Contracting elements and conjugacy growth in Coxeter groups, graph products, and further groups

Anthony Genevois; Laura Ciobanu

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Contracting elements and conjugacy growth in Coxeter groups, graph products, and further groups

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Theorem 1.1: a finitely generated periagroup has a contracting element in its standard Cayley graph if and only if it is infinite and not virtually a product of two infinite groups.

desk verdict Genuinely new machinery for contracting elements in Cayley graphs, but the graph-product iff is overclaimed and the proof misses a case with finite direct factors. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.15636 v1 pith:RHAV2TBH submitted 2025-04-22 math.GR math.COmath.MG

Laura Ciobanu , Anthony Genevois This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.GRmath.COmath.MG MSC 20F6520F6720F55

keywords contractingelementsperiagroupsCoxetergroupsgraphproductsDyerconjugacygrowthacylindricalhyperbolicitymedianglegraphs

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 that a finitely generated periagroup—a family of groups interpolating between Coxeter groups, graph products, and Dyer groups—admits a contracting element in its standard Cayley graph exactly when it is infinite and does not virtually decompose as a product of two infinite groups. Contracting elements are isometries whose orbits behave like geodesics in negative curvature, even when the ambient group is not hyperbolic. The paper then applies a known bridge: an element contracting in a Cayley graph forces the conjugacy growth series to be transcendental. Hence the theorem yields transcendental conjugacy growth series for all such periagroups, and in particular for Coxeter groups, graph products, and Dyer groups, with respect to their standard generating sets.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the paraclique graph, a clique-gated graph in which parallelism of cliques is transitive (so hyperplanes make sense), together with a coherent system of metrics: each clique is given its own metric, compatible with projections between parallel cliques, and these local metrics unfold into one global metric that recovers the Cayley metric from a finite generating set. The criterion Theorem 4.3 reduces 'element is contracting' to a checkable geometric condition—admit an axis and skewer two hyperplanes whose intervening transverse hyperplanes have bounded total thickness. For periagroups, the GP-Cox decomposition $\Pi = \Omega_J \rtimes C(\Psi)$ splits the group into a graph product part and a Coxeter part, and the crossing graph $\Omega$ encodes which hyperplanes can be found with finite stabiliser intersection.

What would settle it

Compute the conjugacy growth series of the right-angled Coxeter group whose defining graph is a 5-cycle, with respect to its standard generating set. This group is infinite, irreducible, and not virtually a product of two infinite groups, so the theorem predicts transcendental conjugacy growth; if the series turned out to be algebraic (in particular rational), then either Theorem 1.1 or its consequence Corollary 1.6 would be false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, Theorem 1.1, is that for a finitely generated periagroup $\Pi := \Pi(\Gamma,\lambda,\mathcal{G})$, once each factor $G$ is given a finite generating set $S_G$, the Cayley graph $\mathrm{Cay}(\Pi, \bigcup S_G)$ contains a contracting element if and only if $\Pi$ is infinite and not virtually a product of two infinite groups. The proof's engine is a new criterion (Theorem 4.3): in a paraclique graph equipped with a coherent, group-invariant system of metrics, an isometry that has an axis and skewers a pair of well-separated hyperplanes is contracting in the associated global metric. The paper verifies this criterion for periagroups by passing through the GP-Cox decomposition $\Pi = \Omega_J \rtimes C(\Psi)$ and using the structure of the crossing graph $\Omega$. Corollary 1.6 records the consequence the paper is ultimately after: the conjugacy growth series of these groups, with respect to standard generating sets, are transcendental.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the structural theorems imported from the second author's earlier work hold: the Cayley graph of a periagroup generated by all non-trivial factor elements is mediangle, and the GP-Cox decomposition yields the semidirect product Π = Ω_J ⋊ C(Ψ); if either fails, the passage from mediangle geometry to finite-generating-set Cayley metrics and the search for skewering hyperplanes collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A finitely generated Coxeter group has a contracting element in its standard Cayley graph exactly when it is a product of irreducible Coxeter groups all but one finite, and the remaining factor is non-affine or infinite dihedral (Corollary 1.2).
A graph product has a contracting element exactly when its defining graph is not complete and does not split as a large join (Corollary 1.3).
A Dyer group has a contracting element exactly when it is infinite and not virtually a product of two infinite groups (Corollary 1.4).
Every periagroup covered by Theorem 1.1 is acylindrically hyperbolic (Section 7), giving uniform acylindrical hyperbolicity criteria for the three families.
The conjugacy growth series of these groups with respect to standard generating sets are transcendental (Corollary 1.6), and Corollary 1.7 extends this to direct products when one factor has strictly larger growth rate.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper, the same criterion should apply to any group acting on a mediangle or paraclique graph with a coherent metric system, for example hypercellular graphs or small-cancellation polygonal complexes, once an axis and a well-separated skewered pair are found.
The paper's hypothesis in Corollary 1.7 that one factor dominates the growth rates is likely removable; if so, every non-virtually-abelian periagroup would have transcendental conjugacy growth regardless of how growth rates compare across factors.
The GP-Cox decomposition suggests a testable dichotomy: for periagroups, failure of acylindrical hyperbolicity is controlled by infinite centralisers of the graph-product part inside the Coxeter part, so analogous obstructions may appear in other semidirect products with a graph-product normal subgroup.

