Bounds of Scalar curvature, S-curvature and distortion on $\infty$-Einstein Finsler manifolds

Bin Shen

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 23 references

Bounds of Scalar curvature, S-curvature and distortion on $\infty$-Einstein Finsler manifolds

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read On complete ∞-Einstein Finsler manifolds, scalar-curvature growth forces two-sided quadratic bounds on distortion and S-curvature, and hence finite topological types.

desk verdict Real new ideas in Finslerian scalar curvature, but Theorem 1.2's proof requires K1 ≤ γ/(n+1), not K1 ≤ (n+1)γ, so the central estimate is currently unsupported. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.01970 v3 pith:PHDVFAFD submitted 2024-12-22 math.DG

Bin Shen This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.DG MSC 53C6058J6053C23

keywords EinsteinFinslermetricscalarcurvatureS-curvaturedistortiongradientRiccisolitonestimatemeasurespacestopologicalfiniteness

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 works in Finsler metric measure spaces, where a Finsler metric does not determine a canonical volume form, and the distortion $\tau$ together with its geodesic derivative, the S-curvature $S$, records how the chosen measure deviates from the metric. It aims to show that curvature controls these measure-theoretic quantities: on a forward complete $\infty$-Einstein Finsler manifold with a pole and bounded Ricci curvature, $S$ and $\tau$ grow at least linearly and quadratically in the distance from the pole. It then introduces a symmetrized scalar curvature $R=g^{ij}R^{k}_{ikj}$ and derives that on an asymmetric essential gradient Ricci soliton normalized to $\sigma=\tfrac12$, a linear lower bound $R\ge \gamma d(p,x)-\alpha$ together with a non-Riemannian curvature bound forces two-sided quadratic bounds on $\tau$ and $R$ and a linear bound on $|S|$. If these estimates hold, standard critical-point arguments give finite topological types, a step toward the conjecture that scalar-curvature lower bounds constrain topology in the Finsler setting.

What carries the argument

The central object is Lemma 5.1, an identity relating scalar curvature, distortion, and non-Riemannian curvature. Along a geodesic it reads $\tfrac12(R+F_y^2(\nabla\tau)-\tau)|_0-\tau|_i C^{t}_{is}R^{s}_{t}=(C^{t}_{il}L^{li}_{s}-C^{t|i}_{is})R^{s}_{t}$, obtained by contracting the second Bianchi identity and inserting the essential soliton equation $\bar R_{ij}+\tau_{|i|j}=\tfrac12 g_{ij}$. The right-hand side is controlled by the assumed non-Riemannian bound, so the quantity $R+F_y^2(\nabla\tau)-\tau$ has controlled derivative along a forward ray; combined with $R\ge\gamma d-\alpha$ this yields a Lipschitz bound on $\sqrt{\tau+\alpha+\beta}$ whose integration produces the quadratic estimates. Theorem 1.1 instead uses the second variation of arc length to bound the integral of Ricci curvature along a ray, then integrates the $\infty$-Einstein equation $\dot S=\sigma-\mathrm{Ric}$.

