<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Smooth Ergodic Theory on Nam Le</title><link>https://blog.namln.org/en/categories/smooth-ergodic-theory/</link><description>Recent content in Smooth Ergodic Theory on Nam Le</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://blog.namln.org/en/categories/smooth-ergodic-theory/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>$C^r$ Stability Conjecture</title><link>https://blog.namln.org/en/posts/cr-stability-conjecture/</link><pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.namln.org/en/posts/cr-stability-conjecture/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Structural stability is a global topological property: a dynamical system is
structurally stable if all nearby systems have the same orbit structure, up to
continuous reparametrisation. Hyperbolicity is a local differential property:
the tangent bundle over the recurrent set splits into uniformly contracting and
expanding directions. That these two conditions should be equivalent is one of the
deepest principles in smooth dynamics.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style="padding:10px 14px; border:2px solid dodgerblue; border-radius:6px; margin:16px 0;"&gt;
&lt;span style="color:dodgerblue; font-weight:bold;"&gt;Conjecture ($C^r$ Stability Conjecture, Palis–Smale, ~1970)&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Let $M$ be a closed smooth manifold and $r \geq 1$. If $f \in \mathrm{Diff}^r(M)$
is $C^r$-structurally stable, then $f$ is hyperbolic, i.e., it satisfies
&lt;strong&gt;Axiom A&lt;/strong&gt; and the &lt;strong&gt;Strong Transversality Condition&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The problem is rated &lt;em&gt;L3&lt;/em&gt; on &lt;a href="https://www.unsolvedmath.com/problems/OPG-725"&gt;UnsolvedMath&lt;/a&gt;
and sits at the heart of the global theory of smooth dynamical systems. The case
$r = 1$ is resolved. The case $r \geq 2$ is open, and even basic consequences of
structural stability that are elementary for $r = 1$ remain unknown for $r = 2$.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr&gt;
&lt;h2 class="heading" id="key-definitions"&gt;
 Key Definitions&lt;span class="heading__anchor"&gt; &lt;a href="#key-definitions"&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Structural stability.&lt;/strong&gt; A diffeomorphism $f \in \mathrm{Diff}^r(M)$ is
&lt;em&gt;$C^r$-structurally stable&lt;/em&gt; if there exists a $C^r$-neighborhood $\mathcal{U}$ of $f$
such that every $g \in \mathcal{U}$ is topologically conjugate to $f$: there is a
homeomorphism $h : M \to M$ with $h \circ f = g \circ h$. The system is therefore
robust under $C^r$-small perturbations in the strongest possible sense: topology,
not just orbit counts, is preserved.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Axiom A.&lt;/strong&gt; The diffeomorphism $f$ satisfies &lt;em&gt;Axiom A&lt;/em&gt; if:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;the non-wandering set $\Omega(f)$ is hyperbolic: there is a $Df$-invariant splitting
$T_x M = E^s_x \oplus E^u_x$ over $\Omega(f)$ with uniform exponential contraction
on $E^s$ and expansion on $E^u$;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;the periodic points of $f$ are dense in $\Omega(f)$.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Strong Transversality Condition (STC).&lt;/strong&gt; For every $x, y \in \Omega(f)$, the
stable manifold $W^s(x)$ and the unstable manifold $W^u(y)$ intersect transversally.
