Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 47 references

Nodal sets and continuity of eigenfunctions of Krein-Feller operators on Riemannian manifolds

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper establishes a Courant nodal domain theorem for Krein-Feller operators on bounded domains of Riemannian manifolds, conditional on continuity of eigenfunctions, and proves that continuity on smooth bounded domains and on compact…

desk verdict The nodal theorem's proof rests on a false Euclidean identification in normal coordinates and the Green operator sign flips between sections; the paper is salvageable but not ready as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.10007 v1 pith:QESVUS2C submitted 2024-12-13 math.FA

Sze-Man Ngai , Wen-Quan Zhao This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.FA MSC 35J0535B0528A8058C4035J08
keywords Krein-FelleroperatorRiemannianmanifoldnodaldomaintheoremeigenfunctioncontinuityGreenmeasure-valuedDirichletproblemμ-subharmonicmaximumprinciplelowerL∞-dimension
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 proves the first Courant-type nodal domain theorem for Krein-Feller operators—Laplacians defined by a Riemannian metric but acting on L2 with respect to an auxiliary measure μ—on bounded domains of complete Riemannian manifolds. The theorem says that if a λ_n-eigenfunction is continuous, its zero set divides the domain into at most n nodal domains (at most n+1 when the boundary is empty), under the dimension condition dim∞(μ)>d-2. The paper then removes the continuity hypothesis in two cases: on bounded domains with smooth boundary and a Green's function, and on compact connected closed manifolds, all eigenfunctions are continuous. A reader should care because these are the basic tools—nodal counts and pointwise regularity—needed to extend nodal-line and spectral-geometry questions to Laplacians whose volume is carried by an arbitrary measure.

What carries the argument

The central objects are the Krein-Feller operator -Δ_μ, defined as the self-adjoint operator associated with the Dirichlet form E(u,v)=∫_Ω⟨∇u,∇v⟩dν on L2(Ω,μ), and its Green operator G_μf(x)=∫_Ω G_y(x)f(y)dμ(y), built from the Dirichlet Green function of the Laplace-Beltrami operator. The nodal theorem is carried by the maximum principle for μ-subharmonic functions, meaning functions u with Δ_μu≥0 μ-a.e.: a nonconstant continuous such function cannot attain its maximum inside Ω. The paper proves this by pulling the function back through normal coordinate charts and invoking the Euclidean maximum principle. The continuity theorems are carried by the identity (-Δ_μ)^{-1}=G_μ+h_μ, where h_μ is a harmonic correction term, together with estimates showing that G_μ maps the domain of -Δ_μ into bounded continuous functions.

What would settle it

Check the maximum-principle transfer on a geodesic ball: exhibit a nonconstant continuous function u with Δ_μu≥0 μ-a.e. that attains its maximum at an interior point of a small geodesic ball in a smooth Riemannian manifold; that would falsify Theorem 3.3 and with it the nodal bound. Alternatively, on a domain where eigenfunctions are known to be continuous, compute the nodal domains of a λ_2-eigenfunction for a measure μ with dim∞(μ)>d-2; finding more than two nodal domains would falsify Theorem 2.1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Krein-Feller operator -Δ_μ on a bounded domain Ω of a smooth complete Riemannian manifold inherits the Courant nodal bound from the Laplace-Beltrami operator: for each n, a λ_n-eigenfunction that is continuous has at most n nodal domains, or n+1 when ∂Ω=∅. The supporting discovery is that, for d≥2, such eigenfunctions are genuinely continuous whenever the domain has smooth boundary and a Green's function, with both dim∞(μ)>d-2 and the analogous condition for the volume measure, or when the manifold is compact, connected, and closed. The proofs run through a maximum principle for μ-subharmonic functions, obtained by transferring the Euclidean argument through normal coordinate charts, and through an inverse formula expressing -$Δ_μ^{{-1}}$ as the Green operator G_μ plus a harmonic correction.

Load-bearing premise

The whole nodal bound leans on a single transfer step: the maximum principle for μ-subharmonic functions, proved in Euclidean space, still works when pulled back to small curved coordinate patches on the manifold. The paper sketches that step rather than writing out every detail; if the transfer has a hidden gap, the Courant bound falls even if the continuity theorems stand.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On a bounded smooth domain with a Green's function, Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 combine: eigenfunctions are continuous, so the Courant nodal bound applies unconditionally to them.
  • On a compact connected closed manifold, the same combination controls nodal domains of all nonconstant eigenfunctions, with constants playing the role of the λ_0 eigenfunction.
  • Continuity of eigenfunctions makes it possible to ask manifold versions of nodal-line questions, such as second-eigenfunction nodal geometry and measure-valued analogues of Yau's nodal measure conjecture, for Krein-Feller operators.
  • The dimension condition dim∞(μ)>d-2 identifies a natural class of measures for which the Krein-Feller spectrum is discrete and eigenfunctions have pointwise meaning.
  • On conformal Riemann surfaces, eigenfunctions of the pushed-forward measure are eigenfunctions on the original surface, giving concrete continuous eigenfunction examples such as a bounded domain in the sphere.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the chart-patching step in the maximum principle can be made fully explicit and the Euclidean maximum principle holds under the measure Poincaré inequality alone, the nodal bound should extend to arbitrary bounded domains without smoothness, since only compactness and continuity of eigenfunctions are used.
  • The threshold d-2 appears both in the existence of the operator and in the Green-operator bounds, suggesting that the condition is not merely technical and that examples at exactly dim∞=d-2 may be sharp.
  • The inverse identity (-Δ_μ)^{-1}=G_μ+h_μ suggests a transfer principle: any regularity theorem proved for the Green potential with respect to μ, such as Hölder continuity under stronger dimension assumptions, would automatically hold for eigenfunctions.
  • The conformal-surface section points to a broader route: on conformally flat surfaces, Krein-Feller eigenfunctions can be pulled back from the plane, so planar examples and counterexamples transfer directly to manifolds.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies Krein-Feller operators Δ_μ on bounded domains of complete Riemannian manifolds and on compact closed manifolds, where μ is a positive finite Borel measure satisfying dim∞(μ) > d−2. It claims a Courant nodal domain theorem (Theorem 2.1) under an assumption that eigenfunctions are continuous, and two theorems (Theorems 2.2 and 2.3) establishing continuity of eigenfunctions on bounded domains and on compact closed manifolds, respectively. The proofs are built on a maximum principle for μ-subharmonic functions, a Green-operator representation of the inverse of −Δ_μ, and small-ball estimates for the Green function. The paper also contains an additional result on conformal Riemann surfaces (Theorem 8.2) with an example.

Significance. If correct, the main results would be the first Courant nodal bound and eigenfunction regularity statements for Krein-Feller operators on Riemannian manifolds, extending the Euclidean results of [40]. The continuity theorems are natural and potentially useful for nodal set analysis and for generalizing Yau-type conjectures to measure-valued Laplacians. The paper includes a concrete example of a continuous eigenfunction on a domain of the sphere. However, the current manuscript has serious gaps: the maximum principle is not proved as written due to an invalid coordinate change, and the Green-operator sections contain systematic sign errors. These issues affect the proofs of Theorems 2.1–2.3, though they appear to be repairable with additional work.

major comments (4)
  1. [Theorem 3.3, equation (3.6)] The proof of Theorem 3.3 is not valid as written. Equation (3.6) replaces the manifold integral ∫_{U0} uΔv dν by the Euclidean integral ∫_{φ(U0)} (u∘φ^{-1}) Δ(v∘φ^{-1}) dx, but in geodesic normal coordinates the Laplace–Beltrami operator is Δ_g v = g^{ij}∂_i∂_j v + (∂_i(√g g^{ij})/√g)∂_j v and the volume form is √g dx, not the Euclidean Laplacian and Lebesgue measure. These differ by generically nonzero terms on any curved manifold, so Lemma 3.2, which applies only to the Euclidean operator with Lebesgue measure, cannot be invoked. In addition, (3.6) has a sign error: combining (2.6) with the identity ∫⟨∇u,∇v⟩dν = −∫uΔv dν gives ∫uΔv dν = −∫f v dµ, not +. Since Theorem 2.1 relies on Theorem 3.3 to show that the first eigenfunction has constant sign and to count nodal domains, the nodal bound is not established as presented.
  2. [Sections 5 and 7, Propositions 5.6, 5.11, 7.3, 7.12] There is a persistent sign inconsistency in the Green operator argument. In Proposition 5.6 the authors state that G_μ f solves Δu = f μ, and in (5.11) they compute ∫(G_μ f)Δξ dν = ∫ξ f dμ. However, using their own Green function equation (5.5), −ΔG_y = δ_y, the correct integration by parts gives ∫G_y Δξ dν = −ξ(y), hence G_μ f solves Δu = −f μ, not +f μ. The same error appears in (7.12) of Section 7. Consequently the statements of Propositions 5.6 and 7.3, and the derivation of Theorems 5.9 and 7.4, are not correct as written. The final inverse statements may be salvageable after flipping signs in the intermediate equations, but as it stands the proofs of Theorems 2.2 and 2.3 rest on an inconsistent sign convention. Moreover, in the proof of Theorem 2.3 the eigenvalue equation is written as Δ_μ f = λf, whereas in Section 2 eigenfunctions are defined by −Δ_μ u = λu; this needs reconciliation.
  3. [Proposition 6.6, Step 1, equations (6.14)–(6.15)] The uniform small-ball estimates (6.14) and (6.15) are asserted without proof. Condition (5.6) only bounds the full integral ∫Ω G_y(x)dμ(y) uniformly in x; it does not by itself imply that the integral over a small ball B_r(z) tends to zero uniformly in x. For the d ≥ 3 case, such a bound can be derived from the α-regularity of μ and the pointwise singularity of the Green function, but the derivation is not given. For d = 2, a similar uniform estimate for the squared Green function is needed. Since these estimates are the core of the continuity proof in Proposition 6.6, Theorems 2.2 and 2.3 depend on this missing step. The authors should provide the details or a precise reference.
  4. [Section 8, Theorem 8.2] Theorem 8.2 invokes [22, Theorem 1] to assert that the Green function pulls back by G^Z_y(x) = G^U_{φ(y)}(φ(x)) under a conformal map between Riemann surfaces. This identity is not generally true for the Laplace–Beltrami operator on a Riemannian surface: a conformal map changes the metric by a conformal factor, and the Green function transforms with additional terms involving the conformal factor. The cited reference is a paper on the method of images for spherical domains and does not establish the general statement needed here. Thus the proof of Theorem 8.2 and the subsequent Example 8.1 are not justified as written. Since this section is not used in the proofs of Theorems 2.1–2.3, this is a separate gap rather than a load-bearing one, but it still affects a stated result.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Throughout] There are numerous typos, including “Scetion” in Section 2, “manidolds” in the references, “Basis on Theorem 8.2” instead of “Based on Theorem 8.2”, and inconsistent notation such as “∆ μ” and “Δ_μ”. A careful copyedit is needed.
  2. [Proposition 5.5, proof] The sentence “By Proposition 5.4, condition (5.6) holds for ν” should refer to μ, not ν. Also, in the inequality the exponent in ∥G_μ f∥_{L^p(Ω)} is written for the Lebesgue measure dν, but the right-hand side is measured with respect to dμ; the distinction should be stated explicitly.
  3. [Proof of Proposition 4.1(b)] The last sentence says “Part (a) now follows by using [38, Theorem 2.2]” but the proof is in part (b); this is a typo.
  4. [Lemma 6.3 and Proposition 6.4] The notation G_μ f^2 is ambiguous; it should be written as G_μ(f^2) to avoid confusion with (G_μ f)^2. The same applies to similar expressions elsewhere (e.g., in the proof of Proposition 6.4).
  5. [Theorem 2.2, hypotheses] The assumption dim∞(ν) > d−2 is automatically satisfied for the Riemannian volume measure on a smooth d-manifold (dim∞(ν) ≥ d by the Bishop–Gromov comparison). This hypothesis can be removed or justified in the text rather than left as an unexplained condition.
  6. [Definition 3.1] The definition of μ-subharmonic functions would be clearer if it explicitly stated that Δ_μ u is a function in L^2(Ω,μ) and that the inequality is understood pointwise μ-a.e. on Ω.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the nodal and continuity theorems are not assumed as inputs, and the cited same-author results are independent prior theorems rather than restatements of the present conclusions.

full rationale

The derivation chain does not reduce any claim to its own input. Theorem 2.1 is proved from a maximum principle (Theorem 3.3) plus Rayleigh-quotient and orthogonality arguments; Theorem 3.3 is stated and proved in the paper, not taken as the conclusion of Theorem 2.1. Theorems 2.2 and 2.3 are obtained by constructing the Green operator G_mu, proving G_mu + h_mu = -Delta_mu^{-1} (Theorem 5.9 / Theorem 7.4), and then deriving the eigenfunction identity u = lambda(G_mu u + h_mu u); this is a standard invertibility equivalence, not a definitional collapse. The manuscript does rely heavily on prior work of the same research group ([24], [38], [40]) for the Euclidean maximum principle, spectral framework, and Green-operator estimates; those citations are load-bearing but are parameter-free results with assumptions that do not include the manifold nodal bound or continuity conclusions of this paper, so they are independent support under the review rules. The questionable change of variables in Eq. (3.6), where d-nu is replaced by dx and Delta_g by the Euclidean Laplacian in normal coordinates, is a potential correctness defect in the proof of Theorem 3.3, not a circular identification: the paper nowhere defines the Riemannian volume or Laplace-Beltrami operator to equal their Euclidean counterparts. Accordingly, no specific circular step can be exhibited, and the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

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

No free parameters are fitted; the theorems are parameter-free given the standing dimension condition. The paper postulates no new physical entities; the Green operator G_mu and harmonic correction h_mu are constructed functions, not postulates. The main uncharged assumptions are the prior framework of [38] (MPI, chart construction, spectral results) and standard elliptic facts about Green's functions and harmonic functions.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption dim_infinity(mu) > d-2 implies the measure Poincare inequality (MPI) and well-definedness of -Delta_mu
    Used throughout; inherited from [38, Theorem 2.1] and stated in the assumptions of Theorems 2.1-2.3.
  • domain assumption Normal-coordinate chart construction from [38] covers Omega by half-size geodesic balls with charts and pushed-apart images
    Section 3, Eq. (3.2); needed to patch the local R^d maximum principle into a global statement on Omega.
  • domain assumption Dirichlet Green's function on smooth bounded domains has Euclidean-type singularity bounds, positivity, symmetry, and boundary continuity
    Proposition 5.3; invoked in Sections 5 and 6 for the L^2 and L^infinity estimates of the Green operator.
  • domain assumption alpha-regularity of mu for some alpha > d-2 follows from dim_infinity(mu) > d-2
    Used in Propositions 5.4, 6.5, and the uniform small-ball integrals (6.14)-(6.15); cited from [38, Lemma 4.1].
  • standard math Weyl's lemma, harmonic function theory, and spectral theorem for compact self-adjoint operators
    Used in Propositions 3.5, 3.6, 5.7, and 7.3 to identify harmonic corrections and justify distributional calculations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nodal sets and continuity of eigenfunctions of Krein-Feller operators on Riemannian manifolds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QESVUS2C

@misc{pith2026241210007,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nodal sets and continuity of eigenfunctions of Krein-Feller operators on Riemannian manifolds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QESVUS2C}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.10007}
}
abstract

Let $d\geq1$, $\Omega$ be a bounded domain of a smooth complete Riemannian d-manifold M, and $\mu$ be a positive finite Borel measure with compact support in $\overline{\Omega}$. We prove the Courant nodal domain theorem for the eigenfunctions of Kre\u{i}n-Feller operator $\Delta_{\mu}$ under the assumption that such eigenfunctions are continuous on $\overline{\Omega}$. For $d\geq2$, We prove that on a bounded domain $\Omega\subset M$ with smooth boundary and on which the Green's function of the Laplace-Beltrami operator exists, the eigenfunctions of $\Delta_{\mu}$ are continuous on $\Omega$. We also prove that if M is compact and $\partial M=\emptyset$, then the eigenfuctions of $\Delta_{\mu}$ are continuous on M.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.10007 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The measure µe y x z [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The 2-eigenfunction in Example 8.1. Appendix A. Proof of Corollary 4.3 Proof of Corollary 4.3. Case 1. n = 1. Let v ∈ C∞ c (Ω) and ϵ > 0 be arbitrary. Then u + ϵv ∈ Hµ. Since Rµ(u) = λ1, by Lemma 4.2, the function f(ϵ) := R Ω |∇(u + ϵv)| 2 dν R Ω |u + ϵv| 2 dµ has a minimum at ϵ = 0. Hence f ′ (0) = 0. Note that f ′ (0) = R Ω |u| 2 dµ · 2 R Ω ⟨∇u, ∇v⟩ dν − 2 R Ω uv dµ · R Ω |∇u| 2 dν  R Ω |u| 2 dµ2 . Thus Z Ω |u| … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [38]

    Ngai and L

    S.-M. Ngai and L. Ouyang, Kre ˘ ın-Feller operators on Riemannian manifold and a compact embed- ding theorem, arXiv:2301.06438 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  2. [40]

    Nodal sets and continuity of eigenfunctions of Kre\u{\i}-Feller operators

    S.-M. Ngai, M.-K. Zhang and W.-Q. Zhao, Nodal sets and continuity of eigenfunctions of Kre ˘ ın- Feller operators, arXiv:2411.14173 (2024)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  3. [1]

    Anderson, On the topology of complete manifolds of non-negative Ricci curvature, Topology 91 (1990), 41–55

    M. Anderson, On the topology of complete manifolds of non-negative Ricci curvature, Topology 91 (1990), 41–55

    work page 1990

  4. [2]

    Aubin, Nonlinear analysis on manifolds

    T. Aubin, Nonlinear analysis on manifolds. Monge-Amp` ere equations, Grundlehren Math. Wiss., vol. 252, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1982

    work page 1982

  5. [3]

    Alessandrini, Nodal lines of eigenfunctions of fixed membrane problem in general convex do- mains, Comment

    G. Alessandrini, Nodal lines of eigenfunctions of fixed membrane problem in general convex do- mains, Comment. Math. Helv. 69 (1994), 142–154

    work page 1994

  6. [4]

    Alessandrini, On Courant’s nodal domain theorem, Forum Math

    G. Alessandrini, On Courant’s nodal domain theorem, Forum Math. 10 (1998), 521–532

    work page 1998

  7. [5]

    B¨ ar, On nodal sets for Dirac and Laplace operators, Comm

    C. B¨ ar, On nodal sets for Dirac and Laplace operators, Comm. Math. Phys. 188 (1997), 709–721

    work page 1997

  8. [6]

    Bartsch, Z

    T. Bartsch, Z. Liu and T. Weth, Sign changing solutions of superlinear Schr¨ odinger equations, Comm. Partial Differential Equations 29 (2004), 25–42

    work page 2004

Show all 47 references
  1. [7]

    R. L. Bishop and R. J. Crittenden, Geometry of manifolds , Academic Press, New York, 1964

    1964

  2. [8]

    Chavel, Eigenvalues in Riemannian geometry , Pure Appl

    I. Chavel, Eigenvalues in Riemannian geometry , Pure Appl. Math., vol. 115, Academic Press, Inc., Oriando, FL, 1984

    1984

  3. [9]

    S. Y. Cheng, Eigenfunctions and nodal sets, Comment. Math. Helv. 51 (1976), 43–55

    1976

  4. [10]

    Courant and D

    R. Courant and D. Hilbert, Methods of Mathematical Physics , vol. I, Interscience Publishers, Inc., New York, 1953. 32 S.-M. NGAI AND W.-Q. ZHAO

    1953

  5. [11]

    E. B. Davies, Spectral Theory and Differential Operators , Cambridge Stud. Adv. Math., vol. 42, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1995

    1995

  6. [12]

    E. B. Davies, G. M. L. Gladwell, J. Leydold and P. F. Stadler, Discrete nodal domain theorems, Linear Algebra Appl. 336 (2001), 51–60

    2001

  7. [13]

    Deng and S.-M

    D.-W. Deng and S.-M. Ngai, Estimates for sums and gaps of eigenvalues of Laplacians on measure spaces, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A. 151 (2021), 842–861

    2021

  8. [14]

    Donnelly and C

    H. Donnelly and C. Fefferman, Nodal sets of eigenfunctions on Riemannian manbifolds, Invent. Math. 93 (1988), 161–183

    1988

  9. [15]

    Donnelly and C

    H. Donnelly and C. Fefferman, Nodal sets of eigenfunctions: Riemannian manbifolds with boundary, Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA , (1990), 251–262

    1990

  10. [16]

    L. C. Evans, Partial Differential Equations , vol. 19, Grad. Stud. Math., American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2010

    2010

  11. [17]

    Feller, Generalized second order differential operators and their lateral conditions, Illinois J

    W. Feller, Generalized second order differential operators and their lateral conditions, Illinois J. Math. 1 (1957), 459–504

    1957

  12. [18]

    Freitag, Complex analysis

    E. Freitag, Complex analysis. 2 , Universitext, Springer, Heidelberg, 2011

    2011

  13. [19]

    G. M. L. Gladwell and H. Zhu, Courant’s nodal line theorem and its discrete counterparts, Quart. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 55 (2002), 1–15

    2002

  14. [20]

    Grigor’yan, Analytic and geometric background of recurrence and non-explosion of Brownian motion on Riemannian manifolds, Bull

    A. Grigor’yan, Analytic and geometric background of recurrence and non-explosion of Brownian motion on Riemannian manifolds, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc.(N.S.) 36 (1999), 135–249

    1999

  15. [21]

    Grigor’yan, Heat kernel and analysis on manifolds , AMS/IP Stud

    A. Grigor’yan, Heat kernel and analysis on manifolds , AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math., Vol. 47, Amer- ican Mathematical Society, Providence, RI; International Press, Boston, MA, 2009

    2009

  16. [22]

    Gutkin and P

    E. Gutkin and P. K. Newton, The method of images and Green’s function for spherical domains, J. Phys. A 37 (2004), 11989–12003

    2004

  17. [23]

    Hebey, Sobolev spaces on Riemannian manidolds , Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1996

    E. Hebey, Sobolev spaces on Riemannian manidolds , Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1996

    1996

  18. [24]

    Hu, K.-S

    J. Hu, K.-S. Lau and S.-M. Ngai, Laplace operators related to self-similar measures on Rd, J. Funct. Anal. 239 (2006), 542–565

    2006

  19. [25]

    Jost, Riemannian geometry and geometric analysis , Universitext, Springer Cham, 2017

    J. Jost, Riemannian geometry and geometric analysis , Universitext, Springer Cham, 2017

    2017

  20. [26]

    Kesseb¨ ohmer and A

    M. Kesseb¨ ohmer and A. Niemann, Spectral dimensions of Kre ˘ ın-Feller operators and Lq-specta, Adv. Math. 399 (2022), 108253

    2022

  21. [27]

    Kesseb¨ ohmer and A

    M. Kesseb¨ ohmer and A. Niemann, Spectral dimensions of Kre ˘ ın-Feller operators in higher dimen- sions, arXiv: 2202.05247 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  22. [28]

    M. G. Kre ˘ ın, On a generalization of investigations of Stieltjes, Doklady Akad. Nauk SSSR(N.S.) 87 (1952), 881–884

    1952

  23. [29]

    Kreyszig, Introductory functional analysis with applications , John Wiley & Sons, New York- London-Sydney, 1978

    E. Kreyszig, Introductory functional analysis with applications , John Wiley & Sons, New York- London-Sydney, 1978

    1978

  24. [30]

    J. M. Lee, Introduction to smooth manifolds , Grad. Texts in Math., vol. 218, Springer, New York, 2013

    2013

  25. [31]

    Li and L.-F

    P. Li and L.-F. Tam, Symmetric Green’s functions on complete manifolds, Amer. J. Math. 109 (1987), 1129–1154

    1987

  26. [32]

    Lin, On the second eigenfunctions of the Laplacian in R2, Comm

    C.-S. Lin, On the second eigenfunctions of the Laplacian in R2, Comm. Math. Phys. 111 (1987), 161–166

    1987

  27. [33]

    Littman, G

    W. Littman, G. Stampacchia and H. F. Weinberger, Regular points for elliptic equations with discontinuous coefficients, Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. 17 (1963), 43–77

    1963

  28. [34]

    Logunov, Nodal sets of Laplace eigenfunctions: polynomial upper estimates of the Hausdorff measure, Ann

    A. Logunov, Nodal sets of Laplace eigenfunctions: polynomial upper estimates of the Hausdorff measure, Ann. of Math.(2) 187 (2018) 221ˇ sC239. NODAL SETS AND CONTINUITY OF EIGENFUNCTIONS ON RIEMANNIAN MANIFOLDS 33

    2018

  29. [35]

    Logunov, Nodal sets of Laplace eigenfunctions: proof of Nadirashvili’s conjecture and of the lower bound in Yau’s conjecture, Ann

    A. Logunov, Nodal sets of Laplace eigenfunctions: proof of Nadirashvili’s conjecture and of the lower bound in Yau’s conjecture, Ann. of Math.(2) 187 (2018) 241ˇ sC262

    2018

  30. [36]

    Logunov and E

    A. Logunov and E. Malinnikova, Nodal sets of Laplace eigenfunctions: estimates of the Hausdorff measure in dimensions two and three, Oper. Theory Adv. Appl. 261 (2018) 2391ˇ sC2411

    2018

  31. [37]

    J. R. Munkres, Topology, Prentice Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2000

    2000

  32. [39]

    Ngai and L

    S.-M. Ngai and L. Ouyang, Differential equations defined by Kre ˘ ın-Feller operators on Riemannian manifolds, arXiv:2408.04858 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Petersen, Riemannian Geometry, Grad

    P. Petersen, Riemannian Geometry, Grad. Texts in Math., vol. 171, Springer, New York, 2006

    2006

  34. [42]

    A. C. Ponce, Elliptic PDEs, measures and capacities. From the Poisson equation to nolinear Thomas-Fermi problems , EMS Tracts Math., vol. 23, European Mathematical Society (EMS), Z¨ urich, 2006

    2006

  35. [43]

    Schoen and S.-T

    R. Schoen and S.-T. Yau, Lectures on differential geometry , Conf. Proc. Lecture Notes Geom. Topology, International Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994

    1994

  36. [44]

    R. S. Strichartz, Self-similar measures and their Fourier transforms III, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 42 (1993), 367–411

    1993

  37. [45]

    S. T. Yau, Some function-theoretic properties of complete Riemannian manifold and their applica- tions to geometry, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 25 (1976), 659–670

    1976

  38. [46]

    S. T. Yau, Problem section, Ann. of Math. Stud., vol. 102, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ., 1982

    1982

  39. [47]

    Weyl, The method of orthogonal projection in potential theory,Duke Math

    H. Weyl, The method of orthogonal projection in potential theory,Duke Math. J. 7 (1940), 411–444. Beijing Institute of Mathematical Science and Applications Key Laboratory of High Per- formance Computing and Stochastic Information Processing (HPCSIP) (Ministry of Educa- tion o...

    1940

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.