## ENTROPY AND AFFINE ACTIONS FOR SURFACE GROUPS

## FRANÇOIS LABOURIE

A bstract . We give a short and independent proof of a theorem of Danciger of Zhang: surface groups with Hitchin linear part cannot act properly on the a ffi ne space. The proof is fundamentally di ff erent and relies on ergodic methods.

## 1. Introduction. Our goal is to give an independent proof, based on thermodynamical ideas, of a recent theorem by Danciger and Zhang [7].

Theorem 1.1. Assume that a surface group acts on the a ffi ne space so that its linear part is a Hitchin representation. Then its action on the a ffi ne space is not proper.

The proof given in this article, which also gives results of independent interest (Theorems 4.1 and 5.2) , uses ergodic theory and hyperbolic dynamics: entropy, Sinai-Ruelle-Bowen measures. We hope that the use of this type of methods open a novel approach on the study of proper a ffi ne actions, expanding previous work of Goldman Margulis and the author.

A surface group is the fundamental group of a closed connected oriented surface of genus greater than 2. A Hitchin representation [14] is a representation that can be deformed into a Fuchsian representation , that is a discrete representation with values in an irreducible SL (2 , R ).

Being very optimistic, as an approach to Auslander conjecture, one could hope that, in the spirit of Kahn-Markovic [16] and Kahn-Labourie-Moze [15], the presence of free groups could help in building surfaces groups close to be Fuchsian inside groups acting cocompactly on the a ffi ne space.

A conjecture, attributed to Auslander [2], states that if a group Γ acts properly and cocompactly on the a ffi ne space then it does not contain a free group. This conjecture has been proved up to dimension 7 by Abels, Margulis and Soïfer in [1]. On the other hand, Margulis in [21] has exhibited free groups acting properly on the a ffi ne space. A work of Goldman, Margulis and the author [11], further extended by Ghosh and Treib [10], have shown how to characterise proper actions of a hyperbolic group using the Labourie-Margulis di ff usion , which is an extension to measures - introduced in [17] - of the Margulis invariant introduced by Margulis in [22]. As for surface groups, there were shown by Mess [23] to admit no proper a ffi ne actions on the a ffi ne 3-space. An alternate proof was given by Goldman and Margulis [12] and then by the author [17] with the extension to groups whose linear part is Fuchsian. On the other hand, Danciger, Guéritaud and Kassel [6] exhibited examples of proper a ffi ne actions of surface groups, or more generally some Coxeter groups, in higher dimensions. For a survey and similar considerations see [27] and [5]

I thank Sourav Ghosh, Fanny Kassel, Andres Sambarino, Ilia Smilga and Tengren Zhang for valuable discussions and input.

1.1. Asketch of the proof. As an initial observation, we observe that the problem reduces to the case of representations whose linear part is in SO ( p p , -1). Indeed, according to Guichard, the Zariski closure G of a Hitchin representation always contains the irreducible SL 2 ( R ), and, if non Zariski dense, contained in either Sp (2 p ) or SO ( p p , -1). Recall finally that if an element of the a ffi ne group acts properly on the a ffi ne space, then 1 is an eigenvalue of its linear part. Thus 1 is in the spectrum of any element in the Zariski closure of its linear part. It follows that the representation is in odd dimensions and non Zariski dense in SL (2 p -1), thus contained in SO ( p p , -1).

From now on, let Γ be a surface group whose linear part is a Hitchin representation in SO ( p p , -1). The Labourie-Margulis di ff usion M is a continuous function on the space of measures invariant by the geodesic flow of the surface, associated to the representation on the a ffi ne space [17]. According to a generalisation of [17, 11] due to Ghosh and Treib [10, Theorem 7.1 and Definition 4.4], if there exists a measure µ so that M ( µ ) = 0, then the action on the a ffi ne space is not proper.

After this initial observation, the proof follows the thermodynamic theme introduced in [17]. A sketch is as follows

Asafirst step in the proof, we embed the Lie algebra of R p p , -1 /multicloseright SO ( p p , -1) as a subalgebra of SO ( p p , ). Thus an a ffi ne representation is seen as a deformation of the linear part of the representation in SO ( p p , ). As in [12, 9], we now interpret in lemma 6.2 the Margulis invariant as a variation of the p th eigenvalue (or the ( p + 1) th ), while the other eigenvalues remain constant.

A recent series of results by Pozzetti, Sambarino and Weinhard [25] implies among other things that this entropy is constantly equal to 1. We prove this result independently in Theorem 5.2 by proving that the isotropic limit curve is smooth and use an idea due to Potrie-Sambarino [24] to obtain the same result. This is a parallel to [25, Theorem 9.9].

As a consequence of the Abramov lemma and the definition of equilibrium states as done in [26], we can now interpret, in lemma 6.4, the Margulis invariant as the variation of the topological entropy of the last root flow , a flow for which the length of the closed orbit associated to γ is the logarithm of the product of the ( p -1) th and p th eigenvalue of ρ γ ( ).

This smoothness, obtained in Theorem 4.1 now follows from a general lemma about proximal bundles - lemma 4.3 - and a transversality property - proposition 3.6 - that we prove for Fuchsian representations in SO ( p p , ). This transversality property is a consequence of Lusztig positivity [20] as usedin [8] and we wonder whetherthis property could characterise Hitchin representations in SO ( p p , ) within Anosov representations.

Combining these simple ideas, on obtains that the Margulis invariant for the Bowen-Margulis measure of the last root flow is zero and thus concludes the proof of the Theorem by Danciger and Zhang.

- 2. Isotropic flags and the geometry of SO ( p p , ) . Let E be a vector space equipped with a metric Q of signature ( p p , ), let SO ( p p , ) be its isometry group. For every vector space V in E we denote by V o its orthogonal with

respect to the quadratic form. An isotropic space is a vector space on which the restriction of Q vanishes, a maximal isotropic plane is an isotropic plane of dimension p . We denote by L the space of maximal isotropic planes.

