Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 38 references

Quantitative estimates for a nonlinear inverse source problem in a coupled diffusion equations with uncertain measurements

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Discrete noisy terminal measurements still determine the fluorophore absorption coefficient through a two-stage regularized inversion, with convergence in expectation and exponential tails.

desk verdict A credible deterministic inverse-source analysis; the stochastic sections need a proof that the noisy fixed point exists in the admissible set before the rates can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.19421 v1 pith:5GYDGES7 submitted 2025-04-28 math.NA cs.NA

Chunlong Sun , Wenlong Zhang , Zhidong Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.NAcs.NA MSC 35R3065J2065M6065N2165N30
keywords inversesourceproblemcoupleddiffusionequationsfluorescenceopticaltomographyuniquenessLipschitzstabilityregularizationstochasticconvergencefixed-pointiteration
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 addresses a nonlinear inverse source problem in the coupled diffusion system that models fluorescence optical tomography: from the final-time emission field $u_m(x,T)$, recover the absorption coefficient $q(x)$ of the fluorophores. It establishes, under stated positivity and size conditions, that this recovery is unique and Lipschitz stable in both $L^2$ and the dual Sobolev norm $(H^1(\Omega))^*$, by exhibiting a monotone fixed-point operator whose fixed points are exactly the sources. Since real sensors deliver only discrete pointwise and noisy values, the paper then splits the inversion into two sub-problems — a regularized elliptic reconstruction of $g$ and $-\Delta g$, followed by the fixed-point iteration — and proves quantitative convergence of the noisy reconstruction to the exact source, both in expectation and with an exponential tail, with explicit dependence on the regularization parameter, noise variance, number of sensors, and spatial dimension. Two-dimensional experiments illustrate that the predicted rates $\lambda^{1/4}$ and $\lambda^{1/6}$ appear numerically.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the operator $Kq = (\partial_t u_m(x,T;q) - \Delta g + p g)/u_e(x,T;q)$, whose fixed points coincide exactly with sources $q$ satisfying $u_m(x,T;q)=g$ (Lemma 2.5). The paper shows $K$ is monotone nondecreasing on its domain $D$ (Lemma 2.6) and Lipschitz continuous in $L^2$ (Lemma 2.8), so the iteration $q_0=(-\Delta g+pg)/u_e(x,T;0)$, $q_{n+1}=Kq_n$ increases monotonically to the unique fixed point (Theorem 2.1). For noisy data, P1 is an elliptic optimal-control problem with penalty $\lambda\|f\|^2_{H^s(\Omega)}$ and empirical data misfit; its analysis rests on the spectral growth of the discrete eigenvalue problem $(\psi,v)_{H^s}=\rho(S\psi,Sv)_n$, which via Weyl-type bounds $\rho_k \ge C k^{2(2+s)/d}$ converts $n$ and $\lambda$ into effective noise filtering. The exponential-tail bound rests on viewing $(e,Su)_n$ as a sub-Gaussian empirical process and invoking covering-entropy estimates for Sobolev balls.

