Weak Solutions to a Sharp Interface Model for a Two-Phase Flow of Incompressible Viscous Fluids with Different Densities

Andrea Poiatti; Helmut Abels

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 37 references

Weak Solutions to a Sharp Interface Model for a Two-Phase Flow of Incompressible Viscous Fluids with Different Densities

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper constructs global weak solutions, in a new varifold sense, for two-phase incompressible viscous flow with different densities, including a weak constant contact-angle condition.

desk verdict The main existence theorem has a load-bearing gap: the vector identity (5.165) used to derive the weak Navier-Stokes equation from the non-conservative formulation is false, so Theorem 3.8 is not established as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.06423 v1 pith:444IHCXY submitted 2025-05-09 math.AP

Helmut Abels , Andrea Poiatti This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 35R3535Q3076D4576T9980A20

keywords two-phaseflowNavier-Stokes-Mullins-SekerkavarifoldsolutionsunmatcheddensitiescontactangleminimizingmovementsDeGiorgiinterpolantssharpenergydissipation

topics Navier-Stokes Regularity

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 proposes a new weak (varifold) solution concept for two immiscible incompressible viscous fluids with different densities and viscosities, coupled to an advected Mullins-Sekerka interface evolution. It claims that for any bounded smooth domain in dimensions two and three, any square-integrable divergence-free initial velocity, and any initial phase configuration with fixed mass, a solution exists for all positive times. The new notion includes a weak formulation of the constant contact angle and sharp De Giorgi-type energy dissipation inequalities that the previous notion lacked. It also proves that every smooth such weak solution coincides with a classical solution of the Navier-Stokes-Mullins-Sekerka system, conditional on a first-variation identity for the varifold. If correct, this gives the first global weak-solution theory for the unequal-density regime that captures energy dissipation and boundary contact angle.

What carries the argument

The engine of the construction is a minimizing-movement scheme with De Giorgi interpolants: at each time step, the new phase indicator minimizes capillary energy plus an $H^{{-1}}$ distance to the previous phase pulled back along the flow map of a regularized velocity, so that the discrete solution inherits the gradient-flow-like structure of the advective Mullins-Sekerka flow. The admissible limit object is an oriented varifold, a measure on interfaces and directions, split into an interior part and a boundary part supported on ∂Ω with weight cosγ; its first variation supplies the generalized mean curvature and a weak Gibbs-Thomson relation. Two potentials play distinct roles: the kinetic potential u drives the diffusive mass flux (ρ1−ρ2)∇u, while the curvature potential w represents surface tension in the stress balance. The sharp dissipation inequalities (3.19)-(3.20) are obtained by passing the De Giorgi inequalities to the limit.

What would settle it

Take a smooth varifold solution in a flat domain with a planar interface meeting the boundary at an angle γ′ different from the prescribed γ, and compute the difference δμ_t(B) − δE[χ(t)](B) for a tangential variation B supported near the contact line. If this difference is nonzero, the solution satisfies the weak definition but not the classical contact-angle condition, showing that the extra assumption in Theorem 3.9(2) is genuinely needed.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 3.8: for d=2,3, a varifold solution exists globally in time for the Navier-Stokes-Mullins-Sekerka system with different densities and viscosities, where the phase indicator and velocity have the regularity stated in (3.13)-(3.14), the interface satisfies a weak Gibbs-Thomson law (3.15), the phase evolution is governed by a kinetic potential through (3.16), the velocity equation (3.17) includes the density-dependent diffusive flux, and the sharp dissipation inequalities (3.19)-(3.20) hold. This is stronger than earlier varifold solutions obtained by sharp-interface limits, because it encodes a weak constant contact-angle condition and a sharp energy-dissipation principle, and it extends the existence theory beyond matched densities. Theorem 3.9 shows consistency: classical solutions are varifold solutions, and smooth varifold solutions satisfying one additional first-variation assumption are classical solutions.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that, for smooth solutions, the varifold's first variation equals the first variation of the capillary energy including the boundary contact term; this equality is what turns a weak varifold solution into a classical solution with a constant contact angle.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Global weak solutions now exist for unequal densities in dimensions two and three, with arbitrary fixed initial mass and square-integrable initial velocity.
The weak contact-angle condition holds for any constant angle γ in (0, π/2], covering cases that the earlier varifold notion could not handle, including the matched-density case.
The sharp De Giorgi-type energy dissipation inequalities give a variational structure to the coupled fluid-interface problem, not just to the Mullins-Sekerka part.
The consistency theorem ensures that classical solutions of the original sharp interface system are not lost by the weak formulation.
The notion is designed so that a relative-entropy weak-strong uniqueness result could be attempted, an advantage the paper highlights as motivation.