An isotropic flag is a collection of isotropic planes L = ( Li ) 1 &lt; i /lessorequalslant p so that Li ⊂ Li + 1 , dim( Li ) = i . An isotropic flag L can be positive or negative depending on Lp . We denote by F the space of positive isotropic flags. The group SO ( p p , ) acts transitively on F and the stabiliser of a point is the minimal parabolic subgroup of SO ( p p , ). Observe also that Lp is determined by Lp -1 . Two isotropic flags L and M are transverse is for all i , we have Mi ⊕ L ◦ i = Li ⊕ Mi ◦ = E .

Recall that the action of SO ( p p , ) on L has two orbits, which are both connected components of L . To distinguish them, let us fix a spacelike p -plane F , and an orientation on F and F o . Any p -isotropic plane P is then the graph of a linear isomorphism A from F to F o . Wesay P is positive when A preserves the orientation and negative otherwise. We denote by L + the space of positive p -isotropic planes and L -the space of negative p -isotropic planes. Any ( p -1)-isotropic plane is contained in exactly one positive isotropic p -plane and one negative isotropic p -plane.

A p -tuples of lines E = ( Ei i ) = 1 ,..., p is isotropic if E 1 + . . . + Ep is maximal isotropic. The isotropic flag F E ( ) associated to E is F E ( ) = ( L 1 , . . . , Lp ) where Li = E 1 + . . . + Ei . Two p -tuples of lines E = ( Ei i ) = 1 ,..., p and E = ( Ei i ) = 1 ,..., p are Q-paired if they are both isotropic and Q restricted to Ei ⊕ Ej is zero for i /nequal j and non degenerate otherwise. We then have

Proposition 2.1. [T ransverse flags ] The maps that sends ( E E , ) to ( F E ( ) , F E ( ) is an SO ( p p -equivariant bijection from the space of Q-paired p-tuples of lines to , ) the set of transverse flags.

Let us conclude with a description of the tangent space to L : Let E 0 , E 1 be two transverse isotropic planes. Let F be a p -plane transverse to to E 1 , so that F is the graph of f ∈ Hom( E 0 , E 1 ). Let ω F be the 2-form on E 0 given by ω F ( u v , ) = Q u ( , f ( v )).

Proposition 2.2. [I dentification ] Let θ 0 and θ 1 be two transverse isotropic planes. The map F → ω F is a di ff eomorphism between the space of isotropic planes transverse to θ 1 and Λ 2 ( θ ∗ 0 ) . In particular, T θ 0 L = Hom( θ , θ 0 1 ) identifies with Λ 2 ( θ ∗ 0 ) .

- 3. Anosov representations for SO ( p p , ) and SO ( p p , -1) . Let Σ be a closed hyperbolic surface, X its unitary tangent bundle and ( ϕ t ) t ∈ R its geodesic flow. We also write Γ /colonequal π 1 ( Σ ).

Observe that ( ϕ t ) t ∈ R lifts to a flow ( Φ t ) t ∈ R acting on E ρ by vector bundle automorphisms which are parallel along the geodesic flow

Let ρ be a representation of Γ in SO ( p p , ) that we see acting on a vector space E equipped with a quadratic form 〈|〉 of signature ( p p , ). Wedenote by E ρ the associated flat bundle on X and Ex , the fibre of E ρ at a point x in X .

Definition 3.1. [A nosov representations for SO ( p p , )] We say ρ is Borel Anosov for SO ( p p , if the bundle , ) E ρ splits into 2 p continuous line bundles E i , E i with 1 /lessorequalslant i /lessorequalslant p, with the following properties

- (1) The lines bundles E i and E i are invariant under ( Φ t ) t ∈ R and Q-paired,
- (2) The flow ( Φ t ) t ∈ R contracts the bundles

$$\mathcal { E } _ { i } ^ { * } \otimes \overline { \mathcal { E } _ { p } } \otimes \mathcal { E } _ { i } \quad w h e n \, i < p,$$

$$\begin{array} { c } \cdot & \mathcal { E } _ { i } ^ { * } \otimes \mathcal { E } _ { j } & \text{ when } j < i,. \end{array}$$

We recall that a flow ( Φ t ) t ∈ R contracts on a bundle E over a compact manifold if there exists a continuous metric and positive constants a and b , so that for all positive t , ‖ Φ t u ‖ /lessorequalslant ae -bt ‖ u ‖ . To be contracting on a compact manifold is independent on the parametrisation of the flow or the choice of the metric.

Let C γ be a closed orbit of the flow on X of length /lscript Γ associated to an element γ in Γ . Then ρ γ ( ) is conjugated to the endomorphism Φ /lscript γ of Ex , and in particular ( E i ) x and ( E i ) x are eigenlines of Φ /lscript γ . We denote by λ ρ γ i ( ) and λ ρ γ i ( ) the corresponding eigenvalues, which are also eigenvalues of ρ γ ( ). The Anosov condition gives λ i · λ i = 1 and the following ordering of eigenvalues

$$\lambda _ { 1 } > \lambda _ { 2 } > \dots > \sup \{ \lambda _ { p }, \lambda _ { p } ^ { - 1 } \} \geqslant \inf \{ \lambda _ { p }, \lambda _ { p } ^ { - 1 } \} > \dots > \overline { \lambda } _ { 1 } \.$$

3.1. Limit curves. Let ρ be an Anosov representation for SO ( p p , ). We may lift the bundle E ρ to a trivial bundle over the unitary tangent bundle Y of the hyperbolic bundle. The line bundles E i and E i also lifts and since they are parallel under ( Φ t ) t ∈ R . Let then consider the maps

↦

$$E _ { i } \, \colon ( x, y ) \mapsto E _ { i } ( x, y ) \coloneqq ( \mathcal { E } _ { i } ) _ { z } \,, \ \overline { E } _ { i } \, \colon ( x, y ) \mapsto \overline { E } _ { i } ( x, y ) \coloneqq ( \overline { \mathcal { E } } _ { i } ) _ { z } \,,$$

↦

where z in a point in the geodesic defined by the pair of distinct points ( x y , ) in the boundary at infinity ∂ ∞ H 2 of the hyperbolic plane H 2 .

Proposition 3.2. [L imit curve ] We have Eq ( x y , ) /colonequal Eq ( y x . , ) Moreover the isotropic flag ξ ( x y , ) given by ( E 1 ( x y , ) , E 2 ( x y , ) , . . . Ep ( x y , )) only depends on x.

