Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 59 references

On n-dependent groups and fields III. Multilinear forms and invariant connected components

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For every n, non-degenerate alternating n-linear spaces over NIP fields carry an n-dependent theory, proved via a new Composition Lemma.

desk verdict Solid, genuinely new work: the Composition Lemma and the n-linear forms results hold up, and the paper deserves referee time. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.19921 v2 pith:7QZYSHLR submitted 2024-12-27 math.LO math.COmath.GR

Artem Chernikov , Nadja Hempel This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.LOmath.COmath.GR MSC 03C4503C60
keywords n-dependenttheoriesmultilinearformsquantifiereliminationNIPfieldsCompositionLemmaNSOP1Lascarstrongtypesinvariantconnectedcomponents
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 establishes that for every arity n, infinite-dimensional non-degenerate alternating n-linear spaces over an NIP field K carry an n-dependent complete theory, strictly n-dependent when the form is generic. The engine is the Composition Lemma: composing a relation definable in an NIP structure with arbitrary definable functions of arity at most k produces a k-dependent formula, proved through a higher-arity generalization of the Sauer-Shelah lemma. Quantifier elimination for these spaces in the language with coordinate functions makes it possible to reduce every atomic formula to such a composition. Direct corollaries include NSOP1 for these theories over NSOP1 fields, with an explicit description of Kim-independence, and a relative absoluteness identity for the invariant connected component $G^\infty$ in k-dependent abelian groups. The result matters because it supplies strictly n-dependent algebraic examples at every level of the dependence hierarchy and a reusable compositional technique for building them.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the Composition Lemma (Theorem 3.24): if an $L'$-structure has an NIP $L$-reduct, then composing any $L$-formula with arbitrary $L'$-definable $k$-ary functions yields a $k$-dependent formula. Its proof is carried by the Array Shattering Lemma (Lemma 3.23), a higher-arity generalization of the Sauer-Shelah lemma asserting that the family of subsets of $[n]^k$ cut out by an NIP formula has size at most $2^{n^k-\varepsilon}$, combined with a finitary type-counting criterion for $k$-dependence (Proposition 3.21). For the multilinear examples, quantifier elimination in $L^K_{\theta,f}$ (Theorem 2.19) and the imported term-reduction Fact 4.5 convert atomic formulas into exactly the form the Composition Lemma controls.

What would settle it

A reader could try to falsify Theorem 4.1 by testing its term-reduction lemma for $n = 3$: exhibit an $L^K_{\theta,f}$-term in an alternating trilinear space whose value is not expressible as any $L^K_{VS}$-term in the variables plus the list of all trilinear values; if such a term exists, the reduction in Fact 4.5 fails and the proof of Theorem 4.1 collapses, though the theorem itself could still hold by another route.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim, Theorem 4.1, is that for each n, if T is a theory of infinite-dimensional n-linear K-spaces eliminating quantifiers in the language $L^K_{\theta,f}$, and K is NIP, then T is n-dependent, and strictly n-dependent if the n-linear form is generic; in particular $\operatorname{Alt}T^K_n$, the theory of non-degenerate alternating n-linear spaces over an NIP field, is n-dependent. The route goes through quantifier elimination (Theorem 2.19) for $\operatorname{Alt}T^K_n$ in the two-sorted language with coordinate functions $f^p_i$, a term-reduction step (Fact 4.5, imported from [1]) that rewrites every atomic formula as a vector-space formula evaluated on the tuple of all n-linear values, and the Composition Lemma (Theorem 3.24), which shows that any such composition is n-dependent. The paper also proves that over an NSOP1 field these theories are NSOP1, with Kim-independence characterized as field-independence plus vector-space independence (Theorem 4.14), and that in k-dependent abelian groups in generic position the connected component $G^\infty$ satisfies an intersection identity expressing its relative absoluteness (Theorem 5.9).