Reading between the lines

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

Inference: if the sharp energy dissipation inequalities turn out to be stable under limits, one might expect the varifold solution to be unique in a class of sufficiently regular strong solutions, by analogy with recent Mullins-Sekerka results.
Inference: the two-potential split suggests a practical numerical scheme: solve the phase evolution by a minimizing-movement step and update the velocity by a regularized Navier-Stokes step, without resolving the interface.
Inference: the conditional assumption in Theorem 3.9(2) could be probed by trying to construct BV-valued solutions whose varifold first variation equals the first variation of the capillary energy; if such solutions do not exist in general, the consistency theory may need a weaker boundary-contact formulation.
Inference: the flow-map composition used in the discretization may extend to other interface-coupled fluid models, since it cleanly separates material advection from the H^{-1} gradient-flow structure.

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

You should know two things before reading: the paper's new two-potential varifold notion and the minimizing-movement construction are substantial and worth studying, but the proof of the central existence theorem contains a concrete algebraic error at equation (5.165). I checked the stress-test note against the text and against explicit Fourier-mode examples on the torus; the note holds up. The claimed identity

-∫ρ(ξ·∇)v·v - ∫ρ(v·∇)ξ·v + ∫ρ(v·∇)v·ξ = -∫ρ(v⊗v):∇ξ

is not an identity. With divergence-free ξ and v (and any honest boundary conditions), the difference is, up to gradient terms that vanish against ξ, a vorticity coupling of the form ∫ρ ξ·(ω×v), which is generically nonzero. The paper's own derivation of (5.165) drops a term proportional to ∫|v|² ξ·∇ρ and gives the wrong factor in front of ∫ρ ξ·(v·∇)v. The stress-test example with v=(y,0), ξ=(y,-x) is not admissible on a bounded domain because ξ does not vanish on ∂Ω, but that is not the core issue; compactly supported and periodic examples show the same failure. Consequently, the limit equation (5.164) cannot be converted to the claimed momentum equation (3.17) by the argument given. The limit velocity may satisfy a different equation with an extra vorticity term absent from Definition 3.4(6). This is not a minor typo; it breaks the proof of Theorem 3.8.

What the paper does well: the two-potential framework (kinetic u and curvature w) is a genuine novelty, as is the De Giorgi dissipation inequality and the weak contact-angle condition for unmatched densities. The a priori estimates (5.74)-(5.76) are detailed and the consistency theorem is carefully stated, with the conditional assumption in Theorem 3.9(2) explicitly flagged. The geometric compactness arguments and the use of the flow map are interesting and likely reusable. If the momentum passage can be repaired—perhaps by tracking the extra term and showing it cancels through the continuity equation, or by adjusting the weak formulation—the paper would be a real advance.

The reader's ACCEPT at moderate confidence is too generous. The soundness score should drop; the central claim is not supported as written. This is a paper for specialists in free-boundary PDE and gradient-flow methods who can assess whether the scheme can be fixed. It deserves a serious referee, but the referee's report should demand a corrected proof of the momentum limit before acceptance. I would not cite the existence theorem in its current form, though I might cite the solution concept if the paper is revised.

Recommendation: send to peer review, but expect major revision. The authors are serious and the framework is promising, but the proof has a real hole.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a new weak-solution concept for the sharp-interface Navier–Stokes–Mullins–Sekerka system with different fluid densities and viscosities, in which the interface is represented by an evolving phase indicator and an oriented varifold, and which includes a weak formulation of the constant contact angle, two potentials (a kinetic potential and a curvature potential), and sharp De Giorgi-type energy inequalities. The main result, Theorem 3.8, asserts global-in-time existence of such varifold solutions in dimensions d=2,3 for arbitrary square-integrable divergence-free initial velocities and BV initial phase indicators. Theorem 3.9 states consistency between classical smooth solutions and varifold solutions, in both directions. The existence proof is based on a minimizing-movement scheme with De Giorgi interpolants, combined with a regularized Navier–Stokes equation at each step, and a compactness passage in which a varifold and the velocity are recovered.

Significance. If the proof is correct, the paper provides the first global existence result for a sharp-interface two-phase flow model with unmatched densities in the presence of positive mobility, and it strengthens the previous varifold-solution notion of Abels–Lengeler by adding a sharp energy dissipation principle and a weak contact-angle condition. The solution concept is carefully designed, the paper is largely self-contained, and the technical appendices (Bochner measurability of the selections and an embedding lemma) are valuable. The proof relies on deep external compactness results for varifolds, but no circularity or fitted parameters are present. The main theorem, if established, is a substantial contribution to the free-boundary and two-phase-flow literature.

major comments (2)

[§5.7.8, Eq. (5.165)] The identity (5.165), used to pass from the discretized momentum equation to the claimed weak Navier–Stokes equation (3.17), is false. For smooth fields with div v = div ξ = 0 and ξ = 0 on ∂Ω, a correct integration by parts gives LHS − RHS = 1/2∫(∇ρ·ξ)|v|^2 dx + ∫ρ(v·∇)v·ξ dx, which is generically nonzero. In the constant-density case explicitly allowed in Definition 3.4, the left side of (5.165) equals −2∫ρ(v⊗v):∇ξ dx, whereas the right side is −∫ρ(v⊗v):∇ξ dx; the difference is ∫ρ(v·∇)v·ξ dx, a vorticity coupling that does not vanish for divergence-free Navier–Stokes velocities. In the paper's derivation, the first equality in the displayed chain before (5.165) omits the term 1/2∫(∇ρ·ξ)|v|^2 dx and misaccounts for the factor 2. Consequently, the limit equation derived in (5.164)-(5.165) is not shown to coincide with Definition 3.4(6); the constructed pair (v, ρ) may satisfy a different momentum equation, and Theorem 3.8 is not established as written.
[§5.7.8, transition from (5.50) to (5.164)] The weak formulation (5.50) contains the advective terms with coefficients −1/2, −1/2, and +1, together with a term involving ∂^{•,h}_t ρ_h − ∂_t ρ_h. In the limit (5.164) these appear with coefficients −1, −1, and +1, with no explanation of how the half coefficients and the density-variation term combine. This is not merely cosmetic: the correct limit of the sum of those terms is what must produce the standard term −∫ρ(v⊗v):∇ξ in (3.17). Since the manuscript instead invokes the false identity (5.165), the derivation of the momentum equation is incomplete. The authors should either prove the required cancellation using the continuity equation for ρ or present the corrected limiting equation and show that it reduces to (3.17).

minor comments (4)

[Appendix B] The word 'Charathéodory' should be 'Carathéodory'; there are also a few other typographical slips such as 'calssical' in Appendix C.
[§5.2.2, inequality (5.16)] The displayed local-Lipschitz bound C/(2ts) becomes singular as s→0; the argument only needs local Lipschitz on (0,h], but the reader would benefit from an explicit statement that s is bounded away from 0 there.
[§5.7.1, compactness passage] The paragraph proving strong convergence of v_h via (5.117)-(5.120) is terse: the use of P_σ(ρ_h v_h) → P_σ(ρ v) and the pointwise convergence of ρ_h and v_h should be expanded slightly, since the identification ζ = P_σ(ρ v) relies on weak continuity of P_σ.
[Theorem 3.9(2) and Remark 3.10] The consistency statement for smooth varifold solutions is explicitly conditional on the first variation of µ_t being given by δE[χ(t)], and Remark 3.10 correctly notes that even for Mullins–Sekerka flow such solutions are only known conditionally; this limitation is appropriately stated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the existence theorem is derived from a new minimizing-movement construction, not from its own statement.

