$L^p$-estimates for the 2D wave equation in the scaling-critical magnetic field

Fang Zhang; Jialu Wang; Jiqiang Zheng; Junyong Zhang

$L^p$-estimates for the 2D wave equation in the scaling-critical magnetic field

T0 review · 0 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For magnetic waves in 2D, the Euclidean L^p smoothing threshold survives.

desk verdict The paper likely proves the sharp Lp range for the 2D magnetic wave propagator, and the kernel-construction proof deserves a serious referee, with the Gaussian heat-kernel input from [6] and the sketched interpolation step flagged for checking. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.03151 v1 pith:DWMQXNTI submitted 2025-02-05 math.AP

Jialu Wang , Fang Zhang , Junyong Zhang , Jiqiang Zheng This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 35L0542B1535P05

keywords Lp-estimatesscaling-criticalmagneticfieldAharonov-BohmpotentialwaveequationSchrödingeroperatorspectralmultipliersBesselfunctions

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 magnetic wave propagator $e^{{it\sqrt{\mathcal{L}}$_\mathbf{A}}}, after smoothing by (1+\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A})^{-\gamma/2}, is bounded on L^p(\mathbb{R}^2) whenever \gamma>|1/p-1/2|, exactly the threshold for the ordinary Laplacian in two dimensions. The operator \mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A} is a Schr\"odinger operator with a scaling-critical magnetic potential, such as the Aharonov-Bohm field, which is singular at the origin. If the result is right, the magnetic singularity does not force any extra Sobolev regularity for the L^p wave flow, and the growth in time is only the mild factor (1+t)^\gamma. As a corollary, the sine propagator \sin(t\sqrt{\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A}})/\sqrt{\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A}} is L^p bounded at each fixed time with linear-in-t constant for every 1\le p\le\infty.

What carries the argument

The machine is the analytic operator family f_{w,t}(\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A}) = (\pi/2)^{1/2}(t\sqrt{\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A}})^{w-1}J_{1-w}(t\sqrt{\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A}}), with w=\epsilon+iy and 1/2<\epsilon<1. Its kernel is computed explicitly using the Macdonald triple-Bessel integral, the angular eigenfunctions of \mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A}, and Poisson summation; the result is a geometric term G plus a diffractive term D satisfying the pointwise bounds |G|\lesssim $t^{{2(\operatorname{Re}}$w-1)}($t^{2}$-|x-y|^2)^{-\operatorname{Re}w} and |D|\lesssim $t^{{2(\operatorname{Re}}$w-1)}($t^{2}$-(r_1+r_2)^2)^{-\operatorname{Re}w}. These bounds are what convert the spectral multiplier problem into a convolution estimate; the family is designed so that the wave multiplier \psi(s)$s^{{-2\ell}}$$e^{{is}}$ can be written as a linear combination of such Bessel multipliers plus a well-controlled remainder, using Bessel asymptotics and the identity relating \cos(s-\pi(\ell+i)) and \cos(s-\pi\ell) to $e^{{is}}$.

What would settle it

Take the Aharonov-Bohm potential (1.4) with a non-integral flux \$\alpha$ and numerically evaluate the claimed kernel bound (3.13) at t just above |x-y| for 1/2<\operatorname{Re}w<1; any violation of the pointwise inequality would refute Theorem 1.3 and hence Theorem 1.1. Alternatively, check whether the norm inequality in Theorem 1.1 remains true at the endpoint \gamma=|1/p-1/2| by testing specific p and t; the paper leaves this endpoint open, so a concrete counterexample there would settle the sharpness question.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, Theorem 1.1, is that for every \gamma>0 and 1<p<\infty with |1/p-1/2|<\gamma, the operator (1+\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A})^{-\gamma/2}$e^{{it\sqrt{\mathcal{L}}$_\mathbf{A}}} maps L^p(\mathbb{R}^2) to itself with norm at most C(p,\gamma)(1+t)^\gamma. Thus the smoothing requirement is the same as for the Euclidean half-wave operator, and the exponent \gamma is sharp up to the endpoint. The paper establishes this by producing, for an analytic family of Bessel-type spectral multipliers f_{w,t}(\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A}), an explicit kernel that splits into a geometric part supported where |x-y|<t<r_1+r_2 and a diffractive part supported where t>r_1+r_2, with pointwise bounds (3.13)-(3.14). These kernel bounds transfer to L^p estimates by Young's inequality, and the main theorem follows by decomposing the multiplier m(\ell,s)=(1+$s^{2}$)^{-\ell}$e^{{is}}$ into a Bessel term controlled by the family and a remainder controlled by standard spectral multipliers.

