An explicit description of the K\"{a}hler-Einstein metrics of Guenancia-Hamenst\"{a}dt

Barry Minemyer; Jean-Fran\c{c}ois Lafont

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

An explicit description of the K\"{a}hler-Einstein metrics of Guenancia-Hamenst\"{a}dt

T0 review · 3 major / 3 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 An explicit polar-coordinate metric realizes the model Kähler–Einstein metric, yielding negatively curved Einstein metrics in every complex dimension.

desk verdict Explicit model metric is a genuinely useful contribution, but the paper's own negative-curvature proof has a real inequality bug that needs fixing before the claims are fully supported. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.00517 v1 pith:MRA3ZLXB submitted 2025-05-01 math.DG math-phmath.GTmath.MGmath.MP

Jean-François Lafont , Barry Minemyer This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.DGmath-phmath.GTmath.MGmath.MP MSC 53C2553C3551M1553C5553B2057R18

keywords Kähler-EinsteinmetricsnegativesectionalcurvaturecomplexhyperbolicbranchedcoversmodelEinsteinwarped-productconeanglesBianchigaugeChern-Weilinvariants

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

The paper establishes that a family of Einstein metrics written explicitly in polar coordinates, obtained by transplanting the model metric construction of [8] into complex hyperbolic geometry, is exactly the model Kähler–Einstein metric whose existence is guaranteed by [10, Theorem 2.2]. The identification gives a concrete coordinate description of that model: on a tube around a totally geodesic complex-hyperbolic divisor the metric is $u^{2}c_{n-1}+u^{2}V_{\alpha}d\theta^{2}+V_{\alpha}^{-1}du^{2}$, with $V_{\alpha}(u)=u^{2}-1+\alpha u^{-2n}$, and the Einstein condition fixes this $V_{\alpha}$ uniquely. The paper then combines these formulas with the perturbation machinery of [8] and [11] to prove that compact Kähler manifolds of every complex dimension admit negatively curved Einstein metrics but no locally symmetric metric. The point of the paper is that an existence proof can be replaced by a usable formula, with explicit curvature bounds, cone angles, and exponential convergence to the complex hyperbolic metric.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the warped-product ansatz $\lambda=u^{2}c_{n-1}+u^{2}Vd\theta^{2}+V^{-1}du^{2}$ on a tube around a totally geodesic $\mathbb{C}H^{n-1}$ in $\mathbb{C}H^{n}$, with $u=\cosh r$ and $V$ a free positive function. The horizontal distribution is non-integrable, producing nonzero mixed curvature terms that the paper computes explicitly in terms of $W=\sqrt{V}$; these Lie-bracket contributions are the main technical difference from the real-hyperbolic construction of [8]. Einstein's equation reduces to the first-order ODE $V'+(2n/u)V=(2n+2)u-2n/u$, whose unique solution is $V_{\alpha}=u^{2}-1+\alpha u^{-2n}$, and substituting $u=f(r)$ converts it to the same second-order ODE that [10] derives for its model metric. The curvature formulas (3.6)–(3.11) carry the negativity, cone-angle, and exponential-approach conclusions.

