Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 36 references

On Strichartz estimates and optimal blowup stability of supercritical wave equations

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves Strichartz estimates for radial wave equations with potentials in similarity variables, for all d≥3 and almost all regularities 1≤s<d/2, and uses them to show that the quintic ODE blowup is stable at optimal regularity.

desk verdict Broad new Strichartz framework in similarity variables for potential-perturbed wave equations; the advertised quintic application hangs on an unproved spectral lemma that needs a real proof. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15939 v1 pith:ZW73B5CM submitted 2024-11-24 math.AP

David Wallauch This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35L0535B4435L7147D06
keywords StrichartzestimatessimilarityvariablesblowupstabilitysupercriticalwaveequationsradialpotentialsquinticnonlinearequationsemigroupresolventSobolevregularity
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 establishes Strichartz estimates for radial wave equations with potentials in similarity variables, for every spatial dimension $d\ge 3$ and almost every regularity $1\le s

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the similarity-variable operator $\widehat L$ and the resolvent of its closure. The resolvent equation reduces to the singular second-order ODE (2.8); the paper constructs explicit fundamental solutions by a Liouville--Green transformation to a Bessel equation, with symbol-type expansions separately near $\rho=0$ and $\rho=1$, glued by a smooth cut-off $\chi_\lambda$. This gives enough control of $(\lambda-\widehat L)^{-1}$ to justify the Laplace representation $$S(\tau)(I-P)f=\frac1{2\pi i}\lim_{N\to\infty}\int_{\varepsilon+iN}^{\varepsilon-iN}$e^{{\lambda\tau}}$(\$\lambda$-\widehat L)^{-1}(I-P)f\,d\$\lambda$,$$ and the desired Strichartz estimates follow from oscillatory-integral bounds on $e^{\lambda\tau}$ times resolvent differences. A two-level interpolation between $\lfloor s\rfloor$ and $\lceil s\rceil$ regularity then upgrades the bounds to all $s$, while the finite-rank projection $P$ removes the unstable part of the spectrum.

What would settle it

Numerically locate the zeros of the eigenvalue coefficient $c_{2,4}(\lambda)$ for the ODE (2.8) with $V=\tfrac{15}{4}$ in a concrete dimension, say $d=3$, $s=1$; finding any eigenvalue with $\operatorname{Re}\lambda\ge0$ other than the simple $\lambda=1$ would falsify Lemma 6.1 and hence Theorem 1.2, while confirming the spectrum would support the stability claim, and a direct numerical check of the asserted endpoint Strichartz pairs for the potential-free case would test the resolvent estimates behind Theorem 1.1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the cylinder $[0,\infty)\times B_1^d$ obtained from $\tau=-\log(T-t)+\log T$, $\rho=r/(T-t)$, the radial wave equation with potential $V$ becomes $\partial_\tau\Psi=\widehat L\Psi+N(\Psi)$, where $\widehat L$ is the differential operator (1.4). Theorem 1.1 asserts that the closure of $\widehat L$ on $H^s_{\rm rad}\times H^{s-1}_{\rm rad}$ generates a semigroup $S$, and there is a finite-rank projection $P$ onto the unstable eigenspace such that $S(\tau)(I-P)$ satisfies the homogeneous and inhomogeneous Strichartz estimates $$\|[S(\tau)(I-P)f]_1\|_{L^p_\tau\dot $W^{{n,q}}$(B_1^d)}\lesssim\|(I-P)f\|_{H^s\times $H^{{s-1}}$}$$ for $0\le n\le s-1$ and scaling-admissible $p,q$, together with fractional-derivative versions and an $L^\infty_\tau H^s$ bound. With the quintic potential $V=\tfrac{15}{4}$ and the spectral fact that the point spectrum of $\widehat L$ lies in $\{\operatorname{Re}z<0\}\cup\{1\}$ with $1$ simple, Theorem 1.2 shows that the ODE blowup is stable at the critical regularity: for small $\delta$ and data in $H^{(d-1)/2}_{\rm rad}\times H^{(d-3)/2}_{\rm rad}(B_{1+\delta}^d)$ within $\delta/M$ of $u_1[0]$, there is a $T\in[1-\delta,1+\delta]$ and a unique solution in the light cone satisfying (1.6) and (1.7). The proof identifies the finite-dimensional subspace $U$ with the unstable eigenspace introduced by $V$, so the Strichartz theorem itself is independent of the concrete spectrum.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is Lemma 6.1, that the quintic linearized operator has exactly one nonnegative eigenvalue, the simple $\lambda=1$, with the rest of the spectrum decaying; this spectral fact is quoted from an earlier hypergeometric calculation rather than derived in the paper, and if it failed the projection step in Theorem 1.2 would collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Theorem 1.1 applies to any smooth radial potential, so the dispersive part of a blowup-stability proof no longer has to be re-derived for each nonlinearity.
  • For the quintic equation, the theorem yields an open ball around $u_1[0]$ in the critical space whose data all follow the ODE blowup profile, with a quantitative $L^2_t L^\infty_x$ bound and control of $\dot W^{n,d/n}$ norms.
  • Because the Strichartz range matches that of the free radial wave equation, including $L^pL^\infty$ endpoints, the estimates are strong enough to work at the scaling-critical regularity $s=(d-1)/2$.
  • The inhomogeneous version of the estimates provides the contraction-mapping setup used in Section 6, so the stability theorem is a direct corollary once spectral data for the linearized operator are available.
  • The paper states that the same proof can be modified to other nonlinearities whenever the required spectral information can be obtained.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If Theorem 1.1 is as general as it appears, the main remaining obstacle for optimal blowup stability of other explicit supercritical profiles is purely spectral: one must locate the eigenvalues of the corresponding $\widehat L$ on $H^s\times H^{s-1}$, not re-prove dispersive estimates.
  • The excluded regularities in odd dimensions, where $\lceil s\rceil>d/2$, are an artifact of the interpolation route; a direct resolvent estimate at regularity $(d+1)/2$, if found, would close the gap and likely extend stability to all $s<d/2$.
  • The endpoint $L^pL^\infty$ bounds at $s=d/2-1/p$ may support stability statements in slightly weaker topologies, for instance by measuring the blowup profile in $L^p_tL^\infty_x$ alone as in (1.6), and may give information about the rate at which solutions converge to the self-similar profile.
  • For potentials whose new eigenvalues sit on the boundary of the essential spectrum, the projection $P$ is a bounded part of a spectral projection; quantifying how $S(\tau)P$ decays there could yield explicit rates in the stability estimate rather than a fixed small $\delta$ ball.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops Strichartz estimates for radial wave equations with potentials in similarity variables on the unit ball, for dimensions d >= 3 and regularities 1 <= s < d/2 with ceiling(s) <= d/2. Theorem 1.1 asserts that, after removing a finite-rank component, the semigroup associated with the similarity-variable operator L satisfies homogeneous and inhomogeneous Strichartz estimates, including derivative versions and fractional regularity. The proof combines a resolvent construction from ODE asymptotics and Bessel functions, a Laplace representation of the semigroup, oscillatory-integral estimates, and interpolation. Theorem 1.2 applies these estimates to prove an optimal blowup stability result for the quintic nonlinear wave equation at scaling regularity, based on spectral information about the linearized operator.

Significance. If Theorem 1.1 is fully correct, it is a substantial advance: it extends the Strichartz framework in similarity variables to all dimensions d >= 3 and to a large range of non-integer regularities, thereby unifying earlier results at energy and at selected higher regularities. The resolvent/oscillatory-integral strategy is coherent, and Theorem 1.1 is largely independent of fine spectral information because the finite-rank projection absorbs the unstable directions. The application to quintic blowup stability is natural and demonstrates the utility of the framework. However, the advertised application currently rests on an unproved spectral assertion, and the manuscript also contains a sign inconsistency in the central resolvent equation and a questionable embedding in the nonlinear estimates; these issues must be addressed before the full claims can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 6, Lemma 6.1] The proof of Theorem 1.2 depends on the assertion that the linearized operator has point spectrum contained in (Re z < 0) union {1}, with 1 simple. This is used in Lemma 6.3 to identify P as one-dimensional and to control the projected nonlinearity. The proof of Lemma 6.1 is a single sentence: the eigenvalue ODE 'can be transformed into a hypergeometric equation' and the conclusion follows by adapting Lemmas 4.10 and 4.11 of [16]. This is not a complete proof. The ODE contains d explicitly through the (d-1)/rho term, so the hypergeometric parameters depend on d, while [16] treats odd space dimensions and Theorem 1.2 claims all d >= 3. If an additional eigenvalue with Re lambda >= 0 exists for some d, the projection P in Section 6 is not the full unstable spectral projection, the estimate for P K_u in Lemma 6.3 fails, and the stability statement does not follow. Please provide the full hypergeometric spectral calculation for all d >= 3, including the simplicity of lambda = 1 and the absence of eigenvalues on the boundary of the essential spectrum, or cite an explicit theorem covering all dimensions.
  2. [Section 2 and Section 4] The sign of the potential term is inconsistent across the central equations. Substituting f2 = rho f1' + (d - 2s + 2lambda)/2 f1 - g1 from the first component of (lambda - L)f = g into the second component gives a potential term -V(rho) f1, not +V(rho) f1. Eq. (3.1) and Lemma 6.1 indeed use the minus sign, but Eqs. (2.7), (2.8), and (4.3) display +V(rho) f1. Consequently, the resolvent R constructed in Lemma 4.6 and used in the oscillatory-integral estimate is the resolvent for L0 - (0, V f1), not for L = L0 + (0, V f1) as defined in (1.4). The argument is probably repairable by replacing V with -V consistently, but as written the derivation is not matched to the operator in Theorem 1.1. Please correct the sign throughout.
  3. [Section 6, Lemma 6.2] The proof for even d relies on the embedding H^{(d-3)/2}(B^d_1) subset W^{d/2-1, 2d/(d+1)}(B^d_1). For d = 4 this asserts H^{1/2} subset W^{1, 8/5}, which is not a standard Sobolev embedding and is false for general functions; radial symmetry does not increase the differentiability order from s to s+1. The subsequent Holder/product estimate for u^5 in H^{(d-3)/2} is therefore not justified for even dimensions. Please provide a correct proof of the nonlinear estimate, for example by using the full H^{(d-1)/2} information available in the X-norm together with admissible Strichartz pairs, or by citing a proved radial embedding with the stated parameters.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Lemma 2.1] The free Strichartz estimates are stated with (I - P)f on the right-hand side, but no operator P has been defined for the free semigroup S0; the projector should presumably be the identity in that statement.
  2. [Definition 5.1 and Lemma 6.2] The condition q in [2, d/n] is undefined when n = 0; it should read q in [2, infinity] for n = 0.
  3. [Throughout] There are numerous typographical and formatting issues, including 'ad verbatim', a missing symbol in the proof of Lemma 4.15, undefined or inconsistent symbols in the definitions of kappa_j, and several repeated phrases such as 'we conclude this proof'. A careful proofreading pass is needed.
  4. [Section 5] In the proof of Lemma 5.3, some operators are written as functions of lambda where the variable tau is intended, and the change of variables t = 1 - e^{-y} in the L^p L^infinity estimates should be stated consistently with the subsequent Young's inequality application.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No load-bearing circularity: Theorem 1.1 is proved by resolvent and oscillatory-integral analysis, not by assuming the target estimates; the only notable imported input for Theorem 1.2 is an external spectral fact, not a self-citation chain.

full rationale

Theorem 1.1 is derived from an asymptotic resolvent construction for the similarity-variable operator L, followed by a Laplace representation and oscillatory-integral bounds; the free semigroup estimates are obtained by scaling from classical Cartesian Strichartz estimates (Lemma 2.1), and the finite-rank projection P is obtained from spectral perturbation theory (Lemma 2.2), not from fitting or from the desired inequalities. None of the technical lemmas that cite the author's previous works ([17], [18], [36]) replaces the central proof step with the theorem being proved: they are published proof techniques (oscillatory-integral estimates, interpolation bookkeeping, variation of blowup time) and are not equivalent to the Strichartz estimates by construction. The stability application Theorem 1.2 rests on the spectral assertion of Lemma 6.1, whose hypergeometric computation is imported from Donninger–Schörkhuber [16] rather than displayed; since [16] is an external peer-reviewed source (not the present author's work) and does not assume Theorem 1.1, this is a completeness/correctness risk (especially for even dimensions) but not a circular reliance on the paper's own conclusions. The self-citations that do occur are routine and non-load-bearing, so the central derivation is not circular.

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

The paper has no data-fitted constants and introduces no new physical entities. Its central claim rests on prior semigroup and spectral theorems: Ostermann's Theorem 2.1 in [34], the resolvent-semigroup framework from [10, 13, 17, 18, 36], classical Cartesian Strichartz estimates, Bessel-function asymptotics, and interpolation theory. Lemma 6.1's spectral fact is imported from [16] by adaptation. These are mathematical inputs rather than fitted parameters.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Free radial wave operator in similarity coordinates generates a semigroup with known exponential growth bounds (Theorem 2.1 in [34]).
    Invoked in Section 2 and in Lemma 2.2 as the starting point for the perturbed operator L; not proved in this paper.
  • domain assumption Classical Strichartz estimates for the free radial wave equation in Cartesian coordinates are valid.
    Used in Lemma 2.1 via scaling to obtain estimates for S0 in similarity variables.
  • domain assumption The linearized quintic operator L has point spectrum contained in {Re z < 0} union {1}, with 1 simple.
    Lemma 6.1, proved only by adapting Lemmas 4.10 and 4.11 of [16]; load-bearing for Theorem 1.2.
  • standard math Complex interpolation of weighted L^p Sobolev spaces works as in Proposition A.1.
    Used to pass from floor/ceil regularity Strichartz estimates to fractional s; the proof is included in Appendix A.
  • standard math Bessel function asymptotics and the Liouville-Green transformation give the stated fundamental systems in Lemmas 3.1 through 3.4.
    Foundation of the resolvent construction; parts are deferred to [17] and [36].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On Strichartz estimates and optimal blowup stability of supercritical wave equations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZW73B5CM

@misc{pith2026241115939,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On Strichartz estimates and optimal blowup stability of supercritical wave equations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZW73B5CM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15939}
}
abstract

We establish Strichartz estimates, including estimates involving spatial derivatives, for radial wave equations with potentials in similarity variables. This is accomplished for all spatial dimensions $d\geq 3$ and almost all regularities above energy and below the threshold $\frac d2$. These estimates provide a unified framework that allows one to derive optimal blowup stability result for a wide range of energy supercritical nonlinear wave equations. To showcase their usefulness, an optimal blowup stability result for the quintic nonlinear wave equation is also obtained.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [16]

    Stable blowup for wa ve equations in odd space dimen- sions

    Roland Donninger and Birgit Sch¨ orkhuber. Stable blowup for wa ve equations in odd space dimen- sions. In Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincare (C) Non Linear Analysi s, volume 34, pages 1181–1213. Elsevier, 2017

    work page 2017

  2. [1]

    The time-like minimal sur face equation in minkowski space: low regularity solutions

    Albert Ai, Mihaela Ifrim, and Daniel Tataru. The time-like minimal sur face equation in minkowski space: low regularity solutions. Inventiones mathematicae, 235:745–891, 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [2]

    On the profile of energy concent ration at blow-up points for subcon- formal focusing nonlinear waves

    Spyros Alexakis and Arick Shao. On the profile of energy concent ration at blow-up points for subcon- formal focusing nonlinear waves. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society , 369(8):5525– 5542, 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [3]

    Blow-up profile for the complex-valued semilinear wav e equation

    Asma Azaiez. Blow-up profile for the complex-valued semilinear wav e equation. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society , 367(8):5891–5933, 2015

    work page 2015

  5. [4]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

    J¨ oran Bergh and J¨ orgen L¨ ofstr¨ om.Interpolation spaces: an introduction , volume 223. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

    work page 2012

  6. [5]

    Stable blowup for the focusing energy critica l nonlinear wave equation under random perturbations

    Bjoern Bringmann. Stable blowup for the focusing energy critica l nonlinear wave equation under random perturbations. Comm. Partial Differential Equations , 45(12):1755–1777, 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [6]

    On blowup for the supercritical quadratic wave equation

    Elek Csobo, Irfan Glogi´ c, and Birgit Sch¨ orkhuber. On blowup f or the supercritical quadratic wave equation. Preprint arXiv:2109.11931, 2021

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

  8. [7]

    Strichartz and smoothing estimat es for dispersive equations with magnetic potentials

    Piero D’ancona and Luca Fanelli. Strichartz and smoothing estimat es for dispersive equations with magnetic potentials. Communications in Partial Differential Equations , 33(6):1082–1112, 2008

    work page 2008

Show all 36 references
  1. [8]

    On stable self-similar blowup for equivariant wav e maps

    Roland Donninger. On stable self-similar blowup for equivariant wav e maps. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 64(8):1095–1147, 2011

    2011

  2. [9]

    Stable self-similar blowup in energy supercritica l Yang-Mills theory

    Roland Donninger. Stable self-similar blowup in energy supercritica l Yang-Mills theory. Math. Z. , 278(3-4):1005–1032, 2014

    2014

  3. [10]

    Strichartz estimates in similarity coordinates and stable blowup for the critical wave equation

    Roland Donninger. Strichartz estimates in similarity coordinates and stable blowup for the critical wave equation. Duke Math. J. , 166(9):1627–1683, 2017

    2017

  4. [11]

    Stable self-similar blow up for energy subcritical wave equations

    Roland Donninger and Sch¨ orkuber Birgit. Stable self-similar blow up for energy subcritical wave equations. Dynamics of Partial Differential Equations , 9(1):63–87, 2012

    2012

  5. [12]

    On the existence and stab ility of blowup for wave maps into a negatively curved target

    Roland Donninger and Irfan Glogi´ c. On the existence and stab ility of blowup for wave maps into a negatively curved target. Anal. PDE , 12(2):389–416, 2019

    2019

  6. [13]

    Blowup stability at optimal regula rity for the critical wave equation

    Roland Donninger and Ziping Rao. Blowup stability at optimal regula rity for the critical wave equation. Adv. Math., 370:107219, 81, 2020

    2020

  7. [14]

    Stable blow up dynam ics for energy supercritical wave equations

    Roland Donninger and Birgit Sch¨ orkhuber. Stable blow up dynam ics for energy supercritical wave equations. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society , pages 2167–2189, 2014

    2014

  8. [15]

    On blowup in supercr itical wave equations

    Roland Donninger and Birgit Sch¨ orkhuber. On blowup in supercr itical wave equations. Communi- cations in Mathematical Physics , 346(3):907–943, 2016

    2016

  9. [17]

    Optimal blowup stability for s upercritical wave maps

    Roland Donninger and David Wallauch. Optimal blowup stability for s upercritical wave maps. Adv. Math., 433:Paper No. 109291, 86, 2023

    2023

  10. [18]

    Optimal blowup stability for t hree-dimensional wave maps, 2023

    Roland Donninger and David Wallauch. Optimal blowup stability for t hree-dimensional wave maps, 2023

    2023

  11. [19]

    Stable blowup for the supercritical hyperbolic Y ang-Mills equations

    Irfan Glogi´ c. Stable blowup for the supercritical hyperbolic Y ang-Mills equations. Adv. Math. , 408:Paper No. 108633, 52, 2022

    2022

  12. [20]

    Co-dimension one stab le blowup for the supercritical cubic wave equation

    Irfan Glogi´ c and Birgit Sch¨ orkhuber. Co-dimension one stab le blowup for the supercritical cubic wave equation. Advances in Mathematics , 390:107930, 2021

    2021

  13. [21]

    Sobolev spaces of symmetric functions and applications

    Djairo Guedes de Figueiredo, Ederson Moreira dos Santos, and Ol ´ ımpio Hiroshi Miyagaki. Sobolev spaces of symmetric functions and applications. Journal of Functional Analysis , 261(12):3735–3770, 2011

    2011

  14. [22]

    On stability of self-similar blowup for mass supercritical NLS

    Zexing Li. On stability of self-similar blowup for mass supercritical NLS. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.02078, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    On existence and scatt ering with minimal regularity for semilinear wave equations

    Hans Lindblad and Christopher D Sogge. On existence and scatt ering with minimal regularity for semilinear wave equations. Journal of Functional Analysis , 130(2):357–426, 1995

    1995

  16. [24]

    Determination of the blow-up rate for the semilinear wave equation

    Frank Merle and Hatem Zaag. Determination of the blow-up rate for the semilinear wave equation. American journal of mathematics , 125(5):1147–1164, 2003

    2003

  17. [25]

    Determination of the blow-up rate for a critical semilinear wave equation

    Frank Merle and Hatem Zaag. Determination of the blow-up rate for a critical semilinear wave equation. Mathematische Annalen , 331(2):395–416, 2005

    2005

  18. [26]

    Existence and universality of the b low-up profile for the semilinear wave equation in one space dimension

    Frank Merle and Hatem Zaag. Existence and universality of the b low-up profile for the semilinear wave equation in one space dimension. Journal of Functional Analysis , 253(1):43–121, 2007. 80

    2007

  19. [27]

    Openness of the set of non-char acteristic points and regularity of the blow-up curve for the 1 d semilinear wave equation

    Frank Merle and Hatem Zaag. Openness of the set of non-char acteristic points and regularity of the blow-up curve for the 1 d semilinear wave equation. Communications in mathematical physics , 282(1):55, 2008

    2008

  20. [28]

    Existence and classification of cha racteristic points at blow-up for a semilinear wave equation in one space dimension

    Frank Merle and Hatem Zaag. Existence and classification of cha racteristic points at blow-up for a semilinear wave equation in one space dimension. American Journal of Mathematics , 134(3):581– 648, 2012

    2012

  21. [29]

    Isolatedness of characteristic p oints at blowup for a 1-dimensional semilinear wave equation

    Frank Merle and Hatem Zaag. Isolatedness of characteristic p oints at blowup for a 1-dimensional semilinear wave equation. Duke Mathematical Journal , 161(15):2837–2908, 2012

    2012

  22. [30]

    On the stability of the notion of non -characteristic point and blow-up profile for semilinear wave equations

    Frank Merle and Hatem Zaag. On the stability of the notion of non -characteristic point and blow-up profile for semilinear wave equations. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 333(3):1529–1562, 2015

    2015

  23. [31]

    Global parametrices and dis persive estimates for variable coef- ficient wave equations

    Jason Metcalfe and Daniel Tataru. Global parametrices and dis persive estimates for variable coef- ficient wave equations. Mathematische Annalen , 353, 07 2007

    2007

  24. [32]

    Asymptotics and special functions

    Frank Olver. Asymptotics and special functions . CRC Press, 1997

    1997

  25. [33]

    A characterization of the subspace of r adially symmetric functions in sobolev spaces

    Matthias Ostermann. A characterization of the subspace of r adially symmetric functions in sobolev spaces. Communications in Contemporary Mathematics , 0(0):2450018, 0

  26. [34]

    Stable blowup for focusing semilinear wave equations in all dimensions

    Matthias Ostermann. Stable blowup for focusing semilinear wave equations in all dimensions. Trans- actions of the American Mathematical Society , 2024

    2024

  27. [35]

    Interpolation theory, function spaces, differential opera tors

    Hans Triebel. Interpolation theory, function spaces, differential opera tors. Johann Ambrosius Barth, Heidelberg, second edition, 1995

    1995

  28. [36]

    Strichartz estimates and blowup stability for ene rgy critical nonlinear wave equa- tions

    David Wallauch. Strichartz estimates and blowup stability for ene rgy critical nonlinear wave equa- tions. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society , 376(06):4321–4360, 2023. Bˆatiment des Math ´ ematiques, EPFL, Station 8, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland Email address ...

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.