existence of the free boundary null mean curvature flow (3.1) for ε = 1 is asserted without proof. For ε = 0 the flow is exactly Stahl's free boundary mean curvature flow, but for ε = 1 the equation includes an additional normal lower-order term, so it is not literally covered by the cited result. This existence statement is needed to produce the strict inequality H_Σ' < nε that rules out H_Σ ≢ nε in Theorem A. Please provide a proof or a precise reference covering the ε = 1 case.
  3. [Section 4, proof of Theorem B, application of Lemma 2.9] The application of Lemma 2.9 requires the condition max{f,ρ} ≥ 0. The paper does not verify this condition explicitly. It presumably follows from ρ ≥ 0, which in turn follows from τ = tr K ≥ 0 under the n-convexity assumption on K, but this should be stated. This is a local but necessary check in the chain leading to θ_+ ≤ 0.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3, proof of Theorem A] Theorem 2.3 is stated for a weakly outermost MOTS, whereas Theorem A only assumes local weak outerness. The proof implicitly restricts to a sufficiently small neighborhood U where Σ is weakly outermost and then applies Theorem 2.3 to U. This reduction should be made explicit.
  2. [Section 2.2, definition of weak outerness with respect to H_0] The definition of 'locally weakly outermost with respect to H_0' is introduced only after Lemma 3.1, although it is used in the statement of Theorem A. Moving this definition to Section 2.1 or to the introduction would improve readability.
  3. [Section 4, Eq. (4.10) and Eq. (4.11)] The notation for the Yamabe quotient Q^{1,0}_h and the normalization by (∫ u^{2n/(n-2)}dv)^{(n-2)/n} is used heavily but could be defined more explicitly at the point of first use in Proposition 4.1 to avoid confusion with the normalized functional of Section 2.2.
  4. [Examples 3.4 and 3.5] In Example 3.4 the notation S^n_+ and h_{S^n_+} should be defined, and in Example 3.5 the role of the interval [a,b] × T^{n-1} in satisfying all hypotheses except condition (4) deserves a few more words.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the equality-case foliation is deferred to [32] (self-citation), but the cited lemmas are prior published results and the volume and warped-product steps are proved in the paper.

full rationale

Setting K = -εg makes θ+ = HΣ - nε, so the free-boundary MOTS condition is exactly the paper's mean-curvature bound. Claim 1 uses Lemma 3.1 to force HΣ ≡ nε, and Claim 2 proves stability directly from λ1(L) ≥ 0; neither assumes the desired splitting. The splitting itself is obtained by applying Theorem 2.3 (Mendes 2022), a published prior result, and the paper then proves, rather than assumes, that the lapse φ is constant (Claim 3 via Lemma 2.1) and that A_t = εh_t, yielding g = dt² + e^{2εt}h. The volume inequality in Theorem B is proved in Proposition 4.1 from stability and the Escobar/Cruz-Santos Yamabe facts; the equality case is self-contained through Proposition 4.2. The only load-bearing deferred items are Lemma 4.3 (simplicity of λ = 0) and Lemma 4.4 (constant-θ+ foliation), both stated as 'entirely analogous' to Lemmas 3.5 and 3.6 of [32], and Lemma 3.1's short-time existence for ε = 1, also stated as 'entirely analogous.' These are verification gaps in the present text, but they are citations to prior published theorems with hypotheses that do not include the conclusions of Theorem A or B, so they do not reduce the derivation to its own inputs. No fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and the examples are compatibility checks rather than smuggled conclusions.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper contributes no new physical entities and fits no parameters to data. Its claims rest on established but partly imported results in MOTS theory, parabolic PDE, and the boundary Yamabe problem; the least externally supported input is the unproved short-time existence for ε = 1 and the omitted proof of the foliation lemma.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Theorem 2.3 (Mendes 2022): splitting and rigidity foliation for compact free boundary stable weakly outermost MOTS under DEC and BDEC
    Invoked in proof of Theorem A as the black box that produces the neighborhood foliation with Ricci-flat leaves and saturated DEC/BDEC; proof not reproduced in this paper.
  • domain assumption Lemma 4.3 and Lemma 4.4 (Mendes 2022): simplicity of the zero eigenvalue of L and existence of a foliation by constant-θ+ free boundary hypersurfaces
    Both are stated without proof in Section 4; they are load-bearing for the equality case of Theorem B.
  • ad hoc to paper Short-time existence of the free boundary null mean curvature flow (3.1) for ε = 1
    Used in Lemma 3.1 to deform Σ into a hypersurface with θ+ < 0; for ε = 1 no reference is given and the proof is described only as entirely analogous.
  • standard math Maximum principle for parabolic equations with Robin boundary conditions (Theorem 2.4)
    Used in Lemma 3.1 to show positivity of u = -e^{-t}θ+; quoted from Stahl's theory of free boundary mean curvature flow.
  • standard math Resolution of the Yamabe problem with boundary, Escobar uniqueness (Theorem 2.7), and Cruz-Santos Proposition 2.8
    Used in Theorem B to select a unique Yamabe metric with scalar curvature -2c and minimal boundary, and to conclude that equality forces an Einstein metric with totally geodesic boundary.
  • standard math Stability operator formula (2.1) and eigenvalue characterization (Lemma 2.2)
    Used throughout; the formula for the variation of null mean curvature is from Andersson-Mars-Simon, and the nonnegativity of the first eigenvalue of L0 is from the second author's [32].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Rigidity results for free boundary hypersurfaces in initial data sets with boundary." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YM4WSHKR

