Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 28 references

Twist maps and codimension-1 spun embeddings

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Every closed orientable 3-manifold admits a codimension-1 spun embedding into a connected sum of S^2×S^2 and the non-spin S^2-bundle over S^2, preserving its planar open book.

desk verdict New structural result: every closed orientable 3-manifold admits a codimension-1 spun embedding into a sum of n S^2-bundles; the proof has a repairable gap about the twist subgroup. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.06168 v1 pith:O53PXBCW submitted 2025-09-07 math.GT

Shital Lawande , Kuldeep Saha This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.GT MSC 57K3057K4057R4057R52
keywords embeddingopenbookdiffeomorphismspheretwistmappushplanarcodimension-13-manifold
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 every closed orientable 3-manifold, presented as a planar open book with page a punctured sphere, admits a codimension-1 spun embedding into a 4-manifold built from $S^2 \times S^2$ and $S^2 \tilde{\times} S^2$ summands. The embedding preserves the open book structure: the 3-manifold sits as the page of an ambient open book whose monodromy is a product of sphere twists. The proof turns each Dehn twist in the page monodromy into a twist along a tubed sphere in $V^n = \#^n_b(S^2 \times [0,1])$, then collapses the whole word to powers of the $n$ core sphere twists using the asserted relation $\sigma_{S_{ij}} = \sigma_{S_i}^{-1}\sigma_{S_j}^{-1}$ and the assertion that the twist subgroup is $(\mathbb{Z}_2)^n$. If these steps hold, every such 3-manifold spun embeds in exactly $n$ copies of $S^2 \times S^2$ or $S^2 \tilde{\times} S^2$, with the parity of the exponents deciding which summand appears. The paper also gives explicit spun embeddings for lens spaces, small Seifert fibered spaces, and the binary icosahedral homology 3-sphere (the last into $\#^8(S^2 \times S^2)$), and proves non-triviality of sphere twists along non-separating spheres.

What carries the argument

The central object is the sphere twist map $\sigma_S$ along an embedded 2-sphere $S$, defined on a tubular neighborhood $S^2\times[0,1]$ by $(y,t)\mapsto(\alpha(t)\cdot y,t)$, where $\alpha$ generates $\pi_1(SO(3))\cong\mathbb{Z}_2$; it is supported near $S$ and induces a Dehn twist on a page that intersects $S$ in a curve. The matching open book lemma (Lemma 2.1) says $\mathrm{OB}(S^2\times[0,1],\mathrm{id})=S^2\times S^2$ and $\mathrm{OB}(S^2\times[0,1],\sigma)=S^2\tilde{\times} S^2$, which converts algebraic data about the monodromy into the diffeomorphism type of the ambient 4-manifold. The other ingredient is the push map, obtained by pushing a sphere boundary component around a loop and back; it realizes the relators in the fundamental group construction and produces the $S^4$ and $S^5$ examples. The load-bearing identity is $\sigma_{S_{ij}}=\sigma_{S_i}^{-1}\sigma_{S_j}^{-1}$ for a sphere obtained by tubing $S_i$ and $S_j$, together with the asserted reduction $\mathrm{Twist}(V^n)=(\mathbb{Z}_2)^n$, which lets every sphere-twist word be replaced by powers of the $n$ core sphere twists.

