Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 35 references

Kinetic-fluid boundary layers and acoustic limit for the Boltzmann equation with general Maxwell reflection boundary condition

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read For hard-sphere Boltzmann gases in a half-space with Maxwell reflection at any accommodation coefficient $0<\alpha\leq 1$, the paper proves convergence to the acoustic system with slip boundary condition $u_{1,3}=0$, at rate…

desk verdict The α=O(1) acoustic limit is a real new result, but the proof is conditional on unpublished Knudsen-layer estimates and omitted construction of high-order terms; worth refereeing, not accepting as is. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.08707 v1 pith:AWDIFMTP submitted 2025-01-15 math.AP

Ning Jiang , Yulong Wu This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35Q2035B2582C4076P05
keywords BoltzmannequationacousticlimitMaxwellreflectionboundaryconditionaccommodationcoefficientKnudsenlayerviscousHilbertexpansionhardspherecollisions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proves that, for hard-sphere gases near a flat wall, the scaled Boltzmann equation with Maxwell reflection converges to the linear acoustic system when the accommodation coefficient $\alpha$ lies anywhere in $(0,1]$. Previous classical-solution results handled only specular reflection ($\alpha=0$) or almost specular reflection ($\alpha=O(\sqrt{\varepsilon})$), and the boundary-layer mechanism here is genuinely different. The construction combines an interior Hilbert expansion with a viscous layer of thickness $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ and a Knudsen layer of thickness $\varepsilon$, and the Knudsen layer's decay at infinity supplies the boundary conditions that the acoustic system alone cannot provide. The result is a smooth-solution analogue of the renormalized acoustic-limit work [25], and the first rigorous justification of Sone's formal boundary-layer analysis for $\alpha=O(1)$.

What carries the argument

The expansion is organized at three scales: interior terms $F_k$ in $x$, viscous-layer terms $F^b_k$ in $\zeta=x_3/\sqrt{\varepsilon}$, and Knudsen-layer terms $F^{bb}_k$ in $\xi=x_3/\varepsilon$. The load-bearing object is the linear Knudsen-layer system (2.36)--(2.37), $v_3\partial_\xi f^{bb}_k + L f^{bb}_k = S$, with the Maxwell boundary operator $K$; its solutions are built from fundamental solutions $\varphi^{(1)}_1$ and $\varphi^{(0)}_1$ whose existence fixes slip coefficients $b_1,c_1$ and hence the boundary conditions for the fluid and viscous layers. Lemma 3.3 supplies pointwise exponential-in-$\xi$ estimates for these layers for all $0<\alpha<1$, and the remainder equation (2.46) is controlled by $L^2$ energy estimates plus weighted $L^\infty$ estimates along backward characteristics.

What would settle it

Solve the linear half-space Knudsen-layer problem (3.4) for a fixed $\alpha$ in $(0,1)$, for example $\alpha=1/2$, with a smooth compactly supported source $s$ and boundary data $g$ satisfying the solvability condition, and test whether the solution decays exponentially in $\xi$ with rate $\sigma_0>0$ and whether the slip coefficients $(b_1,b_2,c)$ are finite; a single $\alpha$ with non-exponential decay or no finite slip coefficients would disprove the key input behind Theorem 1.1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.1: for $0<\alpha\leq 1$, hard-sphere collisions, and well-prepared initial data, the Boltzmann equation (1.1) with Maxwell reflection (1.2) has a unique solution on $[0,\tau]$ of the expanded form (2.45), and the remainder satisfies $\sup_t(\|f_{R,\varepsilon}\|_2^2 + \sqrt{\varepsilon}^3 \|h_{R,\varepsilon}\|_\infty) \leq C$. Consequently $F_\varepsilon - \mu - \sqrt{\varepsilon}F_1$ tends to zero in the stated norms at rate $\varepsilon^{1/4}$, where $(\rho_1,u_1,\theta_1)$ solves the acoustic system (2.10) with the slip-type boundary condition $u_{1,3}=0$. The decisive mechanism is that, for $\alpha=O(1)$, the Knudsen-layer problem has only one algebraic solvability condition, yet the requirement that the layer vanish at infinity imposes four boundary conditions; the extra conditions are absorbed by a viscous Prandtl-type layer, whose boundary condition turns out to be Dirichlet rather than Neumann (the $\alpha=0$ case) or Robin (the $\alpha=O(\sqrt{\varepsilon})$ case).

