Skip to main content

Kirill Y. Lazebnik

Title: Assistant Professor

Department: Mathematics

College: College of Science

Curriculum Vitae

Curriculum Vitae Link

Education

  • PhD, Stony Brook University, 2017
    Major: Mathematics

Current Scheduled Teaching

No current or future courses scheduled.

Texas Education Code 51.974 (HB 2504) requires each institution of higher education to make available to the public, a syllabus for undergraduate lecture courses offered for credit by the institution.

Previous Scheduled Teaching

MATH 6110.001Topics in AnalysisSpring 2024 SPOT
MATH 3740.001Vector CalculusFall 2023 Syllabus SPOT
MATH 5420.001Complex AnalysisSpring 2023 SPOT
MATH 5410.001Complex AnalysisFall 2022 SPOT
MATH 3740.001Vector CalculusFall 2022 Syllabus SPOT
MATH 4610.001ProbabilitySpring 2022 Syllabus SPOT
Texas Education Code 51.974 (HB 2504) requires each institution of higher education to make available to the public, a syllabus for undergraduate lecture courses offered for credit by the institution.

Published Intellectual Contributions

    Journal Article

  • Burkart, J., Lazebnik, K.Y. (2023). Interpolation of Power Mappings. Revista Matemática Iberoamericana. 39 (3) 1181–1200.
  • Bishop, C.J., Lazebnik, K.Y., Urbanski, M. (2023). Equilateral Triangulations and The Postcritical Dynamics of Meromorphic Functions. Mathematische Annalen. 387 1777–1818.
  • Lazebnik, K.Y., Makarov, N.G., Mukherjee, S. (2022). Bers Slices in Families of Univalent Maps. Mathematische Zeitschrift. (300) 2771–2808. Springer.
  • Lazebnik, K.Y. (2021). Quadrature Domains and the Real Quadratic Family. Journal of Conformal Geometry and Dynamics. (25) 104-125.
  • Lazebnik, K.Y., Makarov, N., Mukherjee, S. (2021). Univalent Polynomials and Hubbard Trees. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society. (374) 4839-4893.
  • Lazebnik, K.Y. (2021). Oscillating Wandering Domains for Functions with Escaping Singular Values. Journal of the London Mathematical Society. 103 1643-1665.
  • Bishop, C.J., Lazebnik, K.Y. (2019). Prescribing the Postsingular Dynamics of Meromorphic Functions. Mathematische Annalen. 375 (3-4) 1761–1782.
  • Fagella, N., Jarque, X., Lazebnik, K.Y. (2019). Univalent Wandering domains in the Eremenko-Lyubich Class. Journal d'Analyse Mathematique. 139 (1) 369-395.
  • Lazebnik, K.Y. (2017). Several Constructions in the Eremenko-Lyubich class. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications. 448 (1) 611–632.
  • Mike, B., Lazebnik, K.Y., Rault, P., Singer, J. (2012). On invariant area formulas and lattice point bounds for the intersection of hyperbolic and elliptic regions. Journal of Combinatorics and Number Theory.
  • Catral, M., Cepek, A., Huynh, M., Peters, T., Lazebnik, K.Y., Young, M. (2012). Zero forcing number, maximum nullity, and path cover number of subdivided graphs. The Electronic Journal of Linear Algebra. 23

Contracts, Grants and Sponsored Research

    Grant - Research

  • Lazebnik, K.Y. (Principal), "Approximation Theory and Complex Dynamics," sponsored by National Science Foundation, Federal, $180328 Funded. (2023 - 2026).
  • Allaart, P. (Principal), Lazebnik, K.Y. (Co-Principal), Kawamura, K. (Co-Principal), "Conference: Dynamical Systems and Fractal Geometry," sponsored by National Science Foundation, Federal, $32017 Funded. (2024 - 2025).
  • Lazebnik, K.Y. (Principal), "UNT Junior Faculty Summer Research Support Award," sponsored by University of North Texas, University of North Texas, $5000 Funded. (2022 - 2022).
  • Lazebnik, K.Y. (Principal), "AMS-Simons Travel Grant," sponsored by Simons Foundation, Private, $5000 Funded. (2018 - 2022).
,
Overall
Summative Rating		 Challenge and
Engagement Index		 Response Rate

out of 5
out of 7		 %
of
students responded
  • Overall Summative Rating (median):
    This rating represents the combined responses of students to the four global summative items and is presented to provide an overall index of the class’s quality. Overall summative statements include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 5 = Excellent, 3 = Good, and 1= Very poor):
    • The course as a whole was
    • The course content was
    • The instructor’s contribution to the course was
    • The instructor’s effectiveness in teaching the subject matter was
  • Challenge and Engagement Index:
    This rating combines student responses to several SPOT items relating to how academically challenging students found the course to be and how engaged they were. Challenge and Engagement Index items include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 7 = Much higher, 4 = Average, and 1 = Much lower):
    • Do you expect your grade in this course to be
    • The intellectual challenge presented was
    • The amount of effort you put into this course was
    • The amount of effort to succeed in this course was
    • Your involvement in course (doing assignments, attending classes, etc.) was
CLOSE