What would settle it

For one fixed choice, say $n=2$ and the value $\alpha$ giving cone angle $\pi$, compute the curvature component $R_{1,2,3,4}$ of $\lambda_{\alpha}$ from the connection coefficients in Proposition 2.3 at a point with $u=2$; formula (2.13) requires it to equal $-2(1+V_{\alpha}(2)/4)=-2-2\alpha/2^{6}$, and any other value would disprove Theorem 2.1 and with it the identification of $\lambda_{\alpha}$ with the model Kähler–Einstein metric.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.1: the negatively curved model Einstein metric obtained by generalizing the [8] construction to complex hyperbolic branched covers is isometric to the model Kähler–Einstein metric $\omega_{\alpha}$ whose existence is asserted in [10, Theorem 2.2]. Concretely, the metric is $\lambda_{\alpha}=u^{2}c_{n-1}+u^{2}V_{\alpha}d\theta^{2}+V_{\alpha}^{-1}du^{2}$ with $V_{\alpha}(u)=u^{2}-1+\alpha u^{-2n}$; for exactly this choice of $V_{\alpha}$ the Ricci tensor is $-(2n+2)\lambda_{\alpha}$, the metric has cone angle $2\pi c_{\alpha}$ about a totally geodesic $\mathbb{C}H^{n-1}$, and all sectional curvatures are negative for $\alpha\in(0,\alpha_{\max})$. The proof rewrites the Einstein equation in the form $f''/f+n(f')^{2}/f^{2}+n/f^{2}=n+1$ and matches initial conditions with those satisfied by the [10] model, proving the two metrics coincide. Theorem 1.2 then states that tapering $\lambda_{\alpha}$ to the complex hyperbolic metric on each branched cover and perturbing via the Bianchi-gauged inverse function theorem yields a genuine negatively curved Einstein metric on Kähler manifolds of every complex dimension that do not admit a locally symmetric metric.

Load-bearing premise

The final perturbation step assumes that a gauge-fixed version of the Einstein equation is solvable with a uniform error tolerance that does not shrink as the branched cover gets deeper, and that the recursively constructed submanifolds remain embedded with no self-intersections; the paper cites the first from [10] and models the second on [10] rather than proving them in full.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The model Kähler–Einstein metric of [10] is now given by an explicit formula, so its warping function, curvature components, and asymptotics can be computed directly instead of being inferred from an existence theorem.
For every integer $d\ge2$ there is a unique $\alpha_d$ for which $\lambda_{\alpha}$ has cone angle $2\pi/d$, so the model pulls back to a smooth metric on the $d$-fold cyclic branched covers of [20].
The Bianchi-gauged perturbation argument, using the uniform estimate of [10] and the inverse-function theorem of [11], produces negatively curved Einstein metrics on compact Kähler manifolds in every complex dimension that do not admit locally symmetric metrics.
The approximate metrics $g_k$ C²-converge both to the constructed Einstein metrics $e_k$ and to the Kähler–Einstein metrics of [10]; whether $e_k$ eventually equals the Kähler–Einstein metric is left open.
The explicit curvature formulas may permit Chern–Weil computations of invariants such as the signature of the branched covers constructed in [20] when the dimension is divisible by four.

Reading between the lines

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

If the identification is right, the model metric can be constructed without invoking the existence results referenced in [10]; the explicit solution of the ODE gives an independent route to existence, negativity, and exponential convergence to the complex hyperbolic metric.
The formula $V_{\alpha}=u^{2}-1+\alpha u^{-2n}$ suggests a uniform ansatz for model branched-cover Einstein metrics in all rank-one symmetric spaces, with the correction exponent governed by the Einstein constant of the ambient space rather than by the real dimension.
A numerical test can separate the paper's two claims: integrate the ODE of [10, Theorem 2.9] with initial conditions $f(0)=u_{\alpha}$, $f'(0)=0$ and compare the result with $\sqrt{V_{\alpha}(\cosh r)}$; agreement checks the identification, while failure of the later perturbation would show up only through the uniform estimate of [10, Proposition 4.2].
The question of whether the constructed Einstein metric $e_k$ coincides with the Kähler–Einstein metric $\omega_k$ could be approached through rigidity of $\omega_k$; if $\omega_k$ is isolated among negatively curved Einstein metrics then equality is forced, otherwise the explicit model gives a starting point for constructing a deformation.

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

The useful part of this paper is the explicit warped-product metric λα in (2.4)/(3.1), the curvature tensor formulas in Theorem 2.1, and the identification with the Guenancia–Hamenstädt model metric in Theorem 1.1. That identification is the real new contribution and it is convincing: the ODE they solve is exactly the one in [10, Theorem 2.9], the initial conditions match, and the cone-angle analysis in Lemma 3.5 lines up with [10]'s parameter range. If I worked in this area I would want these formulas in the literature; they make the GH model concretely computable, and the explicit curvature components could be useful for Chern-Weil computations.