full rationale

The central claim (Theorem 3.8) is established by a constructive time-discretization scheme: phase indicators are produced by minimizing movement steps (5.7), (5.44), velocities solve the regularized momentum balance (5.50), and the limit objects (χ, μ, v, u, w) are identified through the compactness arguments of Section 5.7 and the passage to the limit in (5.77), (5.156), and (5.158). No parameter is fitted to a subset of the target conclusion, and the energy inequalities (3.19)-(3.20) are derived from the scheme rather than assumed. The proofs rely on prior works [10], [26], [34], and [36] for technical compactness, varifold structure, and generalized mean curvature facts; these are external results whose hypotheses do not include Theorem 3.8, so the citations are genuine support rather than circular self-citation. The authors' own citations of [10] and [11] are contextual or technical and do not carry the existence conclusion. Remark 3.10 explicitly records that the smooth-consistency direction of Theorem 3.9(2) requires an additional first-variation equality; this is a stated limitation, not a hidden circular assumption. The possible algebraic failure of identity (5.165) noted by a reader would be a correctness defect in the limit passage, not a circularity, since it does not amount to assuming the conclusion or renaming an input.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numerical parameters are fitted: c0, gamma, rho_i, and nu_i are inputs of the model. The proof imports a substantial body of varifold and mean-curvature theory: Allard compactness, Schatzle's characterization of curvature varifolds, Röger's generalized mean curvature, and the Hensel-Stinson gradient-flow admissibility results. These are prior published theorems, not assumptions whose conclusions include the target theorem. The only genuinely conditional part is the identification delta mu_t equals delta E[chi(t)] in the second half of the consistency theorem, which the authors flag.

assumptions (7)

standard math Allard's compactness theorem for integer-rectifiable varifolds
Used in Section 5.7.3 to extract limit varifolds mu_t^Omega and mu_t^partial Omega from uniformly bounded approximating varifolds; the uniform first-variation bounds from (5.75) and (5.134) are the hypotheses.
standard math Schatzle's theorems on hypersurfaces whose mean curvature is given by an ambient Sobolev function
Applied in Section 5.7.5 to identify the generalized mean curvature of the limit varifold and to obtain integer-rectifiability and compatibility condition (3.3).
standard math Röger's existence and structure theory for generalized mean curvature in Mullins-Sekerka flow
Definition 3.1 uses [34, Definition 1.2] and [34, Lemma 4.2]; the intrinsic curvature H_chi is imported from this framework.
standard math Hensel-Stinson Hilbert-space gradient flow results and first-variation estimates up to the boundary
Proposition 4.1, Lemma 4.2, and parts of the compactness argument are quoted from [26]; these supply boundary terms and Lagrange multiplier control.
domain assumption Bounded smooth domain, no-slip boundary, fixed contact angle gamma in (0, pi/2], positive constant densities and viscosities
Assumptions (M0)-(M1) and Theorem 3.8; used for the Stokes operator, BV trace theory, Korn's inequality, and boundary first variation.
domain assumption Initial data chi0 in M_{m0} and v0 in L^2_sigma(Omega)
Theorem 3.8; the minimizing movement scheme starts from this data and all energy estimates depend on E[chi0] and the norm of v0.
domain assumption The sharp interface system (1.1)-(1.10) is the epsilon-to-zero limit of the diffuse interface model (1.11) from [6]
Motivates the model and the extra flux tilde J equals minus (rho1 minus rho2) grad u; cited as known, not reproved here.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Weak Solutions to a Sharp Interface Model for a Two-Phase Flow of Incompressible Viscous Fluids with Different Densities." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/444IHCXY

@misc{pith2026250506423,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Weak Solutions to a Sharp Interface Model for a Two-Phase Flow of Incompressible Viscous Fluids with Different Densities},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/444IHCXY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.06423}
}

read the original abstract

In this paper we consider the flow of two incompressible, viscous and immiscible fluids in a bounded domain, with different densities and viscosities. This model consists of a coupled system of Navier-Stokes and Mullins-Sekerka type parts, and can be obtained from the sharp interface limit of the diffuse interface model proposed by the first author, Garcke, and Gr\"{u}n (Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 22, 2012). We introduce a new notion of weak solutions and prove its global in time existence, together with a consistency result of smooth weak solutions with the classical Navier-Stokes-Mullins-Sekerka system. Our new notion of solution allows to include the case of different densities of the two fluids, a sharp energy dissipation principle \`a la De Giorgi, together with a weak formulation of the constant contact angle condition at the boundary, which were left open in the previous notion of solution proposed by the first author and R\"{o}ger (Ann. Inst. H. Poincar\'e Anal. Non Lin\'eaire 26, 2009).

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

[1]

Abels , On generalized solutions of two-phase flows for viscous incompressible fluids , Interfaces Free Bound., 9 (2007), pp

H. Abels , On generalized solutions of two-phase flows for viscous incompressible fluids , Interfaces Free Bound., 9 (2007), pp. 31--65

work page 2007
[2]

B1 of RIMS K\^oky\^uroku Bessatsu, Res

height 2pt depth -1.6pt width 23pt, On the notion of generalized solutions of viscous incompressible two-phase flows , in Kyoto C onference on the N avier- S tokes E quations and their A pplications, vol. B1 of RIMS K\^oky\^uroku Bessatsu, Res. Inst. Math. Sci. (RIMS), Kyoto, 2007, pp. 1--19

work page 2007
[3]

Abels, D

H. Abels, D. Depner, and H. Garcke , Existence of weak solutions for a diffuse interface model for two-phase flows of incompressible fluids with different densities , J. Math. Fluid Mech., 15 (2013), pp. 453--480

work page 2013
[4]

Abels, D

H. Abels, D. Depner, and H. Garcke , On an incompressible N avier- S tokes/ C ahn- H illiard system with degenerate mobility , Ann. Inst. H. Poincar\'e C Anal. Non Lin\'eaire, 30 (2013), pp. 1175--1190

work page 2013
[5]

Abels, H

H. Abels, H. Garcke, and A. Giorgini , Global regularity and asymptotic stabilization for the incompressible N avier- S tokes- C ahn- H illiard model with unmatched densities , Math. Ann., 389 (2024), pp. 1267--1321

work page 2024
[6]

Abels, H

H. Abels, H. Garcke, and G. Gr \" u n , Thermodynamically consistent, frame indifferent diffuse interface models for incompressible two-phase flows with different densities , Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 22 (2012), p. 1150013 (40 pages)

work page 2012
[7]

Abels, H

H. Abels, H. Garcke, and A. Poiatti , Diffuse interface model for two-phase flows on evolving surfaces with different densities: Local well-posedness , arXiv:2407.14941 (2024)

work page arXiv 2024
[8]

Abels, H

H. Abels, H. Garcke, and A. Poiatti , Mathematical analysis of a diffuse interface model for multi-phase flows of incompressible viscous fluids with different densities , J. Math. Fluid Mech., 26 (2024), pp. Paper No. 29, 51

work page 2024

Show all 37 references

[9]

Abels, H

H. Abels, H. Garcke, and A. Poiatti , Diffuse interface model for two-phase flows on evolving surfaces with different densities: Global well-posedness , Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 64, 141 (2025)

2025
[10]

Abels and D

H. Abels and D. Lengeler , On sharp interface limits for diffuse interface models for two-phase flows , Interfaces Free Bound., 16 (2014), pp. 395--418

2014
[11]

Abels and M

H. Abels and M. R\"oger , Existence of weak solutions for a non-classical sharp interface model for a two-phase flow of viscous, incompressible fluids , Ann. Inst. H. Poincar\'e C Anal. Non Lin\'eaire, 26 (2009), pp. 2403--2424

2009
[12]

Abels and M

H. Abels and M. Wilke , Well-posedness and qualitative behaviour of solutions for a two-phase N avier- S tokes- M ullins- S ekerka system , Interfaces Free Bound., 15 (2013), pp. 39--75