↦

The map ξ : x → ξ ( x ) /colonequal ξ ( x y , ) is the limit curve of the Anosov representation.

Proof. By density, it is enough to check the first identity for ( x y , ) = ( γ , γ + -) where γ + and γ -are respectively the attractive and repulsive points of an element γ of Γ . The result follows by the identification of Ei with eigenlines of ρ γ ( ). Similarly, for the second identity we know that ξ γ ( -, γ + ) is an attractive point of ρ γ ( ). It follows that ξ γ ( -, y ) = ρ γ ( ) n ξ γ ( -, γ n y ). Since γ n ( y ) → →∞ n = γ + . It follows that if y /nequal γ -

$$\xi ( \gamma ^ { - }, y ) = \lim _ { n \rightarrow \infty } \rho ( \gamma ) ^ { n } \xi ( \gamma ^ { - }, \gamma ^ { n } y ) = \xi ( \gamma ^ { - }, \gamma ^ { + } ) \.$$

This concludes the proof

/square

Using proposition 2.1, we can recover the maps Ei using the limit curve ξ . Let us finally define the isotropic limit curves Θ and Θ from ∂ ∞ π 1 ( Σ ) to L as

$$\Theta \coloneqq \bigoplus _ { i = 1 } ^ { p } E _ { i } \ \, \quad \overline { \Theta } \coloneqq \bigoplus _ { i = 1 } ^ { p } \overline { E } _ { i } \.$$

3.2. Hitchin representations in SO ( p p , -1) . By [18], if ρ is a Hitchin representation in SL 2 p -1 ( R ), we have a decomposition of the associated bundle

$$\mathcal { V } _ { \rho } = \mathcal { V } _ { 1 } \oplus \dots \oplus \mathcal { V } _ { 2 p - 1 }$$

suchthat the line bundles V i are invariant by the flow and the flow contracts Hom( V V i , j ) for i &gt; j . If furthermore the representation is with values in SO ( p p , -1), the flow preserves a quadratic form of signature ( p p , -1), V p is a timelike trivial bundle equipped with a trivial action of the flow, while the other V i are lightlike.

Proposition3.3. AnyHitchinrepresentation with values in SO ( p p , -1) is Anosov for SO ( p p . , )

Proof. Taking E ρ = V ⊕ ρ R - where R is the trivial line bundle - equipped with the product metric, we obtain the decomposition as wished by taking for i &lt; p , E i = V i and E i = V 2 p i and finally E p and E p to be the lightlike lines in V ⊕ p R . /square

3.3. The principal SL 2 ( R ) -representations. In this section, we will give an explicit description of the map Ei in the case of Fuchsian representations. Let

$$A = \left ( \begin{array} { c c } 1 & z \\ 0 & 1 \end{array} \right ) \,, \ \Lambda = \left ( \begin{array} { c c } \lambda & 0 \\ 0 & \lambda ^ { - 1 } \end{array} \right ) \,.$$

Recall that the (2 p -1) -dimensional irreducible representation of SL 2 ( R ) preserves a quadratic form 〈|〉 of signature ( p p , -1). Moreover there exists a basis ε , . . . , ε 1 2 p -1 so that, writing ε i /colonequal ε 2 p -i and α , k m /colonequal 〈 A ( ε k ) | ε m 〉 , for all z /nequal 0,

$$\langle \varepsilon _ { k } \, | \, \overline { \varepsilon } _ { m } \rangle = \delta _ { k, m } \quad, \quad \Lambda ( \varepsilon _ { m } ) = \lambda ^ { 2 p - 2 m } \varepsilon _ { m } \\ \alpha _ { k, m } \neq 0 \ \text{if} \ m \geqslant k \quad, \quad \alpha _ { k, m } = 0 \ \text{if} \ m < k \,.$$

The principal representation of SL 2 ( R ) in SO ( p p , ) is described as follows: let V be a vector space on which SL 2 ( R ) acts irreducibly preserving a quadratic form of signature ( p p , -1); Let ( ε , . . . ε 1 2 p -1 ) be the basis of V as above; let L be a line generated by a vector f . We introduce now the base ( e 1 , . . . , ep , e 1 , . . . , ep ) of E /colonequal V ⊕ L where

$$\forall i < p, \ e _ { i } = \varepsilon _ { i } \,, \ \overline { e } _ { i } \coloneqq \overline { \varepsilon } _ { i } \coloneqq \varepsilon _ { 2 p - i } \quad e _ { p } = \varepsilon _ { p } - f \,, \ \overline { e } _ { p } = \varepsilon _ { p } + f \,.$$

Then SL 2 ( R ) preserves the quadratic form given in these coordinates by

$$\langle e _ { i } \, | \, e _ { j } \rangle = \langle \overline { e } _ { i } \, | \, \overline { e } _ { j } \rangle = 0 \,, \ \langle e _ { i } \, | \, \overline { e } _ { j } \rangle = \delta _ { i, j }$$

By convention, ( e 1 , . . . , ep ) generates a positive isotropic space.

3.4. TheFuchsianrepresentations in SO ( p p , -1) and SO ( p p . , ) Let Σ beequipped with a hyperbolic structure and ∂ ∞ π 1 ( Σ ) is identified with P 1 ( R ). Let ρ be a fuchsian representation of Γ in SO ( p p , ) of the form J ◦ ν where ν is a discrete representation of Γ in SL 2 ( R ). Let for i /lessorequalslant p , the lines Ei ( x 0 , y 0 ), respectively Ei ( x 0 , y 0 ) be generated by ei , respectively ei .

where ( x 0 , y 0 ) = ([1 : 0] , [0 : 1]) are elements of ∂ ∞ π 1 ( Σ ). Then, since the stabiliser of ( x 0 , y 0 ) is the group generated by Λ and Λ preserves Ei ( x 0 , y 0 ) and Ei ( x 0 , y 0 ) , we define coherently

$$E _ { i } ( A x _ { 0 }, A y _ { 0 } ) \coloneqq A ( E _ { i } ( x _ { 0 }, y _ { 0 } ) ) \, \ \overline { E } _ { i } ( A x _ { 0 }, A y _ { 0 } ) \coloneqq A ( \overline { E } _ { i } ( x _ { 0 }, y _ { 0 } ) ) \.$$

Then for all x and y ,

$$E _ { i } ( A x, A y ) = A ( E _ { i } ( x, y ) ) \, \, \ \overline { E } _ { i } ( A x, A y ) \coloneqq A ( \overline { E } _ { i } ( x, y ) ) \.$$

One now immediately checks the proposition

Proposition 3.4. If Γ is a Fuchsian group in PSL (2 R) , , J ( Γ ) is an Anosov representation for SO ( p p , whose limit curve is , ) ξ ( x ) = F E x ( ( , y )) .