Now the soft spots, in order of severity. First, the stress-test note about Proposition 3.8 is correct. In the chain of inequalities, the step replacing 4a1a5b2b6 X by 2(a1b2+a5b6)^2 X, with X = -1 + nα/u^{2n+2} < 0, goes the wrong direction: for negative X you get 4abX > 2(a+b)^2X, not < . So the displayed chain does not establish the claimed upper bound K ≤ -1 + nα/u^{2n+2}. That is a real flaw in the paper's direct proof. The bound may still be true—it would follow from Theorem 1.1 plus Bland's result if the identification with [10]'s ωα is accepted—but as written the paper's independent proof of negative curvature is invalid, and the claimed alternate proof of [10, Theorem 2.11] is unsupported.

Second, Theorem 1.2 leans on [10, Proposition 4.2], a uniform inverse-function theorem from another recent preprint that is not proved here. The paper says the proof is identical to [11, Theorem 4.3] with constants independent of k, but since that external result is load-bearing, the global existence theorem is conditional. Third, Theorem 4.1's recursive construction is plausible but a bit quick about avoiding self-intersections of the lifted Nk; it follows the analogy with [10, Prop. 3.3] but the details are not given. These are not fatal in my view—they are exactly the kind of thing a referee should ask the authors to tighten.

The paper is honest and mostly well organized, and the identification with GH's metric is a genuine advance over [10]'s abstract existence proof. But the flawed inequality in Proposition 3.8 is a problem for a paper whose stated goal includes a direct proof of negative curvature. I would send it to a serious referee rather than desk reject, with a clear request to fix or re-prove Proposition 3.8 and to make the dependence on [10, Prop. 4.2] explicit. If the authors can repair that inequality—or simply cite Bland and [10] for negative curvature—the paper would be a solid contribution.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper generalizes the Fine-Premoselli construction of negatively curved Einstein metrics from hyperbolic branched covers to the complex hyperbolic setting. It derives explicit curvature formulas (Theorem 2.1) for a warped metric λ on CH^n minus a totally geodesic CH^{n-1}, determines the one-parameter family V_α(u)=u^2-1+α/u^{2n} for which λ is Einstein with constant -2(n+1), analyzes the cone angles, and identifies the resulting metric λα with the model Kähler-Einstein metric ω_α of Guenancia-Hamenstädt (Theorem 1.1). It then gives a proof of negative sectional curvature for λα (Proposition 3.8), constructs complex hyperbolic branched covers with large normal injectivity radius (Theorem 4.1), forms approximate Einstein metrics by tapering λα to the complex hyperbolic metric, and applies a Bianchi-gauged inverse function theorem to obtain negatively curved Einstein metrics on Kähler manifolds of every complex dimension (Theorem 1.2).

Significance. If the identification in Theorem 1.1 is correct, the paper provides an explicit, coordinate-friendly description of the Guenancia-Hamenstädt model metric, which is currently characterized only abstractly; the explicit curvature formulas in Theorem 2.1 and the family (3.1) are likely to be useful for studying Stover-Toledo manifolds and their characteristic classes. The paper is candid about relying on the recent preprint [10], and the Ricci computations in Section 3 are consistent with the Einstein equation. However, the independent proof of negative curvature in Proposition 3.8 contains a false inequality, and the perturbation argument in Theorem 1.2 depends on the unproved [10, Proposition 4.2], so the main existence theorem is conditional on external results.

major comments (3)

[Proposition 3.8, proof] The proof of Proposition 3.8 contains a false inequality. In the displayed chain after the expansion of K(σ), the term 4a1a5b2b6 X is replaced by 2(a1b2+a5b6)^2 X, where X = -1 + nα/u^{2n+2} < 0 for α ∈ (0, αmax). Since 4a1a5b2b6 ≤ (a1b2+a5b6)^2 always and X < 0, multiplication by X reverses the inequality, giving 4a1a5b2b6 X ≥ (a1b2+a5b6)^2 X > 2(a1b2+a5b6)^2 X. Thus the replacement makes the right-hand side more negative in general, so the inequality K(σ) < (last expression) is not established; the direction is opposite. A concrete instance is a=b=1, X=-1, for which 4abX = -4 > -8 = 2(a+b)^2X. Consequently, the paper's independent proof that λα is negatively curved, and the asserted upper bound K ≤ -1 + nα/u^{2n+2}, are not justified as written. This is load-bearing because the negative curvature feeds into Proposition 4.3(1) and hence into Theorem 1.2. The authors should repair the estimate or replace the independent proof with a citation to the negative-curvature result from [10] once the identification in Theorem 1.1 is accepted.
[§4.3, proof of Theorem 1.2] The perturbation step relies on [10, Proposition 4.2], which asserts a uniform C^0-estimate and surjectivity of the Bianchi-gauged Einstein operator Φ_{g_k} onto a fixed ε-ball around Φ_{g_k}(g_k), independent of k. This proposition comes from a preprint and is not proved in the present paper; the statement that the argument is identical to [11, Theorem 4.3] is not a substitute for a proof or for a precise statement of its hypotheses. Since this uniform surjectivity is essential for producing the exact Einstein metrics e_k, Theorem 1.2 is conditional on [10, Proposition 4.2]. The authors should either prove the needed proposition or a suitable version of it in an appendix, or state explicitly that Theorem 1.2 depends on the validity of [10].
[§4.1, Theorem 4.1] In the recursive construction of (M_{k+1}, N_{k+1}), the paper does not prove that N_{k+1} = Λ_k \ V embeds into M_{k+1} = Γ_{k+1} \ CH^n. An element of Γ_{k+1} that maps V to a different component of the preimage of N_k would create self-intersections of N_{k+1}, violating condition (2) of Theorem 4.1. The finitely many steps that eliminate the specific geodesic γ do not obviously rule out all such elements. The argument is only described as 'analogous to [10, Proposition 3.3]', so the embedding property must be proved directly or the exact statement of [10, Proposition 3.3] must be quoted and verified to apply here.

minor comments (3)

[§4.3, proof of Theorem 1.2] The text says 'By Proposition 4.3 (4) we have that ||g_k||_{L2} → 0'; this should be '||Ric(g_k)+(2n+2)g_k||_{L2} → 0' or '||Φ_{g_k}(g_k)||_{L2} → 0', since that is what Proposition 4.3(4) states.
[Lemma 3.5(2)] The definition of s is printed as 's = √(2uα/cα)(u−uα)', but the subsequent identities hold for s = sqrt((2uα/cα)(u−uα)); the formula appears to be missing a fraction bar and should be clarified.
[Introduction, paragraph 6] There is a typo: 'the explicit curvature formulas from Thereom 2.1' should read 'Theorem 2.1'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the model metric is derived from the Einstein equations independently, and [10] is used as an external comparison and uniqueness source, not to fit the constants.

full rationale

The central derivation of the model metric is self-contained. In Section 3, the Ricci formulas (Proposition 3.1) are substituted into the Einstein condition and the ODE V' + (2n/u)V = (2n+2)u - (2n)u^{-1} is solved explicitly, yielding V(u) = u^2 - 1 + alpha u^{-2n} (Theorem 3.2). Thus the family lambda_alpha is not fitted to [10]; it is obtained from a direct calculation of the Einstein equations. Theorem 1.1 then identifies lambda_alpha with Guenancia-Hamenstadt's omega_alpha by matching the ODE with [10, Theorem 2.9] and matching the initial data range via Lemma 3.5, with uniqueness imported from the external result [10, Theorem 2.2]. This is comparison, not circularity: the present authors are not the authors of [10], and no constant in lambda_alpha is chosen so that the identification holds by construction. The perturbative Theorem 1.2 depends on the inverse-function-theorem machinery of [10, Proposition 4.2] and [11], but those are external preprints by other authors, and they are not used to determine alpha or V_alpha. The only self-citations, [15] and [17], are computational references for Lie brackets and curvature normalizations; they support the curvature calculation but are not a self-citation chain that forces the main theorems. The algebraic error in Proposition 3.8 identified by the skeptic is a correctness concern, not a circularity: an invalid inequality does not amount to the claimed result being an input to itself, and the paper also offers the identification with [10]'s omega_alpha plus Bland's theorem as an alternative route to negative curvature. Remark 1.3 explicitly disclaims priority and describes the independent origin of Sections 2 and 3, which is consistent with the absence of a circular derivation.