Tangential intersections, namely &lt;em&gt;homoclinic or heteroclinic tangencies&lt;/em&gt;, are forbidden.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Together, Axiom A and the STC constitute what is usually meant by saying $f$ is
&lt;em&gt;hyperbolic&lt;/em&gt; in the sense of the stability conjecture.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr&gt;
&lt;h2 class="heading" id="the-two-directions"&gt;
 The Two Directions&lt;span class="heading__anchor"&gt; &lt;a href="#the-two-directions"&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;The conjecture, as an equivalence, has an easy direction and a hard direction.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Structural stability follows from hyperbolicity&lt;/strong&gt; (the easy direction). Robbin (1971)
proved this for $C^2$ diffeomorphisms; Robinson (1976) extended it to $C^1$. Both
proofs use the implicit function theorem on an appropriate space of conjugacies,
and work for all $r \geq 1$ since Axiom A + STC is the hypothesis.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style="padding:10px 14px; border:2px solid #27ae60; border-radius:6px; margin:16px 0;"&gt;
&lt;span style="color:#27ae60; font-weight:bold;"&gt;Theorem (Robbin 1971, Robinson 1976)&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For every $r \geq 1$, if $f \in \mathrm{Diff}^r(M)$ satisfies Axiom A and the
Strong Transversality Condition, then $f$ is $C^r$-structurally stable.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hyperbolicity follows from structural stability&lt;/strong&gt; (the hard direction) is the
conjecture itself. It requires understanding what structural stability forces on
the dynamics, ruling out every non-hyperbolic mechanism compatible with stability.
This is where the difficulty lies, and where the gap between $r = 1$ and $r \geq 2$
opens.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr&gt;
&lt;h2 class="heading" id="the-c1-case-mañés-theorem"&gt;
 The $C^1$ Case: Mañé&amp;rsquo;s Theorem&lt;span class="heading__anchor"&gt; &lt;a href="#the-c1-case-ma%c3%b1%c3%a9s-theorem"&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;The $C^1$ stability conjecture was fully proved by Mañé in 1987.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style="padding:10px 14px; border:2px solid #27ae60; border-radius:6px; margin:16px 0;"&gt;
&lt;span style="color:#27ae60; font-weight:bold;"&gt;Theorem (Mañé, 1987)&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Every $C^1$-structurally stable diffeomorphism of a closed manifold satisfies
Axiom A and the Strong Transversality Condition.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The proof, published in &lt;em&gt;Publ. Math. IHÉS&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;66&lt;/strong&gt; (1987), 161–210, is a tour de
force of $C^1$ perturbation theory. It rests on several tools that are available
only in the $C^1$ topology:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pugh&amp;rsquo;s $C^1$ closing lemma (1967):&lt;/strong&gt; Given a non-wandering point $x$ of $f$,
one can make an arbitrarily small $C^1$ perturbation of $f$ to create a periodic
orbit passing near $x$. This is the essential mechanism for showing that periodic
points are dense in $\Omega(f)$.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mañé&amp;rsquo;s ergodic closing lemma (1982):&lt;/strong&gt; A more refined version that controls the
Lyapunov exponents of the created periodic orbit, allowing the construction of
hyperbolic periodic points that shadow the orbit of an ergodic measure.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Franks&amp;rsquo; lemma (1971):&lt;/strong&gt; Linear maps along periodic orbits can be prescribed
independently (up to $C^1$ conjugacy), allowing one to test whether a given
splitting is genuinely hyperbolic or can be destroyed by a small $C^1$ perturbation.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The strategy is to assume structural stability and use these tools to show, step by
step, that the non-wandering set must be hyperbolic and that tangencies cannot persist.