Thefollowing transversality property will play a crucial role in the sequel

Proposition 3.5. [T ransversality ] For all pairwise distinct of triple points ( x y z , , ) in ∂ ∞ π 1 ( Σ )

$$\Theta ( z ) \ \bigcap \ \left ( E _ { p } ( x, y ) \oplus ( E _ { p - 1 } ^ { o } ( x, y ) \cap \overline { \Theta } ( y ) ) \right ) \,. \quad & ( 5 ) \\ \text{It is enough to consider the case $x = \text{1} \colon 0\text{1} \, u = \text{10} \, \colon 1\text{1 and } z = \text{12} \, \colon$$

Proof. It is enough to consider the case x = [1 : 0], y = [0 : 1] and z = [ z : 1] = A ([0 : 1)] where A is as in Equation 4. Let now

$$u \ = \ - b _ { p } f + \sum _ { \substack { m = 1 \\ \ } \dots \ - \dots \. } ^ { p } \in \Theta ( x )$$

$$u \ & = \ \ - b _ { p } f + \sum _ { m = 1 } ^ { p } b _ { m } \varepsilon _ { m } \in \Theta ( x ) \, \\ \text{ so that } \ A ( u ) \ \ & \in \ \ \Theta ( z ) \cap F ( x, y ) \, \\ \text{ where } F ( x, y ) \ \ & \colon = \ \ ( E _ { p } ( x, y ) \oplus ( E _ { p - 1 } ^ { o } ( x, y ) \cap \overline { \Theta } ( y ) ) \. \\. \quad \. \quad \. \quad \. \quad \. \quad \.$$

Recall now that F o ( x y , ) is generated by { ε , . . . , ε 1 p -1 , ε p + 1 , } . Thusfor k /lessorequalslant p + 1 and k /nequal p , 〈 A u ( ) | ε k 〉 = 0, in other words

$$0 = \sum _ { m = 1 } ^ { k } \alpha _ { m, k } b _ { m } \.$$

The matrix corresponding to this system is upper triangular with non zero coe ffi cients, it follows that for all 1 /lessorequalslant m /lessorequalslant p , we have bk = 0. Thus Θ ( z ) ∩ F x ( , y ) = { 0 . } /square

Corollary 3.6. Let ρ be a representation close to a Fuchsian representation. Then the transversality property (5) holds

Proof. This follows from the continuity of limit curves as a dependence of the representation [13, 3] and the fact that Γ acts cocompactly on the space of triple pairwise distinct points in ∂ ∞ π 1 ( Σ ). /square

## 4. The isotropic limit curves and the Smoothness Theorem.

Theorem 4.1. [S moothness theorem ] Let SO ( p p , ) be Anosov representation satisfying the Transversality Property (5) , then the image of the isotropic limit curve Θ is a smooth curve M. Moreover, using the identification of proposition 2.2, T Θ M = Λ 2 ( E p ∗ -1 ⊕ Ep ∗ ) .

4.1. Proof of the Smoothness Theorem 4.1. Wewill denote in general by Vx the fibre at x ∈ X of a vector bundle V over a compact base X . Let ( ϕ t ) t ∈ R be a flow on X which lifts to a flow ( Φ t ) t ∈ R of bundle automorphisms on V .

Definition 4.2. [P roximal bundle ] We say the lift ( Φ t ) t ∈ R is proximal if there exists a continuous ( Φ t ) t ∈ R -invariant proximal decomposition V = Z ⊕ W so that

- (1) the subbundle Z has rank one,
- (2) The flow contracts the subbundle Z and the bundle Z ∗ ⊗ W,

The following lemma is crucial in the smoothness part of the result.

Lemma 4.3. [P roximality and smoothness ] Let σ be a continuous section of the bundle V. Assume that for all x in X, σ ( x ) does not belong to W.

Then denoting σ = Z σ + W , where Z σ σ is a section of Z and W σ is a section of W, there exist a positive constants A and λ so that for all positive t

$$\| \Phi _ { t } ( W _ { \sigma } ) \| \leqslant A \| \Phi _ { t } ( Z _ { \sigma } \| ^ { \lambda + 1 } \,.$$

Proof. Let us choose an auxiliary metric on Z and W , since the flow is contracting on Z , we may reparametrise the flow so that for every v in Z ,

$$\| \Phi _ { t } ( v ) \| = e ^ { - t } \| v \| \,.$$

Thenthecontractionpropertyon Z ∗ ⊗ W tells that there is a positive constants B and λ so that for all w in Z ∗ ⊗ W

$$\| \Phi _ { t } ( w ) \| \leqslant B e ^ { - \lambda t } \| w \| \,.$$

Thus for any ( u v , ) in Z × W , where u is non zero, and all positive t ,

$$\ell ^ { 2 } \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \colon \\ \| \Phi _ { t } ( v ) \| \leqslant B e ^ { - \lambda t } \frac { \| v \| \cdot \| \Phi _ { t } ( u ) \| } { \| u \| } \leqslant A e ^ { - ( \lambda + 1 ) t } \| v \| \cdot$$