Load-bearing premise

The proof imports a Gaussian upper bound for the heat kernel of \mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A} from an earlier paper; if that bound were false, the spectral multiplier estimates in Lemma 2.2, and with them the proof of Theorem 1.1, would fall apart.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If Theorem 1.1 holds, the L^p regularity threshold for the wave equation with a scaling-critical magnetic potential in \mathbb{R}^2 is identical to the Euclidean threshold |1/p-1/2|, up to the endpoint.
The fixed-time sine propagator is L^p bounded for every 1\le p\le\infty with constant C|t|, matching the Euclidean behavior in two space dimensions.
The explicit kernel of f_{w,t}(\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A}) gives pointwise control of the magnetic wave propagator, which can be used to prove further dispersive and spectral multiplier estimates for \mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A}.
The time-growth factor (1+t)^\gamma in the main estimate is uniform in t>0 and is the natural analogue of the Euclidean result, not a worsened power forced by the singularity.

Reading between the lines

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

I would expect the same threshold to hold for Klein-Gordon propagators e^{it\sqrt{\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{A}+1}} with appropriate smoothing, since the kernel construction here is spectral rather than purely hyperbolic; the paper cites earlier Klein-Gordon Strichartz work for the same operator, but does not state the L^p smoothness analogue.
The proof's angular-mode summation suggests that the Aharonov-Bohm flux \alpha only enters through phase factors e^{\pm i\alpha(\theta_1-\theta_2)} and indicator functions, so the L^p bounds should be uniform in \alpha over compact intervals; this uniformity is not explicitly claimed.
A numerical check of the pointwise kernel at t near |x-y| could test the endpoint sharpness: if (3.13) fails at \operatorname{Re}w=1/2, the endpoint \gamma=|1/p-1/2| is genuinely excluded.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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

The paper proves the right sharp Lp bound for the 2D magnetic wave propagator, and the proof is built on an explicit kernel construction rather than black-box multiplier arguments. I think it deserves a serious referee.

What is new: Theorem 1.1 is the first sharp range gamma>|1/p-1/2| for this class of scaling-critical magnetic operators. The improvement over gamma>2|1/p-1/2| is not cosmetic; it matches the Euclidean wave propagator threshold. The main work is the construction of the kernel of the analytic family f_{w,t}(L_A), using Macdonald identities and Poisson summation. Proposition 3.2 gives explicit pointwise bounds for the geometric and diffractive terms, and the cancellations in the diffractive term are checked rather than merely asserted. That is the paper's real contribution.

What I would want checked: the proof rests on the Gaussian heat kernel bound (2.21) quoted from [6]. That is a strong statement for this operator class, and it is genuinely load-bearing: Lemma 2.2 and the whole Section 4 reduction go through it. But it is a published result in [6] for the same operators, so quoting it is legitimate. The stress tester's worry would only land if [6] had proved it under narrower hypotheses, say only for the Aharonov-Bohm potential, and nothing in this text suggests that. A referee should verify that the statement in [6] covers A in W^{1,infty}(S^1) with the transversality condition. I'd also ask the authors to expand the Stein interpolation step for ell <= 1/4; it is sketched in a few lines in Section 4. The proof is organized around ell in (1/4,1/2), and the reduction from the general gamma>|1/p-1/2| to that range is compressed. I don't see a circularity problem: [6] is independent of Theorem 1.1. The sine-propagator theorem, Theorem 1.2, is essentially a repackaging of [6, Props 4.1-4.2], as the authors acknowledge; that reduces the novelty of that part, but the main theorem carries the paper.

Bottom line: good paper, no fatal flaw visible. The kernel estimates are explicit and the proof is formally grounded. For people working on spectral multipliers, wave equations with singular potentials, and magnetic Schrodinger operators, this is worth careful refereeing. I would send it to review.