@misc{pith2026250209433,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Rigidity results for free boundary hypersurfaces in initial data sets with boundary},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YM4WSHKR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.09433}
}
read the original abstract

In this work, we present several rigidity results for compact free boundary hypersurfaces in initial data sets with boundary. Specifically, in the first part of the paper, we extend the local splitting theorems from [G. J. Galloway and H. C. Jang, Some scalar curvature warped product splitting theorems, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 148 (2020), no. 6, 2617-2629] to the setting of manifolds with boundary. To achieve this, we build on the approach of the original paper, utilizing results on free boundary marginally outer trapped surfaces (MOTS) applied to specific initial data sets. In the second part, we extend the main results from [A. Barros and C. Cruz, Free boundary hypersurfaces with non-positive Yamabe invariant in mean convex manifolds, J. Geom. Anal. 30 (2020), no. 4, 3542-3562] to the context of free boundary MOTS in initial data sets with boundary.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Marginally outer trap surface with capillary boundary and rigidity of initial data sets

    math.DG 2025-07 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    For stable MOTS with capillary boundary, equality in the area estimate forces the contact angle to 90 degrees and the ambient initial data set to split as a product, under stated energy assumptions.

  2. Area-charge inequality and local rigidity in charged initial data sets

    math.DG 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Equality in the area-charge inequality forces a spherical horizon to have a locally product geometry with constant normal electric and magnetic fields.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [32]

    A, Theory Methods 220 (2022), 15 (English), Id/No 112841

    , Rigidity of free boundary MOTS , Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl., Ser. A, Theory Methods 220 (2022), 15 (English), Id/No 112841

    work page 2022

  2. [1]

    Alaee, M

    A. Alaee, M. Lesourd, and S.-T. Yau, Stable surfaces and free boundary marginally outer trapped surfaces, Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 60 (2021), no. 5, 27 (English), Id/No 186

    work page 2021

  3. [2]

    Almaraz, L

    S. Almaraz, L. L. de Lima, and L. Mari, Spacetime positive mass theorems for initial data sets with non-compact boundary, Int. Math. Res. Not. 2021 (2021), no. 4, 2783–2841 (English)

    work page 2021

  4. [3]

    L. C. Ambrozio, Rigidity of area-minimizing free boundary surfaces in mean convex three-manifolds, J. Geom. Anal. 25 (2015), no. 2, 1001–1017 (English)

    work page 2015

  5. [4]

    Anderson, Canonical metrics on 3-manifolds and 4-manifolds , Asian J

    Michael T. Anderson, Canonical metrics on 3-manifolds and 4-manifolds , Asian J. Math. 10 (2006), no. 1, 127–164 (English)

    work page 2006

  6. [5]

    Andersson, M

    L. Andersson, M. Mars, and W. Simon, Stability of marginally outer trapped surfaces and existen ce of marginally outer trapped tubes , Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 12 (2008), no. 4, 853–888 (English)

    work page 2008

  7. [6]

    Andersson and J

    L. Andersson and J. Metzger, The area of horizons and the trapped region , Commun. Math. Phys. 290 (2009), no. 3, 941–972 (English)

    work page 2009

  8. [7]

    Aubin, Equations diff´ erentielles non lin´ eaires et probl` eme de Yamabe concernant la courbure scalaire , J