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the imported term-reduction lemma (Fact 4.5, cited as [1, Lemma 5.9]): every $L^K_{\theta,f}$-term $t(x)$ is equivalent in $T$ to an $L^K_{VS}$-term in $x$ together with the tuple of values of the n-linear form on the vector variables.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every $n \geq 2$, non-degenerate alternating n-linear spaces over NIP fields are strictly n-dependent, producing algebraic examples of strict n-dependence at every level (Theorem 4.1).
  • If the underlying field has $IP_k$ and the form is generic, the n-linear space theory has $IP_{nk}$, multiplying the field's combinatorial complexity by the arity (Theorem 4.1(2)).
  • Over NSOP1 fields, the same theories are NSOP1, with Kim-independence computable as independence in the field sort plus independence of spans in the vector sort (Theorem 4.14).
  • In k-dependent abelian groups with tuples in generic position, $G^\infty$ satisfies the relative absoluteness identity $G^\infty_{M\cup b_1\cup\dots\cup b_{k-1}} = \left(\bigcap_i G^\infty_{M\cup b_1\cup\dots\widehat{b_i}\dots\cup b_{k-1}}\right) \cap G^\infty_{C\cup b_1\cup\dots\cup b_{k-1}}$ for some small $C$ (Theorem 5.9).
  • For alternating n-linear spaces over finite fields, the component $G^\infty = G^{00} = G^0$ is computed explicitly as the intersection of the kernels $V_{\bar a}$ over $\bar a \in A^{n-1}$ (Section 5.5).

