The geometry of triples of antipodal ideal chambers of affine buildings

Corentin Le Bars; Corina Ciobotaru

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 69 references

The geometry of triples of antipodal ideal chambers of affine buildings

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 In affine buildings of types C2, G2 and B3, every antipodal triple of ideal chambers is automatically generic, and all other irreducible types admit explicit non-generic configurations.

desk verdict Useful framework and checkable Weyl-group computations, but the converse half of the main theorem rests on a missing projection argument—worth refereeing, not worth believing yet. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.04520 v1 pith:TJ6CIM6J submitted 2026-08-05 math.GR math.GTmath.MG

Corina Ciobotaru , Corentin Le Bars This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.GRmath.GTmath.MG MSC 20E4251E2420F55

keywords affinebuildingssphericalatinfinityantipodaltriplesidealchambersaffine-genericityroot-flatsbisectorsWeylgroups

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 studies triples of pairwise opposite chambers in the spherical boundary at infinity of a locally finite affine building. It distinguishes ideal-genericity, meaning the three apartment boundaries have empty common intersection, from affine-genericity, a condition on bounded boundary components of pairwise intersections of affine apartments, and shows the affine notion supports a continuous barycenter map. The main classification result is that, among irreducible finite Weyl groups of rank at least two, the geometric criterion of Proposition 6.3 holds exactly for types G2, B2=C2, and B3. Consequently, in affine buildings of those types every antipodal triple of ideal chambers is automatically ideal-generic and affine-generic. In all remaining irreducible types the paper constructs explicit non-generic configurations, and in the Bruhat–Tits setting it proves that the k-rank of the stabilizer of an antipodal triple equals the dimension of its canonical root-flat.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is the equivalence of Proposition 6.3: the affine Coxeter complex contains a root-flat perpendicular to a bisector exactly when the Weyl vector $\rho$, the half-sum of the positive roots, lies in the span of a proper subset of roots. A root-flat is an unbounded intersection of affine walls, and a bisector is a bi-infinite geodesic whose endpoints are the barycenters of two opposite ideal chambers. Since bisectors have directions $w\rho$, perpendicularity of $\bigcap_{\alpha\in T}H_\alpha$ to a bisector is equivalent to $w\rho\in\mathrm{Span}(T)$, and Lemma 6.4 reduces the check to $W$-orbits of the standard parabolic hyperplanes. That reduction is what turns the classification over all irreducible finite Weyl groups into a finite, algorithmic computation.

What would settle it

Search a type eB3 affine building, for instance the Bruhat–Tits building of split SO7 over Q_p, for an antipodal triple of ideal chambers whose three apartment boundaries have non-empty intersection; finding such a triple would directly refute Theorem 6.13. Equivalently, exhaust the finite W-orbits of proper root subspaces for the Weyl vector (5/2, 3/2, 1/2) in type B3: if this vector lies in any such orbit, the algebraic criterion of Proposition 6.3 fails for B3.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that two genericity notions for triples of pairwise opposite chambers at infinity are governed by a single root-system dichotomy. Proposition 4.1 shows that failure of affine-genericity propagates across all three pairwise apartment intersections and produces a canonical root-flat, defined up to parallelism, lying in all three apartment boundaries. Proposition 5.2 shows that the barycenter of a finite convex hull built from the bounded boundary components is locally constant, hence continuous. Theorem 6.13 then classifies the situation: among irreducible finite Weyl groups of rank at least two, the sufficient condition 'no root-flat is perpendicular to a bisector' holds exactly for types G2, B2=C2 and B3, so in affine buildings of affine types G2, C2 and B3 every antipodal triple of ideal chambers is ideal-generic and affine-generic. In all remaining types the paper gives algorithmic constructions of non-generic triples, and for Bruhat–Tits buildings it proves that the k-rank of the setwise stabilizer of any antipodal triple equals the dimension of the canonical root-flat attached to the triple.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the unproved angle assertion in Proposition 6.2: in the rotation argument, the Euclidean angle at one point between a ray in the shared root-flat and a bisector can coincide with the corresponding angle at another point only if that angle is 90 degrees; if this assertion is false, Theorem 6.13 would not establish automatic genericity for types C2, G2, and B3.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In affine buildings of types eG2, eC2 and eB3, every antipodal triple of ideal chambers is ideal-generic, so any three pairwise opposite chambers at infinity determine three apartments whose boundaries meet transversely.
Affine-genericity in these types gives a well-defined, locally constant, and therefore continuous barycenter map on the space of antipodal triples, producing a geometric invariant attached to each triple.
For Bruhat–Tits buildings of type eC2, eG2 or eB3, the stabilizer of every antipodal triple of ideal chambers is compact, because the canonical root-flat has dimension zero.
In every other irreducible affine type of rank at least two, non-generic configurations exist, and the paper's construction yields explicit triples that are not affine-generic or even not ideal-generic.
For any antipodal triple in a Bruhat–Tits building, the k-rank of its setwise stabilizer equals the dimension of the canonical root-flat, with the stabilizer splitting as a compact group extended by a free abelian lattice of that rank.