    T. Aubin, Equations diff´ erentielles non lin´ eaires et probl` eme de Yamabe concernant la courbure scalaire , J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 55 (1976), 269–296 (French)

    work page 1976

Show all 42 references
  1. [8]

    Barros and C

    A. Barros and C. Cruz, Free boundary hypersurfaces with non-positive Yamabe inva riant in mean convex manifolds, J. Geom. Anal. 30 (2020), no. 4, 3542–3562 (English)

    2020

  2. [9]

    Barros, C

    A. Barros, C. Cruz, R. Batista, and P. Sousa, Rigidity in dimension four of area-minimising Einstein manifolds, Math. Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 158 (2015), no. 2, 355–363 (English)

    2015

  3. [10]

    H. Bray, S. Brendle, and A. Neves, Rigidity of area-minimizing two-spheres in three-manifol ds, Commun. Anal. Geom. 18 (2010), no. 4, 821–830 (English)

    2010

  4. [11]

    Brendle and S

    S. Brendle and S. S. Chen, An existence theorem for the Yamabe problem on manifolds wit h boundary, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 16 (2014), no. 5, 991–1016 (English)

    2014

  5. [12]

    Cai, Volume minimizing hypersurfaces in manifolds of nonnegati ve scalar curvature, Minimal surfaces, geometric analysis and symplectic geometry

    M. Cai, Volume minimizing hypersurfaces in manifolds of nonnegati ve scalar curvature, Minimal surfaces, geometric analysis and symplectic geometry. Based on the le ctures of the workshop and conference, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA, March 16–21, 1999, Tokyo: M...

    1999

  6. [13]

    Cai and G

    M. Cai and G. J. Galloway, Rigidity of area minimizing tori in 3-manifolds of nonnegat ive scalar curvature, Commun. Anal. Geom. 8 (2000), no. 3, 565–573 (English)

    2000

  7. [14]

    Vitor Cardoso, ´Oscar J. C. Dias, and Jos´ e P. S. Lemos,Nariai, bertotti-robinson, and anti-nariai solutions in higher dimensions , Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004), 024002

    2004

  8. [15]

    S. S. Chen, Conformal deformation to scalar flat metrics with constant m ean curvature on the boundary in higher dimensions , 2010

    2010

  9. [16]

    Cruz and A

    T. Cruz and A. S. Santos, Critical metrics and curvature of metrics with unit volume o r unit area of the boundary, J. Geom. Anal. 33 (2023), no. 1, 34 (English), Id/No 22

    2023

  10. [17]

    de Moura Almaraz, An existence theorem of conformal scalar-flat metrics on man ifolds with boundary , Pac

    S. de Moura Almaraz, An existence theorem of conformal scalar-flat metrics on man ifolds with boundary , Pac. J. Math. 248 (2010), no. 1, 1–22 (English)

    2010

  11. [18]

    Deng, A Bray-Brendle-Neves type inequality for a Riemannian mani fold, Acta Math

    H. Deng, A Bray-Brendle-Neves type inequality for a Riemannian mani fold, Acta Math. Sci., Ser. B, Engl. Ed. 41 (2021), no. 2, 487–492 (English). RIGIDITY RESULTS FOR FREE BOUNDARY HYPERSURF ACES 32

    2021

  12. [19]

    Ecker and G

    K. Ecker and G. Huisken, Interior estimates for hypersurfaces moving by mean curvat ure, Invent. Math. 105 (1991), no. 3, 547–569 (English)

    1991

  13. [20]

    J. F. Escobar, Conformal deformation of a Riemannian metric to a scalar flat metric with constant mean curvature on the boundary , Ann. Math. (2) 136 (1992), no. 1, 1–50 (English)

    1992

  14. [21]

    , The Yamabe problem on manifolds with boundary , J. Differ. Geom. 35 (1992), no. 1, 21–84 (English)

    1992

  15. [22]

    , Uniqueness and non-uniqueness of metrics with prescribed s calar and mean curvature on compact manifolds with boundary. , J. Funct. Anal. 202 (2003), no. 2, 424–442 (English)

    2003

  16. [23]

    Fischer-Colbrie and R

    D. Fischer-Colbrie and R. Schoen, The structure of complete stable minimal surfaces in 3-mani folds of non- negative scalar curvature , Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 33 (1980), 199–211 (English)

    1980

  17. [24]

    G. J. Galloway, Stability and rigidity of extremal surfaces in Riemannian g eometry and general relativity , Surveys in geometric analysis and relativity. Dedicated to Richard Schoen in honor of his 60th birthday, Somerville, MA: International Press; Beijing: Higher Educ ation...