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

Mark, read the paper through. The main new thing is the paraclique graph framework and the local-metric criterion (Theorem 4.3), which gives a uniform way to transfer contracting isometries from the big Cayley graph (with all factor elements) to the standard finite-generating-set Cayley graph. That is a genuinely useful idea, and it pays off: Theorem 1.1 for periagroups, and the corollaries for Coxeter and Dyer groups, look right in their main thrust. The Coxeter case is proved carefully, with the Davis complex argument. The conjugacy growth applications are straightforward once you have the contracting elements, but they're cleanly packaged.

Now the soft spot, and it is not tiny. Corollary 1.3 states an iff for graph products: contracting element exists iff Γ is not complete and does not split as a large join. That is false as stated. Take Γ complete on two vertices, vertex groups F2 and Z2. The graph product is F2×Z2, which is infinite and not virtually a product of two infinite groups, and it clearly has contracting elements (any hyperbolic element of F2). The theorem's own criterion would promise one, but Corollary 1.3 excludes all complete graphs. The stress-test note is right: the proof of the graph-product case (Theorem 5.5) is a sufficient condition for an element, not an existence criterion. In the complete-graph finite-factor situation, every essential support is complete, so the hypothesis of Theorem 5.5 fails. The gap is real, but I think it is repairable: the missing cases are exactly the ones where the graph product has a direct factor that is either finite or has its own contracting element, and those can be handled by the same product arguments used elsewhere in the paper. Still, as written, the statement of Corollary 1.3 needs correction and the proof of Theorem 6.30(ii) needs an additional case.

Other concern: the paper leans heavily on structural results from the second author's earlier work (mediangle geometry of periagroups, the semidirect decomposition with the crossing graph). These are quoted, not proved, so the paper is not self-contained. That is normal for this kind of paper, but it matters because the step from mediangle geometry to finite-generating-set metrics is load-bearing. If any of those structural theorems have hidden assumptions that fail for periagroups with mixed labels, the whole thing would need rework. I didn't find a concrete problem, only a dependency worth flagging.

Bottom line: the main theorem is likely true and the framework is a real advance. The paper deserves serious peer review, but it needs revision before publication: fix the graph-product corollary, add the missing case in the proof, and ideally state explicitly which structural results are imported from where. I'd send it to a good journal and ask for those changes. If you work on contracting elements or acylindrical hyperbolicity, the paraclique machinery is worth having on your radar.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a general criterion for an isometry of a paraclique graph endowed with a coherent system of local metrics to be contracting (Theorem 4.3), then applies it to periagroups. For a finitely generated periagroup Π(Γ,λ,G) it claims Theorem 1.1: Π has a contracting element in its standard Cayley graph if and only if Π is infinite and not virtually a direct product of two infinite groups. Consequences are drawn for Coxeter groups, graph products, and Dyer groups, including acylindrical hyperbolicity classifications and transcendence of conjugacy growth series via [GY22, Cor. 1.8]. The proof passes through a mediangle-geometric description of periagroups and a semidirect decomposition attached to a GP-Cox decomposition.