Let now

$$C \ \coloneqq \ \inf \{ \| Z _ { \sigma } ( x ) \| \ | \ c \in X \}$$

$$D \ \coloneqq \ \sup \{ \| W _ { \sigma } ( x ) \| \| \ | \ x \in X \}$$

and recall that by hypothesis C is positive. Let now z be a point in x , then for any positive t ,

$$\| \Phi _ { t } ( W _ { \sigma } ( x ) ) \| \ \leqslant \ B e ^ { - ( \lambda + 1 ) t } \| W _ { \sigma } ( x ) \|$$

$$& \frac { \| \Phi _ { t } ( Z _ { \sigma } ( x ) ) \| } { \| Z _ { \sigma } ( x ) \| } \Big ) ^ { \lambda + 1 } \| W _ { \sigma } ( x ) \| \\ & \varkappa C ^ { - ( \lambda + 1 ) } \| \Phi _ { t } ( Z _ { \sigma } ( x ) ) \| ^ { \lambda + 1 } \. \\ & = B D C ^ { - ( \lambda + 1 ) }. & \Box \\ & \quad. = \.$$

$$\tau \cdots \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \\ \| \Phi _ { t } ( W _ { \sigma } ( x ) ) \| \ \leq \ \ B e ^ { - ( \lambda + 1 ) t } \| W _ { \sigma } ( x ) \| \\ \leq \ \ B \left ( \frac { \| \Phi _ { t } ( Z _ { \sigma } ( x ) ) \| } { \| Z _ { \sigma } ( x ) \| } \right ) ^ { \lambda + 1 } \| W _ { \sigma } ( x ) \| \\ \leq \ \ B D C ^ { - ( \lambda + 1 ) } \| \Phi _ { t } ( Z _ { \sigma } ( x ) ) \| ^ { \lambda + 1 } \. \\ \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \colon \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \ddots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \\ \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots$$

Thus we obtain the lemma with A = BDC λ +

4.2. Curves in bundles. The limit maps Θ and Θ then give rise to two continuous, flow invariant maximal isotropic and transverse subbundles (also denoted Θ and Θ of E ρ . We see these subbundles as sections, also denoted Θ and Θ of L ρ the associated bundle over X to the Grassmannian of totally isotropic planes L in E

Let us choose an orientation on Σ andthusacomplexstructure associated to the hyperbolic structure, as well as an orientation on ∂ ∞ π 1 ( Σ ).

From hyperbolic geometry, we have a Γ equivariant map h from the unit bundle H 2 of Σ to ∂ ∞ Γ , which associates to a unit vector u , the end point of the geodesic given by Ju , where J is the complex structure on Σ associated to the hyperbolic metric.

Thus we obtain a section σ of L ρ given by

$$\sigma ( u ) \coloneqq \Theta ( h ( u ) ) \,.$$

For a representation close to be Fuchsian, since Θ ( z ) is transverse to Θ ( w ) is z /nequal w by the Anosov property, we will consider σ as a section of the vector bundle

$$\mathcal { T } \coloneqq T _ { \Theta } L \subset H o m ( \Theta, \overline { \Theta } ) \,.$$

that we freely identify with Λ 2 ( Θ ∗ ), using proposition 2.2 by an identification that respects the lifts of the flow. Then we have

Proposition 4.4. The decomposition T = Z ⊕ W is a proximal vector bundle decomposition where

$$Z \coloneqq \Lambda ^ { 2 } \left ( E _ { p - 1 } ^ { * } \oplus E _ { p } ^ { * } \right ) \,, \quad W \coloneqq \{ \omega \in \Lambda ^ { 2 } ( \Theta ^ { * } ) \ | \ \omega | _ { E _ { p } \oplus E _ { p - 1 } } = 0 \} \,. \quad \, ( 7 ) \\ \text{Proof. By the Anosov property, the flow contracts}$$

Proof. By the Anosov property, the flow contracts

$$\Lambda ^ { 2 } ( \Theta ^ { * } ) = \bigoplus _ { p \geqslant i > j } \Lambda ^ { 2 } ( E _ { i } ^ { * } \oplus E _ { j } ^ { * } )$$

and furthermore contracts less on Λ 2 ( Ep ∗ ⊕ E p ∗ -1 ) than on Λ 2 ( E i ∗ ⊕ E j ∗ ) when i &lt; j and j &gt; p . /square

Lemma 4.5. For all x in X, σ ( x ) does no belong to Wx.

Proof. In the identification Λ 2 ( Θ = ) T L ⊂ Hom( Θ Θ , ), W is a subset of

$$W _ { 0 } \coloneqq \{ f \, | \, \forall ( u, v ) \in E _ { p - 1 } \times E _ { p } \,. \ q ( u, f ( v ) ) = q ( v, f ( u ) ) = 0 \}$$

But if f ∈ W 0 , then f ( Ep ) is included in E o p -1 ∩ Θ . Thus the graph of f has an intersection of positive dimension with Ep ⊕ ( E o p -1 ∩ Θ ). It follows from the third statement of proposition 3.6 that σ ( x ) does not belong W for all x in X . /square

As a corollary of our proximal and smoothness lemma 4.3 we now get, denoting u the section of Z of norm 1 which is so that for all t ,

$$u = \frac { \Phi _ { t } ( Z _ { \sigma } ( \varphi _ { - t } x ) ) } { \| \Phi _ { t } ( Z _ { \sigma } ( \varphi _ { - t } x ) ) \| } \.$$

Observe that u gives rise to an orientation of Z .

Corollary 4.6. There exist positive constants A and λ , such that for all positive t,

$$\| \Phi _ { t } ( W _ { \sigma } ) \| \leqslant A \| \Phi _ { t } ( Z _ { \sigma } \| ^ { \lambda + 1 } \,.$$

And in particular

$$\lim _ { t \to \infty } \left ( \frac { \Phi _ { t } ( \sigma ( \varphi _ { - t } x ) ) } { \| \Phi _ { t } ( \sigma ( \varphi _ { - t } x ) ) \| } \right ) = u \.$$

Wenow explain how this corollary implies the Smoothness Theorem 4.1.

Proof of Theorem 4.1. Let us also choose some auxiliary Riemannian metric and let U be the unit vector field in along C /colonequal Θ ( ∂ ∞ π 1 ( Σ )) so that ux is tangent at Θ ( x ) to

$$Z _ { x } \coloneqq \Lambda ^ { 2 } ( E _ { p - 1 } ^ { * } ( x, y ) \oplus E _ { p - 1 } ^ { * } ( x, y ) ) \subset T _ { \Theta ( x ) } \mathbf L \,,$$

and inducing the orientation compatible with that coming from u .