What would settle it

Compute $\mathrm{Diff}_\partial(\#^n_b(S^2\times[0,1]))$ for $n=2$ or $n=3$ and test whether Proposition 2.2's boundary-sphere relation together with $\sigma_{S_{ij}}=\sigma_{S_i}^{-1}\sigma_{S_j}^{-1}$ generates exactly $(\mathbb{Z}_2)^n$; any extra relation or non-abelian generator would produce a monodromy word that cannot be collapsed to core sphere twists, directly upsetting Theorem 1.1 for some planar open book.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Let $M = \mathrm{OB}(\Sigma_{0,n+1},\varphi_M)$ be a closed orientable 3-manifold written as a planar open book. Theorem 1.1 claims that $M$ open book embeds in $W_{i,j} = (\#^i S^2\times S^2)\#(\#^j S^2\tilde{\times} S^2)$ for some $i,j$ with $i+j=n$, where the embedding restricts to a proper embedding of the page $\Sigma_{0,n+1}$ into $V^n = \#^n_b(S^2\times[0,1])$ and intertwines the monodromies up to isotopy. The numbers $i$ and $j$ are read from a Dehn twist presentation of $\varphi_M$: after identifying each boundary-parallel curve $\delta_k$ with the core circle of the $k$-th copy of $S^1\times[0,1]$, a twist along a curve homologous to $\delta_i+\delta_j$ is realized by a twist along the tubed sphere $S_{ij}$, with $\sigma_{S_{ij}} = \sigma_{S_i}^{-1}\sigma_{S_j}^{-1}$. Since the paper asserts $\mathrm{Twist}(V^n)=(\mathbb{Z}_2)^n$, any product of such sphere twists reduces to $\prod_{q=1}^n \sigma_{S_q}^{\beta_q}$, and Lemma 2.1 identifies each summand as $S^2\times S^2$ or $S^2\tilde{\times} S^2$ according as $\beta_q$ is even or odd.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the paper's unproved 'Recall' that the twist subgroup of $\mathrm{Diff}_\partial(V^n)$, for $V^n=\#^n_b(S^2\times[0,1])$, is exactly $(\mathbb{Z}_2)^n$ and that a twist along a tubed sphere $S_{ij}$ equals $\sigma_{S_i}^{-1}\sigma_{S_j}^{-1}$; if that subgroup is larger or non-abelian, the page monodromy cannot in general be collapsed to powers of the $n$ core sphere twists, and the claimed embedding in $W_{i,j}$ need not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every closed orientable 3-manifold admits a codimension-1 spun embedding into a connected sum of $n$ copies of $S^2\times S^2$ or $S^2\tilde{\times} S^2$, where $n$ is the number of strands in a surgery presentation.
  • The parity of the exponents $\beta_q$ in the collapsed monodromy decides the target: even exponents contribute $S^2\times S^2$ and odd exponents contribute $S^2\tilde{\times} S^2$.
  • Lens spaces $L(p,q)$ spun embed in $\#^k S^2\times S^2$ when all continued-fraction coefficients $a_i$ are even, and in $\#^k S^2\tilde{\times} S^2$ otherwise.
  • The binary icosahedral homology 3-sphere spun embeds in $\#^8(S^2\times S^2)$, a concrete improvement over previously known embeddings of that manifold in spin 4-manifolds.
  • Every finitely presented group is the fundamental group of a closed oriented 4-manifold with simplicial volume zero, obtained as a 4-dimensional open book with push-map monodromy.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper leaves implicit that even if the exact $(\mathbb{Z}_2)^n$ assertion fails, the same construction on $V^N$ for $N\ge n$ would embed $M$ in a connected sum with $N$ summands, so the load-bearing content is the minimal number of $S^2$-bundle summands rather than existence of some spun embedding.
  • A testable extension is to apply the parity condition $\sum_i c_{ij}\alpha_i\equiv 0\pmod 2$ for a spin target to arbitrary planar open books; this converts the embedding problem into a linear algebra check over $\mathbb{Z}_2$ on the Dehn twist word.
  • The non-triviality proof suggests a transferable invariant: any relative diffeomorphism whose mapping torus is non-spin while the identity mapping torus is spin is automatically non-trivial, a cheap detection tool for twist maps in settings where classical invariants vanish.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies codimension-1 embeddings that preserve open book decompositions. Its main result, Theorem 1.1, states that every closed orientable 3-manifold M=OB(Σ_{0,n+1},φ_M) admits a codimension-1 spun embedding into W_{i,j}=(#^i S^2×S^2)#(#^j S^2~×S^2) for some i,j with i+j=n. The proof embeds the planar page in V^n=#^n_b(S^2×[0,1]), encodes each Dehn twist of the monodromy by a sphere twist along a tubed core sphere, and then uses the asserted fact Twist(V^n)=(Z_2)^n to reduce the monodromy to a product of powers of the n core sphere twists. The paper also gives explicit planar open book embeddings for lens spaces, Seifert fibered spaces, the Poincaré homology sphere, and examples in S^4 and S^5, and it proves nontriviality of a sphere twist along a nonseparating sphere in Diff_∂^+(S^1×S^{n-1}#V).

Significance. If the main theorem is correct, it is a genuinely new and useful result: it extends the spun-embedding program from the codimension-2 setting to codimension-1, and the explicit planar-page constructions are concrete and potentially applicable. The paper is self-contained in its geometric constructions, does not fit parameters to its conclusions, and gives a simple open-book proof of nontriviality of sphere twists. The central claim, however, rests on an unproved and nontrivial algebraic assertion about the twist subgroup of Diff_∂(#^n_b(S^2×[0,1])), so the significance is real but conditional on closing that gap.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3, proof of Theorem 1.1] The reduction from an arbitrary product of sphere twists to a product of powers of the n core sphere twists uses the sentence 'Recall that every σ_{γ_i} is a composition of twists along the boundary spheres S_1,S_2,...,S_n and Twist(V^n)=(Z_2)^n.' Neither half of this statement is proved or given a precise reference. Proposition 2.2 only records the single relation that the product of twists along the n+1 boundary spheres of D^3_n is isotopic to the identity; it does not identify the full twist subgroup. If Twist(V^n) is larger than (Z_2)^n, or if the core twist generators satisfy additional relations, then ∏σ_{γ_i}^{α_i} need not collapse to an independent product of core twists, and the conclusion that OB(V^n,∏σ_{γ_i}^{α_i}) is diffeomorphic to (#^i S^2×S^2)#(#^j S^2~×S^2) with i+j=n is unsupported. This is the load-bearing step of Theorem 1.1 and should be proved or cited to a source that computes Twist(V^n).
  2. [Section 3, proof of Theorem 1.1] The claim that a sphere twist along a tubed sphere S_{ij} induces a Dehn twist along the curve γ_{ij} on the embedded page is stated as 'As observed before' but is not proved in the paper. This is the geometric bridge between the 3-dimensional page monodromy and the 4-dimensional sphere twists, and it is used for every curve γ_i in the monodromy presentation. A proof or a precise reference is needed; without it the passage from Dehn twists on Σ_{0,n+1} to sphere twists on V^n is not established.
  3. [Section 4, proof of Theorem 1.3] The proof relies on the assertion that 'S^2~×S^{n-1} is not spin' and hence that S^1×S^n#S^2~×S^{n-1} does not embed in R^{n+3}. This is not justified, and in the case n=2 it appears to be false: if S^2~×S^1 denotes the nontrivial S^1-bundle over S^2, then this is the Hopf fibration S^3, which is spin. More generally, non-spinness is not by itself an embedding obstruction into Euclidean space. The argument needs a correct invariant, or a restriction on n such that the stated nonembedding is true, or a different proof of nontriviality of the sphere twist.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.5] The sentence 'Thus, Theorem 3.1 implies the following' should refer to Theorem 2.4, since the corollary follows from the open-book construction just proved together with Kastenholz's result.
  2. [Section 3.2] The text contains the placeholder 'Figure ***' when referring to the surgery diagram of a small Seifert manifold; an actual figure reference is needed.
  3. [Section 4] The statement of Lemma 4.1 uses the symbol '§' between S^1×D^n and S^n×[0,1], where the later proof indicates that a boundary connected sum is intended; this should be written as #_b or described in words.
  4. [Throughout] There are several typos, including 'recieved' and 'orienteable' in Section 1, and references [3] and [7] do not appear to be cited in the text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: Theorem 1.1 is a geometric open-book embedding whose algebraic reduction rests on external Hatcher-Wahl/Laudenbach facts; the unproved 'Recall' assertion is a completeness risk, not a self-referential derivation.

