Assuming the existence of a monster model, tameness, and continuity of nonsplitting in an abstract elementary class (AEC), we extend known superstability results: let $\mu>\operatorname {LS}(\mathbf {K})$ be a regular stability cardinal and let $\chi $ be the local character of $\mu $ -nonsplitting. The following holds: 1.When $\mu $ -nonforking is restricted to $(\mu,\geq \chi )$ -limit models ordered by universal extensions, it enjoys invariance, monotonicity, uniqueness, existence, extension, and continuity. It also has local character $\chi $. This generalizes (...) Vasey’s result [37, Corollary 13.16] which assumed $\mu $ -superstability to obtain same properties but with local character $\aleph _0$.2.There is $\lambda \in [\mu,h(\mu ))$ such that if $\mathbf {K}$ is stable in every cardinal between $\mu $ and $\lambda $, then $\mathbf {K}$ has $\mu $ -symmetry while $\mu $ -nonforking in (1) has symmetry. In this case:(a) $\mathbf {K}$ has the uniqueness of $(\mu,\geq \chi )$ -limit models: if $M_1,M_2$ are both $(\mu,\geq \chi )$ -limit over some $M_0\in K_{\mu }$, then $M_1\cong _{M_0}M_2$ ;(b)any increasing chain of $\mu ^+$ -saturated models of length $\geq \chi $ has a $\mu ^+$ -saturated union. These generalize [31] and remove the symmetry assumption in [10, 38].Under $(<\mu )$ -tameness, the conclusions of (1), (2)(a)(b) are equivalent to $\mathbf {K}$ having the $\chi $ -local character of $\mu $ -nonsplitting.Grossberg and Vasey [18, 38] gave eventual superstability criteria for tame AECs with a monster model. We remove the high cardinal threshold and reduce the cardinal jump between equivalent superstability criteria. We also add two new superstability criteria to the list: a weaker version of solvability and the boundedness of the U-rank. (shrink)

We introduce the notion of a w-good \-frame which is a weakening of Shelah’s notion of a good \-frame. Existence of a w-good \-frame implies existence of a model of size \. Tameness and amalgamation imply extension of a w-good \-frame to larger models. As an application we show:Theorem 0.1. Suppose\. If \ = \mathbb {I} = 1 \le \mathbb {I} < 2^{\lambda ^{++}}\)and\is\\)-tame, then\.The proof presented clarifies some of the details of the main theorem of Shelah and avoids using (...) the heavy set-theoretic machinery of Shelah by replacing it with tameness. (shrink)