Observe that ux is continuous in x . Then by corollary 4.6

$$\lim _ { z \to x ^ { + } } \frac { \Theta ( x ) - \Theta ( z ) } { \| \Theta ( x ) - \Theta ( z ) \| } = u \.$$

Taking the opposite orientation on Σ we obtain symmetrically

$$\lim _ { z \to x ^ { - } } \frac { \Theta ( x ) - \Theta ( z ) } { \| \Theta ( x ) - \Theta ( z ) \| } = - u \.$$

It follows that C is a C 1 curve whose tangent space at x is Zx . /square

5. The last root flow and the Entropy Theorem. We also have [4, proposition 2.4] the following result

Proposition 5.1. For ρ with values in SO ( p p , ) close to a Hitchin representation in SO ( p p , -1) , there exists a reparametrisation ( ψ t ) t ∈ R , called the last root flow , of ( ϕ t ) t ∈ R so that the length of the closed orbit of ψ associated to γ is log λ p ( ρ γ ( )) + log λ p -1 ( ρ γ ( )) .

Indeed, we observe the real line bundle Z = Λ 2 ( E p ∗ -1 ⊕ E p ∗ -1 ) is contracted by the flow and its contraction spectrum associates to the closed orbit γ the number log λ p ( ρ γ ( )) + log λ p -1 ( ρ γ ( )).

The entropy theorem is now properly stated as

Theorem5.2. [E ntropy T heorem ] For ρ close enough to a Hitchin representation in SO ( p p , -1) , the entropy of the last root flow is equal to 1.

This theorem is also a consequence to [25], also using a fundamental idea due to Potrie and Sambarino [24].

Proof. We follow closely Potrie and Sambarino [24], to obtain a proof of the Entropy Theorem 5.2. We observe that the if γ , γ + -are respectively the attractive and repulsive fixed points of γ on ∂ ∞ π 1 ( Σ ), then Ξ q ( γ , γ + -) is a fixed point of ρ γ ( ) in Mq and that its rate of contraction is given by λ p ( γ ) · λ p -1 ( γ ) on Λ 2 ( Ep ∗ ⊕ E p ∗ -1 ). The same discussion as in Potrie-Sambarino usingSRBmeasuresgivesustheresultintheneighbourhoodoftheFuchsian representation by Corollary 3.6 and Theorem 4.1 since the isotropic limit curve is C 1 . Finally, as in [24], the analyticity of the entropy obtained in [3] implies that the entropy is constant and equal to 1 on the neighbourhood of the Hitchin representations in SO ( p p , -1). /square

It seems likely that all representations in the Hitchin component for SO ( p p , ) are Anosov, in which case the previous theorem applies to the whole Hitchin component.

## 6. Entropy and the A ffi ne Action Theorem.

↦

The corresponding embedding of SO ( p p , -1) to SO ( p p , ) is so that have the SO ( p p , -1) invariant decomposition x

6.1. A ffi ne group and quadratic forms. Let us consider a representation ρ : γ → ργ of a surface group Γ in the a ffi ne group of E whose linear part ρ 0 is a Hitchin representation is in SO ( p p , -1). We describe the translation part by ω ∈ H 1 ρ 0 ( E ), defined by the cocycle γ → ωγ /colonequal ρ γ ( )(0). Let L be a onedimensional vector space generated by a vector f . Let 〈|〉 be the quadratic form on E ⊕ L , given by 〈 u + xf | u + xf 〉 = Q u ( ) -x 2 of signature ( p p , ).

$$T _ { \text{id} } \text{SO} ( p, p ) = T _ { \text{id} } \text{SO} ( p, p - 1 ) \oplus E \.$$

Accordingly, we consider Rep( Γ , SO ( p p , -1) as a subset of Rep( Γ , SO ( p p , )) and we identify H 1 ρ ( E ) as a vector subspace of T ρ 0 Rep( Γ , SO ( p p , )).

↦

Weknowdefinethisisomorphismmoreexplicitly. Werepresentelements /a113 ρ in T ρ 0 Rep( Γ , SO ( p p , )) by coholomogy class of cocycles /a113 ρ : γ → /a113 ρ γ . Let then H be the subset of T ρ 0 Rep( Γ , SO ( p p , )) defined by

$$\mathcal { H } \ \coloneqq \ \{ \mathring { \rho } \ | \ \forall u, v \in E, \ \forall \gamma \in \Gamma \ \langle \mathring { \rho } _ { \gamma } ( u ) \ | \ v \rangle = 0 \}$$

↦

Proposition 6.1. [I nterpretation ] The map /a113 ρ → ω , where ω is defined by

$$\forall v \in E, \ Q ( \omega _ { \gamma }, v ) = \langle \dot { \rho } _ { \gamma } ( e _ { f } ) \, | \, \rho ( \gamma ) ( v ) \rangle$$

is an isomorphism between H and H 1 ρ ( E . )

6.2. Margulis invariant. Let ρ be a representation of Γ in the a ffi ne group, ρ 0 its linear part assumed to be a Hitchin representation in SO ( p p , -1) and ω the a ffi ne deformation, that we see as a (closed) form in Ω 1 ( X , V 0 ), where V 0 is the flat bundle on X associated to ρ 0 . By section 3.2 we have the flow invariant decomposition:

$$\mathcal { V } _ { 0 } = \sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { 2 p - 1 } \mathcal { V } _ { i } \,. \quad \\ \cdot \quad \dots \quad \dots$$

Let ε p be the section of norm 1 of the spacelike line bundle Ep . Let us choose a parametrisation of the geodesic flow, with generator X . Let µ be a measure invariant by the geodesic flow. We define as in [17, 11] the di ff usion

$$M ( \mu ) \coloneqq \int _ { \mathbb { U S } } Q ( \varepsilon _ { p }, \omega ( X ) ) \, \mathrm d \mu \,.$$

One may notice that one could get rid of the choice of the parametrisation by working with invariant currents.