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the Composition Lemma's conjectured extension from NIP to n-dependent bases holds (Conjecture 3.27), composing an n-dependent relation with k-ary definable functions would yield kn-dependent formulas, unifying many existing strictly dependent examples under one transfer principle.
  • The strictly n-dependent multilinear examples give concrete support to the heuristic that n-dependent theories are 'multilinear over a dependent part', and suggest a test route toward the paper's Conjecture 1.2 that n-dependent fields are already dependent.
  • Since the n-dependence proof hinges on the imported term-reduction Fact 4.5, checking it directly for trilinear forms would either certify the architecture or produce a counterexample redirecting the proof strategy.
  • The explicit computation of $G^\infty$ in Section 5.5 suggests that in n-dependent abelian groups, Lascar strong types over parameter sets admit finite-dimensional approximations, which may serve as a template for the non-abelian conjecture (Conjecture 5.10).
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops the model theory of n-linear forms for arbitrary n. Section 2 proves quantifier elimination and completeness for infinite-dimensional non-degenerate alternating n-linear spaces over a field K in the language L^K_{θ,f} (Theorem 2.19), generalizing Granger's bilinear result and correcting its language defect. Section 3 establishes a Composition Lemma (Theorem 3.24) showing that composing an NIP relation with arbitrary L'-definable functions of arity k yields a k-dependent formula, based on a finitary type-counting criterion (Proposition 3.21) and an Array Shattering Lemma (Lemma 3.23). Section 4 uses these tools to prove that over an NIP field K such theories are n-dependent (strictly so for generic forms), and NSOP1 if K is, while also diagnosing gaps in earlier NSOP1 proofs. Section 5 proves a relative absoluteness identity for G∞ in k-dependent abelian groups (Theorem 5.9) and computes an example for multilinear forms over finite fields.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper supplies a uniform family of strictly n-dependent algebraic examples for every n, a reusable higher-arity composition technique, a corrected and generalized NSOP1 analysis of multilinear forms, and a new relative absoluteness result for invariant connected components. The proofs are detailed and largely self-contained, with explicit combinatorial lemmas and a candid discussion of gaps in prior work. The n-dependent examples over arbitrary NIP fields are a substantial advance beyond the previously known bilinear constructions, and the paper is likely to become a standard reference for higher-arity dependence and connected components.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.4, proof of Lemma 3.23(2)_k implies (1)_{k+1}] After applying Lemma 3.5, the authors obtain a set J0 ⊆ [m] with |J0| ≤ f_φ(n) such that the ξ-values are constant on each gap between consecutive points of J0. They then assert that the longest such gap J satisfies |J| ≥ m/f_φ(n) − 1. This inequality is not justified in general: if J0 has f points, the average length of the f+1 gaps is (m−f)/(f+1), which for m large compared to f^2 is smaller than m/f − 1. The bound that is actually guaranteed is |J| ≥ (m−f)/(f+1) ≥ m/(f+1) − 1, so the argument goes through with f_φ(n)+1 in place of f_φ(n). Since the Composition Lemma only requires existence of some function f, this is a local, easily repairable gap, but the proof as written contains an incorrect inequality.
  2. [Section 2.2, Lemma 2.15] The proof of closure under the n-linear form uses an expansion over strictly increasing tuples with sign factors, which is valid for alternating forms but not for symmetric forms. For symmetric forms, the expansion would require multisets and no sign. The lemma is stated for alternating/symmetric spaces, but the proof only covers the alternating case. Since the paper's main applications are to alternating forms, this does not affect the central results, but the statement should either be restricted or the symmetric case should be handled separately.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Definition 2.10] The symbol for the inverse function on the field sort appears as '−1 k', which looks like a typesetting artifact; it should be a standard superscript notation.
  2. [Proof of Claim 2.17] In the computation of η(⟨w1,...,wn⟩_n), one line writes 'g(⟨vi1,...,vin⟩_n)' before rewriting as 'h(...)'; since g restricted to the field sort is h, this is harmless but inconsistent.
  3. [Remark 2.20(2)] The phrase 'the filed K' should read 'the field K'.
  4. [Fact 4.5] The term-reduction lemma is cited from [1, Lemma 5.9] rather than proved. Given its role in Theorem 4.1, a brief proof sketch or a clearer statement of the exact reduction would improve self-containedness.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the main theorems are proved from independent combinatorial and algebraic inputs, and the cited prior work functions as ordinary supporting lemmas rather than as a disguised version of the conclusions.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, Theorem 4.1, is assembled from three separate ingredients that are not circularly related to the conclusion: quantifier elimination for L^K_theta,f (Theorem 2.19), proved by an explicit back-and-forth argument in Section 2; the term-reduction Fact 4.5, quoted from the independent paper [1, Lemma 5.9] and used only to rewrite atomic formulas, not to assume n-dependence; and the Composition Lemma (Theorem 3.24), whose proof is carried out in Sections 3.1-3.5 using published higher-arity Sauer-Shelah and UDTFS facts. The load-bearing citations to the authors' own earlier work, notably [16, Proposition 3.9] and [14, Fact 3.14], are previously published, parameter-free theorems with independent proofs; they concern finite set families and generalized indiscernibles, not the n-dependence of multilinear forms, so invoking them is ordinary lemma use rather than circularity. The NSOP1 and G^infty results similarly rest on published tools such as Kim-dividing facts and Gismatullin's description of G^infty, with the G^infty proof carried out in detail. There are no fitted parameters renamed as predictions, no definitions of the target properties in terms of one another, and no uniqueness or ansatz claims imported from the authors' own prior work. Any open questions about the strictness clause or the unproved Fact 4.5 are matters of proof burden and correctness risk, not circularity.

