Multiple Normalized Solutions to a Class of Modified Quasilinear Schrodinger Equations Schrodinger Equations

Ayesha Baig; Li Zhouxin

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 44 references

Multiple Normalized Solutions to a Class of Modified Quasilinear Schrodinger Equations Schrodinger Equations

T0 review · 4 major / 5 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 A prescribed-mass quasilinear equation has positive normalized solutions in six growth regimes.

desk verdict Plausible and genuinely new extension of the global-branch method to a quasilinear class, but the global branch is only sketched and the L-infinity return step is proved only for power nonlinearities—so the main theorem is not yet a proof. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15962 v1 pith:T5W3SZ4V submitted 2024-11-24 math.AP

Ayesha Baig , Li Zhouxin This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 35Q5535J6235B3235A15

keywords normalizedsolutionsquasilinearSchrödingerequationdualapproachglobalbranchprescribedmasscriticalexponentpositiveradialmultiplicity

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

This paper establishes a full existence, non-existence, and multiplicity picture for positive normalized solutions of a modified quasilinear Schrödinger equation in dimensions N≥3, under a prescribed L2 mass constraint. It treats nonlinearities that are mass subcritical, mass critical, or mass supercritical in one framework, through a dual change of variables followed by a global branch argument. The main theorem gives the exact mass ranges in which a positive solution exists, depending on the asymptotic exponents of the nonlinearity, and proves that the constructed solutions solve the original quasilinear equation for small enough k. A sympathetic reader would care because normalized solutions model standing waves with fixed mass in optics and plasma physics, where the quasilinear term is a singular perturbation.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the dual change of variables v=G(u)=∫₀ᵘ g(s)ds with g(t)=√(1−kt²) truncated to remain in [√(1/6),1]. This converts the nonsmooth quasilinear problem into the semilinear equation −Δv+λ G⁻¹(v)/g(G⁻¹(v))=f(G⁻¹(v))/g(G⁻¹(v)), whose functional is C¹ on H¹(ℝ^N). The proof then studies the connected branch 𝒮̃ of positive radial solutions parameterized by λ, uses the mass map ρ̃(λ,v)=‖G⁻¹(v)‖₂² and its limits as λ→0⁺ and λ→+∞ to determine attainable masses, and uses an iteration argument to bound ‖v_λ‖∞ independently of k, ensuring |u_λ|∞≤√6 C₁<√(1/(3k)).

What would settle it

For a permitted nonlinearity such as f(s)=$s^{{α−1}}$(2+sin s) with α∈(2,2N/(N−2)), compute the dual solution v_λ and test whether ‖v_λ‖∞≤C₁ with C₁ independent of k; if not, the truncation step fails and the constructed u_λ is not a solution of the original equation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the quasilinear equation −Δu+λu+(k/2)[Δ(u²)]u=f(u) with prescribed mass ‖u‖₂²=c has positive normalized solutions exactly in the mass ranges dictated by the growth exponents α,β of f at zero and at infinity: any c in the mass-subcritical case 2<α,β<2+4/N and the mass-supercritical case 2+4/N<α,β<2N/(N−2); c in the interval (c∗,c∗) in the exactly mass-critical case α=β=2+4/N; and small or large mass intervals in the mixed and at-least-critical cases, with no positive normalized solutions outside these ranges. The solutions are radially symmetric, the Lagrange multiplier λ is positive, and the branch of dual solutions is continuous over all λ>0.

Load-bearing premise

The proof relies on a uniform bound on the dual solution's maximum size that is established only for power-type nonlinearities, although the theorem permits more general ones; if that bound fails for a permitted nonlinearity, the constructed function is not a solution of the original equation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For any prescribed mass c>0, a positive normalized solution exists in both the mass subcritical and mass supercritical cases, while the exactly critical case admits solutions only for c in the interval (c∗,c∗).
In the mixed cases there are at least two distinct positive normalized solutions for small (or large) masses and none for large (or small) masses.
The constructed solutions solve the original equation (1.1), not merely the truncated dual problem, whenever 0<k<k₁, with sup|u_λ|≤√(1/(3k)).
The positive normalized solutions form a connected branch over λ∈(0,+∞), and the limits of ‖G⁻¹(v_λ)‖₂ as λ→0⁺ and λ→+∞ determine which masses are attained.

