Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 84 references

From relativistic Vlasov-Maxwell to electron-MHD in the quasineutral regime

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 After explicitly filtering fast electromagnetic oscillations, solutions of the relativistic Vlasov-Maxwell system converge strongly to the kinetic electron-MHD limit as the Debye length tends to zero.

desk verdict A real first result on the analytic quasineutral limit to kinetic e-MHD, but Theorem 1.2 has a sign error in the B-field corrector that must be fixed. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.11428 v1 pith:P3MCPQES submitted 2025-05-16 math.AP

Antoine Gagnebin , Mikaela Iacobelli , Alexandre Rege , Stefano Rossi This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35Q8335Q6135B2535A2076X05
keywords quasineutrallimitrelativisticVlasov-Maxwellkineticelectronmagnetohydrodynamicsanalyticregularitymulti-fluiddecompositionoscillatorycorrectorsKlein-Gordondispersionplasmaoscillations
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

At stake is a clean derivation of a standard plasma reduction: when the Debye length is far smaller than the machine size, the relativistic Vlasov-Maxwell system should behave like kinetic electron magnetohydrodynamics (e-MHD), the model used for tokamak and stellarator plasmas. This paper proves that the reduction is valid in the sense of strong convergence, provided fast electromagnetic oscillations are first filtered out by explicit correctors. The proof works in an analytic-regularity framework and gives the first strong-convergence result for the quasineutral Vlasov-Maxwell limit. The price is a uniform-in-$\varepsilon$ bound on the full time interval, which the paper establishes only for a short $\varepsilon$-independent time.

What carries the argument

The multi-fluid reformulation represents the electron distribution as a superposition of monokinetic layers, each governed by a compressible Euler-Maxwell system coupled through the common electromagnetic field. The electric field is then split by the Helmholtz-Hodge decomposition into mean, irrotational, and solenoidal parts, and each part satisfies its own wave equation: the mean and irrotational parts are forced harmonic oscillators with the plasma frequency $\omega_{pe}$, while the solenoidal part obeys a Klein-Gordon equation with symbol $\omega^2(k)=\omega_{pe}^2+c^2|k|^2$. The proof works with analytic norms whose radius shrinks linearly in time, and introduces a time-averaging operator $H^\varepsilon$ that isolates the $O(\varepsilon^{-1})$ oscillations; the corrector $W^\varepsilon=\int_0^t(\mathrm{Id}-H^\varepsilon)E^\varepsilon\,ds$ is subtracted before taking limits.

