The Dirichlet eigenvalue counting function of the lattice fractal sprays Ω(k1,k2)⊂R2\Omega(k_1,k_2)\subset\mathbb{R}^2 built from the Koch snowflake admits, by Kombrink–Schmidt (2023, published 2025), an asymptotic expansion whose poles lie strictly left of the critical line ℜ(z)=−δ/2\Re(z)=-\delta/2, where δ=log⁡4/log⁡3\delta=\log 4/\log 3 is the boundary dimension, with remainder o(tδ/2+γ)o(t^{\delta/2+\gamma}) for every γ>0\gamma>0. Whether the two-sided Fourier–Laplace transform driving the renewal analysis extends meromorphically across that line, and whether z=−δ/2z=-\delta/2 is a genuine pole — heuristically, whether the counting function has a second term of order exactly tδ/2t^{\delta/2} — is undetermined: boundedness of the generator-level remainder does not suffice, since admissible oscillatory remainder components create lacunary series with dense singularities on the line. The open problem asks for a classification of the fine-scale generator-remainder behaviours (including the arithmetic constraints coming from the lattice constant a=(log⁡3)/2a=(\log 3)/2) that are necessary and sufficient for meromorphic continuation of the transform and for the presence of a genuine pole at −δ/2-\delta/2, together with the corresponding sharp second-term asymptotics for the counting function.

Background

For a bounded planar domain Ω\Omega, let ND(Ω,t)N_D(\Omega,t) denote the Dirichlet eigenvalue counting function: the number of eigenvalues (counted with multiplicity) of −Δ-\Delta on Ω\Omega with zero boundary conditions that do not exceed tt. Weyl's law gives ND(Ω,t)=vol2(Ω)4πt+o(t)N_D(\Omega,t)=\frac{\mathrm{vol}_2(\Omega)}{4\pi}t+o(t), and for smooth boundary a second term of order t\sqrt{t} proportional to the boundary length. Berry conjectured (the Weyl–Berry conjecture) that for rough boundaries the second term is governed by the fractal geometry of ∂Ω\partial\Omega; Lapidus's modified Weyl–Berry conjecture predicts, more precisely, that if ∂Ω\partial\Omega has Minkowski dimension dd — the decay exponent of the area of the inner ε\varepsilon-neighbourhood Ω−ε:={x∈Ω:dist(x,∂Ω)<ε}\Omega^{-\varepsilon}:=\{x\in\Omega:\mathrm{dist}(x,\partial\Omega)<\varepsilon\} as ε→0\varepsilon\to0 — and positive finite Minkowski content (the limit of ε−(2−d)vol2(Ω−ε)\varepsilon^{-(2-d)}\mathrm{vol}_2(\Omega^{-\varepsilon})), then a second term of order td/2t^{d/2} should appear. Lapidus proved an early partial resolution, Lapidus–Pomerance established the one-dimensional case (fractal strings) exactly, and the same authors showed the modified conjecture is false in dimensions ≥2\ge 2; for planar domains with genuinely fractal boundary, the existence and shape of a sharp second term remains open in essentially all nontrivial cases.

