Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Viscous Destabilization for Large Shocks of Conservation Laws

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 ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Large viscous shocks of certain conservation laws fail a-contraction even for arbitrarily small perturbations, although the inviscid waves contract and the viscous waves are nonlinearly stable.

desk verdict The scalar counterexample is likely right, but the Navier-Stokes half rests on a broken approximation space; the paper deserves review but needs real revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.01537 v1 pith:SEPTZ67T submitted 2025-01-02 math.AP

Paul Blochas , Jeffrey Cheng This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35B3535L6576N1535L67
keywords StabilityViscousconservationlawRelativeentropyShockwaveContractiona-contractionNavier-StokesScalar
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 asks whether the $a$-contraction property --- a weighted $L^2$ contraction up to shift that holds uniformly in shock amplitude for inviscid shocks and for small viscous shocks --- remains valid for large viscous shocks. The authors establish that it does not: for scalar conservation laws with strictly convex fluxes whose derivative goes to $-\infty$ faster than any polynomial, and for $1$-shocks of a barotropic Navier-Stokes system as the post-shock specific volume tends to zero, arbitrarily small smooth perturbations can increase the weighted $L^2$ distance for a short time under every Lipschitz shift. Because ordinary nonlinear orbital stability of these viscous shocks is known, the failure shows that $a$-contraction is strictly stronger than asymptotic stability. The inviscid versions of the same models are contractive up to shift, so the paper calls this effect viscous destabilization.

What carries the argument

The engine is the relative entropy method in shock variables. With $y=S(x)$ and $w(y,t)=u^{-X}(S^{-1}(y),t)-y$, the time derivative of the weighted $L^2$ distance splits as $2\dot X(t)Y(w)+Z(w)+R_1(w)$, where $Y$ is a linear functional controlling the shift, $Z$ is a quadratic form involving weighted integrals of $w^2$, $|w_y|^2$, and the relative flux $A(w+y|y)$, and $R_1$ is a cubic remainder. The construction chooses $w$ with $Y(w)=0$ and $Z(w)>0$. The flux-growth hypothesis enters through Lemma 2.4: for arbitrarily large $K$, the ratio $|\sigma/A'(-K)|$ can be made as small as desired, so the positive term $\int \tilde a A'' w^2$ dominates all error terms and $Z(w)\ge c|A'(-K)|$. Compact support and Lipschitz shifts are handled by approximating the profile in a weighted $H$ norm and by a continuity lemma (Lemma 3.5) that preserves the sign of the time derivative over a short interval. In the Navier-Stokes case, the effective velocity $h=u+p(v)_x$ transforms the system into a tractable form, and the pair $w=1/p'(y)$, $g=\alpha\,1_{[v_+,2v_+]}$ with $\alpha$ from Lemma 4.3 plays the same role: it solves the linear shift condition and leaves a positive quadratic form.

What would settle it

Compute the scalar quadratic form $F(w)$ defined in Section 3.1.1 for $A(u)=e^{-u}+u-1$, $\tilde a=1$, and $w(y)=\tilde w(y/K)$ at $K=2^m$. The theorem predicts $F(w)>0$ for all sufficiently large $K$ with $Y(w)=0$; any such $K$ with $F(w)\le0$ refutes Theorem 1.1. For the Navier-Stokes theorem, run the transformed system (26) with $p(v)=v^{-\gamma}$, $v_+=10^{-3}$, and initial perturbation $(1/p'(y), \alpha\,1_{[v_+,2v_+]})$, and check whether the weighted relative entropy derivative at $t=0$ is positive; a non-positive value refutes Theorem 4.1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is a pair of counterexamples. Theorem 1.1: for any smooth strictly convex flux $A$ with $A'(0)=0$ and with $A'(x)$ going to $-\infty$ faster than every polynomial as $x\to-\infty$, and for any fixed weight profile $\tilde a\in W^{2,\infty}([0,1])$, there are shock amplitudes $K_n\to\infty$ such that the viscous shock $S$ joining $0$ to $-K_n$ admits compactly supported smooth initial data $u_0$ with $u_0-S\in C_c^\infty$ for which, for every Lipschitz shift $X$ and all sufficiently small $t>0$, the weighted $L^2$ distance $\int_{\mathbb R} \tilde a(-S(x)/K_n)\,|u(x+X(t),t)-S(x)|^2\,dx$ is strictly larger than at $t=0$. Theorem 1.2 transfers the same conclusion to the barotropic Navier-Stokes system with $p(v)=v^{-\gamma}$, $\mu(v)=\gamma v^{-\gamma}$, for $1$-shocks with $v_+$ sufficiently small, with perturbations arbitrarily small in $H^s$, using the relative entropy $\eta=h^2/2+Q(v)$ and weights $\tilde a(b(\tilde v(x)))$. The underlying discovery is that $a$-contraction fails uniformly in the amplitude even though each viscous wave is nonlinearly stable, and even though the inviscid scalar model with the same flux satisfies $L^2$-contraction up to shift.

Load-bearing premise

For the Navier-Stokes half, the proof needs the perturbed solution to differ from the shock profile by a function with two square-integrable spatial derivatives, continuously in time on a short interval; this is asserted in Lemma 5.1 with only a sketch, and the fluid counterexample collapses if it fails. The scalar half does not rely on this lemma.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Uniform-in-amplitude $a$-contraction for viscous scalar conservation laws cannot hold for the standard weight family when the flux is super-polynomial; any such theorem must restrict the flux growth or enlarge the weight class.
  • Viscous destabilization is real: the inviscid scalar equation with the same flux is $L^2$-contractive up to shift for shocks of every size, while the viscous equation is not, even for arbitrarily small perturbations.
  • $a$-contraction is strictly stronger than nonlinear stability: the counterexample perturbations are arbitrarily small in $H^s$ but still increase the weighted distance, despite the underlying shock being asymptotically stable.
  • For the Navier-Stokes system the failure is not a large-perturbation artifact; Theorem 1.2 produces counterexamples with initial perturbation norm below any prescribed $\delta>0$.
  • The mechanism is amplitude-driven: the relevant small parameter is the ratio $\sigma/A'(-K)$ for scalar fluxes, or the post-shock specific volume $v_+$ for the fluid system, not the size of the perturbation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The proof's reliance on $\sigma/A'(-K)\to0$ suggests the same failure should occur for any strictly convex flux whose derivative goes to $-\infty$ faster than linearly, not only super-polynomially; the super-polynomial hypothesis is one sufficient route to that ratio.
  • For polynomial fluxes, where $\sigma/A'(-K)$ stays bounded, uniform $a$-contraction may still be possible, so the growth threshold separating these counterexamples from the cubic-flux large-shock result could be characterized by the decay rate of $A'$.
  • A testable quantitative prediction is that the short-time entropy increase scales roughly like $|A'(-K)|$ in the scalar case and like $|\sigma|$ in the fluid case, so $T^*$ should shrink as the amplitude grows; direct numerical evaluation of $F(w)$ for $A(u)=e^{-u}+u-1$ at $K=10^n$ would check this.
  • For the Navier-Stokes system, the same construction may extend to $2$-shocks or to other pressure laws with $p'(v)\to-\infty$ at vacuum, because the proof only uses $[p]\to\infty$ and the bound of Lemma 4.4.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies whether the a-contraction property with shifts holds uniformly in shock amplitude for viscous conservation laws. It presents two negative results: Theorem 1.1 for the semilinear scalar equation u_t + A(u)_x = u_xx with strictly convex A, and Theorem 1.2 (via Theorem 4.1) for the barotropic Navier-Stokes system with p(v)=v^{-γ}, μ(v)=γv^{-γ}. In each case the authors construct a trial perturbation that makes the time derivative of the weighted relative entropy positive at t=0, then argue by approximation in a functional topology and a short-time continuity argument that there exist compactly supported smooth initial data for which the entropy increases initially under every Lipschitz shift. The paper thus claims a 'viscous destabilization' effect: a-contraction holds for the inviscid limit but fails for large viscous shocks, and the a-contraction property is stronger than classical nonlinear stability.

Significance. If the results were established, they would be a significant contribution to the theory of a-contraction for viscous shocks: they would show that uniform-in-amplitude a-contraction fails for natural classes of fluxes and for the barotropic Navier-Stokes system, contrasting with the inviscid theory and with small-shock viscous results. The paper is constructive, builds on prior work of Kang, Vasseur, Stokols, and others, and its main strategy is transparent. It does not appear to contain circular reasoning or parameter fitting; the claims are falsifiable counterexamples. However, as written, the proof has load-bearing gaps in the approximation steps, and those gaps affect both main theorems.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.2 and Section 5.2] The quadratic form used to define the space H is not positive definite, so H is not a normed space. In Section 3.2 the norm is defined by ‖f‖_H^2 = ‖f‖_{L^2}^2 + ∫_0^{-K} y(K+y)|f'|^2 dy, and on the interval (-K,0) the weight y(K+y) is strictly negative. In Section 5.2 the analogous weight is (y-v+)(y-v−), which is strictly negative on (v+,v−) because v+<v−. Therefore the 'closure of C_0^∞ in this topology' is not a Banach space, Lemma 3.1 cannot be invoked, and the density argument that converts the trial functions w or (w,g) into compactly supported initial data collapses. This step is essential for both Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 4.1, since without it the initial perturbation is not in C_c^∞ as required by the theorem statements.
  2. [Section 5.2] Even after correcting the sign of the weight in the H norm, the functional F is not continuous on H in the system case. The functional defined in Section 5.1.1 contains the term ∫_{v+}^{v−} \tilde a(b(y)) ((p'(y) w(y))_y)^2 q(y) dy, which depends on w_y (i.e. b_y in the notation of Section 5.2). The proposed H norm controls m_y through the weighted derivative term and only b in L^2; it does not control b_y. Thus the assertion 'F is continuous on H equipped with this topology' in Section 5.2 is not justified, and the approximation of the pair (w,g) = (1/p', α 1_{[v+,2v+]}) cannot be performed as written.
  3. [Lemma 5.1] The Navier-Stokes short-time argument depends on Lemma 5.1, which asserts that the perturbed solution U satisfies U - \tilde U ∈ C([0,T]; H^2)^2. The proof is only a sketch, and the iterative viscous approximation contains several unproved uniformity claims: the positivity of inf_{k,ν} T^*_{k,ν}, the ν-uniform contractivity in C([0,T];L^2), and the passage to the limit yielding a solution in C([0,T];H^2). Since Lemma 3.5 and the conclusion that the entropy derivative remains positive for a short time require exactly this regularity, Lemma 5.1 is load-bearing for Theorem 4.1. The references to existing well-posedness results in [21] are not sufficient, because the precise equivalence with the transformed system (26) is not detailed.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Lemma 4.2] In the proof of Lemma 4.2, the displayed derivative D_λ f(0,λ*) is written as ∫ \tilde a'(b(y)) p'(y) φ(y) dy, but the formula for f shows it should be ∫ \tilde a(b(y)) p'(y) φ(y) dy, matching the denominator of λ*.
  2. [Proof of Lemma 2.3] The sentence 'Hence, A′(x) goes to −∞ as x goes to ∞' should read 'as x goes to −∞', since the preceding argument concerns the behavior on R^-.
  3. [Theorem 4.1] The phrase 'with \tilde U − (u0,u0) ∈ (C_0^∞(R))^2' appears to contain a typo; the intended condition is that the initial data (v0,h0) satisfy (v0,h0) − \tilde U ∈ (C_0^∞(R))^2.
  4. [Section 3.1.1] The existence of the non-increasing smooth function \tilde w satisfying properties (1)-(4) is asserted without proof. A short construction (e.g., a smooth monotone transition from 1 on [-1,-1/2] to -C on [-1/4,0], with C chosen by continuity of the integral) would make the argument self-contained.
  5. [Section 5.2] The pair (b,m) is introduced in the definition of ‖(b,m)‖_H, but the functional F is defined on (w,g); the notational mismatch should be clarified so that the reader can see which component carries the derivative weight.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the counterexample constructions are explicit and do not reduce to their inputs by definition.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. Theorem 1.1 fixes a class of strictly convex fluxes and then constructs, for a sequence of shock sizes K_n, an explicit compactly supported perturbation w whose relative-entropy time derivative is shown to be positive at t=0. The core identity (Lemma 2.1) is a direct calculation using the entropy eta(u)=u^2 and the shock profile equation; it does not assume the failure of a-contraction. The shift condition Y(w)=0 is solved by an implicit-function-theorem construction (Lemma 2.2), with the parameter lambda* determined by the condition, and the positivity estimate F(w)>0 follows from explicit lower bounds on integrals using the growth lemmas for A. No fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction; the perturbation is constructed, not calibrated to the claimed output. Theorem 4.1/1.2 uses the relative-entropy identity (28) quoted from Lemma 2.3 of Kang--Vasseur [18], but that citation is an independent published calculation, not a self-citation by Blochas and Cheng, and it is used only as an algebraic representation before the explicit perturbation (w,g)=(1/p', alpha 1_[v+,2v+]) is inserted. The weight a(x)=a~(b(v~(x))) is precisely the family for which uniform contraction is being disproved, so adopting it is not smuggling the conclusion. The paper's acknowledged or apparent rigor gaps (e.g., the H-space norm in Section 5.2 not being positive definite as written, and Lemma 5.1 being only sketched) are correctness concerns, not circularity: they do not exhibit an output that equals an input by construction. Accordingly no circular step can be quoted with a specific reduction, and the circularity score is 0.

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

The paper introduces no new entities or fitted parameters. Its dependencies are standard background theorems plus two proof-specific assertions (w_tilde existence, Navier-Stokes regularity) that are not fully demonstrated.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Existence and uniqueness of global smooth solutions to (1) for L-infinity initial data and to (4) for C_c^infinity perturbations (cited [15], [21]).
    Used throughout to ensure the solution u exists for the time interval needed in the entropy derivative calculations (Sections 2.1, 4.2).
  • standard math The relative entropy identity for the Navier-Stokes system, Lemma 2.3 in [18], is taken as given.
    The derivative formula (28) for the BD-entropy is borrowed from [18]; it is an established result, not proven here.
  • domain assumption Flux growth condition: for every polynomial P there exists x<0 with P(x)>A'(x).
    This is an explicit hypothesis of Theorem 1.1; it ensures Lemma 2.3 (unbounded ratio A'(x)/A'(theta x)) which is used to make the shock speed negligible for large K.
  • standard math Existence of the viscous shock profile for (4) under the Rankine-Hugoniot and Lax conditions (5), cited to [28].
    The shock (v_tilde, u_tilde) is the reference solution; its existence is not proven in this paper.
  • ad hoc to paper Existence of a smooth nonincreasing function w_tilde on [-1,0] with properties (1)-(4) in Section 3.1.1.
    This function provides the trial perturbation that makes the functional F(w)>0. Its existence is asserted without proof; it is load-bearing for the scalar case.
  • ad hoc to paper Regularity of the perturbed Navier-Stokes solution, Lemma 5.1 (U - U_tilde in C([0,T]; H^2)^2).
    Only a proof sketch is given; the short-time continuity argument (Lemma 3.5) requires this regularity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Viscous Destabilization for Large Shocks of Conservation Laws." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SEPTZ67T

@misc{pith2026250101537,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Viscous Destabilization for Large Shocks of Conservation Laws},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SEPTZ67T}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.01537}
}
abstract

The recent theory of $a-$contraction with shifts provides $L^2$-stability for shock waves of $1-$D hyperbolic systems of conservation laws. The theory has been established at the inviscid level uniformly in the shock amplitude, and at the viscous level for small shocks. In this work, we investigate whether the $a-$contraction property holds uniformly in the shock amplitude for some specific systems with viscosity. We show that in some cases, the $a-$contraction fails for sufficiently large shocks. This showcases a "viscous destabilization" effect in the sense that the $a$-contraction property is verified for the inviscid model, but can fail for the viscous one. This also shows that the $a$-contraction property, even among small perturbations, is stronger than the classical notion of nonlinear stability, which is known to hold regardless of shock amplitude for viscous scalar conservation laws.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. $L^2$-contraction and asymptotic stability of large shock for scalar viscous conservation laws

    math.AP 2025-09 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    For scalar viscous conservation laws with polynomial flux u^p, p in [2,4], arbitrarily large viscous shock profiles are L2-contractive and time-asymptotically stable under small H1 perturbations, with t^{-1/4} decay f...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [21]

    Moon-Jin Kang and Alexis F. Vasseur. Global smooth solu tions for 1D barotropic Navier- Stokes equations with a large class of degenerate viscositi es. J. Nonlinear Sci. , 30(4):1703– 1721, 2020

    work page 2020

  2. [1]

    Existence of globa l weak solutions for a 2D viscous shallow water equations and convergence to the quasi-geost rophic model

    Didier Bresch and Benoît Desjardins. Existence of globa l weak solutions for a 2D viscous shallow water equations and convergence to the quasi-geost rophic model. Comm. Math. Phys. , 238(1-2):211–223, 2003

    work page 2003

  3. [2]

    On the constructio n of approximate solutions for the 2D viscous shallow water model and for compressible Navier- Stokes models

    Didier Bresch and Benoît Desjardins. On the constructio n of approximate solutions for the 2D viscous shallow water model and for compressible Navier- Stokes models. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) , 86(4):362–368, 2006

    work page 2006

  4. [3]

    On so me compressible fluid models: Korteweg, lubrication, and shallow water systems

    Didier Bresch, Benoît Desjardins, and Chi-Kun Lin. On so me compressible fluid models: Korteweg, lubrication, and shallow water systems. Comm. Partial Differential Equations , 28(3-4):843–868, 2003

    work page 2003

  5. [4]

    Existence of strong so lutions in a larger space for the shallow-water system

    Frédéric Charve and Boris Haspot. Existence of strong so lutions in a larger space for the shallow-water system. Adv. Differential Equations , 17(11-12):1085–1114, 2012

    work page 2012

  6. [5]

    Dafermos

    Constantine M. Dafermos. The second law of thermodynami cs and stability. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 70(2):167–179, 1979

    work page 1979

  7. [6]

    Ronald J. DiPerna. Uniqueness of solutions to hyperboli c conservation laws. Indiana Univ. Math. J. , 28(1):137–188, 1979

    1979

  8. [7]

    L1 stability of shock waves in scalar viscous conservation laws

    Heinrich Freistühler and Denis Serre. L1 stability of shock waves in scalar viscous conservation laws. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 51(3):291–301, 1998

    work page 1998

Show all 37 references
  1. [8]

    Vasseur Geng Chen, Moon-Jin Kang

    Alexis F. Vasseur Geng Chen, Moon-Jin Kang. From navier- stokes to bv solutions of the barotropic euler equations. Preprint on Arxiv , jan 2024

    2024

  2. [9]

    Nonlinear asymptotic stability of vi scous shock profiles for conservation laws

    Jonathan Goodman. Nonlinear asymptotic stability of vi scous shock profiles for conservation laws. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. , 95(4):325–344, 1986

    1986

  3. [10]

    Stability of viscous scalar shock fr onts in several dimensions

    Jonathan Goodman. Stability of viscous scalar shock fr onts in several dimensions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 311(2):683–695, 1989

    1989

  4. [11]

    W eak-strong uniqueness for compressibl e Navier-Stokes system with degenerate viscosity coefficient and vacuum in one dimension

    Boris Haspot. W eak-strong uniqueness for compressibl e Navier-Stokes system with degenerate viscosity coefficient and vacuum in one dimension. Commun. Math. Sci. , 15(3):587–591, 2017

    2017

  5. [12]

    The partial differential equation ut + uux = µu xx

    Eberhard Hopf. The partial differential equation ut + uux = µu xx. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 3:201–230, 1950

    1950

  6. [13]

    Pointwise Green’s function approach to s tability for scalar conservation laws

    Peter Howard. Pointwise Green’s function approach to s tability for scalar conservation laws. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 52(10):1295–1313, 1999

    1999

  7. [14]

    Time-asymptotic stability of composite waves of degenerate oleinik shock and rarefaction for non-convex co nservation laws

    Feimin Huang, Yi W ang, and Jian Zhang. Time-asymptotic stability of composite waves of degenerate oleinik shock and rarefaction for non-convex co nservation laws. Preprint on Arxiv , August 2024

    2024

  8. [15]

    Il’in and Olga A

    Arlen M. Il’in and Olga A. Ole ˘ ınik. Asymptotic behavio r of solutions of the Cauchy problem for some quasi-linear equations for large values of the time . Mat. Sb. (N.S.) , 51(93):191–216, 1960

    1960

  9. [16]

    L2-type contraction for shocks of scalar viscous conservatio n laws with strictly convex flux

    Moon-Jin Kang. L2-type contraction for shocks of scalar viscous conservatio n laws with strictly convex flux. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) , 145:1–43, 2021

    2021

  10. [17]

    L2 decay for large pertu rbations of viscous shocks for multi-d burgers equation

    Moon-Jin Kang and HyeonSeop Oh. L2 decay for large pertu rbations of viscous shocks for multi-d burgers equation. Preprint on Arxiv , mar 2024

    2024

  11. [18]

    Contraction propert y for large perturbations of shocks of the barotropic Navier-Stokes system

    Moon-Jin Kang and Alexis Vasseur. Contraction propert y for large perturbations of shocks of the barotropic Navier-Stokes system. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) , 23(2):585–638, 2021

    2021

  12. [19]

    Moon-Jin Kang and Alexis F. Vasseur. Criteria on contra ctions for entropic discontinuities of systems of conservation laws. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 222(1):343–391, 2016

    2016

  13. [20]

    Moon-Jin Kang and Alexis F. Vasseur. L2-contraction for shock waves of scalar viscous con- servation laws. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré C Anal. Non Linéaire , 34(1):139–156, 2017

    2017

  14. [22]

    Moon-Jin Kang and Alexis F. Vasseur. Uniqueness and sta bility of entropy shocks to the isentropic Euler system in a class of inviscid limits from a l arge family of Navier-Stokes systems. Invent. Math. , 224(1):55–146, 2021. VISCOUS DESTABILIZATION FOR LARGE SHOCKS OF CONSER ...

    2021

  15. [23]

    Vasseur, and Yi W ang

    Moon-Jin Kang, Alexis F. Vasseur, and Yi W ang. Time-asy mptotic stability of composite waves of viscous shock and rarefaction for barotropic Navie r-Stokes equations. Adv. Math. , 419:Paper No. 108963, 66, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    L2 stability estimates for shock solutions of scalar conserva tion laws using the relative entropy method

    Nicholas Leger. L2 stability estimates for shock solutions of scalar conserva tion laws using the relative entropy method. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 199(3):761–778, 2011

    2011

  17. [25]

    Nonlinear stability of shock waves for vi scous conservation laws

    Tai-Ping Liu. Nonlinear stability of shock waves for vi scous conservation laws. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. , 56(328):v+108, 1985

    1985

  18. [26]

    Pointwise convergence to shock waves for viscous conservation laws

    Tai-Ping Liu. Pointwise convergence to shock waves for viscous conservation laws. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 50(11):1113–1182, 1997

    1997

  19. [27]

    On nonlinear stability of general undercompressive viscous shock waves

    Tai-Ping Liu and Kevin Zumbrun. On nonlinear stability of general undercompressive viscous shock waves. Comm. Math. Phys. , 174(2):319–345, 1995

    1995

  20. [28]

    Asymptotic stability of viscous shock wave for a one- dimensional isentropic model of viscous gas with density de pendent viscosity

    Akitaka Matsumura and Yang W ang. Asymptotic stability of viscous shock wave for a one- dimensional isentropic model of viscous gas with density de pendent viscosity. Methods Appl. Anal., 17(3):279–290, 2010

    2010

  21. [29]

    A note on the stability of travelling w ave solutions of Burgers’ equation

    Kenji Nishihara. A note on the stability of travelling w ave solutions of Burgers’ equation. Japan J. Appl. Math. , 2(1):27–35, 1985

    1985

  22. [30]

    Sattinger

    David H. Sattinger. On the stability of waves of nonline ar parabolic systems. Advances in Math., 22(3):312–355, 1976

    1976

  23. [31]

    Local existence for viscous system of cons ervation laws: H s-data with s > 1+d/ 2

    Denis Serre. Local existence for viscous system of cons ervation laws: H s-data with s > 1+d/ 2. In Nonlinear partial differential equations and hyperbolic wa ve phenomena , volume 526 of Contemp. Math. , pages 339–358. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2010

    2010

  24. [32]

    Denis Serre and Alexis F. Vasseur. L2-type contraction for systems of conservation laws. J. Éc. polytech. Math. , 1:1–28, 2014

    2014

  25. [33]

    Shelukhin

    Vladimir V. Shelukhin. On the structure of generalized solutions of the one-dimensional equations of a polytropic viscous gas. Appl. Math. Mech., Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics , pages 665–672, 1984

    1984

  26. [34]

    Logan F. Stokols. L2-type contraction of viscous shocks for scalar conservatio n laws. J. Hy- perbolic Differ. Equ. , 18(2):271–292, 2021

    2021

  27. [35]

    Nonlinear stability of viscous shock waves

    Anders Szepessy and Zhou Ping Xin. Nonlinear stability of viscous shock waves. Arch. Ra- tional Mech. Anal. , 122(1):53–103, 1993

    1993

  28. [36]

    Alexis F. Vasseur. Relative entropy and contraction fo r extremal shocks of conservation laws up to a shift. In Recent advances in partial differential equations and appli cations, volume 666 of Contemp. Math. , pages 385–404. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2016

    2016

  29. [37]

    Stability of large-amplitude shock wav es of compressible Navier-Stokes equa- tions

    Kevin Zumbrun. Stability of large-amplitude shock wav es of compressible Navier-Stokes equa- tions. In Handbook of mathematical fluid dynamics. Vol. III , pages 311–533. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2004. With an appendix by Helge Kristian Jenssen and Gregory Lyng. Department of M...

    2004

Pith tools

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