2013
[13]

W. K. Allard , On the first variation of a varifold , Annals of Mathematics, 95 (1972), pp. 417--491

1972
[14]

Ambrosio, N

L. Ambrosio, N. Fusco, and D. Pallara , Functions of bounded variation and free discontinuity problems , Oxford Mathematical Monographs, The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 2000

2000
[15]

urich, Birkh\

L. Ambrosio, N. Gigli, and G. Savar\'e , Gradient flows in metric spaces and in the space of probability measures , Lectures in Mathematics ETH Z\"urich, Birkh\"auser Verlag, Basel, second ed., 2008

2008
[16]

Chen , Global asymptotic limit of solutions of the C ahn- H illiard equation , J

X. Chen , Global asymptotic limit of solutions of the C ahn- H illiard equation , J. Differential Geom., 44 (1996), pp. 262--311

1996
[17]

I. V. Denisova and V. A. Solonnikov , Solvability in H \"older spaces of a model initial-boundary value problem generated by a problem on the motion of two fluids , Zap. Nauchn. Sem. Leningrad. Otdel. Mat. Inst. Steklov. (LOMI), 188 (1991), pp. 5--44, 186

1991
[18]

Fischer and S

J. Fischer and S. Hensel , Weak-strong uniqueness for the N avier- S tokes equation for two fluids with surface tension , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 236 (2020), pp. 967--1087

2020
[19]

Fischer, S

J. Fischer, S. Hensel, T. Laux, and T. Simon , A weak-strong uniqueness principle for the M ullins- S ekerka equation , (arXiv:2404.02682, 2024)

2024 arXiv
[20]

Frigeri , Global existence of weak solutions for a nonlocal model for two-phase flows of incompressible fluids with unmatched densities , Math

S. Frigeri , Global existence of weak solutions for a nonlocal model for two-phase flows of incompressible fluids with unmatched densities , Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 26 (2016), pp. 1955--1993

2016
[21]

C. G. Gal, A. Giorgini, M. Grasselli, and A. Poiatti , Global well-posedness and convergence to equilibrium for the A bels- G arcke- G r\"un model with nonlocal free energy , J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 178 (2023), pp. 46--109

2023
[22]

Garcke , Curvature driven interface evolution , Jahresber

H. Garcke , Curvature driven interface evolution , Jahresber. Dtsch. Math.-Ver., 115 (2013), pp. 63--100

2013
[23]

Gigli and S

N. Gigli and S. J. N. Mosconi , A variational approach to the N avier- S tokes equations , Bull. Sci. Math., 136 (2012), pp. 256--276

2012
[24]

M. E. Gurtin, D. Polignone, and J. Vi \ n als , Two-phase binary fluids and immiscible fluids described by an order parameter , Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 6 (1996), pp. 815--831

1996
[25]

Hensel and T

S. Hensel and T. Laux , A new varifold solution concept for mean curvature flow: Convergence of the A llen- C ahn equation and weak-strong uniqueness , To appear in J. Differ. Geom., 2024

2024
[26]

Hensel and K

S. Hensel and K. Stinson , Weak solutions of M ullins- S ekerka flow as a H ilbert space gradient flow , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 248 (2024), pp. Paper No. 8, 60

2024
[27]

Hohenberg and B

P. Hohenberg and B. Halperin , Theory of dynamic critical phenomena. , Rev. Mod. Phys., 49 (1977), pp. 435--479

1977
[28]

ohne, J. Pr\

M. K\"ohne, J. Pr\"uss, and M. Wilke , Qualitative behaviour of solutions for the two-phase N avier- S tokes equations with surface tension , Math. Ann., 356 (2013), pp. 737--792

2013
[29]

N. Q. Le , A gamma-convergence approach to the C ahn- H illiard equation , Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 32 (2008), pp. 499--522

2008
[30]

Modica , Gradient theory of phase transitions with boundary contact energy , Ann

L. Modica , Gradient theory of phase transitions with boundary contact energy , Ann. Inst. H. Poincar\'e Anal. Non Lin\'eaire, 4 (1987), pp. 487--512

1987
[31]

Pironneau , On the transport-diffusion algorithm and its applications to the N avier- S tokes equations , Numer

O. Pironneau , On the transport-diffusion algorithm and its applications to the N avier- S tokes equations , Numer. Math., 38 (1981/82), pp. 309--332

1981
[32]

P. I. Plotnikov , Generalized solutions of a problem on the motion of a non- N ewtonian fluid with a free boundary , Sibirsk. Mat. Zh., 34 (1993), pp. 127--141, iii, ix

1993
[33]

R\"oger , Solutions for the S tefan problem with G ibbs- T homson law by a local minimisation , Interfaces Free Bound., 6 (2004), pp

M. R\"oger , Solutions for the S tefan problem with G ibbs- T homson law by a local minimisation , Interfaces Free Bound., 6 (2004), pp. 105--133

2004
[34]

height 2pt depth -1.6pt width 23pt, Existence of weak solutions for the M ullins- S ekerka flow , SIAM J. Math. Anal., 37 (2005), pp. 291--301

2005
[35]

Sandier and S

E. Sandier and S. Serfaty , Gamma-convergence of gradient flows with applications to G inzburg- L andau , Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 57 (2004), pp. 1627--1672

2004
[36]

Sch\"atzle , Hypersurfaces with mean curvature given by an ambient S obolev function , J

R. Sch\"atzle , Hypersurfaces with mean curvature given by an ambient S obolev function , J. Differential Geom., 58 (2001), pp. 371--420

2001
[37]

W. A. Strauss , On continuity of functions with values in various B anach spaces , Pacific J. Math., 19 (1966), pp. 543--551

1966

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Abels , On generalized solutions of two-phase flows for viscous incompressible fluids , Interfaces Free Bound., 9 (2007), pp

H. Abels , On generalized solutions of two-phase flows for viscous incompressible fluids , Interfaces Free Bound., 9 (2007), pp. 31--65

work page 2007

[2] [2]

B1 of RIMS K\^oky\^uroku Bessatsu, Res

height 2pt depth -1.6pt width 23pt, On the notion of generalized solutions of viscous incompressible two-phase flows , in Kyoto C onference on the N avier- S tokes E quations and their A pplications, vol. B1 of RIMS K\^oky\^uroku Bessatsu, Res. Inst. Math. Sci. (RIMS), Kyoto, 2007, pp. 1--19

work page 2007

[3] [3]

Abels, D

H. Abels, D. Depner, and H. Garcke , Existence of weak solutions for a diffuse interface model for two-phase flows of incompressible fluids with different densities , J. Math. Fluid Mech., 15 (2013), pp. 453--480

work page 2013

[4] [4]

Abels, D

H. Abels, D. Depner, and H. Garcke , On an incompressible N avier- S tokes/ C ahn- H illiard system with degenerate mobility , Ann. Inst. H. Poincar\'e C Anal. Non Lin\'eaire, 30 (2013), pp. 1175--1190

work page 2013

[5] [5]

Abels, H

H. Abels, H. Garcke, and A. Giorgini , Global regularity and asymptotic stabilization for the incompressible N avier- S tokes- C ahn- H illiard model with unmatched densities , Math. Ann., 389 (2024), pp. 1267--1321

work page 2024

[6] [6]

Abels, H

H. Abels, H. Garcke, and G. Gr \" u n , Thermodynamically consistent, frame indifferent diffuse interface models for incompressible two-phase flows with different densities , Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 22 (2012), p. 1150013 (40 pages)

work page 2012

[7] [7]

Abels, H

H. Abels, H. Garcke, and A. Poiatti , Diffuse interface model for two-phase flows on evolving surfaces with different densities: Local well-posedness , arXiv:2407.14941 (2024)

work page arXiv 2024

[8] [8]

Abels, H

H. Abels, H. Garcke, and A. Poiatti , Mathematical analysis of a diffuse interface model for multi-phase flows of incompressible viscous fluids with different densities , J. Math. Fluid Mech., 26 (2024), pp. Paper No. 29, 51

work page 2024