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

No fitted constants or invented entities are introduced. The paper rests on standard model-theoretic tools, a few external preservation and term-reduction lemmas, and prior Ramsey or Sauer-Shelah results.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Uniform definability of types over finite sets for NIP formulas (Fact 3.4).
    Used to obtain shrinking of indiscernible arrays (Lemma 3.5) and the Array Shattering Lemma; cited from [18] and [30].
  • standard math Higher arity Sauer-Shelah lemma for VC_k-dimension (Fact 3.17).
    Used in Proposition 3.21 and Lemma 3.23; proved in [16, Prop 3.9] by the same authors, but independent of the paper's target.
  • standard math Existence of generalized indiscernibles for ordered n-partite hypergraphs via structural Ramsey theory (Facts 3.9, 3.12, 3.13).
    Provides the G_{n,p}-indiscernible sequences used in the n-dependence characterization; standard Ramsey-class machinery.
  • standard math Erdos-Rado theorem.
    Used in the proof of Theorem 5.9 to shrink long sequences to regular subfamilies with uniform exponents.
  • domain assumption Preservation of NIP and NSOP1 for algebraically closed fields with a distinguished subfield (Fact 4.3 from [23]).
    Used in Corollary 4.4 to transfer tameness from fields to vector spaces; the paper relies on this external preservation theorem rather than proving it.
  • domain assumption Term-reduction lemma [1, Lemma 5.9] for L^K_theta,f-terms (Fact 4.5).
    Load-bearing in the proof of Theorem 4.1; the paper cites rather than proves it.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On n-dependent groups and fields III. Multilinear forms and invariant connected components." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7QZYSHLR

@misc{pith2026241219921,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On n-dependent groups and fields III. Multilinear forms and invariant connected components},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7QZYSHLR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.19921}
}
abstract

We develop some model theory of multi-linear forms, generalizing Granger in the bi-linear case. In particular, after proving a quantifier elimination result, we show that for an NIP field K, the theory of infinite dimensional non-degenerate alternating n-linear spaces over K is strictly n-dependent; and it is NSOP1 if K is. This relies on a new Composition Lemma for functions of arbitrary arity and NIP relations (which in turn relies on certain higher arity generalizations of Sauer-Shelah lemma). We also study the invariant connected components $G^{\infty}$ in n-dependent groups, demonstrating their relative absoluteness in the abelian case.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Higher arity stability and the functional order property

    A Abd-Aldaim, G Conant, and C Terry. Higher arity stability and the functional order property. Preprint, arXiv:2305.13111, 2023

    arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    An introduction to theories without the independence property.Archive for Mathemat- ical Logic, 5, 2008

    Hans Adler. An introduction to theories without the independence property.Archive for Mathemat- ical Logic, 5, 2008

    work page 2008

  3. [3]

    Thorn-forking as local forking.Journal of Mathematical Logic, 9(01):21–38, 2009

    Hans Adler. Thorn-forking as local forking.Journal of Mathematical Logic, 9(01):21–38, 2009

    work page 2009

  4. [4]

    Stability theory, permutations of indiscernibles, and embedded finite models.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 352(11):4937–4969, 2000

    John Baldwin and Michael Benedikt. Stability theory, permutations of indiscernibles, and embedded finite models.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 352(11):4937–4969, 2000

    work page 2000

  5. [5]

    Mekler’s construction preserves CM-triviality.Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 115(1-3):115–173, 2002

    Andreas Baudisch. Mekler’s construction preserves CM-triviality.Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 115(1-3):115–173, 2002

    work page 2002

  6. [6]

    An independence theorem for NTP2 theories

    Itaï Ben Yaacov and Artem Chernikov. An independence theorem for NTP2 theories. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 79(1):135–153, 2014

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    Simplicity in compact abstract theories.Journal of Mathematical Logic, 3(02):163– 191, 2003

    Itay Ben-Yaacov. Simplicity in compact abstract theories.Journal of Mathematical Logic, 3(02):163– 191, 2003

    work page 2003

  8. [8]

    Isogeny classes of cubic spaces.Preprint, arXiv:2207.13951, 2022

    Arthur Bik, Alessandro Danelon, and Andrew Snowden. Isogeny classes of cubic spaces.Preprint, arXiv:2207.13951, 2022

    arXiv 2022

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    NIPn CHIPS.Preprint, arXiv:2401.04697, 2024