Reading between the lines

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

If the unproved angle assertion in Proposition 6.2 is supplied with a proof, the classification should transfer to any affine building with the same finite Weyl group, not only the classical Bruhat–Tits examples, because the criterion is purely combinatorial in the Coxeter complex.
The rank equality in Theorem 7.7 suggests a testable converse: in types G2, C2 and B3, stabilizers of antipodal triples are always compact, whereas in other types one should be able to exhibit stabilizers whose free abelian quotient has rank equal to the root-flat dimension.
The non-generic triples constructed in Section 6.2 are natural test cases for boundary dynamics of p-adic groups, since their stabilizers act with positive k-rank and a lattice of translations along the canonical root-flat.
A further extension the authors do not draw: the same root-system criterion could be used to classify automatic genericity for k-tuples of pairwise opposite chambers, not just triples, by asking whether all bisectors and root-flats satisfy the same perpendicularity obstruction.

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

Here's the short version: the paper builds a genuinely useful framework for thinking about genericity of antipodal ideal-chamber triples in affine buildings, and the algebraic classification of finite Weyl groups it contains is solid. The problem is the claimed converse—that the only types where every triple is automatically generic are B2=C2, G2, B3—is not proven. The construction in Section 6.2 that is supposed to produce non-generic triples in all other types has a load-bearing gap. I would still send this to a serious referee, but not with a recommendation to accept as is.

What is genuinely new: the distinction between ideal-genericity and affine-genericity, Proposition 4.1 showing that non-genericity propagates and yields a canonical root-flat, and Proposition 5.2 giving a locally constant barycenter map on affine-generic triples. The algebraic part is also a real contribution. Propositions 6.5 through 6.11 carry out an explicit, checkable analysis of which irreducible finite Weyl groups satisfy the root-space condition of Proposition 6.3. I spot-checked several of the arithmetic claims and they work. The later section connecting the rank of the setwise stabilizer of a triple to the dimension of the canonical root-flat (Theorem 7.7) is a nice payoff and is cleanly argued given the geometric setup.

The soft spots are real but concentrated in one place. Section 6.2, Step 2 asserts that the intersection Q'_1 = A12 ∩ A13 is a convex cone parallel to Q1. That is not justified. In the transverse building, the analogous intersection for an ideal-generic triple typically has nonempty bounded boundary, so the product with the Euclidean factor is a cylinder over a bounded polyhedron rather than a cone. This affects the construction of the third chamber. Step 3 then explicitly requires that the bisector γ12 projects to a bisector in X_I; the paper only indicates this happens for eA2 in Remark 6.12, and that projection property is exactly what is needed to ensure C2 and C3 are opposite. Without these steps, the counterexamples for all non-exceptional types do not go through, and the 'only' direction of Theorem 6.13 is unproven. Section 6.3 is even more explicitly conditional, relying on assumptions about unipotent subgroups that are not known to hold generally. The authors do acknowledge some of these limitations, which I appreciate, but the abstract and theorem statement overclaim.

One concern the reader flagged—the angle assertion in Proposition 6.2—looks repairable. The stress-test note is right that the rays toward the two opposite barycenters on a fixed bisector point in opposite directions, so the angle argument can be made rigorous. I would not treat that as a serious flaw.

Who is this for: people working on boundaries of affine buildings, group actions on buildings, or C*-simplicity and its relatives. The framework and the positive results in Sections 4 and 5 will be used, regardless of what happens to the converse.