Significance. If correct, the results are substantial: they unify and extend known contracting-element and acylindrical-hyperbolicity results for Coxeter groups and graph products, and they yield transcendental conjugacy growth series for the standard generating sets. The paraclique-graph framework and the coherent-system-of-metrics technique are interesting tools in their own right, and Claim 6.35, which recovers finite-generating-set word metrics from local clique metrics, is a clean and useful observation. The main caveat is that the graph-product case of the main theorem is underproved and one of the announced corollaries is false as stated.

major comments (2)

[Section 6.4, proof of Theorem 6.30(ii)] The graph-product case is dismissed with the sentence 'If Ψ is empty, then our periagroup coincides with a graph product and Theorem 5.5 applies.' This is not a valid existence argument. Theorem 5.5 is a sufficient condition on an individual element: an element whose essential support is neither complete nor contained in a large join is contracting. It does not assert that such an element always exists. For example, take Γ=K2, G_u=F2 and G_v=Z2; then every essential support is either {u}, {v}, or {u,v}, all complete, so the hypothesis of Theorem 5.5 fails for every element, even though F2×Z2 is infinite, is not virtually a product of two infinite groups, and contains contracting elements. The proof of Theorem 6.30(ii) therefore does not establish the existence direction of Theorem 1.1 for complete graphs. This can be repaired by a separate direct-product argument or by invoking the second case of Corollary 5.11, but the written proof is incomplete.
[Corollary 1.3] As stated, this corollary is false. For Γ=K2 with G_u=F2 and G_v=Z2, the right-hand side fails because Γ is complete, yet Cay(F2×Z2, S_u∪S_v) contains a contracting element, for instance a hyperbolic element of the F2 factor. The statement is also stronger than what Theorem 5.5 proves, since Theorem 5.5 is only a sufficient condition. The corollary needs to be reformulated so that complete graphs with at most one infinite factor are handled, in agreement with Theorem 1.1 and Corollary 5.11.

minor comments (4)

[Section 5.1, proof of Theorem 5.1] The phrase 'provided by By [CF10]' should read 'provided by [CF10]'.
[Section 5.2, before Theorem 5.5] The word 'reprensented' should be 'represented'.
[Example 6.9] The word 'aslo' should be 'also'.
[Section 6.2, proof of Proposition 6.18] The word 'exaclty' should be 'exactly'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper's derivation is a forward chain from independent structural results; the flagged graph-product gap is a correctness concern, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, Theorem 1.1, is derived by establishing contracting elements from a geometric criterion (Theorem 4.3), then applying it to Coxeter groups, graph products, and general periagroups. None of the target conclusions—existence of a contracting element, acylindrical hyperbolicity, or transcendence of conjugacy growth—appears as a hypothesis in the proof. The structural inputs imported from prior work, notably the mediangle geometry of periagroup Cayley graphs [Gen22a, Theorem 1.1] and the semidirect decomposition associated to a GP-Cox decomposition [Gen22a, Theorem 6.1], are independent foundational results about periagroups, not restatements of the contracting-element or conjugacy-growth conclusions. The conjugacy growth applications use the external counting theorem [GY22, Corollary 1.8] and standard results on rational series for virtually abelian groups [Eve19]. The self-citations to [Gen22a], [Gen24], and [Gen17] are load-bearing in the sense that the proof would fail without them, but they are prior mathematical theorems with their own proofs, not fitted parameters or renamed versions of the present results. The reviewer's concern about the graph-product case of Theorem 1.1 and Corollary 1.3 is a potential gap in the sufficiency argument: Theorem 5.5 is an element-level sufficient condition, and it is not automatic that every non-complete, non-large-join graph contains an element satisfying it. That is a correctness or completeness issue, not circularity, because the missing step is not an equation that reduces to the conclusion but rather an existence argument. Accordingly, no circular step is exhibited, and the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The ledger lists imported structural theorems and new definitions. There are no numerical free parameters: the generating sets S_G are arbitrary finite choices fixed in the statement, not fitted values. The main mathematical assumptions are the periagroup structure theorems from [Gen22a] and [Gen24].