full rationale

The main derivation chain is self-contained as a geometric construction and does not define its outputs by its inputs. In Theorem 1.1, an arbitrary planar open book OB(Σ,φ_M) is embedded in OB(V^n,∏σ_{γ_i}^{α_i}) by applying sphere twists on fibers, and the normalization ∏σ_{γ_i}^{α_i}=∏σ_{S_q}^{β_q} uses the sentence 'Recall that every σ_{γ_i} is a composition of twists along the boundary spheres S_1,S_2,...,S_n and Twist(V^n)=(Z_2)^n.' This step is load-bearing, but it is an algebraic statement about Diff_∂(#^n_b(S^2×[0,1])) attributable to the external Hatcher-Wahl framework (Proposition 2.2 is explicitly cited to [12]) and to Laudenbach's commutativity of sphere twists; it does not assume the conclusion W_{i,j} or the existence of the embedding. The only defect is that this 'Recall' assertion is not proved or precisely referenced at that point, so I flag it as a missing-support/correctness risk, not as circularity. The final identification OB(V^n,∏σ_{S_q}^{β_q}) with (#^i S^2×S^2)#(#^j S^2~×S^2) is then a direct computation of parities of β_q. The same external fact is reused in Theorems 3.2 and the Seifert/Poincaré examples; it is still not derived from the target claims. Theorem 1.3's non-triviality proof uses Lemma 4.1 and the spin obstruction 'S^2~×S^{n-1} is not spin' to contradict embeddability in R^{n+3}; this is a standard external obstruction, not a restatement of the theorem. Lemma 2.1 is proved by cutting S^2×S^n along a page. The planar open book input from surgery diagrams is attributed to Etnyre and Onaran, and the only self-citation [19] appears in a general survey list for codimension-2 embeddings and is not load-bearing. No parameter is fitted to a subset of data and no quantity is defined in terms of the quantity being predicted. Thus the appropriate finding is no significant circularity, score 0.

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

The central results rest on standard surgery constructions, on the algebraic structure of twist subgroups, and on a geometric mechanism promoting Dehn twists to sphere twists. None of these are derived from scratch in the paper, and one of the asserted embedding obstructions in Theorem 1.3 is not generally valid as stated.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption There exists a planar open book decomposition OB(Σ_{0,n+1}, φ_M) for every closed orientable 3-manifold M, obtained from a ±1 surgery diagram of unknots.
    Used in Theorem 1.1 and Section 2.7, based on Lickorish-Wallace surgery and Onaran's construction. The paper sketches the braid argument but does not prove the full surgery-to-open-book conversion.
  • domain assumption Twist(V^n) = (Z_2)^n for V^n = #^n_b(S^2×[0,1]), and σ_{S_{ij}} = σ_{S_i}^{-1}σ_{S_j}^{-1} by Proposition 2.2.
    Load-bearing in the proof of Theorem 1.1; stated as 'Recall' without proof. It is plausibly known from Hatcher-Wahl, but the paper does not give a theorem number.
  • domain assumption A sphere twist along a tubed sphere S_γ in V^n induces exactly the Dehn twist τ_γ on the properly embedded planar page Σ_{0,n+1}.
    This is the central mechanism of the main theorem. It is geometrically plausible but is not proved in the paper.
  • ad hoc to paper Non-spin of S^2~×S^{n-1} implies that S^1×S^n#S^2~×S^{n-1} does not embed in R^{n+3}.
    Asserted in the proof of Theorem 1.3 with no proof or citation. As stated it is not a general theorem, since non-spin manifolds can embed in Euclidean spaces of codimension 2; the argument needs repair.
  • domain assumption Lemma 4.1: OB(S^1×D^n § S^n×[0,1], φ_1∘φ_2) = OB(S^1×D^n,φ_1)#OB(S^n×[0,1],φ_2).
    Used for Theorem 1.3; proof is sketched with a figure and is standard as a Murasugi sum or plumbing relation, but it is not fully rigorous in the text.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Twist maps and codimension-1 spun embeddings." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/O53PXBCW

@misc{pith2026250906168,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Twist maps and codimension-1 spun embeddings},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/O53PXBCW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.06168}
}
abstract

