arxiv: v1 [math.gt] 19 Oct 2007

Transcription

1 CURVE COMPLEXES WITH CONNECTED BOUNDARY ARE RIGID arxiv: v1 [math.gt] 19 Oct 2007 KASRA RAFI AND SAUL SCHLEIMER Abstract. When the boundary of the curve complex is connected any quasi-isometry is bounded distance from a simplicial automorphism. As a consequence, when the boundary is connected the quasi-isometry type of the curve complex determines the homeomorphism type of the surface. 1. Introduction The curve complex of a surface was introduced into the study of Teichmüller space by Harvey [6] as an analogue of the Tits building of a symmetric space. Since then the curve complex has played a key role in many areas of geometric topology such as the classification of infinite volume hyperbolic three-manifolds, the study of the cohomology of mapping class groups, the geometry of Teichmüller space, and the combinatorics of Heegaard splittings. Our motivation is the work of Masur and Minsky [12, 13], which focuses on the coarse geometric structure of the curve complex, the mapping class group, and other combinatorial moduli spaces. It is a sign of the richness of low-dimensional topology that the geometric structure of such objects is not well understood. Suppose that S = S g,n is an orientable, connected, compact surface with genus g and n boundary components. Let CS) denote the curve complex of S. When S is a sphere, disk or pants then CS) is empty and we disregard these cases. Theorem 7.1. Suppose that the Gromov boundary of CS) is connected. Then every quasi-isometry of CS) is bounded distance from a simplicial automorphism of CS). Remark 1.1. Leininger and the second author [11] have shown that the boundary of curve complex is connected if S has genus at least four, or if the genus is at least two and S is non-empty. Date: February 2, This work is in the public domain. 1

2 2 KASRA RAFI AND SAUL SCHLEIMER Recall that QIX) is the group of quasi-isometries of a geodesic metric space X, modulo the following equivalence relation: quasi-isometries f and g are equivalent if and only if there is a constant d so that for every x X we have d X fx), gx)) d. There is a homomorphism from the isometry group to the quasi-isometry group. Corollary 1.2. Suppose that CS) is connected. Then QICS)) is isomorphic to AutCS)), the group of simplicial automorphisms. Proof. Recall that all elements of AutCS)) are isometries. So we have a homomorphism AutCS)) QICS)). This map is always an injection. To see this recall Ivanov s Theorem [7]: every φ AutCS)) is induced by some homeomorphism of S, called φ S. Suppose that φ AutCS)) is not the identity element. Then there is some curve α with φ S α) not isotopic to α. Consider the action of φ S on PMLS). There is a small neighborhood of α in PMLS), say U, so that φ S U) U =. Since ending laminations are dense φ S moves some ending lamination of S. By Klarreich s Theorem see Theorem 2.3 below), we deduce that φ moves some point of CS). Finally, any isometry of a Gromov hyperbolic space moving a point of the boundary is nontrivial in the quasi-isometry group. On the other hand, when CS) is connected, Theorem 7.1 implies that the homomorphism AutCS)) QICS)) is a surjection. Remark 1.3. If CS) is not connected then the conclusion of Corollary 1.2 may fail. For example, when S is a four-holed sphere or onceholed torus the curve complex is a copy of the Farey graph. Thus CS) is quasi-isometric to T, the countably infinite valence tree [2]. Hence QICS)) is uncountable while AutCS)) = PGL2, Z) is countable. Theorem 1.4. Suppose S and Σ are surfaces such that CS) is connected and neither S nor Σ is homeomorphic to S 2 or S 1,2. If CS) is quasi-isometric to CΣ) then S and Σ are homeomorphic. Proof. By Corollary 1.2 the automorphism groups of CS) and CΣ) are isomorphic. Ivanov s Theorem [7] tells us that, for these surfaces, the simplicial automorphism group is isomorphic to the mapping class group. Finally, it follows from work of Ivanov [8] that surfaces are characterized, up to homeomorphism, by their mapping class groups. The proof of Theorem 7.1 has the following ingredients: We begin by examining pairs of ending laminations. A pair of such is cobounded if all subsurface projections to strict subsurfaces of S are uniformly bounded. We prove:

3 CURVE COMPLEXES WITH CONNECTED BOUNDARY ARE RIGID 3 Theorem 5.2. Suppose that CS) is connected and φ: CS) CΣ) is a quasi-isometric embedding. Then the induced map on boundaries preserves the coboundedness of ending laminations. This places a restriction on quasi-isometric embeddings of curve complexes. For non-trivial examples see [15]. Theorem 5.2 where the connectedness of CS) is used in an essential fashion. Let MS) denote the marking complex of the surface S. The projection map p: MS) CS) is coarsely mapping class group equivariant. Theorem 6.1. Suppose that CS) is connected and φ: CS) CΣ) is a q quasi-isometric embedding. Then φ induces a map Φ: MS) MΣ) so that the diagram Φ MS) MΣ) π p CS) φ CΣ) commutes up to an additive error. Furthermore, the map Φ is coarsely Lipschitz: there is a constant Q so that for all markings m, m MS) we have d M µ, µ ) Q d M m, m ) + Q. where µ = Φm) and µ = Φm ). When φ: CS) CS) is a quasi-isometry we apply Theorem 6.1 in both directions. It follows that the induced map Φ is a quasi-isometry of marking complexes. We now turn to a recent theorem of Behrstock, Kleiner, Minsky and Mosher as well as Hamenstädt [5]: Theorem 1.5. Every quasi-isometry of MS) is bounded distance from the action of a homeomorphism of S. Theorem 7.1 now immediately follows from Theorem 6.1. Acknowledgements. This paper was sparked by a question of Slava Matveyev. 2. Background Hyperbolic spaces. A geodesic metric space X is Gromov hyperbolic if there is a hyperbolicity constant, δ X, so that every triangle is δ X slim: for every triple of vertices x, y, z X and every triple of geodesics [x, y], [y, z], [z, x] the δ X neighborhood of [x, y] [y, z] contains [z, x].

4 4 KASRA RAFI AND SAUL SCHLEIMER Suppose that X, d X ) and Y, d Y ) are geodesic metric spaces and f : X Y is a map. Then f is a q quasi-isometric embedding if for all x, y X we have 1 dy fx), fy)) q ) d X x, y) q d Y fx), fy)) + q. q Two maps f, g: X Y are d close if for all x X we find d Y fx), gx)) d. If f : X Y and g: Y X are q quasi-isometric embeddings so that f g and g f are q close to identity maps then f and g are q quasi-isometries. A quasi-isometric embedding of an interval [s, t] Z, with the usual metric, is called a quasi-geodesic. In hyperbolic spaces quasi-geodesics are stable: Lemma 2.1. Suppose that X, d X ) is δ X hyperbolic and let f : [s, t] X be a q quasi-geodesic. Then there is a constant M X = Mδ X, q) so that for any [p, q] [s, t] the image f[p, q]) and any geodesic [fp), fq)] have Hausdorff distance at most M X in X. See [3] for further background on hyperbolic spaces. Curve Complexes. Let S = S g,n be a surface, as before. Define the vertex set of the curve complex, CS), to be the set of simple closed curves in S that are essential and non-peripheral, considered up to isotopy. When the complexity ξs) = 3g 3 + n is at least two, distinct vertices a, b CS) are connected by an edge if they have disjoint representatives. When ξs) = 1 vertices are connected by an edge if there are representatives with geometric intersection exactly one for the once-holed torus or exactly two for the four-holed sphere. This gives the Farey graph. When S is an annulus the vertices are essential embedded arcs, considered up to isotopy fixing the boundary pointwise. Vertices are connected by an edge if there are representatives with disjoint interiors. For any vertices a, b CS) define the distance d S a, b) to be the minimal number of edges appearing in an edge path between a and b. If A and B are finite subsets of CS) then define d S A, B) = max{d S a, b) a A, b B}. If A is finite and B is infinite then define d S A, B) = min{d S A, b) b B}.