Referee Report

0 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies L^p estimates for the wave equation associated with the scaling-critical magnetic Schrödinger operator L_A = (i∇ + A(x̂)/|x|)^2 on R^2, where A ∈ W^{1,∞}(S^1; R^2) satisfies the transversality condition A·x̂ = 0. The main result, Theorem 1.1, states that for γ > |1/p - 1/2| the operator (1+L_A)^{-γ/2} e^{it√L_A} is bounded on L^p(R^2) with norm O((1+t)^γ), matching the sharp Euclidean threshold. The proof constructs the kernel of an analytic family f_{w,t}(L_A) of Bessel multipliers, proves pointwise kernel estimates (Propositions 3.1 and 3.2), and then uses these bounds together with spectral multiplier theorems derived from a Gaussian heat kernel estimate to control the half-wave multiplier. The paper also proves Theorem 1.2, an L^p bound for the sine propagator sin(t√L_A)/√L_A, by quoting kernel estimates from the authors' earlier work. The central novelty is the explicit kernel construction and the pointwise estimates for the analytic family, which are carried out in detail in Section 3.

Significance. If correct, Theorem 1.1 is a sharp result: it shows that for a class of singular magnetic potentials with critical scaling, the L^p regularity threshold for the wave propagator is the same as for the Euclidean Laplacian. The proof is genuinely two-dimensional and avoids the parametrix methods used for cones, instead deriving exact kernel formulas through Bessel-function identities and Poisson summation. The paper is honest about its external inputs: the Gaussian heat kernel bound (2.21) from [6] and spectral multiplier results from [29] are cited rather than reproved. The manuscript contains no fitted parameters and the main new estimates are explicit and checkable. The result is likely to be of interest to researchers in harmonic analysis, spectral multipliers, and dispersive equations with singular potentials.

minor comments (6)

[Section 2.3, Eq. (2.21)] The Gaussian heat kernel bound (2.21) is the sole input for Lemma 2.2 and hence for the spectral multiplier reductions in Section 4. The paper cites [6, Prop. 3.1, 3.2] but does not restate the hypotheses under which it holds. Please add a precise statement that (2.21) holds for the class A∈W^{1,∞}(S^1) satisfying (1.3) and indicate whether the proof in [6] covers the general class or only the Aharonov-Bohm potential (1.4).
[Section 4, paragraph on Ω1] The Stein interpolation step for ℓ≤1/4 is only sketched. Please specify the analytic family of operators, the endpoint estimates at A=(1/2,0) and on the boundary ℓ=1/4, and the resulting interpolation inequality that yields (1.9) for the remaining range.
[Section 4, reduction to (4.1)] The sentence 'Combining with (4.1), this yields Theorem 1.1 for region Ω3' is imprecise: applying (4.1) with ℓ=3/8 gives growth (1+t)^{3/4}, which is not bounded by (1+t)^ℓ for all ℓ∈[1/2,3/4). Please clarify that one chooses an auxiliary ℓ0∈(1/4,1/2) with 2ℓ0≤ℓ (or uses the Ω1 interpolation for intermediate ℓ).
[Section 3.2, Eq. (3.19)] The equality in (3.19) is not literally correct for complex w because cosh(β2)-cosh τ is negative for τ>β2; the displayed identity should involve an absolute value (or a phase factor) on the right, since only the modulus is used in the subsequent estimates.
[Section 3.2, Eq. (3.24)] The identity cosh(τ)-cos(θ̄+π)=sinh^2(τ/2)+sin^2((θ̄+π)/2) is missing a factor of 2 on the right-hand side; the correct identity is cosh τ - cos φ = 2sinh^2(τ/2)+2sin^2(φ/2). The omission does not affect the bounds, but the formula should be corrected.
[References] Reference [13] lists 'Josaroop' while the cited author's name is 'Jotsaroop'; reference [42] similarly misprints the author's name. Please correct these.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the new Lp bounds follow from an explicit kernel construction, with prior heat-kernel results used only as external inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is: (i) prove Theorem 1.3 by explicitly constructing the kernel of f_{w,t}(L_A) (Proposition 3.1) and estimating it pointwise (Proposition 3.2), then applying Young's inequality; (ii) reduce Theorem 1.1 to (4.2) via the Bessel-function identities (4.8)-(4.9), with the remainder controlled by the spectral multiplier Lemma 2.2; (iii) control the main term by Theorem 1.3 and Lemma 2.2. The only external input is the Gaussian heat-kernel bound (2.21), quoted from [6, Prop. 3.1, 3.2], and the sine-kernel formulas in Lemma 5.1-5.2, also from [6]. These are prior published results, parameter-free, and they do not assume Theorem 1.1 or Theorem 1.3; they supply standard spectral-multiplier estimates and a kernel representation, respectively. No fitted parameter is later renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' previous work, and no definition builds the target estimate into the hypothesis. The heavy reliance on [6] is a dependency, not a circular reduction.

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

The central claim rests on published background results: the Gaussian heat kernel bound for L_A from the authors' earlier paper [6], spectral multiplier theorems from Ouhabaz, the Laptev-Weidl eigenvalue decomposition, and classical Bessel and Legendre identities. No parameters are fitted to data and no ad hoc entities are introduced.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Gaussian heat kernel upper bound |e^{-tL_A}(x,y)| ≲ t^{-1} e^{-|x-y|^2/(4t)} for all t>0, from [6, Prop. 3.1, 3.2]
Invoked in Lemma 2.2 to get imaginary-power bounds, Mikhlin-Hörmander multipliers, and decaying multiplier estimates; also needed for the reduction in Section 4.
standard math Spectral decomposition of L_A^{S1}=(i∂_θ+α(θ))^2 with eigenvalues (k+Φ_A)^2 and eigenfunctions φ_k, from Laptev and Weidl [25]
Basis of the separation of variables and the functional calculus formulas (2.13)-(2.16).
standard math Macdonald triple Bessel integral formula (2.18) and the Legendre function identities (2.19), (2.20) from Watson and Miyachi
Used to convert the Bessel kernel integral into explicit angular integrals for the analytic family f_{w,t}.
standard math Bessel asymptotic expansion (A.6) with remainder W_ν satisfying the stated derivative estimates
Used in Proposition 4.1 to decompose the wave multiplier into analytic Bessel operators plus a rapidly decaying remainder.
standard math Poisson summation formula for the shifted angular spectrum, ∑ cos(s|k+α|)e^{-ikθ}
Used in Proposition 3.1 to sum the angular eigenfunction series and produce the delta-supported geometric term.
standard math Stein interpolation theorem for analytic families of operators
Used in Section 4 to pass from the point A, corresponding to p=2 and γ=0, to the region ℓ≤1/4.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of $L^p$-estimates for the 2D wave equation in the scaling-critical magnetic field." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DWMQXNTI

@misc{pith2026250203151,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: $L^p$-estimates for the 2D wave equation in the scaling-critical magnetic field},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DWMQXNTI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.03151}
}

abstract

In this paper, we study the $L^{p}$-estimates for the solution to the $2\mathrm{D}$-wave equation with a scaling-critical magnetic potential. Inspired by the work of \cite{FZZ}, we show that the operators $(I+\mathcal{L}_{\mathbf{A}})^{-\gamma}e^{it\sqrt{\mathcal{L}_{\mathbf{A}}}}$ is bounded in $L^{p}(\mathbb{R}^{2})$ for $1<p<+\infty$ when $\gamma>|1/p-1/2|$ and $t>0$, where $\mathcal{L}_{\mathbf{A}}$ is a magnetic Schr\"odinger operator. In particular, we derive the $L^{p}$-bounds for the sine wave propagator $\sin(t\sqrt{\mathcal{L}_{\mathbf{A}}})\mathcal{L}^{-\frac12}_{\mathbf{A}}$. The key ingredients are the construction of the kernel function and the proof of the pointwise estimate for an analytic operator family $f_{w,t}(\mathcal{L}_{\mathbf{A}})$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.03151 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Here A = ( 1 2 , 0), B = (1, 1 4 ), C = (0, 1 4 ), D = (1, 1 2 ), E = (0, 1 2 ), respectively. The line AB : l = 1 2 ( 1 p − 1 2 ). The line AC : l = 1 2 ( 1 2 − 1 p ). Finally, we focus on the proof of (4.1) when 1 2 > ℓ > 1 4 . Firstly, for all s > 0, we define m(ℓ, s) = 1 + s 2 −ℓ e is , mℓ(s) = ψ(s)s −2ℓ e is , Mℓ(s) = m(ℓ, s) − mℓ(s), in which ψ ∈ C∞ (R+) satisfies the following conditions: ψ(s) = ( 0, if s ≤… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

[6]

Fanelli, J

L. Fanelli, J. Zhang and J. Zheng, Dispersive estimates f or 2D-wave equations with critical potentials, Adv. Math. 400 (2022) No. 108333, 46 pp. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 21

work page 2022
[29]

I n: dans la serie London Math

Ouhabaz, E.M., Analysis of heat equations on domains. I n: dans la serie London Math. Soc. Monographs No 31. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2005) 7, 8

work page 2005
[1]

Aharonov, and D

Y. Aharonov, and D. Bohm, Signiﬁcance of electromagneti c potentials in quantum theory, Phys. Rev. 115 (1959), 485–491. 1

work page 1959
[2]

Cheeger, and M

J. Cheeger, and M. Taylor, Diﬀraction of waves by Conical Singularities parts I & II, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 35 (1982), 275-331, 487–529. 5

work page 1982
[3]

Chen, X T

P. Chen, X T. Duong, J. Li, L. Yan, Sharp endpoint Lp estimates for Schr¨ odinger groups, Math. Ann. 378 (2020), 667–702. 3

work page 2020
[4]

Papageorgiou, Oscillating multipliers on rank one lo cally symmetric spaces, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 494 (2021)

E. Papageorgiou, Oscillating multipliers on rank one lo cally symmetric spaces, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 494 (2021). 2

work page 2021
[5]

Fanelli, V

L. Fanelli, V. Felli, M. A. Fontelos, and A. Primo, Time de cay of scaling invariant electromagnetic Schr¨ odinger equations on the plane, Comm. Math. Phys. 337 (2015), 1515–1533. 2

work page 2015
[7]

Fanelli, J

L. Fanelli, J. Zhang and J. Zheng, Uniform resolvent esti mates for critical magnetic Schr¨ odinger operators in 2D, International Mathematics Research Notices. Vol. 2023, No. 20, pp. 17656–17703. 2

work page 2023

Show all 46 references

[8]

I. S. Gradsbteyn, L. M. Ryzbik, Table of Integrals, Serie s, and Products, 7th edn. In: Translation edited and with a preface by Alan Jeﬀrey and Daniel Zwillinger. Acad emic Press, Inc., San Diego, CA, 2007. Reproduction in P.R. China authorized by Elsevier (Singapo re) Pte Ltd. 22

2007
[9]

X. Gao, J. W ang, J. Zhang and J. Zheng, Uniform resolvent e stimates for Schr¨ odinger operators in Aharonov-Bohm magnetic ﬁelds, J. Diﬀ. Equ. 292 (2021), 70–89. 2

2021
[10]

X. Gao, Z. Yin, J. Zhang and J. Zheng, Decay and Strichart z estimates in critical electromagnetic ﬁelds, J. Funct. Anal. 282 (2022), 109350. 2, 3, 4, 7

2022
[11]

Giulini, S.Meda, Oscillating multipliers on noncom pact symmetric spaces

S. Giulini, S.Meda, Oscillating multipliers on noncom pact symmetric spaces. J. Reine Angew. Math. 409, (1990), 93–105. 2

1990
[12]

Ionescu, Fourier integral operators on noncompact s ymmetric spaces of real rank one

A. Ionescu, Fourier integral operators on noncompact s ymmetric spaces of real rank one. J. Funct. Anal. 174, (2000), 274–300. 2

2000
[13]

Josaroop, S

K. Josaroop, S. Thangavelu, Lp estimates for the wave equation associated to the Grushin op erator. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5) 13 (2014), no.3, 775–794. 2 24 JIALU W ANG, F ANG ZHANG, JUNYONG ZHANG, AND JIQIANG ZHENG

2014
[14]

Laptev, and T

A. Laptev, and T. W eidl, Hardy inequalities for magneti c Dirichlet forms, Mathematical results in quantum mechanics (Prague, 1998) , 299–305; Oper. Theory Adv. Appl. 108, Birkh¨ auser, Basel, 1999. 6

1998
[15]

Li, Estimations Lp de l’´ equation des ondes sur les va ri´ et´ es ` a singularit´ e conique,Math

H. Li, Estimations Lp de l’´ equation des ondes sur les va ri´ et´ es ` a singularit´ e conique,Math. Z. 272 (2012), 551–575. 2, 3, 4, 6, 18, 20