Recommendation: engage with it, but send to a referee with explicit instructions to chase the projection assumption in Section 6.2. If that step cannot be proved, the correct conclusion is that the classification has only a proven 'if' direction, and the paper should say so. With that change, it is still a solid contribution.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper defines two competing notions of genericity for triples of pairwise opposite ideal chambers in the boundary of a locally finite affine building: ideal-genericity, requiring the three apartments at infinity to have empty common intersection, and affine-genericity, requiring each intersection of two affine apartments to have a bounded boundary component. The main results are: Proposition 4.1, which shows that failure of affine-genericity propagates through the whole triple and yields a canonical root-flat; Proposition 5.2, which constructs a locally constant (hence continuous) barycenter map on affine-generic triples; Propositions 6.2–6.3, which reduce the automatic-genericity question to a root-system condition; and a case-by-case computation, Theorem 6.13, asserting that among irreducible finite Weyl groups of rank at least two the automatic-genericity condition holds exactly for types B2=C2, G2 and B3. The paper also proposes explicit constructions of non-generic triples in all other types and derives algebraic consequences for stabilizers of triples in Bruhat–Tits buildings.

Significance. The paper's ideas are attractive and the fully proved parts are useful. The root-system computations in Propositions 6.5–6.11 are explicit, checkable, and appear correct; I spot-checked the arithmetic in B2, B3, A_n, B_4 and E_6. The local constancy of the barycenter map in Proposition 5.2 is a genuinely interesting structural statement, and the algebraic consequences in Section 7 would be a natural application of the geometric results. However, the converse direction of Theorem 6.13 is not currently established: the construction of non-generic triples for all non-exceptional types rests on two unproved assumptions in Section 6.2. The theorem may well be true, but the manuscript as written does not yet prove it.

major comments (3)

[6.2, Step 3 (pp. 25–26)] The construction of a non-affine-generic triple for every non-exceptional type depends on the condition, stated in Step 3, that the bisector γ12 in A12 projects under p_I to a bisector in A12. This condition is not proved, and Remark 6.12 only asserts it for eA2. The projection of a bisector is not automatically a bisector, because the ideal endpoint of a projected ray is generally not the barycenter of the projected chamber. Without a proof of the projection condition for the families in Propositions 6.6–6.11, the existence of bad triples in types A_n (n≥2), B_n (n≥4), C_n (n≥3), D_n (n≥3), F_4 and E_n is not established, and the 'only' direction of Theorem 6.13 remains open.
[6.2, Step 2 (p. 25)] The assertion that Q'_1 = A12 ∩ A13 is 'a convex cone parallel to Q1' is unjustified. In the splitting X(η+,η−) ≅ R^{n-|I|} × X_I, the apartments A12 and A13 are products of R^{n-|I|} with apartments of X_I; for an ideal-generic triple in X_I, the intersection of two apartments generally has nonempty bounded boundary, so Q'_1 is a cylinder over a bounded polyhedron rather than a cone. Since the construction of the geodesic ray whose endpoint defines C3 starts from this asserted cone geometry, this step needs a corrected proof or a different argument.
[Prop. 6.2 (p. 13)] The key angular claim that the angle α at x1 'can coincide with the corresponding angle at x2 ... if and only if α = 90°' is stated without proof. This is the step that converts the failure of ideal-genericity into the existence of a root-flat perpendicular to a bisector, so it is load-bearing for the automatic-genericity half of Theorem 6.13. The claim is true — the rays r1 and r2 point in opposite directions along the same parallel class, while the two bisector rays are parallel with the same orientation — but the text should supply the short argument, because the retraction argument alone does not make the equality of the two angles explicit.

minor comments (4)