5 CURVE COMPLEXES WITH CONNECTED BOUNDARY ARE RIGID 5 Theorem 2.2 Masur-Minsky [12]). The complex of curves CS) is Gromov hyperbolic. We use δ S to denote the hyperbolicity constant of CS). Boundary of the curve complex. Let CS) be the Gromov boundary of CS). This is the space of quasi-geodesic rays in CS) modulo equivalence: two rays are equivalent if and only if they their images have bounded Hausdorff distance. Recall that PMLS) is the projectivized space of measured laminations on S. A measured lamination l is filling if every component S l is a disk or a once-punctured disk. Take FLS) PMLS) to be the set of filling laminations with the subspace topology. Define ELS), the space of ending laminations, to be the quotient of FLS) obtained by forgetting the measures. See [9] for an expansive discussion of laminations. Theorem 2.3 Klarreich [10]). There is a mapping class group equivariant homeomorphism between CS) and ELS). We define CS) = CS) CS). Note that CS) is not connected when S is an annulus, once-holed torus or four-holed sphere. On the other hand, Remark 1.1 gives many examples where CS) is connected. Subsurface projection. Suppose that Z S is an essential subsurface: Z is embedded, every component of Z is essential in S and Z is not a boundary parallel annulus. An essential subsurface Z S is strict if Z is not homeomorphic to S. We say that a curve cuts the subsurface Z if every representative intersects Z. If a curve b does not cut Z we say that b misses Z. Suppose now that a, b CS) both cut a strict subsurface Z. Define the subsurface projection distance d Z a, b) as follows: tighten a and b with respect to Z to realize the intersection number. Surger the arcs of a Z to obtain π Z a), a finite set of vertices in CZ). Notice that π Z a) has uniformly bounded diameter in CZ), independent of a, Z and S. Define d Z a, b) = d Z πz a), π Z b) ). We now recall the Lipschitz Projection Lemma [13, Lemma 2.3]: Lemma 2.4 Masur-Minsky). Suppose that {a i } N i=0 CS) is a path where every vertex cuts Z S. Then d Z a 0, a N ) 2N. For geodesics, more is true [13, Bounded Geodesic Image Theorem]:

6 6 KASRA RAFI AND SAUL SCHLEIMER Theorem 2.5 Masur-Minsky). There is a constant c 0 = c 0 S) with the following property. For any strict subsurface Z and any points a, b CS), if every vertex of the geodesic [a, b] cuts Z then d Z a, b) c 0. Marking complex. We now discuss the marking complex. A marking m is a pants decomposition basem) of S together with a transversal t a for each element a basem). To define t a, let X a be the non-pants component of S basem) {a}). Then any vertex of CX a ) not equal to a and meeting a minimally can serve as the transversal t a. Notice that diameter of m in CS) is at most 2. In [13], Masur and Minsky define elementary moves on markings. The set of markings and these moves define a locally finite graph. This is called the marking complex, MS). The projection map p: MS) CS), sending m to any element of basem), is coarsely mapping class group equivariant. Lemma 2.6 [13]). If m and m differ by an elementary move then for any subsurface Z of S, we have d Z m, m ) 4. A converse also holds: for every constant c there is a bound e = ec, S) with the following property. If d Z m, m ) c for all Z S then d M m, m ) e. That is, the markings m, m differ by at most e elementary moves Tight geodesics. The curve complex is locally infinite. Generally, there are infinitely many geodesics connecting a given pair of points in CS). In [13] the notion of a tight geodesic is introduced. This is a technical hypothesis which provides a certain kind of local finiteness. Lemma 2.8 below is the only property of tight geodesics used in this paper. Definition 2.7. A pair of curves, markings or laminations a, b are c cobounded if d Z a, b) c for all strict subsurfaces Z S cut by both a and b. Minsky shows [14, Lemma 5.14]) that if a, b CS) then there is a tight geodesic [a, b] CS) connecting them. All geodesics from here on are assumed to be tight. Lemma 2.8 Minsky). There is a constant c 1 = c 1 S) with the following property. Suppose that a, b) is a c cobounded pair in CS) and c [a, b] is a vertex of a tight geodesic. Then the pairs a, c) and c, b) are c + c 1 ) cobounded.