Reading between the lines

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

A natural next step would be to replace the specific truncation g with any coefficient satisfying the same structural identities; the branch argument would likely reproduce the same six-regime classification.
Because k₁=1/(18C₁²) comes from a conservative uniform bound, sharper estimates might show the original equation is solved for a much wider range of k than the theorem states.
If the limiting profiles U and V could be identified explicitly, the critical mass interval (c∗,c∗) and the small/large mass thresholds would become concrete, testable numbers.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper is a genuine attempt to carry Jeanjean–Zhang–Zhong's global branch approach over to a quasilinear Schrödinger equation with prescribed mass, via the dual change v=G(u). That combination is new for this class, and the full mass-regime classification (subcritical, exact critical, mixed, supercritical) is not in the papers it cites. The asymptotic analysis of ||G^{-1}(v_λ)||_2 as λ→0+ and λ→+∞ is competently done, the local uniqueness argument via nondegeneracy of the limiting profiles is reasonable, and the paper is honest about importing the main branch machinery from [33]. It is not circular; the imported theorem is by other authors.

The problem is that the central step is not delivered. Theorem 5.4 asserts that the connected component S̃ projects onto all of (0,+∞), and the text says only "since similar to [33] we only sketch it." Compactness of S(a,b), which is needed for the Leray–Schauder degree argument, is asserted with "applying a similar blow-up technique and an ODE approach, it is easy to demonstrated." No proof is given. Without P1(S̃)=(0,+∞), the inclusions ρ(S)⊃ρ(S̃)⊃... in Section 6.1 are empty, and all six existence/non-existence regimes in Theorem 1.2 rest on an unproved continuum. That is load-bearing.

There is a second serious gap. Proposition 6.1 claims a uniform L∞ bound for all positive solutions of the dual equation, independent of k, but the proof uses f(s)=|s|^{p-2}s at the crucial inequality. The theorem is stated for general f satisfying (F1)-(F2). Without this bound, the step u=G^{-1}(v) may violate |u|∞

Smaller issues: (2.3) is missing the λ|u|^2 term, k/κ notation drifts, and the final "graphical evidence" for the bound is not a proof. These are minor relative to the two gaps, but they confirm the manuscript is not in referee-ready shape.

Verdict: the paper has a plausible route and a real contribution, but the main theorem is not established as written. It deserves a serious referee—the gaps are specific and possibly fillable—but the referee should demand a complete proof of compactness of S(a,b) and the projection claim, and a version of Proposition 6.1 that covers the stated class of nonlinearities.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the quasilinear Schrödinger equation (1.1) with prescribed L² mass, under nonlinearities satisfying general growth assumptions (F1)–(F3). Using the dual transformation via G(u), the authors convert the problem into the semilinear equation (2.7) and then invoke a global branch approach adapted from Jeanjean–Zhang–Zhong [33]. The main theorem, Theorem 1.2, claims existence, non-existence, and multiplicity of positive normalized solutions in six regimes depending on the mass-subcritical, mass-critical, and mass-supercritical position of the exponents α and β. The proof combines asymptotic limits as λ→0⁺ and λ→+∞, local uniqueness results for small and large λ, a claimed global connectedness of the solution branch, and an L∞ bound independent of the truncation parameter k.

Significance. If the result were established, it would be a welcome extension of the global branch method of [33] to quasilinear equations, providing a unified treatment of mass-subcritical, critical, and supercritical nonlinearities. The asymptotic identifications in Theorem 3.6, especially the limits of the L²-norm of G⁻¹(v_λ), are natural and potentially useful. However, the paper does not currently establish the main theorem: the global projection P₁(S̃)=(0,+∞) is only sketched, the uniform L∞ bound in Proposition 6.1 is proved only for pure power nonlinearities, and the uniqueness/continuity of the branch for intermediate λ is assumed without proof. These are load-bearing gaps, not presentation issues.

major comments (4)

