Compactness of scalar-flat conformal metrics on low-dimensional manifolds with constant mean curvature on boundary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We concern C^{2} -compactness of the solution set of the boundary Yamabe problem on smooth compact Riemannian manifolds with boundary provided that their dimensions are 4, 5 or 6. By conducting a quantitative analysis of a linear equation associated with the problem, we prove that the trace-free second fundamental form must vanish at possible blow-up points of a sequence of blowing-up solutions. Applying this result and the positive mass theorem, we deduce the C^{2} -compactness for all 4-manifolds (which may be non-umbilic). For the 5-dimensional case, we also establish that a sum of the second-order derivatives of the trace-free second fundamental form is non-negative at possible blow-up points. We essentially use this fact to obtain the C^{2} -compactness for all 5-manifolds. Finally, we show that the C^{2} -compactness on 6-manifolds is true if the trace-free second fundamental form on the boundary never vanishes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".