What would settle it

Take the smooth-source test case ($b=(x+y)^2 t+5$, $p=x+y+10$), choose $n=100$ sensors and noise $\sigma=0.01$ so that the P1 reconstruction $Sf^\sigma$ is not guaranteed to stay positive, and check whether the iteration (3.3) still has a fixed point in $D$ and whether the empirical probability $P(\|q^\sigma-q^*\|_{(H^1)^*} > (\lambda^{1/4}+\lambda^{1/2}\|p\|_{\infty})\rho_0(1+z))$ respects the bound $Ce^{-Cz^2}$ for $z=2$; a violation would show the theorem's hypotheses fail in a regime the paper does not exclude.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that discrete noisy terminal measurements still determine the absorption coefficient $q^*$ through a two-stage scheme with quantitative error control. Stage P1 solves the Tikhonov-regularized elliptic optimal control problem $$f^\$\sigma$ = \arg\min_{f\in H^s(\$\Omega$)} \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n (Sf(x_i)-g_i^\$\sigma$)^2 + \$\lambda$\|f\|^2_{H^s(\$\Omega$)},\quad s\in\{0,1\},$$ to reconstruct $f^*=-\Delta g$ and $g=Sf^*$; stage P2 runs the fixed-point iteration $$q^\sigma_0 = \frac{f^\$\sigma$ + p\,Sf^\$\sigma$}{u_e(x,T;0)},\qquad q^\sigma_{n+1} = \frac{\partial_t u_m(x,T;q^\sigma_n) + f^\$\sigma$ + p\,Sf^\$\sigma$}{u_e(x,T;q^\sigma_n)}.$$ Under Assumption 2.1 and the smallness condition $\sqrt{T M_b (M+1)}/(m_Q\sqrt{C_p})<1$, Theorem 3.2 gives $E\|q^\sigma - q^*\|_{(H^1(\Omega))^*} \le C(\lambda^{1/4}+\lambda^{1/2}\|p\|_{L^\infty})\|f^*\|^2_{L^2}$ for $s=0$, with the analogous $L^2$ rate $\lambda^{1/6}$ for $s=1$, and Theorem 3.4 gives the exponential-tail bound $P(\|q^\sigma - q^*\|_{(H^1(\Omega))^*} > (\lambda^{1/4}+\lambda^{1/2}\|p\|_{L^\infty})\rho_0(1+z)) \le C e^{-Cz^2}$ for $s=0$, where $\lambda^{1/2+d/8}=O(\sigma n^{-1/2}\rho_0^{-1})$ and $\rho_0=\|f^*\|_{H^s}+\sigma n^{-1/2}$. The numerical experiments display the predicted linear dependence of expected errors on $\lambda^{1/4}$ and $\lambda^{1/6}$.

Load-bearing premise

The rate and tail theorems assume that the fixed point $q^\sigma$ of the noisy iteration exists inside the admissible set $D$ and that the first-stage reconstructions satisfy all the positivity and size conditions imposed on the exact data, which the paper does not prove.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the theorems hold, a practitioner can choose the regularization parameter explicitly as $\lambda^{1/2+d/8}=O(\sigma n^{-1/2})$ for $s=0$ and predict the achieved source error before running the inversion.
  • The exponential-tail statement means the probability of a large reconstruction error decays like $e^{-Cz^2}$, so averaging over independent experiments drives the error down quickly.
  • The H1-penalized variant ($s=1$) yields convergence of the source in $L^2$ at rate $\lambda^{1/6}$, while the L2-penalized variant yields convergence in the dual norm $(H^1)^*$ at rate $\lambda^{1/4}$; the numerics indicate smooth sources favour $s=1$ and discontinuous sources favour $s=0$.
  • The deterministic stability estimate supplies the bridge: stochastic error in reconstructing $g$ and $-\Delta g$ is amplified by the explicit constant $C=\sqrt{C_p}/(m_Q\sqrt{C_p}-\sqrt{T M_b (M+1)})$, so the whole pipeline inherits quantitative control from the two sub-problems.
  • The self-consistent Algorithm 1 estimates $\lambda$ without knowing $f^*$ or the noise variance $\sigma$ and converges in a few iterations in the experiments, making the theoretical rates reachable in practice.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An extension the paper leaves implicit is that any inverse problem whose forward map factorizes into a data-completion step followed by a monotone fixed-point step could inherit the same two-stage probabilistic estimates, since the analysis separates the stochastic regularization (P1) from the deterministic inversion (P2).
  • The smallness condition $\sqrt{T M_b (M+1)}/(m_Q\sqrt{C_p})<1$ suggests the rates degrade as the fluorophore absorption $M$ approaches the background absorption scale; testing the transition where this constant crosses 1 would map the practical limits of the stability theorem.
  • The numerical observation that H1 penalization wins for smooth sources and L2 penalization for discontinuous ones has no rigorous selection rule in the paper; a data-driven or oracle rule for choosing $s$ would be a natural next question.
  • Algorithm 1's convergence is demonstrated experimentally but not proven; proving that the self-consistent $\lambda$ iteration converges would close the loop between the rate theory and the practical implementation.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the recovery of the fluorophore absorption coefficient q in a coupled excitation–emission diffusion system from the terminal-time measurement g(x)=u_m(x,T). Section 2 defines a monotone operator K in (2.1) on a domain D and proves, under Assumption 2.1 and a smallness condition, that the fixed-point iteration (2.7) converges monotonically to the unique fixed point in D (Theorem 2.1), and derives two conditional Lipschitz stability estimates (Theorem 2.2). Section 3 treats discrete noisy observations by splitting the problem into P1, a Tikhonov recovery of f*=-Δg and Sf*=g via (3.2), and P2, a fixed-point iteration with the noisy operator Kσ in (3.4). Theorems 3.1 and 3.3 give expectation and exponential-tail error estimates for P1; Theorems 3.2 and 3.4 state analogous convergence rates for qσ relative to the exact q*. Section 4 reports two-dimensional numerical experiments for smooth and discontinuous sources.

Significance. If established, the deterministic part is a clean conditional-stability result for a nonlinear coupled-system inverse problem, and the stochastic part would provide practically useful explicit rates with exponential tails. The paper has clear strengths: the monotone fixed-point construction is elegant, the smallness condition in Theorem 2.2 is explicit, the use of empirical-process tools is appropriate, and the numerical experiments are extensive and reproduce the predicted P1 rates. However, the advertised P2 estimates in Theorems 3.2 and 3.4 rest on an unproved existence, regularity, and membership hypothesis for the noisy fixed point qσ, and the derivation combining the deterministic and stochastic estimates is incomplete. The central claims of the paper are therefore not yet supported as stated.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2–3.3, Theorems 3.2 and 3.4] The theorems are stated for a fixed point qσ of the noisy iteration (3.3), but neither the existence of such a fixed point nor its membership in the domain D of (2.2) is proved. The initial value qσ0=(fσ+p(x)Sfσ)/u_e(x,T;0) is only known to lie in H^s(Ω); for s=0 (and for s=1 when d=3) H^s is not embedded in C(Ω̄), so qσ0 may fail to be continuous, while D is a subset of C(Ω). Even when qσ0 is continuous, membership in D would require the pointwise inequalities (-Δg+pg)≤fσ+pSfσ≤M u_e(x,T;0), and the unconstrained minimization (3.2) imposes no such bounds. Moreover, the sign analysis in Lemma 2.6 for Kσ would require ∂t u_m(x,T;q2)+fσ+pSfσ≥0, a property that is not inherited from Assumption 2.1(c). Consequently Theorem 2.2, whose hypotheses include q̂,q̃∈D and whose proof uses those sign properties, cannot be invoked for the pair (qσ,q*). The paper also does not prove that the iteration (3.3) converges to qσ, so the output of Algorithm 2 is not covered by the theorem. This is a load-bearing gap: the expectation and exponential-tail estimates in Theorems 3.2 and 3.4 hold only conditionally on an unstated existence-and-regularity hypothesis. A proof of high-probability containment in D, or an explicit assumption combined with a modified algorithm that enforces it, is required.
  2. [§3.2, Theorem 3.2] Even granting that a fixed point qσ∈D exists, the sentence 'combining Theorem 2.2 and Theorem 3.1' omits the key transfer step. To apply Theorem 2.2 one must first show that Gqσ = u_m(x,T;qσ) equals Sfσ, i.e., the noisy analogue of Lemma 2.5; this identity is not stated or proved. One must then bound the quantities Δ(Gqσ-Gq*) and Gqσ-Gq* in the norms appearing in Theorem 2.2 in terms of the right-hand sides of (3.8)–(3.11). Theorem 3.1 directly controls E‖fσ-f*‖² in (H^1)* and E‖Sfσ-Sf*‖²_n, and the proof contains auxiliary H^1 estimates, but the passage from these quantities to E‖qσ-q*‖_{(H^1)*} or E‖qσ-q*‖_{L2} is not written. Without this derivation, Theorem 3.2 is not established; the same comment applies to Theorem 3.4.
  3. [§3.2, Theorem 3.2 statement] The right-hand sides of the two estimates in Theorem 3.2 contain ‖f*‖²_{L2(Ω)} and ‖f*‖²_{H^1(Ω)}, respectively, but taking square roots of (3.10) and (3.11) and applying Theorem 2.2 yields factors proportional to ‖f*‖_{L2(Ω)} and ‖f*‖_{H^1(Ω)}, not their squares. This is not merely a typo: the balancing conditions already use ‖f*‖^{-1}, and the tail version in Theorem 3.4 uses the linear quantity ρ0=‖f*‖_{H^s(Ω)}+σ n^{-1/2}. The statement should be corrected to use the first power of the norm, and the constants in the proof should be checked accordingly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.1, Algorithm 2, line 5] Line 5 of Algorithm 2 says 'Solve 3.2 for fσ', but the iteration in (3.3) requires solving the forward coupled system (1.1)–(1.2) with q=qσ_j. As written, the algorithm re-solves the P1 problem and never updates the forward solutions, so it is not reproducible.
  2. [§3.3, Proof of Theorem 3.3] In the proof, the semi-metric for the sub-Gaussian process {(e,Sv)_n} is written d(u,v)=δ n^{-1/2}‖Su−Sv‖_n, whereas Lemma 3.7 defines d(u,v)=σ n^{-1/2}‖Su−Sv‖_n; the subsequent integrals use σ, so the displayed semi-metric is a typo that should be corrected.
  3. [§3.2, Proof of Theorem 3.1] The proof states a condition 'n^{d/2/(2+s)}λ≥1' that does not match the theorem's condition 'n^{(4+2s)/d}λ≥1'. The exponent should be harmonized, since the validity of the L2-error estimate depends on the sampling/inverse inequality connecting the empirical norm with the Sobolev norm.
  4. [§4.2, Figure 4 caption] The caption of Figure 4 says that E(Err 2) is plotted against λ^{1/3}, but the text and Theorem 3.1 give the rate λ^{1/4} for the (H^1)* error when s=0; please correct the caption.
  5. [Throughout] There are several small typographical issues: 'Kronerker delta' should be 'Kronecker delta', 'Orilicz' should be 'Orlicz', and 'Inf p(x)' should be 'inf p(x)'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the stochastic source estimate is a genuine two-stage composition, not a re-labelled fit.

full rationale

The paper's deterministic Section 2 is self-contained: K in (2.1), the admissible domain D in (2.2), the iteration (2.7), and the proofs of Lemma 2.5, Lemma 2.6, Theorem 2.1 and Theorem 2.2 derive uniqueness and stability from the PDE, maximum principle and elliptic uniqueness, without importing the target q* into the construction. The noisy section defines fσ and Sfσ by the Tikhonov problem (3.2) and then seeks a fixed point qσ of Kσ in (3.4). For any such fixed point, the terminal elliptic equation gives -ΔGqσ + pGqσ = fσ + pSfσ; since Sfσ solves the same elliptic problem with the same Robin boundary condition, Gqσ = Sfσ, so the P2 estimate is exactly the deterministic stability estimate applied to the data discrepancy Gqσ-Gq* = Sfσ-g. Nothing in the rate is put in by hand: the λ, σ, n rates in Theorems 3.1 and 3.3 are balanced terms, and p, M, Mb, mQ, Cp are problem data, not fitted constants. The self-citations to [11] for Lemmas 3.2, 3.3, 3.7 and 3.8 are auxiliary published empirical-process/eigenvalue results and do not encode the target q*; even though they are co-authored, they are not load-bearing in a circular direction. The main caveat is that the paper assumes, rather than proves, that a fixed point qσ exists in D and that fσ+pSfσ meets the pointwise bounds of Assumption 2.1; this is a missing-existence/regularity hypothesis, not a circular reduction of the theorem to its own statement.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data; the constants in the estimates are generic. The central derivation rests on Assumption 2.1, especially p ≥ Δg/g, the smallness condition in Theorem 2.2, and the assumed existence of fixed points for the noisy operator Kσ; these are stated rather than verified.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Parabolic regularity and maximum principle for the Robin initial-boundary value problem, Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2 from Evans [15].
    Used throughout Section 2 to get H2 regularity, continuity, and sign of ue, um and their time derivatives.
  • domain assumption Assumption 2.1: b, ∂tb, ∂t²b nonnegative with b(x,T) > 0; p ≥ Δg/g; q∗ ∈ Q with 0 ≤ q∗ ≤ M.
    Needed for positivity of ue(T;q), nonempty domain D, q0 ≥ 0, and monotonicity of K; the condition p ≥ Δg/g is not verified after regularization.
  • ad hoc to paper Smallness condition sqrt(T) Mb (M+1) / (mQ sqrt(Cp)) < 1 in Theorem 2.2.
    This is a sufficient condition imposed by the authors to make the Lipschitz stability constant finite; it is not derived from the model and may fail.
  • ad hoc to paper Existence of fixed points q∗ of K and qσ of Kσ in D.
    Theorem 2.1 and Theorems 3.2 and 3.4 assume a fixed point exists; no existence proof is given, and the P1 reconstructions may not generate admissible data.
  • domain assumption Quasi-uniform sensor points and iid zero-mean or sub-Gaussian noise.
    The empirical norm inequalities and probabilistic estimates in Section 3 depend on these assumptions on the measurement model.
  • standard math Weyl eigenvalue asymptotics and empirical process entropy bounds, Lemmas 3.1, 3.5 and 3.6.
    Used to control the stochastic term in Theorem 3.1 and the peeling argument in Theorem 3.3.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantitative estimates for a nonlinear inverse source problem in a coupled diffusion equations with uncertain measurements." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5GYDGES7

@misc{pith2026250419421,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantitative estimates for a nonlinear inverse source problem in a coupled diffusion equations with uncertain measurements},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5GYDGES7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.19421}
}
abstract

This work considers a nonlinear inverse source problem in a coupled diffusion equation from the terminal observation. Theoretically, under some conditions on problem data, we build the uniqueness theorem for this inverse problem and show two Lipschitz-type stability results in $L^2$ and $(H^1(\cdot))^*$ norms, respectively. However, in practice, we could only observe the measurements at discrete sensors, which contain the noise. Hence, this work further investigates the recovery of the unknown source from the discrete noisy measurements. We propose a stable inversion scheme and provide probabilistic convergence estimates between the reconstructions and exact solution in two cases: convergence respect to expectation and convergence with an exponential tail. We provide several numerical experiments to illustrate and complement our theoretical analysis.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.19421 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Numerical results for different regularization pa [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The optimal regularization parameter provided by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The exact and reconstructed solutions by Algorith [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a), (c): The linear dependence of E(Err1) on λ 1/2 for s = 0 and s = 1; (b): The linear dependence of E(Err2) on λ 1/3 for s = 0; (d): The linear dependence of E(Err3) on λ 1/6 for s = 1. (2) Discontinuous source: q ∗ 2 (x, y) =    1, k(x, y) − (0.3, 0.8)k2 ≤…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Profiles of exact solutions q ∗ 1 and q ∗ 2 in Example 4.2. penalty in P1 are plotted in Figures 6 and 7, respectively. The reconstructions of q ∗ 2 with L 2 penalty and H1 penalty in P1 are plotted in Figures 8 and 9, respectively. We summarize the reconstructions in …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Reconstructions of smooth source q ∗ 1 in Example 4.2 with L 2 penalty in P1. The first raw are profiles of numerical reconstructions q σ and the second raw are their corresponding point error |q σ − q ∗ 1 | [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Reconstructions of smooth source q ∗ 1 in Example 4.2 with H 1 penalty in P1. The first raw are profiles of numerical reconstructions q σ and the second raw are their corresponding point error |q σ − q ∗ 1 | [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Reconstructions of q ∗ 2 in Example 4.2 with L 2 penalty in P1. The first raw are profiles of numerical reconstructions q σ and the second raw are their corresponding point error |q σ − q ∗ 2 |. For the case of using the L 2 penalty in P1, the logarithmic values of Err…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The reconstructions of q ∗ 2 in Example 4.2 with H 1 penalty in P1. The first raw are profiles of numerical reconstructions q σ and the second raw are their corresponding point error |q σ − q ∗ 2 |. 2 4 6 8 Iteration 10-3 10-2 10-1 noise 10% noise 1% noise 0.1% 2 4 6 8…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Convergence histories of Algorithm 2 with different noise levels, where q ∗ = q ∗ 1 in Example 4.2. s = 0 and 1, respectively, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: (a), (b): The convergence of ten times inversions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [11]

    Stochastic co nvergence of regularized solutions and their finite element approximations to invers e source problems

    Zhiming Chen, Wenlong Zhang, and Jun Zou. Stochastic co nvergence of regularized solutions and their finite element approximations to invers e source problems. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. , 60(2):751–780, 2022

    work page 2022

  2. [1]

    R econstruction of extended sources with small supports in the elliptic equation ∆ u +µu =F from a single Cauchy data

    Batoul Abdelaziz, Abdellatif El Badia, and Ahmad El Hajj. R econstruction of extended sources with small supports in the elliptic equation ∆ u +µu =F from a single Cauchy data. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris , 351(21-22):797–801, 2013

    work page 2013

  3. [2]

    Simon R. Arridge. Optical tomography in medical imaging . Inverse Problems , 15(2):R41–R93, 1999

    work page 1999

  4. [3]

    Arridge and John C

    Simon R. Arridge and John C. Schotland. Optical tomograp hy: forward and inverse problems. Inverse Problems, 25(12):123010, 59, 2009

    work page 2009

  5. [4]

    Bagtzoglou

    Juliana Atmadja and Amvrossios C. Bagtzoglou. State of th e art report on mathemat- ical methods for groundwater pollution source identificati on. Environmental Forensics, 2(3):205–214, 2001

    work page 2001

  6. [5]

    El Badia, T

    A. El Badia, T. Ha Duong, and F. Moutazaim and. Numerical so lution for the identifi- cation of source terms from boundary measurements. Inverse Problems in Engineering , 8(4):345–364, 2000

    work page 2000

  7. [6]

    El Badia, A

    A. El Badia, A. El Hajj, M. Jazar, and H. Moustafa. Lipschit z stability estimates for an inverse source problem in an elliptic equation from interio r measurements. Applicable Analysis, 95(9):1873–1890, 2016

    work page 2016

  8. [7]

    Stability for the invers e source problems in elastic and electromagnetic waves

    Gang Bao, Peijun Li, and Yue Zhao. Stability for the invers e source problems in elastic and electromagnetic waves. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) , 134:122–178, 2020

    work page 2020

Show all 38 references
  1. [8]

    Lead isoto pe geochemistry of the urban environment in the pearl river delta

    Zhu Bing-Quan, Chen Yu-Wei, and Peng Jian-Hua. Lead isoto pe geochemistry of the urban environment in the pearl river delta. Applied Geochemistry, 16(4):409–417, 2001

    2001

  2. [9]

    M. ˇ S. Birman and M. Z. Solomjak. Piecewise polynomial app roximations of functions of classes WpSpanα . Mat. Sb. (N.S.) , 73(115):331–355, 1967

    1967

  3. [10]

    Stochastic co nvergence of a nonconform- ing finite element method for the thin plate spline smoother f or observational data

    Zhiming Chen, Rui Tuo, and Wenlong Zhang. Stochastic co nvergence of a nonconform- ing finite element method for the thin plate spline smoother f or observational data. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. , 56(2):635–659, 2018

    2018

  4. [12]

    Continuation of solut ions to elliptic and parabolic equations on hyperplanes and application to inverse source problems

    Jin Cheng and Masahiro Yamamoto. Continuation of solut ions to elliptic and parabolic equations on hyperplanes and application to inverse source problems. Inverse Problems, 38(8):Paper No. 085005, 23, 2022

    2022

  5. [13]

    Ming-Hui Ding, Rongfang Gong, Hongyu Liu, and Catharin e W. K. Lo. Determining sources in the bioluminescence tomography problem. Inverse Problems , 40(12):Paper No. 125022, 28, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    An inverse source p roblem for Helmholtz’s equa- tion from the Cauchy data with a single wave number

    Abdellatif El Badia and Takaaki Nara. An inverse source p roblem for Helmholtz’s equa- tion from the Cauchy data with a single wave number. Inverse Problems, 27(10):105001, 15, 2011

    2011

  7. [15]

    Lawrence C. Evans. Partial differential equations , volume 19 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1998. 30

    1998

  8. [16]

    Jacqueline Fleckinger and Michel L. Lapidus. Eigenval ues of elliptic boundary value problems with an indefinite weight function. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 295(1):305–324, 1986

    1986

  9. [17]

    Application of the general ized multiscale finite element method in an inverse random source problem

    Shubin Fu and Zhidong Zhang. Application of the general ized multiscale finite element method in an inverse random source problem. J. Comput. Phys. , 429:Paper No. 110032, 17, 2021

    2021

  10. [18]

    Garcia, Axel Osses, and Marcelo Tapia

    Galina C. Garcia, Axel Osses, and Marcelo Tapia. A heat s ource reconstruction formula from single internal measurements using a family of null con trols. J. Inverse Ill-Posed Probl., 21(6):755–779, 2013

    2013

  11. [19]

    S.A. Geer. Empirical Processes in M-Estimation . Cambridge Series in Statistical and Probabilistic Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, 2 000

  12. [20]

    Gorelick, Barbara Evans, and Irwin Remson

    Steven M. Gorelick, Barbara Evans, and Irwin Remson. Ide ntifying sources of ground- water pollution: An optimization approach. Water Resources Research, 19(3):779–790, 1983

    1983

  13. [21]

    Inverse source problems, volume 34 of Mathematical Surveys and Mono- graphs

    Victor Isakov. Inverse source problems, volume 34 of Mathematical Surveys and Mono- graphs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1990

    1990

  14. [22]

    Inverse problems for partial differential equations , volume 127 of Applied Mathematical Sciences

    Victor Isakov. Inverse problems for partial differential equations , volume 127 of Applied Mathematical Sciences. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998

    1998

  15. [23]

    A thr ee-dimensional inverse gravimetry problem for ice with snow caps

    Victor Isakov, Shingyu Leung, and Jianliang Qian. A thr ee-dimensional inverse gravimetry problem for ice with snow caps. Inverse Probl. Imaging , 7(2):523–544, 2013

    2013

  16. [24]

    On the inverse source proble m with boundary data at many wave numbers

    Victor Isakov and Shuai Lu. On the inverse source proble m with boundary data at many wave numbers. In Inverse problems and related topics , volume 310 of Springer Proc. Math. Stat. , pages 59–80. Springer, Singapore, [2020] ©2020

    2020

  17. [25]

    Coerc ivity-based analysis and its application to an inverse source problem for a subdiffusi on equation with time- dependent principal parts

    Daijun Jiang, Zhiyuan Li, and Masahiro Yamamoto. Coerc ivity-based analysis and its application to an inverse source problem for a subdiffusi on equation with time- dependent principal parts. Inverse Problems, 40(12):Paper No. 125027, 15, 2024