[Definitions 2.1 and 6.1] The manuscript uses 'root-flat orthogonal/perpendicular to a bisector' for flats of arbitrary dimension without a formal definition; please state precisely that every direction of the flat is orthogonal to the bisector direction.
[6.3 (p. 26)] The existence and properties of the unipotent element u are assumptions, not theorems; please state them as explicit hypotheses in the subsection's conclusion so that the conditional nature of the construction is preserved in any later citation.
[7, Remark 7.1] Defining the k-rank of the setwise stabilizer Stab_G{C1,C2,C3} as the k-rank of P1∩P2∩P3 is nonstandard; please state this convention at the start of Section 7 and add a remark explaining why the possible permutations of the three chambers do not change the rank conclusion.
[Remark 6.12] Since Step 3 of Section 6.2 assumes that γ12 projects to a bisector, the eA2 example deserves an explicit verification rather than a bare assertion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation; the paper's main chain is self-contained, with a minor auxiliary self-citation and correctness gaps that are not circularity.

full rationale

I find no circular step in the claimed derivation. The structural results (Proposition 4.1, Proposition 5.2, Proposition 6.2, Proposition 6.3) are proved from the definitions of ideal/affine genericity, apartments, retractions, convex hulls, and the standard geometry of Coxeter complexes; none of these results is used to define its own hypothesis, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The classification in Section 6.1 is a direct computation from Bourbaki root-system tables: Propositions 6.5-6.11 explicitly verify the condition rho not-in span(T) for each irreducible type, while Lemma 6.4 is a standard reduction to maximal parabolic spans. The only self-citation is [CLB26, Proposition 5.6] in Section 6.2, used to select an ideal-generic triple in the transverse building X_I; that is an auxiliary existence input for the construction of non-generic triples, not an assumption equivalent to the classification, and it does not appear in the positive direction of Theorem 6.13. Therefore the citation is not load-bearing in a circularity sense. Two passages should be weighed as correctness risks rather than circularity: (i) the proof of Proposition 6.2 relies on the unproved angle assertion 'can coincide ... if and only if alpha = 90 degrees'; and (ii) Section 6.2 Step 3 concludes non-affine-genericity only under the assumption that gamma_12 projects via p_I to a bisector, with Remark 6.12 supplying only the eA2 case, so the existence of bad triples for all non-exceptional types is not established. These gaps affect the 'only' direction of the abstract claim but do not make the derivation circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim is a finite classification in Coxeter theory, so it is mostly self-contained given standard root-system tables. The load-bearing assumptions are Rousseau's structure theorem for X(η+,η−), the existence result [CLB26, Prop 5.6] (a self-citation), and two conditional geometric hypotheses in Sections 6.2 and 6.3 that the paper flags. No free parameters are fitted to data.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption The union X(η+,η−) is an extended thick affine building isomorphic to R^{n-|I|} × X_I (Rousseau's structure theorem).
Invoked in Proposition 3.1 and used throughout Sections 4, 6 and 7 to split the building along the canonical root-flat. The paper relies on the cited result [Rou11, Section 4.3] without proof.
standard math In a CAT(0) space, the convex hull of a bounded set has a well-defined circumcenter (Bridson-Haefliger [BH99]).
Used in Definition 5.1 to define the barycenter map ζ.
standard math Parabolic subgroups of a finite Weyl group W correspond to root subsystems, and every proper root subspace is W-conjugate to a standard parabolic flat.
Used in the proof of Lemma 6.4 to reduce the Weyl-vector condition to maximal standard parabolic spans. Standard in Bourbaki but not proved here.
standard math The root-system data (positive roots, fundamental weights, Weyl vectors) for irreducible finite root systems are taken from Bourbaki tables.
Basis for all case-by-case computations in Props 6.5 to 6.11.
domain assumption The transverse building X_I contains at least one ideal-generic antipodal triple of ideal chambers ([CLB26, Prop 5.6]).
Used in Section 6.2 to seed the construction of non-affine-generic triples. This is a self-citation to the authors' previous preprint; not independently verified here.
ad hoc to paper The parabolic subgroup P_{η+} has a non-trivial unipotent part containing arbitrarily many elements, and there exists a unipotent element u satisfying conditions (1)-(3) of Section 6.3.
The construction of non-ideal-generic but affine-generic triples in Section 6.3 is conditional on this unipotent assumption, which is stated but not established in this paper.
ad hoc to paper In Section 6.2 Step 3, the bisector γ12 in A12 projects via p_I to a bisector in the transverse building A12.
Needed to guarantee that the constructed chambers C2 and C3 are opposite. The paper notes this occurs in eA2 buildings but provides no general proof or criterion.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The geometry of triples of antipodal ideal chambers of affine buildings." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TJ6CIM6J