Load-bearing premise

The entire construction leans on Lemma 3.3, imported without proof from the unpublished manuscript [22]: pointwise exponential decay estimates for the Knudsen-layer problem for every $0<\alpha<1$; if those estimates fail for some $\alpha$ in that range, the boundary-layer expansion and the theorem collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every small $\varepsilon$, a unique solution exists on the fixed time interval $[0,\tau]$ and collapses onto $\mu+\sqrt{\varepsilon}F_1$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$, so the acoustic system with $u_{1,3}=0$ is the effective macroscopic model.
  • The rate $\varepsilon^{1/4}$ is natural: the $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$-thick viscous layer contributes $L^2$ norm of order $\varepsilon^{1/4}$, so no faster $L^2$ rate is possible without changing norms.
  • The boundary condition for the viscous layer is Dirichlet, completing the picture: Neumann for $\alpha=0$, Robin for $\alpha=O(\sqrt{\varepsilon})$, and Dirichlet for $\alpha=O(1)$.
  • At order $\sqrt{\varepsilon}^2$ and higher, Knudsen-layer corrections are needed and constructed with exponential decay, giving purely boundary-controlled slip effects.
  • This is the first classical-solution justification of Sone's formal acoustic boundary-layer analysis for $\alpha=O(1)$ in a compressible fluid model with boundary.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same three-layer ansatz should extend to general cutoff collision kernels; the paper states this is standard from the techniques in [19] and [26], so a direct check is to rerun Proposition 3.5 with general kernels.
  • As $\alpha$ crosses from $O(1)$ to $o(1)$, the Dirichlet boundary condition should deform into the Robin or Neumann conditions of earlier works; quantifying this transition would require treating the singular limit $\alpha\to 0$, which the paper excludes.
  • Because the leading viscous layer satisfies linear heat-type equations here, the corresponding Euler limit with $\alpha=O(1)$ would need the nonlinear compressible Prandtl equations, whose well-posedness the paper identifies as open; the acoustic result is the test case that avoids that obstruction.
  • The $\varepsilon^{1/4}$ rate is an $L^2$ artifact of the layer's thickness; a sharper $\varepsilon^{1/2}$ statement would require weighted or pointwise norms that track the layer, a refinement not attempted here.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Formalized claims in Lean

  1. Claim #1: The central claim is Theorem 1.1: for $0<\alpha\leq 1$, hard-sphere collisions, and well-prepared initial data, the Boltzmann equation (1.1) with Maxwell reflection (1.2) has a unique solution on $[0,\tau]$ of the expanded form (2.45), and the remainder satisfies $\sup_t(\|f_{R,\varepsilon}\|_2^2 + \sqrt{\varepsilon}^3 \|h_{R,\varepsilon}\|_\infty) \leq C$. Consequently $F_\varepsilon - \mu - \sqr

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proves an acoustic limit from the scaled Boltzmann equation with hard-sphere collisions and Maxwell reflection boundary condition in the half-space, for accommodation coefficient α in the full range 0<α≤1. The proof is based on a Hilbert expansion with viscous and Knudsen boundary layers, truncated at order ε^3, leaving a remainder f_R,ε whose L2 and weighted L∞ norms are controlled uniformly in ε. The main advertised novelty is the treatment of α=O(1), for which the Knudsen-layer mechanism differs from the previously studied cases α=0 and α=o(1). The paper states the main theorem (Theorem 1.1) and derives boundary conditions for acoustic system (2.31) and for the viscous layer, with slip coefficients b1,c1,b2,c2 determined by Milne-type problems (2.43)-(2.44). The final convergence rate is ε^{1/4} in the L2 norm and ε^{3/4} in the weighted L∞ norm (Remark 1.2). The overall structure is standard, but several load-bearing steps are asserted without proof and, in one case, delegated to an unpublished manuscript.

