Related papers: Erratum to: Medial axis and singularities

We comment on some misunderstandings exhibited in a recent paper by Matolcsi et al. (Gen. Rel. Grav.39 413 (2007)).

This paper has been withdrawn because the models on which it was based have undergone significant changes and improvements. A new paper with the same title, based on the improved models, is accepted for publication in MNRAS and is available…

This paper has been withdrawn by the author due to a crucial error in several equations.

We review the results of our previous publication [Phys. Rev. D63, 116001 (2001); hep-ph/0012226] in the light of recent calculations and comments.

We correct the proof of Theorem 4.1 from [C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Soc. R. Can. \textbf{44} (2022), no. 4, 88--112].

After the publication of [Compos. Math. 156 (2020), no. 4, 822-861], Andrew Putman pointed out a mistake in our paper and helped us fix it. In this note, we will explain what this mistake is and how to fix it.

This paper is a set of notes that we wrote concerning the first version of Emergent Gravity [gr-qc/0602022]. It is our version of an exercise that we proposed to some of our students. The idea was to find mathematical errors and…

The main purpose of this article is to get a handle on determining how far a non-rational singularity is from being rational, or in other words, introduce a measure of the failure of a singularity being rational.

This paper continues a series in which we study deficiencies in previously published works concerning fixed point assertions for digital images.

This paper is a corrigendum to the article 'On the ideal theorem for number fields`. The main result of this paper proves to be untrue and is replaced by an estimate of a weighted sum with an improved error term.

This paper has been withdrawn because of serious errors.

After the rejection of their comment [arXiv:cond-mat/0609399v1] to our Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 97}, 100601 (2006), the Authors informed us that an extended version of their comment is going to be published in a different journal under the…

The paper (as posted originally) contains several errors. It has been subsequently split into two papers, the corrected (and accepted for publication) versions appear in the archive as papers cs.CC/0503082 and cs.DM/0503083.

We correct some intermediate expressions and arguments in hep-lat/0002009 (Nucl. Phys. B 585 (2000) 471--513). The main results do not change. We also mention some additional observations, including a constraint on a coefficient of the…

In this note, we correct an oversight from the paper mentioned in the title.

(One typo corrected and one incorrect statement removed. Extra details on conserved quantities and symmetry algebras added).

This paper has been withdrawn by the author due to an error.

In Rahman, Guns, Rousseau, and Engels (2015) we described several approaches to determine the cognitive distance between two units. One of these approaches was based on what we called barycenters in N dimensions. This note corrects this…

The paper of Unal [J. Math. Phys. 59, 062104 (2018)], though worthy of attention, contains a conclusion that is in error and may mislead the efforts to extend his results. The aim of the present note is twofold: we provide a correction to…

We correct a mistake in the analytical expression for the energy density given in Phys. Rev. C76, 021902 (2007) [arXiv:0704.3625 [hep-ph]]. The expression should be multiplied by 16. One question then arises; how could it be possible to…