@misc{pith2026260804520,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The geometry of triples of antipodal ideal chambers of affine buildings},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TJ6CIM6J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.04520}
}

abstract

In this article, we investigate two notions of genericity for triples of antipodal ideal chambers in a locally finite affine building $X$: one defined at the ideal boundary $X^{\infty}$, which we call ideal-genericity, and the other defined from within the affine building $X$, which we call affine-genericity. While ideal-genericity implies affine-genericity, the latter is the more suitable notion for constructing a barycenter map associated with affine-generic triples of antipodal ideal chambers. This perspective also allows us to establish that this barycenter map is locally constant, and hence continuous. Finally, we provide sufficient geometric conditions on the affine Weyl group associated with $X$ that guarantee both ideal- and affine-genericity for all triples of antipodal ideal chambers of $X^\infty$. These conditions yield an algorithmic method for constructing geometric configurations in $X \cup X^{\infty}$ (when they exist) that correspond to non-generic triples of antipodal ideal chambers of $X^{\infty}$. Furthermore, our computations for the irreducible finite Weyl groups of rank at least two show that automatic ideal-genericity holds for all triples of antipodal ideal chambers only in types $B_2 = C_2$, $G_2$ and $B_3$.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

[1]

and Margulis, G

Abels, H. and Margulis, G. A. and So. Semigroups containing proximal linear maps , JOURNAL =. 1995 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1007/BF02761637 , URL =

doi:10.1007/bf02761637 1995
[2]

, TITLE =

Abramenko, Peter and Brown, Kenneth S. , TITLE =. 2008 , PAGES =. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-78835-7 , URL =

work page doi:10.1007/978-0-387-78835-7 2008
[3]

and Renault, J

Anantharaman-Delaroche, C. and Renault, J. , TITLE =. 2000 , PAGES =

2000
[4]

Archbold, R. J. and Spielberg, J. S. , TITLE =. Proc. Edinburgh Math. Soc. (2) , FJOURNAL =. 1994 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1017/S0013091500018733 , URL =

doi:10.1017/s0013091500018733 1994
[5]

Ergodic Theory Dynam

Bader, Uri and Caprace, Pierre-Emmanuel and Furman, Alex and Sisto, Alessandro , TITLE =. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems , FJOURNAL =. 2025 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1017/etds.2024.65 , URL =

work page doi:10.1017/etds.2024.65 2025
[6]

On the linearity of lattices in affine buildings and ergodicity of the singular

Bader, Uri and Caprace, Pierre-Emmanuel and L\'. On the linearity of lattices in affine buildings and ergodicity of the singular. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , FJOURNAL =. 2019 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1090/jams/914 , URL =

work page doi:10.1090/jams/914 2019
[7]

Furstenberg maps for

Bader, Uri and Duchesne, Bruno and L\'. Furstenberg maps for. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems , FJOURNAL =. 2016 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1017/etds.2014.147 , URL =

work page doi:10.1017/etds.2014.147 2016
[8]

Normal Subgroup Theorem for groups acting on

Uri Bader and Alex Furman and Jean Lécureux , year=. Normal Subgroup Theorem for groups acting on. 2310.13472 , archivePrefix=

work page arXiv

Show all 69 references

[9]

Balser, Andreas , TITLE =. Canad. Math. Bull. , FJOURNAL =. 2006 , NUMBER =. doi:10.4153/CMB-2006-033-3 , URL =

2006 doi
[10]

Bardy-Panse, Nicole and Charignon, Cyril and Gaussent, St\'ephane and Rousseau, Guy , TITLE =. Enseign. Math. (2) , FJOURNAL =. 2013 , NUMBER =. doi:10.4171/LEM/59-1-1 , URL =

2013 doi
[11]

and Cowling, M

Bekka, M. and Cowling, M. and de la Harpe, P. , TITLE =. Inst. Hautes \'Etudes Sci. Publ. Math. , FJOURNAL =. 1994 , PAGES =

1994
[12]

Random walks on reductive groups , SERIES =

Benoist, Yves and Quint, Jean-Fran. Random walks on reductive groups , SERIES =. 2016 , ISBN =

2016
[13]