Significance. If the missing steps were supplied, the result would be significant: it would give the first rigorous classical-solution justification of the acoustic limit for the Boltzmann equation with Maxwell reflection boundary condition with accommodation coefficient of order one, thereby confirming Sone's formal analysis and extending the renormalized-solution result of Jiang-Levermore-Masmoudi to a setting where boundary layers are visible. The paper correctly identifies that the novel difficulty is the full range 0<α≤1 and the associated Knudsen-layer solvability and pointwise decay. However, the central technical input for this range is exactly what is not proved here. The paper also contains a useful, clearly written formal derivation of the boundary-layer hierarchy and the slip boundary conditions. The L2-L∞ remainder framework follows the established pattern of Guo-Huang-Wang and Guo-Jang-Jiang, and the estimates in Sections 4.1-4.2 are plausible, though they depend on the uniform bounds asserted in Proposition 3.5.

major comments (4)
  1. [§2.3, Eq. (2.45), Eq. (2.49)] The terms f_bb_4, f_bb_5 and f_bb_6 appear in the expansion (2.45) and in the source term S5 in (2.49), but they are never defined. The text states in §2.3 that f_bb_k for k≥4 'can be constructed by the same ways' and that 'the calculations are tedious but trivial, so we will omit the details here.' As written, the remainder equation (2.46) is not a closed, well-defined equation, because S5 contains f_bb_5 and f_bb_6. This is a load-bearing gap: the L2 estimate in Lemma 4.1 uses the uniform bounds of these terms via Proposition 3.5, and the proof of Theorem 1.1 cannot proceed without a complete construction of the truncated expansion.
  2. [Lemma 3.3, p. 17-18] Lemma 3.3 is quoted from the unpublished manuscript [22] and is the only source of the pointwise exponential Knudsen-layer estimates for 0<α<1. The published reference [23] covers only α=1. Since the advertised novelty of the paper is precisely the full range 0<α≤1, this lemma is the central technical input of the paper. The lemma statement also contains apparent typos: the far-field condition in (3.4) is written as 'lim_{ξ→0} f=0' instead of ξ→∞, and the phrase 'for all λ∈(0,λ0)' appears with no λ in the statement. The paper should either include a proof of Lemma 3.3, or state it as an explicit assumption; as it stands, Theorem 1.1 rests on an unverifiable citation.
  3. [Proposition 3.5, p. 19] Proposition 3.5 asserts uniform Sobolev and weighted-L∞ bounds for all expansion terms f_k, f_b_k and f_bb_k for k=1,...,6, with a specific hierarchy of Sobolev indices and weights. The proof is omitted, with a reference to [18, Proposition 5.1]. This proposition is load-bearing: it is used to bound the source terms S3, S4 and S5 in the remainder estimate (4.1), and it must cover the new Knudsen-layer estimates for 0<α<1 from Lemma 3.3 and the new coupled boundary conditions derived in §2.3. The adaptation from [18] is not immediate, and the assertion that the bounds hold with the stated index hierarchy needs a detailed proof.
  4. [Lemma 3.2, p. 17] The proof of Lemma 3.2 for the heat-layer estimates is omitted, with the comment that it is 'similar and much easier as [18, Lemma 4.1].' Since the heat layer is a standard component and the lemma statement is specific, this omission is less serious than the previous ones, but the proof should still be included or a precise reference supplied, because the weighted Sobolev norms H^r_l defined in §1.3 are nonstandard and the compatibility conditions are not spelled out.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (2.49)] In the definition of the remainder source term, 'S := S1 + S2 + S3 + S3 + S4 + S5' lists S3 twice; presumably the second S3 should be S3, but the duplicate suggests a typographical error that should be corrected.
  2. [Lemma 4.1, Eq. (4.1) and Eq. (4.3)] The notation 'fR,ǫ' appears in the boundary term in (4.1) and in (4.3), inconsistent with the subscript 'fR,ε' used elsewhere; this should be corrected.
  3. [Lemma 3.3, Eq. (3.4)] The far-field boundary condition in the Knudsen-layer problem (3.4) is written as 'lim_{ξ→0} f pt, ¯x, ξ, v q = 0', while all other far-field conditions in the paper use ξ→∞; this is almost certainly a typo and should be fixed.