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

The paper's own contribution is local and computational; it introduces no new physical or geometric entities beyond a family of metrics. The main free parameter α is fixed by the desired cone angle. The load-bearing external inputs are the Guenancia-Hamenstädt existence, ODE, and inverse-function theorems, plus the lattice and submanifold results used to build the branched covers.

free parameters (1)

α (ramification parameter) = α_d = β^{-1}(1/d) for a d-fold branched cover, not a data fit
Appears in V_α = u^2 − 1 + α/u^{2n}; controls the cone angle 2π c_α and the curvature bounds. The value is determined by Corollary 3.6 from the integer ramification degree d.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption Existence and uniqueness of the model Kähler-Einstein metric ω_α (Guenancia-Hamenstädt, [10, Theorem 2.2]).
Used in the proof of Theorem 1.1 to identify λ_α with ω_α; the paper does not reprove this existence.
domain assumption The warping function of ω_α solves the ODE f''/f + n(f')^2/f^2 + n/f^2 = n+1 with f'(0)=0 and f(0) ∈ (v,1) ([10, Theorem 2.9]).
The identification proof in Section 3 checks that the explicit V_α satisfies this ODE under u=f(r) with the relevant initial conditions.
domain assumption Uniform inverse-function-theorem estimate [10, Proposition 4.2] for the Bianchi-gauged Einstein operator, with constants independent of k.
Load-bearing for the perturbation step in Theorem 1.2; cited but not proved in this paper.
domain assumption Subgroup separability and finiteness of short geodesics ([4],[7]) permit a finite-index lattice Γ_{k+1} containing the stabilizer of V and excluding all problematic short classes.
Used in Theorem 4.1 to push the normal injectivity radius η_k to infinity while keeping N_k isometric.
domain assumption Stover-Toledo d-divisibility [20, Proposition 5.1] and Zheng's Kähler property [24].
Guarantee that the branched covers X_k are Kähler and that [N_k] is d-divisible, so the cyclic d-fold cover is a smooth manifold.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of An explicit description of the K\"{a}hler-Einstein metrics of Guenancia-Hamenst\"{a}dt." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MRA3ZLXB

@misc{pith2026250500517,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: An explicit description of the K\"ahler-Einstein metrics of Guenancia-Hamenst\"adt},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MRA3ZLXB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.00517}
}

read the original abstract

Fine and Premoselli (FP) constructed the first examples of manifolds that do not admit a locally symmetric metric but do admit a negatively curved Einstein metric. The manifolds here are hyperbolic branched covers like those used by Gromov and Thurston, and the construction of their model Einstein metric is a variation of the hyperbolic metric written in polar coordinates. Very recently, Guenancia and Hamenst\"{a}dt (GH) proved the existence of the first examples of manifolds that are not locally symmetric but admit a negatively curved K\"{a}hler-Einstein metric. The GH metrics are realized on complex hyperbolic branched covers constructed by Stover and Toledo. In this article we generalize the construction of FP to the complex hyperbolic setting and show that this yields a negatively curved Einstein metric that asymptotically approaches the metric of GH.

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

On ratios of Chern numbers for complex hyperbolic branched covers
math.DG 2025-05 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

Cyclic branched covers of complex hyperbolic manifolds have non-complex-hyperbolic Chern number ratios, proven exactly in dimension 2 and claimed with a gap in higher even dimensions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

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

[10]

K¨ ahler-eins tein metrics of negative curvature

Henri Guenancia and Ursula Hamenst¨ adt. K¨ ahler-eins tein metrics of negative curvature. preprint, arXiv: 2503.02838 , 2025

arXiv 2025
[1]

Anderson

Michael T. Anderson. Dehn ﬁlling and Einstein metrics in higher dimensions. J. Diﬀer. Geom., 73(2):219–261, 2006

work page 2006
[2]