7 CURVE COMPLEXES WITH CONNECTED BOUNDARY ARE RIGID 7 3. Extension Lemmas We now examine how points of CS) can be connected to infinity. Lemma 3.1 Completion). There is a constant c 2 = c 2 S) with the following property. Suppose that b CS) and l CS). Suppose that the pair b, l) is c cobounded. Then there is a marking m so that b basem) and m, l) are c + c 2 ) cobounded. The existence of the marking m follows from the construction preceding [1, Lemma 6.1]. Lemma 3.2 Extension past a point). Suppose that a CS) and z CS). Then there is a point l CS) so that the vertex a lies in the one-neighborhood of [z, l]. Proof. Let k CS) be any lamination. Let Y be a component of S a that meets z. Pick any mapping class φ with support in Y and with translation distance at least 2c 0 + 2) in CY ). We have either d Y z, k) c 0 or d Y z, φk)) c 0. By Theorem 2.5, one or possibly both) of the geodesics [z, k] or [z, φk)] passes through the one-neighborhood of a. Proposition 3.3 Extension past a marking). There is a constant c 3 = c 3 S) such that if m is a marking on S, then there are laminations k and l such that the pairs k, l), k, m) and m, l) are c 3 cobounded and [k, l] passes through the one-neighborhood of m. Proof. There are only finitely many markings up to the action of the mapping class group. Fix a class of markings and pick a representative m. We will find a pseudo-anosov map with stable and unstable laminations k and l such that [k, l] passes through the one-neighborhood of m. This suffices to prove the proposition: for c 3 m) large enough the pairs k, l), k, m) and m, l) are c 3 m) cobounded. The same constant works for every marking in the class of m, by conjugation. We can then take c 3 to be the maximum of c 3 m) as m ranges over one representative from each classes. So choose any pseudo-anosov map φ with stable and unstable laminations k and l. Choose any point b [k, l ]. We may conjugate φ to φ, sending k, l, b ) to k, l, b), so that b is disjoint from some curve a basem). This finishes the proof. 4. The shell is connected Let Bz, r) be the ball of radius r about z CS). The difference of concentric balls is called a shell.

8 8 KASRA RAFI AND SAUL SCHLEIMER Proposition 4.1. Suppose that CS) is connected and d max{δ S, 1}. Then, for any r 0, the shell is connected. Bz, r + 2d) Bz, r 1) In what follows we only need the fact that CS) Bz, r 1) is connected. However, the shell has other interesting geometric properties. We will return to this subject in a future paper. One difficulty in the proof of Proposition 4.1 lies in pushing points of the inner boundary into the interior of the shell. To deal with this we use the fact that CS) has no dead ends. Lemma 4.2. Fix vertices z, a CS). Suppose d S z, a) = r. Then there is a vertex a CS) with d S a, a ) 2 and d S z, a ) = r + 1. Note that this implies that any geodesic [a, a ] lies outside of Bz, r 1). For a proof of Lemma 4.2, see Proposition 3.1 of [16]. Proof of Proposition 4.1. Fix z CS). Define a norm on CS) by: a, b z = inf { d S z, [a, b]) } where the infimum ranges over all geodesics [a, b]. For every k CS) let Uk) = {l CS) k, l z > r + 2d}. The set Uk) is a neighborhood of k, by the definition of the topology on the boundary [4]. Notice that if l Uk) then k Ul). Consider the set V k) of all l CS) so that there is a finite sequence k = k 0, k 1,...,k N = l with k i+1 Uk i ) for all i. Now, if l V k) then Ul) V k); thus V k) is open. If l is a limit point of V k) then there is a sequence l i V k) entering every neighborhood of l. So there is some i where l i Ul). Thus l Ul i ) V k) and we find that V k) is closed. Finally, as CS) is connected, V k) = CS). Let a, b be any vertices in the shell Bz, r + 2d) Bz, r 1). We connect a, via a path in the shell, to a vertex a so that d S z, a) = r+d. We do the same for b and b. This is always possible: points far from z may be pushed inward along geodesics and points near z may be pushed outward by Lemma 4.2. By Lemma 3.2 there are points k, l CS) so that there are geodesic rays [z, k] and [z, l] within distance one of a and b respectively. Connect k to l by a chain of points {k i } in V k), as above. Define a i [z, k i ] so that d S z, a i ) = R +d. Connect a to a 0 via a path of length at most 2.