We study codimension $1$ embeddings preserving open book structures. In particular, we prove that every closed orientable 3-manifold admits a codimension-1 spun embedding in a finite connected sum of $S^2 \times S^2$s and $S^2 \tilde{\times} S^2$s. We discuss some explicit constructions of planar open books on 3-manifolds and their codimension $1$ spun embeddings. To construct these embeddings, we use sphere twist maps and push maps. We also give a simple proof for nontriviality of the twist map along a nonseparating $S^n$ in the group of orientation preserving diffeomorphisms of $S^1 \times S^n \setminus D^{n+1}$, relative to the boundary.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.06168 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. D 3 as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The closed curve obtained as the union of an arc joining the two boundary components of B1,1 and its image under ρα, is homotopic to α. We note that ρS,α corresponds to a loop in Emb(S 2 , M). This gives a proper embedding fS,α : S 1 × D 2 \ S({pt.} × D 2 ) → M, where S({pt.} × D 2 ) denotes the suspension of the disk {pt.} × D 2 . We note that ρS,α is supported in a neighborhood of the image of fS,α. 2.4. Open book… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. M0 Let rj = a δ1 i1 a δ2 i2 · · · a δl(j) il(j) for 1 ≤ j ≤ k, and let γj be a simple closed curve in the interior of M0 homotopic to rj . We define an element ϕ ∈ Diff+ ∂ (M0) by ϕ = ρS1,γ1 ◦ ρS2,γ2 ◦ · · · ◦ ρSk,γk . Define V = OB(M0, ϕ). We claim that π1(V ) = G. To see this, we first observe that π1(V ) = ⟨a1, a2, . . . , ag|a −1 1 ϕ∗(a1), a−1 2 ϕ∗(a2), . . . , a−1 g ϕ∗(ag), ¯θ1ϕ∗(θ1), ¯θ2ϕ∗(θ2)· · · ¯θkϕ∗(θk)⟩.… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (19 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: By Lickorish [21] and Wallace [28], every closed oriented 3-manifold can be obtained from S 3 by ±1 surgery along an n-component link L of unknots. Moreover, L can be chosen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Similar methods can be used to create planar open book decompositions from other surgery diagrams also. We shall discuss some explicit constructions of planar open books in section 3. The following was proved by Onaran [23]. Theorem 2.8 (Onaran [23]). Let M be a closed…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Proof of Theorem 1.1. Consider S 1 embedded in S 2 as the great circle. This induces a canon￾ical embedding of S 1 × [0, 1] in S 2 × [0, 1]. Let Vn denote the boundary connected sum of n copies of S 2 × [0, 1]. We can take the boundary connected sum so that it induces …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A proper embedding of Σ0,3 in (S 2 × [0, 1])#b(S 2 × [0, 1]). The curve δi can be identified with the core circle of the i-th copy of S 1 × [0, 1] in Σ0,n+1 for i = 1, 2, ..., n. Let Si denote the core 2-sphere of the corresponding S 2 × [0, 1] in Vn. Let γij be a simp…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: planar open book decomposition of L(p, q) with page Σ0,k+1 and monodromy ψ. Here, ψ is a composition of Dehn twists along the boundary parallel curves γ1, γ2, . . . , γk and the simple closed curves γij homologous to Pk j=i [γj ] for i ∈ {1, 2, . . . , k − 1}. In fact,…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Similar to the proof of Theorem 1.1, we properly embed Σ0,k+1 in Mk = #k b (S 2 × [0, 1]) such that twist along the ith sphere, σi , induces Dehn twist along γi . Let σi,i+1,...,k denote the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: 3.2. Small Seifert fibered spaces. The methods used in Theorem 3.2 can also be used to produce spun embedding of small Seifert fibered spaces. A small Seifert manifold M(e0; r1, r2, r3) (e0 ∈ Z and r1, r2, r3 ∈ (0, 1)∩Q) has the following surgery diagram as shown in F…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Planar open book for Mp from braided surgery diagram. Example 3.3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The plumbing diagram for M(−3; − 3 2 , − 5 3 , − 5 3 ). 3.3. Poincar´e homology sphere. The famous Poincar´e homology sphere Σ(2, 3, 5) has a planar open book decomposition OB(Σ0,3, τ −1 α ◦ τ −1 β ◦ τα ◦ τβ ◦ τ −1 δ1 ◦ τδ2 ◦ τ −1 δ3 )(see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/fu…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Thus surgery coefficients of all unknots changes from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_16.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Planar open book for M(−3; − 3 2 , − 5 3 , − 5 3 ) from braided surgery diagram. δ3 δ1 δ2 − − + + + − β α − [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: A planar open book for Σ(2, 3, 5) −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: 16.Thus blue unknot has new surgery coefficient −1. After doing isotopy we get a link shown on left of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: a1 a2 a3 a4 a5 a6 a7 a8 b1 b2 b3 1 1 1 1 −1 −1 1 2 3 2 1 1 −1 −1 −1 −1 −1 −1 −1 −1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Example 3.4. Consider an open book with page Σ0,3 and monodromy h = τ ia a τ ib b τ ic c τ id d τ ie e τ if f τ ig g (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: 3.5. Codimension–1 spun embedding in S 4 . Consider a proper embedding of Σ0,3 in H1,1 = S 1 × D 2#bS 2 × [0, 1] as described in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: then the induced push map is given by the mapping class τa ◦ τ −1 b . b c a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: A family of planar open books for S 3 . will give a proper embedding of Σ0,2n+1 in #2n b H1,1. Let ϕM = Q γ1,...,γm∈C τ α1 γ1 ◦ · · · ◦ τ αm γm ◦ ρb1,a1 ◦ ρb2,a2 ◦ · · · ◦ ρbn,an , for some integers m, α1, . . . αm such that [γi ] = Pn j=1 cij [aj ] and nj = Pm i=1 ci…
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: The shaded 2d boxes specify the gluing regions after removal of two (n + 1)-disks from OB(S 1 × D n−1 , ϕ1) and OB(S n × [0, 1], ϕ2), respectively. mapping cylinders, where two ends of a cylinder are identified via the identity map. The monodromy in the first mapping …