    2024

  18. [26]

    Well-pose dness of the stochastic time- fractional diffusion and wave equations and inverse random s ource problems

    Matti Lassas, Zhiyuan Li, and Zhidong Zhang. Well-pose dness of the stochastic time- fractional diffusion and wave equations and inverse random s ource problems. Inverse Problems, 39(8):Paper No. 084001, 36, 2023

    2023

  19. [27]

    Inverse source pro blems for the stochastic wave equations: far-field patterns

    Jianliang Li, Peijun Li, and Xu Wang. Inverse source pro blems for the stochastic wave equations: far-field patterns. SIAM J. Appl. Math. , 82(4):1113–1134, 2022

    2022

  20. [28]

    Rest oring the discontinu- ous heat equation source using sparse boundary data and dyna mic sensors

    Guang Lin, Na Ou, Zecheng Zhang, and Zhidong Zhang. Rest oring the discontinu- ous heat equation source using sparse boundary data and dyna mic sensors. Inverse Problems, 40(4):Paper No. 045014, 17, 2024

    2024

  21. [29]

    Theoretic al and numerical studies of inverse source problem for the linear parabolic equation wi th sparse boundary measure- ments

    Guang Lin, Zecheng Zhang, and Zhidong Zhang. Theoretic al and numerical studies of inverse source problem for the linear parabolic equation wi th sparse boundary measure- ments. Inverse Problems, 38(12):Paper No. 125007, 28, 2022

    2022

  22. [30]

    An integral equation method to recover non-additive and non-separable heat source without initial temperature

    Chein-Shan Liu. An integral equation method to recover non-additive and non-separable heat source without initial temperature. International Journal of Heat and Mass Trans- fer, 97:943–953, 2016. 31

    2016

  23. [31]

    On fluorescence imaging: The diffusion equation model and recov ery of the absorption coefficient of fluorophores

    Jijun Liu, Manabu Machida, Gen Nakamura, Goro Nishimur a, and Chunlong Sun. On fluorescence imaging: The diffusion equation model and recov ery of the absorption coefficient of fluorophores. Science China Mathematics , 65(6):1179–1198, 2022

    2022

  24. [32]

    NELSON and S.H

    P.A. NELSON and S.H. YOON. Estimation of acoustic sourc e strength by inverse methods: Part i, conditioning of the inverse problem. Journal of Sound and Vibration , 233(4):639–664, 2000

    2000

  25. [33]

    On the identificatio n of source term in the heat equation from sparse data

    William Rundell and Zhidong Zhang. On the identificatio n of source term in the heat equation from sparse data. SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis , 52(2):1526–1548, 2020

    2020

  26. [34]

    Uniqueness and numeric al inversion in the time- domain fluorescence diffuse optical tomography

    Chunlong Sun and Zhidong Zhang. Uniqueness and numeric al inversion in the time- domain fluorescence diffuse optical tomography. Inverse Problems , 38(10):Paper No. 104001, 23, 2022

    2022

  27. [35]

    M. Tadi. Inverse heat conduction based on boundary meas urement. Inverse Problems, 13(6):1585–1605, 1997

    1997

  28. [36]

    van der Vaart and J.A

    A. van der Vaart and J.A. Wellner. Weak Convergence and Empirical Processes: With Applications to Statistics . Springer Series in Statistics. Springer, 1996

    1996

  29. [37]

    Stability for a mu lti-frequency inverse random source problem

    Tianjiao Wang, Xiang Xu, and Yue Zhao. Stability for a mu lti-frequency inverse random source problem. Inverse Problems , 40(12):Paper No. 125029, 25, 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    Imaging an acoustic o bstacle and its excitation sources from phaseless near-field data

    Deyue Zhang, Yue Wu, and Yukun Guo. Imaging an acoustic o bstacle and its excitation sources from phaseless near-field data. Inverse Probl. Imaging , 18(4):797–812, 2024. 32

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.