What would settle it

Take a non-Berwald Finsler metric with a pole and a chosen volume form, and compute along unit-speed forward geodesic rays the ratio $K_0/F$, where $K_0=(C^{t}_{il}L^{li}_{s}-C^{t|i}_{is})R^{s}_{t}$. If some ray satisfies $R\ge\gamma d(p,x)-\alpha$ but has $K_0>\tfrac12\gamma F$ at a point, the non-Riemannian hypothesis used in the proof is violated; exhibiting such a ray would falsify the claim that the stated hypotheses imply the two-sided distortion bounds.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.2: on a forward complete asymmetric essential Finsler gradient Ricci soliton with a pole $p$, normalized factor $\sigma=\tfrac12$, scalar curvature at least linear in the forward distance, $R\ge \gamma d(p,x)-\alpha$, and non-Riemannian curvature bounded by $|(C^{t}_{il}L^{li}_{s}-C^{t|i}_{is})R^{s}_{t}|\le \tfrac{n+1}{2}K_{1}F$ with $K_{1}\le(n+1)\gamma$, the distortion, S-curvature and scalar curvature satisfy the bounds $\tfrac14[d(p,x)-C_2]^2-\alpha-\beta\le \tau(x,y)\le \tfrac14[d(p,x)+C_1]^2-\alpha-\beta-\gamma$, $|S(x,y)|\le(\tfrac12 d(p,x)+C_1)F$, and $\tfrac14[d(p,x)+C_3]^2-\alpha\le R\le \tfrac14[d(p,x)+C_1]^2-\alpha$. The companion Theorem 1.1 gives linear and quadratic lower bounds for $S$ and $\tau$ under the simpler hypothesis of bounded Ricci curvature and $\sigma\ge\tfrac12$. Together these results are intended to show that on this special class of Finsler metric measure spaces, scalar-curvature lower bounds control both the measure-theoretic quantities and the topology, with the distance function having no critical points outside a controlled region.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the non-Riemannian term $K_0=(C^{t}_{il}L^{li}_{s}-C^{t|i}_{is})R^{s}_{t}$ is bounded by $\tfrac12\gamma F$ along every forward ray from the pole, which is stronger than the theorem's stated $K_1\le(n+1)\gamma$ and is what the integration argument actually uses, and that the bounds extend from one ray to every direction at the endpoint; if either fails, the two-sided estimates for $\tau$, $S$, and $R$ do not follow from the proof.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Theorem 1.1 gives $S(x,y)\ge \tfrac12(d(p,x)-K_0)$ and $\tau(x,y)\ge \tfrac14(d(p,x)-K_0)^2-K'_0$ on every forward complete $\infty$-Einstein Finsler manifold with a pole, $\sigma\ge\tfrac12$, and $|\mathrm{Ric}|\le cF^2$.
Theorem 1.2 traps the distortion and the scalar curvature between two quadratics in $d(p,x)$ and bounds $|S|$ linearly, with constants depending only on $n$, $\gamma$, the Finsler metric, and the measure on the unit tangent sphere at the pole.
Because the distance function has no critical points outside a controlled region once these bounds hold, Corollary 1.3 yields finite topological types in both the bounded-Ricci and the scalar-curvature soliton cases.
On a Berwald essential soliton with the Busemann-Hausdorff volume form, the new scalar curvature is constant along geodesics and bounded on each indicatrix.
For metrics with isotropic S-curvature $S=(n+1)c(x)F$, the same hypotheses force a logarithmic growth estimate for $c(x)$ along geodesics.

Reading between the lines

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

The same Bianchi-contraction and ray-integration scheme should adapt to the general $(a,b)$-weighted Einstein metrics, with the weighted coefficient $\theta$ entering the linear-growth constant and interpolating between Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.2.
On Landsberg or Berwald limits the non-Riemannian term vanishes, so the linear growth lower bound on $R$ may be relaxable to a constant lower bound; checking whether the quadratic distortion bounds survive would separate the role of the $K_1$ term.
Because the estimates are directional, taking a $y$-average of the scalar curvature with respect to the chosen measure may yield measure-dependent scalar bounds, drawing the Finsler picture closer to the Riemannian scalar-curvature setting.
The constants' dependence on the volume form suggests that changing the measure shifts the distortion bounds by an additive constant while leaving the quadratic coefficient $\tfrac14$ intact, a comparison that can be tested on explicit Finsler metrics.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things to know. First, this paper has a genuinely new idea: defining asymmetric and essential ∞-Einstein Finsler metrics and a scalar curvature R = g^{ij}R^k_{ikj}, then asking how a scalar curvature lower bound controls distortion and S-curvature. That is a reasonable extension of the Perelman/Cao–Zhou estimates into Finsler geometry, and the key formula in Lemma 5.1 is derived cleanly. Second, the advertised main theorem is not established as stated.

The gap is in Theorem 7.1, which Theorem 1.2 depends on. After equation (7.3) the proof asserts K0 ≤ γF/2 "under the given curvature conditions." But the condition in the theorem is |K0| ≤ (n+1)/2 K1 F with K1 ≤ (n+1)γ. Substituting the maximal K1 gives |K0| ≤ (n+1)^2 γF/2, which is larger than γF/2 for every n ≥ 1. The proof actually needs K1 ≤ γ/(n+1). That is a factor (n+1)^2 difference, and there is no cancellation argument in the text that recovers the one-sided bound. So the upper bounds for τ, S, and R in Theorem 1.2, and the topological consequence in Corollary 1.3, rest on a hypothesis the paper does not assume.