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Aceto, M

    P. Aceto, M. Golla, K. Larson,Embedding 3-manifolds in spin 4-manifolds, Journal of Topology, vol. 10(2), 301-323, 2017

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    Alexander,A lemma on systems of knotted curves, Proc

    J. Alexander,A lemma on systems of knotted curves, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., vol. 9, (1923), 93–95

    work page 1923

  3. [3]

    Baader, F

    S. Baader, F. Misev,On the stabilization height of fiber surfaces inS 3, Journal of Knot Theory and Its Ramifications, vol. 27, No. 3 (2018)

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Brendle, N

    T. Brendle, N. Broaddus and A. Putman,The mapping class group of connect sums ofS 1×S 2, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 376 (2023), 2557-2572

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Budney and D

    R. Budney and D. Gabai,On the automorphism groups of the hyperbolic manifolds, arXiv:2303.05010v1 [math.GT], 2023

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Cochran,Embedding4-manifolds inS 5, Topology, vol

    T. Cochran,Embedding4-manifolds inS 5, Topology, vol. 23(3), 257-269,1984

    work page 1984

  7. [7]

    A. L. Edmonds, C. Livingston,Embedding punctured lens spaces in four-manifolds, Comment. Math. Helvitici 71 (1996) 169-191

    work page 1996

  8. [8]

    J. B. Etnyre,Lectures on open book decompositions and contact structures, arXiv:math/0409402v3 [math.SG], 2005

    arXiv 2005

Show all 28 references
  1. [9]

    J. B. Etnyre and Y. Lekili,Embedding all contact3–manifolds in a fixed contact5–manifold, Journal of the London Mathematical Society, Volume 99, Issue 1, February 2019, 52-68

    2019

  2. [10]

    Ghiggini, P

    P. Ghiggini, P. Lisca, A. I. Stipsicz,Tight contact structures on some small Seifert fibered 3- manifolds, American Journal of Mathematics, 129(5), 1403-1447 (2007)