[§5, after Theorem 5.4] The assertion P₁(S̃)=(0,+∞) is not proved. The text states "Since similar to [33] we only sketch it" and then asserts compactness of S(a,b) with the sentence "Applying a similar blow-up technique and an ODE approach, it is easy to demonstrated that the set S(a,b) is compact", but no proof is supplied. No verification is given that the Leray–Schauder continuation theorem applies, that the local fixed point index −1 persists along the branch, or that the branch cannot escape to infinity. Since the inclusions ρ(S) ⊃ ρ(S̃) ⊃ ⋯ in Section 6.1 all rely on P₁(S̃)=(0,+∞), the existence and non-existence conclusions of Theorem 1.2 are unsupported without this step.
[Theorem 5.4] The theorem assumes that for every λ>0 there is a unique positive solution v_λ of (2.7) and that the map λ↦v_λ is continuous. However, uniqueness is proved in Theorem 4.1 only for λ small or λ large. For intermediate λ, no uniqueness is demonstrated, so the map λ↦v_λ is not well-defined and the proof's use of uniqueness at an arbitrary λ₀ to conclude convergence is circular. In particular, the final claim that the set of solutions is connected is not justified.
[Proposition 6.1] The uniform bound ‖v_λ‖_∞ ≤ C₁ with C₁ independent of k is proved only for the pure power nonlinearity f(s)=|s|^{p−2}s. The proof explicitly specializes at the line "Considering f(s)=|s|^{p−2}s" and uses the L^{2^*} norm of v_λ with exponent p−2 in the subsequent Hölder estimates. Theorem 1.2 is stated for general f satisfying (F1)–(F2), so the bound needed to set k₁ = 1/(18C₁²) and conclude that u_λ = G⁻¹(v_λ) solves the original equation (1.1) is not established for the claimed class of nonlinearities. Without this bound, the dual solution may solve only the truncated equation, not (1.1).
[Equation (2.3)] The energy functional in (2.3) is written as J_κ(u) = ½∫g²(u)|∇u|²dx + ½∫λ dx − ∫F(u)dx, in which the middle term contains no factor |u|²; this is not the correct functional for equation (2.2). In (2.5), the λ-term is omitted entirely, while it reappears in the derivative expression (2.6). These inconsistencies make the variational formulation ambiguous and should be corrected before the results can be assessed.

minor comments (5)

[Throughout] The manuscript contains many typographical errors and OCR artifacts, including the repeated word "Schrodinger" in the title, "Corrosponding" in the footnote, and inconsistent notation such as both k and κ for the quasilinear parameter.
[Theorem 3.1 and Lemma 3.5] The proofs of Lemma 3.1 and Lemma 3.5 are almost entirely delegated to "following the method in [33]" and "in a manner analogous to [33]"; since these asymptotic results feed directly into Theorem 3.6 and hence into the proof of Theorem 1.2, more details are needed for the paper to be self-contained.
[Theorem 5.4 proof] The proof appears to be written for N=1, using H¹(ℝ), L^p(ℝ), and the phrase "v_{λ_n} is a decreasing function", whereas the theorem is stated for N≥3 and radial functions in H¹(ℝ^N). This dimensional inconsistency should be fixed.
[Section 6.1, case (iv)] The "two distinct solutions" conclusion is derived from the fact that the same mass c is attained at two different λ values. Since the theorem states solutions as pairs (λ_i, u_{λ_i}), the distinctness of the pairs follows, but the text should explicitly state this to avoid ambiguity.
[Figure 1] Figure 1 is presented as "Graphical Evidence" for the inequality √6C₁ < √(1/(3k)); the inequality is elementary and is proved algebraically in the text, so the figure is unnecessary and its role as evidence is improper.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation found: the global-branch framework is imported from independent prior work by Jeanjean–Zhang–Zhong, and the gaps identified are incompleteness of proof rather than self-referential reasoning.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. The central global-branch claim P1(S̃)=(0,+∞) is imported from [33] (Jeanjean, Zhang, Zhong), who are not the present authors, and the manuscript explicitly labels the argument a sketch: 'Since similar to [33] we only sketch it.' The compactness assertion for S(a,b), stated as 'Applying a similar blow-up technique and an ordinary differential equation (ODE) approach, it is easy to demonstrated that the set S(a,b) is compact,' is unproved in the text, but this is a missing proof rather than an input being renamed as an output. Similarly, Proposition 6.1 is stated for general f satisfying (F1)–(F2), yet its proof restricts to the power case ('Considering f(s)=|s|^(p−2)s'), which is a proof gap, not a circular reduction. The asymptotic mass limits in Theorem 3.6 are derived from the independently established rescalings w_n and known solutions U, V, and the existence/non-existence regimes in Section 6.1 are obtained by continuity along the projected branch, not by defining the target quantity in terms of itself. There is no fitted parameter called a prediction, no load-bearing self-citation chain, and no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors' own prior work. The main risks are mathematical incompleteness and an over-wide statement of Proposition 6.1, neither of which constitutes circularity.

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

The central claim rests on nonlinearity assumptions (F1)-(F3), imported global-branch and uniqueness theorems, and a k-independent L infinity bound whose proof is not valid for general f. No free parameters are fitted to data; the critical mass constants are derived from limiting profiles U and V.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption (F1)-(F2): f in C^1[0, infinity), f(0)=0, f(s)>0, with prescribed power-like limits of f' at 0 and infinity with exponents alpha, beta in (2, 2N/(N-2)).
Section 1.2. These growth conditions drive Lemma 2.4, which validates the Berestycki-Lions setting for h_lambda.
domain assumption (F3): there is no positive radially decreasing classical solution of -Delta u + k/2 [Delta(u^2)] u = f(u) in R^N.
Section 1.2; Remark 1.1 only verifies it for power nonlinearities. Used in blow-up arguments and in the small-lambda uniqueness proof.
domain assumption The truncated coefficient g(t) and its inverse G^{-1} satisfy (g0)-(g7), including G^{-1}(t)/t tending to 1 at 0 and to sqrt(6) at infinity.
Lemma 2.2 quotes (g4)-(g7) from [39] and [32]; these limits set the critical mass thresholds and the factor 6 in the limiting equation.
standard math Berestycki-Lions existence, Gidas-Ni-Nirenberg symmetry, and mountain-pass characterization apply to h_lambda after odd extension.
Proposition 5.1 imports [3], [4], [8], [20]; the non-oddness of h_lambda is circumvented by an odd extension whose ground state is nonnegative.
standard math The limiting profiles U and V are unique and nondegenerate, and no nontrivial bounded radial solution exists for the limiting equations.
Used in Theorem 4.1 and Lemmas 3.1 and 3.4; sourced to [7] and [33] without reproduction.
standard math The solution set S(a,b) is compact and the local fixed point index of T_lambda at v_lambda is -1, so the projected branch covers all lambda > 0.
Theorem 5.4's final paragraph asserts this transfer from [33] by degree theory with only a sketch.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multiple Normalized Solutions to a Class of Modified Quasilinear Schrodinger Equations Schrodinger Equations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/T5W3SZ4V

@misc{pith2026241115962,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multiple Normalized Solutions to a Class of Modified Quasilinear Schrodinger Equations Schrodinger Equations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/T5W3SZ4V}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15962}
}

read the original abstract

We investigate the existence, non-existence, and multiplicity of positive solutions to a class of quasilinear Schrodinger equations with a prescribed mass condition in higher dimensions. Using the dual approach, the equation is transformed into a corresponding semilinear form. A global branch approach is employed to address nonlinearities that may be mass subcritical, critical, or supercritical. This study further examines the asymptotic behavior of positive solutions as the parameter approaches zero or infinity and identifies a continuum of unbounded solutions within the functional space under consideration.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

[33]

A global branch approach to normalized solutions for the Schrödinger equation [J]

Jeanjean L, Zhang J, Zhong X. A global branch approach to normalized solutions for the Schrödinger equation [J]. Journal de Mathématiques Pures et Appl iquées, 2024, 183: 44-75

work page 2024
[1]

On a class of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with superlinear or asymptotically linear terms [J]

Severo U B, Gloss E, DA Silva E D. On a class of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with superlinear or asymptotically linear terms [J]. Journal of Differential Equations, 2017, 263(6): 3550-80

work page 2017
[2]

Solutions for a quasilinear Schrödinger equation: a dual approach [J]

Colin M, Jeanjean L. Solutions for a quasilinear Schrödinger equation: a dual approach [J]. Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, 2004, 56(2): 213-26

work page 2004
[3]

Nonlinear scalar field equations

Berestycki H, Lions P -L. Nonlinear scalar field equations. Pt. 1 [J]. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 1983, 82(4): 313-46

work page 1983
[4]

Symmetry of positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations in Rn, PartA [J]

Gidas B. Symmetry of positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations in Rn, PartA [J]. Mathematical Analysis and Applications. Part A, Advances in Mathematics, Supplementary Studies, 1981: 369-402

work page 1981
[5]

Existence of solution s with prescribed norm for semilinear elliptic equations [J]

Jeanjean L. Existence of solution s with prescribed norm for semilinear elliptic equations [J]. Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, 1997, 28(10): 1633-59

work page 1997
[6]

Large -amplitude quasi -solitons in superfluid films [J]

Kurihara S. Large -amplitude quasi -solitons in superfluid films [J]. Journal of the Physical Society of Japan, 1981, 50(10): 3262-67

work page 1981
[7]

Uniqueness of positive solutions of Δu- u + up = 0 in Rn [J]

Kwong M K. Uniqueness of positive solutions of Δu- u + up = 0 in Rn [J]. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 1989, 105: 243-66

work page 1989

Show all 44 references

[8]

Nonlinear scalar field equations, II existence of infinitely many solutions [J]

Berestycki H, Lions P -L. Nonlinear scalar field equations, II existence of infinitely many solutions [J]. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 1983, 82(4): 347-75

1983
[9]

On a class of nonlinear Schrödinger equations [J]

Rabinowitz P H. On a class of nonlinear Schrödinger equations [J]. Zeitschrift Angewandte Mathematik und Physik, 1992, 43(2): 270-91

1992
[10]

Existence of solitary waves in higher dimensions [J]

Strauss W A. Existence of solitary waves in higher dimensions [J]. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 1977, 55: 149-62

1977
[11]

Orbital stability of standing waves for some nonlinear Schrödinger equations [J]

Cazenave T, Lions P -L. Orbital stability of standing waves for some nonlinear Schrödinger equations [J]. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 1982, 85: 549 - 61

1982
[12]

A natural constraint approach to normalized solutions of nonlinear Schrödinger equations and systems [J]

Bartsch T, Soave N. A natural constraint approach to normalized solutions of nonlinear Schrödinger equations and systems [J]. Journal of Functional Analysis, 2017, 272(12): 4998-5037

2017
[13]

Multiple normalized solutions for a quasi-linear Schrödinger equation via dual approach [J]

Zhang L, Li Y, Wang Z -Q. Multiple normalized solutions for a quasi-linear Schrödinger equation via dual approach [J]. Topological Methods in Nonlinear Analysis, 2023, 61(1): 465-489. 34

2023
[14]

Normalized ground states for the NLS equation with combined nonlinearities [J]

Soave N. Normalized ground states for the NLS equation with combined nonlinearities [J]. Journal of Differential Equations, 2020, 269(9): 6941-87

2020
[15]

Normalized solutions of nonlinear Schrödinger equations [J]

Bartsch T, De Valeriola S. Normalized solutions of nonlinear Schrödinger equations [J]. Archiv der Mathematik, 2012, 100: 75-83

2012
[16]

A note on deformation argument for L2 normalized solutions of nonlinear Schrödinger equations and systems [J]

Ikoma N, Tanaka K. A note on deformation argument for L2 normalized solutions of nonlinear Schrödinger equations and systems [J]. Advances in Differential Equations, 2019, 24(11/12): 609-646

2019
[17]

A mass supercritical problem revisited [J]

Jeanjean L, Lu S-S. A mass supercritical problem revisited [J]. Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations, 2020, 59(5): 174

2020
[18]

Normalized ground states of the nonlinear Schrödinger equation with at least mass critical growth [J]

Bieganowski B, Mederski J. Normalized ground states of the nonlinear Schrödinger equation with at least mass critical growth [J]. Journal of Functional Analysis, 2021, 280(11): 108989

2021
[19]

Quasilinear Schrödinger equations: ground state and infinitely many normalized solutions [J]

Li H, Zou W. Quasilinear Schrödinger equations: ground state and infinitely many normalized solutions [J]. Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 2023, 322(1): 99-138

2023
[20]

A Remark on Least Energy Solutions in RN [J]

Jeanjean L, Tanaka K. A Remark on Least Energy Solutions in RN [J]. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 2003: 2399-408

2003
[21]

A note on the topo logical degree at a critical point of mountainpass-type [J]

Hofer H. A note on the topo logical degree at a critical point of mountainpass-type [J]. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 1984, 90(2): 309-15

1984
[22]

Some continuation properties via minimax arguments [J]

Jeanjean L. Some continuation properties via minimax arguments [J]. Electronic Journal of Differential Equations, 2011, 48: 1-10

2011
[23]

Positive solutions to a class of quasilinear elliptic equations on ℝ [J]

Ambrosetti A, Wang Z-Q. Positive solutions to a class of quasilinear elliptic equations on ℝ [J]. Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2003, 9(1): 55-68

2003
[24]

Stability and instability results for sta nding waves of quasi-linear Schrödinger equations [J]

Colin M, Jeanjean L, Squassina M. Stability and instability results for sta nding waves of quasi-linear Schrödinger equations [J]. Nonlinearity, 2010, 23(6): 1353

2010
[25]

Soliton solutions for quasilinear Schrödinger equations, I [J]

Liu J, Wang Z -Q. Soliton solutions for quasilinear Schrödinger equations, I [J]. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 2003, 131(2): 441-48

2003
[26]

Solutions for quasilinear Schrödinger equations via the Nehari method [J]

Liu J-Q, Wang Y-Q, Wang Z -Q. Solutions for quasilinear Schrödinger equations via the Nehari method [J]. Communications in Partial Differential Equations, 2004, 29(5 - 6): 879-901

2004
[27]

On the existence of soliton solutions to quasilinear Schrödinger equations [J]

Poppenberg M, Schmitt K, Wang Z -Q. On the existence of soliton solutions to quasilinear Schrödinger equations [J]. Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations, 2002, 14(3): 329-44. 35

2002
[28]

Normalized solutions for Schrödinger equations with critical Sobolev exponent and mixed nonlinearities [J]

Wei J, Wu Y. Normalized solutions for Schrödinger equations with critical Sobolev exponent and mixed nonlinearities [J]. Journal of Fu nctional Analysis, 2022, 283(6): 109574

2022
[29]

Existence and dynamics of normalized solutions to nonlinear Schrödinger equations with mixed fractional Laplacians [J]

Chergui L, Gou T, Hajaiej H. Existence and dynamics of normalized solutions to nonlinear Schrödinger equations with mixed fractional Laplacians [J]. Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations, 2023, 62(7): 208

2023
[30]

Normalized solutions to Schrödinger equations with potential and inhomogeneous nonlinearities on large convex domains [J]

Bartsch T, Qi S, Zou W. Normalized solutions to Schrödinger equations with potential and inhomogeneous nonlinearities on large convex domains [J]. arXiv preprint arXiv:230607826, 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.07826

2023 doi arXiv
[31]

Berestycki-Lions conditions on ground state solutions for a nonlinear Schrödinger equation with variable potentials [J]

Chen S, Tang X. Berestycki-Lions conditions on ground state solutions for a nonlinear Schrödinger equation with variable potentials [J]. Advances in Nonlinear Analysis, 2019, 9(1): 496-515

2019
[32]

A class of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with criti cal or supercritical exponents [J]

Wang Y. A class of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with criti cal or supercritical exponents [J]. Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 2015, 70(4): 562-72

2015
[34]

Ground states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations with potentials vanishing at infinity [J]

Aamnrosetti A, Felli V, Malchiodi A. Ground states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations with potentials vanishing at infinity [J]. Journal of the European Mathematical Society, 2005, 7(1): 117-44

2005
[35]

Normalize d solutions of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with saturable nonlinearity [J]