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The Cayley graph M(Γ,λ,G) = Cay(Π, ⋃_{G∈G} G\{1}) is a mediangle graph (Theorem 6.10).
Imported from [Gen22a]; every later hyperplane and contracting argument in Section 6 relies on this structural fact.
domain assumption Periagroups admit the semidirect decomposition Π = Ω_J ⋊ C(Ψ) for any GP-Cox decomposition (from [Gen22a, Theorem 6.1]).
Used in Section 6.4 to reduce the periagroup case to graph products; central to Claim 6.36.
domain assumption Intersections of parabolic subgroups are parabolic and cosets of standard parabolics are gated (Theorem 6.17).
Used to prove the descending chain condition and the finite stabilizer claims in Claims 6.37 through 6.39.
standard math A contracting element in a Cayley graph implies transcendental conjugacy growth series ([GY22, Cor 1.8]).
External theorem connecting contracting elements to conjugacy growth; this is the bridge to Corollary 1.6.
standard math Sequences with asymptotics α^n/n have transcendental generating functions ([Fla87, Thm D]).
Used in Corollary 8.3 to convert growth asymptotics into transcendence of the series.
standard math Coxeter groups with a rank-one isometry in the Davis complex are characterized as non-affine or infinite dihedral times finite ([CF10]).
Starting point for Theorem 5.1; the paper transfers this from the Davis complex to the standard Cayley graph.

invented entities (3)

paraclique graphs
purpose: Generalize mediangle and quasi-median graphs and support coherent systems of metrics and the contracting criterion Theorem 4.3.
A new graph class defined in Section 2.1; its mathematical value is established internally by the theorems, with no external falsifiable prediction.
coherent system of metrics
purpose: Encodes factor word metrics on cliques so that the finite-generated Cayley metric can be recovered from the mediangle graph (Claim 6.35).
New technical device introduced in Section 3 and used throughout; it is internal to the proof.
GP-Cox decomposition
purpose: Splits a periagroup into graph-product and Coxeter parts for the inductive construction of contracting elements.
Introduced in Definition 6.28; it is a proof device, not an observable entity.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Contracting elements and conjugacy growth in Coxeter groups, graph products, and further groups." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RHAV2TBH

@misc{pith2026250415636,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Contracting elements and conjugacy growth in Coxeter groups, graph products, and further groups},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RHAV2TBH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.15636}
}

read the original abstract

In this article we construct contracting elements in the standard Cayley graphs of the so-called periagroups, a family of groups introduced by the second-named author which include Coxeter groups, graph products, and Dyer groups. As a consequence, we deduce that, unless they virtually split as direct products, periagroups are acylindrically hyperbolic and their conjugacy growth series, with respect to standard generating sets, are transcendental.

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

Beyond graph products and cactus groups: quandle products of groups
math.GR 2025-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

Quandle products of groups form a unified family with quasi-median Cayley graphs, solvable word problems, and iterated semidirect-product decompositions into graph products.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Antol\'in and L

Y. Antol\'in and L. Ciobanu. Formal Conjugacy Growth in Acylindrically Hyperbolic Groups . International Mathematics Research Notices , 2017(1):121--157, 2017

work page 2017
[2]

Arzhantseva, C

G. Arzhantseva, C. Cashen, and J. Tao. Growth tight actions. Pacific J. Math. , 278(1):1--49, 2015

work page 2015
[3]

H.-J. Bandelt. Retracts of hypercubes. J. Graph Theory , 8(4):501--510, 1984

work page 1984
[4]

Bestvina, K

M. Bestvina, K. Bromberg, and K. Fujiwara. Constructing group actions on quasi-trees and applications to mapping class groups. Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes \'Etudes Sci. , 122:1--64, 2015

work page 2015
[5]

Behrstock and R

J. Behrstock and R. Charney. Divergence and quasimorphisms of right-angled A rtin groups. Math. Ann. , 352(2):339--356, 2012

work page 2012
[6]

Bestvina and K

M. Bestvina and K. Fujiwara. A characterization of higher rank symmetric spaces via bounded cohomology. Geom. Funct. Anal. , 19(1):11--40, 2009

work page 2009
[7]