2012
[16]

Li, Lohou´ e, N., Estimations Lp des solutions de l’´ e quation des ondes sur certaines vari´ et´ es coniques

H. Li, Lohou´ e, N., Estimations Lp des solutions de l’´ e quation des ondes sur certaines vari´ et´ es coniques. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 355 (2003), 689–711. 2, 4

2003
[17]

H. M. Macdonald, Note on the evaluation of a certain inte gral containing Bessel’s functions, Proc. London Math. Soc. 7(1909), 142–149. 4

1909
[18]

Miyachi, On some estimates for the wave equation in Lp and H p, Journal of the Faculty of Science, the University of Tokyo

A. Miyachi, On some estimates for the wave equation in Lp and H p, Journal of the Faculty of Science, the University of Tokyo. Sect. 1 A, Mathematics. , 27 1980, 331–354. 1, 7

1980
[19]

Melrose, R., W unsch, J., Propagation of singularities for the wave equation on conic manifolds. Invent. Mat h. 156 (2004), 235–299. 2

2004
[20]

C. Miao, L. Yan, and J. Zhang, Bochner-Riesz mean for cri tical magnetic Shr¨ odinger operators on R2. arXiv.2405.02531. 2

arXiv
[21]

M¨ uller, A

D. M¨ uller, A. Seeger, Regularity properties of wave pr opagation on conic manifolds and applications to spectral multipliers. Adv. Math. 161 (2001), 41–130. 2, 3

2001
[22]

M¨ uller, E

D. M¨ uller, E. M. Stein, Lp-estimates for the wave equation on the Heisenberg group. Rev. Mat. Iberoamer- icana. 15 (1999), 297–334. 2

1999
[23]

M¨ uller, M

D. M¨ uller, M. Vallarino, W ave equation and multiplier estimates on Damek-Ricci spaces. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 16 (2010), 204–232. 2

2010
[24]

Kovarik, Heat kernels of two-dimensional magnetic Schr¨ odinger and Pauli operators, Calc

H. Kovarik, Heat kernels of two-dimensional magnetic Schr¨ odinger and Pauli operators, Calc. Var. Partial Diﬀerential Equations , 44 (2012) 351–374. 3

2012
[25]

Laptev, and T

A. Laptev, and T. Weidl , Hardy inequalities for magnetic Dirichlet forms, Mathematical results in quan- tum mechanics (Prague, 1998) , 299–305; Oper. Theory Adv. Appl. 108, Birkh¨ auser, Basel, 1999. 6

1998
[26]

Ouhabaz, Analysis of Heat Equations on Domains

E.M. Ouhabaz, Analysis of Heat Equations on Domains. Lo ndon Mathematical Society Monographs Series,
[27]

Melgaard, E

M. Melgaard, E. Ouhabaz, G. Rozenblum , Negative discrete spectrum of perturbed multivortex Aharonov-Bohm Hamiltonians, Ann. H. Poincar´ e5 (2004), 979–1012. 3

2004
[28]

E. K. Narayanan and S. Thangavelu, Oscillating Multipl iers for some Eigenfunction Expansions, Journal of Fourier Analysis and Applications, Vol. 7, Issue 4, (2001), 373–394. 2

2001
[30]

Peshkin, and A

M. Peshkin, and A. Tonomura, The Aharonov-Bohm Eﬀect. Lect. Notes Phys. 340 (1989). 1

1989
[31]

Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2005. 3

2005
[32]

Hassell,P

A. Hassell,P. Portal and J. Rozendaal, Oﬀ-singularity bounds and Hardy spaces for Fourier integral opera- tors. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 373 (2020), 5773–5832. 2

2020
[33]

N. Liu, J. Rozendaal, L. Song and L. Yan, Local smoothing and Hardy spaces for Fourier integral operators on manifolds. J. Funct. Anal. 286 (2024), Paper No. 110221, 7 2 pp. 2

2024
[34]

Hassell and J

A. Hassell and J. Rozendaal, Lp and H p FIO regularity for wave equations with rough coeﬃcients. Pure A ppl. Anal. 5 (2023), 541–599. 2

2023
[35]

Rozendaal, Rough pseudodiﬀerential operators on Ha rdy spaces for Fourier integral operators