Let ( ρ t ) t ∈ R be a family of representations of Γ in SO ( p p , ) associated to ρ , according to our Interpretation proposition 6.1, so that

$$\cdot \quad \frac { d } { d t } \Big | _ { t = 0 } \rho _ { t } = \omega \,, \ \rho ^ { 0 } = \rho _ { 0 } \,. \\ \intertext { close to a Hitchin representation} \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot$$

∣ For t close to zero, ρ t is close to a Hitchin representation in SO ( p p , -1) (hence Borel Anosov in SO ( p p , ) by proposition 3.3) and thus also Borel Anosov

[18, 13]. We can decompose the associated bundle as in Definition 3.1 in

$$\begin{array} { c } \mu \\ \quad \mathcal { E } _ { \rho _ { t } } = \bigoplus _ { i = 1 } ^ { p } \mathcal { E } _ { i } ^ { t } \oplus \bigoplus _ { i = 1 } ^ { p } \overline { \mathcal { E } } _ { i } ^ { t } \,. \\ \mu \quad \dots \quad \dots \quad \dots \quad \dots \end{array}$$

This decomposition is given by the limit curves. Since they depend analytically on the representation [3, Theorem 6.1], we may choose an identification of E ρ t with V ⊕ 0 L , where L is the trivial bundle such that furthermore

- (1) the quadratic form is constant,
- (2) the bundles E t i and E t i are constant and thus denoted E i and E i
- (3) Finally E i = V E i , i = V 2 p i + 1 , for i &lt; p , E p and E p are the lightlike lines in V ⊕ p L .

Let µγ be the current represented to a closed orbit associated by a non trivial element γ of Γ . The next lemma is a generalisation of [12, Lemma 2].

Lemma 6.2. The variation of the eigenvalues are given as follows:

$$\frac { \text{d} } { \text{d} t } \Big | _ { t = 0 } \lambda _ { p } ( \rho _ { t } ( \gamma ) ) & = \frac { 1 } { 2 } M ( \mu _ { \gamma } ) \quad, \quad \text{for $i<p$,} \quad \frac { \text{d} } { \text{d} t } \Big | _ { t = 0 } \lambda _ { i } ( \rho _ { t } ( \gamma ) ) = 0 \. \\ \text{Proof} \ \text{We can obtain this lemma as a direct application of $[19, Lemma $4.1.1]$}, \\ \dots \dots \dots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots$$

$$a & = \, \ddot { \overline { d } t } | _ { t = 0 } \, a ( t ), \, \text{then} \, M ( \mu _ { \gamma } ) \, \text{is equal to} \\ & Q ( \omega _ { \gamma }, \varepsilon _ { p } ) = Q ( \dot { \rho } _ { \gamma } ( f ) \, \varepsilon _ { p } ) = \langle e _ { p } + \overline { e } _ { p } \, | \, \dot { \rho } _ { \gamma } ( e _ { p } - \overline { e } _ { p } ) \rangle = 2 \, \langle \dot { \rho } _ { \gamma } ( e _ { p } ) \, | \, \overline { e } _ { p } \rangle = 2 \dot { \lambda } _ { p } \,.$$

∣ ∣ Proof. Wecan obtain this lemma as a direct application of [19, Lemma 4.1.1], we reproduce the easy proof in this context. We choose basis ei and ei of E i and E i respectively, so that ep = 1 2 ( ε p + f ), ep = 1 2 ( ε p -f ). where ε p is a basis of Ep of norm 1 and f a basis of the trivial bundle L of norm -1. Writing /a113 a = d dt ∣ ∣ t = 0 a t ( ), then M ( µγ ) is equal to

Similarly, by proposition 3.6, 0 = 〈 /a113 ρ γ ( ε k ) | ε 2 p -k 〉 for k &lt; p , thus /a113 λ k = 0. /square

Corollary 6.3. For any measure µ , if g is the variation of the reparametrisation of the last root flow

$$2 \int _ { \text{UX} } g \, d \mu \ = \ M ( \mu ) \.$$

Proof. Let µγ is a current supported on a closed orbit. Then using the definition for the first equality, the fact that λ p = 1 for an SO ( p p , -1) representation and lemma 6.2

$$\int _ { \text{UV} } g \, \mathrm d \mu _ { \gamma } = \frac { \dot { \lambda } _ { p - 1 } } { \lambda _ { p - 1 } } + \frac { \dot { \lambda } _ { p } } { \lambda _ { p } } = \dot { \lambda } _ { p } = \frac { 1 } { 2 } M ( \mu _ { \gamma } ) \.$$

Thus the equation (8) holds for all currents supported on closed orbits, hence for all linear combination of such by linearity, hence for all measures by density and continuity of the di ff usion. /square

6.3. Abramov lemma. We will use the thermodynamic formalism and refer to [3] for a general discussion and references.

Let ( ψ s t ) t ∈ R be a family metric Anosov flow on a space M . Let /lscript s γ be the length of every closed orbit γ for ψ s . Let f s be a family of functions on M so

that

$$\ell _ { \gamma } ^ { s } = \int _ { 0 } ^ { \ell _ { \gamma } ^ { 0 } } f _ { s } \circ \psi _ { u } ^ { 0 } ( x ) \, d u \,, \\.. \quad \dots \, \tau \, \tau \, \dots \, \dots \, \tau \, \tau \, \dots \, \tau \,.$$

where x is a point in γ - see [3, Paragraph 3.1] for details. Then if m is an invariant measure for ( ψ 0 t ) t ∈ R , then is an invariant measure for ( ψ s t ) t ∈ R . The Abramov lemma [26, Lemma 2.4] is then that

$$\mathbb { w } \mathbb { w } _ { n } \mathbb { w } _ { n } \\ m ^ { s } \coloneqq \frac { 1 } { \int _ { M } f _ { s } m } f _ { s } m \,, \\ \text{assure for} \left ( \psi _ { i } ^ { s } \right ) _ { \mathbb { w } }. \text{ The Abramov lemma} \left [ 2 6, Lemma 2. 4 \right ]$$

Then as a consequence.

$$h ( m ^ { s } ) = \frac { 1 } { \int _ { M } f _ { s } m } h ( m ) \,.$$

Lemma 6.4. Assume that f s ( m depends C ) 1 in s and the derivative is bounded in m. Let hs be the topological entropy of ψ s , assuming that hs is constant and non zero then

$$0 & = \int _ { M } \frac { d f _ { s } } { d s } \Big | _ { s = 0 } \, d \mu _ { e q } \,. \quad & ( 1 1 ) \\ \text{sider } \mu _ { e q } ^ { s } & \text{as in formula $9$. By Abramov lemma for the first}$$