A fractal spray is a countable disjoint union of rescaled copies of a fixed open set GG, called the generator, the scalings being those of an iterated function system (IFS), i.e. a finite family of contracting similarities. If all contraction ratios are integer powers of a common e−ae^{-a}, the IFS is called lattice, with lattice constant aa. Kombrink and Schmidt study lattice sprays Ω(k1,k2)⊂R2\Omega(k_1,k_2)\subset\mathbb{R}^2 with (k1,k2)∈{0,…,6}2(k_1,k_2)\in\{0,\dots,6\}^2, built from the Koch snowflake KK of base length 1, whose boundary has Hausdorff and Minkowski dimension δ=log⁡4/log⁡3≈1.26\delta=\log 4/\log 3\approx 1.26. The base case Ω(0,0)\Omega(0,0) arises via a 12-map IFS with six maps of ratio 1/3=e−2a1/3=e^{-2a} and six of ratio 3−1/2=e−a3^{-1/2}=e^{-a}, so a=(log⁡3)/2a=(\log 3)/2, and with generator KK; for (k1,k2)≠(0,0)(k_1,k_2)\neq(0,0) one replaces k1k_1 of the ratio-1/31/3 maps by six maps of ratio 1/91/9 each and k2k_2 of the ratio-3−1/23^{-1/2} maps by six maps of ratio 1/(93)1/(9\sqrt{3}) each, obtaining an IFS with 12+5(k1+k2)12+5(k_1+k_2) maps whose generator is a union of 1+k1+k21+k_1+k_2 Koch snowflakes of different base lengths, all similar to KK. Since NDN_D is additive over disjoint unions and scales as ND(αG,t)=ND(G,α2t)N_D(\alpha G,t)=N_D(G,\alpha^2 t), the counting function of each generator reduces to that of KK, and for every (k1,k2)(k_1,k_2) the spray's counting function is a renewal-type sum of shifted copies of the generator counting function g(t):=ND(K,et)g(t):=N_D(K,e^t). A companion result of the authors gives two-sided bounds on the generator remainder: g(t)=vol2(K)4πet+M(t)etδ/2g(t)=\frac{\mathrm{vol}_2(K)}{4\pi}e^t+M(t)e^{t\delta/2} with MM bounded (explicit constants C−=−1481C^-=-1481, C+=281.5⋅103C^+=281.5\cdot 10^3 from Dirichlet–Neumann bracketing and inner Minkowski-content estimates).

The analysis proceeds through the two-sided Fourier–Laplace transform of the counting function sampled on the lattice 2aZ+β2a\mathbb{Z}+\beta (with β∈[0,2a)\beta\in[0,2a) a phase parameter):

N^β(z):=∑ℓ∈Ze2aℓz ND(Ω,e2aℓ+β),\hat N_\beta(z):=\sum_{\ell\in\mathbb{Z}} e^{2a\ell z}\, N_D\bigl(\Omega,e^{2a\ell+\beta}\bigr),

which converges for ℜ(z)<−1\Re(z)<-1 and, on the strength of the boundedness of MM, extends meromorphically to the half-plane C−δ/2={z:ℜ(z)<−δ/2}\mathbb{C}_{-\delta/2}=\{z:\Re(z)<-\delta/2\}, with poles among the complex dimensions ZC={z:∑iri−2z=1, ℑ(z)∈[0,π/a)}Z_C=\{z:\sum_{i} r_i^{-2z}=1,\ \Im(z)\in[0,\pi/a)\} determined by the IFS ratios rir_i. Transferring these poles back to the counting function yields their Theorem 4.1: for every γ>0\gamma>0,

ND(Ω(k1,k2),et)=vol2(Ω(k1,k2))4πet−∑z∈ZC, ℜ(z)<−δ/2[2a Qβ(t)(z)] e−2a⌊t/2a⌋z+o(et(δ/2+γ)),N_D\bigl(\Omega(k_1,k_2),e^t\bigr)=\tfrac{\mathrm{vol}_2(\Omega(k_1,k_2))}{4\pi}e^t-\sum_{z\in Z_C,\ \Re(z)<-\delta/2}\bigl[2a\, Q_{\beta(t)}(z)\bigr]\, e^{-2a\lfloor t/2a\rfloor z}+o\bigl(e^{t(\delta/2+\gamma)}\bigr),

with coefficients bounded and oscillatory in β(t)=2a{t/2a}\beta(t)=2a\{t/2a\}. All poles strictly left of the critical line ℜ(z)=−δ/2\Re(z)=-\delta/2 are captured; the method stops at that line because the summand involving MM is only controlled by the geometric factor (1−e2a(z+δ/2))−1(1-e^{2a(z+\delta/2)})^{-1}, and whether z=−δ/2z=-\delta/2 is a genuine pole — which would correspond to a second term of order exactly tδ/2t^{\delta/2} in NDN_D — depends on the fine behaviour of MM that the two-sided bounds do not determine. Notably, −δ/2∉ZC-\delta/2\notin Z_C (one checks ∑iriδ=6⋅(1/3)δ+6⋅3−δ/2=9/2≠1\sum_i r_i^{\delta}=6\cdot(1/3)^{\delta}+6\cdot 3^{-\delta/2}=9/2\ne 1), so a pole at −δ/2-\delta/2 could only originate from the generator remainder itself, making the question genuinely spectral rather than geometric. By contrast, the companion problem for the inner ε\varepsilon-parallel volume of the same sprays is completely settled in the same paper, including the critical-line pole at 2−log⁡4/log⁡32-\log 4/\log 3, because the generator's tube function is explicitly known from the Lapidus–Pearse tube formula for the Koch snowflake curve.