, TITLE =

Benoist, Y. , TITLE =. Geom. Funct. Anal. , FJOURNAL =. 1997 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1007/PL00001613 , URL =

1997 doi
[14]

2024 , eprint=

Dynamics of strongly I-regular hyperbolic elements on affine buildings , author=. 2024 , eprint=

2024
[15]

Journal of Algebra , volume=

On dense free subgroups of Lie groups , author=. Journal of Algebra , volume=. 2003 , publisher=

2003
[16]

and Haefliger, Andr\'

Bridson, Martin R. and Haefliger, Andr\'. Metric spaces of non-positive curvature , SERIES =. 1999 , ISBN =. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-12494-9 , URL =

1999 doi
[17]

Breuillard, Emmanuel and Kalantar, Mehrdad and Kennedy, Matthew and Ozawa, Narutaka , TITLE =. Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes \'Etudes Sci. , FJOURNAL =. 2017 , PAGES =. doi:10.1007/s10240-017-0091-2 , URL =

2017 doi
[18]

and Mozes, S

Burger, M. and Mozes, S. , TITLE =. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , FJOURNAL =. 1996 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1090/S0894-0347-96-00196-8 , URL =

1996 doi
[19]

Rocky Mountain J

Cairns, Grant and Kolganova, Alla and Nielsen, Anthony , TITLE =. Rocky Mountain J. Math. , FJOURNAL =. 2007 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1216/rmjm/1181068757 , URL =

2007
[20]

Ergodic Theory Dynam

Caprace, Pierre-Emmanuel and Ciobotaru, Corina , TITLE =. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems , FJOURNAL =. 2015 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1017/etds.2013.102 , URL =

2015 doi
[21]

Combinatorial and group-theoretic compactifications of buildings , JOURNAL =

Caprace, Pierre-Emmanuel and L\'. Combinatorial and group-theoretic compactifications of buildings , JOURNAL =. 2011 , NUMBER =. doi:10.5802/aif.2624 , URL =

2011 doi
[22]

The cone topology on masures , NOTE =

Ciobotaru, Corina and M\". The cone topology on masures , NOTE =. Adv. Geom. , FJOURNAL =. 2020 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1515/advgeom-2019-0020 , URL =

2020 doi
[23]

2025 , eprint=

Poisson boundaries of building lattices and rigidity with hyperbolic-like targets , author=. 2025 , eprint=

2025
[24]

de la Harpe, Pierre , TITLE =. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. , FJOURNAL =. 2007 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1112/blms/bdl014 , URL =

2007 doi
[25]

, TITLE =

Engelking, R. , TITLE =. 1968 , PAGES =

1968
[26]

1989 , PAGES =

Engelking, Ryszard , TITLE =. 1989 , PAGES =

1989
[27]

Fock, Vladimir and Goncharov, Alexander , TITLE =. Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes \'Etudes Sci. , FJOURNAL =. 2006 , PAGES =. doi:10.1007/s10240-006-0039-4 , URL =

2006 doi
[28]

Furstenberg and H

H. Furstenberg and H. Kesten , title =. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics , number =
[29]

and Kifer, Y

Furstenberg, H. and Kifer, Y. , TITLE =. Israel J. Math. , FJOURNAL =. 1983 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1007/BF02760620 , URL =

1983 doi
[30]

Harmonic analysis on homogeneous spaces (

Furstenberg, Harry , TITLE =. Harmonic analysis on homogeneous spaces (. 1973 , MRCLASS =

1973
[31]

Furstenberg, Harry , TITLE =. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , FJOURNAL =. 1976 , NUMBER =. doi:10.2307/2041874 , URL =

1976 doi
[32]

Handbook of dynamical systems,

Furman, Alex , TITLE =. Handbook of dynamical systems,. 2002 , MRCLASS =. doi:10.1016/S1874-575X(02)80014-5 , URL =

2002 doi
[33]

Noncommuting Random Products , volume =

Harry Furstenberg , journal =. Noncommuting Random Products , volume =
[34]

Furstenberg, Harry , TITLE =. Ann. of Math. (2) , FJOURNAL =. 1963 , PAGES =. doi:10.2307/1970220 , URL =

1963 doi
[35]

