Gradient catastrophes and an infinite hierarchy of H\"older cusp-singularities for 1D Euler

Isaac Neal; Steve Shkoller; Vlad Vicol

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 44 references

Gradient catastrophes and an infinite hierarchy of H\"older cusp-singularities for 1D Euler

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Smooth one-dimensional Euler flows can form a first singularity shaped as a cusp with exactly $C^{0,1/(2n+1)}$ Hölder regularity for any integer $n \geq 1$, and the initial data doing so form a codimension-$(2n-2)$ manifold.

desk verdict Infinite cusp hierarchy for 1D Euler is a strong and plausible result, but the codimension-stability proof relies on omitted estimates, so the flagship claim is not established as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.21040 v2 pith:QRJUN4YU submitted 2024-12-30 math.AP

Isaac Neal , Steve Shkoller , Vlad Vicol This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 35L6735Q3135L6535B44

keywords 1DEulerequationsgradientcatastrophepre-shockHöldercuspsingularityshockformationRiemannvariablesfinite-codimensionstabilitycharacteristicmethods

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proves that the one-dimensional Euler equations of gas dynamics admit an infinite hierarchy of finite-time gradient catastrophes, all reached from smooth, compressive, non-vacuous initial data. For each integer $n \geq 1$ there is a codimension-$(2n-2)$ Banach manifold of initial data in $W^{2n+2,\infty}$ such that the solution develops its first gradient singularity at a single point $(y_*,T_*)$ with $T_* = 2/(1+\alpha) + O(\varepsilon)$, and at that instant the velocity and sound speed form a cusp $u(y,T_*) = b_0 + b_1 (y-y_*)^{1/(2n+1)} + O(|y-y_*|^{2/(2n+1)})$ with explicit leading coefficient $b_1 = -(2n+1)^{1/(2n+1)}(1+O(\varepsilon))$; equivalently, the gradient has precisely $C^{0,1/(2n+1)}$ Hölder regularity. The hierarchy matters because the pre-shock cusp is the transition state from smooth flow to shock: a theory of shock formation must account for which cusps can form and how many tuning conditions they impose, and here $n=1$ is the fully stable cubic-root cusp while each higher $n$ demands $2n-2$ additional constraints on the data. The paper also records that the formal $n \to \infty$ limit of the cusp profiles is the classical Riemann data, but the radius of validity collapses, so a direct bridge to the Riemann problem remains open.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the study of differentiated Riemann variables pulled back along the fast-acoustic characteristic flow $\eta$, defined by $\partial_t \eta = \lambda_3(\eta,t)$ with $\lambda_3 = u + \alpha\sigma$. In these Lagrangian coordinates the product $\eta_x \mathring{W}$ stays as smooth as the initial data even though $\partial_y w$ blows up, and the system for $(\Sigma, \eta_x, \eta_x\mathring{W}, \mathring{Z}, \mathring{K})$ has polynomial right-hand sides. The key inequality $\eta_x \mathring{W} \leq -\tfrac12 + 4\eta_x$, proved by bootstrap, makes the weighted $L^q$ energies for $\mathring{Z}$ and $\mathring{K}$ contractive, and after sending $q \to \infty$ yields uniform $W^{2n+2,\infty}$ bounds up to the blowup time. The first singularity is then characterized exactly as the first time $\eta_x$ vanishes at a single point $x_*$; imposing the vanishing of the first $2n-1$ $x$-derivatives of $\eta_x$ there gives $2n$ equations in two unknowns, which the implicit function theorem solves as a codimension-$(2n-2)$ Lipschitz graph in initial-data space. Finally, polynomial inversion (an analytic Puiseux-Newton expansion) produces the inverse of the map $x \mapsto y = \eta(x,T_*)$ as $(y-y_*)^{1/(2n+1)}$ plus controllable error, converting the smooth expansion of $w \circ \eta$ into the cusp formulas.