∣ Proof. Let us consider µ s eq as in formula 9. By Abramov lemma for the first equality and the definition of topological entropy for the second

$$& \frac { h _ { 0 } } { \int _ { M } f _ { s } \, \mathrm d \mu _ { e q } } = h ( \mu _ { e q } ^ { s } ) \leqslant h _ { 0 } \,. \\ \vdash & \mu _ { e q } \, \geqslant \, 1, \text{ while } \, \int _ { \mathcal { M } } f _ { 0 } \mathrm d \mu _ { e q } \, = \, \int _ { \mathcal { M } } \dot { c }$$

Thus for all s , ∫ M f s d µ eq /greaterorequalslant 1, while ∫ M f 0 d µ eq = ∫ M d µ eq = 1. The result followss /square

6.4. Proof of the A ffi ne action Theorem 1.1. Let σ be a Hitchin representation in the a ffi ne group whose linear part ρ is Hitchin in SO ( p p , -1). We interpret σ as a a family of representation ( ρ s ) s ∈ [0 1] , in SO ( p p , ) with ρ 0 = ρ as in paragraph 6.1 and proposition 6.1.

Now by [10, Theorem 7.1 and Definition 4.4] if there is a measure that annihilates the Margulis invariant, then the action on the a ffi ne group is not proper. This concludes the proof of Danciger and Zhang's Theorem 1.1 .

Let ψ s be the last root flow of ρ s and f s be a family of reparametrisations of ψ 0 giving rise to ψ s . Let g = d f s d s ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ s = 0 . Since the entropy of ψ s is constant by the Entropy Theorem 5.2, we have by lemma 6.4 that ∫ g g d µ = 0 where µ is the Bowen-Margulis measure of the last root flow of ρ 0 . Thus by corollary 6.3, M ( µ ) = 0.

## R eferences

- 1. Herbert Abels, Gregory Margulis, and Gregory Soifer, The Auslander conjecture for dimension less than 7 , arXiv.org (2012).

2. Louis Auslander, The structure of complete locally a ffi ne manifolds , Topology 3 (1964), no. suppl. 1, 131-139.

- 3. Martin J Bridgeman, Richard Canary, François Labourie, and Andres Sambarino, The pressure metric for Anosov representations , Geometric And Functional Analysis 25 (2015), no. 4, 1089-1179.
- 4. Martin J Bridgeman, Richard Canary, François Labourie, and Andres Sambarino, Simple root flows for Hitchin representations , Geom. Dedicata 192 , (2018)
- 5. Je ff rey Danciger, Todd A. Drumm, William M. Goldman, and Ilia Smilga, Proper actions of discrete groups of a ffi ne transformations , arXiv:2002.09520, to be published in Geometry, Groups and Dynamics.
- 6. Je ff rey Danciger, François Guéritaud, and Fanny Kassel, Proper a ffi ne actions for rightangled Coxeter groups , arXiv.org (2018).
- 7. Je ff rey Danciger and Tengren Zhang, A ffi ne actions with Hitchin linear part , arXiv.org (2018).
- 8. Vladimir V Fock and Alexander B Goncharov, Moduli spaces of local systems and higher Teichmüller theory , Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. (2006), no. 103, 1-211.
- 9. Sourav Ghosh, Avatars of Margulis invariants and proper actions , arXiv.org (2018).
- 10. Sourav Ghosh and Nicolaus Treib, A ffi ne Anosov representations and Proper actions. , arXiv.org (2017).
- 11. William M Goldman, François Labourie, and Gregory A. Margulis, Proper a ffi ne actions and geodesic flows for hyperbolic surfaces , Annals of Maths 170 (2009), no. 3, 1051-1083.
- 12. William M Goldman and Gregory A. Margulis, Flat Lorentz 3-manifolds and cocompact Fuchsian groups , vol. 262, 2000.
- 13. Olivier Guichard and Anna Wienhard, Anosov representations: domains of discontinuity and applications , Inventiones Mathematicae 190 (2012), no. 2, 357-438.
- 14. Nigel J Hitchin, Lie groups and Teichmüller space , Topology 31 (1992), no. 3, 449-473.
- 15. Jeremy Kahn, François Labourie, and Shahar Mozes, Surface groups in uniform lattices of some semi-simple groups , arXiv.org (2018).
- 16. Jeremy Kahn and Vladimir Markovic, Immersing almost geodesic surfaces in a closed hyperbolic three manifold , Annals of Mathematics 175 (2012), no. 3, 1127-1190.
- 17. François Labourie, Fuchsian a ffi ne actions of surface groups , Journal of Di ff erential Geometry 59 (2001), no. 1, 15-31.
- 18. , Anosov flows, surface groups and curves in projective space , Inventiones Mathematicae 165 (2006), no. 1, 51-114.
- 19. François Labourie and Richard Wentworth, Variations along the Fuchsian locus , Annales Scientifiques de l'Ecole Normale Supérieure. Quatrième Série 51 (2018), no. 2, 487-547.
- 20. George Lusztig, Total positivity in reductive groups , vol. 123, 1994.
- 21. Gregory A. Margulis, Free completely discontinuous groups of a ffi ne transformations , Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 272 (1983), no. 4, 785-788.
- 22. , Complete a ffi ne locally flat manifolds with a free fundamental group , Zap. Nauchn. Sem. Leningrad. Otdel. Mat. Inst. Steklov. (LOMI) 134 (1984), 190-205.
- 23. Geo ff rey Mess, Lorentz spacetimes of constant curvature , Geometriae Dedicata 126 (2007), 3-45.
- 24. Rafael Potrie and Andrés Sambarino, Eigenvalues and Entropy of a Hitchin representation , Inventiones Mathematicae (2017), no. 3, 885-925.
- 25. Beatrice Pozzetti, Andrés Sambarino, and Anna Wienhard, Conformality for a robust class of non-conformal attractors , arXiv.org (2019).
- 26. Andrés Sambarino, Quantitative properties of convex representations , Commentarii Mathematici Helvetici 89 (2014), no. 2, 443-488.
- 27. Ilia Smilga, Proper a ffi ne actions on semisimple Lie algebras , Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble), 66 , (2016),no. 2, 785-831.
François Labourie
Entropy and affine actions for surface groups
We give an independent proof of a theorem of Danciger of Zhang: surface
groups with Hitchin linear part cannot act properly on the affine space