Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 50 references

Existence of weak solutions to volume-preserving mean curvature flow with obstacles

T0 review · 3 major / 6 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 This paper proves that volume-preserving mean curvature flow constrained by fixed obstacles admits global weak solutions in every dimension, obtained as limits of an Allen-Cahn phase-field equation with a multiplier and obstacle forcing.

desk verdict First existence result for volume-preserving mean curvature flow with obstacles, genuinely novel and credible, but a central density-ratio estimate is deferred to a cited reference and needs to be spelled out before the main theorem is fully verified. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.03455 v3 pith:Z3YXYZAG submitted 2025-01-07 math.AP

Jiwoong Jang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35K5553E10
keywords volume-preservingmeancurvatureflowobstacleproblemAllen-CahnequationvarifoldsweaksolutionsphasefieldmethoddiscrepancymeasureL2-flow
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

Volume-preserving mean curvature flow moves an interface with normal velocity equal to its mean curvature minus a time-dependent multiplier chosen to keep the enclosed volume fixed. This paper proves that when the interface is additionally forbidden from entering fixed obstacles, a global weak solution still exists in every dimension $d\ge 2$, by showing that solutions of a suitably modified Allen-Cahn phase-field equation converge to such a flow. The modification adds a spatially dependent forcing that pushes the interface away from the obstacles, and the main technical achievement is controlling this forcing against the nonlocal volume-preserving multiplier. If the result is correct, it supplies the first existence theorem for the combined obstacle-plus-volume-preserving problem and validates a concrete phase-field scheme for computing constrained interface motions such as those arising in cell motility models.

What carries the argument

The central object is the modified Allen-Cahn equation (1.8), $\varepsilon\partial_t\phi_\varepsilon = \varepsilon\Delta\phi_\varepsilon - \varepsilon^{-1}W'(\phi_\varepsilon) + g_\varepsilon\sqrt{2W(\phi_\varepsilon)}$, with double-well potential $W(r)=\tfrac12(1-r^2)^2$, multiplier $\lambda_\varepsilon(t)$ defined in (1.9) as an $\varepsilon^{-\alpha}$-normalized integral of $\eta_\varepsilon(s(x))(k(\phi_\varepsilon^0)-k(\phi_\varepsilon))$, and the spatially dependent forcing $g_\varepsilon$ of (1.10) interpolating between $\lambda_\varepsilon\eta_\varepsilon$ in a $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$-neighborhood of the obstacles and $\pm d/R_0$ on the obstacle interiors. This is the mechanism that converts volume preservation into a normal-velocity constraint while keeping the interface out of $O_\pm$: the gradient-flow structure forces the bound $|\lambda_\varepsilon(t)|\le C\varepsilon^{-\alpha/2}$, which is strong enough to make the obstacle forcing win in the comparison principle, to give the $L^2$ bound in time on $\lambda_\varepsilon$, and, through the monotonicity formula and the upper bounds on the discrepancy and density ratio, to yield the vanishing $|\xi_\varepsilon|\to 0$ that underlies rectifiability and integrality.

What would settle it

Check whether estimate (5.19) can actually be derived for the forcing $g_\varepsilon$ under the assumptions (5.7), following the continuity argument cited from [24, Section 6, (6.4)]. If the argument cannot be adapted, the density-ratio bound of Proposition 8 has no proof, and the rectifiability and integrality conclusions would be unsupported. A complementary numerical check: solve (1.8) with a fixed obstacle and monitor whether $\sup_{t\in[0,T]} D_\varepsilon(t)$ remains bounded uniformly in $\varepsilon$; unbounded growth would disprove Proposition 8 and the $(d-1)$-integrality clause.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Theorem 1: from any $C^1$ initial surface $M_0=\partial U_0$ separating two fixed disjoint obstacles $O_+\subset U_0$ and $O_-\subset\Omega\setminus U_0$ with $C^{2,\beta}$ boundaries, there is a subsequence of solutions to the Allen-Cahn system (1.8) whose associated energy measures converge to a family of Radon measures $\mu_t$ forming a global weak solution of the obstacle-constrained volume-preserving mean curvature flow in the L2-flow sense, meaning a family of rectifiable varifolds with an $L^2$ generalized mean curvature and a generalized velocity field. In the limit, $\mu_t$ is a $(d-1)$-dimensional integral varifold for almost every time; the phase fields converge to the characteristic function of a finite-perimeter set $E(t)$ whose volume matches the initial volume and which contains $O_+$ and avoids $O_-$ for all time; and, away from the obstacles, the motion law $v = h - (\lambda/\theta)\nu$ holds on the reduced boundary, with $\lambda$ the weak $L^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$ limit of the multipliers $\lambda_\varepsilon$. The constructive content is that the spatially dependent forcing can be handled: the estimate $|\lambda_\varepsilon(t)|\le C\varepsilon^{-\alpha/2}$ lets the constant obstacle driving $\pm d/R_0$ dominate the multiplier near $\partial O$, the $L^2$ bound on $\lambda_\varepsilon$ yields the volume constraint in the limit, and the vanishing of the discrepancy measure $|\xi_\varepsilon|\to 0$ provides the sharp-interface, integrality requirement.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a technical estimate the proof borrows from a cited argument — described in the paper only as following 'with necessary changes made in a straightforward manner' — really holds for this spatially variable forcing and is not secretly assuming the very conclusion it supports; the manuscript itself notes, before Proposition 8, that 'the relation between Proposition 8 and (5.19) appears to be a circularity' and defers the resolution to the cited source without reproducing it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A $C^1$ initial surface separating prescribed disjoint obstacles admits a global-in-time weak motion that conserves its enclosed volume and never penetrates the obstacles, in every spatial dimension $d\ge 2$.
  • The Allen-Cahn system (1.8) with the multiplier (1.9) and forcing (1.10) is a convergent diffuse-interface approximation: its energy measures and phase fields pass to the sharp-interface limit with no volume drift and no obstacle overlap in the limit.
  • Away from the obstacles the limiting flow obeys the motion law $v = h - (\lambda/\theta)\nu$, so the geometric content of volume-preserving mean curvature flow survives the transition to weak solutions.
  • The multiplier $\lambda_\varepsilon$ is uniformly bounded in $L^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$ and passes to a weak limit $\lambda$, giving a well-defined continuum Lagrange multiplier for the volume constraint.
  • The vanishing of the discrepancy measure means the limiting energy concentrates on a $(d-1)$-rectifiable integer-multiplicity surface, so the weak solution is genuinely an interface rather than a diffuse bulk effect.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension, not claimed by the paper, is to apply the same multiplier-versus-forcing comparison to other constrained flows (for example area-preserving curve shortening or surface diffusion with obstacles) whenever the conserved quantity admits an $\varepsilon$-uniform bound of the type (2.9).
  • The $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$-cut-off layer in (1.10) suggests a testable size estimate: in the phase-field approximation, any penetration of the interface into the obstacles should be confined to a region whose thickness vanishes at most like $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$, which could be checked numerically.
  • If the circularity in the density-ratio argument cannot be resolved, a plausible alternative route to the theorem would be an original density estimate tailored to $g_\varepsilon$ that does not pass through the borrowed lemma; the paper does not provide such a route.
  • The convergence results are subsequential and do not address uniqueness; a neighboring open problem is whether the limiting flow depends on the chosen subsequence or on the auxiliary parameters used to build the approximation.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proves global-in-time existence of weak solutions (L2-flows in the sense of Mugnai and Roger) to volume-preserving mean curvature flow with obstacles in all dimensions d >= 2, via the phase-field method. The Allen-Cahn equation is augmented with a spatially dependent forcing g_epsilon designed near the obstacles to prevent intrusion into O_+ and O_-, and with a nonlocal multiplier lambda_epsilon. The main theorem asserts convergence of the associated energy measures to an integral varifold mu_t, convergence of the phase fields to a BV characteristic function with preserved volume and obstacle non-overlap, and the motion law v = h - (lambda/theta) nu on the reduced boundary away from the obstacles. The proof follows the strategy of Takasao [48] and Kagaya [24], with new estimates for the spatially dependent forcing (Propositions 2, 5, 7) and a new density-ratio bound (Proposition 8).

Significance. If correct, this is the first existence result for the combined volume-preserving mean curvature flow with obstacles, and it extends the phase-field approach to a setting where the maximum principle is unavailable and the discrepancy measure does not satisfy the usual nonpositivity. The paper is clearly written and identifies the main technical difficulty - the spatially dependent forcing and the loss of nonpositivity of xi_epsilon - and introduces Propositions 7 and 8 as a way to control the extra term in the monotonicity formula. However, the proof currently rests on several substantial deferred arguments, most importantly the estimate (5.19), and the paper explicitly acknowledges an apparent circularity between Proposition 8 and (5.19). The contribution would be solid once these gaps are filled.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.2, Proposition 8 and (5.19)] The proof of the epsilon-uniform density-ratio bound D_epsilon(t) <= D_T is by contradiction and relies on estimate (5.19), which is asserted to follow from [24, Lemma 6.7] 'with necessary changes made in a straightforward manner using (5.7)'. Immediately before Proposition 8 the text states that 'the relation between Proposition 8 and (5.19) appears to be a circularity' and refers to [24, Section 6, (6.4)] for clarification, but the resolution is not reproduced. This is load-bearing because (5.19) is subsequently used in Lemma 7, Theorem 2, and Theorem 4; without it, the density bound, the vanishing of |xi|, and the integrality of mu_t would not follow. The manuscript must either prove (5.19) directly in the present spatially dependent setting or include the full circularity-breaking bootstrap argument from [24] adapted to the forcing g_epsilon.
  2. [§5.4, Theorem 2] The proof of the vanishing of the discrepancy measure is incomplete: after deriving a finiteness condition, the text says 'We omit the rest of the argument as it is similar to the proof of [48, Theorem 13]' and only indicates changes to equation [48, (78)]. Since Theorem 2 is the key input to rectifiability (Theorem 3), integrality (Theorem 4), and part (D) of Theorem 1, and since the nonpositivity of xi_epsilon fails in this setting, the omitted part is not a routine repetition of [48]; the modifications should be written out fully.
  3. [§5.5, Theorem 4] The integrality theorem, which yields part (A.iii) of Theorem 1, is stated without proof. The text says the arguments of [48, Subsection 4.4] hold with 'necessary modifications' to [48, (96), (122)] and the last line of [48, p. 40], using Proposition 6, (5.19), and Theorem 2. Given the dependence on the unproved (5.19) and on Theorem 2, the reader cannot currently verify integrality. These modifications should be presented explicitly, especially where the nonconstant forcing g_epsilon enters.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'mean curvature flow with in the presence of obstacles' should read 'mean curvature flow in the presence of obstacles'.
  2. [§1.4, first variation definition] In the definition of the first variation, the test vector field is introduced as zeta in C^1_c(Omega; R^d), but the integral uses a different symbol; a single symbol should be used for the test field.
  3. [§2.2, display (2.7)] The display contains 'g_epsilon dot (k(phi_epsilon(t)) - k(phi_epsilon(0)) dx', which is missing a closing parenthesis; it should be 'g_epsilon (k(phi_epsilon(t)) - k(phi_epsilon(0))) dx'.
  4. [§5.2, proof of Proposition 8] The constant C_2 appearing in the final inequality is not defined; it should presumably be C_1, the contradiction constant introduced at the start of the proof.
  5. [Various] There are several typographical slips: 'Helley's selection theorem' should be 'Helly's selection theorem' (p. 25), and 'seel' should be 'see' (p. 12).
  6. [Various] The empty set is sometimes denoted by phi (e.g., 'M0 cap partial O = phi' on p. 4); use 'emptyset' or similar to avoid confusion with the phase field phi_epsilon.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Proposition 8's density-ratio bound is proved using (5.19), whose derivation assumes the same density-ratio bound; the paper flags the circularity and defers to [24] without reproducing the resolution.

  1. other [Section 5.2, before Proposition 8 and in the proof of Proposition 8 (near (5.19))]
    "Before we prove the following ε-uniform upper bound of Dε(t), we mention as an aside that the relation between Proposition 8 and (5.19) appears to be a circularity. We refer to [24, Section 6, (6.4)] for a detailed account that clarifies this circularity. ... By following the proof of [24, Lemma 6.7] with the availability of Proposition 7 and supt∈[0,et] Dε(t) ≤ D1, we obtain (5.19)."

    Proposition 8 is exactly the ε-uniform density-ratio estimate Dε(t) ≤ D_T. Its contradiction proof derives (5.19) from [24, Lemma 6.7] under the hypothesis supt∈[0,et] Dε(t) ≤ D1, i.e., under an upper bound on the very quantity Proposition 8 is proving. Estimate (5.19) is then used to produce the contradiction. The paper does not reproduce the continuity/first-violation argument from [24] that would break the loop; it merely cites [24, Section 6, (6.4)]. The same (5.19) is subsequently invoked in Lemma 7 and Theorem 2 to prove |ξ| = 0, which in turn underlies Theorems 3 and 4 (rectifiability and integrality of µt) and Part (D)'s motion law. Thus the flagged circularity is load-bearing for the integrality of µt.

full rationale

The paper itself identifies the one load-bearing circularity: the proof of Proposition 8 assumes an upper density-ratio bound in order to derive (5.19), and then uses (5.19) to prove the density-ratio bound. Because this step is explicitly acknowledged and deferred to an external prior work ([24], not by the author), and because the main theorem does not reduce by definition to any fitted input or to a self-citation chain, the score is moderate rather than high. The remainder of the derivation—energy dissipation, barrier comparisons for the obstacles, the L2-estimate of the multiplier, the BV/phase-field convergence, and the final varifold identity—rests on independent estimates with no additional self-referential reductions.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The only hand-chosen constant is the exponent alpha. The central proof rests on standard geometric measure theory and on the deferred resolution of an acknowledged circularity in the density-ratio bound.

free parameters (1)
  • alpha = any fixed value in (0,1)
    Exponent in the multiplier definition (1.9) and in the cut-off scaling. Chosen by hand to balance powers of epsilon in the barrier comparison (Lemma 1) and the L2 estimate (Prop 5). The theorem holds for any fixed alpha in (0,1), so it is not fitted to data, but the bounds depend on it.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption C1 regularity of the initial surface M0 and C^{2,beta} regularity of the obstacle boundary, with M0 disjoint from the obstacle boundary
    Stated in Section 1.3 and used for the interior ball condition (2.1), the existence of smooth approximations U^i0 via [19], and the barrier functions in Section 3.
  • standard math Interior ball condition for the obstacles with radius R0
    Follows from C^{2,beta} regularity of the obstacle boundary; used in the barrier construction (Lemma 1) and the energy decay near obstacles in the proof of (B.iv).
  • standard math The Allen-Cahn to Brakke/L2-flow convergence framework of prior works is valid and carries over
    The paper adopts the notions of L2-flow, varifold convergence, the monotonicity formula (Prop 6), and the integrality arguments from [23,40,46,48], with many proofs omitted.
  • ad hoc to paper The circularity-breaking bootstrap for the density ratio in [24, Section 6, (6.4)] applies to the present spatially dependent forcing g_epsilon
    Section 5.2 flags the circularity between Prop 8 and (5.19) and defers to [24], asserting 'necessary changes are made in a straightforward manner'. The applicability to this forced Allen-Cahn equation is not demonstrated in the text.
  • standard math Well-prepared initial data with epsilon-uniform energy bound and nonpositive discrepancy
    Constructed in Section 2.1 from smoothed distance functions and tanh profiles; these properties are standard for the phase-field method and are used for the initial density ratio bound (5.17).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Existence of weak solutions to volume-preserving mean curvature flow with obstacles." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Z3YXYZAG

@misc{pith2026250103455,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Existence of weak solutions to volume-preserving mean curvature flow with obstacles},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Z3YXYZAG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.03455}
}
read the original abstract

We prove the existence of global-in-time weak solutions to volume-preserving mean curvature flow with in the presence of obstacles by the phase field method in all dimensions. Namely, we prove the convergence of solutions to the Allen-Cahn equation with a multiplier to a weak solution to the flow. The choice of the multiplier is motivated from [Mugnai-Seis-Spadaro '16], [Kim-Kwon '20], and [Takasao '23], which enables us to complete the comparison between the multiplier and the forcing that stops the intrusion into the obstacle. We also prove the vanishing of the discrepancy measure by dealing with the forcing term that is now spatially dependent due to the obstacles.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.03455 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The forcing term g ε near ∂O+. The choices (1.9) and (1.10) are due to the expectations that O+ ⊂ Ut , O− ⊂ Ω \ Ut for all time and thus that the volume preservation only on Ω \ O suffices. We remark that as typically happens to Allen-Cahn-type equations, ϕ ε assumes values close enough to ±1, for which we have [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [24]

    Convergence of the allen–cahn equation with a zero neumann boundary condition on non-convex domains

    Takashi Kagaya. Convergence of the allen–cahn equation with a zero neumann boundary condition on non-convex domains. Math. Ann., 373:1485–1528, 2019. 29

    work page 2019

  2. [48]

    The existence of a weak solution to volume preserving mean curvature flow in higher dimensions

    Keisuke Takasao. The existence of a weak solution to volume preserving mean curvature flow in higher dimensions. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. , 247(52), 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [1]

    Convergence of a mass conserving allen-cahn equation whose lagrange multiplier is nonlocal and local

    Mattieu Alfaro and Pierre Alifrangis. Convergence of a mass conserving allen-cahn equation whose lagrange multiplier is nonlocal and local. Interfaces Free Bound., 16(2):243–268, 2014

    work page 2014

  4. [2]

    Samuel Allen and John W. Cahn. A microscopic theory for antiphase boundary motion and its application to antiphase domain coarsening. Acta Metallurgh, 27:2789–2796, 1979

    work page 1979

  5. [3]

    Mean curvature flow with obstacles

    Luis Almeida, Antonin Chambolle, and Matteo Novaga. Mean curvature flow with obstacles. H. Poincar´ e Anal. Non Lin´ eaire, 29:667–681, 2012

    work page 2012

  6. [4]

    Functions of bounded variation and free discontinuity problems

    Luigi Ambrosio, Nicola Fusco, and Diego Pallara. Functions of bounded variation and free discontinuity problems. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 2000

    work page 2000

  7. [5]

    Asymptotic behavior of a diffused interface volume-preserving mean curvature flow

    Matteo Bonforte, Francesco Maggi, and Daniel Restrepo. Asymptotic behavior of a diffused interface volume-preserving mean curvature flow. arXiv:2407.18868, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  8. [6]

    The motion of a surface by its mean curvature

    Kenneth Brakke. The motion of a surface by its mean curvature . Princeton University Press, 1978. 28

    work page 1978

Show all 50 references
  1. [7]

    A modified phase field approximation for mean curvature flow with conservation of the volume

    Elie Bretin and Morgan Brassel. A modified phase field approximation for mean curvature flow with conservation of the volume. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. , 34(10):1157–1180, 2011

    2011

  2. [8]

    Phase field method for mean curvature flow with boundary constraints

    Elie Bretin and Valerie Perrier. Phase field method for mean curvature flow with boundary constraints. ESAIM Math. Model. Numer. Anal. , 46:1509–1526, 2012

    2012

  3. [9]

    Volume-preserving mean curvature flow as a limit of a nonlocal ginzburg-landau equation

    Lia Bronsard and Barbara Stoth. Volume-preserving mean curvature flow as a limit of a nonlocal ginzburg-landau equation. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 28(4):769–807, 1997

    1997

  4. [10]

    Global asymptotic limit of solutions of the cahn-hilliard equation

    Xinfu Chen. Global asymptotic limit of solutions of the cahn-hilliard equation. J. Differential Geometry, 44:262–311, 1996

    1996

  5. [11]

    Uniqueness and existence of viscosity solutions of generalized mean curvature flow equations

    Yun-Gang Chen, Yoshikazu Giga, and Shun’ichi Goto. Uniqueness and existence of viscosity solutions of generalized mean curvature flow equations. J. Differential Geom. , 33(3):749–786, 1991

    1991

  6. [12]

    Elliott, Bj¨ orn Stinner, and Chandrasekhar Venkataraman

    Charles M. Elliott, Bj¨ orn Stinner, and Chandrasekhar Venkataraman. Modelling cell motility and chemotaxis with evolving surface finite elements. J. R. Soc. Interface , 9:3027–3044, 2012

    2012

  7. [13]

    Some dynamic properties of volume preserving curvature driven flows

    Joachim Escher and Kazuo Ito. Some dynamic properties of volume preserving curvature driven flows. Math. Ann., 333(1):213–230, 2005

    2005

  8. [14]

    The volume preserving mean curvature flow near spheres

    Joachim Escher and Gieri Simonett. The volume preserving mean curvature flow near spheres. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 126(9):2789–2796, 1998

    1998

  9. [15]

    Evans, Halil M

    Lawrence C. Evans, Halil M. Soner, and Panagiotis E. Souganidis. Phase separations and generalized motion by mean curvature. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 45:1097–1123, 1992

    1992

  10. [16]

    Evans and Joel Spruck

    Lawrence C. Evans and Joel Spruck. Motion of level sets by mean curvature. i. J. Differential Geom., 33(3):635–681, 1991

    1991

  11. [17]

    On an area-preserving evolution equation for plane curves, volume 51

    Michael Gage. On an area-preserving evolution equation for plane curves, volume 51. American Mathematical Society, 1986

    1986

  12. [18]

    Tran, and Longjie Zhang

    Yoshikazu Giga, Hung V. Tran, and Longjie Zhang. On obstacle problem for mean curvature flow with driving force. Geom. Flows, 4:9–29, 2019

    2019

  13. [19]

    Minimal Surfaces and Functions of Bounded Variation , Monographs in Math- ematics, volume 80

    Enrico Giusti. Minimal Surfaces and Functions of Bounded Variation , Monographs in Math- ematics, volume 80. Birkh¨ auser Verlag, Basel, 1984

    1984

  14. [20]

    The volume-preserving motion by mean curvature as an asymptotic limit of reaction-diffusion equations

    Dmitry Golovaty. The volume-preserving motion by mean curvature as an asymptotic limit of reaction-diffusion equations. Quart. Appl. Math. , 55(2):243–298, 1997

    1997

  15. [21]

    The volume preserving mean curvature flow

    Gerhard Huisken. The volume preserving mean curvature flow. J. reine angew. Math. , 382:35– 48, 1987

    1987

  16. [22]

    Asymptotic behavior for singularities of the mean curvature flow

    Gerhard Huisken. Asymptotic behavior for singularities of the mean curvature flow. J. Dif- ferential Geom., 31:285–299, 1990

    1990

  17. [23]

    Convergence of the allen-cahn equation to brakke’s motion by mean curvature

    Tom Ilmanen. Convergence of the allen-cahn equation to brakke’s motion by mean curvature. J. Differential Geom. , 38(2):417–461, 1993

    1993

  18. [25]

    Volume preserving mean curvature flow for star-shaped sets

    Inwon Kim and Dohyun Kwon. Volume preserving mean curvature flow for star-shaped sets. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations , 59(81), 2020

    2020

  19. [26]

    A deterministic-control-based approach to motion by curva- ture

    Robert Kohn and Sylvia Serfaty. A deterministic-control-based approach to motion by curva- ture. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 59:344–407, 2006

    2006

  20. [27]

    Quantitative convergence of the nonlocal allen-cahn equation to volume-preserving mean curvature flow

    Milan Kroemer and Tim Laux. Quantitative convergence of the nonlocal allen-cahn equation to volume-preserving mean curvature flow. Math. Ann., 2024

    2024

  21. [28]

    Weak-strong uniqueness for volume-preserving mean curvature flow

    Tim Laux. Weak-strong uniqueness for volume-preserving mean curvature flow. Rev. Mat. Iberoam., 40(1):93–110, 2024

    2024

  22. [29]

    Tim Laux and Theresa M. Simon. Convergence of allen-cahn equation to multiphase mean curvature flow. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations , 71(8):1597–1647, 2018

    2018

  23. [30]

    Convergence of thresholding schemes incorporating bulk effects

    Tim Laux and Drew Swartz. Convergence of thresholding schemes incorporating bulk effects. Interfaces Free Bound., 19(2):273–304, 2017

    2017

  24. [31]

    Implicit time discretization for the mean cur- vature flow equation

    Stephan Luckhaus and Thomas Sturzenhecker. Implicit time discretization for the mean cur- vature flow equation. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations , 3(2):253–271, 1995

    1995

  25. [32]

    Ideals of differentiable functions

    Bernard Malgrange. Ideals of differentiable functions . Oxford Univ. Press, 1966

    1966

  26. [33]

    Mayer and Gieri Simonett

    Uwe F. Mayer and Gieri Simonett. Self-intersections for the surface diffusion and the volume- preserving mean curvature flow. Differential Integral Equations, 13(7-9):1189–1199, 2000

    2000

  27. [34]

    Volume-preserving mean-curvature flow as a singular limit of a diffusion-aggregation equation

    Antoine Mellet and Michael Rozowski. Volume-preserving mean-curvature flow as a singular limit of a diffusion-aggregation equation. arXiv:2408.14309, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Mean curvature flow with obstacles: A viscosity approach.arXiv:1409.7657, 2014

    Gwena¨ el Mercier. Mean curvature flow with obstacles: A viscosity approach.arXiv:1409.7657, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Mean curvature flow with obstacles: existence, unique- ness and regularity of solutions

    Gwena¨ el Mercier and Matteo Novaga. Mean curvature flow with obstacles: existence, unique- ness and regularity of solutions. Interfaces Free Bound., 17:399–426, 2015

    2015

  30. [37]

    A game-theoretic approach to the asymptotic behavior of solutions to an obstacle problem for the mean curvature flow equation

    Kuniyasu Misu. A game-theoretic approach to the asymptotic behavior of solutions to an obstacle problem for the mean curvature flow equation. arXiv:2404.02682, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Mizuhara, Leonid Beryland, Volodymyr Rybalko, and Lei Zhang

    Matthew S. Mizuhara, Leonid Beryland, Volodymyr Rybalko, and Lei Zhang. On an evolution equation in a cell motility model. Phys. D. , 318/319:12–25, 2016

    2016

  32. [39]

    A gradient bound and a liouville theorem for nonlinear poisson equations

    Luciano Modica. A gradient bound and a liouville theorem for nonlinear poisson equations. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 38:679–684, 1985

    1985

  33. [40]

    The allen-cahn action functional in higher dimensions

    Luca Mugnai and Matthias R¨ oger. The allen-cahn action functional in higher dimensions. Interfaces and Free Boundaries, 10(1):45–78, 2008

    2008

  34. [41]

    Global solutions to the volume- preserving mean-curvature flow

    Luca Mugnai, Christian Seis, and Emanuele Spadaro. Global solutions to the volume- preserving mean-curvature flow. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations , 55(18), 2016

    2016

  35. [42]

    Schauder estimate for solutions of poisson’s equation with neumann boundary condition

    Giacomo Nardi. Schauder estimate for solutions of poisson’s equation with neumann boundary condition. Enseign. Math. , 60(3/4):421–435, 2014

    2014

  36. [43]

    On an obstacle problem for the brakke flow with a gener- alized right-angle boundary condition

    Katerina Nik and Keisuke Takasao. On an obstacle problem for the brakke flow with a gener- alized right-angle boundary condition. SIAM. J. Math. Anal. , 57(1):452–494, 2025. 30

    2025

  37. [44]

    Nonlocal reaction-diffusion equations and nucleation

    Jacob Rubinstein and Peter Sternberg. Nonlocal reaction-diffusion equations and nucleation. IMA J. Appl. Math. , 48(3):249–264, 1992

    1992

  38. [45]

    Lectures on Geometric Measure Theory, volume 3

    Leon Simon. Lectures on Geometric Measure Theory, volume 3. Proceedings of the Centre for Mathematics and its Applications, Australian National University, 1983

    1983

  39. [46]

    Existence of weak solution for volume preserving mean curvature flow via phase field method

    Keisuke Takasao. Existence of weak solution for volume preserving mean curvature flow via phase field method. Indiana Univ. Math. J. , 66(6):2015–2035, 2017

    2015

  40. [47]

    On obstacle problem for brakke’s mean curvature flow

    Keisuke Takasao. On obstacle problem for brakke’s mean curvature flow. SIAM. J. Math. Anal., 53(6):6355–6369, 2021

    2021

  41. [49]

    Integrality of varifolds in the singular limit of reaction-diffusion equations

    Yoshihiro Tonegawa. Integrality of varifolds in the singular limit of reaction-diffusion equations. Hiroshima Math. J. , 33:323–341, 2003

    2003

  42. [50]

    Analytic extensions of differentiable functions defined in closed sets

    Hassler Whitney. Analytic extensions of differentiable functions defined in closed sets. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 36(1):63–89, 1934

    1934

Pith tools

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