Talk:Affine symmetric group

3146:, paying very careful attention to exactly what it says about sourcing? Note in particular that it is much less strict than the DYK sourcing rules, which themselves require only a single footnote per paragraph. The relevant rules for GA are 2b, which does not say anything about what should be referenced, only that when things are referenced their sources should be reliable, and 2c, which says in its entirety "it contains no original research". Not that all content is actually sourced to anything, but merely that it is known material rather than something entirely made up as new material for the Knowledge article. On what basis of GA rules are you making these bizarre demands that material that merely explains the structure of the article itself must somehow have a footnote and that this footnote requirement would be satisfied by putting something inane and non-referency into the footnote? In what way do any of these statements constitute original research? Wouldn't putting an inane non-citation into a reference violate 2b, which requires that the references be reliable sources? How do you read the rules as in any way causing such a requirement to exist? What words of the rules are you following in this? — 3068:

is an argument that they should be removed (without any changes to the text). Both remaining cn tags concern the following situation: there are multiple valid conventions in the literature about how to present, display, or denote something; while each is separately valid, the conventions are incompatible with each other, and so any given expositor is forced to choose one of them. (For example, one could choose to number the rows of a matrix so that the indices increase from top to bottom, or one could choose to number them so that they increase from bottom to top.) Both sentences that are tagged explain to the reader what convention is being used in this article. This is essential information (otherwise it leaves ambiguity as to which of several incompatible choices has been made), but it is impossible in principle to cite it (because they are statements about this article itself). I suppose for the first one I could remove the figure (thereby removing the need to explain what convention is being used in the figure), but the second one seems completely unavoidable to me. Any thoughts or comments you had are welcome. --

2583:

varies between the two modes of stating things without the context of where it came from ("the affine symmetric group is ...") versus attributing particular ideas to particular people ("Shi showed that ..."). I'm not sure I can exactly justify each choice about which fact gets introduced which way, but roughly I think the division is between "folklore" and "things everyone knows" (esp. in the context where you might write a background section of a paper and begin, "for more information on these topics, see " somewhere at the beginning) on one hand, and things that are more recent, have only appeared in the original research papers (rather than being re-exposited elsewhere), etc. One might hope that mentioning particular authors also gives a sense of the dynamic of the field (something that you have noted was not otherwise conveyed well -- though now with a history section it's a bit better).

2210:. Much of your review is helpful, but I wanted to comment on this part. I do not agree with the view that the Harvard references here are deprecated since they are not references in the Knowledge sense, but are used to refer to specific works. Writing "Smith wrote in 1999" and "In (Smith 1999)" are essentially the same and don't appear (to me) to be the deprecated style, since it is merely a way of writing names, not a way of citing sources for specific information. Now, this does raise an interesting question - should the "Representation theory and an affine Robinson–Schensted correspondence" section have references, or is the textual clue that they refer to specific works enough? Dunno, but something to think about. Also, even if it were a citation style, consistency in citation styles is not required by the GA criteria. (Deprecation is a separate issue.) 1916:. The first two are summary sentences of the subsections that follow them -- they are not meant to be free-standing factual claims, but rather navigational aids that briefly give the reader an overview of what is coming. I would have thought that they did not need independent citations (for the same reason that the introductory section of articles does not). (I mean, I suppose that I could copy some lower-occuring citations up to these sentences, if you thought that would be better.) The third example is a sentence about navigating the article -- it tells the reader that we have introduced X and we have introduced Y and where in the article to find the relationship between them. It has no factual content to cite. May I remove it? Or, is there some way I can reword that you think might avoid confusion here? Thanks again, 2174:, or stand-ins for the papers being referred to, rather than at the ends of sentences as sources only visible on mouseover as we typically do, regardless of the citation style being used. This, again, recalls a common issue in GANs for me, in which it is often possible to detect the involvement of different writers at different times due to subtle and not-so-subtle changes in focus and style, often in citations ... in other words, the nominator didn't go through the whole article after expanding it to make sure the voice was consistent. But, again, that is clearly not the issue here, since the article's voice is the same throughout. 630:. Since this is a/the traditional way of writing the affine symmetric group, and it's not explained in the literature explicitly, you are right to be uncomfortable to add it to the article -- it would of course be original. I don't think mentioning S_n being the symmetric group earlier would be too helpful. I suppose I was just confused, not having much experience in this particular area, as to why a tilde was used here - but that appears to be because of my lack of exposure. :) Best of luck, I imagine you'll pass GAN with flying colors and I look forward to seeing other content you contribute to the project. 3436:, which merely stated which of multiple notational conventions the article was following, and refusing to back down from that demand after multiple editors tried to intervene. However, Case's responses to why he was refusing to back down did not make me confident in the depth of the rest of the review: as far as I can tell it amounted to checking sourcing by whether there were lots of little blue numbered footnote markers and not by whether the material needed sources and whether the sources were adequate for the material. — 2112:: a brief history section explaining how the concept came to be discovered or something like that. This article IMO could use one. As it is it just seems as if the idea of affine symmetric groups just appeared on a stone tablet lowered from a flying saucer by a beam of light. Surely this is not the case ... a reader would get a better handle on the subject understanding where it came from, who (if they are notable) developed and perhaps named the concept, when, and where. And maybe they won an award for doing this. 257: 247: 226: 21: 3263:, I think your comment has convinced me first that the description of the image should really be in the image caption, not in the text. (The reason to display the matrix this way is that if you don't, it's very hard to see the isolated 1s in a huge sea of 0s -- several references make the same choice, presumably for the same reason.) Do you think it would help if I added row and column numbers along the outer border of the matrix? -- 195: 2590:, and Urve commented on it above. My view is that I'm using Harvard references in order to mention, in the text, the authors of particular works, along with pointers to those works. Some uses are unambiguously of this form (e.g., the first sentence of the section on juggling sequences). But I do agree that I'm maybe trying to have it both ways in some places, where I'm mentioning individual authors or papers and not 54: 2980:.) Yes, this really fell off my radar as end-of-semester hecticness set in. Is it possible to get a revised sense of what issues you view as unaddressed / essential to be resolved? For example, I have marked some things as "done" above, but it is not clear to me if they are done to your satisfaction. (I realize there are still a number of cn tags in the article, as well.) Thanks very much, 132: 2304: 3708:) seem to mention it -- and the article on algebraic groups does not mention the associated Weyl group. Core partitions are probably a central object in dozens of research papers, parabolic subgroups in hundreds or more, so I think notability is not a concern. (Obviously I need to convince some friends to become Knowledge editors to fix these oversights.) About 1770: 3245:

geometric flavor to the image so that you can see a pattern, but yeah. For reference, I studied math in undergrad, so it may be confusing for those even less mathematical training (though I suppose most readers of this article will have some). Perhaps an image that requires less explanation can be used, or the image might be omitted altogether as JBL suggested.

2036: 3590:, and I have not found any serious issues with the article in my reading so far. I'm a physics person rather than a pure-math person, so I'm accustomed to technical prose without being too familiar with the details of this specific topic. Speaking from that background, I think it's a pretty nice page! Kudos to all those who have put serious work into it. 2717: 2689: 2650: 2624: 2504: 2464: 2414: 2346: 5608:.) This extends the poset of regions of the affine braid arrangement (viewed as a linear hyperplane arrangement) to a lattice. It is conjectured (but not proved) that the extended weak order of any Coxeter group is a lattice. It might be worth adding something on this at some point, perhaps after more of these references are published. -- 612:

discussion (that I believe may not be stated in any reliable source) into the article. However, perhaps your point is not that I should add text about why this notation is used, but instead that if I introduce the reader to the fact that the symmetric group is called S_n earlier, that by itself would be helpful? Thanks again,

3769:, it doesn't matter what type it is, but if you happen to be the kind of person who thinks about reflection groups then of course this is a crucial piece of identifying information. My first instinct is to remove both instances of "type A" from the section you mention, and to add a few words in the section 3675:, thanks for your comments! In the section on the representation theory, I could easily convert the Viennot reference to a (Viennot yyyy) reference by mild rewriting: "... introduced by Viennot in (Viennot yyyy)." That would reduce by 1 the number of distinct styles in the section. A worthwhile change? 3067:

Thanks again for all the work you've put into this. The current status is as follows: I have provided sources for factual claims as best I can; I've removed some material that ultimately I have not been able to adequately source. There are two cn tags still in the article. The rest of this comment

2582:

The mention of multiple authors amused me, because really this is my individual work (of course with several improvements by other editors since it went live). Though it's not necessary to address the issue you raised, I thought I would take a swing at explaining. Mathematical journal writing often

2374:

is a certain perspective on the study of geometry that focuses on collinearity (when points are on the same lines) and parallelism; the geometric transformations (like rotations, translations, reflections) that preserve these properties (so if several lines are parallel, they get transformed into new

2383:

gives an etymology. I would write something shorter than the preceding if I write something.) On the other hand, I don't have any source for what I just wrote: it's a cobbled together synthesis from sources that don't mention the affine symmetric group at all, plus my personal understanding of how

2018:

It seems even to me that at least one, maybe two, more grafs could be added summarizing the sections of the article past the definitions (Consider that the DYK hook fact mentioned the juggling connection ... this is something that should probably have been mentioned in the intro; some DYK reviewers,

3645:

in like that (and then including it inconsistently thereafter) might be slightly puzzling. "What makes this lattice 'type A'? Do these things also have lattices of other types? What does the type tell me?" Maybe I'd say something like, "... forms a root lattice, specifically one of type A". Perhaps

3522:

I also cannot reiterate strongly enough how personally I take your insinuation that I only cared about the existence of citations and not their quality. Assessing the quality of the sources here may have been beyond my depth, as I've said (and to put more crudely what I've said a few times already,

3412:

has stepped back from reviewing; has David Eppstein taken over, or do we need to find a new reviewer? If the latter is the case, then the nomination should probably be set to request a second opinion, in the hopes that someone who can deal with the arcane mathematics text will be able to take over.

2444:

ever singled this group out for particular attention in his work. Unfortunately searching that out will take more time than I have available in the near future. (It is possible that in some sense the history of this object studied for its own sake rather than as one example of an important family

3244:

I will say, however, that it took me a bit to understand the image of the matrix since it uses dots for 1s and omitted zeros and lacks borders for individual rows and columns (if I understand it correctly, the lines delimit each group of three rows and columns). I know it's probably to give a more

2439:

Yes, more historical information would be good. I note that I haven't written down anywhere that the combinatorial definition of the group was first given by Lusztig in 1986, for example. I am not sure whether it will be possible to source a full section's worth of historical content to reliable

3186:

to GA rules caused by your inventing rules out of thin air, and (3) the damage to encyclopedia content creator goodwill caused by your turning what should be a much more straightforward evaluation process into a bureaucratic nightmare. Anyway, is there a reason why you haven't answered any of the

2007:

understand from writing articles about court cases and legal topics the challenges of writing about an abstract subject, often seen as impenetrable by lay readers, where common usage within the field requires both the use of words used nowhere else in English discourse, and some words that take a

5331:

Ref "Lusztig, George (1983), "Some examples of square integrable representations of semisimple p-adic groups", Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 277: 623–653" is missing its DOI. Some other references are lacking DOI but have their MR numbers so it is fine by me. You might still get it pointed out at FAC

3479:

It is possible that an editor who is trying to promote an article to GA-class (good article status) might add citations to basic facts such as "...the sky is blue...". This is a good thing, and the fact that the sky is not always blue does benefit from adding a citation. We can add citations for

5335:

Two references are only arXiv preprint which might pose a problem at the FA source review. But these preprints have since been published. "Chmutov, Michael; Frieden, Gabriel; Kim, Dongkwan; Lewis, Joel Brewster; Yudovina, Elena (2018), Monodromy in Kazhdan-Lusztig cells in affine type A" is now

3450:

Failure to assume good faith like this is why I am not interested in finishing this review. "Multiple editors" did not try to intervene on Eppstein's behalf; in fact if there were any actions by multiple editors that might have served as effective intervention had they been more willing to take

3330:

This looks better to me too. I might quibble that the rectangular rather than square aspect ratio of each matrix cell, and pixel graphics rather than vector graphics, are both suboptimal, but those are minor quibbles that shouldn't affect the discussion here, and they may be difficult to change

563:

in some sources). When there are "linear" (or finite) and "affine" versions of some object (like a Coxeter group), it seems very common to denote the affine one with a tilde on top (but again this is not universal; sometimes one sees a hat used, or for authors for whom the affine object is the

3468:

As for his comments about "checking sourcing by whether there were lots of little blue numbered footnote markers and not by whether the material needed sources and whether the sources were adequate for the material", well, Dave, you need to get out of the math ghetto more. This is exactly the

2078:

A lot of sentences in the definitions sections, and indeed throughout the article, use "one" in the third-person impersonal style. I do not know if this is standard in mathematics—if it is, and we use it in other math articles, and we're OK with doing that in math articles, and I can be shown

611:

is taking the intersection of these two common choices, and is widely in use in the literature. I should be clear that these are my observations from reading sources -- I do not recall seeing anyone write down anything about the choice of notation. I am reluctant to put something like this

2594:

citing those mentions to other authors or papers. I think I'd like to try to reach an agreement about which places current usage is acceptable (e.g., I feel strongly that this is the case for the section on juggling sequences) and which are not (I think Urve has a point that the section on

2114:

At the very least it would provide a brief respite from the equations and diagrams, especially if there is the potential for it to be illustrated by the inevitable image of some dead old white guy, either painted in academic regalia or photographed in black and white staring intently at the

1999:

I also was grateful for well-written prose, with few grammatical errors and no spelling errors. Nor were any facts repeated, or stated fragmentarily. I would like to think that this is coincident with having to write so precisely, and to a great extent in symbols, about such an abstract and

335:

Beautiful prose quality and attention to detail, here, with great illustration. I came across this in the GAN queue; even though I studied quite a bit of algebra, I am not in a position to determine whether the article meets the criteria. (I have no experience in combinatorics.) Good work!