There are two more soft spots. Theorem 1.1 is proved along a single minimal geodesic from p to x; the step from there to all y in S_xM is not justified. And Section 6.2 has a sign error: the lower bound R|0 ≥ -(n+1)K2F gives (K1+K2+c) in (6.6), not (K1−K2+c), so Theorem 6.2's logarithmic estimate is derived with the wrong sign.

To give credit where it's due: the definitions are sensible, the local derivation of the key formula seems careful, and the paper is honest about where its assumptions are restrictive (Remark 7.3). The errors are repairable in principle—weakening Theorem 1.2 to the stronger curvature bound, or proving the needed one-sided estimate by a different route, would fix the main gap. As it stands, the central claim is unsupported.

Who should read it: Finsler geometers working on weighted Ricci curvature and Gromov's scalar curvature questions. It deserves a serious referee—the ideas are worth engaging with—but the referee should require the theorem statements and the Section 6.2 signs to be fixed before publication.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies ∞-Einstein Finsler metric measure spaces, introducing a new scalar curvature R = g^{ij} R^k_{i kj} and several variants of gradient Ricci solitons. It claims lower bounds on S-curvature and distortion under a bounded Ricci curvature condition (Theorem 1.1), and two-sided bounds on distortion, S-curvature, and scalar curvature under a linear growth lower bound for R plus a non-Riemannian curvature bound (Theorem 1.2). These results are used to deduce a topological finiteness theorem (Corollary 1.3).

Significance. If the theorems were fully established, the paper would offer a Finsler analogue of Perelman's monotonicity-type estimates and a partial response to Gromov's scalar-curvature program in the Finsler setting. The paper contains original ingredients: a new scalar curvature definition, a family of refined Einstein-type conditions, and a nontrivial identity (Lemma 5.1) linking R, the distortion, and non-Riemannian curvature. However, the main estimates contain load-bearing gaps: the constant mismatch in Theorem 7.1 and the unjustified passage from geodesic-direction bounds to arbitrary directions in Theorem 1.1. These issues undermine the central claims as stated, so the advertised conclusions are not currently supported.

major comments (2)

[Section 7, Theorem 7.1 (after Eq. (7.3))] The assertion 'Under the given curvature conditions, K0 ≤ 1/2 γF' is not a consequence of the stated hypotheses. The theorem assumes |(C^t_il L^li_s − C^{t|i}_{is})R^s_t| ≤ (n+1)/2 K1 F with K1 ≤ (n+1)γ, which yields |K0| ≤ (n+1)^2 γF/2. This exceeds γF/2 for every n ≥ 1. The subsequent integration (7.4)–(7.12) requires K1 ≤ γ/(n+1), not the weaker bound stated. Consequently, the upper bounds of Theorem 7.1 are unproved. Since Theorem 1.2 is stated as a combination of Theorems 7.1 and 7.4, and Corollary 1.3 relies on Theorem 1.2, the paper's central conclusions are unsupported as stated. This is a quantitative mismatch, not a minor typo: the allowed non-Riemannian term is too large by a factor of (n+1)^2, and the proof contains no sign or cancellation argument to recover the needed one-sided bound.
[Section 4, proof of Theorem 1.1 (Eqs. (4.9)–(4.10))] The bound (4.9) is derived for the specific terminal vector ˙γ(t0) of a minimal forward geodesic from p to x. The passage to (4.10), asserted for all y ∈ S_xM, uses only the 1-homogeneity of S; homogeneity scales a given direction but does not change it. The theorem statement claims S(x,y) ≥ (1/2)(d(p,x) − K0) for arbitrary y, but the proof does not establish that every y ∈ S_xM is the terminal velocity of a minimal forward geodesic from p to x, which is particularly delicate in asymmetric Finsler metrics. Similarly, the stated dependence of the constants on 'measures on SxM' is not supported by the proof, which uses bounds on SB_p(1) and SB_{γ(t0)} only. Thus Theorem 1.1 is not proven in the stated generality.

minor comments (4)