Bandelt, H

H.-J. Bandelt, H. M. Mulder, and E. Wilkeit. Quasi-median graphs and algebras. J. Graph Theory , 18(7):681--703, 1994

work page 1994
[8]

Ciobanu and G

L. Ciobanu and G. Crowe. Conjugacy geodesics and growth in dihedral artin groups. New York J. Math , 31:465--507, 2025

work page 2025

Show all 46 references

[9]

Ciobanu, A

L. Ciobanu, A. Evetts, and Meng-Che Ho. The conjugacy growth of the soluble B aumslag- S olitar groups. New York Journal of Mathematics , 26:473--495, 2020

2020
[10]

Caprace and K

P.-E. Caprace and K. Fujiwara. Rank-one isometries of buildings and quasi-morphisms of K ac- M oody groups. Geom. Funct. Anal. , 19(5):1296--1319, 2010

2010
[11]

Ciobanu, S

L. Ciobanu, S. Hermiller, and V. Mercier. Formal conjugacy growth in graph products I . Groups, Geometry, and Dynamics , 17(2):427--457, 2023

2023
[12]

R. Coulon. Ergodicity of the geodesic flow for groups with a contracting element. arxiv:2303.01390 , 2023

2023
[13]

R. Coulon. Patterson- S ullivan theory for groups with a strongly contracting element. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems , 44(11):3216--3271, 2024

2024
[14]

Caprace and M

P.-E. Caprace and M. Sageev. Rank rigidity for CAT (0) cube complexes. Geom. Funct. Anal. , 21(4):851--891, 2011

2011
[15]

Charney and H

R. Charney and H. Sultan. Contracting boundaries of CAT(0) spaces. J. Topol. , 8(1):93--117, 2015

2015
[16]

M. Davis. The geometry and topology of C oxeter groups , volume 32 of London Mathematical Society Monographs Series . Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2008

2008
[17]

Davis and T

M. Davis and T. Januszkiewicz. Right-angled A rtin groups are commensurable with right-angled C oxeter groups. J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 153(3):229--235, 2000

2000
[18]

M. Dyer. Reflection subgroups of C oxeter systems. J. Algebra , 135(1):57--73, 1990

1990
[19]

A. Evetts. Rational growth in virtually abelian groups. Illinois Journal of Mathematics , 63(4):513 -- 549, 2019

2019
[20]

Flajolet

P. Flajolet. Analytic models and ambiguity of context-free languages. Theoretical Computer Science , 49(2):283--309, 1987

1987
[21]

Genevois

A. Genevois. Cubical-like geometry of quasi-median graphs and applications to geometric group theory. PhD thesis, arxiv:1712.01618 , 2017

2017 arXiv
[22]

Genevois

A. Genevois. Automorphisms of graph products of groups and acylindrical hyperbolicity. arxiv:1807.00622, to appear in Memoirs of the AMS , 2018

2018 arXiv
[23]

Genevois

A. Genevois. Hyperbolicities in CAT (0) cube complexes. Enseign. Math. , 65(1-2):33--100, 2019

2019
[24]

Genevois

A. Genevois. On the geometry of van K ampen diagrams of graph products of groups. arXiv:1901.04538 , 2019

1901 arXiv
[25]

Genevois

A. Genevois. Contracting isometries of CAT (0) cube complexes and acylindrical hyperbolicity of diagram groups. Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 20(1):49--134, 2020

2020
[26]

Genevois

A. Genevois. Rotation groups, mediangle graphs, and periagroups: a unified point of view on C oxeter groups and graph products groups. arxiv:2212.06421 , 2022

2022
[27]

Genevois

A. Genevois. Translation lengths in crossing and contact graphs of (quasi-)median graphs. arXiv:2209.06441 , 2022

2022 arXiv
[28]

Genevois

A. Genevois. Rotation groups virtually embed into right-angled rotation groups. arXiv:2404.15652 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[29]

Genevois and A

A. Genevois and A. Martin. Automorphisms of graph products of groups from a geometric perspective. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) , 119(6):1745--1779, 2019

2019
[30]

E. Green. Graph products of groups. PhD Thesis , 1990

1990
[31]