    2011

  18. [25]

    G. J. Galloway and H. C. Jang, Some scalar curvature warped product splitting theorems , Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 148 (2020), no. 6, 2617–2629 (English)

    2020

  19. [26]

    G. J. Galloway and A. Mendes, Aspects of the geometry and topology of expanding horizons , Proc. Am. Math. Soc., to appear

  20. [27]

    G. J. Galloway and R. Schoen, A generalization of Hawking’s black hole topology theorem t o higher dimensions, Commun. Math. Phys. 266 (2006), no. 2, 571–576 (English)

    2006

  21. [28]

    F. C. Marques, Existence results for the Yamabe problem on manifolds with b oundary, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 54 (2005), no. 6, 1599–1620 (English)

    2005

  22. [29]

    , Conformal deformations to scalar-flat metrics with constan t mean curvature on the boundary , Commun. Anal. Geom. 15 (2007), no. 2, 381–405 (English)

    2007

  23. [30]

    Mendes, Rigidity of marginally outer trapped (hyper)surfaces with negative σ-constant, Trans

    A. Mendes, Rigidity of marginally outer trapped (hyper)surfaces with negative σ-constant, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 372 (2019), no. 8, 5851–5868 (English)

    2019

  24. [31]

    , Rigidity of volume-minimising hypersurfaces in Riemannia n 5-manifolds , Math. Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 167 (2019), no. 2, 345–353 (English)

    2019

  25. [33]

    Micallef and V

    M. Micallef and V. Moraru, Splitting of 3-manifolds and rigidity of area-minimising s urfaces, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 143 (2015), no. 7, 2865–2872 (English)

    2015

  26. [34]

    Moraru, On area comparison and rigidity involving the scalar curvat ure, J

    V. Moraru, On area comparison and rigidity involving the scalar curvat ure, J. Geom. Anal. 26 (2016), no. 1, 294–312 (English)

    2016

  27. [35]

    Nunes, Rigidity of area-minimizing hyperbolic surfaces in three- manifolds, J

    I. Nunes, Rigidity of area-minimizing hyperbolic surfaces in three- manifolds, J. Geom. Anal. 23 (2013), no. 3, 1290–1302 (English)

    2013

  28. [36]

    L. F. Pessoa, E. V´ eras, and B. Vieira, Area estimates for capillary cmc hypersurfaces with non-po sitive Yamabe invariant, to appear

  29. [37]

    Schoen, Conformal deformation of a Riemannian metric to constant sc alar curvature, J

    R. Schoen, Conformal deformation of a Riemannian metric to constant sc alar curvature, J. Differ. Geom. 20 (1984), 479–495 (English)

    1984

  30. [38]

    Schoen and S.-T

    R. Schoen and S.-T. Yau, Existence of incompressible minimal surfaces and the topol ogy of three dimensional manifolds with non-negative scalar curvature , Ann. Math. (2) 110 (1979), 127–142 (English)

    1979

  31. [39]

    Symp., Madison/Wis

    , The structure of manifolds with positive scalar curvature , Directions in partial differential equations, Proc. Symp., Madison/Wis. 1985, Publ. Math. Res . Cent. Univ. Wis. Madison 54, 235-242 (1987)., 1987. RIGIDITY RESULTS FOR FREE BOUNDARY HYPERSURF ACES 33

    1987

  32. [40]

    Stahl, Regularity estimates for solutions to the mean curvature flo w with a Neumann boundary condition, Calc

    A. Stahl, Regularity estimates for solutions to the mean curvature flo w with a Neumann boundary condition, Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 4 (1996), no. 4, 385–407 (English)

    1996

  33. [41]

    N. S. Trudinger, Remarks concerning the conformal deformation of Riemannia n structures on compact manifolds, Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa, Sci. Fis. Mat., III. Ser. 22 (1968), 265–274 (English)

    1968

  34. [42]

    Yamabe, On a deformation of Riemannian structures on compact manifo lds, Osaka Math

    H. Yamabe, On a deformation of Riemannian structures on compact manifo lds, Osaka Math. J. 12 (1960), 21–37 (English). Instituto Federal de Educac ¸˜ao, Ci ˆencia e Tecnologia do Cear ´a, Crate ´us, CE, Brazil. Email address : deivid.almeida@ifce.edu.br Instituto de Matem ´ati...

    1960

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.