    Blaise Boissonneau. NIPn CHIPS.Preprint, arXiv:2401.04697, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    A note on some example of NSOP1 theories.Preprint, arXiv:2304.05404, 2023

    Yvon Bossut. A note on some example of NSOP1 theories.Preprint, arXiv:2304.05404, 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    Number 39

    Enrique Casanovas.Simple theories and hyperimaginaries. Number 39. Cambridge University Press, 2011

    2011

  4. [12]

    Finite structures with few types

    Gregory L Cherlin and Ehud Hrushovski. Finite structures with few types. Princeton University Press, 2003

    2003

  5. [13]

    Mekler’s construction and generalized stability.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 230:745–769, 2019

    Artem Chernikov and Nadja Hempel. Mekler’s construction and generalized stability.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 230:745–769, 2019

    2019

  6. [14]

    On n-dependent groups and fields II.Forum of Mathematics, Sigma, 9:e38, 2021

    Artem Chernikov and Nadja Hempel. On n-dependent groups and fields II.Forum of Mathematics, Sigma, 9:e38, 2021

    2021

  7. [15]

    Transitivity, lowness, and ranks in NSOP1 theories

    Artem Chernikov, Byunghan Kim, and Nicholas Ramsey. Transitivity, lowness, and ranks in NSOP1 theories. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 88(3):919–946, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    On n-dependence.Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 60(2):195–214, 2019

    Artem Chernikov, Daniel Palacin, and Kota Takeuchi. On n-dependence.Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 60(2):195–214, 2019

    2019

  9. [17]

    On model-theoretic tree properties.Journal of Mathematical Logic, 16(02):1650009, 2016

    Artem Chernikov and Nicholas Ramsey. On model-theoretic tree properties.Journal of Mathematical Logic, 16(02):1650009, 2016

    2016

  10. [18]

    Externally definable sets and dependent pairs II.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 367(7):5217–5235, 2015

    Artem Chernikov and Pierre Simon. Externally definable sets and dependent pairs II.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 367(7):5217–5235, 2015

    2015

  11. [19]

    Ramsey growth in some NIP structures

    Artem Chernikov, Sergei Starchenko, and Margaret EM Thomas. Ramsey growth in some NIP structures. Journal of the Institute of Mathematics of Jussieu, 20(1):1–29, 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    Hypergraph regularity and higher arity VC-dimension

    Artem Chernikov and Henry Towsner. Hypergraph regularity and higher arity VC-dimension. Preprint, arXiv:2010.00726, 2020

    2010 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Perfect stable regularity lemma and slice-wise stable hyper- graphs

    Artem Chernikov and Henry Towsner. Perfect stable regularity lemma and slice-wise stable hyper- graphs. Preprint, arXiv:2402.07870, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Connected components of definable groups and o-minimality I

    Annalisa Conversano and Anand Pillay. Connected components of definable groups and o-minimality I. Advances in Mathematics, 231(2):605–623, 2012

    2012

  15. [23]

    On algebraically closed fields with a distin- guished subfield.Israel Journal of Mathematics, pages 1–43, 2024

    Christian d’Elbée, Itay Kaplan, and Leor Neuhauser. On algebraically closed fields with a distin- guished subfield.Israel Journal of Mathematics, pages 1–43, 2024

    2024

  16. [24]

    A two-sorted theory of nilpo- tent Lie algebras.Preprint, arXiv:2407.12452, 2024

    Christian d’Elbée, Isabel Müller, Nicholas Ramsey, and Daoud Siniora. A two-sorted theory of nilpo- tent Lie algebras.Preprint, arXiv:2407.12452, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Model-theoretic properties of nilpotent groups and Lie algebras.Journal of Algebra, 662:640–701, 2025

    Christian d’Elbée, Isabel Müller, Nicholas Ramsey, and Daoud Siniora. Model-theoretic properties of nilpotent groups and Lie algebras.Journal of Algebra, 662:640–701, 2025

    2025

  18. [26]

