Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T09:22:37.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dynamics of non-classical interval exchanges

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 November 2011

VAIBHAV S. GADRE
VAIBHAV S. GADRE*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Harvard University, One Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA (email: vaibhav@math.harvard.edu)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

A natural generalization of interval exchange maps are linear involutions, first introduced by Danthony and Nogueira [Measured foliations on non-orientable surfaces. Ann. Sci. Éc. Norm. Supér. (4) 26(6) (1993), 645–664]. Recurrent train tracks with a single switch provide a subclass of linear involutions. We call such linear involutions non-classical interval exchanges. They are related to measured foliations on orientable flat surfaces. Non-classical interval exchanges can be studied as a dynamical system by considering Rauzy induction in this context. This gives a refinement process on the parameter space similar to Kerckhoff’s simplicial systems. We show that the refinement process gives an expansion that has a key dynamical property called uniform distortion. We use uniform distortion to prove normality of the expansion. Consequently, we prove an analog of Keane’s conjecture: almost every non-classical interval exchange is uniquely ergodic. Uniform distortion has been independently shown in [A. Avila and M. Resende. Exponential mixing for the Teichmüller flow in the space of quadratic differentials, http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.1102].

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems , Volume 32 , Issue 6 , December 2012 , pp. 1930 - 1971
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

References

[1]Avila, A. and Resende, M.. Exponential mixing for the Teichmüller flow in the space of quadratic differentials. Comment. Math. Helv. to appear. See http://w3.impa.br/∼avila/papers.html.Google Scholar
[2]Boissy, C. and Lanneau, E.. Dynamics and geometry of the Rauzy–Veech induction for quadratic differentials. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 29(3) (2009), 767–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Bufetov, A.. Decay of correlations for the Rauzy–Veech–Zorich induction map on the space of interval exchange transformations and the central limit theorem for the teichmüller flow on the moduli space of abelian differentials. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 19(3) (2006), 579–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Danthony, C. and Nogueira, A.. Measured foliations on non-orientable surfaces. Ann. Sci. Éc. Norm. Supér. (4) 26(6) (1993), 645–664.Google Scholar
[5]Dunfield, N. and Thurston, D.. A random tunnel number one 3-manifold does not fiber over the circle. Geom. Topol. 10 (2006), 2431–2499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Gadre, V.. Harmonic measures for distributions with finite support on the mapping class group are singular, http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.2891.Google Scholar
[7]Gadre, V.. The limit set of the handlebody set has measure zero. Appendix to Are large distance Heegaard splittings generic? by M. Lustig and Y. Moriah, J. Reine Angew. Math. to appear.Google Scholar
[8]Kerckhoff, S.. Simplicial systems for interval exchange maps and measured foliations. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 1985(5) 257–271.Google Scholar
[9]Kerckhoff, S.. The measure of the limit set of the handlebody group. Topology 29(1) (1990), 27–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Kontsevich, M. and Zorich, A.. Connected components of the moduli spaces of Abelian differentials with prescribed singularities. Invent. Math. 153(3) (2003), 631–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Masur, H.. Interval exchange transformations and measured foliations. Ann. of Math. (2) 115(1) (1982), 169–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Masur, H. and Minsky, Y.. Geometry of the complex of curves I: hyperbolicity. Invent. Math. 138 (1999), 103–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Mosher, L.. Train track expansions of measured foliations. Preprint.Google Scholar
[14]Nogueira, A.. Almost all interval exchange transformations with flips are non-ergodic. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 9(3) (1989), 515–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Penner, R. and Harer, J.. Combinatorics of Train Tracks (Annals of Mathematics Studies, 125). Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Rees, M.. An alternative approach to the ergodic theory of measured foliations on surfaces. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 1 461–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Veech, W.. Gauss measures for transformations on the space of interval exchange maps. Ann. of Math. (2) 115(1) (1982), 201–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18]Yoccoz, J.-C.. Continued fraction algorithms for interval exchange maps: an introduction. Frontiers in Number Theory, Physics and Geometry. I. Springer, Berlin, 2006, pp. 401–435.Google Scholar
[19]Zorich, A.. Finite Gauss measure on the space of interval exchange transformations. Lyapunov exponents. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 46(2) (1996), 325–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar