Structural stability of boundary layers in the entire subsonic regime

Shengxin Li; Tong Yang; Zhu Zhang

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 38 references

Structural stability of boundary layers in the entire subsonic regime

T0 review · 3 major / 3 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 The paper establishes uniform-in-Mach-number structural stability of steady compressible boundary layers in the entire subsonic regime, and derives the first low-Mach Prandtl-layer limit.

desk verdict A substantial nonlinear stability result for subsonic compressible boundary layers, likely correct in intent but stated with a repairable gap: the uniform subsonic condition needs U_s <= 1, which is not in (1.3)-(1.4). read the letter →

arxiv 2501.16268 v2 pith:6XNCKOBU submitted 2025-01-27 math.AP

Shengxin Li , Tong Yang , Zhu Zhang This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 76N2076N1035Q3535B35

keywords subsoniccompressibleNavier-StokesboundarylayerstabilityPrandtlOrr-Sommerfeldequationquasi-compressible-StokesiterationlowMachnumberlimitshearflowRayleigh-Airy

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper proves that a compressible shear-flow boundary layer of the form $(\rho_s,u_s)=(1,U_s(y/\sqrt\nu),0)$ is structurally stable for the full subsonic range of Mach numbers $m\in(0,1)$, provided the external-force perturbation is small with respect to $\nu^{9/8+}$ and the spatial period $L$ is short. Such stability was previously established only in restricted settings, and the incompressible steady boundary-layer theory is recovered as the $m\to0$ limit. The authors establish existence, uniqueness, and uniform-in-$m$ estimates for the steady two-dimensional compressible Navier-Stokes equations in a half-plane with periodic tangential direction, with a boundary-layer profile attached to a no-slip wall. As a byproduct they prove the first low-Mach-number limit in the presence of a Prandtl boundary layer, at rate $O(m^2\nu^{-5/8-})$. If correct, the result gives a Sobolev-level validation of Prandtl's boundary-layer expansion for steady subsonic compressible flows.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is the quasi-compressible approximation (3.1): an artificial viscosity $\sqrt\nu\Delta_\alpha$ acting separately on the velocity components replaces the physical viscosity, which breaks the density-velocity coupling. Writing $u=\partial_Y\varphi-U_s\varrho$, $v=-i\alpha\varphi$ for an effective stream function $\varphi$ reduces the approximation to the compressible Orr-Sommerfeld equation $i\epsilon\Lambda(\Delta_\alpha\varphi)+U_s\Lambda(\varphi)-\varphi\partial_Y(A^{-1}\partial_Y U_s)=f$, where $\Lambda(\varphi)=\partial_Y(A^{-1}\partial_Y\varphi)-\alpha^2\varphi$ and $A(Y)=1-m^2U_s(Y)^2$. The factor $A$, treated as uniformly positive because $m<1$, is what makes $\Lambda$ elliptic. Rayleigh-Airy iteration solves the equation at low and middle frequencies; a direct energy method covers high frequencies. A Stokes regularizing system and boundary-layer correctors built from homogeneous quasi-compressible solutions then recover the no-slip velocity condition, and a modified linear system controls the nonlinear iteration.

What would settle it

Let $m=0.95$ and $U_s(Y)=1-e^{-Y}+\frac12 Y^2e^{-Y}\sin(10Y)$, which satisfies $U_s(0)=0$, $U_s'(0)=1$, positivity on $\mathbb R_+$, and the algebraic decay (1.4). Near $Y=2$ this profile exceeds $1/m\approx1.053$, so $A(Y)<0$ on an interval; the Rayleigh and Airy estimates in Section 3, which all use $A^{-1}$ as an elliptic weight, then fail. Evaluating $A$ on any admissible profile with $\sup U_s>1/m$ is therefore a direct check of whether Theorem 1.1 needs an extra hypothesis.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

This paper's central claim is Theorem 1.1: for every Mach number $m\in(0,1)$ and any shear profile $U_s$ satisfying the structural conditions (1.3)-(1.4), there exists a torus length $L_0$ such that for $L\in(0,L_0)$, small $\nu$, and external perturbations of weighted norm at most $\nu^{9/8+}$, the steady compressible Navier-Stokes system (1.6) has a unique solution $(\rho,u,v)$ near the boundary layer $(1,U_s(y/\sqrt\nu),0)$, obeying $\|(\rho,u,v)\|_X\le C\|(F_{\mathrm{ext},1},F_{\mathrm{ext},2})\|_w$ together with the zero-mass condition. Theorem 1.2 then sends $m\to0$: the same family of solutions converges to the incompressible Navier-Stokes solution with Prandtl boundary layer, at rate $O(m^2\nu^{-5/8-})$, which the authors identify as the first such low-Mach limit in the presence of a Prandtl layer. The argument splits the linearized problem into zero and non-zero Fourier modes, solves a compressible Orr-Sommerfeld equation by Rayleigh-Airy iteration in low and middle frequencies and by an energy method in high frequencies, and uses boundary-layer corrections to restore the no-slip condition.

Load-bearing premise

For every estimate in the proof, $A(Y)=1-m^2U_s(Y)^2$ must stay uniformly positive, but conditions (1.3)-(1.4) do not force $U_s\le 1$; a profile that rises above $1/m$ makes $A$ change sign and destroys the ellipticity on which the Orr-Sommerfeld analysis rests.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For every $m\in(0,1)$, a sufficiently short torus supports a unique steady solution near the shear boundary layer, with error controlled linearly by the weighted external force.
The uniform-in-$m$ estimates make the entire subsonic regime a single parameter range: no separate treatment is needed at any $m<1$.
Letting $m\to0$ recovers the incompressible Navier-Stokes solution with a Prandtl layer, and the boundary layer survives the low-Mach limit at an explicit rate.
The zero-mass condition and the extra boundary condition $\operatorname{div}_{x,y}(u,v)|_{y=0}=0$ are preserved by the nonlinear solution, which underpins the higher-order estimates.
The stability holds in Sobolev regularity rather than analytic regularity, so the result applies to nonzero modes across all frequency ranges.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper, the same proof structure implies the theorem should be stated with the extra structural condition $\sup_Y U_s(Y)<1/m$; without it the claimed uniform positivity of $A=1-m^2U_s^2$ is not guaranteed by $m\in(0,1)$ alone.
A natural testable extension is the non-isentropic case, where the Mach factor becomes $1-m^2U_s^2$ times a thermodynamic function of the background profile; the quasi-compressible iteration should still close at all subsonic Mach numbers.
The authors' remark that the torus length can be large when the shear amplitude is small points to a long-torus variant: fix any period and make $\|\partial_Y U_s\|_{L^\infty}$ small, connecting structural stability to spectral conditions rather than to shortness of the spatial period.
The reported rate $O(m^2\nu^{-5/8-})$ likely reflects the norm's worst derivative weights; a refined cancellation between the pressure and divergence terms could lift the negative power of $\nu$.

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

Colleague,

Read the whole thing carefully. The headline is that this is a real step forward: the first nonlinear Sobolev-space structural stability theorem for compressible Prandtl-type boundary layers across the full subsonic range, plus a low-Mach-number limit that keeps the Prandtl layer. That is genuinely new relative to what I know: previous compressible results either needed analytic regularity, covered only m<1/sqrt(3), or were linear instability analyses. The quasi-compressible-Stokes iteration from [38] is extended here to the steady problem with a clean frequency decomposition, and the higher-order nonlinear estimates in Section 8 are the kind of laborious, substantive work that makes the paper worth referee time. The zero-mode analysis and the mass constraint are handled properly.

Now the soft spots, in order of seriousness.

The load-bearing gap is real and the stress-test note is right. In Section 3.1, A(Y)=1-m^2 U_s(Y)^2 is asserted to satisfy A>=1-m^2 from m in (0,1) alone. That requires U_s(Y)<=1. Conditions (1.3)-(1.4) only give U_s>0, U_s(0)=0, U_s'(0)=1, decay to 1, and algebraic decay of derivatives; they do not rule out overshoot above 1. For m close to 1, A can vanish or change sign, and then the Orr-Sommerfeld operator loses ellipticity at exactly the point where every Rayleigh-Airy estimate needs a uniform positive lower bound. The paper even uses 0<=U_s<=1 explicitly in Section 6.1 around (6.33), so the proof already assumes more than the theorem states. This is repairable: add the hypothesis m sup U_s < 1 or U_s<=1, and the intended class is almost certainly the standard monotone Prandtl layer. But Theorem 1.1 as written overreaches its hypotheses.

Minor but worth noting: several lemmas (3.1, 3.2, 5.1, 5.4) defer proofs to [14] or prior work. That is not a flaw by itself, but the verification burden is nontrivial because the compressible coefficients change the operators. The high-frequency regime is solved by energy methods and is less delicate, so the gap is isolated in the low/middle frequency analysis.

Who is this for: anyone working on boundary layer stability, compressible Navier-Stokes asymptotics, or low-Mach limits. A serious referee should engage with it, but should require the missing hypothesis and a check that every use of A^{-1} carries the corrected assumption.

Recommendation: send to peer review, conditional on the authors fixing the U_s bound and restating Theorems 1.1-1.2 accordingly. The core machinery holds up; the stated theorem needs tightening.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies the two-dimensional steady compressible Navier-Stokes equations in the half-plane, with the horizontal variable on a torus, near a shear boundary-layer profile (1, U_s(Y), 0). Theorem 1.1 claims, for every Mach number m in (0,1) and under the structural conditions (1.3)-(1.4), that small external-force perturbations admit a unique solution with bounds in a weighted high-regularity space and a zero-mass condition. Theorem 1.2 derives a low-Mach-number limit to the steady incompressible Navier-Stokes equations with a Prandtl layer. The proof proceeds by a zero-mode analysis, a Fourier-mode decomposition, a quasi-compressible Orr-Sommerfeld approximation, a quasi-compressible-Stokes iteration, boundary-layer correctors in low/middle/high frequency regimes, and a nonlinear iteration in Sobolev spaces. The paper is long and technically substantial, and the proof strategy is original in combining the authors' earlier quasi-compressible-Stokes framework with the Rayleigh-Airy machinery of Gérard-Varet and Maekawa.

Significance. If the missing hypothesis identified below is added, this would be a significant contribution: it provides uniform-in-Mach-number structural stability of subsonic steady Prandtl-type boundary layers in Sobolev spaces, over the whole subsonic range m in (0,1), and it gives a low-Mach-number limit in the presence of a Prandtl boundary layer. The proof is coherent and the frequency-by-frequency analysis is a genuine technical achievement. The paper does not assume its own conclusion; it builds on independent published results [14,38]. However, the theorem as stated overreaches because a key ellipticity assumption is not implied by (1.3)-(1.4). The gap is local and repairable, but it is load-bearing for every subsequent estimate.

major comments (3)

[Section 3.1, Eq. (3.3)-(3.5)] The paper asserts that m in (0,1) implies A(Y)=1-m^2 U_s(Y)^2 satisfies A(Y) >= 1-m^2 > 0. This is false under assumptions (1.3)-(1.4), which impose U_s>0, U_s(0)=0, U_s'(0)=1, U_s->1 as Y->infinity, and algebraic decay, but do not prevent U_s from exceeding 1 or even 1/m. If U_s overshoots, A can vanish or change sign. Since A^{-1} enters the density formula (3.3), the modified vorticity operator Lambda in (3.5), and all subsequent Rayleigh-Airy estimates in Lemmas 3.1-3.3 and Proposition 3.4, the loss of a uniform positive lower bound for A invalidates the claimed solvability of the compressible Orr-Sommerfeld equation. The theorem should either add the hypothesis 0 < U_s <= 1 (or, more generally, m sup U_s < 1) or prove such a bound from the existing assumptions; the latter is not possible as stated.
[Section 6.1, Eqs. (6.33)-(6.34)] The closing estimate for the Stokes regularization system explicitly uses the inequality 0 <= U_s <= 1. Specifically, after Eq. (6.33), the proof absorbs the term involving ||sqrt(U_s) rho|| using m<1 and 0<=U_s<=1. This inequality is not among the structural conditions (1.3)-(1.4); it is an unstated additional hypothesis. Consequently Proposition 6.3, the linear stability theorem Theorem 7.5, and the nonlinear Theorem 1.1 all rely on an assumption that is not part of the theorem statement. The same issue appears in Section 4 around Eq. (4.11), where the proof uses 'A^{-1} ~ 1' without a uniform upper and lower bound on U_s. The repair is the same: add a uniform upper bound on U_s, for example 0 < U_s <= 1, or equivalently m sup U_s < 1, to the hypotheses of Theorems 1.1 and 1.2.
[Lemmas 3.1, 3.2, 5.1, 5.4] Several technical lemmas are stated and then deferred to prior work, especially [14, Propositions 5.1, 6.1, 7.11] and [38]. Some of these are classical incompressible results, but here they are applied to compressible operators containing A(Y) and m-dependent coefficients. Because the missing U_s bound affects the validity of these cited results, the authors should either give proofs of these lemmas or provide a precise verification that the hypotheses of the cited propositions are satisfied under the repaired assumptions. This is important for verification but is secondary to the main hypothesis gap.

minor comments (3)

[Throughout] There are numerous typographical and rendering errors, such as 'Foturnately', 'middﬂe', 'asscciated', 'sufﬁces', and stray '/greaterorsimilar' symbols in Section 3.4 and elsewhere. These should be cleaned up.
[Remark 1.1(v)] The remark says L can be large if the amplitude of the boundary-layer profile is small. Since the proof repeatedly requires L to be small, this remark should be made precise or moved to a heuristic comment, otherwise it may confuse the reader about the quantitative role of L.
[Theorem 1.2] The phrase 'the first result concerning the low Mach number limit in the presence of Prandtl boundary layers' is a strong claim. Please check the existing literature carefully and, if this is indeed the first steady result, state the comparison class explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper proves its estimates with an explicit linear/nonlinear iteration; the cited self- and overlapping-author works supply techniques, not the Theorem 1.1 conclusion.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained in the sense required by the circularity test. Theorem 1.1 is not assumed: the proof builds a linear solver (Theorem 7.5) from zero-mode ODE estimates (Theorem 2.1), a compressible Orr-Sommerfeld analysis (Section 3), and a quasi-compressible-Stokes iteration (Sections 4-7), then closes the nonlinear problem by a fixed-point iteration (Section 8). The cited [38] by two of the authors is used as a source of the quasi-compressible-Stokes iteration idea, and [38, Prop. 3.9] for a Stokes existence argument, but the paper re-proves the needed estimates and does not cite a previous structural stability theorem for compressible boundary layers as its conclusion. The same holds for [14], [28], [29], and [5]: they are cited for technical lemmas (Rayleigh-Airy estimates, Airy anti-derivative bounds) or for prior instability results that motivate, rather than imply, the stability theorem. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem from overlapping authors is invoked, and no equation is defined in terms of the target quantity. The one substantive mathematical concern, highlighted by the proof itself, is that the bound A(Y)=1-m^2 U_s(Y)^2 >= 1-m^2 requires more than m in (0,1) unless sup U_s <= 1; Section 6.1 explicitly uses 0 <= U_s <= 1 and (1.3)-(1.4) do not state it. That is a correctness/hypothesis gap, not a circularity: it does not make the conclusion equivalent to an input. Hence the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central proof rests on a handful of structural hypotheses: a subsonic-bounded shear profile, a small torus period, zero-mode-free external force, and standard elliptic and Airy estimates imported from prior literature. The one under-specified premise is the uniform subsonicity bound A(Y)>=1-m^2, which is only guaranteed if U_s<=1, a condition missing from (1.3)-(1.4).

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The shear profile U_s satisfies U_s(0)=0, U_s'(0)=1, U_s>0, and decays algebraically to 1; implicitly U_s(Y) <= 1 for all Y so that A(Y)=1-m^2U_s^2 >= 1-m^2.
Section 1.2, conditions (1.3)-(1.4); used throughout after Section 3.1. The bound U_s<=1 is not stated but is needed for the claimed uniform subsonic lower bound on A.
domain assumption The torus length L is sufficiently small, L<L0, to make the Rayleigh-Airy iteration and quasi-compressible-Stokes iteration contractive.
Propositions 3.4 and 6.4; Theorem 1.1. Without small L the convergence mechanism is not established.
domain assumption The external force perturbation has zero Fourier zero mode: P0 F_ext,1 = P0 F_ext,2 = 0.
Before Theorem 1.1; the authors say the general case can be treated by smallness and decay, but the theorem is stated under this simplification.
standard math Standard elliptic regularity for Stokes equations in bounded domains and whole-space estimates (monographs [12,35]), properties of Airy functions [1], and solvability estimates for Rayleigh and Airy equations from [14].
Used in Lemmas 9.1, 3.3, 5.4 and others; these are cited as established results.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Structural stability of boundary layers in the entire subsonic regime." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6XNCKOBU

@misc{pith2026250116268,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Structural stability of boundary layers in the entire subsonic regime},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6XNCKOBU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.16268}
}

abstract

Despite the physical importance, there are limited mathematical theories for the compressible Navier-Stokes equations with strong boundary layers. This is mainly due to the absence of a stream function structure, unlike the extensively studied incompressible fluid dynamics in two dimensions. This paper aims to establish the structural stability of boundary layer profiles in the form of shear flow for the two-dimensional steady compressible Navier-Stokes equations. Our estimates are uniform across the entire subsonic regime, where the Mach number $m\in (0,1)$. As a byproduct, we provide the first result concerning the low Mach number limit in the presence of Prandtl boundary layers. The proof relies on the quasi-compressible-Stokes iteration introduced in [38], along with a subtle analysis of the interplay between density and velocity variables in different frequency regimes, and the identification of cancellations in higher-order estimates.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

[38]

Yang, T., Zhang, Z.: Linear instability analysis on com pressible Navier-Stokes equations with strong boundary la yer, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 247 (2023), 247-283. DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED MATHEMATICS , T HE HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY , H ONG KONG , C HINA . Email address: sh1li@polyu.edu.hk INSTITUTE FOR MATH & AI, W UHAN UNIVERSITY , W UHAN , C HI...

work page 2023
[14]

G´ erard-V aret, D., Maekawa, Y .: Sobolev stability of Prandtl expansion for the steady Navier-Stokes equations, A rch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 233 (2019), 1319-1382

work page 2019
[1]

Na tional Bureau of Standards Applied Mathematics Series, V ol

Abramowitz, M., Stegun, I.: Handbook of mathematical fu nctions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables. Na tional Bureau of Standards Applied Mathematics Series, V ol. 55, 1964

work page 1964
[2]

G., Xu, C.-J., Yang, T.: Well-pose dness of the Prandtl equation in Sobolev spaces, J

Alexander, R., Wang Y . G., Xu, C.-J., Yang, T.: Well-pose dness of the Prandtl equation in Sobolev spaces, J. Amer. Mat h. Soc., 28 (2015), 745-784

work page 2015
[3]

F.: Transition thresh old for the 2-D Couette ﬂow in a ﬁnite channel

Chen, Q., Li, T., Wei, D., Zhang, Z. F.: Transition thresh old for the 2-D Couette ﬂow in a ﬁnite channel. Arch. Ration. M ech. Anal., 238 (2020), 125-183

work page 2020
[4]

F.: On the L∞ stability of Prandtl expansions in the Gevrey class, Sci

Chen, Q., Wu, D., Zhang Z. F.: On the L∞ stability of Prandtl expansions in the Gevrey class, Sci. China Math., 65 (2022), 2521-2562

work page 2022
[5]

F.: On the stability of shear ﬂow s of Prandtl type for the steady Navier-Stokes equations, Sc i

Chen, Q., Wu, D., Zhang Z. F.: On the stability of shear ﬂow s of Prandtl type for the steady Navier-Stokes equations, Sc i. China Math., 66 (2023), 679-722

work page 2023
[6]

Collot, C., Ghoul, T.-E., Ibrahim, S., Masmoudi, N.: On s ingularity formation for the two-dimensional unsteady Prandtl system around the axis. J. Eur . Math. Soc.24, 3703-3800, (2022)

work page 2022

Show all 38 references

[7]

Dalibard, A.-L., Masmoudi, N.: Separation for the stati onary Prandtl system. Publ. math. IHES 130, 187–297, (2019)

2019
[8]

Dietert, H., G´ erard-V aret, D.: Well-posedness of the Prandtl equation without any assumption. Ann. PDE 5 (1), Paper No. 8, (2019)

2019
[9]

C.: Partial Differential Equations, 2nd ed., A MS, 2010

Evans, L. C.: Partial Differential Equations, 2nd ed., A MS, 2010

2010
[10]

W., Engquist, B.: Blow up of solutions of the unsteady Prandtl’s equation

E. W., Engquist, B.: Blow up of solutions of the unsteady Prandtl’s equation. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 50, 1287–1293, (1997)

1997
[11]

Esposito, R., Guo, Y ., Kim, C., Marra, R.: Non-isotherm al boundary in the Boltzmann theory and Fourier law. Comm. Math. Phy. 323, 177–239, (2013)

2013
[12]

P .: An introduction to the Mathematical Theor y of the Navier-Stokes Equations, V ol 1, Springer-V erlag, New Y ork, 1994

Galdi, G. P .: An introduction to the Mathematical Theor y of the Navier-Stokes Equations, V ol 1, Springer-V erlag, New Y ork, 1994

1994
[13]

G´ erard-V aret, D., Dormy, E.: On the ill-posedness of the Prandtl equation. J. Amer . Math. Soc.23 (2), 591–609, 2010

2010
[15]

J., 167(2018), 2531-2631

G´ erard-V aret, D., Maekawa, Y ., Masmoudi, N.: Gevrey s tability of Prandtl expansions for 2D Navier-Stokes ﬂows, D uke Math. J., 167(2018), 2531-2631

2018
[16]

G´ erard-V aret, D., Maekawa, Y ., Masmoudi, N.: Optimal Prandtl expansion around concave boundary layer, to appear in Analysis & PDE
[17]

S.: V alidity of steady Prandtl Expansions

Guo, Y ., Iyer. S.: V alidity of steady Prandtl Expansions. Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 76, (2023), 3150–3232

2023
[18]

Pure Appl

Grenier, E.: On the nonlinear instability of Euler and P randtl equations, Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 53 (2000), 1067-1091

2000
[19]

J., 165(2 016), 3085-3146

Grenier, E., Guo, Y ., Nguyen, T.: Spectral instability of characteristic boundary layer ﬂows, Duke Math. J., 165(2 016), 3085-3146
[20]

PDE 5(2), 18 (2019), 36 p p

Grenier, E., Nguyen, T.: L∞ instability of Prandtl layers, Ann. PDE 5(2), 18 (2019), 36 p p

2019
[21]

Iyer, S.: On global-in- x stability of Blasius proﬁles. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 237, (2020), 951–998

2020
[22]

Iyer, S., Masmoudi, N.: Global-in-x stability of stead y Prandtl expansions for the 2D Navier-Stokes ﬂows, arXiv:2 008.12347, 2020

2020
[23]

S., Masmoudi, N.: Reversal in the stationary Pra ndtl equations, arXiv

Iyer,. S., Masmoudi, N.: Reversal in the stationary Pra ndtl equations, arXiv. 2203. 02845
[24]

Rational Mech

Kagei Y ., Nishida, T.: Traveling waves bifurcating fro m plane Poiseuille ﬂow of the compressible Navier-Stokes eq uation, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 231 (2019), 1-44

2019
[25]

Kukavica, I., Vicol, V ., Wang, F.: The inviscid limit fo r the Navier-Stokes equations with data analytic only near t he boundary, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 237 (2020), 779-827

2020
[26]

C., Mazzucato A.L., Nussenzveig Lopes H

Lopes Filho M. C., Mazzucato A.L., Nussenzveig Lopes H. J.: V anishing viscosity limit for incompressible ﬂow inside a rotating circle. Phys. D, 237 (2008), 1324-1333

2008
[27]

Pure Appl

Maekawa, Y .: On the inviscid limit problem of the vortic ity equations for viscous incompressible ﬂows in the half-p lane, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 67 (2014), 1045-1128

2014
[28]

F.: Tollmien-S chlichting waves in the subsonic regime, Proc

Masmoudi, N., Wang, Y ., Wu, D., Zhang, Z. F.: Tollmien-S chlichting waves in the subsonic regime, Proc. Lond. Math. S oc., 128 (2024), no. 3, Paper No. e12588, 112 pp

2024
[29]

F.: Mack modes i n supersonic boundary layer , arXiv

Masmoudi, N., Wang, Y ., Wu, D., Zhang, Z. F.: Mack modes i n supersonic boundary layer , arXiv. 2405.04853

arXiv
[30]

Masmoudi, N., Wong, T.: Local-in-time existence and un iqueness of solutions to the Prandtl equations by energy met hods. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 68 (2015), 1683-1741

2015
[31]

L., Taylor, M.: V anishing viscosity plan e parallel channel ﬂow and related singular perturbation pr oblems, Anal

Mazzucato, A. L., Taylor, M.: V anishing viscosity plan e parallel channel ﬂow and related singular perturbation pr oblems, Anal. PDE, 1 (2008), 35-93

2008
[32]

Nguyen, T., Nguyen, T.: The inviscid limit of Navier–St okes equations for analytic data on the half space, Arch. Rat ion. Mech. Anal., 230 (2018), 1103-1129

2018
[33]

Oleinik, O.: The Prandtl system of equations in boundar y layer theory. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 4 (1963), 583-586

1963
[34]

Sammartino, M., Caﬂisch R.: Zero viscosity limit for an alytic solutions of the Navier-Stokes equation on a half-sp ace. II. Construction of the Navier-stokes solution, Comm. Math. Phys., 192 (1998 ), 463-491

1998
[35]

Sohr, H., The Navier-Stokes equations: an elementary f unctional analytic approach, Birkh¨ auser, Basel, 2001

2001
[36]

F.: Zero-viscosity limit of the Navier-Stokes equations in the analytic setting, Arch

Wang, C., Wang Y ., Zhang, Z. F.: Zero-viscosity limit of the Navier-Stokes equations in the analytic setting, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 224 (2017), 555-595

2017
[37]

F.: Zero-viscosity limit of the compressible Navier-Stokes equations in the analytic s etting, arXiv

Wang, C., Wang Y ., Zhang, Z. F.: Zero-viscosity limit of the compressible Navier-Stokes equations in the analytic s etting, arXiv. 2305. 09393. 74 SHENGXIN LI, TONG Y ANG, AND ZHU ZHANG

Pith tools

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

[1] [38]

Yang, T., Zhang, Z.: Linear instability analysis on com pressible Navier-Stokes equations with strong boundary la yer, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 247 (2023), 247-283. DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED MATHEMATICS , T HE HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY , H ONG KONG , C HINA . Email address: sh1li@polyu.edu.hk INSTITUTE FOR MATH & AI, W UHAN UNIVERSITY , W UHAN , C HI...

work page 2023

[2] [14]

G´ erard-V aret, D., Maekawa, Y .: Sobolev stability of Prandtl expansion for the steady Navier-Stokes equations, A rch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 233 (2019), 1319-1382

work page 2019

[3] [1]

Na tional Bureau of Standards Applied Mathematics Series, V ol

Abramowitz, M., Stegun, I.: Handbook of mathematical fu nctions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables. Na tional Bureau of Standards Applied Mathematics Series, V ol. 55, 1964

work page 1964

[4] [2]

G., Xu, C.-J., Yang, T.: Well-pose dness of the Prandtl equation in Sobolev spaces, J

Alexander, R., Wang Y . G., Xu, C.-J., Yang, T.: Well-pose dness of the Prandtl equation in Sobolev spaces, J. Amer. Mat h. Soc., 28 (2015), 745-784

work page 2015

[5] [3]

F.: Transition thresh old for the 2-D Couette ﬂow in a ﬁnite channel

Chen, Q., Li, T., Wei, D., Zhang, Z. F.: Transition thresh old for the 2-D Couette ﬂow in a ﬁnite channel. Arch. Ration. M ech. Anal., 238 (2020), 125-183

work page 2020

[6] [4]

F.: On the L∞ stability of Prandtl expansions in the Gevrey class, Sci

Chen, Q., Wu, D., Zhang Z. F.: On the L∞ stability of Prandtl expansions in the Gevrey class, Sci. China Math., 65 (2022), 2521-2562

work page 2022

[7] [5]

F.: On the stability of shear ﬂow s of Prandtl type for the steady Navier-Stokes equations, Sc i

Chen, Q., Wu, D., Zhang Z. F.: On the stability of shear ﬂow s of Prandtl type for the steady Navier-Stokes equations, Sc i. China Math., 66 (2023), 679-722

work page 2023

[8] [6]

Collot, C., Ghoul, T.-E., Ibrahim, S., Masmoudi, N.: On s ingularity formation for the two-dimensional unsteady Prandtl system around the axis. J. Eur . Math. Soc.24, 3703-3800, (2022)

work page 2022