4744:

I shall write here my comments rather than on your talk page as for some reason this caused your talk page to crash (it had to do with mathjax re-interpreting old stuff from your talk page for some reason). The article looks very good to me, informative and complete. I have a couple of

840:

because of the requirement that the shifts sum to zero) and the last one is the quotient from the "As a quotient" subsection? I mean, you sort of do already describe it, but without saying it's a short exact sequence and without stating that the kernel is actually a free abelian group.

3465:, which seemed to me to be rigorous enough. Again, I think anyone looking for a review of an article that had been languishing at GAN unreviewed for six months should be grateful someone went and reviewed it at all rather than raising side-eyed comments about "the depth of the review". 1958:

What about the third one: "The correspondence between the geometric and combinatorial representations for other elements is discussed below in § Connection between the geometric and combinatorial definitions.)"? This sentence has no substantive assertion beyond the structure of the

1725:, I didn't say it was deprecated here. I said use without a template (like ref, sfn, or harvtxt -- so only bare text, which this article is not) is deprecated. We're on the same page. I only mentioned it for future reference and because they mentioned there was some use of inline 3236:

and their corresponding descriptions; the first image's description there has a citation but I think that's more to support the "popular" claim. In this case (i.e. the article Affine symmetric group) the description is just kind of long and is in the article instead of under the

856:

Freeness is mentioned, but it's snuck in the very last sentence of the section. Perhaps a short additional paragraph on that section, offering the short exact sequence as a summary. Running off to lunch now, but I'll try to find a moment to think about it this afternoon.

3593:

Minor concerns: the manner in which it points to items in the literature is not perfectly uniform. I call this a "concern" rather than a "problem", because I don't think it impedes understanding, and life is too short for me to really care about the distinction between

3368:

There are several ways of getting svg from pdf, but I'm not sure which of them if any play nicely with the LaTeX fonts. The workflow I use for that (opening in Adobe Illustrator and saving as svg) definitely doesn't work well with those fonts. Maybe someone else knows?

2737:

And to complement a history section, I wonder if it might be possible to end briefly talking about the future. What's going on in research into affine symmetric groups? Are any interesting possibilities opening up? Any new questions to be answered? Maybe something like

2741:

This is a nice suggestion but I think it would be impossible to source to secondary sources. (I could, like, go pull a bunch of conjectures and open problems from recent papers, but I think it would be impossible to justify any particular choices and avoid synth.)

2331:

Hi Daniel Case, thanks very much for this review, both the positive feedback and constructive criticisms. I plan to respond in stages over the next several days. An initial version (with some bolded quotes of your comments and my interspersed responses) is below.

1504:

I am not at home so can't easily browse for citations, but I am sure they exist; I am a bit annoyed that neither paragraph has any at the moment. (Also annoying: the Knowledge LaTeX implementation seems to lose the correct spacing around \to if you use \overset ?

2016:. This is a common occurrence in GANs I review; usually it stems from someone's efforts to expand the article prior to the nomination and accompanying failure to commensurately expand the intro. But here this is an exception, as it came out of wikiversity that way. 1638:, no worries. Letters are usually for explanatory material that doesn't need to be in the prose proper, so they're more notes than citations. Regarding parenthetical citations: In this article, they use a template. The use of parenthetical style without templates 1866:, but ... it does not look like we can let this slide any longer. I owe about four reviews, and the type of a person I am, I prefer to take the harder reviews that are always in the top bar (not least because some of my nominations have ended up there; in fact 2956:

Merry Christmas (two days late) and Happy New Year! Holiday greetings aside, I see that you have not been able to do any work on this article in a month. I know you're an academic and this is a busy time of year. Will you be able to resume after the holidays?

3240:

For the second one, it's just explaining convention which is common (and necessary) in mathematical writing. Since convention is important and using different conventions can be seriously confusing, it may be better to leave it in the article rather than a

3181:

The harm is not primarily to the article, but (1) to the Good Article process caused by your dragging out this review endlessly with demands for additional footnotes where no footnote is needed and where none of the GA rules justify such a demand, (2) the

2282:

I think the juggling patterns illustration, given its long strip-like shape, would look better centered above the text, rather than off to the side sticking into the main text awkwardly, twice as wide as any other image. I did something sort of similar

4470: 1451: 5332:

though. Similarly none of the books have the publisher location listed but I think it is fine for FAC if nobody raises this in the sources review. It is actually better to have none than an inconsistent style with some that do and others that don't.

1688:. The current article uses Harvard-style references in short footnotes, and Harvard-style parenthetical text as a way of talking about authors and their publications within the article text. Neither of those things is deprecated. I would have used 3803:

can point to, then leaving it as a redlink is the best thing (as it signals there's a new topic to develop). I like your instinct about the "type A" business. And if there's no obvious way to expand the "History" section, I think it's fine as is.

3633:

There are a couple redlinks. This isn't a problem with the article itself, but if the content they should point to does exist somewhere, then they should be pipes or redirects. It's probably worth checking. No big deal if they stay as they are,

1873:

So, I will do what I usually do ... print it out, do a light copy edit (to the extent possible for me here) and come back within a week's time with my thoughts based on the article's structure and non-math aspects. I will probably ask at

5580: 3653:

Very short sections often read as unfinished to me. Here, "History" is only three sentences. It's serviceable, and I wouldn't object to a GA having a section like that, but I'd advise thinking a moment or two about whether it could be

3679:

are a wonderful combinatorial gadget that I'm surprised no one has written anything about in Knowledge, but I have looked in all the obvious places and searched in various ways and I just don't think it's here. We have content about

2032:, of "affine" so the reader has a chance to understand what it means in this context. Before I started reviewing the article I thought it might have been someone's name (some obscure French or French-speaking mathematician, perhaps? 4369: 1354: 5316:

General question: let's say a reader wants to delve more into the subject, which book shall he/she go to ? Is there no general review book on the topic or are the historical item cited the best there is to be up to date on the

3453:

I had thought my willingness to take on a GA review in this subject area, especially an article which I remind Dave had languished for months before anyone dared review it, might have been appreciated, and indeed it was, by

2023:

This wouldn't be necessary to expand the intro, as it can be done with what's there already, but it might be nice to link from the intro, as soon as possible after the bolded statement of the subject in the lede (from which

5066:(I think) where it is eminently simple to visualize. The relation to the braid group on the circle makes it easier (to me at least) to visualize the relations of the algebraic definition, in a manner similar to that given 750: 2807:

So far so good. I was wondering ... now that we've expanded the intro, is there any image in the article we could put in the intro as lede image? If not, is there one somewhere else? Can one be created relatively easily.

2398:

A lot of sentences in the definitions sections, and indeed throughout the article, use "one" in the third-person impersonal style. ... is it possible to rewrite or recast those sentences such that we don't have to use

115: 35: 5646: 5641: 3231:

For what it's worth at this point, I agree with JBL. The first CN tagged sentence is just describing the image of the matrix. It's not really making a claim that needs a citation. See for instance the images in

3732:

is introduced; in the section on Lie algebras; and finally in the section on other affine Coxeter groups) where it is alluded to, but that's it. I can't decide how I feel about this: from the point of view of

2298:

And that's it. I think these issues can reasonably be addressed within the usual week or so, and of course I can extend that time limit if it looks like you're making progress. So, I'm putting the article ...

2085:

explicitly does not rule out this use. But it also suggests that such use should be limited only to situations where that is really the only way to do it, and I'm not sure we have that here. I also note that

2595:

Representation theory and an affine Robinson–Schensted correspondence is pushing the boundary here, and maybe the section on Fully commutative elements and pattern avoidance as well) before I patch them. --

2976:, thanks for the ping and the holiday greetings -- the same to you! (I was up vaguely in your corner of the world for Thanksgiving -- took the wonderful Amtrak line along the Hudson, visiting family in 1597:

Also, what's inconsistent about them? They all appear to use short footnotes with longer references in Citation Style 2. There is one use of "Cor." rather than "Corollary" but that's easily fixed. The

4097: 5636: 1904:

for starting this review, and for your initial efforts! I will begin addressing some of the citation needed tags soon. However, there were three of them I wanted to discuss: the one at the top of

2994:

Sure, it may take a while, but I'll get back here. Generally you're more than 50% done ... if I could suggest anything right now, it would be making sure everything that isn't currently cited is.

3773:

to explicitly mention that type A is the one we're talking about. What do you think? Finally, about the short history section, if you search above on this page you'll see my comment there that

5145: 1172: 4511: 1492: 5336:

published at Selecta Math. New Ser. 28, 67 (2022) and "Monodromy in Kazhdan-Lusztig cells in affine type A; Michael Chmutov, Joel Brewster Lewis, Pavlo Pylyavskyy" is in Math. Annalen, 2022.

313: 1986:

I am glad to see that editors involved are already attending to the requested footnotes. And, since in the process of reviewing I looked at the original draft on Wikiversity and found the

1114: 1049: 4642: 4893:

for all i. Of course this is a simple observation, straightforward from the formal definition but I wonder why this isn't in the article. This quotient is compatible with the projection

1990:, by People Who Know This Stuff, with advanced degrees, actual academic chairs and all, I will defer to that and consider the math substantially correct, beyond the need for any sort of 2195:

we deprecated inline parenthetical refs a little over a year ago, there is no justification for doing things this way. Put them in tags and rewrite or recast the sentences. This is the

1583:

Can you say a bit more? I'm not too sure I understand the problem looking at that guideline. Is it that the citations themselves are inconsistent in style? If so, that's not required.

140: 5425: 1996:

review. I will say that, with the help of the various links, I was able to follow most of the article on a very minimal, conceptual level. The author(s) are to be commended for that.

2785:

Thank you for your patience. I have completed a first run through at addressing or responding to your comments. I would be interested in your assessment of this progress. Thanks,

1987: 5288: 5242: 4678: 4189: 4007: 3767: 1775: 609: 495: 409: 373: 4143: 3799:

I think reducing the number of distinct styles by 1 would be a slight but noticeable improvement, and since it's a quick fix, it's probably worthwhile. If there's nothing yet that

3432:

I have edited the article too much to take over. The mathematics has all been reviewed; the only sticking point was that Case was demanding citations for sentences like the one in

553: 5195: 809: 4947: 2620:

I have (temporarily) converted from the imperative to the third person, to be further resolved when I think about the rest of the "one can"s. So let's call this specific point

838: 3825:

Thank you! I have made those two changes (Viennot and type A). The wording of the new sentence in the section on other groups is a bit clunky, but I think it does the job. --

2109: 4593: 4383: 3966: 2019:

in fact, insist that the hook fact be in the intro. I don't think that's always necessary and don't insist on it, but here I think it could and should easily have been done).

1364: 440:

as a subgroup, as you explain later, but not when it is first introduced.) But that may be hard to do in a way that preserves prose quality and flow, so feel free to ignore.

60: 5506: 5037: 4817: 4547: 2342:

I have added two short paragraphs to the introduction; together, I believe they mention the highlights of all major body sections of the article. I'm going to call this

1621:

Sorry, that was dumb of me. I saw parenthetical refs in the text, and numbers and letters in the References section, and stupidly thought "there must be a mistake here".

5468: 4890: 3730: 438: 3102:... since we're not in a better world, I'll recommend instead what I've done for years since someone at a DYK nom accepted OI but insisted I find some way to cite it: 5064: 4974: 4844: 4774: 4709: 4233: 4034: 3530:

GA nominations I've reviewed, I have queried the reliability of the sources. And I'm sure if I looked through other GA noms I've reviewed, I could find more examples.

3451:

action (a reluctance I now fully understand) it was the many supportive emails I got from other participants in the math project about dealing with Diamond Dave here.

2294:: What's going on in research into affine symmetric groups? Are any interesting possibilities opening up? Any new questions to be answered? Maybe something like that. 522: 4994: 4911: 2917:

I did think about this a little when choosing the figure, and decided the risk of confusion was low. The figure DE linked is the one I would have chosen instead. --

5606: 3840: 1808: 3046:

That's incredibly helpful, thanks. I was able to get into my office yesterday and pick up some books; I will put in a final push this week and ping again soon. --

2044:

able to gather that it has some meaning that puts it, at least sometimes, in contrast to "infinite", but I would have liked a fuller understanding from the get-go.