    2007

  3. [11]

    R. E. Gompf, A. I. Stipsicz,4-manifolds and Kirby calculus, Graduate Studies in Mathematics (vol. 20), AMS

  4. [12]

    Hatcher, N

    A. Hatcher, N. Wahl,Stabilization for mapping class groups of 3-manifolds, Duke Math. J. 155(2): 205-269, 2010

    2010

  5. [13]

    C-S Hsueh,Kirby diagrams of 4-dimensional open books, Proceedings of the Edinburgh Mathe- matical Society (2024),1-29

    2024

  6. [14]

    C-S Hsueh,Handle decompositions and stabilizations of open books, arXiv:2505.19343v1 [math.GT], 2025

    2025 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Kastenholz,Simplicial volume of open books in dimension 4, arXiv:2504.10975v1 [math.GT], 2025

    T. Kastenholz,Simplicial volume of open books in dimension 4, arXiv:2504.10975v1 [math.GT], 2025

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Kegel, F

    M. Kegel, F. Schmaschke,Trisecting a4-dimensional open book into three chapters, arXiv:2304.12250v3 [math.GT] , 2024

    2024

  9. [17]

    Laudenbach,Sur les 2-spheres dune variete de dimension 3, Ann

    F. Laudenbach,Sur les 2-spheres dune variete de dimension 3, Ann. of Math. (2) 97 (1973), 57–81

    1973

  10. [18]

    Laudenbach,Topologie de la dimension trois: homotopie et isotopie, Societe Mathematique de France, Paris, 1974

    F. Laudenbach,Topologie de la dimension trois: homotopie et isotopie, Societe Mathematique de France, Paris, 1974

    1974

  11. [19]

    Lawande and K

    S. Lawande and K. Saha,Surfaces in 4-manifolds and extendible mapping classes. https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.17640v2, 2025 20 SHITAL LA W ANDE AND KULDEEP SAHA

    2025 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Lawson, Open book decomposition for odd dimensional manifolds,Topology, vol 17, (1979), 189–192

    T. Lawson, Open book decomposition for odd dimensional manifolds,Topology, vol 17, (1979), 189–192

    1979

  13. [21]

    W. B. R. Lickorish,A representation of orientable combinatorial3-manifolds, Ann. Math. 76 (1962), 531-540

    1962

  14. [22]

    (2016) 2:69–119

    Burak Ozbagci, Patrick Popescu-Pampu,Generalized plumbings and murasugi sums, Arnold Math J. (2016) 2:69–119

    2016

  15. [23]

    Onaran,Planar open book decompositions of3-manifolds, Rocky Mountain Journal of Math- ematics, 2014;4(5): 1621-1630

    S. Onaran,Planar open book decompositions of3-manifolds, Rocky Mountain Journal of Math- ematics, 2014;4(5): 1621-1630

    2014

  16. [24]

    D. M. Pancholi, S. Pandit, K. Saha:Embedding of3-manifolds via open books, Journal of the Ramanujan Mathematical Society 36 (3), 243-250, 2021

    2021

  17. [25]

    Osamu Saeki,On simple fibered knots inS 5 and the existence of decomposable algebraic3-knots, Comment. Math. Helvetici 62 (1987) 587-601

    1987

  18. [26]

    Saha,On open book embedding of contact manifolds in the standard contact sphere

    K. Saha,On open book embedding of contact manifolds in the standard contact sphere. Canadian Math. Bull. 2020;63(4):755-770

    2020

  19. [27]

    Sch¨ onenberger,Planar open books and symplectic fillings, PhD

    S. Sch¨ onenberger,Planar open books and symplectic fillings, PhD. Thesis (2005), University of Pennsylvania

    2005

  20. [28]

    A. H. Wallace,Modifications and cobounding manifolds, Canadian J. Math. 12 (1960), 503-528. IAI TCG CREST Kolkata, and Ramakrishna Mission Vivekananda Education and Research Institute, Belur Math Email address:shital.lawande@tcgcrest.org IAI TCG CREST Kolkata, and Academy of S...

    1960

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.