    Élimination des quantificateurs dans les paires de corps algébriquement clos.Con- fluentes Mathematici, 4(2), 2012

    Françoise Delon. Élimination des quantificateurs dans les paires de corps algébriquement clos.Con- fluentes Mathematici, 4(2), 2012

    2012

  19. [27]

    Sets, groups, and fields definable in vector spaces with a bilinear form

    Jan Dobrowolski. Sets, groups, and fields definable in vector spaces with a bilinear form. InAnnales de l’Institut Fourier, volume 73, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    Independence over arbitrary sets in NSOP1 theories

    Jan Dobrowolski, Byunghan Kim, and Nicholas Ramsey. Independence over arbitrary sets in NSOP1 theories. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 173(2):103058, 2022

    2022

  21. [29]

    Pillay M

    A. Pillay M. Ziegler E. Casanovas, D. Lascar. Galois groups of first order theories.J. Math. Log., 1:305–319, 2001

    2001

  22. [30]

    On uniform definability of types over finite sets for NIP formulas

    Shlomo Eshel and Itay Kaplan. On uniform definability of types over finite sets for NIP formulas. Journal of Mathematical Logic, 21(03):2150015, 2021

    2021

  23. [31]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 2009

    Israel M Gelfand, Mikhail Kapranov, and Andrei Zelevinsky.Discriminants, Resultants, and Multi- dimensional Determinants. Springer Science & Business Media, 2009. ON N-DEPENDENT GROUPS AND FIELDS III 51

    2009

  24. [32]

    Model theoretic connected components of groups.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 184:251–274, 2011

    Jakub Gismatullin. Model theoretic connected components of groups.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 184:251–274, 2011

    2011

  25. [33]

    Stability, simplicity and the model theory of bilinear forms

    Nicolas Mark Granger. Stability, simplicity and the model theory of bilinear forms. University of Manchester, 1999

    1999

  26. [34]

    Tensor spaces and the geometry of polynomial representations

    Nate Harman and Andrew Snowden. Tensor spaces and the geometry of polynomial representations. Preprint, arXiv:2407.19132, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Ultrahomogeneous tensor spaces.Advances in Mathematics, 443:109599, 2024

    Nate Harman and Andrew Snowden. Ultrahomogeneous tensor spaces.Advances in Mathematics, 443:109599, 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    On n-dependent groups and fields.Mathematical Logic Quarterly, 62(3):215–224, 2016

    Nadja Hempel. On n-dependent groups and fields.Mathematical Logic Quarterly, 62(3):215–224, 2016

    2016

  29. [37]

    Stable forms and special metrics.Contemporary mathematics, 288:70–89, 2001

    Nigel Hitchin. Stable forms and special metrics.Contemporary mathematics, 288:70–89, 2001

    2001

  30. [38]

    Zariski geometries

    E Hrushovski and B Zilber. Zariski geometries. Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 9(1):1–56, 1996

    1996

  31. [39]

    On Kim-independence.Journal of the European Mathematical Society, 22(5):1423–1474, 2020

    Itay Kaplan and Nicholas Ramsey. On Kim-independence.Journal of the European Mathematical Society, 22(5):1423–1474, 2020

    2020

  32. [40]

    Transitivity of Kim-independence.Advances in Mathematics, 379:107573, 2021

    Itay Kaplan and Nicholas Ramsey. Transitivity of Kim-independence.Advances in Mathematics, 379:107573, 2021

    2021

  33. [41]

    Local character of Kim-independence.Proceed- ings of the American Mathematical Society, 147(4):1719–1732, 2019

    Itay Kaplan, Nicholas Ramsey, and Saharon Shelah. Local character of Kim-independence.Proceed- ings of the American Mathematical Society, 147(4):1719–1732, 2019

    2019

  34. [42]

    Properties of high rank subvarieties of affine spaces.Geometric and Functional Analysis, 30(4):1063–1096, 2020