[Throughout] There are several typos and grammatical errors, e.g., 'Euledian' for 'Euclidean' (page 8), 'ciurvature' for 'curvature' (page 7), 'distorsion' for 'distortion' (page 17), 'intergration' for 'integration' (page 24), and 'This work not partially extends' (page 5) should likely read 'This work not only partially extends'.
[Section 3, Remark 3.3] The coordinate expression for Ric∞_y(y,V) should be checked carefully; as written it appears to identify a tensor with its action on vectors, and the sentence ends with an extra comma.
[Section 7, proof of Theorem 7.1] The phrase 'Since √χ is Lipschitz on SM' is imprecise because no metric on the sphere bundle SM has been defined. The subsequent estimate (7.8) can be justified by integrating along the geodesic, but the as-written statement is vague.
[Introduction, Theorem 1.2] The definitions of the constants C1, C2, C3, β, and K5 are not consistent across Theorems 1.2, 7.1, and 7.4; the paper should use uniform notation to avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the estimates are derived from the stated ∞-Einstein equation and curvature hypotheses; the coefficient gap in §7 is a correctness issue, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's main estimates (Theorem 1.2 via Theorems 7.1 and 7.4) are derived from the asymmetric essential gradient Ricci soliton equation (7.1), the scalar-curvature lower bound R ≥ γd(p,x) − α, and the assumed non-Riemannian curvature bound. No target inequality is inserted as an input. The upper bounds on τ, S, and R follow by integrating (7.3)–(7.5) and then using the assumed lower bound on R; the lower bounds follow from the second variation estimate (4.4)–(4.9) combined with the already-established upper bounds. Constants such as K5, β, and δ are integration data on the compact sphere bundle SpM, not fitted parameters, and the conclusions are not equivalent to the hypotheses by construction. The only self-citation entering the technical chain is [14], used for a Ricci identity in deriving Lemma 5.1; that identity is a general parameter-free Finsler identity that does not encode the target estimates or the assumed curvature bounds, so it is independent support rather than load-bearing circularity. There is a genuine coefficient gap in the proof of Theorem 7.1: from |K0| ≤ (n+1)K1F/2 and K1 ≤ (n+1)γ one cannot conclude K0 ≤ γF/2, because that would require K1 ≤ γ/(n+1). This is a correctness or quantitative issue, not a circularity. No definition reduces to the claimed output, no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem from the authors' prior work is invoked. Therefore no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The derivation rests on standard Finsler machinery plus the curvature bounds assumed in the theorems. No parameters are fitted to the target inequalities, but the proof of Theorem 7.1 requires a stronger K1 bound than the theorem states, and the directional quantification of the estimates is left ambiguous.

free parameters (1)

Einstein factor σ = 1/2 after rescaling
Remark 3.7 normalizes the constant soliton factor to 1/2 by metric rescaling. This is a normalization chosen by hand, not a quantity fitted to data.

assumptions (5)

standard math Second variation formula for forward geodesics in Finsler manifolds as given in [16, Ch.5].
Used at the start of the proof of Theorem 1.1 to derive the index-form inequality (4.4).
standard math Chern connection identities, Bianchi identities, and the Ricci identity for τ cited from [14].
Used in Section 5 to derive the key formula (5.25) for essential gradient Ricci solitons.
domain assumption Forward completeness guarantees a minimal forward geodesic from the pole p to every point x.
Used in the proofs of Theorems 1.1, 7.1, and 7.4 to integrate differential inequalities along geodesics.
ad hoc to paper The non-Riemannian curvature term (C^t_il L^li_s - C^{t|i}_{is})R^s_t is globally controlled along rays by the stated K1 bound.
This is an additional curvature hypothesis. The paper asserts it is automatic on compact or precompact sets, but the proof needs its global validity along noncompact rays, which is exactly what the estimates require.
domain assumption The scalar curvature lower bound R ≥ γd(p,x)-α holds along each relevant geodesic ray.
Theorems 1.2, 7.1, and 7.4 assume this linear growth lower bound; it is not derived in the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bounds of Scalar curvature, S-curvature and distortion on $\infty$-Einstein Finsler manifolds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PHDVFAFD