5511: 5308: 3486: 774: 673: 2370:

Ok so on one hand this point is obviously correct, and I would like to write a sentence (or maybe footnote) that explains it. (The ultimate explanation is that

984: 2861:

The only thing I'm a little worried about with this image is that symmetries of the tiling itself and symmetries of the colored tiling are not the same thing. —

2535:

You are right about what MOS:MATH says, but wrong in this instance that it applies. That portion of the MOS is about definitions; for example, in the section

1983:

OK ... I had meant to get this done over the weekend, but I couldn't, and then I had to work at the polls on Tuesday so that delayed this into the later week.

497:, first let me say why this is what I chose (which I think you understand already): by far the most common notation for the (usual, finite) symmetric group is 2759:

It is a nice idea! I wish there were more people writing the kind of expository / state-of-the-field articles in mathematics that could be used for this. --

1798: 3354:

PNG to produce images (same as for all the others I created in the article); if you know how to get SVG output from LaTeX, I'd be happy to hear about it! --

4749:

There is a whole section on "Relationship to the finite symmetric group" and so I wondered why there was nothing on the relation to the group of braids on

1938:

I know how you feel, but I've been dinged myself for this sort of thing (uncited prefatory/introductory sentences) far too many times even though if I had

1867: 1780: 5656: 4238: 3167:

What harm could it possibly do to the article? If you'd like to have someone else review it, I'd be happy to let it go and have them take a crack at it.

1216: 303: 2900:. I'm not sure it's really much of a problem. Anyone who would notice that it's an issue would also know to ignore the colors for sake of the example. — 3895: 3666: 3856: 3813: 1684:

and, as an RFC that was purely about referencing, did not concern the use of the same style as a way of commenting on authors and their publications

3587: 5651: 2685:

I believe that Shi probably is notable. However, I'm not going to write an article about him in the near future, so I have removed the link.

279: 1194:, affine permutations with underlying permutation the identity, and translations); in all three settings, the natural group operation turns 5631: 3712:, I see that the classification of affine Coxeter groups is not clearly spelled out anywhere in the article -- there are a few spots (when 3918:

Here I'm going to maintain a (hopefully short) list of things that are true but that I was not able to find sources for on first attempt:

3641:

is introduced and used bothers me a bit. If a reader isn't familiar with the classification of root systems and related topics, dropping

157: 5370: 3688:

groups, and of course this concept is intimately related to the concept in Coxeter groups, but none of our articles on Coxeter groups (

5369:

All pictures must have alt text, which you can insert in the code with "| alt =" in the figure caption. This is mandatory for FA, see

2003:

That said, I do think there are some other non-math issues besides the insufficient citations (Before I begin, let me just say that I

3524: 1847: 270: 231: 2611:

To translate between the geometric and algebraic definitions, fix an alcove and consider the n hyperplanes that form its boundary

2284: 2166:

Starting at "cycle type and reflection length", the article inexplicably begins using its Harvard references not only inline and

2099:

To translate between the geometric and algebraic definitions, fix an alcove and consider the n hyperplanes that form its boundary

1826: 1803: 1601: 96: 2176:

So, honestly, I don't know why this was done here. But, and I must speak more boldly than I have otherwise in this review, it

4042: 2384:

mathematicians use words. So I'm concerned about how to go about this in practice. Thoughts or suggestions are welcome. --

2379:, and in the geometric construction of the affine symmetric group the elements are all affine transformations. The article 2897: 1676:

You are seriously mistaken about the format here being deprecated. The use of parenthetical (Harvard) style is deprecated

3352:

Hmm, I hadn't noticed that they're not perfect squares, thanks -- I've fiddled, now it's better. I am using LaTeX -: -->

2829:

Well, the natural thing is the triangular tiling of the plane; I went and found one on commons with some color in it. --

206: 3610:

is legitimate. This is a matter of taste; perhaps the most serious thing I can say about it is that having effectively

5076: 3098:. Technically, you'd say you don't need any citation, and in a better world I'd agree with you, and that would be it. 2710:

I think the juggling patterns illustration, given its long strip-like shape, would look better centered above the text

1119: 670:

In the "Relationship to the finite symmetric group" section, should there be some mention of the short exact sequence

30: 4475: 2500:, for whatever reason -- I have merged related consecutive single-sentence paragraphs there into larger paragraphs. 2250:" This to me is an implicit requirement that does not and should not need to be restated (even though, of course, it 1456: 1859:

This article has sat unreviewed for six months now, likely because it's about an arcane (to most of us) math topic.

3881: 3834: 3794: 2547:

is an affine permutation if and only if ". But the statement about permutation patterns is not a definition.

2408:

I see about 15 uses of "one has", "one may", etc. -- some are clearly avoidable, I'll see what I can do with them.

2228:

are deprecated. There's no problem with them in footnotes, like the former of the two variants you proposed above.

2977: 1054: 989: 4598: 3557: 3511:

and come in and kick everything over, over a relatively minor issue that you could have handled with much more

3441: 3374: 3336: 3192: 3151: 2905: 2866: 1713: 1639: 1626: 1612: 1573: 1524: 846: 194: 20: 2367:

it might be nice to link from the intro ... to some article, or perhaps the Wiktionary definition, of "affine"

1942:

druthers, too, it wouldn't be necessary. Your proposed solution of moving cites up has always worked for me.

5359: 5248: 3433: 3120:

endnotes. I think that would work here, and then the remaining sentence could be joined into the next graf.

3110:

As for the second one, I think, I typically put such meta references of the "In this article ..." type into

5067: 3770: 3281:

but it did not work well so I self-reverted. May try again later (1st day of classes is tomorrow) .... --

2536: 2497: 1913: 1909: 1905: 1822: 1175: 168: 5257: 5200: 4647: 4465:{\displaystyle 0\to \mathbb {Z} ^{n-1}\to {\widetilde {S}}_{n}\mathop {\overset {\pi }{\to }} S_{n}\to 0} 4158: 3976: 3736: 2093:

In other words, is it possible to rewrite or recast those sentences such that we don't have to use "one"?

1446:{\displaystyle 0\to \mathbb {Z} ^{n-1}\to {\widetilde {S}}_{n}\to S_{n}\mathop {\overset {\pi }{\to }} 0} 578: 464: 378: 342: 53: 5432:) has, in the case of the affine symmetric group, a nice combinatorial representation (Barkley--Speyer: 4102: 3891: 3877: 3852: 3845:

Do not close a review started by another reviewer without first attempting to contact the first reviewer

3809: 3662: 3571: 3566:

So you would have more respect for me if I had lied? I'll keep that in mind next time. If there is one.

3538: 3422: 3300: 3250: 3221: 3172: 3125: 3030: 2999: 2962: 2887: 2852: 2813: 2750: 2566: 2380: 2376: 2317: 2263: 2156: 2068: 1947: 1886: 1841: 527: 212: 150: 40: 5150: 2633:

Might those parentheticals at the end of a couple of grafs be better off converted into endnotes using

2290:

And to complement a history section, I wonder if it might be possible to end briefly talking about the

2279:

If J.Y. Shi's notability can be demonstrated, start at least a stub article. Otherwise delink his name.

2119:

Might those parentheticals at the end of a couple of grafs be better off converted into endnotes using

1878:

for someone not involved with the article to take a look at the math and let me know how solid it is.

779: 256: 3469:

criterion by which GANs in every other subject area are reviewed. I commend to your reading attention

3295:

Yes I think adding row/column numbers may help, and would also allow the description to be shortened.

2238:

require a consistent citation style throughout the article, but ... I would commend your attention to

4916: 4378: 4192: 3527: 3480:

things that are well-known, and the source can contain additional information to benefit our readers.

2844: 1359: 814: 4714:

Full details of the geometry for the infinite dihedral group: who are the roots, what is the alcove.

3800: 3676: 2543:

is an affine permutation if ." The admonition in MOS is that I should not have written "a function

166:

Did you know ... that juggling patterns can be encoded in terms of a mathematical object called the

5613: 5403: 5395: 5311: 4726: 3830: 3790: 3553: 3552:

rather than even the most feeble denial? (Also, please do not call me "Dave"; it is not my name.) —

3470: 3437: 3405: 3370: 3359: 3347: 3332: 3321: 3286: 3268: 3188: 3162: 3147: 3073: 3051: 2985: 2922: 2901: 2877: 2862: 2834: 2790: 2764: 2728: 2701: 2662: 2600: 2552: 2515: 2484: 2450: 2426: 2389: 2358: 2239: 1966: 1921: 1875: 1722: 1709: 1635: 1622: 1608: 1569: 1538: 1520: 1510: 862: 842: 651: 617: 131: 4560: 3925: 278:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

5473: 5437: 4999: 4779: 4530: 3681: 3462: 3414: 2406:(first-person plural is standard in mathematical papers, even when written by a single author). 2187:

be undone to be consistent with the citations in the first half of the article. I see nothing in

1203: 753: 262: 5310:

is" you could perhaps add the word "bivariate" in front of "generating" and you can wikilink to

3548:

Why would I apologize, when your response to my accusation of superficial reference-checking is

2136:

we should try to combine them with adjacent, longer grafs, unless there is a good reason not to.

246: 225: 4849: 2336:

First, at 60K total, it is long enough that the intro can and should be more than the one graf.

5382: 5345: 5322: 2192: 2188: 1881:

Hey, we should all try to stretch ourselves and push the limit on what we think we can do ...

1183: 44: 5575:{\displaystyle \cdots \prec -2\prec 0\prec 2\prec \cdots \prec 3\prec 1\prec -1\prec \cdots } 5447: 3715: 2079:

examples, I drop any perceived objections. However, I have seen it nowhere else on Knowledge.

5363: 3887: 3873: 3863: 3848: 3820: 3805: 3697: 3672: 3658: 3608:

to mention, in the text, the authors of particular works, along with pointers to those works

3567: 3534: 3418: 3409: 3311: 3296: 3260: 3246: 3217: 3168: 3137: 3121: 3062: 3041: 3026: 2995: 2973: 2958: 2883: 2848: 2824: 2809: 2780: 2746: 2562: 2313: 2259: 2152: 2108:

One thing that might help make for a longer intro is something many of our other conceptual

2064: 1943: 1901: 1882: 1837: 1702: 882: 875: 414: 3922:"In terms of the geometric definition, this corresponds to the reflection across the plane 3839:

Those changes look good to me. I'm inclined to say the article deserves GA status now. The

5042: 4952: 4822: 4752: 4687: 4550: 4211: 4012: 3705: 3183: 2676: 2614: 2371: 2102: 556: 500: 4979: 4896: 4776:

because as far as I can tell the affine symmetric group is a quotient of the braid group

5585: 3785:

My opinion of this hasn't really changed since then. Thanks again for your comments! --

2915:

Oops, I could have sworn I responded here yesterday, but it seems I never hit "publish".

2040:

As in so many other sciences, a lot of people leave their mark on the field that way) I

1652: 1565: 5609: 5399: 4741: 4722: 4037: 3826: 3786: 3701: 3603: 3550:"This is exactly the criterion by which GANs in every other subject area are reviewed." 3401: 3355: 3317: 3282: 3264: 3143: 3084: 3069: 3047: 3010: 2981: 2951: 2918: 2830: 2802: 2786: 2760: 2724: 2697: 2658: 2596: 2548: 2511: 2480: 2446: 2422: 2385: 2354: 2255: 2231: 2215: 1962: 1933: 1917: 1734: 1660: 1588: 1559: 1534: 1506: 858: 647: 637: 627: 613: 447: 5293: 5244:

as these forms are commonly encountered in the literature when presenting this result.

3646:

the text or the figure caption could mention that the triangular lattice is known as A

759: 339:

The only thing I can offer is to suggest that there be some motivation for calling it

5625: 5147:

I understand that this is easier for the general audience, but perhaps you could add

3689: 3508: 3019: 2471:

for now. I believe it would be possible to write a more detailed history section on

2105:. That's common in a textbook, but we generally try to avoid that in an encyclopedia. 2025: 1692: 1199: 888: 5251:

for the affine symmetric group is solvable. I think this should be stated somewhere.

4717:

The sentence "However for higher dimensions, the alcoves are not regular simplices."

4364:{\displaystyle \pi (s_{0})=s_{1}s_{2}\cdots s_{n-2}s_{n-1}s_{n-2}\cdots s_{2}s_{1}.} 1961:

Never mind, I see, it's a two-sentence parenthetical. Back to the bookshelf .... --

1349:{\displaystyle \{(1,-1,0,\ldots ,0),(0,1,-1,\ldots ,0),\ldots ,(0,\ldots ,0,1,-1)\}} 881:

is by definition the set of affine permutations whose underlying permutation is the

5378: 5341: 5318: 3114: 3095: 2637: 2123: 2090:

strongly suggests that the use of pronouns to address the reader should be avoided.