    David Kazhdan and Tamar Ziegler. Properties of high rank subvarieties of affine spaces.Geometric and Functional Analysis, 30(4):1063–1096, 2020

    2020

  35. [43]

    Some model theory of quadratic geometries

    Charlotte Kestner and Nicholas Ramsey. Some model theory of quadratic geometries. Preprint, arXiv:2408.10196, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    University of Notre Dame, 1996

    Byunghan Kim.Simple first order theories. University of Notre Dame, 1996

    1996

  37. [45]

    A New Kim’s lemma.Model Theory, 3(3):825–860, 2024

    Alex Kruckman and Nicholas Ramsey. A New Kim’s lemma.Model Theory, 3(3):825–860, 2024

    2024

  38. [46]

    Amenability, definable groups, and automorphism groups

    Krzysztof Krupiński and Anand Pillay. Amenability, definable groups, and automorphism groups. Advances in Mathematics, 345:1253–1299, 2019

    2019

  39. [47]

    Vapnik-Chervonenkis classes of definable sets.Journal of the London Mathe- matical Society, 2(2):377–384, 1992

    Michael C Laskowski. Vapnik-Chervonenkis classes of definable sets.Journal of the London Mathe- matical Society, 2(2):377–384, 1992

    1992

  40. [48]

    Indiscernible arrays and rational functions with algebraic constraint

    Elad Levi. Indiscernible arrays and rational functions with algebraic constraint. Preprint, arXiv:1506.07489, 2015

    2015 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 2006

    David Marker.Model theory: an introduction, volume 217. Springer Science & Business Media, 2006

    2006

  42. [50]

    Oligomorphic groups and ultrahomogeneous cubic spaces over finite fields.Preprint, arXiv:2308.13247, 2023

    Yury A Neretin. Oligomorphic groups and ultrahomogeneous cubic spaces over finite fields.Preprint, arXiv:2308.13247, 2023

    2023

  43. [51]

    Indiscernibles, EM-types, and Ramsey classes of trees.Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 56(3):429–447, 2015

    Lynn Scow. Indiscernibles, EM-types, and Ramsey classes of trees.Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 56(3):429–447, 2015

    2015

  44. [52]

    SaharonShelah.Classificationtheoryforelementaryclasseswiththedependenceproperty—amodest beginning. Sci. Math. Jpn., 59:265–316

  45. [53]

    Minimal bounded index subgroup for dependent theories.Proceedings of the Amer- ican Mathematical Society, 136(3):1087–1091, 2008

    Saharon Shelah. Minimal bounded index subgroup for dependent theories.Proceedings of the Amer- ican Mathematical Society, 136(3):1087–1091, 2008

    2008

  46. [54]

    Strongly dependent theories.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 204(1):1–83, 2014

    Saharon Shelah. Strongly dependent theories.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 204(1):1–83, 2014

    2014

  47. [55]

    Definable groups for dependent and 2-dependent theories

    Saharon Shelah. Definable groups for dependent and 2-dependent theories. Sarajevo J. Math., 13(25)(1):3–25, 2017

    2017

  48. [56]

    Higher-order generalizations of stability and arithmetic regularity

    Caroline Terry and Julia Wolf. Higher-order generalizations of stability and arithmetic regularity. Preprint, arXiv:2111.01739, 2021

    2021

  49. [57]

    Irregular triads in 3-uniform hypergraphs

    Caroline Terry and Julia Wolf. Irregular triads in 3-uniform hypergraphs. Preprint, arXiv:2111.01737, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Springer, 2000

    Frank Olaf Wagner.Simple theories, volume 260. Springer, 2000

    2000

  51. [59]

    Cambridge University Press, tits buildings and the model theory of groups edition, 1998

    Martin Ziegler.Introduction to the Lascar group, volume 291 ofLondon Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, tits buildings and the model theory of groups edition, 1998

    1998

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.