Equations du type Monge-Amp` ere sur les v ari´ et´ es K¨ ahleriennes compactes

Thierry Aubin. Equations du type Monge-Amp` ere sur les v ari´ et´ es K¨ ahleriennes compactes. Bull. Sci. Math., II. S´ er., 102:63–95, 1978

work page 1978
[3]

Complex hyperbolic hyperplane comple ments

Igor Belegradek. Complex hyperbolic hyperplane comple ments. Math. Ann. , 353(2):545–579, 2012

2012
[4]

The ﬁrst Betti number and the Laplace s pectrum of certain hyperbolic manifolds

Nicolas Bergeron. The ﬁrst Betti number and the Laplace s pectrum of certain hyperbolic manifolds. Enseign. Math. (2) , 46(1-2):109–137, 2000

work page 2000
[5]

John S. Bland. The Einstein-K¨ ahler metric on {|z|2 +|w|2p < 1}. Mich. Math. J. , 33:209–220, 1986

work page 1986
[6]

On the existence of a complete K¨ ahler metric on non-compact complex manifolds and the regularity of Feﬀerm an’s equation

Shiu-Yuen Cheng and Shing-Tung Yau. On the existence of a complete K¨ ahler metric on non-compact complex manifolds and the regularity of Feﬀerm an’s equation. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. , 33:507–544, 1980

work page 1980
[7]

J. J. Duistermaat, J. A. C. Kolk, and V. S. Varadarajan. Sp ectra of compact locally symmetric manifolds of negative curvature. Invent. Math. , 52:27–93, 1979

work page 1979

Show all 25 references

[8]

Examples of compact Eins tein four-manifolds with negative curvature

Joel Fine and Bruno Premoselli. Examples of compact Eins tein four-manifolds with negative curvature. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , 33(4):991–1038, 2020

2020
[9]

Gromov and W

M. Gromov and W. Thurston. Pinching constants for hyperb olic manifolds. Invent. Math. , 89(1):1–12, 1987. EXPLICIT DESCRIPTION OF K ¨AHLER-EINSTEIN METRICS 23

1987
[11]

Negatively cu rved einstein metrics on gromov- thurston manifolds

Ursula Hamenst¨ adt and Frieder J¨ ackel. Negatively cu rved einstein metrics on gromov- thurston manifolds. preprint, arXiv: 2411.12956 , 2025

2025 arXiv
[12]

The signature of ramiﬁed coveri ngs

Friedrich Hirzebruch. The signature of ramiﬁed coveri ngs. Global Analysis, Papers in Honor of K. Kodaira 253-265 (1969)., 1969

1969
[13]

Eﬀective stability of negatively cur ved einstein metrics in dimensions at most

Frieder J¨ ackel. Eﬀective stability of negatively cur ved einstein metrics in dimensions at most
[14]

preprint, arXiv: 2502.16692 , 2025

2025
[15]

Non-deformability of Einstein metric s

Norihito Koiso. Non-deformability of Einstein metric s. Osaka J. Math. , 15:419–433, 1978

1978
[16]

Real hyperbolic hyperplane complemen ts in the complex hyperbolic plane

Barry Minemyer. Real hyperbolic hyperplane complemen ts in the complex hyperbolic plane. Adv. Math. , 338:1038–1076, 2018

2018
[17]

K¨ ahler manifolds with an almost 1 / 4-pinched metric

Barry Minemyer. K¨ ahler manifolds with an almost 1 / 4-pinched metric. preprint, arXiv: 2307.15550v2, 2023

2023 arXiv
[18]

W arped product metrics on hyperbolic a nd complex hyperbolic manifolds

Barry Minemyer. W arped product metrics on hyperbolic a nd complex hyperbolic manifolds. To appear in Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 2025

2025
[19]

Riemannian geometry , volume 171 of Grad

Peter Petersen. Riemannian geometry , volume 171 of Grad. Texts Math. Cham: Springer, 3rd edition edition, 2016

2016
[20]

Negatively curved Einstein metrics on ramiﬁed covers of closed four- dimensional hyperbolic manifolds

Bruno Premoselli. Negatively curved Einstein metrics on ramiﬁed covers of closed four- dimensional hyperbolic manifolds. In Actes de s´ eminaire de th´ eorie spectrale et g´ eom´ etrie. Ann´ ee 2017–2019, pages 129–161. St. Martin d’H` eres: Universit´ e de Grenob le I, Instit...