1655:, which does not require it. (Why that is the case I do not know, but so it goes.) 5617: 5407: 5386: 5349: 5326: 4730: 4373:

The relationship between the kernel, the affine symmetric group, and the image of

3847:, but in this case the first reviewer appears to have distanced from the article. 3575: 3561: 3542: 3445: 3426: 3378: 3363: 3340: 3325: 3304: 3290: 3272: 3254: 3225: 3196: 3176: 3155: 3129: 3077: 3055: 3034: 3015:

Alright. Looking everything over, I think all that's left is the six places where

3003: 2989: 2966: 2926: 2909: 2891: 2870: 2856: 2838: 2817: 2794: 2768: 2754: 2732: 2705: 2666: 2604: 2570: 2556: 2519: 2488: 2454: 2430: 2393: 2362: 2321: 2267: 2219: 2160: 2072: 2029: 1970: 1951: 1925: 1890: 1851: 1738: 1717: 1664: 1630: 1616: 1592: 1577: 1542: 1528: 1514: 866: 850: 655: 641: 621: 451: 2586:

Now let me move towards addressing the point. There was a discussion about this

275: 5394:

Note to anyone else interested in this discussion: it ended up taking place on

1607:

template uses Citation Style 1, but that appears to be more difficult to fix. —

3693: 3533:

To make such a remark so recklessly warrants an apology, but I'm not hopeful.

2200: 1651:

have inconsistent citation style, then it would be a concern. But not for the

252: 745:{\displaystyle 0\to \mathbb {Z} ^{n-1}\to {\widetilde {S}}_{n}\to S_{n}\to 0} 2211: 2013: 1730: 1671: 1656: 1584: 631: 458: 441: 144: 3775:

I believe it would be possible to write a more detailed history section on

2180:

be undone. We can't have two different cite styles within the same article.

1829:. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. 1680:. The RFC that led to deprecation of that format did not deprecate its use 3233: 2403: 2133: 2132:

There are also a fair amount of free-standing single-sentence grafs. Per

2087: 1568:, which may spell misfortune for a GA review. Might want to take a look. 1519:

Looks ok to me. I added \mathop to the formula to space the \to better. —

756:

of translations, affine permutations that don't permute the residues mod

3216:

Because I'm done with this review right here and right now, that's why.

2713:

Yes, nice suggestion, and thank you for showing me how it can be done.

2303: 1190:

is used in this article for all three of these sets (integer vectors in

3630:, where an endnote and both styles of parenthetical all crowd together. 2441: 2082: 2056:

of articles that seem like they would provide the necessary explanation

1992: 3491:

It's easier to find a citation than to argue over why it is not needed

2000:

complicated subject. If so, it speaks well of mathematics as a field.

3628:

Representation theory and an affine Robinson–Schensted correspondence

2143:. Going back to the above link to MOS:MATH, it explicitly says that " 2051: 3512: 3499:

been willing to meet me halfway on this, and I was really just that

2528:. Going back to the above link to MOSMATH, it explicitly says that " 2493:

There are also a fair amount of free-standing single-sentence grafs.

2248:

citations within any given article should follow a consistent style.

2058:

I didn't myself feel anywhere near qualified to choose the best one.

1358:

The relationship of the preceding paragraph may be expressed by the

5433: 5312:

Generating_function#Bivariate_and_multivariate_generating_functions

3771:

Affine_symmetric_group#Combinatorics_of_other_affine_Coxeter_groups

2191:

suggesting that citations can be used this way, and given that per

885:. The window notations of such affine permutations are of the form 5429: 2008:

nonstandard meaning that cannot be easily intuited from context):

4523:

The analogous combinatorial construction is to choose any subset

1910:

Affine symmetric group#Relationship to the finite symmetric group

3626:— is too choppy. This particularly sticks out in the subsection 2410:

I have significantly reduced the number of these; let's call it

5254:

In sentence "The generating function for these statistics over

5073:

In the section on the combinatorial definition, when you write

3779:, but I am skeptical that there is a lot more to be said about 2475:, but I am skeptical that there is a lot more to be said about 5247:

As a Coxeter group (or as a quotient of the braid group), the

3461:

Yes, I'm not a higher level mathematician, so I relied on the

188: 3602:. I see that this has been discussed above, and I think that 2530:

When defining a term, do not use the phrase 'if and only if'.

2145:

When defining a term, do not use the phrase 'if and only if'.

3503:

issue away from ending the review with a promotion when you

3463:

critiques of the math sourcing in the WikiJournal of Science

1708:

for the in-text ones, but that's a minor stylistic choice. —

461:, thanks very much for the kind words! About the notation 5647:

Knowledge Did you know articles that are featured articles

5642:

Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once

3025:

tags remain. Fix those and we're pretty much (ahem) good.

2050:

a link that could be made, from the third sentence; while

3914:

True statements that I was not immediately able to source

3600:

A 2019 paper by Lewis et al. proved the following formula

1729:, not that the relevant deprecation was applicable here. 3596:

In (Lewis et al. 2019), the following formula was proved

4150: 4092:{\displaystyle S_{a_{1}}\times \cdots \times S_{a_{k}}} 3969: 3278: 2682: 2525: 2498:

Affine symmetric group#Descents, length, and inversions

2140: 108: 89: 3089:

Oh ... OK ... I see what you're saying and I hear you.

1178:, that is, the isometries that shift the entire space 646:

That makes sense -- thanks again for your feedback! --

5637:

Featured articles that have appeared on the main page

5588: 5514: 5476: 5450: 5296: 5260: 5203: 5153: 5079: 5045: 5002: 4982: 4955: 4919: 4899: 4853: 4825: 4782: 4755: 4690: 4650: 4601: 4563: 4533: 4478: 4386: 4241: 4214: 4161: 4105: 4045: 4015: 3979: 3928: 3739: 3718: 1459: 1367: 1219: 1122: 1057: 992: 891: 817: 782: 762: 676: 581: 530: 503: 467: 417: 381: 345: 5416:

An object that might deserve mention in this article

3872:

been monitoring this and I'm OK with your decision.