Guba and M

V. Guba and M. Sapir. On the conjugacy growth functions of groups. Illinois Journal of Mathematics , 54(1):301--313, 2010

2010
[32]

Gekhtman and W

I. Gekhtman and W. Yang. Counting conjugacy classes in groups with contracting elements. Journal of Topology , 15(2):620--665, 2022

2022
[33]

Hagauer and S

J. Hagauer and S. Klav z ar. Clique-gated graphs. Discrete Math. , 161(1-3):143--149, 1996

1996
[34]

Hull and D

M. Hull and D. Osin. Conjugacy growth of finitely generated groups. Advances in Mathematics , 235:361--389, 2013

2013
[35]

Hsu and D

T. Hsu and D. Wise. On linear and residual properties of graph products. Michigan Math. J. , 46:251--259, 1999

1999
[36]

V. Mercier. Conjugacy growth series of some wreath products, 2017. http://arxiv.org/abs/1610.07868

2017 arXiv
[37]

Minasyan and D

A. Minasyan and D. Osin. Acylindrical hyperbolicity of groups acting on trees. Math. Ann. , 362(3-4):1055--1105, 2015

2015
[38]

Niblo and L

G. Niblo and L. Reeves. Coxeter groups act on CAT (0) cube complexes. J. Group Theory , 6(3):399--413, 2003

2003
[39]

D. Osin. Acylindrically hyperbolic groups. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 368(2):851--888, 2016

2016
[40]

I. Rivin. Growth in free groups and other stories. Illinois Journal of Mathematics , 54(1):327--370, 2010

2010
[41]

A. Sisto. Contracting elements and random walks. J. Reine Angew. Math. , 742:79--114, 2018

2018
[42]

M. Soergel. A generalization of the D avis- M oussong complex for D yer groups. J. Comb. Algebra , 8(1-2):209--249, 2024

2024
[43]

H. Sultan. Hyperbolic quasi-geodesics in CAT (0) spaces. Geom. Dedicata , 169:209--224, 2014

2014
[44]

Soergel and N

M. Soergel and N. Vaskou. Dyer groups: Centres, hyperbolicity, and acylindrical hyperbolicity. arxiv:2410.22464 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[45]

R. Wan, X. Xu, and W. Yang. Marked length spectrum rigidity in groups with contracting elements. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) , 111(4):Paper No. e70146, 2025

2025
[46]

W.-Y. Yang. Genericity of contracting elements in groups. Math. Ann. , 376(3-4):823--861, 2020

2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Antol\'in and L

Y. Antol\'in and L. Ciobanu. Formal Conjugacy Growth in Acylindrically Hyperbolic Groups . International Mathematics Research Notices , 2017(1):121--157, 2017

work page 2017

[2] [2]

Arzhantseva, C

G. Arzhantseva, C. Cashen, and J. Tao. Growth tight actions. Pacific J. Math. , 278(1):1--49, 2015

work page 2015

[3] [3]

H.-J. Bandelt. Retracts of hypercubes. J. Graph Theory , 8(4):501--510, 1984

work page 1984

[4] [4]

Bestvina, K

M. Bestvina, K. Bromberg, and K. Fujiwara. Constructing group actions on quasi-trees and applications to mapping class groups. Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes \'Etudes Sci. , 122:1--64, 2015

work page 2015

[5] [5]

Behrstock and R

J. Behrstock and R. Charney. Divergence and quasimorphisms of right-angled A rtin groups. Math. Ann. , 352(2):339--356, 2012

work page 2012

[6] [6]

Bestvina and K

M. Bestvina and K. Fujiwara. A characterization of higher rank symmetric spaces via bounded cohomology. Geom. Funct. Anal. , 19(1):11--40, 2009

work page 2009

[7] [7]

Bandelt, H

H.-J. Bandelt, H. M. Mulder, and E. Wilkeit. Quasi-median graphs and algebras. J. Graph Theory , 18(7):681--703, 1994

work page 1994

[8] [8]

Ciobanu and G

L. Ciobanu and G. Crowe. Conjugacy geodesics and growth in dihedral artin groups. New York J. Math , 31:465--507, 2025

work page 2025