Mañé had proved the surface case ($\dim M = 2$, $r = 1$) earlier, with the full
higher-dimensional result completed in the 1987 paper. Aoki (1992) and Hayashi (1992)
subsequently settled the closely related Mañé conjecture on the $C^1$ interior of the
set of diffeomorphisms with all hyperbolic periodic points.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr&gt;
&lt;h2 class="heading" id="the-wall-at-r-geq-2"&gt;
 The Wall at $r \geq 2$&lt;span class="heading__anchor"&gt; &lt;a href="#the-wall-at-r-geq-2"&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;The $C^r$ case for $r \geq 2$ is not merely an incremental extension. The tools that
power Mañé&amp;rsquo;s proof are fundamentally $C^1$ phenomena.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The $C^r$ closing lemma is open for $r \geq 2$.&lt;/strong&gt; Pugh&amp;rsquo;s closing lemma fails for
$r \geq 2$ in general: Gutierrez showed that the local perturbation argument used
for $C^1$ does not work in the $C^2$ topology. A $C^r$ closing lemma is available
only for specific classes of diffeomorphisms:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Conservative (volume-preserving) diffeomorphisms on surfaces: Asaoka–Irie
($C^\infty$, 2015), Cristofaro-Gardiner–Prasad–Zhang (2023).&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Partially hyperbolic diffeomorphisms with one-dimensional center bundle (all
$r \geq 2$ including $r = \infty$): Gan–Shi (2022) and the follow-up
$C^r$-chain closing lemma of Shi–Wang (&lt;em&gt;Ergodic Theory Dynam. Syst.&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;44&lt;/strong&gt;, 2024).&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the absence of a general $C^r$ closing lemma, the first step of Mañé&amp;rsquo;s proof,
showing that periodic points are dense in $\Omega(f)$ under $C^r$ structural
stability, is not known for $r \geq 2$.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mañé himself underscored this gap.&lt;/strong&gt; In the 1987 paper, immediately after the
proof of Theorem A, he writes that for $r &amp;gt; 1$ &amp;ldquo;not even [being] known whether a
$C^2$ structurally stable diffeomorphism has at least one periodic point, it seems,
to say the least, difficult to prove that they are dense.&amp;rdquo;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Franks&amp;rsquo; lemma also fails for $r \geq 2$.&lt;/strong&gt; Controlling linear maps along periodic
orbits requires $C^1$ perturbations; in higher regularity the ambient perturbation
must be smooth and the constraints on higher derivatives can prevent the desired
linear behaviour from being achieved.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr&gt;
&lt;h2 class="heading" id="research-directions"&gt;
 Research Directions&lt;span class="heading__anchor"&gt; &lt;a href="#research-directions"&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;h3 class="heading" id="1-the-cr-closing-lemma-for-general-diffeomorphisms"&gt;
 1. The $C^r$ Closing Lemma for General Diffeomorphisms&lt;span class="heading__anchor"&gt; &lt;a href="#1-the-cr-closing-lemma-for-general-diffeomorphisms"&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;The most direct path to the $C^r$ stability conjecture passes through a general
$C^r$ closing lemma. For $r \geq 2$ this asks: given any non-wandering point of a
$C^r$ diffeomorphism, can one make an arbitrarily small $C^r$ perturbation to close
the orbit? Answering this in the affirmative for all closed manifolds and all
$r \geq 2$ would be a landmark result, and would immediately advance the stability
conjecture. The recent progress in conservative surface dynamics (Cristofaro-Gardiner
et al., 2023) and partially hyperbolic settings shows the question is not hopeless,
but the general dissipative case remains untouched.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3 class="heading" id="2-the-surface-case-dim-m--2-r-geq-2"&gt;
 2. The Surface Case $\dim M = 2$, $r \geq 2$&lt;span class="heading__anchor"&gt; &lt;a href="#2-the-surface-case-dim-m--2-r-geq-2"&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;On surfaces the dynamics is simpler: the non-wandering set has lower-dimensional
structure, and the absence of a center bundle means &amp;ldquo;partially hyperbolic&amp;rdquo; reduces
to &amp;ldquo;hyperbolic.&amp;rdquo; Mañé settled the surface case for $r = 1$. The $C^r$ stability
conjecture for surfaces and $r \geq 2$ is already an important open target and may
be the most accessible subcase. Recent $C^\infty$ closing lemmas for conservative
surface diffeomorphisms (Asaoka–Irie) suggest that the conservative surface case
may be reachable.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3 class="heading" id="3-partially-hyperbolic-diffeomorphisms"&gt;
 3. Partially Hyperbolic Diffeomorphisms&lt;span class="heading__anchor"&gt; &lt;a href="#3-partially-hyperbolic-diffeomorphisms"&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;A diffeomorphism is &lt;em&gt;partially hyperbolic&lt;/em&gt; if the tangent bundle splits as
$TM = E^{ss} \oplus E^c \oplus E^{uu}$ with uniform contraction on $E^{ss}$,
uniform expansion on $E^{uu}$, and an intermediate &amp;ldquo;center&amp;rdquo; bundle $E^c$.