3408:, where does this review stand? It seems clear that 3107:(Or whatever term for the image works best for you). 524:(sometimes rendered with the S in other fonts, like 274:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2183:And you have no choice of which style to adopt. It 5600: 5574: 5508:. (NB: there can be complicated order type, like 5500: 5462: 5302: 5282: 5236: 5189: 5139: 5058: 5031: 4988: 4968: 4941: 4905: 4883: 4838: 4811: 4768: 4703: 4672: 4636: 4587: 4541: 4505: 4464: 4363: 4227: 4183: 4137: 4091: 4028: 4001: 3960: 3761: 3724: 2896:Only by using a much less eye-catching image like 2460:I have made a first attempt at this, so let's say 2014:the intro can and should be more than the one graf 1486: 1445: 1348: 1166: 1108: 1043: 978: 832: 803: 768: 744: 603: 547: 516: 489: 432: 403: 367: 59:This article appeared on Knowledge's Main Page as 5366:are wikilinked to several times in the main text. 5181: 5160: 5140:{\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}u(i)=1+2+\cdots +n} 2203:after getting all the material properly sourced. 1167:{\displaystyle (a_{1},\ldots ,a_{n})\in \Lambda } 4506:{\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} ^{n-1}\cong \Lambda } 2375:lines that are still parallel, etc.) are called 1487:{\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} ^{n-1}\cong \Lambda } 3477: 3331:depending on how you're generating the image. — 2537:Affine symmetric group#Combinatorial definition 2147:" Some of the other guidance there is on point. 2110:math articles that have gained at least GA have 1914:Affine symmetric group#Combinatorial definition 5424:of Coxeter groups (general reference by Dyer: 2496:This was particularly the case in the section 559:, and I've even seen other random things like 4009:are all isomorphic to parabolic subgroups of 2679:expertise for their opinion on this question. 1174:. Geometrically, this kernel consists of the 8: 3091:These cats can be skinned in different ways. 2882:Is this something that can be easily fixed? 2524:I actually seemed to have been right before 2139:I actually seemed to have been right before 2012:First, at 60K total, it is long enough that 1343: 1220: 43:. Even so, if you can update or improve it, 39:as one of the best articles produced by the 33:; it (or a previous version of it) has been 3519:tact at all would have been an improvement. 2440:sources; for example, I don't know whether 2402:Ha, gosh, and I was so proud of myself for 2340:Yes, absolutely I agree, I will work on it. 1109:{\displaystyle a_{1}+a_{2}+\ldots +a_{n}=0} 1044:{\displaystyle (a_{1},a_{2},\ldots ,a_{n})} 4637:{\displaystyle ({\widetilde {S}}_{n})_{A}} 1758: 575:for the linear version). So the notation 220: 68: 15: 5587: 5513: 5475: 5449: 5295: 5274: 5263: 5262: 5259: 5207: 5202: 5180: 5159: 5157: 5152: 5095: 5084: 5078: 5050: 5044: 5020: 5007: 5001: 4981: 4960: 4954: 4933: 4922: 4921: 4918: 4898: 4863: 4858: 4852: 4830: 4824: 4800: 4787: 4781: 4760: 4754: 4695: 4689: 4664: 4653: 4652: 4649: 4628: 4618: 4607: 4606: 4600: 4562: 4535: 4534: 4532: 4513:is the kernel, a free abelian group with 4485: 4481: 4480: 4477: 4450: 4433: 4427: 4416: 4415: 4399: 4395: 4394: 4385: 4352: 4342: 4323: 4307: 4291: 4278: 4268: 4252: 4240: 4219: 4213: 4175: 4164: 4163: 4160: 4129: 4110: 4104: 4081: 4076: 4055: 4050: 4044: 4020: 4014: 3993: 3982: 3981: 3978: 3946: 3933: 3927: 3753: 3742: 3741: 3738: 3717: 1466: 1462: 1461: 1458: 1427: 1421: 1408: 1397: 1396: 1380: 1376: 1375: 1366: 1218: 1182:without rotating or reflecting it. In an 1149: 1130: 1121: 1094: 1075: 1062: 1056: 1032: 1013: 1000: 991: 961: 930: 905: 890: 824: 820: 819: 816: 789: 785: 784: 781: 761: 730: 717: 706: 705: 689: 685: 684: 675: 595: 584: 583: 580: 539: 533: 532: 529: 508: 502: 481: 470: 469: 466: 424: 419: 416: 395: 384: 383: 380: 359: 348: 347: 344: 3973:"The non-maximal parabolic subgroups of 3781:the affine symmetric group in particular 3413:(Or perhaps a request should be made at 2477:the affine symmetric group in particular 2026:we are strongly discouraged from linking 192: 2646:This is a chronic flaw in my writing. 2539:, the second sentence says "a function 1789: 1761: 222: 4680:of affine permutations that stabilize 4208:In terms of the Coxeter generators of 3844: 3774: 3642: 3638: 3627: 3623: 3619: 3615: 3607: 3599: 3595: 3549: 871:What about this as a starting point? 3105:See accompanying diagram</ref: --> 3094:For the first one, you're leaning on 2681:So based on David Eppstein's comment 7: 5283:{\displaystyle {\widetilde {S}}_{n}} 5237:{\displaystyle ={\frac {n(n+1)}{2}}} 4673:{\displaystyle {\widetilde {S}}_{n}} 4549:that contains one element from each 4184:{\displaystyle {\widetilde {S}}_{n}} 4002:{\displaystyle {\widetilde {S}}_{n}} 3762:{\displaystyle {\widetilde {S}}_{n}} 2033: 1678:for inline (non-footnote) references 1564:I believe the citation format isn't 604:{\displaystyle {\widetilde {S}}_{n}} 490:{\displaystyle {\widetilde {S}}_{n}} 404:{\displaystyle {\widetilde {S}}_{n}} 368:{\displaystyle {\widetilde {S}}_{n}} 268:This article is within the scope of 4138:{\displaystyle a_{1},\ldots ,a_{k}} 3187:questions in my previous comment? — 2643:? They sort of read that way to me. 2129:? They sort of read that way to me. 548:{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {S}}_{n}} 534: 211:It is of interest to the following 5190:{\displaystyle ={\binom {n+1}{2}}} 5164: 4500: 3719: 3142:can you please re-read the actual 2445:only dates back < 40 years.) -- 1906:Affine symmetric group#Definitions 1481: 1161: 804:{\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} ^{n-1}} 14: 5657:Low-priority mathematics articles 3637:Something about the way the term 555:; other options are mentioned at 288:Knowledge:WikiProject Mathematics 4942:{\displaystyle {\tilde {S}}_{n}} 4884:{\displaystyle s_{i}^{2}=Id: --> 3777:affine Coxeter groups in general 3614:citation styles — a footnote to 2715: 2687: 2675:I am querying someone with more 2648: 2622: 2502: 2473:affine Coxeter groups in general 2462: 2412: 2344: 2302: 2034: 1956:Great, thanks, I will do that. 833:{\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} ^{n}} 291:Template:WikiProject Mathematics 255: 245: 224: 193: 130: 52: 19: 5358:I found a couple of duplinks : 3886:Thank you for letting me know! 3523:beggars can't be choosers). In 3458:who was working on the article. 2587: 2028:), to some article, or perhaps 1827:Talk:Affine symmetric group/GA1 1494:is the free abelian group with 1051:is an integer vector such that 564:"natural" one they might write 308:This article has been rated as 5440:) in terms of total orders on 5225: 5213: 5110: 5104: 5026: 5013: 4927: 4806: 4793: 4625: 4602: 4456: 4435: 4411: 4390: 4258: 4245: 1429: 1414: 1392: 1371: 1340: 1307: 1295: 1262: 1256: 1223: 1155: 1123: 1038: 993: 973: 892: 736: 723: 701: 680: 1: 5652:FA-Class mathematics articles 4736:Affine symmetric group review 4588:{\displaystyle 1+2+\ldots +n} 4205:(D'oh -- this is just false!) 3961:{\displaystyle x_{i}-x_{j}=k} 3896:21:00, 17 February 2022 (UTC) 3882:20:49, 17 February 2022 (UTC) 3857:20:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC) 3835:12:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC) 3814:02:26, 17 February 2022 (UTC) 3795:01:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC) 3667:20:54, 16 February 2022 (UTC) 3576:19:19, 16 February 2022 (UTC) 3562:16:07, 16 February 2022 (UTC) 3543:08:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC) 3446:06:54, 16 February 2022 (UTC) 3427:05:42, 16 February 2022 (UTC) 3004:05:39, 31 December 2021 (UTC) 2990:00:44, 29 December 2021 (UTC) 2967:01:04, 28 December 2021 (UTC) 2898:File:Uniform tiling 63-t2.svg 2871:08:21, 30 November 2021 (UTC) 2857:06:35, 30 November 2021 (UTC) 2839:00:23, 28 November 2021 (UTC) 2818:07:05, 18 November 2021 (UTC) 2795:12:25, 16 November 2021 (UTC) 2769:12:25, 16 November 2021 (UTC) 2755:22:56, 15 November 2021 (UTC) 2706:14:49, 15 November 2021 (UTC) 2605:12:25, 16 November 2021 (UTC) 2489:14:49, 15 November 2021 (UTC) 2455:11:48, 10 November 2021 (UTC) 2431:11:48, 10 November 2021 (UTC) 2394:11:48, 10 November 2021 (UTC) 1566:consistent within the article 752:where the first group is the 282:and see a list of open tasks. 5501:{\displaystyle a+n\prec b+n} 5354:Technical comments for FAC: 5032:{\displaystyle B_{n}(S^{1})} 4812:{\displaystyle B_{n}(S^{1})} 4731:11:30, 4 November 2021 (UTC) 4542:{\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} } 3379:01:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC) 3364:01:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC) 3341:02:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC) 3326:02:05, 14 January 2022 (UTC) 3305:02:35, 11 January 2022 (UTC) 3291:21:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC) 3273:21:12, 10 January 2022 (UTC) 3255:10:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC) 3226:05:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC) 3197:05:40, 10 January 2022 (UTC) 3177:05:37, 10 January 2022 (UTC) 3156:05:32, 10 January 2022 (UTC) 3130:04:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC) 2927:15:35, 3 December 2021 (UTC) 2910:07:12, 2 December 2021 (UTC) 2892:06:04, 2 December 2021 (UTC) 2733:12:17, 9 November 2021 (UTC) 2667:12:17, 9 November 2021 (UTC) 2571:18:50, 5 November 2021 (UTC) 2561:OK, no problem ... I defer. 2557:12:17, 9 November 2021 (UTC) 2520:12:17, 9 November 2021 (UTC) 2363:12:17, 9 November 2021 (UTC) 2322:06:14, 4 November 2021 (UTC) 2268:19:06, 5 November 2021 (UTC) 2230:You are correct in that the 2220:09:06, 4 November 2021 (UTC) 2161:05:47, 4 November 2021 (UTC) 2073:05:15, 4 November 2021 (UTC) 1971:23:44, 28 October 2021 (UTC) 1952:18:25, 28 October 2021 (UTC) 1926:18:01, 28 October 2021 (UTC) 1912:, and the one at the end of 1891:03:49, 26 October 2021 (UTC) 1852:03:49, 26 October 2021 (UTC) 5632:Knowledge featured articles 4099:for some positive integers 3078:00:57, 7 January 2022 (UTC) 3056:01:53, 5 January 2022 (UTC) 3035:22:54, 4 January 2022 (UTC) 2843:Looks good ... we got some 626:That makes a lot of sense, 568:for the affine version and 375:rather than another name. ( 164:The text of the entry was: 5673: 5618:17:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC) 4557:and whose elements sum to 4199:that preserve the lattice 642:02:05, 30 April 2021 (UTC) 622:16:36, 29 April 2021 (UTC) 452:23:25, 28 April 2021 (UTC) 116:Featured article candidate 5408:17:09, 30 June 2023 (UTC) 4996:also the projection from 4745:questions/observations: 4235:, this can be written as 2745:OK; it was just an idea. 2256:featured article criteria 2030:the Wiktionary definition 1653:good article requirements 307: 240: 219: 179: 71: 67: 5463:{\displaystyle a\prec b} 5387:11:46, 5 June 2023 (UTC) 5377:More comments to follow. 5350:09:44, 5 June 2023 (UTC) 5327:09:44, 5 June 2023 (UTC) 4377:may be expressed by the 3725:{\displaystyle \Lambda } 2588:on the article talk-page 2224:Harvard references used 1908:, the one at the top of 1739:03:47, 8 July 2021 (UTC) 1718:21:51, 7 July 2021 (UTC) 1665:20:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC) 1631:17:41, 7 July 2021 (UTC) 1617:04:33, 7 July 2021 (UTC) 1593:02:26, 7 July 2021 (UTC) 1578:22:11, 6 July 2021 (UTC) 1543:20:33, 1 June 2021 (UTC) 1529:18:52, 1 June 2021 (UTC) 1515:17:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC) 867:15:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC) 851:19:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC) 656:15:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC) 314:project's priority scale 143:appeared on Knowledge's 61:Today's featured article 5360:infinite dihedral group 5290:simultaneously for all 3316:Indeed! It is done. -- 1896:Comments from JayBeeEll 1862:I am not a math person 1642:(no longer to be used). 433:{\displaystyle {S}_{n}} 271:WikiProject Mathematics 5602: 5576: 5502: 5464: 5340:More comments to come. 5304: 5284: 5238: 5191: 5141: 5100: 5060: 5033: 4990: 4970: 4943: 4907: 4886: 4840: 4813: 4770: 4705: 4674: 4638: 4589: 4543: 4507: 4466: 4365: 4229: 4185: 4139: 4093: 4030: 4003: 3962: 3763: 3726: 3482: 2377:affine transformations 2052:we do have at least a 1602:Academic peer reviewed 1503: 1488: 1447: 1350: 1168: 1110: 1045: 980: 834: 805: 770: 746: 605: 549: 518: 491: 434: 405: 369: 201:This article is rated 169:affine symmetric group 141:fact from this article 27:Affine symmetric group 5603: 5577: 5503: 5465: 5305: 5285: 5239: 5192: 5142: 5080: 5061: 5059:{\displaystyle S_{n}} 5034: 4991: 4971: 4969:{\displaystyle S_{n}} 4944: 4908: 4887: 4841: 4839:{\displaystyle S^{1}} 4814: 4771: 4769:{\displaystyle S^{1}} 4706: 4704:{\displaystyle S_{n}} 4675: 4639: 4590: 4544: 4508: 4467: 4366: 4230: 4228:{\displaystyle S_{n}} 4193:rigid transformations 4186: 4140: 4094: 4031: 4029:{\displaystyle S_{n}} 4004: 3963: 3764: 3727: 3144:good article criteria 2381:Affine transformation 2232:good article criteria 1489: 1448: 1351: 1169: 1111: 1046: 981: 872: 835: 806: 771: 747: 606: 550: 519: 517:{\displaystyle S_{n}} 492: 435: 406: 370: 5586: 5512: 5474: 5448: 5294: 5258: 5201: 5151: 5077: 5043: 5000: 4989:{\displaystyle \pi } 4980: 4953: 4917: 4906:{\displaystyle \pi } 4897: 4851: 4846:under the relations 4823: 4780: 4753: 4688: 4648: 4599: 4561: 4531: 4476: 4384: 4379:short exact sequence 4239: 4212: 4159: 4103: 4043: 4013: 3977: 3926: 3737: 3716: 2847:action going there! 2609:And per the above, " 2097:And per the above, " 1870:is there as I type. 1457: 1365: 1360:short exact sequence 1217: 1120: 1055: 990: 889: 815: 780: 760: 674: 666:Short exact sequence 579: 528: 501: 465: 415: 379: 343: 294:mathematics articles 97:Good article nominee 5601:{\displaystyle n=2} 5422:extended weak order 4868: 4191:to be the group of 3710:type A root lattice 3682:parabolic subgroups 3639:type A root lattice 2945:Christmas greetings 2526:this partial revert 2141:this partial revert 63:on October 8, 2023. 41:Knowledge community 5598: 5572: 5498: 5460: 5300: 5280: 5234: 5187: 5137: 5056: 5029: 4986: 4966: 4939: 4903: 4881: 4854: 4836: 4809: 4766: 4701: 4670: 4634: 4585: 4539: 4503: 4462: 4361: 4225: 4181: 4135: 4089: 4026: 3999: 3958: 3759: 3722: 3509:the angry mastodon 3485:And there is also 3456:every other editor 2579:Harvard references 2170:sentences, but as 1988:peer reviews there 1484: 1443: 1346: 1164: 1106: 1041: 976: 830: 801: 766: 754:free abelian group 742: 601: 545: 514: 487: 430: 401: 365: 263:Mathematics portal 207:content assessment 72:Article milestones 5438:extended abstract 5396:my user talk-page 5303:{\displaystyle n} 5271: 5232: 5179: 4930: 4684:is isomorphic to 4661: 4615: 4441: 4424: 4172: 3990: 3750: 2916: 2151:Saving again ... 1900:Thanks very much 1817: 1816: 1533:Great, thanks! -- 1435: 1405: 1184:abuse of notation 1116:, that is, where 769:{\displaystyle n} 714: 592: 478: 392: 356: 331:Beautiful article 328: 327: 324: 323: 320: 319: 187: 186: 125: 124: 90:February 17, 2022 5664: 5607: 5605: 5604: 5599: 5581: 5579: 5578: 5573: 5507: 5505: 5504: 5499: 5469: 5467: 5466: 5461: 5364:identity element 5309: 5307: 5306: 5301: 5289: 5287: 5286: 5281: 5279: 5278: 5273: 5272: 5264: 5243: 5241: 5240: 5235: 5233: 5228: 5208: 5196: 5194: 5193: 5188: 5186: 5185: 5184: 5175: 5163: 5146: 5144: 5143: 5138: 5099: 5094: 5065: 5063: 5062: 5057: 5055: 5054: 5038: 5036: 5035: 5030: 5025: 5024: 5012: 5011: 4995: 4993: 4992: 4987: 4975: 4973: 4972: 4967: 4965: 4964: 4948: 4946: 4945: 4940: 4938: 4937: 4932: 4931: 4923: 4912: 4910: 4909: 4904: 4892: 4889: 4888: 4882: 4867: 4862: 4845: 4843: 4842: 4837: 4835: 4834: 4818: 4816: 4815: 4810: 4805: 4804: 4792: 4791: 4775: 4773: 4772: 4767: 4765: 4764: 4710: 4708: 4707: 4702: 4700: 4699: 4683: 4679: 4677: 4676: 4671: 4669: 4668: 4663: 4662: 4654: 4643: 4641: 4640: 4635: 4633: 4632: 4623: 4622: 4617: 4616: 4608: 4594: 4592: 4591: 4586: 4556: 4548: 4546: 4545: 4540: 4538: 4526: 4519: 4512: 4510: 4509: 4504: 4496: 4495: 4484: 4471: 4469: 4468: 4463: 4455: 4454: 4442: 4434: 4432: 4431: 4426: 4425: 4417: 4410: 4409: 4398: 4376: 4370: 4368: 4367: 4362: 4357: 4356: 4347: 4346: 4334: 4333: 4318: 4317: 4302: 4301: 4283: 4282: 4273: 4272: 4257: 4256: 4234: 4232: 4231: 4226: 4224: 4223: 4202: 4198: 4190: 4188: 4187: 4182: 4180: 4179: 4174: 4173: 4165: 4148: 4144: 4142: 4141: 4136: 4134: 4133: 4115: 4114: 4098: 4096: 4095: 4090: 4088: 4087: 4086: 4085: 4062: 4061: 4060: 4059: 4036:, that is, to a 4035: 4033: 4032: 4027: 4025: 4024: 4008: 4006: 4005: 4000: 3998: 3997: 3992: 3991: 3983: 3967: 3965: 3964: 3959: 3951: 3950: 3938: 3937: 3867: 3824: 3768: 3766: 3765: 3760: 3758: 3757: 3752: 3751: 3743: 3731: 3729: 3728: 3723: 3698:Reflection group 3622:and also inline 3487:this section hed 3351: 3315: 3166: 3141: 3119: 3113: 3106: 3088: 3066: 3045: 3024: 3018: 3014: 2955: 2914: 2881: 2828: 2806: 2784: 2723: 2719: 2718: 2695: 2691: 2690: 2656: 2652: 2651: 2642: 2636: 2630: 2626: 2625: 2510: 2506: 2505: 2470: 2466: 2465: 2420: 2416: 2415: 2352: 2348: 2347: 2306: 2128: 2122: 2046:As it is, there 2039: 2038: 2037: 1937: 1771:Copyvio detector 1759: 1707: 1701: 1697: 1691: 1675: 1647:If this article 1606: 1600: 1563: 1500: 1493: 1491: 1490: 1485: 1477: 1476: 1465: 1452: 1450: 1449: 1444: 1436: 1428: 1426: 1425: 1413: 1412: 1407: 1406: 1398: 1391: 1390: 1379: 1355: 1353: 1352: 1347: 1212: 1197: 1193: 1189: 1181: 1173: 1171: 1170: 1165: 1154: 1153: 1135: 1134: 1115: 1113: 1112: 1107: 1099: 1098: 1080: 1079: 1067: 1066: 1050: 1048: 1047: 1042: 1037: 1036: 1018: 1017: 1005: 1004: 985: 983: 982: 979:{\displaystyle } 977: 966: 965: 935: 934: 910: 909: 880: 839: 837: 836: 831: 829: 828: 823: 810: 808: 807: 802: 800: 799: 788: 775: 773: 772: 767: 751: 749: 748: 743: 735: 734: 722: 721: 716: 715: 707: 700: 699: 688: 634: 610: 608: 607: 602: 600: 599: 594: 593: 585: 554: 552: 551: 546: 544: 543: 538: 537: 523: 521: 520: 515: 513: 512: 496: 494: 493: 488: 486: 485: 480: 479: 471: 444: 439: 437: 436: 431: 429: 428: 423: 410: 408: 407: 402: 400: 399: 394: 393: 385: 374: 372: 371: 366: 364: 363: 358: 357: 349: 296: 295: 292: 289: 286: 265: 260: 259: 249: 242: 241: 236: 228: 221: 204: 198: 197: 189: 182:Featured article 180:Current status: 134: 111: 92: 69: 56: 31:featured article 23: 16: 5672: 5671: 5667: 5666: 5665: 5663: 5662: 5661: 5622: 5621: 5584: 5583: 5510: 5509: 5472: 5471: 5470:if and only if 5446: 5445: 5436:& Barkley: 5418: 5292: 5291: 5261: 5256: 5255: 5209: 5199: 5198: 5165: 5158: 5149: 5148: 5075: 5074: 5046: 5041: 5040: 5016: 5003: 4998: 4997: 4978: 4977: 4956: 4951: 4950: 4920: 4915: 4914: 4895: 4894: 4848: 4847: 4826: 4821: 4820: 4796: 4783: 4778: 4777: 4756: 4751: 4750: 4738: 4691: 4686: 4685: 4681: 4651: 4646: 4645: 4624: 4605: 4597: 4596: 4595:; the subgroup 4559: 4558: 4554: 4551:conjugacy class 4529: 4528: 4524: 4514: 4479: 4474: 4473: 4446: 4414: 4393: 4382: 4381: 4374: 4348: 4338: 4319: 4303: 4287: 4274: 4264: 4248: 4237: 4236: 4215: 4210: 4209: 4200: 4196: 4162: 4157: 4156: 4155:One may define 4146: 4125: 4106: 4101: 4100: 4077: 4072: 4051: 4046: 4041: 4040: 4016: 4011: 4010: 3980: 3975: 3974: 3942: 3929: 3924: 3923: 3916: 3861: 3818: 3740: 3735: 3734: 3714: 3713: 3706:Coxeter diagram 3677:Core partitions 3649: 3399: 3345: 3309: 3160: 3135: 3117: 3111: 3103: 3082: 3060: 3039: 3022: 3016: 3008: 2978:Columbia County 2949: 2947: 2875: 2822: 2800: 2778: 2716: 2714: 2688: 2686: 2649: 2647: 2640: 2634: 2623: 2621: 2503: 2501: 2463: 2461: 2435:history section 2413: 2411: 2372:affine geometry 2345: 2343: 2329: 2312:Happy editing! 