J. Rozendaal, Rough pseudodiﬀerential operators on Ha rdy spaces for Fourier integral operators. J. Anal. Math. 149 (2023), 135–165. 2

2023
[36]

Peral, Lp-estimates for the wave equation, J

J. Peral, Lp-estimates for the wave equation, J. Funct. Anal. , 36 (1980), 114–145. 1

1980
[37]

Schlag, W., Soﬀer, A., Staubach, W., Decay for the wave a nd Schr¨ odinger evolutions on manifolds with conical ends. I. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 362 (2010), 19–52. 2

2010
[38]

Schlag, W., Soﬀer, A., Staubach, W., Decay for the wave a nd Schr¨ odinger evolutions on manifolds with conical ends. II. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 362 (2010), 289–318. 2

2010
[39]

Strichartz, Convolution with kernels having singul arities on a sphere, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 148 (1970), 461–471

R. Strichartz, Convolution with kernels having singul arities on a sphere, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 148 (1970), 461–471. 1

1970
[40]

C. D. Sogge, Fourier Integrals in Classical Analysis, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 105, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993. 11

1993
[41]

E. M. Stein, Interpolation of linear operators, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 83 1956, 482–492. 18

1956
[42]

Sikora, J

A. Sikora, J. W right, Imaginary powers of Laplace opera tors, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 129 (2000),1745–

2000
[43]

Thangavelu, Naidu Dogga, Venku, Lp → L2 estimates for solutions of the wave equation associated to the Grushin operator

S. Thangavelu, Naidu Dogga, Venku, Lp → L2 estimates for solutions of the wave equation associated to the Grushin operator. Adv. Pure Appl. Math. 9 (2018), no.2, 85–92. 2

2018
[44]

Taylor, Partial Diﬀerential Equations, vol

M. Taylor, Partial Diﬀerential Equations, vol. II, Spr inger, 1996. 6

1996
[45]

G. N. W atson, A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Function s, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1944. 3, 6, 7, 22

1944
[46]

Zhong, Harmonic Analysis for some Schr¨ odinger Oper ators, Princeton University thesis

J. Zhong, Harmonic Analysis for some Schr¨ odinger Oper ators, Princeton University thesis. 2 Lp-ESTIMATES FOR MAGNETIC W A VE 25 Department of Mathematics, Beijing Institute of Technolog y, Beijing, China, 100081; Email address : jialu wang@bit.edu.cn Department of Mathematic...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [6]

Fanelli, J

L. Fanelli, J. Zhang and J. Zheng, Dispersive estimates f or 2D-wave equations with critical potentials, Adv. Math. 400 (2022) No. 108333, 46 pp. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 21

work page 2022

[2] [29]

I n: dans la serie London Math

Ouhabaz, E.M., Analysis of heat equations on domains. I n: dans la serie London Math. Soc. Monographs No 31. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2005) 7, 8

work page 2005

[3] [1]

Aharonov, and D

Y. Aharonov, and D. Bohm, Signiﬁcance of electromagneti c potentials in quantum theory, Phys. Rev. 115 (1959), 485–491. 1

work page 1959

[4] [2]

Cheeger, and M

J. Cheeger, and M. Taylor, Diﬀraction of waves by Conical Singularities parts I & II, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 35 (1982), 275-331, 487–529. 5

work page 1982

[5] [3]

Chen, X T

P. Chen, X T. Duong, J. Li, L. Yan, Sharp endpoint Lp estimates for Schr¨ odinger groups, Math. Ann. 378 (2020), 667–702. 3

work page 2020

[6] [4]

Papageorgiou, Oscillating multipliers on rank one lo cally symmetric spaces, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 494 (2021)

E. Papageorgiou, Oscillating multipliers on rank one lo cally symmetric spaces, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 494 (2021). 2

work page 2021

[7] [5]

Fanelli, V

L. Fanelli, V. Felli, M. A. Fontelos, and A. Primo, Time de cay of scaling invariant electromagnetic Schr¨ odinger equations on the plane, Comm. Math. Phys. 337 (2015), 1515–1533. 2

work page 2015

[8] [7]

Fanelli, J

L. Fanelli, J. Zhang and J. Zheng, Uniform resolvent esti mates for critical magnetic Schr¨ odinger operators in 2D, International Mathematics Research Notices. Vol. 2023, No. 20, pp. 17656–17703. 2

work page 2023