What would settle it

Take analytic initial data with a two-stream (double-bump) momentum profile on the torus, run the $\varepsilon$-dependent Euler-Maxwell system (1.12), and monitor $\sup_{\varepsilon,t\le T}(\|\rho^\varepsilon_\Theta\|_{H^s}+\|\xi^\varepsilon_\Theta\|_{H^s}+\|\varepsilon E^\varepsilon\|_{H^s}+\|B^\varepsilon\|_{H^s})$ for $T$ beyond the short analytic existence time $\eta$. If this quantity is unbounded as $\varepsilon\to0$ before the expected convergence time, the uniform bound (1.16) fails and the strong convergence statement of Theorem 1.2 is not applicable.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the quasineutral limit of the relativistic Vlasov-Maxwell system is the kinetic electron magnetohydrodynamics (e-MHD) system, and that the convergence is strong once the fast electromagnetic oscillations are explicitly removed. Under uniform-in-$\varepsilon$ Sobolev bounds (1.16) on $[0,T]$, the multi-fluid variables $(\rho^\varepsilon_\Theta,\xi^\varepsilon_\Theta,\varepsilon E^\varepsilon,B^\varepsilon)$ converge in $C^0([0,T];H^{s'})$ to a solution of (1.13), after subtracting spatially independent correctors $d_{0,\pm}$, irrotational correctors $d_{1,\pm}$, and solenoidal correctors $d_{2,\pm}$. The correctors encode oscillations of amplitude $O(\varepsilon^{-1})$ and frequency $O(\varepsilon^{-1})$ generated by the magnetic field and the solenoidal electric component, which have no analogue in the electrostatic case. This is the first strong convergence result for the Vlasov-Maxwell quasineutral limit under analytic regularity assumptions.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion depends on assuming that, up to the final time $T$, the solutions' high-order spatial derivatives stay bounded uniformly in the small parameter $\varepsilon$; the paper constructs such uniform bounds only for a short $\varepsilon$-independent time interval, so the limit is proven conditionally on their persistence.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The quasineutral reduction to kinetic e-MHD (1.13) is rigorously justified for analytic initial data on the $\varepsilon$-independent time interval of Theorem 1.1.
  • After subtracting the three corrector families, convergence is strong in $C^0([0,T];H^{s'})$ for $s'<s-2$, so the limit is more than a formal or weak limit.
  • The oscillations removed by the correctors are exactly plasma-frequency modes in the mean and irrotational electric components and Klein-Gordon modes with $\omega^2=\omega_{pe}^2+c^2|k|^2$ in the solenoidal component.
  • Both smooth and multi-sheet electron distributions fit the multi-fluid representation, so the quasineutral limit result covers those classes of initial data.
  • In the limiting e-MHD system the electron density is forced to the ion background, $\int_M\rho_\Theta\,d\mu=1$, and the magnetic field obeys Ampère's law $\nabla\times B=j$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • On the whole space $\mathbb{R}^3$, the Klein-Gordon dispersion of the solenoidal correctors should make their oscillatory energy radiate away, so for $t>0$ the magnetic field could converge without any corrector; the paper notes this possibility but leaves the proof open.
  • The explicit limit equations for $d_{0,\pm},d_{1,\pm},d_{2,\pm}$ suggest a practical post-processing test: reconstruct the three corrector families from a kinetic simulation and check that the residual $w^\varepsilon_\Theta=\xi^\varepsilon_\Theta-W^\varepsilon$ satisfies the e-MHD equations to order $\varepsilon$.
  • If the uniform-in-$\varepsilon$ Sobolev bound fails after the short analytic time, the strong limit should break down, as in known lower-regularity instability examples; a numerical search for such failure would mark the theorem's true time horizon.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the quasineutral limit (epsilon -> 0) of the relativistic Vlasov-Maxwell system in the high-regularity framework introduced by Grenier for Vlasov-Poisson. The authors reformulate the kinetic equation as a continuum of compressible Euler-Maxwell systems indexed by a probability space, construct local-in-time analytic solutions with bounds uniform in epsilon (Theorem 1.1), and then prove a conditional strong-convergence result to the kinetic electron-MHD system after subtracting explicit oscillatory correctors (Theorem 1.2). The proof combines analytic a priori estimates, an iterative Cauchy-Kovalevskaya construction, a filtering of fast oscillations via time-averaging operators, and weak/strong compactness arguments. The paper also derives closed equations for the correctors, which exhibit plasma, Klein-Gordon, and mean-field dispersion relations.

Significance. If the statements are corrected, this is a substantial contribution. It appears to be the first strong-convergence result for the quasineutral limit of the full relativistic Vlasov-Maxwell system under analytic regularity assumptions, extending Grenier's electrostatic analysis to the electromagnetic case. The construction of epsilon-uniform analytic solutions for the Euler-Maxwell reformulation and the explicit dispersive correctors for the magnetic field are technically demanding and of independent interest. The proof is detailed and structured, with explicit estimates in Sections 3 and 4. The main caveat is that Theorem 1.2 is conditional on uniform Sobolev bounds on the whole interval [0,T], while Theorem 1.1 only provides such bounds on a short epsilon-independent interval; this limitation should be stated prominently.