Problem Statement

For the lattice Koch-snowflake sprays Ω(k1,k2)⊂R2\Omega(k_1,k_2)\subset\mathbb{R}^2 of Kombrink–Schmidt ((k1,k2)∈{0,…,6}2(k_1,k_2)\in\{0,\dots,6\}^2; built from Koch snowflakes similar to the snowflake KK of base length 1, boundary dimension δ=log⁡4/log⁡3\delta=\log 4/\log 3, lattice constant a=(log⁡3)/2a=(\log 3)/2), with generator Dirichlet counting function g(t)=ND(K,et)=vol2(K)4πet+M(t)etδ/2g(t)=N_D(K,e^t)=\frac{\mathrm{vol}_2(K)}{4\pi}e^t+M(t)e^{t\delta/2} and bounded remainder MM, classify the fine-scale behaviour of MM — and of any additional oscillatory components of gg that are admissible, i.e. consistent with the two-sided bounds established for the generator remainder (Theorem 3.2: MM bounded, with the explicit constants C−=−1481C^-=-1481, C+=281.5⋅103C^+=281.5\cdot 10^3; the heuristic component constructed in Remark 4.2 below lies in this class) — that determines the analytic structure of the two-sided Fourier–Laplace transform N^β(z)=∑ℓ∈Ze2aℓzND(Ω(k1,k2),e2aℓ+β)\hat N_\beta(z)=\sum_{\ell\in\mathbb{Z}}e^{2a\ell z}N_D(\Omega(k_1,k_2),e^{2a\ell+\beta}) on and beyond the critical line ℜ(z)=−δ/2\Re(z)=-\delta/2, as follows:

(i) give necessary and sufficient conditions on the generator-level remainder under which N^β\hat N_\beta admits a meromorphic extension across the line ℜ(z)=−δ/2\Re(z)=-\delta/2, for every phase β∈[0,2a)\beta\in[0,2a) (extendability propagates across phases, so this quantification is effectively uniform in β\beta);

(ii) give conditions under which z=−δ/2z=-\delta/2 is a genuine pole of that extension — heuristically, whether ND(Ω(k1,k2),t)N_D(\Omega(k_1,k_2),t) possesses a second asymptotic term of order exactly tδ/2t^{\delta/2} (with a multiplicatively periodic coefficient, i.e. periodic in log⁡t\log t), or whether the remainder is of smaller order, or no meromorphic continuation exists at all;

(iii) derive, for each classified remainder behaviour, the corresponding sharp limits on the possible secondary exponents and coefficient growth in the expansion of ND(Ω(k1,k2),t)N_D(\Omega(k_1,k_2),t) relative to the currently known remainder o(tδ/2+γ)o(t^{\delta/2+\gamma}) valid for every γ>0\gamma>0.

The classification must account for the arithmetic obstruction exhibited in Remark 4.2 of the source: an admissible oscillatory component A(t)etδ/2A(t)e^{t\delta/2} of gg with A(t)=1/⌊t/a⌋A(t)=1/\lfloor t/a\rfloor when ⌊t/a⌋\lfloor t/a\rfloor is a power of two and A(t)=0A(t)=0 otherwise generates in the sampled transform the lacunary series ∑m≥0(ea(z+δ/2))2m/2m\sum_{m\ge 0}\bigl(e^{a(z+\delta/2)}\bigr)^{2^m}/2^m — a power series in ea(z+δ/2)e^{a(z+\delta/2)} whose nonzero terms occur only at the widely spaced exponents 2m2^m — and, were a meromorphic extension beyond ℜ(z)=−δ/2\Re(z)=-\delta/2 to exist, some phase-shifted transform would also contain the coefficient-one series ∑m≥0(ea(z+δ/2))2m\sum_{m\ge 0}\bigl(e^{a(z+\delta/2)}\bigr)^{2^m}, which diverges at every z=−δ/2+2πiq/(a 2p)z=-\delta/2+2\pi i q/(a\,2^p) (p∈Zp\in\mathbb{Z}, q∈Nq\in\mathbb{N}) — a set dense on the line ℜ(z)=−δ/2\Re(z)=-\delta/2 — so no meromorphic extension beyond the line, and in particular no pole at −δ/2-\delta/2, can be concluded from boundedness of the generator remainder alone. The research target comprises (a) the general classification (i)–(iii) over admissible remainders, including the diophantine/lattice-arithmetic conditions arising from aa and the scaling ratio; (b) a resolution of the instance question for the actual Koch snowflake generator — does the true remainder MM of ND(K,⋅)N_D(K,\cdot) permit meromorphic continuation, and is −δ/2-\delta/2 a genuine pole?

References

  1. S. Kombrink and L. Schmidt, Eigenvalue Counting Functions and Parallel Volumes for Examples of Fractal Sprays Generated by the Koch Snowflake, in: Recent Developments in Fractals and Related Fields, Trends in Mathematics, Birkhäuser/Springer, 2025. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-80453-3_10, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-80453-3_10 (preprint arXiv:2312.12331, https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.12331)
  2. S. Kombrink and L. Schmidt, On bounds for the remainder term of counting functions of the Neumann Laplacian on domains with fractal boundary, preprint (2023). arXiv:2312.12308, https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.12308
  3. M. L. Lapidus and E. P. J. Pearse, A tube formula for the Koch snowflake curve, with applications to complex dimensions, Journal of the London Mathematical Society (2) 74 (2006), 397–414. DOI: 10.1112/s0024610706022988, https://doi.org/10.1112/s0024610706022988
  4. M. L. Lapidus and C. Pomerance, The Riemann Zeta-Function and the One-Dimensional Weyl-Berry Conjecture for Fractal Drums, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society (3) 66 (1993), 41–69. DOI: 10.1112/plms/s3-66.1.41, https://doi.org/10.1112/plms/s3-66.1.41
  5. M. L. Lapidus and C. Pomerance, Counterexamples to the modified Weyl–Berry conjecture on fractal drums, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 119 (1996), 167–178. DOI: 10.1017/s0305004100074053, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305004100074053
  6. M. L. Lapidus, Fractal Drum, Inverse Spectral Problems for Elliptic Operators and a Partial Resolution of the Weyl-Berry Conjecture, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 325 (1991), 465–529. DOI: 10.1090/s0002-9947-1991-0994168-5, https://doi.org/10.1090/s0002-9947-1991-0994168-5
  7. M. L. Lapidus, E. P. J. Pearse, and S. Winter, Pointwise tube formulas for fractal sprays and self-similar tilings with arbitrary generators, Advances in Mathematics 227 (2011), 1349–1398. DOI: 10.1016/j.aim.2011.03.004, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2011.03.004
  8. M. L. Lapidus and M. van Frankenhuijsen, Fractal Geometry, Complex Dimensions and Zeta Functions, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer, 2006. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-35208-4, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35208-4
  9. M. Kesseböhmer and S. Kombrink, A complex Ruelle-Perron-Frobenius theorem for infinite Markov shifts with applications to renewal theory, Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems, Series S 10 (2017), 335–352. DOI: 10.3934/dcdss.2017016, https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdss.2017016
  10. R. S. Strichartz and S. C. Wiese, Spectral Properties of Laplacians on Snowflake Domains and Filled Julia Sets, Experimental Mathematics (2020). DOI: 10.1080/10586458.2020.1743213, https://doi.org/10.1080/10586458.2020.1743213
  11. S. Gómez, D. Hewett, and A. Moiola, A discontinuous Galerkin method with fractal elements, preprint (2026). arXiv:2604.11093, https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.11093
  12. S. van Golden, S. Kombrink, and T. Samuel, On the geometry of generalised Koch snowflakes, preprint (2026). arXiv:2601.07371, https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.07371