9 CURVE COMPLEXES WITH CONNECTED BOUNDARY ARE RIGID 9 Notice that d S a i, [k i, k i+1 ]) > d δ. By hyperbolicity, the vertex a i is δ close to [z, k i+1 ]. Thus a i and a i+1 may be connected inside of the shell via a path of length at most 2δ. 5. Image of a cobounded geodesic is cobounded We begin with a simple lemma: Lemma 5.1. For every c and r there is a constant K with the following property: Let [a, b] CS) be a geodesic segment of length 2r with a, b) being c cobounded. Let z be the midpoint. Then there is a path P of length at most K connecting a to b outside of Bz, r 1). Proof. There are only finitely many such triples a, z, b), up the action of the mapping class group. This is because there are only finitely many hierarchies having total length less than a given upper bound; see [13]). The conclusion now follows from the connectedness of the shell Proposition 4.1). Note that any quasi-isometric embedding φ: CS) CΣ) extends to a one-to-one continuous map from CS) to CΣ). Theorem 5.2. There is a function H: N N, depending only on q and the topology of S and Σ, with the following property. Suppose k, l) is a pair of c cobounded laminations and φ: CS) CΣ) is a q quasiisometric embedding. Then κ = φk) and λ = φl) are Hc) cobounded Proof. For every strict subsurface Ω Σ we must bound d Ω κ, λ) from above. Now, if d Σ Ω, [κ, λ]) 2 then by Bounded Geodesic Image Theorem 2.5) we find d Ω κ, λ) c 0 = c 0 Σ) and we are done. Now suppose d Σ Ω, [κ, λ]) 1. Note that [κ, λ] lies in the M neighborhood of φ[k, l]), where M = M Σ is provided by Lemma 2.1. Choose a vertex z [k, l] so that d Σ φz), Ω) M + 1. Set r = qq + 2M + 3) + q. Thus d S y, z) r = d Σ φy), φz)) q + 2M + 3 = d Σ φy), Ω) q + M + 2. Let a and b be the intersections of [k, l] with Bz, r), chosen so that [k, a] and [b, l] meet Bz, r) at the vertices a and b only. Connect a to b via a path P of length K, outside of Bz, r 1), as provided by Lemma 5.1. Let α = φa) and β = φb). Now, any consecutive vertices of P are mapped by φ to vertices of CΣ) that are at distance at most 2q. Connecting these by geodesic segments gives a path Π from α to β.

10 10 KASRA RAFI AND SAUL SCHLEIMER k CS) κ CΣ) a b z α φz) β Ω l λ Figure 1. Points outside of an r ball about z are sent by φ outside of an q + M Σ + 2) ball about Ω. Note that Π has length at most 2qK. Since every vertex of φp) is q + M + 2) far from Ω every vertex of Π is M + 2) far from Ω. So every vertex of Π cuts Ω. It follows that d Ω α, β) 4qK, by Lemma 2.4. All that remains is to bound d Ω κ, α) and d Ω β, λ). It suffices, by the Bounded Geodesic Image Theorem, to show that every vertex of [κ, α] cuts Ω. The same will hold for [β, λ]. Every vertex of [κ, α] is M close to a vertex of φ[k, a]). But each of these is q + M + 2) far from Ω. This completes the proof. 6. The induced map on markings In this section, given a quasi-isometric embedding of one curve complex into another we construct a coarsely Lipschitz map between the associated marking complexes. Let MS) and MΣ) be the marking complexes of S and Σ respectively. Let p: MS) CS) and π: MΣ) CΣ) be maps that send a marking to some curve in that marking. Theorem 6.1. Suppose that CS) is connected and φ: CS) CΣ) is a q quasi-isometric embedding. Then φ induces a map Φ: MS) MΣ) so that the diagram Φ MS) MΣ) π p CS) φ CΣ)

11 CURVE COMPLEXES WITH CONNECTED BOUNDARY ARE RIGID 11 commutes up to an additive error. Furthermore, the map Φ is coarsely Lipschitz: there is a constant Q so that for all markings m, m MS) we have d M µ, µ ) Q d M m, m ) + Q. where µ = Φm) and µ = Φm ). Proof. For a marking m and laminations k and l, we say the triple m, k, l) is c admissible if d S m, [k, l] ) 3 and the pairs k, m), m, l) and k, l) are c cobounded. For c large enough and for every marking m, Proposition 3.3 shows that there exists a c-admissible triple m, k, l). From this data, we now construct an admissible triple µ, κ, λ) in Σ. Let α be any curve in φm) CΣ), κ = φk) and λ = φl). Note that 6.2) d Σ α, [κ, λ] ) 4q + MΣ, by the stability of quasi-geodesics. Also κ, λ) is a Hc) cobounded pair, by Theorem 5.2. Let β be a closest point projection of α to the geodesic [κ, λ]. By Lemma 2.8, the pair β, κ) is Hc)+c 1 ) cobounded. Using Lemma 3.1, there is a marking µ so that β baseµ) and µ, κ) are Hc) + c 1 + c 2 ) cobounded. Therefore, for C = 2Hc) + c 1 + c 2 the triple µ, κ, λ) is C admissible. Define Φm) to be equal to µ. λ α µ CΣ) κ µ λ α κ Figure 2. Markings µ and µ are bounded apart. We now prove Φ is coarsely well-defined and is coarsely Lipschitz. Assume that m and m differ by at most one elementary move and the triples m, k, l) and m, k, l ) are c-admissible. Let µ, κ, λ) and