For these systems, Gan–Shi (2022) and Shi–Wang (2024) have established $C^r$
closing and chain-closing lemmas when $\dim E^c = 1$. The question is whether
$C^r$-structural stability of a partially hyperbolic diffeomorphism forces the
center bundle to also become hyperbolic, that is, whether partial hyperbolicity
implies full hyperbolicity under stability.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3 class="heading" id="4-the-palis-global-conjecture"&gt;
 4. The Palis Global Conjecture&lt;span class="heading__anchor"&gt; &lt;a href="#4-the-palis-global-conjecture"&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;Palis proposed that the complement of the hyperbolic diffeomorphisms is exactly the
closure of systems exhibiting &lt;em&gt;homoclinic tangencies&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;heteroclinic cycles&lt;/em&gt;. This
is a positive description of non-hyperbolic dynamics, and is a strengthening of the
$C^r$ stability conjecture (it would also characterise what structural stability
forbids). In $C^1$ topology this programme is largely complete through Bonatti–
Crovisier&amp;rsquo;s connecting lemma (2004) and related results. For $r \geq 2$ it is wide
open, and progress on the Palis conjecture in $C^r$ would likely resolve the
stability conjecture as a corollary.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3 class="heading" id="5-flows-and-the-vector-field-analogue"&gt;
 5. Flows and the Vector Field Analogue&lt;span class="heading__anchor"&gt; &lt;a href="#5-flows-and-the-vector-field-analogue"&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;The stability conjecture has a natural analogue for $C^r$ vector fields: a
$C^r$-structurally stable flow should satisfy Axiom A and the strong transversality
condition. For $r = 1$ this is also proved. For $r \geq 2$ it is open. The vector
field setting introduces additional complications from singular points (zeros of the
vector field), as Labarca–Pacifico showed that on manifolds with boundary stable
flows can fail Axiom A, so the correct formulation may need adaptation. Progress
on the diffeomorphism case would likely shed light on the flow case as well.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr&gt;
&lt;h2 class="heading" id="references"&gt;
 References&lt;span class="heading__anchor"&gt; &lt;a href="#references"&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;ol&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Palis, J. &amp;amp; Smale, S. (1970). Structural stability theorems. &lt;em&gt;Proc. Sympos. Pure Math.&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;14&lt;/strong&gt;, 223–231.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Robbin, J. W. (1971). A structural stability theorem. &lt;em&gt;Annals of Mathematics&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;94&lt;/strong&gt;(2), 447–493.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Robinson, C. (1976). Structural stability of $C^1$ diffeomorphisms. &lt;em&gt;Journal of Differential Equations&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;22&lt;/strong&gt;(1), 28–73.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Mañé, R. (1987). A proof of the $C^1$ stability conjecture. &lt;em&gt;Publications Mathématiques de l&amp;rsquo;IHÉS&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;66&lt;/strong&gt;, 161–210.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Aoki, N. (1992). The set of Axiom A diffeomorphisms with no cycles. &lt;em&gt;Bol. Soc. Brasil. Mat.&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;23&lt;/strong&gt;(1–2), 21–65.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Hayashi, S. (1992). Diffeomorphisms in $\mathcal{F}^1(M)$ satisfy Axiom A. &lt;em&gt;Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;12&lt;/strong&gt;(2), 233–253.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Gan, S. &amp;amp; Shi, Y. (2022). $C^r$-closing lemma for partially hyperbolic diffeomorphisms with 1D-center bundle. &lt;em&gt;Journal of Differential Equations&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;334&lt;/strong&gt;, 337–363.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Shi, Y. &amp;amp; Wang, X. (2024). $C^r$-chain closing lemma for certain partially hyperbolic diffeomorphisms. &lt;em&gt;Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;44&lt;/strong&gt;(7), 1923–1944.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Bonatti, C. &amp;amp; Crovisier, S. (2004). Récurrence et généricité. &lt;em&gt;Inventiones Mathematicae&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;158&lt;/strong&gt;(1), 33–104.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Berger, P. (2017). Lectures on structural stability in dynamics. arXiv:1703.00092.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ol&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>