  4. [§2.3, p. 15] The sentence 'The calculations are teidous but trival' contains spelling mistakes ('teidous' and 'trival') and should be rewritten as 'tedious but trivial'.
  5. [§1.3, Eq. (1.11)-(1.12)] The velocity weight w_l is defined by w_l(v) = {1+|v|^2}^{l/2}, but in Lemma 4.3 the kernel estimate uses e^{η|v-v'|^2} and the weight w_l(v)/w_l(v'). The relationship between the polynomial weight and the exponential factor should be clarified at first use.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular reduction: the acoustic limit is obtained from an independent Hilbert/Knudsen-layer construction; the main caveat is an unproven same-author lemma imported from [22], which is a verifiability gap rather than a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain does not feed the desired acoustic limit back into its inputs. In §2.3 the acoustic boundary condition u_{1,3}^0=0 is derived from the matching conditions (2.30) together with u^b_{1,3}=0 from (2.20), and the slip coefficients b1,c1,b2,c2 are determined by the solvability of the half-space Milne/Knudsen problems (2.43)–(2.44), not by fitting the acoustic system. The remainder estimates in §4 are standard L2–L8 arguments based on the uniform bounds of the constructed expansion terms, and they do not assume the theorem's conclusion. The genuine weakness is verifiability rather than circularity: Lemma 3.3, the only source of pointwise exponential Knudsen-layer estimates for the full range 0<α<1, is quoted without proof from the authors' own unpublished manuscript [22], and the paper itself states 'Recently, the authors of this paper and He proved this statement rigorously, see [22].' Additionally, the construction of f_bb_4, f_bb_5, f_bb_6 is omitted ('the calculations are tedious but trivial, so we will omit the details here') and Proposition 3.5 is asserted by analogy with [18, Proposition 5.1]. These are proof gaps and independence/reproducibility concerns, not displays of an equation reducing to its own input: Lemma 3.3 concerns a linear Knudsen-layer boundary value problem with stated assumptions s in N^perp and a solvability condition, and it does not assume the acoustic limit. Accordingly, the appropriate finding is no significant circularity, with a low score reflecting the weak independence of the key imported lemma.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities or fitted constants. It relies on standard kinetic-theory background (spectral gap, axial symmetry), on a well-prepared initial data assumption, and on a load-bearing Knudsen-layer estimate imported from an unpublished companion manuscript. The slip coefficients are determined by solving boundary-layer problems, not fitted to data.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math The linearized Boltzmann operator L has spectral gap (1.6) on the microscopic subspace, and L decomposes as ν-K with estimates for K.
    Invoked throughout; standard results for hard-sphere kernels, cited to [8,16].
  • standard math Axial symmetry identities (B.1)-(B.5) hold for L, K, and Γ.
    Used in Section 2.3 to reduce Knudsen-layer solutions to fundamental solutions; proof is sketched in Appendix B with references to Sone's books.
  • domain assumption Well-prepared initial data: the initial data are exactly given by the expansion (1.10), with compatibility condition γ_- f^in_R,ε = K f^in_R,ε.
    Theorem 1.1 is conditional on this; no initial-layer construction is provided.
  • ad hoc to paper Existence and pointwise exponential decay of Knudsen-layer solutions for 0<α<1, as stated in Lemma 3.3.
    Taken from the unpublished manuscript [22] by He, Jiang and Wu; the current paper does not prove this lemma.
  • standard math Smooth solvability of the linear acoustic system (Lemma 3.1, cited to [18]) and of the heat equations for the viscous layer (Lemma 3.2, proof omitted).
    Standard linear PDE theory; the paper relies on prior results without proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Kinetic-fluid boundary layers and acoustic limit for the Boltzmann equation with general Maxwell reflection boundary condition." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AWDIFMTP