1976 , PAGES =

Glasner, Shmuel , TITLE =. 1976 , PAGES =

1976
[36]

, TITLE =

Grundh\"ofer, Theo and Kramer, Linus and Van Maldeghem, Hendrik and Weiss, Richard M. , TITLE =. Tohoku Math. J. (2) , FJOURNAL =. 2012 , NUMBER =. doi:10.2748/tmj/1347369367 , URL =

2012
[37]

Random walks and geometry , PAGES =

Guivarc'h, Yves and Le Page, \'Emile , TITLE =. Random walks and geometry , PAGES =. 2004 , ISBN =

2004
[38]

Lyapunov exponents of a product of random matrices , JOURNAL =

Gol'dshe. Lyapunov exponents of a product of random matrices , JOURNAL =. 1989 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1070/RM1989v044n05ABEH002214 , URL =

1989 doi
[39]

Proper proximality in non-positive curvature , JOURNAL =

Horbez, Camille and Huang, Jingyin and L\'. Proper proximality in non-positive curvature , JOURNAL =. 2023 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1353/ajm.2023.a907700 , URL =

2023 doi
[40]

Jolissaint, Paul and Robertson, Guyan , TITLE =. J. Funct. Anal. , FJOURNAL =. 2000 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1006/jfan.2000.3608 , URL =

2000
[41]

1989 , PAGES =

Ronan, Mark , TITLE =. 1989 , PAGES =

1989
[42]

, TITLE =

Kaimanovich, Vadim A. , TITLE =. Ann. of Math. (2) , FJOURNAL =. 2000 , NUMBER =. doi:10.2307/2661351 , URL =

2000 doi
[43]

, TITLE =

Kaimanovich, Vadim A. , TITLE =. Geom. Funct. Anal. , FJOURNAL =. 2003 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1007/s00039-003-0433-8 , URL =

2003 doi
[44]

, TITLE =

Kapovich, Michael and Leeb, Bernhard and Millson, John J. , TITLE =. Geom. Funct. Anal. , FJOURNAL =. 2009 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1007/s00039-009-0026-2 , URL =

2009 doi
[45]

, year =

Kechris, Alexander S. , year =. Classical descriptive set theory , volume =. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4190-4 , file =

doi
[46]

Kennedy, Matthew , TITLE =. Ann. Sci. \'Ec. Norm. Sup\'er. (4) , FJOURNAL =. 2020 , NUMBER =. doi:10.24033/asens.2441 , URL =

2020 doi
[47]

Kalantar, Mehrdad and Kennedy, Matthew , TITLE =. J. Reine Angew. Math. , FJOURNAL =. 2017 , PAGES =. doi:10.1515/crelle-2014-0111 , URL =

2017 doi
[48]

, TITLE =

Kramer, Linus and Weiss, Richard M. , TITLE =. Adv. Math. , FJOURNAL =. 2014 , PAGES =. doi:10.1016/j.aim.2013.10.031 , URL =

2014 doi
[49]

Stationary measures and random walks on

Le Bars, Corentin , year=. Stationary measures and random walks on. 2410.18821 , archivePrefix=
[50]

Le Bars, Corentin and Lécureux, Jean and Schillewaert, Jeroen , keywords =. A
[51]

Dynamics of rank 2 groups and their selfless reduced

Le Bars, Corentin and Leibtag, Elyashev and Vigdorovich, Itamar , keywords =. Dynamics of rank 2 groups and their selfless reduced
[52]

Amenability of actions on the boundary of a building , JOURNAL =

L. Amenability of actions on the boundary of a building , JOURNAL =. 2010 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1093/imrn/rnp241 , URL =

2010 doi
[53]

Margulis, G. A. , TITLE =. 1991 , PAGES =. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-51445-6 , URL =

1991 doi
[54]

Groups Geom

Nevo, Amos and Sageev, Michah , TITLE =. Groups Geom. Dyn. , FJOURNAL =. 2013 , NUMBER =. doi:10.4171/GGD/202 , URL =

2013 doi
[55]

Parkinson, James , TITLE =. Math. Z. , FJOURNAL =. 2006 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1007/s00209-005-0924-4 , URL =

2006 doi
[56]

Crystallographic groups and their generalizations (

Parreau, Anne , TITLE =. Crystallographic groups and their generalizations (. 2000 , MRCLASS =. doi:10.1090/conm/262/04180 , URL =

2000 doi
[57]

Parreau, Anne , TITLE =. Innov. Incidence Geom. , FJOURNAL =. 2019 , NUMBER =. doi:10.2140/iig.2019.17.109 , URL =

2019 doi
[58]

Characterization of linear groups whose reduced

Tal Poznansky , year=. Characterization of linear groups whose reduced. 0812.2486 , archivePrefix=

arXiv
[60]

Quint, Jean-Fran. C\^. Transform. Groups , FJOURNAL =. 2002 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1007/s00031-002-0013-2 , URL =

2002 doi
[61]

, TITLE =

Quint, J.-F. , TITLE =. Geom. Dedicata , FJOURNAL =. 2005 , PAGES =. doi:10.1007/s10711-005-0122-x , URL =

2005 doi
[62]

Martin compactifications of affine buildings , note =

R. Martin compactifications of affine buildings , note =. 2021 , copyright =. doi:10.48550/ARXIV.2105.14807 , url =

2021 doi arXiv
[63]

Robertson, Guyan and Steger, Tim , TITLE =. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) , FJOURNAL =. 1996 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1112/plms/s3-72.3.613 , URL =

1996 doi
[64]

[2023] 2023 , PAGES =

Rousseau, Guy , TITLE =. [2023] 2023 , PAGES =. doi:10.4171/etm/35 , URL =

2023 doi
[65]

1974 , PAGES =

Tits, Jacques , TITLE =. 1974 , PAGES =

1974
[66]

Paulin, Frédéric , TITLE =
[67]

Dynamical boundaries of affine buildings:

Ciobotaru, Corina and Le Bars, Corentin , year=. Dynamical boundaries of affine buildings:. 2601.13092 , archivePrefix=
[68]

Pure and Applied Mathematics Quarterly , volume =

Guy Rousseau , title =. Pure and Applied Mathematics Quarterly , volume =. 2011 , pages =

2011
[69]

, title =

Sam, Steven V. , title =. 2021 , url =

2021
[70]

2002 , isbn =

Bourbaki, Nicolas , title =. 2002 , isbn =

2002

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

and Margulis, G

Abels, H. and Margulis, G. A. and So. Semigroups containing proximal linear maps , JOURNAL =. 1995 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1007/BF02761637 , URL =

doi:10.1007/bf02761637 1995

[2] [2]

, TITLE =

Abramenko, Peter and Brown, Kenneth S. , TITLE =. 2008 , PAGES =. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-78835-7 , URL =

work page doi:10.1007/978-0-387-78835-7 2008

[3] [3]

and Renault, J

Anantharaman-Delaroche, C. and Renault, J. , TITLE =. 2000 , PAGES =

2000

[4] [4]

Archbold, R. J. and Spielberg, J. S. , TITLE =. Proc. Edinburgh Math. Soc. (2) , FJOURNAL =. 1994 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1017/S0013091500018733 , URL =

doi:10.1017/s0013091500018733 1994

[5] [5]

Ergodic Theory Dynam

Bader, Uri and Caprace, Pierre-Emmanuel and Furman, Alex and Sisto, Alessandro , TITLE =. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems , FJOURNAL =. 2025 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1017/etds.2024.65 , URL =

work page doi:10.1017/etds.2024.65 2025

[6] [6]

On the linearity of lattices in affine buildings and ergodicity of the singular

Bader, Uri and Caprace, Pierre-Emmanuel and L\'. On the linearity of lattices in affine buildings and ergodicity of the singular. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , FJOURNAL =. 2019 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1090/jams/914 , URL =

work page doi:10.1090/jams/914 2019

[7] [7]

Furstenberg maps for

Bader, Uri and Duchesne, Bruno and L\'. Furstenberg maps for. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems , FJOURNAL =. 2016 , NUMBER =. doi:10.1017/etds.2014.147 , URL =

work page doi:10.1017/etds.2014.147 2016

[8] [8]

Normal Subgroup Theorem for groups acting on

Uri Bader and Alex Furman and Jean Lécureux , year=. Normal Subgroup Theorem for groups acting on. 2310.13472 , archivePrefix=

work page arXiv