2126: 2120: 2035: 1981: 1931: 1898: 1821:This review is 1813: 1785: 1757: 1705: 1699: 1695: 1689: 1686:in article text 1669: 1604: 1598: 1557: 1555: 1495: 1460: 1455: 1454: 1417: 1395: 1374: 1363: 1362: 1215: 1214: 1207: 1195: 1191: 1187: 1179: 1145: 1126: 1118: 1117: 1090: 1071: 1058: 1053: 1052: 1028: 1009: 996: 988: 987: 957: 926: 901: 887: 886: 878: 818: 813: 812: 783: 778: 777: 758: 757: 726: 704: 683: 672: 671: 668: 632: 582: 577: 576: 574: 557:Symmetric group 531: 526: 525: 504: 499: 498: 468: 463: 462: 442: 418: 413: 412: 382: 377: 376: 346: 341: 340: 333: 293: 290: 287: 284: 283: 261: 254: 234: 205:on Knowledge's 202: 175: 174: 162: 109:August 22, 2023 107: 88: 12: 11: 5: 5670: 5668: 5660: 5659: 5654: 5649: 5644: 5639: 5634: 5624: 5623: 5597: 5594: 5591: 5571: 5568: 5565: 5562: 5559: 5556: 5553: 5550: 5547: 5544: 5541: 5538: 5535: 5532: 5529: 5526: 5523: 5520: 5517: 5497: 5494: 5491: 5488: 5485: 5482: 5479: 5459: 5456: 5453: 5417: 5414: 5413: 5412: 5411: 5410: 5375: 5374: 5367: 5338: 5337: 5333: 5329: 5314: 5299: 5277: 5270: 5267: 5252: 5245: 5231: 5227: 5224: 5221: 5218: 5215: 5212: 5206: 5183: 5178: 5174: 5171: 5168: 5162: 5156: 5136: 5133: 5130: 5127: 5124: 5121: 5118: 5115: 5112: 5109: 5106: 5103: 5098: 5093: 5090: 5087: 5083: 5071: 5053: 5049: 5028: 5023: 5019: 5015: 5010: 5006: 4985: 4963: 4959: 4936: 4929: 4926: 4902: 4880: 4877: 4874: 4871: 4866: 4861: 4857: 4833: 4829: 4808: 4803: 4799: 4795: 4790: 4786: 4763: 4759: 4737: 4734: 4719: 4718: 4715: 4712: 4698: 4694: 4667: 4660: 4657: 4631: 4627: 4621: 4614: 4611: 4604: 4584: 4581: 4578: 4575: 4572: 4569: 4566: 4537: 4521: 4502: 4499: 4494: 4491: 4488: 4483: 4461: 4458: 4453: 4449: 4445: 4440: 4437: 4430: 4423: 4420: 4413: 4408: 4405: 4402: 4397: 4392: 4389: 4371: 4360: 4355: 4351: 4345: 4341: 4337: 4332: 4329: 4326: 4322: 4316: 4313: 4310: 4306: 4300: 4297: 4294: 4290: 4286: 4281: 4277: 4271: 4267: 4263: 4260: 4255: 4251: 4247: 4244: 4222: 4218: 4206: 4178: 4171: 4168: 4152: 4132: 4128: 4124: 4121: 4118: 4113: 4109: 4084: 4080: 4075: 4071: 4068: 4065: 4058: 4054: 4049: 4038:Young subgroup 4023: 4019: 3996: 3989: 3986: 3971: 3957: 3954: 3949: 3945: 3941: 3936: 3932: 3915: 3912: 3911: 3910: 3909: 3908: 3907: 3906: 3905: 3904: 3903: 3902: 3901: 3900: 3899: 3898: 3801:core partition 3756: 3749: 3746: 3721: 3702:Dynkin diagram 3655: 3651: 3647: 3635: 3631: 3591: 3584: 3583: 3582: 3581: 3580: 3579: 3578: 3554:David Eppstein 3483: 3475: 3438:David Eppstein 3417:?) Thank you. 3406:David Eppstein 3398: 3395: 3394: 3393: 3392: 3391: 3390: 3389: 3388: 3387: 3386: 3385: 3384: 3383: 3382: 3381: 3371:David Eppstein 3348:David Eppstein 3333:David Eppstein 3293: 3242: 3238: 3214: 3213: 3212: 3211: 3210: 3209: 3208: 3207: 3206: 3205: 3204: 3203: 3202: 3201: 3200: 3199: 3189:David Eppstein 3163:David Eppstein 3148:David Eppstein 3058: 2946: 2943: 2942: 2941: 2940: 2939: 2938: 2937: 2936: 2935: 2934: 2933: 2932: 2931: 2930: 2929: 2902:David Eppstein 2878:David Eppstein 2863:David Eppstein 2776: 2775: 2774: 2773: 2772: 2771: 2739: 2735: 2711: 2708: 2672: 2669: 2644: 2631: 2618: 2607: 2584: 2580: 2576: 2575: 2574: 2573: 2533: 2522: 2494: 2491: 2458: 2436: 2433: 2400: 2396: 2368: 2365: 2337: 2328: 2325: 2296: 2295: 2288: 2280: 2276: 2275: 2274: 2273: 2272: 2271: 2199:thing in this 2197:most essential 2149: 2148: 2137: 2130: 2117: 2106: 2095: 2061: 2060: 2021: 1980: 1977: 1976: 1975: 1974: 1973: 1897: 1894: 1832: 1831: 1815: 1814: 1812: 1811: 1806: 1801: 1795: 1792: 1791: 1787: 1786: 1784: 1783: 1781:External links 1778: 1773: 1767: 1764: 1763: 1756: 1753: 1752: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1743: 1742: 1741: 1723:David Eppstein 1710:David Eppstein 1645: 1643: 1636:Horsesizedduck 1623:Horsesizedduck 1609:David Eppstein 1570:Horsesizedduck 1554: 1551: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1545: 1521:David Eppstein 1483: 1480: 1475: 1472: 1469: 1464: 1442: 1439: 1434: 1431: 1424: 1420: 1416: 1411: 1404: 1401: 1394: 1389: 1386: 1383: 1378: 1373: 1370: 1357: 1345: 1342: 1339: 1336: 1333: 1330: 1327: 1324: 1321: 1318: 1315: 1312: 1309: 1306: 1303: 1300: 1297: 1294: 1291: 1288: 1285: 1282: 1279: 1276: 1273: 1270: 1267: 1264: 1261: 1258: 1255: 1252: 1249: 1246: 1243: 1240: 1237: 1234: 1231: 1228: 1225: 1222: 1163: 1160: 1157: 1152: 1148: 1144: 1141: 1138: 1133: 1129: 1125: 1105: 1102: 1097: 1093: 1089: 1086: 1083: 1078: 1074: 1070: 1065: 1061: 1040: 1035: 1031: 1027: 1024: 1021: 1016: 1012: 1008: 1003: 999: 995: 975: 972: 969: 964: 960: 956: 953: 950: 947: 944: 941: 938: 933: 929: 925: 922: 919: 916: 913: 908: 904: 900: 897: 894: 869: 843:David Eppstein 827: 822: 798: 795: 792: 787: 765: 741: 738: 733: 729: 725: 720: 713: 710: 703: 698: 695: 692: 687: 682: 679: 667: 664: 663: 662: 661: 660: 659: 658: 598: 591: 588: 572: 542: 536: 511: 507: 484: 477: 474: 427: 422: 398: 391: 388: 362: 355: 352: 332: 329: 326: 325: 322: 321: 318: 317: 306: 300: 299: 297: 280:the discussion 267: 266: 250: 238: 237: 229: 217: 216: 210: 199: 185: 184: 177: 176: 163: 138: 137: 135: 127: 126: 123: 122: 119: 112: 104: 103: 100: 93: 85: 84: 81: 78: 74: 73: 65: 64: 57: 49: 48: 24: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5669: 5658: 5655: 5653: 5650: 5648: 5645: 5643: 5640: 5638: 5635: 5633: 5630: 5629: 5627: 5620: 5619: 5615: 5611: 5595: 5592: 5589: 5569: 5566: 5563: 5560: 5557: 5554: 5551: 5548: 5545: 5542: 5539: 5536: 5533: 5530: 5527: 5524: 5521: 5518: 5515: 5495: 5492: 5489: 5486: 5483: 5480: 5477: 5457: 5454: 5451: 5443: 5439: 5435: 5431: 5427: 5423: 5415: 5409: 5405: 5401: 5397: 5393: 5392: 5391: 5390: 5389: 5388: 5384: 5380: 5372: 5368: 5365: 5361: 5357: 5356: 5355: 5352: 5351: 5347: 5343: 5334: 5330: 5328: 5324: 5320: 5315: 5313: 5297: 5275: 5268: 5265: 5253: 5250: 5246: 5229: 5222: 5219: 5216: 5210: 5204: 5176: 5172: 5169: 5166: 5154: 5134: 5131: 5128: 5125: 5122: 5119: 5116: 5113: 5107: 5101: 5096: 5091: 5088: 5085: 5081: 5072: 5069: 5051: 5047: 5021: 5017: 5008: 5004: 4983: 4961: 4957: 4934: 4924: 4900: 4878: 4875: 4872: 4869: 4864: 4859: 4855: 4831: 4827: 4819:of braids on 4801: 4797: 4788: 4784: 4761: 4757: 4748: 4747: 4746: 4743: 4735: 4733: 4732: 4728: 4724: 4716: 4713: 4696: 4692: 4665: 4658: 4655: 4629: 4619: 4612: 4609: 4582: 4579: 4576: 4573: 4570: 4567: 4564: 4552: 4522: 4517: 4497: 4492: 4489: 4486: 4459: 4451: 4447: 4443: 4438: 4428: 4421: 4418: 4406: 4403: 4400: 4387: 4380: 4372: 4358: 4353: 4349: 4343: 4339: 4335: 4330: 4327: 4324: 4320: 4314: 4311: 4308: 4304: 4298: 4295: 4292: 4288: 4284: 4279: 4275: 4269: 4265: 4261: 4253: 4249: 4242: 4220: 4216: 4207: 4204: 4194: 4176: 4169: 4166: 4153: 4151: 4130: 4126: 4122: 4119: 4116: 4111: 4107: 4082: 4078: 4073: 4069: 4066: 4063: 4056: 4052: 4047: 4039: 4021: 4017: 3994: 3987: 3984: 3972: 3970: 3955: 3952: 3947: 3943: 3939: 3934: 3930: 3921: 3920: 3919: 3913: 3897: 3893: 3889: 3885: 3884: 3883: 3879: 3875: 3871: 3865: 3860: 3859: 3858: 3854: 3850: 3846: 3842: 3838: 3837: 3836: 3832: 3828: 3822: 3817: 3816: 3815: 3811: 3807: 3802: 3798: 3797: 3796: 3792: 3788: 3784: 3782: 3778: 3772: 3754: 3747: 3744: 3711: 3707: 3703: 3699: 3695: 3691: 3690:Coxeter group 3687: 3683: 3678: 3674: 3670: 3669: 3668: 3664: 3660: 3656: 3652: 3644: 3640: 3636: 3632: 3629: 3625: 3621: 3617: 3613: 3609: 3605: 3601: 3597: 3592: 3589: 3588:only one edit 3585: 3577: 3573: 3569: 3565: 3564: 3563: 3559: 3555: 3551: 3547: 3546: 3545: 3544: 3540: 3536: 3531: 3529: 3526: 3520: 3518: 3515:... in fact, 3514: 3510: 3506: 3502: 3498: 3492: 3488: 3484: 3481: 3476: 3474: 3472: 3466: 3464: 3459: 3457: 3449: 3448: 3447: 3443: 3439: 3435: 3431: 3430: 3429: 3428: 3424: 3420: 3416: 3411: 3407: 3403: 3396: 3380: 3376: 3372: 3367: 3366: 3365: 3361: 3357: 3349: 3344: 3343: 3342: 3338: 3334: 3329: 3328: 3327: 3323: 3319: 3313: 3308: 3307: 3306: 3302: 3298: 3294: 3292: 3288: 3284: 3280: 3279:tried a thing 3276: 3275: 3274: 3270: 3266: 3262: 3258: 3257: 3256: 3252: 3248: 3243: 3239: 3235: 3230: 3229: 3228: 3227: 3223: 3219: 3198: 3194: 3190: 3185: 3180: 3179: 3178: 3174: 3170: 3164: 3159: 3158: 3157: 3153: 3149: 3145: 3139: 3134: 3133: 3132: 3131: 3127: 3123: 3116: 3108: 3101: 3097: 3092: 3086: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3075: 3071: 3064: 3059: 3057: 3053: 3049: 3043: 3038: 3037: 3036: 3032: 3028: 3021: 3012: 3007: 3006: 3005: 3001: 2997: 2993: 2992: 2991: 2987: 2983: 2979: 2975: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2968: 2964: 2960: 2953: 2944: 2928: 2924: 2920: 2913: 2912: 2911: 2907: 2903: 2899: 2895: 2894: 2893: 2889: 2885: 2879: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2868: 2864: 2860: 2859: 2858: 2854: 2850: 2846: 2842: 2841: 2840: 2836: 2832: 2826: 2821: 2820: 2819: 2815: 2811: 2804: 2799: 2798: 2797: 2796: 2792: 2788: 2782: 2770: 2766: 2762: 2758: 2757: 2756: 2752: 2748: 2744: 2743: 2740: 2736: 2734: 2730: 2726: 2722: 2712: 2709: 2707: 2703: 2699: 2694: 2684: 2680: 2678: 2673: 2670: 2668: 2664: 2660: 2655: 2645: 2639: 2632: 2629: 2619: 2616: 2612: 2608: 2606: 2602: 2598: 2593: 2589: 2585: 2581: 2578: 2577: 2572: 2568: 2564: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2554: 2550: 2546: 2542: 2538: 2534: 2531: 2527: 2523: 2521: 2517: 2513: 2509: 2499: 2495: 2492: 2490: 2486: 2482: 2478: 2474: 2469: 2459: 2457: 2456: 2452: 2448: 2443: 2437: 2434: 2432: 2428: 2424: 2419: 2409: 2405: 2404:avoiding "we" 2401: 2397: 2395: 2391: 2387: 2382: 2378: 2373: 2369: 2366: 2364: 2360: 2356: 2351: 2341: 2338: 2335: 2334: 2333: 2326: 2324: 2323: 2319: 2315: 2310: 2309: 2305: 2300: 2293: 2289: 2286: 2281: 2278: 2277: 2270: 2269: 2265: 2261: 2257: 2253: 2249: 2245: 2241: 2237: 2233: 2227: 2223: 2222: 2221: 2217: 2213: 2209: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2202: 2198: 2194: 2190: 2186: 2181: 2179: 2173: 2169: 2165: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2158: 2154: 2146: 2142: 2138: 2135: 2131: 2125: 2118: 2116: 2111: 2107: 2104: 2100: 2096: 2094: 2091: 2089: 2088:MOS:MATH#NOWE 2084: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2070: 2066: 2059: 2057: 2055: 2049: 2043: 2031: 2027: 2022: 2020: 2015: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2006: 2001: 1997: 1995: 1994: 1989: 1984: 1978: 1972: 1968: 1964: 1960: 1955: 1954: 1953: 1949: 1945: 1941: 1935: 1930: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1923: 1919: 1915: 1911: 1907: 1903: 1895: 1893: 1892: 1888: 1884: 1879: 1877: 1871: 1869: 1865: 1860: 1857: 1854: 1853: 1849: 1846: 1843: 1839: 1836: 1830: 1828: 1824: 1819: 1818: 1810: 1807: 1805: 1802: 1800: 1797: 1796: 1794: 1793: 1788: 1782: 1779: 1777: 1774: 1772: 1769: 1768: 1766: 1765: 1760: 1754: 1740: 1736: 1732: 1728: 1724: 1721: 1720: 1719: 1715: 1711: 1704: 1694: 1687: 1683: 1679: 1673: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1662: 1658: 1654: 1650: 1646: 1644: 1641: 1640:is deprecated 1637: 1634: 1633: 1632: 1628: 1624: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1614: 1610: 1603: 1596: 1595: 1594: 1590: 1586: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1575: 1571: 1567: 1561: 1552: 1544: 1540: 1536: 1532: 1531: 1530: 1526: 1522: 1518: 1517: 1516: 1512: 1508: 1502: 1498: 1478: 1473: 1470: 1467: 1440: 1437: 1432: 1422: 1418: 1409: 1402: 1399: 1387: 1384: 1381: 1368: 1361: 1337: 1334: 1331: 1328: 1325: 1322: 1319: 1316: 1313: 1310: 1304: 1301: 1298: 1292: 1289: 1286: 1283: 1280: 1277: 1274: 1271: 1268: 1265: 1259: 1253: 1250: 1247: 1244: 1241: 1238: 1235: 1232: 1229: 1226: 1210: 1205: 1201: 1200:abelian group 1186:, the symbol 1185: 1177: 1158: 1150: 1146: 1142: 1139: 1136: 1131: 1127: 1103: 1100: 1095: 1091: 1087: 1084: 1081: 1076: 1072: 1068: 1063: 1059: 1033: 1029: 1025: 1022: 1019: 1014: 1010: 1006: 1001: 997: 970: 967: 962: 958: 954: 951: 948: 945: 942: 939: 936: 931: 927: 923: 920: 917: 914: 911: 906: 902: 898: 895: 884: 877: 870: 868: 864: 860: 855: 854: 853: 852: 848: 844: 825: 796: 793: 790: 763: 755: 739: 731: 727: 718: 711: 708: 696: 693: 690: 677: 665: 657: 653: 649: 645: 644: 643: 639: 635: 629: 625: 624: 623: 619: 615: 596: 589: 586: 571: 567: 562: 558: 540: 509: 505: 482: 475: 472: 460: 456: 455: 454: 453: 449: 445: 425: 420: 396: 389: 386: 360: 353: 350: 337: 330: 315: 311: 305: 302: 301: 298: 281: 277: 273: 272: 264: 258: 253: 251: 248: 244: 243: 239: 233: 230: 227: 223: 218: 214: 208: 200: 196: 191: 190: 183: 178: 173: 171: 170: 160: 159: 154: 152: 151:Did you know? 146: 142: 136: 133: 129: 128: 120: 118: 117: 113: 110: 106: 105: 101: 99: 98: 94: 91: 87: 86: 82: 79: 76: 75: 70: 66: 62: 58: 55: 51: 50: 46: 42: 38: 37: 32: 28: 25: 22: 18: 17: 5441: 5421: 5419: 5376: 5353: 5339: 5249:word problem 4739: 4720: 4515: 4154: 3917: 3869: 3841:instructions 3780: 3776: 3709: 3685: 3624:(Smith 2005) 3620:Smith (2005) 3616:Smith (2005) 3611: 3586:I have made 3532: 3521: 3516: 3504: 3500: 3496: 3494: 3490: 3478: 3467: 3460: 3455: 3452: 3400: 3397:Status query 3215: 3109: 3104:<ref: --> 3099: 3093: 3090: 2948: 2777: 2720: 2692: 2674: 2653: 2627: 2613:" is in the 2610: 2591: 2544: 2540: 2529: 2507: 2476: 2472: 2467: 2438: 2417: 2407: 2349: 2339: 2330: 2311: 2307: 2301: 2297: 2291: 2251: 2247: 2243: 2240:WP:CITESTYLE 2235: 2229: 2225: 2207: 2196: 2184: 2182: 2177: 2175: 2171: 2167: 2150: 2144: 2113: 2101:" is in the 2098: 2092: 2080: 2062: 2053: 2047: 2045: 2041: 2017: 2004: 2002: 1998: 1991: 1985: 1982: 1957: 1939: 1899: 1880: 1872: 1863: 1861: 1858: 1855: 1844: 1834: 1833: 1820: 1809:Instructions 1726: 1698:rather than 1685: 1682:in footnotes 1681: 1677: 1648: 1556: 1501:generators. 