12 12 KASRA RAFI AND SAUL SCHLEIMER µ, κ, λ ) be any corresponding C admissible triples in Σ, as constructed above. See Figure 2.) We must show that µ and µ differ by at most a bounded number of elementary moves. By second part Lemma 2.6, it suffices to prove: Claim. For every subsurface Ω Σ, d Ω µ, µ ) = O1). The first part Lemma 2.6 gives d S m, m ) 4. Deduce Therefore, d Σ φm), φm )) 5q. d Σ µ, µ ) d Σ µ, φm) ) + dσ φm), φm ) ) + d Σ φm ), µ ) ) 24q + M Σ + 2) + 5q. On the other hand, for any strict subsurface Ω Σ, we have d Ω µ, µ ) d Ω µ, κ) + d Ω κ, κ ) + d Ω κ, µ ). The first and third terms on the right are bounded by C. By Theorem 5.2, the second term is bounded by H2c + 4). This is because, for every strict subsurface Y S, d Y k, k ) d Y k, m) + d Y m, m ) + d Y m, k ) 2c + 4. This finishes the proof. 7. Rigidity of the curve complex Theorem 7.1. Suppose that CS) is connected. Then every quasiisometry of CS) is bounded distance from a simplicial automorphism of CS). Proof. Let f : CS) CS) be a q-quasi-isometry. By Theorem 6.1 there is a Q-quasi-isometry F : MS) MS) associated to f. By Theorem 1.5 the action of F is uniformly close to the induced action of some homeomorphism G: S S. That is, 7.2) d M Fm), Gm) ) = O1). Let g: CS) CS) be the simplicial automorphism induced by G. We need to show that f and g are equal in QICS)). Fix a curve a CS). We must show the distance d S fa), ga)) is bounded by a constant independent of the curve a. Choose a marking m containing a as a base curve. Note that d S a, pm)) 2, thus d S fa), fpm)) ) 3q. By Theorem 6.1, for every marking m MS), d S fpm), pfm)) ) = O1).

13 CURVE COMPLEXES WITH CONNECTED BOUNDARY ARE RIGID 13 From Equation 7.2 we have ) d S pfm), pgm) = O1). Also, ga) is a base curve of Gm), hence ) ) d S p Gm), ga) 2. These four equations imply that ) d S fa), ga) = O1). This finishes the proof. References [1] Jason A. Behrstock. Asymptotic geometry of the mapping class group and Teichmüller space. Geom. Topol., 10: electronic), arxiv:math/ [2] Gregory Bell and Koji Fujiwara. The asymptotic dimension of a curve graph is finite. arxiv:math/ [3] Martin R. Bridson and André Haefliger. Metric spaces of non-positive curvature. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, [4] Mikhael Gromov. Hyperbolic groups. In Essays in group theory, pages Springer, New York, [5] Ursula Hamenstaedt. Geometry of the mapping class groups III: Quasiisometric rigidity. arxiv:math/ [6] Willam J. Harvey. Boundary structure of the modular group. In Riemann surfaces and related topics: Proceedings of the 1978 Stony Brook Conference State Univ. New York, Stony Brook, N.Y., 1978), pages , Princeton, N.J., Princeton Univ. Press. [7] Nikolai V. Ivanov. Mapping class groups. In Handbook of geometric topology, pages North-Holland, Amsterdam, [8] Nikolai V. Ivanov Personal communication. [9] Michael Kapovich. Hyperbolic manifolds and discrete groups. Birkhäuser Boston Inc., Boston, MA, [10] Erica Klarreich. The boundary at infinity of the curve complex and the relative Teichmüller space. [11] Chris Leininger and Saul Schleimer. Connectivity of the space of ending laminations. In preparation. [12] Howard A. Masur and Yair N. Minsky. Geometry of the complex of curves. I. Hyperbolicity. Invent. Math., 1381): , arxiv:math/ [13] Howard A. Masur and Yair N. Minsky. Geometry of the complex of curves. II. Hierarchical structure. Geom. Funct. Anal., 104): , arxiv:math/ [14] Yair N. Minsky. The classification of Kleinian surface groups, I: Models and bounds. arxiv:math/ [15] Kasra Rafi and Saul Schleimer. Covers and the curve complex, arxiv:math/ [16] Saul Schleimer. The end of the curve complex. arxiv:math/

14 14 KASRA RAFI AND SAUL SCHLEIMER address: address: