Major references

[JmsNxn]

https://math.eretrandre.org/publications.html

...
I know mphlee, who's much more organized than me, has a list of major publications in the scope of tetration. He could be more help here, lol.

Thank you very much. I'll quote your whole text and attribute it to you.
Have you seen https://ingalidakis.com/math/IERefs.html? He might let me direct link to the page. I will also be listing Galidakis' work.

Yes! I have read Galidakis--from what I remember his infinite composition theorem was for \(f : \mathbb{D} \to \mathbb{D}\) where \(\mathbb{D}\) is the unit disk. I remember reading some of his work, but he seemed to only have "half-results" while still being fairly right. Him and John Gill are kind of the only two good sources for infinite compositions. And much of my work is just cementing and building a stronger foundation of what they saw... A lot of infinite compositions does not have the \(\epsilon/\delta\) work you'd like to see. Especially in a professional manner. I pride myself with being the first to rigorously prove a lot of the foundations--what Galidakis seems to take for granted in his expansions. Because of this, a lot of their problems and results, are non problems if you understand \(\Omega ... \bullet z\) notation. Additionally everything will converge. I don't talk about these things a lot here, because they aren't directly related to tetration. But I highly suggest:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.05111

Which deals with infinite compositions in the general sense

https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.09292

Which deals with infinite compositions in the degenerate case (this is also the beta method case)--while additionally takes infinite compositions while taking infinite compositions.

If you like calculus, then this is the infinite composition representation of Picard and Lindelof's theorem (John Gill did this first, I just did it with more notation, and a stricter dialogue):

https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.04248

---

If you want to learn about the history and players of infinite compositions. I can definitely help there, Daniel. I guess, for me, it's just too indirectly related to tetration--so I don't post these results here.