What would settle it

For the explicit data $u_0 = \sigma_0 = \tfrac12 w_0$, $S_0 = 0$ with $w'_0(y) = -1 + y^{2n}$ (periodicized, positive, zero mean), the solution reduces to Burgers dynamics, and the theorem predicts a first singularity at $T_* = 2/(1+\alpha)$ with log-log slope $-2n/(2n+1)$ for $|\partial_y u|$ versus $|y-y_*|$ and leading coefficient $(2n+1)^{1/(2n+1)}$; a numerical simulation for $n = 2, 3, 4$ measuring the local exponent at the first time $\min_x \eta_x = 0$, or a simulation showing $\eta_x$ vanishes at two distinct points before any gradient blowup, would settle the central claim directly.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, Theorem 9.1, is that for every integer $n \geq 1$ there exists a codimension-$(2n-2)$ Banach submanifold $M_n$ of $(W^{2n+2,\infty}(\mathbb{T}))^3$, containing the reference data $(u_0,\sigma_0,S_0) = \tfrac12(w_0,w_0,0)$ with $w'_0(y) = -1 + y^{2n}$ near the distinguished point, such that every solution from data in $M_n \cap B_\varepsilon$ forms its first gradient singularity for $u$ and $\sigma$ at a unique point $(y_*,T_*)$, with $T_* = 2/(1+\alpha) + O(\varepsilon)$ and $y_* = \tfrac12 + O(\varepsilon)$ on the torus. At that instant the velocity and sound speed obey the cusp expansion $u(y,T_*) = b_0 + b_1 (y-y_*)^{1/(2n+1)} + O(|y-y_*|^{2/(2n+1)})$, and $\sigma$ similarly, with $b_0 = \tfrac52 + O(\varepsilon)$ and $b_1 = -(2n+1)^{1/(2n+1)}[1+O(\varepsilon)]$, while the entropy $S$ remains $C^{1,1/(2n+1)}$ uniformly; away from $y_*$ the solution stays $W^{2n+2,\infty}$ smooth. The gradient blows up like $(y-y_*)^{2n/(2n+1)}$, which is exactly the statement that the pre-shock has $C^{0,1/(2n+1)}$ Hölder regularity. For $n=1$, $M_1$ is open (codimension zero) and the result recovers the established stable $C^{0,1/3}$ pre-shock; for $n=2$ it recovers the previously known codimension-2 unstable $C^{0,1/5}$ cusp, and for all $n \geq 3$ it gives new singularity profiles.

Load-bearing premise

The construction rests on a quantitative bootstrap: the differentiated Riemann variables, pulled back to the fast-acoustic coordinates, must stay uniformly bounded up to order $2n+1$ with the specific inequality $\eta_x \mathring{W} \leq -\tfrac12 + 4\eta_x$ making the energy estimates contractive, and if those bounds failed, the blowup time could not be identified with the first zero of $\eta_x$ and the cusp expansion would not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The $n=1$ case reproduces the fully stable $C^{0,1/3}$ pre-shock from an open set of $W^{4,\infty}$ data, so the classical picture of one-dimensional shock formation is contained as the first element of the hierarchy.
For every $n \geq 2$ there are smooth initial data producing a first singularity with Hölder exponent $1/(2n+1)$, so infinitely many distinct cusp types are dynamically reachable, not merely the generic cubic-root cusp.
Each higher cusp is exactly finitely stable: the set of its initial data has codimension $2n-2$ in $W^{2n+2,\infty}$, so $2n-2$ independent tuning conditions are necessary and sufficient to avoid collapsing to the generic cusp.
The explicit profile (leading coefficient $-(2n+1)^{1/(2n+1)}$, blowup time $2/(1+\alpha)$ independent of $n$) gives quantitative, checkable predictions for what a numerical observation of the pre-shock should see.
With $L$ additional derivatives of the initial data the cusp expansion extends to a truncated Puiseux series of order $L$; the paper flags that the $n \to \infty$ limit degenerates, so connecting the hierarchy to the classical Riemann problem remains an open problem.

Reading between the lines

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

Because the proof never invokes self-similar profiles and uses only the transport structure of the dominant characteristic family, the same flatness-to-cusp dictionary should transfer to other one-dimensional hyperbolic conservation systems with a genuinely nonlinear fast wave family, with the cusp exponent $1/(2n+1)$ fixed by the order of flatness of the initial compression alone.
The codimension-$(2n-2)$ statement implies a selection rule for generic data: small random perturbations of the $n$-th reference data for $n \geq 2$ should almost surely fall onto the $n=1$ stratum and produce a $C^{0,1/3}$ cusp, so the higher cusps are observable only with deliberately tuned data; this is testable numerically by adding small generic noise and measuring the local Hölder exponent a
The degenerate $n \to \infty$ limit suggests a double-scaling regime in which the flatness order $n$ and the perturbation amplitude $\varepsilon$ are linked (for instance $\varepsilon \sim n^{-c}$), possibly giving a quantitative route toward the Riemann-problem data at a controlled rate; the paper leaves this connection open.
The entropy $S$ remains strictly smoother than the velocity and sound speed through the singularity, so the cusp is a property of the acoustic family alone; this separated-regularity structure could serve as a marker for detecting pre-shock formation in numerical or experimental settings.

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

You should know two things about this paper. First, the construction is genuinely new: for each n≥1 it exhibits smooth 1D Euler data whose first singularity is a C^{0,1/(2n+1)} cusp, covering all exponents in the odd-denominator hierarchy without self-similar analysis. The differentiated Riemann variables in Lagrangian coordinates are the right tool, the Puiseux inversion in Section 9 is clean, and the recovery of the n=1 stable cusp and the n=2 Buckmaster–Iyer result with milder assumptions is real progress. Second, the headline codimension-(2n−2) stability claim is not actually proven in the written text. Section 6.4 states the estimates are omitted, Section 7 is explicitly a sketch, and Proposition 8.10 plus the manifold conclusion depend on exactly those missing bounds. This is not a manufactured gap; the paper tells you the proofs are absent. Without Proposition 6.6 and the full difference estimates from §7, the surjectivity of D_λ f_n and the Lipschitz dependence of T* and η_x on the data are unverified, so the graph λ* in Proposition 8.10 is not rigorously established. The cusp expansion in Section 9 is conditional on being on that manifold, so the main theorem as stated is incomplete. I want to be fair: the omitted estimates are advertised as analogues of the detailed §5.4 estimates, and the line of argument is credible. A determined author could likely fill them. But “completely analogous” is not a proof for a claim of this precision, and the codimension statement is the selling point of the abstract. For a reader, the paper is worth studying for the framework and the existence side, but I would not cite the codimension theorem in its current form. A serious referee should engage, but ask for the missing estimates to be written out before accepting the stability claim. This deserves peer review, not desk rejection, because the core idea is strong and the gaps look repairable.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies finite-time gradient catastrophe formation for the 1D compressible Euler equations with non-constant entropy. It introduces differentiated Riemann variables composed with fast-acoustic characteristics and proves a priori estimates in Lagrangian coordinates. The main result, stated as Theorem 9.1 and abbreviated as Theorem 1.1, asserts that for each integer n≥1 there is a codimension-(2n−2) Banach submanifold M_n of (W^{2n+2,∞}(T))^3 such that solutions from M_n form a first gradient singularity at a unique point (y*,T*), with T*=2/(1+α)+O(ε), the velocity and sound speed having a cusp of the form b0+b1(y−y*)^{1/(2n+1)}+O(|y−y*|^{2/(2n+1)}), with b1=−(2n+1)^{1/(2n+1)}[1+O(ε)], and with z and k remaining C^{1,1/(2n+1)} up to T*. The proof combines Lagrangian energy estimates, stability estimates with respect to perturbations of the initial data, an implicit-function argument to construct the finite-codimension manifold, and a Puiseux-inversion step to extract the cusp profile.

Significance. If the proof is completed, this is a significant contribution: it would give the full hierarchy of C^{0,1/(2n+1)} cusp singularities for smooth 1D Euler data, recovering the stable n=1 case and the unstable n=2 case of Buckmaster–Iyer under weaker regularity, with a characteristic method that avoids self-similar profiles. The explicit leading-order coefficient b1, the n-independent range of validity, and the Puiseux inversion are concrete and non-circular strengths. However, the finite-codimension part of the claim depends on stability estimates in Section 6.4 whose proofs are explicitly omitted and on a solution-continuity argument in Section 7 that is only sketched; these are load-bearing, not cosmetic.

major comments (3)

[§6.4] The paragraph at the start of §6.4 states that the proofs of Proposition 6.6 and Corollaries 6.7–6.8 “will be omitted” because they are analogous to §5.4. These λ-stability bounds are load-bearing: Lemma 8.9 and the proof of Proposition 8.10 use (8.28c), which is Corollary 6.8, to show that D_λ f_n = Id + small error. Without a complete proof of these estimates, the existence of the graph λ* and hence the codimension-(2n−2) manifold M_n for n≥2 is not rigorously established. The authors should either write out the full induction or give a detailed reduction to Proposition 5.5, specifying the modified weights, constants M and L_n, and all changed terms, rather than leaving the verification to the reader.
[§7] Section 7 is presented as a sketch. Proposition 7.1 and the culminating bounds (7.13a)–(7.13b) are stated after a calculation that suppresses the terms coming from (7.3a)–(7.3b), including differences of ∂_t~K, ∂_x~K, ∂_t~Z and ∂_x~Z multiplied by (η_x−~η_x) and (Σ−~Σ). These bounds are what make T* and ~η_x Lipschitz in the initial data in Proposition 8.8, which in turn gives the Lipschitz dependence of (˚x,˚T) and f_n used in §8.4. A sketch is insufficient at this point in the argument; the energy estimates for the difference system should be checked term by term with the same precision as in §5.3, or the absent estimates should be provided explicitly.
[§8.4, Proposition 8.10] The computation of D_λ f_n and the contraction estimate for f_n treat ∂_{λ_j} T* and ∂_{λ_j}(˚x,˚T) as genuine derivatives. The paper only proves that λ↦T* is Lipschitz (Proposition 8.8) and then uses Rademacher's theorem to obtain almost-everywhere derivative bounds (8.27a)–(8.27b). It is not explained why the chain-rule calculation for ∂_{λ_j} f_n^i is valid at points where T* is not differentiable, nor how the almost-everywhere derivative control implies the uniform bound ‖Id − D_λ f_n‖ ≤ 1/9 needed in Lemma C.1. Since Proposition 8.10 is the step that constructs the manifold, this differentiability-to-contraction issue must be addressed explicitly.

minor comments (5)

[Eq. (3.3)] The initial condition for the fast-acoustic characteristics is written as η(x,0)=0, but the subsequent use of η_x(x,0)=1 throughout the paper shows that this should be η(x,0)=x.
[§1.1] There are typographical errors such as “adiabtic exponent” and “discontintuous”; these should be corrected.
[§3.3] The sentence “neither vacuum formation nor finite-time implosion is not possible” contains a double negative and should be rewritten.
[§8.1] The notation w0 is overloaded: the fixed profile defined in (8.1) and the general initial-data component w0 are both denoted w0, which can be confusing in the manifold construction.
[§1.3] Theorem 1.1 uses the notation O_γ(ε) for the blowup time, while Theorem 9.1 uses O_α(ε); since α=(γ−1)/2 this is consistent, but the dependence on n should be stated uniformly in the introductory theorem.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the cusp hierarchy and codimension statement are derived from uniform a priori estimates, not fitted or imported from self-citations.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The claimed cusp exponent, amplitude, blowup time, and codimension are not inputs in disguise. The coefficient a_{2n+1} in the inversion step is computed from the estimate (8.4b) for ∂_x^{2n} η_x, yielding a_{2n+1} = [1+O(C_x^{2n}B_z ε)]/(2n+1) in (9.10a); then b1 is computed in (9.17) as B_1^w a_{2n+1}^{-1/(2n+1)} = -(2n+1)^{1/(2n+1)}[1+O(C_x^{2n}B_z ε)], with B_1^w = -1+O(B_z ε) following from (8.12a) and (9.13). No fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction: the initial data class B_n(ε,C_0) is deliberately chosen to realize the flatness order 2n, and the solution is then shown, by pathwise estimates, to form the claimed Puiseux cusp. The codimension-(2n−2) statement is obtained from the implicit function theorem applied to f_n in (8.19), whose Jacobian D_λ f_n is proved in Proposition 8.10 to be Id plus an explicitly small correction, not imposed by normalization or by a self-citation chain. Citations to [39] and [42] establish the differentiated-Riemann-variable framework and notation, but all quantitative estimates used later (Propositions 4.1, 5.4, 5.5, 6.5, 7.1) are proved in this paper; the cited works do not carry the load. The only textual caveats are that §6.4 says its proofs are omitted and §7 gives a sketch; this is a completeness or rigor concern, not circularity, because no claim is shown to reduce to its own input. The Puiseux inversion lemma is proved in Appendix A and applied under verified hypotheses (9.6), so the hierarchy is not a renaming of a known empirical pattern. Consequently the circularity score is 0.

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

The paper introduces no fitted parameters and no new physical entities. The differentiated Riemann variables and Lagrangian coordinates are mathematical transformations, not postulated objects. The smallness conditions are quantified in the theorem and are not fitted to data. The background results listed above are standard or explicitly cited.

assumptions (5)

standard math Local well-posedness, continuation, and the Eulerian blowup criterion for symmetrizable quasilinear hyperbolic systems.
Invoked in Section 3.3, equations (3.8) and (3.9), and cited to [25,35].
domain assumption In one space dimension, smooth non-vacuous Euler solutions cannot form vacuum or implosion before gradient blowup.
Used to select shock-type singularities as the only possible first singularity; cited to [14,13].
standard math The Puiseux-Newton theorem for formal Puiseux series solutions of polynomial equations.
Used in Appendix A to construct the inverse of the characteristic map; cited to [4, Section 8.3].
standard math Banach-space implicit function theorem and contraction mapping principle.
Used in Section 8.4 and Appendix C to produce the Lipschitz graph that defines the manifold M_n.
domain assumption The ideal gas equation of state p = (1/gamma) rho^gamma e^S and the transformation to (u, sigma, S).
The Euler system (1.1)-(1.2) is specialized to ideal gases with gamma > 1; the theorem is stated for this model.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gradient catastrophes and an infinite hierarchy of H\"older cusp-singularities for 1D Euler." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QRJUN4YU

@misc{pith2026241221040,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gradient catastrophes and an infinite hierarchy of H\"older cusp-singularities for 1D Euler},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QRJUN4YU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.21040}
}

abstract

We establish an infinite hierarchy of finite-time gradient catastrophes for smooth solutions of the 1D Euler equations of gas dynamics with non-constant entropy. Specifically, for all integers $n\geq 1$, we prove that there exist classical solutions, emanating from smooth, compressive, and non-vacuous initial data, which form a cusp-type gradient singularity in finite time, in which the gradient of the solution has precisely $C^{0,\frac{1}{2n+1}}$ H\"older-regularity. We show that such Euler solutions are codimension-$(2n-2)$ stable in the Sobolev space $W^{2n+2,\infty}$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

[1]

The emergence of the singu lar boundary from the crease in 3D compressible Euler ﬂow

Leo Abbrescia and Jared Speck. The emergence of the singu lar boundary from the crease in 3D compressible Euler ﬂow. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.07107, 2022

arXiv 2022
[2]

Blowup of small data solutions for a class of quasilinear wave equations in two space dimensions

Serge Alinhac. Blowup of small data solutions for a class of quasilinear wave equations in two space dimensions. II. Acta Math., 182(1):1–23, 1999

1999
[3]

Blowup of small data solutions for a quasi linear wave equation in two space dimensions

Serge Alinhac. Blowup of small data solutions for a quasi linear wave equation in two space dimensions. Ann. of Math. (2) , 149(1):97–127, 1999

work page 1999
[4]

Plane algebraic curves

Egbert Brieskorn and Horst Knörrer. Plane algebraic curves. Birkhäuser V erlag, 1986

work page 1986
[5]

Smooth imploding solutions for 3d compressibl e ﬂuids

Tristan Buckmaster, Gonzalo Cao-Labora, and Javier Góm ez-Serrano. Smooth imploding solutions for 3d compressibl e ﬂuids. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.09445, 2022

arXiv 2022
[6]

Simultaneous development of shocks and cusp s for 2d euler with azimuthal symmetry from smooth data

Tristan Buckmaster, Theodore D Drivas, Steve Shkoller, and Vlad Vicol. Simultaneous development of shocks and cusp s for 2d euler with azimuthal symmetry from smooth data. Annals of PDE , 8(2):1–199, 2022

work page 2022
[7]

Formation and development of singularitiesfor the compressible Euler equations

Tristan Buckmaster, Theodore D Drivas, Steve Shkoller, and Vlad Vicol. Formation and development of singularitiesfor the compressible Euler equations. In Dmitry Beliaev and Stanislav Smirnov, editor s, Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicia ns 2022 , volume 5, pages 3636–3659. EMS Press, Berlin, 2023

work page 2022
[8]

Formation of unstab le shocks for 2D insentropic compressible Euler

Tristan Buckmaster and Sameer Iyer. Formation of unstab le shocks for 2D insentropic compressible Euler. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 389:197–271, 2022

work page 2022

Show all 44 references

[9]

For mation of shocks for 2D isentropic compressible Euler

Tristan Buckmaster, Steve Shkoller, and Vlad Vicol. For mation of shocks for 2D isentropic compressible Euler. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, 75(9):2069–2120, 2022

2022
[10]

Fo rmation of point shocks for 3D compressible Euler

Tristan Buckmaster, Steve Shkoller, and Vlad Vicol. Fo rmation of point shocks for 3D compressible Euler. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 76(9):2073–2191, 2023

2023
[11]

Sh ock formation and vorticity creation for 3D Euler

Tristan Buckmaster, Steve Shkoller, and Vlad Vicol. Sh ock formation and vorticity creation for 3D Euler. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 76(9):1965–2072, 2023

1965
[12]

Non-radial implosion for compressib le Euler and Navier-Stokes in T3 and R3

Gonzalo Cao-Labora, Javier Gómez-Serrano, Jia Shi, an d Gigliola Stafﬁlani. Non-radial implosion for compressib le Euler and Navier-Stokes in T3 and R3. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.05325, 2023

2023 arXiv
[13]

Optimal time-dependent lower bound on densi ty for classical solutions of 1-d compressible euler equati ons

Geng Chen. Optimal time-dependent lower bound on densi ty for classical solutions of 1-d compressible euler equati ons. Indiana University Mathematics Journal, pages 725–740, 2017

2017
[14]

Shock forma tion in the compressible euler equations and related system s

Geng Chen, Robin Y oung, and Qingtian Zhang. Shock forma tion in the compressible euler equations and related system s. Journal of Hyper- bolic Differential Equations, 10(01):149–172, 2013

2013
[15]

The Cauchy problem for th e Euler equations for compressible ﬂuids

Gui-Qiang Chen and Dehua Wang. The Cauchy problem for th e Euler equations for compressible ﬂuids. In Handbook of mathematical ﬂuid dynamics, Vol. I, pages 421–543. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2002

2002
[16]

V orticity blowup in compressible Euler eq uations in Rd, d ≥ 3

Jiajie Chen. V orticity blowup in compressible Euler eq uations in Rd, d ≥ 3. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.04319, 2024

2024 arXiv
[17]

V orticity blowup in 2D compressible Euler equations

Jiajie Chen, Giorgio Cialdea, Steve Shkoller, and Vlad Vicol. V orticity blowup in 2D compressible Euler equations . arXiv:2407.06455, 07 2024

2024 arXiv
[18]

Formation and constructi on of shock for p-system

Shuxing Chen and Liming Dong. Formation and constructi on of shock for p-system. Science in China Series A: Mathematics , 44(9):1139– 1147, 2001

2001
[19]

The formation of shocks in 3-dimensional ﬂuids , volume 2

Demetrios Christodoulou. The formation of shocks in 3-dimensional ﬂuids , volume 2. European Mathematical Society, 2007

2007
[20]

The shock development problem

Demetrios Christodoulou. The shock development problem. Monographs in Mathematics. European Mathematical Societ y, 2019

2019
[21]

Shock dev elopment in spherical symmetry

Demetrios Christodoulou and André Lisibach. Shock dev elopment in spherical symmetry. Annals of PDE , 2(1):3, 2016. AN INFINITE HIERARCHY OF HÖLDER CUSPS FOR 1D EULER 61

2016
[22]

Compressible ﬂow and Euler’s equations , volume 9 of Surveys of Modern Mathematics

Demetrios Christodoulou and Shuang Miao. Compressible ﬂow and Euler’s equations , volume 9 of Surveys of Modern Mathematics. Interna- tional Press, Somerville, MA; Higher Education Press, Beij ing, 2014

2014
[23]

Singularity formation for burgers equation with transvers e viscosity

Charles Collot, Tej-Eddine Ghoul, and Nader Masmoudi. Singularity formation for burgers equation with transvers e viscosity. Ann. Sci. Éc. Norm. Supér . (4), 55(4):1047–1133, 2022

2022
[24]

Supersonic Flow and Shock Waves

Richard Courant and Kurt Otto Friedrichs. Supersonic Flow and Shock Waves . Interscience Publishers, Inc., New Y ork, 1948

1948
[25]

Hyperbolic conservation laws in continuum physics , volume 3

Constantine M Dafermos. Hyperbolic conservation laws in continuum physics , volume 3. Springer, 2005

2005
[26]

Formation of singularities in one-dimensi onal nonlinear wave propagation

Fritz John. Formation of singularities in one-dimensi onal nonlinear wave propagation. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 27:377–405, 1974

1974
[27]

Formation and propagation of singularit ies for 2 × 2 quasilinear hyperbolic systems

De-Xing Kong. Formation and propagation of singularit ies for 2 × 2 quasilinear hyperbolic systems. Transactions of the American Mathemat- ical Society, 354(8):3155–3179, 2002

2002
[28]

Landau and Evgeny M

Lev D. Landau and Evgeny M. Lifshitz. Fluid Mechanics: V olume 6, volume 6. Elsevier, 1987

1987
[29]

Peter D. Lax. Development of singularities of solution s of nonlinear hyperbolic partial differential equations. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 5(5):611–613, 1964

1964
[30]

Description de la formation d’un choc dans le p-système

Marie-Pierre Lebaud. Description de la formation d’un choc dans le p-système. Journal de mathématiques pures et appliquées, 73(6):523–566, 1994

1994
[31]

Development of singularities in the nonl inear waves for quasi-linear hyperbolic partial different ial equations

Tai-Ping Liu. Development of singularities in the nonl inear waves for quasi-linear hyperbolic partial different ial equations. Journal of Differ- ential Equations, 33(1):92–111, 1979

1979
[32]

Shock waves, volume 215 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics

Tai-Ping Liu. Shock waves, volume 215 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2021

2021
[33]

Shock formation in soluti ons to the 2d compressible euler equations in the presence of non-zero vorticity

Jonathan Luk and Jared Speck. Shock formation in soluti ons to the 2d compressible euler equations in the presence of non-zero vorticity. Inventiones mathematicae, 214(1):1–169, 2018

2018
[34]

The stability of simple pl ane-symmetric shock formation for three-dimensional comp ressible Euler ﬂow with vorticity and entropy

Jonathan Luk and Jared Speck. The stability of simple pl ane-symmetric shock formation for three-dimensional comp ressible Euler ﬂow with vorticity and entropy. Anal. PDE, 17(3):831–941, 2024

2024
[35]

Compressible ﬂuid ﬂow and systems of conservation laws in se veral space variables, volume 53

Andrew Majda. Compressible ﬂuid ﬂow and systems of conservation laws in se veral space variables, volume 53. Springer-V erlag, 1984

1984
[36]

On the implosion of a compressible ﬂuid I: smoot h self-similar inviscid proﬁle

Frank Merle, Pierre Raphaël, Igor Rodnianski, and Jere mie Szeftel. On the implosion of a compressible ﬂuid I: smoot h self-similar inviscid proﬁle. Ann. of Math. (2) , 196(2):567–778, 2022

2022
[37]

On the implosion of a compressible ﬂuid II: sing ularity formation

Frank Merle, Pierre Raphaël, Igor Rodnianski, and Jere mie Szeftel. On the implosion of a compressible ﬂuid II: sing ularity formation. Ann. of Math. (2), 196(2):779–889, 2022

2022
[38]

A new type of stable shock formation in gas dynamics

Isaac Neal, Calum Rickard, Steve Shkoller, and Vlad Vic ol. A new type of stable shock formation in gas dynamics. Communications on Pure and Applied Analysis, 23(10):1423–1447, 2024

2024
[39]

A character istics approach to shock formation in 2D Euler with azimutha l symmetry and entropy

Isaac Neal, Steve Shkoller, and Vlad Vicol. A character istics approach to shock formation in 2D Euler with azimutha l symmetry and entropy. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01289, 2023

2023 arXiv
[40]

Gradient blow-u p for dispersive and dissipative perturbations of the Burge rs equation

Sung-Jin Oh and Federico Pasqualotto. Gradient blow-u p for dispersive and dissipative perturbations of the Burge rs equation. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 248(3):Paper No. 54, 61, 2024

2024
[41]

Über die Fortpﬂanzung ebener Luftwe llen von endlicher Schwingungsweite

Bernhard Riemann. Über die Fortpﬂanzung ebener Luftwe llen von endlicher Schwingungsweite. Abhandlungen der Königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, 8:43–66, 1860
[42]

The geometry of maximal d evelopment and shock formation for the Euler equations in mu ltiple space dimen- sions

Steve Shkoller and Vlad Vicol. The geometry of maximal d evelopment and shock formation for the Euler equations in mu ltiple space dimen- sions. Inventiones mathematicae, 237(3):871–1252, 2024

2024
[43]

Thomas C. Sideris. Formation of singularities in three -dimensional compressible ﬂuids. Comm. Math. Phys. , 101(4):475–485, 1985

1985
[44]

Formation and construction of a shock wav e for 3-D compressible Euler equations with the spherical in itial data

Huicheng Yin. Formation and construction of a shock wav e for 3-D compressible Euler equations with the spherical in itial data. Nagoya Math. J., 175:125–164, 2004. DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS , UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS , DAVIS , CA 95616. Email address: ineal@ucdavis.edu ...

2004

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

The emergence of the singu lar boundary from the crease in 3D compressible Euler ﬂow

Leo Abbrescia and Jared Speck. The emergence of the singu lar boundary from the crease in 3D compressible Euler ﬂow. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.07107, 2022

arXiv 2022

[2] [2]

Blowup of small data solutions for a class of quasilinear wave equations in two space dimensions

Serge Alinhac. Blowup of small data solutions for a class of quasilinear wave equations in two space dimensions. II. Acta Math., 182(1):1–23, 1999

1999

[3] [3]

Blowup of small data solutions for a quasi linear wave equation in two space dimensions

Serge Alinhac. Blowup of small data solutions for a quasi linear wave equation in two space dimensions. Ann. of Math. (2) , 149(1):97–127, 1999

work page 1999

[4] [4]

Plane algebraic curves

Egbert Brieskorn and Horst Knörrer. Plane algebraic curves. Birkhäuser V erlag, 1986

work page 1986

[5] [5]

Smooth imploding solutions for 3d compressibl e ﬂuids

Tristan Buckmaster, Gonzalo Cao-Labora, and Javier Góm ez-Serrano. Smooth imploding solutions for 3d compressibl e ﬂuids. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.09445, 2022

arXiv 2022

[6] [6]

Simultaneous development of shocks and cusp s for 2d euler with azimuthal symmetry from smooth data

Tristan Buckmaster, Theodore D Drivas, Steve Shkoller, and Vlad Vicol. Simultaneous development of shocks and cusp s for 2d euler with azimuthal symmetry from smooth data. Annals of PDE , 8(2):1–199, 2022

work page 2022

[7] [7]

Formation and development of singularitiesfor the compressible Euler equations

Tristan Buckmaster, Theodore D Drivas, Steve Shkoller, and Vlad Vicol. Formation and development of singularitiesfor the compressible Euler equations. In Dmitry Beliaev and Stanislav Smirnov, editor s, Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicia ns 2022 , volume 5, pages 3636–3659. EMS Press, Berlin, 2023

work page 2022

[8] [8]

Formation of unstab le shocks for 2D insentropic compressible Euler

Tristan Buckmaster and Sameer Iyer. Formation of unstab le shocks for 2D insentropic compressible Euler. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 389:197–271, 2022

work page 2022