2017
[21]

Residual ﬁniteness for central extensions of lattices in PU(n, 1) and negatively curved projective varieties

Matthew Stover and Domingo Toledo. Residual ﬁniteness for central extensions of lattices in PU(n, 1) and negatively curved projective varieties. Pure Appl. Math. Q. , 18(4):1771–1797, 2022

2022
[22]

O. Ya. Viro. The signature of branched covering. Mat. Zametki , 36(4):549–557, 1984

1984
[23]

A general Schwarz lemma for K¨ ahler manifolds

Shing-Tung Yau. A general Schwarz lemma for K¨ ahler manifolds. Am. J. Math. , 100:197–203, 1978

1978
[24]

On the Ricci curvature of a compact K¨ ah ler manifold and the complex Monge-Amp` ere equation

Shing-Tung Yau. On the Ricci curvature of a compact K¨ ah ler manifold and the complex Monge-Amp` ere equation. I. In Complex geometry from Riemann to K¨ ahler-Einstein and Calabi-Yau, pages 285–345. Somerville, MA: International Press; Beij ing: Higher Education Press, 2018

2018
[25]

Examples of non-positively curved K¨ a hler manifolds

Fangyang Zheng. Examples of non-positively curved K¨ a hler manifolds. Comm. Anal. Geom. , 4(1-2):129–160, 1996. Department of Mathematics, The Ohio State University, Colum bus, Ohio 43210 Email address : jlafont@math.ohio-state.edu Department of Mathematics, Computer Science,...

1996

Pith tools

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

[1] [10]

K¨ ahler-eins tein metrics of negative curvature

Henri Guenancia and Ursula Hamenst¨ adt. K¨ ahler-eins tein metrics of negative curvature. preprint, arXiv: 2503.02838 , 2025

arXiv 2025

[2] [1]

Anderson

Michael T. Anderson. Dehn ﬁlling and Einstein metrics in higher dimensions. J. Diﬀer. Geom., 73(2):219–261, 2006

work page 2006

[3] [2]

Equations du type Monge-Amp` ere sur les v ari´ et´ es K¨ ahleriennes compactes

Thierry Aubin. Equations du type Monge-Amp` ere sur les v ari´ et´ es K¨ ahleriennes compactes. Bull. Sci. Math., II. S´ er., 102:63–95, 1978

work page 1978

[4] [3]

Complex hyperbolic hyperplane comple ments

Igor Belegradek. Complex hyperbolic hyperplane comple ments. Math. Ann. , 353(2):545–579, 2012

2012

[5] [4]

The ﬁrst Betti number and the Laplace s pectrum of certain hyperbolic manifolds

Nicolas Bergeron. The ﬁrst Betti number and the Laplace s pectrum of certain hyperbolic manifolds. Enseign. Math. (2) , 46(1-2):109–137, 2000

work page 2000

[6] [5]

John S. Bland. The Einstein-K¨ ahler metric on {|z|2 +|w|2p < 1}. Mich. Math. J. , 33:209–220, 1986

work page 1986

[7] [6]

On the existence of a complete K¨ ahler metric on non-compact complex manifolds and the regularity of Feﬀerm an’s equation

Shiu-Yuen Cheng and Shing-Tung Yau. On the existence of a complete K¨ ahler metric on non-compact complex manifolds and the regularity of Feﬀerm an’s equation. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. , 33:507–544, 1980

work page 1980

[8] [7]

J. J. Duistermaat, J. A. C. Kolk, and V. S. Varadarajan. Sp ectra of compact locally symmetric manifolds of negative curvature. Invent. Math. , 52:27–93, 1979

work page 1979