@misc{pith2026250108707,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Kinetic-fluid boundary layers and acoustic limit for the Boltzmann equation with general Maxwell reflection boundary condition},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AWDIFMTP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.08707}
}
abstract

We prove the acoustic limit from the Boltzmann equation with hard sphere collisions and the Maxwell reflection boundary condition. Our construction of solutions include the interior fluid part and Knudsen-viscous coupled boundary layers. The main novelty is that the accommodation coefficient is in the full range $0<\alpha\leq 1$. The previous works in the context of classical solutions only considered the simplest specular reflection boundary condition, i.e. $\alpha=0$. The mechanism of the derivation of fluid boundary conditions in the case $\alpha=O(1)$ is quite different with the cases $\alpha=0$ or $\alpha=o(1)$. This rigorously justifies the corresponding formal analysis in Sone's books \cite{sone2002kinetic,sone2007molecular}. In particular, this is a smooth solution analogue of \cite{jiang2010remarks}, in which the renormalized solution was considered and the boundary layers were not visible.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [22]

    L.-B. He, N. Jiang, and Y. Wu, Boundary layer solution of the Boltzmann equation for Maxwe ll reflection boundary condition, manuscript

    work page

  2. [23]

    Huang and Y

    F. Huang and Y. Wang, Boundary layer solution of the Boltzmann equation for diffusi ve reflection boundary conditions in half-space , SIAM J. Math. Anal. 54 (2022), no. 3, 3480–3534. MR4438039

    work page 2022

  3. [18]

    Y. Guo, F. Huang, and Y. Wang, Hilbert expansion of the Boltzmann equation with specular b oundary condition in half-space , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 241 (2021), no. 1, 231–309. MR4271959

    work page 2021

  4. [1]

    K. Aoki, C. Baranger, M. Hattori, S. Kosuge, G. Martal` o, J. Mathiaud, and L. Mieussens, Slip bound- ary conditions for the compressible Navier-Stokes equatio ns, J. Stat. Phys. 169 (2017), no. 4, 744–781. MR3715862

    work page 2017

  5. [2]

    Bardos, R

    C. Bardos, R. E. Caflisch, and B. Nicolaenko, The Milne and Kramers problems for the Boltzmann equation of a hard sphere gas , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 39 (1986), no. 3, 323–352. MR829844

    work page 1986

  6. [3]

    Bardos, F

    C. Bardos, F. Golse, and C. D. Levermore, Fluid dynamic limits of kinetic equations. II. Convergence proofs for the Boltzmann equation , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 46 (1993), no. 5, 667–753. MR1213991

    work page 1993

  7. [4]

    Bardos, F

    C. Bardos, F. Golse, and D. Levermore, Fluid dynamic limits of kinetic equations. I. Formal deriva tions, J. Statist. Phys. 63 (1991), no. 1-2, 323–344. MR1115587

    work page 1991

  8. [5]

    Bardos and S

    C. Bardos and S. Ukai, The classical incompressible Navier-Stokes limit of the Bo ltzmann equation, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 1 (1991), no. 2, 235–257. MR1115292 KINETIC-FLUID BOUNDARY LAYERS AND ACOUSTIC LIMIT 27

    work page 1991

Show all 35 references
  1. [6]

    Briant, From the Boltzmann equation to the incompressible Navier-S tokes equations on the torus: a quantitative error estimate , J

    M. Briant, From the Boltzmann equation to the incompressible Navier-S tokes equations on the torus: a quantitative error estimate , J. Differential Equations 259 (2015), no. 11, 6072–6141. MR3397318

    2015

  2. [7]

    Briant, S

    M. Briant, S. Merino-Aceituno, and C. Mouhot, From Boltzmann to incompressible Navier-Stokes in Sobolev spaces with polynomial weight , Anal. Appl. (Singap.) 17 (2019), no. 1, 85–116. MR3894734

    2019

  3. [8]

    R. E. Caflisch, The fluid dynamic limit of the nonlinear Boltzmann equation , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 33 (1980), no. 5, 651–666. MR586416

    1980

  4. [9]

    Coron, F

    F. Coron, F. Golse, and C. Sulem, A classification of well-posed kinetic layer problems , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 41 (1988), no. 4, 409–435. MR933229

    1988

  5. [10]

    Desvillettes and F

    L. Desvillettes and F. Golse, A remark concerning the Chapman-Enskog asymptotics , Advances in kinetic theory and computing, 1994, pp. 191–203. MR1323184

    1994

  6. [11]

    Gallagher and I

    I. Gallagher and I. Tristani, On the convergence of smooth solutions from Boltzmann to Nav ier-Stokes, Ann. H. Lebesgue 3 (2020), 561–614. MR4149820

    2020

  7. [12]

    Golse and C

    F. Golse and C. D. Levermore, Stokes-Fourier and acoustic limits for the Boltzmann equat ion: convergence proofs, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 55 (2002), no. 3, 336–393. MR1866367

    2002

  8. [13]

    Golse, B

    F. Golse, B. Perthame, and C. Sulem, On a boundary layer problem for the nonlinear Boltzmann equa tion, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 103 (1988), no. 1, 81–96. MR946970

    1988

  9. [14]

    Golse and L

    F. Golse and L. Saint-Raymond, The Navier-Stokes limit of the Boltzmann equation for bound ed collision kernels, Invent. Math. 155 (2004), no. 1, 81–161. MR2025302

    2004

  10. [15]

    Golse and L

    F. Golse and L. Saint-Raymond, The incompressible Navier-Stokes limit of the Boltzmann eq uation for hard cutoff potentials , J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 91 (2009), no. 5, 508–552. MR2517786

    2009

  11. [16]