1496: 1208: 1202:, generated 1176:translations 873: 811:rather than 669: 569: 565: 560: 338: 334: 310:Low-priority 309: 269: 235:Low‑priority 213:WikiProjects 181: 167: 165: 158:May 10, 2021 156: 148: 114: 95: 45:please do so 34: 26: 4520:generators. 3874:Daniel Case 3568:Daniel Case 3535:Daniel Case 3419:BlueMoonset 3410:Daniel Case 3312:Notsniwiast 3261:Notsniwiast 3259:Hum, well, 3218:Daniel Case 3169:Daniel Case 3138:Daniel Case 3122:Daniel Case 3063:Daniel Case 3042:Daniel Case 3027:Daniel Case 2996:Daniel Case 2974:Daniel Case 2959:Daniel Case 2884:Daniel Case 2849:Daniel Case 2825:Daniel Case 2810:Daniel Case 2781:Daniel Case 2747:Daniel Case 2657:(I think). 2563:Daniel Case 2421:for now. -- 2314:Daniel Case 2260:Daniel Case 2153:Daniel Case 2065:Daniel Case 2063:Saving ... 1944:Daniel Case 1902:Daniel Case 1883:Daniel Case 1838:Daniel Case 1823:transcluded 285:Mathematics 276:mathematics 232:Mathematics 5626:Categories 5444:that obey 3888:XOR'easter 3864:XOR'easter 3849:XOR'easter 3821:XOR'easter 3806:XOR'easter 3694:Weyl group 3673:XOR'easter 3659:XOR'easter 3606:'s desire 3353:PDF -: --> 2615:imperative 2236:explicitly 2201:punch list 2193:WP:HARVARD 2189:WP:HARVREF 2103:imperative 1776:Authorship 1762:GA toolbox 1727:references 1553:References 155:column on 36:identified 4891:}" /: --> 4742:JayBeeEll 4145:with sum 3686:algebraic 3654:expanded. 3618:, inline 3434:this diff 3241:footnote. 3085:JayBeeEll 3011:JayBeeEll 2952:JayBeeEll 2803:JayBeeEll 2353:for now. 1934:JayBeeEll 1835:Reviewer: 1799:Templates 1790:Reviewing 1755:GA Review 1560:JayBeeEll 628:JayBeeEll 411:contains 145:Main Page 5317:notion ? 4976:, so is 4472:. Here 3657:Cheers, 3237:picture. 3234:addition 2677:WP:NPROF 2671:J.Y. Shi 2327:Response 2242:, which 2134:MOS:PARA 1959:article. 1848:contribs 1804:Criteria 1453:. Here 1213:vectors 1198:into an 986:, where 883:identity 203:FA-class 121:Promoted 5426:journal 5379:Iry-Hor 5371:the MOS 5342:Iry-Hor 5319:Iry-Hor 4850:}": --> 4553:modulo 3634:though. 3297:Winston 3247:Winston 2442:Coxeter 2308:On hold 2254:in the 2234:do not 2208:Comment 2115:camera. 2083:MOS:YOU 1993:de novo 1876:WT:MATH 1703:harvtxt 1505:Bah.)-- 1206:by the 312:on the 147:in the 80:Process 3643:type A 3507:to be 3415:WT:GAN 2399:"one"? 2292:future 2246:say: " 2226:inline 2168:within 2054:couple 1979:Review 1864:at all 1204:freely 876:kernel 776:(with 209:scale. 102:Listed 83:Result 5582:when 5434:arXiv 5430:arXiv 5398:. -- 4913:from 4879:: --> 4740:Dear 3612:three 3528:other 3184:creep 3096:WP:OI 2845:Joker 2738:that. 2172:nouns 2081:Yes, 1825:from 29:is a 5614:talk 5420:The 5404:talk 5383:talk 5362:and 5346:talk 5323:talk 5068:here 4727:talk 3892:talk 3878:talk 3870:have 3853:talk 3843:say 3831:talk 3810:talk 3791:talk 3663:talk 3598:and 3572:talk 3558:talk 3539:talk 3525:some 3513:tact 3495:JBL 3471:this 3442:talk 3423:talk 3375:talk 3360:talk 3337:talk 3322:talk 3301:talk 3287:talk 3269:talk 3251:talk 3222:talk 3193:talk 3173:talk 3152:talk 3126:talk 3074:talk 3052:talk 3031:talk 3020:fact 3000:talk 2986:talk 2963:talk 2923:talk 2906:talk 2888:talk 2867:talk 2853:talk 2835:talk 2814:talk 2791:talk 2765:talk 2751:talk 2729:talk 2721:Done 2702:talk 2693:Done 2683:here 2663:talk 2654:Done 2628:Done 2601:talk 2592:also 2567:talk 2553:talk 2516:talk 2508:Done 2485:talk 2479:. -- 2468:Done 2451:talk 2427:talk 2418:Done 2390:talk 2359:talk 2350:Done 2318:talk 2285:here 2264:talk 2244:does 2216:talk 2212:Urve 2185:must 2178:must 2157:talk 2069:talk 1967:talk 1948:talk 1922:talk 1887:talk 1856:OK. 1842:talk 1735:talk 1731:Urve 1714:talk 1693:harv 1672:Urve 1661:talk 1657:Urve 1627:talk 1613:talk 1589:talk 1585:Urve 1574:talk 1539:talk 1525:talk 1511:talk 874:The 863:talk 847:talk 652:talk 638:talk 633:Urve 618:talk 459:Urve 448:talk 443:Urve 77:Date 5610:JBL 5400:JBL 5197:or 5039:to 4949:to 4723:JBL 4644:of 4527:of 4518:− 1 4195:of 4149:." 3968:." 3827:JBL 3787:JBL 3684:of 3671:Hi 3604:JBL 3517:any 3505:had 3501:one 3497:had 3489:: " 3402:JBL 3356:JBL 3318:JBL 3283:JBL 3265:JBL 3115:efn 3100:But 3070:JBL 3048:JBL 2982:JBL 2972:Hi 2919:JBL 2831:JBL 2787:JBL 2761:JBL 2725:JBL 2698:JBL 2659:JBL 2638:efn 2597:JBL 2549:JBL 2512:JBL 2481:JBL 2447:JBL 2423:JBL 2386:JBL 2355:JBL 2258:). 2124:efn 2042:was 1963:JBL 1918:JBL 1868:one 1649:did 1535:JBL 1507:JBL 1499:− 1 1211:− 1 859:JBL 648:JBL 614:JBL 457:Hi 304:Low 5628:: 5616:) 5570:⋯ 5567:≺ 5561:− 5558:≺ 5552:≺ 5546:≺ 5543:⋯ 5540:≺ 5534:≺ 5528:≺ 5522:− 5519:≺ 5516:⋯ 5487:≺ 5455:≺ 5428:, 5406:) 5385:) 5348:) 5325:) 5269:~ 5129:⋯ 5082:∑ 4984:π 4928:~ 4901:π 4729:) 4721:-- 4659:~ 4613:~ 4577:… 4501:Λ 4498:≅ 4490:− 4457:→ 4444:⁡ 4439:π 4436:→ 4422:~ 4412:→ 4404:− 4391:→ 4336:⋯ 4328:− 4312:− 4296:− 4285:⋯ 4243:π 4170:~ 4120:… 4070:× 4067:⋯ 4064:× 3988:~ 3940:− 3894:) 3880:) 3868:I 3855:) 3833:) 3812:) 3793:) 3748:~ 3720:Λ 3704:, 3700:, 3696:, 3692:, 3665:) 3574:) 3560:) 3541:) 3493:". 3444:) 3425:) 3404:, 3377:) 3362:) 3339:) 3324:) 3303:) 3289:) 3277:I 3271:) 3253:) 3224:) 3195:) 3175:) 3154:) 3128:) 3118:}} 3112:{{ 3076:) 3054:) 3033:) 3023:}} 3017:{{ 3002:) 2988:) 2965:) 2925:) 2908:) 2890:) 2869:) 2855:) 2837:) 2816:) 2793:) 2767:) 2753:) 2731:) 2704:) 2696:-- 2665:) 2641:}} 2635:{{ 2603:) 2569:) 2555:) 2518:) 2487:) 2453:) 2429:) 2392:) 2361:) 2320:) 2266:) 2252:is 2218:) 2159:) 2127:}} 2121:{{ 2071:) 2048:is 2005:do 1969:) 1950:) 1940:my 1924:) 1889:) 1850:) 1737:) 1716:) 1706:}} 1700:{{ 1696:}} 1690:{{ 1663:) 1629:) 1615:) 1605:}} 1599:{{ 1591:) 1576:) 1541:) 1527:) 1513:) 1482:Λ 1479:≅ 1471:− 1438:⁡ 1433:π 1430:→ 1415:→ 1403:~ 1393:→ 1385:− 1372:→ 1356:. 1335:− 1317:… 1302:… 1287:… 1278:− 1248:… 1233:− 1162:Λ 1159:∈ 1140:… 1085:… 1023:… 968:⋅ 955:− 946:… 937:⋅ 924:− 912:⋅ 899:− 865:) 857:-- 849:) 794:− 737:→ 724:→ 712:~ 702:→ 694:− 681:→ 654:) 640:) 620:) 590:~ 476:~ 450:) 390:~ 354:~ 139:A 5612:( 5596:2 5593:= 5590:n 5564:1 5555:1 5549:3 5537:2 5531:0 5525:2 5496:n 5493:+ 5490:b 5484:n 5481:+ 5478:a 5458:b 5452:a 5442:Z 5402:( 5381:( 5373:. 5344:( 5321:( 5298:n 5276:n 5266:S 5230:2 5226:) 5223:1 5220:+ 5217:n 5214:( 5211:n 5205:= 5182:) 5177:2 5173:1 5170:+ 5167:n 5161:( 5155:= 5135:n 5132:+ 5126:+ 5123:2 5120:+ 5117:1 5114:= 5111:) 5108:i 5105:( 5102:u 5097:n 5092:1 5089:= 5086:i 5070:. 5052:n 5048:S 5027:) 5022:1 5018:S 5014:( 5009:n 5005:B 4962:n 4958:S 4935:n 4925:S 4885:} 4876:d 4873:I 4870:= 4865:2 4860:i 4856:s 4832:1 4828:S 4807:) 4802:1 4798:S 4794:( 4789:n 4785:B 4762:1 4758:S 4725:( 4711:. 4697:n 4693:S 4682:A 4666:n 4656:S 4630:A 4626:) 4620:n 4610:S 4603:( 4583:n 4580:+ 4574:+ 4571:2 4568:+ 4565:1 4555:n 4536:Z 4525:A 4516:n 4493:1 4487:n 4482:Z 4460:0 4452:n 4448:S 4429:n 4419:S 4407:1 4401:n 4396:Z 4388:0 4375:π 4359:. 4354:1 4350:s 4344:2 4340:s 4331:2 4325:n 4321:s 4315:1 4309:n 4305:s 4299:2 4293:n 4289:s 4280:2 4276:s 4270:1 4266:s 4262:= 4259:) 4254:0 4250:s 4246:( 4221:n 4217:S 4203:. 4201:Λ 4197:V 4177:n 4167:S 4147:n 4131:k 4127:a 4123:, 4117:, 4112:1 4108:a 4083:k 4079:a 4074:S 4057:1 4053:a 4048:S 4022:n 4018:S 3995:n 3985:S 3956:k 3953:= 3948:j 3944:x 3935:i 3931:x 3890:( 3876:( 3866:: 3862:@ 3851:( 3829:( 3823:: 3819:@ 3808:( 3789:( 3783:. 3755:n 3745:S 3661:( 3650:. 3648:2 3570:( 3556:( 3537:( 3473:: 3440:( 3421:( 3373:( 3369:— 3358:( 3350:: 3346:@ 3335:( 3320:( 3314:: 3310:@ 3299:( 3285:( 3267:( 3249:( 3220:( 3191:( 3171:( 3165:: 3161:@ 3150:( 3140:: 3136:@ 3124:( 3087:: 3083:@ 3072:( 3065:: 3061:@ 3050:( 3044:: 3040:@ 3029:( 3013:: 3009:@ 2998:( 2984:( 2961:( 2954:: 2950:@ 2921:( 2904:( 2886:( 2880:: 2876:@ 2865:( 2851:( 2833:( 2827:: 2823:@ 2812:( 2805:: 2801:@ 2789:( 2783:: 2779:@ 2763:( 2749:( 2727:( 2700:( 2661:( 2617:. 2599:( 2565:( 2551:( 2545:u 2541:u 2532:" 2514:( 2483:( 2449:( 2425:( 2388:( 2357:( 2316:( 2287:. 2262:( 2214:( 2155:( 2067:( 1965:( 1946:( 1936:: 1932:@ 1920:( 1885:( 1845:· 1840:( 1733:( 1712:( 1674:: 1670:@ 1659:( 1625:( 1611:( 1587:( 1572:( 1562:: 1558:@ 1537:( 1523:( 1509:( 1497:n 1474:1 1468:n 1463:Z 1441:0 1423:n 1419:S 1410:n 1400:S 1388:1 1382:n 1377:Z 1369:0 1344:} 1341:) 1338:1 1332:, 1329:1 1326:, 1323:0 1320:, 1314:, 1311:0 1308:( 1305:, 1299:, 1296:) 1293:0 1290:, 1284:, 1281:1 1275:, 1272:1 1269:, 1266:0 1263:( 1260:, 1257:) 1254:0 1251:, 1245:, 1242:0 1239:, 1236:1 1230:, 1227:1 1224:( 1221:{ 1209:n 1196:Λ 1192:V 1188:Λ 1180:V 1156:) 1151:n 1147:a 1143:, 1137:, 1132:1 1128:a 1124:( 1104:0 1101:= 1096:n 1092:a 1088:+ 1082:+ 1077:2 1073:a 1069:+ 1064:1 1060:a 1039:) 1034:n 1030:a 1026:, 1020:, 1015:2 1011:a 1007:, 1002:1 998:a 994:( 974:] 971:n 963:n 959:a 952:n 949:, 943:, 940:n 932:2 928:a 921:2 918:, 915:n 907:1 903:a 896:1 893:[ 879:π 861:( 845:( 841:— 826:n 821:Z 797:1 791:n 786:Z 764:n 740:0 732:n 728:S 719:n 709:S 697:1 691:n 686:Z 678:0 650:( 636:( 616:( 597:n 587:S 573:0 570:W 566:W 561:γ 541:n 535:S 510:n 506:S 483:n 473:S 446:( 426:n 421:S 397:n 387:S 361:n 351:S 316:. 215:: 172:? 161:. 153:" 149:" 47:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index