@misc{pith2026250101970,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bounds of Scalar curvature, S-curvature and distortion on $\infty$-Einstein Finsler manifolds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PHDVFAFD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.01970}
}

abstract

This manuscript investigates the curvature and topological properties of certain $\infty$-Einstein Finsler metrics on Finsler metric measure spaces. By imposing symmetry conditions, we construct a series of special metrics and analyze their equivalence on special manifolds. Provided a Ricci curvature bound, we establish a linear growth lower bound estimate for the S-curvature and the distortion, revealing the interplay between curvature and measure on $\infty$-Einstein Finsler manifolds. Furthermore, by introducing scalar curvature and imposing a linear growth lower bound condition, we derive upper and lower bounds for the distortion, S-curvature, and the scalar curvature itself on asymmetric essential gradient Ricci solitons with certain non-Riemannian curvature constraints. These results yield direct topological finiteness conclusions for some forward-complete $\infty$-Einstein Finsler manifolds. Our work partially addresses Gromov's conjecture of scalar curvature in the context of Finsler metric measure spaces and provides a foundation for further research in geometric analysis within general Finsler geometry.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

23 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

[1]

Akbar-Zadeh, Sur les espaces de Finsler A courbures sectionnelles con- stantes, Acad

H. Akbar-Zadeh, Sur les espaces de Finsler A courbures sectionnelles con- stantes, Acad. Roy. Belg. Bull. Cl. Sci., 74 (1988), 271-322

work page 1988
[2]

Bao, S.S

D. Bao, S.S. Chern and Z. Shen, An introduction to Riemann–Finsler Geometry, Springer, New York, 2000

work page 2000
[3]

Cao and D

H.-D. Cao and D. Zhou, On complete gradient shrinking Ricci solitons, J. Differ. Geom. 85, 2 (2010), 175-186

work page 2010
[4]

Cheng, Z

X. Cheng, Z. Shen, Y. Tian, A class of Einstein ( α, β)-metrics, Israel J. Math. 192, 1 (2012), 221-249

work page 2012
[5]

Chern, Finsler geometry is just Riemannian geometry without the quadratic restriction, Notices Amer

S.-S. Chern, Finsler geometry is just Riemannian geometry without the quadratic restriction, Notices Amer. Math. Soc., 43, 9 (1996), 959-963

work page 1996
[6]

F. Fang, J. Man and Z. Zhang, Complete gradient shrinking Ricci solitons have finite topological type, C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris, 346 (2018), 653–656

work page 2018
[7]

On Minkowskian Product Einstein-Finsler spaces

A. Gangopadhyay, R. Gangopadhyay, G. Prajapati and B. Tiwari, On Minkowskian Product Einstein-Finsler spaces , arXiv:2408.01930 [math.DG] (2024)

work page Pith review arXiv 2024
[8]

Gromov, Four lectures on scalar curvature , Gromov, Mikhail L

M. Gromov, Four lectures on scalar curvature , Gromov, Mikhail L. (ed.) et al., Perspectives in scalar curvature. In 2 volumes. Singapore: World Scientific. 1-514, 2023

work page 2023

Show all 23 references

[9]

Y. Li, X. Mo and X. Wang, Navigation Finsler metrics on a gradient Ricci soliton, Appl. Math., Ser. B (Engl. Ed.) 39, 2 (2024), 266-275

2024
[10]

X. Li, H. Chen and Z. Chen, Einstein-Randers metrics on compact simple Lie groups, Publ. Math. Debr., 97, 1-2 (2020), 149-160

2020
[11]

Ohta, Finsler interpolation inequalities, Calc

S. Ohta, Finsler interpolation inequalities, Calc. Var. PDE., 36 (2009), 211–249

2009
[12]

Ohta, Comparison Finsler geometry , Springer Monographs in Mathematics, 2021

S. Ohta, Comparison Finsler geometry , Springer Monographs in Mathematics, 2021

2021
[13]

Perelman, Ricci flow with surgery on three-manifolds , arXiv:math/0303109 [math.DG] (2003)

G. Perelman, Ricci flow with surgery on three-manifolds , arXiv:math/0303109 [math.DG] (2003). 26

2003 arXiv
[14]

Shen, Vanishing of Killing vector fields on compact Finsler manifolds , Kodai Math

B. Shen, Vanishing of Killing vector fields on compact Finsler manifolds , Kodai Math. J., 41, 1 (2018), 1-15

2018
[15]