Zhang Y, Sun J. Normalize d solutions of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with saturable nonlinearity [J]. Applied Mathematics Letters, 2023, 138: 108531

2023
[36]

Upper hybrid solitons and oscillating -two-steam instabilities [R]: Princeton Plasma Physics Lab.(PPPL), Princeton, NJ (United States), 1975

Porkolab M, Goldman M V. Upper hybrid solitons and oscillating -two-steam instabilities [R]: Princeton Plasma Physics Lab.(PPPL), Princeton, NJ (United States), 1975

1975
[37]

Strong turbulence of plasma waves [J]

Goldman M V. Strong turbulence of plasma waves [J]. Reviews of modern physics, 1984, 56(4): 709

1984
[38]

Ground states for a class of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with vanishing potentials [J]

Li Z, Zhang Y. Ground states for a class of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with vanishing potentials [J]. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2021, 20(2)

2021
[39]

Soliton solutions for a class of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with a parameter [J]

Alves C O, Wang Y, Shen Y. Soliton solutions for a class of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with a parameter [J]. Journal of Differential Equations, 2015, 259(1): 318 - 43

2015
[40]

On global minimizers for a mass constrained problem [J]

Jeanjean L, Lu S-S. On global minimizers for a mass constrained problem [J]. Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations, 2022, 61(6): 214. 36

2022
[41]

Semilinear Schrodinger Equations [M]

Cazenave T. Semilinear Schrodinger Equations [M]. American Mathematical Society, 2003

2003
[42]

Instability of nonlinear bound states [J]

Shatah J, Strauss W. Instability of nonlinear bound states [J]. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 1985, 100(2): 173-90

1985
[43]

Equation with positive coefficient in the quasilinear term and vanishing potential [J]

Aires J F, Souto M A. Equation with positive coefficient in the quasilinear term and vanishing potential [J]. Topological Methods in Nonlinear Analysis, 2015, 46(2): 813- 833

2015
[44]

Superlinear parabolic problems [M]

Quittner P, Souplet P. Superlinear parabolic problems [M]. Springer International Publishing, 2019

2019

Pith tools

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

[1] [33]

A global branch approach to normalized solutions for the Schrödinger equation [J]

Jeanjean L, Zhang J, Zhong X. A global branch approach to normalized solutions for the Schrödinger equation [J]. Journal de Mathématiques Pures et Appl iquées, 2024, 183: 44-75

work page 2024

[2] [1]

On a class of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with superlinear or asymptotically linear terms [J]

Severo U B, Gloss E, DA Silva E D. On a class of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with superlinear or asymptotically linear terms [J]. Journal of Differential Equations, 2017, 263(6): 3550-80

work page 2017

[3] [2]

Solutions for a quasilinear Schrödinger equation: a dual approach [J]

Colin M, Jeanjean L. Solutions for a quasilinear Schrödinger equation: a dual approach [J]. Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, 2004, 56(2): 213-26

work page 2004

[4] [3]

Nonlinear scalar field equations

Berestycki H, Lions P -L. Nonlinear scalar field equations. Pt. 1 [J]. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 1983, 82(4): 313-46

work page 1983

[5] [4]

Symmetry of positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations in Rn, PartA [J]

Gidas B. Symmetry of positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations in Rn, PartA [J]. Mathematical Analysis and Applications. Part A, Advances in Mathematics, Supplementary Studies, 1981: 369-402

work page 1981

[6] [5]

Existence of solution s with prescribed norm for semilinear elliptic equations [J]

Jeanjean L. Existence of solution s with prescribed norm for semilinear elliptic equations [J]. Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, 1997, 28(10): 1633-59

work page 1997

[7] [6]

Large -amplitude quasi -solitons in superfluid films [J]

Kurihara S. Large -amplitude quasi -solitons in superfluid films [J]. Journal of the Physical Society of Japan, 1981, 50(10): 3262-67

work page 1981

[8] [7]

Uniqueness of positive solutions of Δu- u + up = 0 in Rn [J]

Kwong M K. Uniqueness of positive solutions of Δu- u + up = 0 in Rn [J]. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 1989, 105: 243-66

work page 1989