    Guo, Boltzmann diffusive limit beyond the Navier-Stokes approxim ation, Comm

    Y. Guo, Boltzmann diffusive limit beyond the Navier-Stokes approxim ation, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 59 (2006), no. 5, 626–687. MR2172804

    2006

  12. [17]

    Guo, Decay and continuity of the Boltzmann equation in bounded do mains, Arch

    Y. Guo, Decay and continuity of the Boltzmann equation in bounded do mains, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 197 (2010), no. 3, 713–809. MR2679358

    2010

  13. [19]

    Y. Guo, J. Jang, and N. Jiang, Acoustic limit for the Boltzmann equation in optimal scalin g, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 63 (2010), no. 3, 337–361. MR2599458

    2010

  14. [20]

    Hattori and S

    M. Hattori and S. Takata, Asymptotic theory for the time-dependent behavior of a slig htly rarefied gas over a smooth solid boundary , J. Stat. Phys. 147 (2012), 1182–1215

    2012

  15. [21]

    Hattori and S

    M. Hattori and S. Takata, Sound waves propagating in a slightly rarefied gas over a smoo th solid boundary , Phys. Rev. Fluids 4 (2019), 103401

    2019

  16. [24]

    Jang and C

    J. Jang and C. Kim, Incompressible Euler limit from Boltzmann equation with di ffuse boundary condition for analytic data , Ann. PDE 7 (2021), no. 2, Paper No. 22, 103. MR4307723

    2021

  17. [25]

    Jiang, C

    N. Jiang, C. D. Levermore, and N. Masmoudi, Remarks on the acoustic limit for the Boltzmann equation , Comm. Partial Differential Equations 35 (2010), no. 9, 1590–1609. MR2754056

    2010

  18. [26]

    Jiang and Y.-L

    N. Jiang and Y.-L. Luo, Knudsen boundary layer equations for full ranges of cutoff co llision kernels: Maxwell reflection boundary with all accommodation coefficie nts in [0,1] , arXiv:2407.02852

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    Jiang, Y.-L

    N. Jiang, Y.-L. Luo, and S. Tang, Compressible Euler limit from Boltzmann equation with Maxw ell reflec- tion boundary condition in half-space , arXiv:2101.11199

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    Jiang, Y.-L

    N. Jiang, Y.-L. Luo, and S. Tang, Compressible Euler limit from Boltzmann equation with comp lete diffusive boundary condition in half-space , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 377 (2024), no. 8, 5323–5359. MR4771224

    2024

  21. [29]

    Jiang and N

    N. Jiang and N. Masmoudi, Boundary layers and incompressible Navier-Stokes-Fourie r limit of the Boltz- mann equation in bounded domain I , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 70 (2017), no. 1, 90–171. MR3581824

    2017

  22. [30]

    Jiang, C.-J

    N. Jiang, C.-J. Xu, and H. Zhao, Incompressible Navier-Stokes-Fourier limit from the Bolt zmann equation: classical solutions, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 67 (2018), no. 5, 1817–1855. MR3875244

    2018

  23. [31]

    Masmoudi and L

    N. Masmoudi and L. Saint-Raymond, From the Boltzmann equation to the Stokes-Fourier system in a bounded domain, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 56 (2003), no. 9, 1263–1293. MR1980855

    2003

  24. [32]

    Saint-Raymond, Convergence of solutions to the Boltzmann equation in the in compressible Euler limit , Arch

    L. Saint-Raymond, Convergence of solutions to the Boltzmann equation in the in compressible Euler limit , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 166 (2003), no. 1, 47–80. MR1952079

    2003

  25. [33]

    Saint-Raymond, Hydrodynamic limits: some improvements of the relative ent ropy method, 2009, pp

    L. Saint-Raymond, Hydrodynamic limits: some improvements of the relative ent ropy method, 2009, pp. 705–

    2009

  26. [34]

    Sone, Kinetic theory and fluid dynamics , Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Tech- nology, Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2002

    Y. Sone, Kinetic theory and fluid dynamics , Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Tech- nology, Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2002. MR1919 070

    2002

  27. [35]

    Sone, Molecular gas dynamics , Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Techn ology, Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2007

    Y. Sone, Molecular gas dynamics , Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Techn ology, Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2007. Theory, techni ques, and applications. MR2274674 28 N. JIANG AND Y.-L. WU (N. Jiang) School of Mathematics and Statistics, Wuhan Univ...

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.