B. Shen, Operators on nonlinear metric measure spaces I: A new Laplacian comparison theorem on Finsler manifolds and a traditional approach to gradi- ent estimates of Finslerian Schr¨ odinger equation, arXiv:2312.06617 [math.DG] (2023)

2023 arXiv
[16]

Shen and Z

Y. Shen and Z. Shen, Introduction to Modern Finsler Geometry , Higher educa- tion Press, Beijing, 2016

2016
[17]

Shen, Volume comparison and its applications in Riemann-Finsler geometry, Adv

Z. Shen, Volume comparison and its applications in Riemann-Finsler geometry, Adv. Math., 128, 2 (1997), 306-328

1997
[18]

Shen and L

Z. Shen and L. Sun, On the projective Ricci curvature , Sci. China, Math. 64, 7 (2021), 1629-1636

2021
[19]

Shen and R

Z. Shen and R. Zhao, On a class of weakly weighted Einstein metrics , Int. J. Math. 33, 10-11 (2022), Article ID 2250068, 15 p

2022
[20]

Villase˜ nor,Schur theorem for the Ricci curvature of any weakly Landsberg Finsler metric , arXiv:2304.08933 [math.DG] (2023)

F. Villase˜ nor,Schur theorem for the Ricci curvature of any weakly Landsberg Finsler metric , arXiv:2304.08933 [math.DG] (2023)

2023 arXiv
[21]

Xia, Local gradient estimate for harmonic functions on Finsler manifolds

C. Xia, Local gradient estimate for harmonic functions on Finsler manifolds. Calc. Var. PDE. 51 (2014), 3-4, 849-865

2014
[22]

Xia, Almost Ricci solitons on Finsler spaces , arXiv:2403.02038 [math.DG] (2024)

Q. Xia, Almost Ricci solitons on Finsler spaces , arXiv:2403.02038 [math.DG] (2024)

2024 arXiv
[23]

Yin, Comparison theorems on Finsler manifolds with weighted Ricci curva- ture bounded below, Front

S. Yin, Comparison theorems on Finsler manifolds with weighted Ricci curva- ture bounded below, Front. Math. China, 13, 2 (2018), 435-448. Bin Shen School of Mathematics, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, P. R. China E-mail: shenbin@seu.edu.cn 27

2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Akbar-Zadeh, Sur les espaces de Finsler A courbures sectionnelles con- stantes, Acad

H. Akbar-Zadeh, Sur les espaces de Finsler A courbures sectionnelles con- stantes, Acad. Roy. Belg. Bull. Cl. Sci., 74 (1988), 271-322

work page 1988

[2] [2]

Bao, S.S

D. Bao, S.S. Chern and Z. Shen, An introduction to Riemann–Finsler Geometry, Springer, New York, 2000

work page 2000

[3] [3]

Cao and D

H.-D. Cao and D. Zhou, On complete gradient shrinking Ricci solitons, J. Differ. Geom. 85, 2 (2010), 175-186

work page 2010

[4] [4]

Cheng, Z

X. Cheng, Z. Shen, Y. Tian, A class of Einstein ( α, β)-metrics, Israel J. Math. 192, 1 (2012), 221-249

work page 2012

[5] [5]

Chern, Finsler geometry is just Riemannian geometry without the quadratic restriction, Notices Amer

S.-S. Chern, Finsler geometry is just Riemannian geometry without the quadratic restriction, Notices Amer. Math. Soc., 43, 9 (1996), 959-963

work page 1996

[6] [6]

F. Fang, J. Man and Z. Zhang, Complete gradient shrinking Ricci solitons have finite topological type, C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris, 346 (2018), 653–656

work page 2018

[7] [7]

On Minkowskian Product Einstein-Finsler spaces

A. Gangopadhyay, R. Gangopadhyay, G. Prajapati and B. Tiwari, On Minkowskian Product Einstein-Finsler spaces , arXiv:2408.01930 [math.DG] (2024)

work page Pith review arXiv 2024

[8] [8]

Gromov, Four lectures on scalar curvature , Gromov, Mikhail L

M. Gromov, Four lectures on scalar curvature , Gromov, Mikhail L. (ed.) et al., Perspectives in scalar curvature. In 2 volumes. Singapore: World Scientific. 1-514, 2023

work page 2023