major comments (2)
  1. The magnetic-field corrector displayed in Theorem 1.2 is inconsistent with the proof. Proposition 4.4(3) proves convergence of B^epsilon + T^epsilon_{2,-} curl dtilde_{2,+} + T^epsilon_{2,+} curl dtilde_{2,-} to B, where dtilde_{2,pm} = mp i (1+|k|^2)^{-1/2} d_{2,pm} as in (4.21). Fourier-computing the added term gives S := sum_{sigma in {+,-}} (-sigma) exp(sigma i sqrt(1+|k|^2)t/epsilon) (k wedge dhat_{2,sigma})/sqrt(1+|k|^2). The corrector subtracted in (1.17) is Q := i S, i.e., the theorem subtracts i S from B^epsilon. If both the theorem and Proposition 4.4(3) were true, then (1-i)S would converge to 0, which is not a consequence of the estimates and fails for generic non-vanishing correctors. The coefficient in (1.17) should be (-sigma), not (-sigma i). This is a load-bearing error because Theorem 1.2 is the central statement of the paper, although the proof suggests the intended statement is correct after this sign change.
  2. The quasineutral-limit theorem assumes the uniform-in-epsilon Sobolev bounds (1.16) on the entire interval [0,T], but Theorem 1.1 only constructs such bounds on a short, epsilon-independent interval [0,eta] (see the proof of Theorem 1.1 in Section 3.4). No persistence argument is given beyond eta. Consequently, for the solution class constructed in Theorem 1.1, Theorem 1.2 can currently be applied only with T <= eta, and for larger times the convergence is conditional on an unverified hypothesis. This limitation should be stated explicitly in the statements and in the abstract/introduction, where the result is described as a rigorous justification of the e-MHD reduction.
minor comments (4)
  1. The set 1 = {ell in Z^3 : |ell| = sqrt(3)} is used in equation (4.32) before it is defined; the definition should be moved earlier or the notation introduced in the statement of Proposition 4.5.
  2. Proposition 4.2 states convergence in C^0([0,T]; H^{s'-2}) with s'<s, while Theorem 1.2 states convergence in C^0([0,T]; H^{s'}) with s'<s-2. These are equivalent up to renaming, but the mismatch is confusing; use a single exponent convention throughout.
  3. In the proof of Lemma 3.1, the text says 'we start with the irrational term'; this should read 'irrotational term'. There are also several duplicated words in Section 4.3, such as 'by by part (3) of Lemma 4.3'.
  4. After correcting the sign in the B-field corrector, the initial-data identities for w_Theta(0) and B(0) should be rechecked against the proof of Proposition 4.2, since they involve the same curl of the initial corrector and may inherit the sign discrepancy.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the quasineutral limit and all correctors are derived from the evolution equations by weak/strong compactness, not fitted to the target system; cited tools are external, and flagged issues are correctness/limitation issues rather than circularity.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The limiting e-MHD system (1.13) is not assumed: Proposition 4.2 starts from the exact quantities w_Θ^ε = ξ_Θ^ε − W^ε and b^ε = B^ε + ∇∧W^ε with W^ε defined as the actual filtered time-integral (4.2), obtains uniform bounds from (1.16), passes to the limit in the exact Euler–Maxwell equations, and identifies E, B, w_Θ, ρ_Θ as limits of the filtered sequence. The correctors d_{0,±}, d_{1,±}, d_{2,±} in Proposition 4.4 are limits of εE_{mean,±}, εE_{irr,±}, εE_{sol,±} (and of the corresponding W^ε components), not free parameters fitted to the convergence statement; their equations (4.32)–(4.34) are obtained by weak limits of (3.13), (3.19), (3.24) in (4.29)–(4.31), so they are consequences of the original dynamics rather than inputs. Reliance on Grenier [44] and Caflisch [22] is external mathematical support (analytic norm lemmas and Cauchy–Kovalevskaya theorem), and the paper's self-citations (e.g., [13,35,65,66]) are contextual or peripheral, not load-bearing for Theorem 1.2. Two flagged points are not circularity: (i) Theorem 1.2 assumes the uniform Sobolev bound (1.16) on the full interval [0,T], while Theorem 1.1 constructs analytic solutions only on [0,η], so the theorem is conditional beyond that existence time; this is a limitation, not a circular reduction. (ii) The B-field corrector displayed in Theorem 1.2 with coefficient (−σ i) differs by a factor i from the corrector proved in Proposition 4.4(3) combined with (4.21), where the converging quantity is B^ε + T_{2,−}∇∧~d_{2,+} + T_{2,+}∇∧~d_{2,−} with ~d_{2,±} = ∓ i (1+|k|^2)^{−1/2} d_{2,±}; this is an internal consistency/correctness issue in the statement, not a derivation that reduces to its own inputs. Since no predicted quantity is defined in terms of the claimed limit and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces correctors d0,pm, d1,pm, and d2,pm as auxiliary mathematical functions defined by limits of time-filtered solutions, not as new physical entities. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are postulated. Free parameters are limited to technical analytic-norm parameters; the physical scaling beta = epsilon is a regime assumption rather than a fitted constant.

free parameters (2)
  • analytic exponent beta in (1.9) = beta in (0,1)
    Technical parameter controlling the weight of spatial derivatives in the uniform analytic norm. Chosen by hand for the estimates; no numerical value is fitted to data.
  • analytic radius delta0 and existence time eta = delta0 > 1, eta > 0 small
    Parameters in Theorem 1.1. The existence time is chosen small and independent of epsilon; the conclusions do not depend on their specific values.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The relativistic and quasineutral scales are tied by beta = epsilon after (1.3), so magnetic effects remain order one in the limit.
    This defines the regime studied; the opposite alpha to zero scaling yields incompressible Euler equations, as noted in [20,84].
  • domain assumption Initial distributions admit the multi-fluid decomposition (1.11) with analytic layer densities and momenta uniformly bounded in epsilon.
    The Euler-Maxwell reformulation and all a priori estimates are built on this representation. Smooth distributions and finite electron sheets satisfy it, but general data are not covered.
  • domain assumption Uniform analytic initial bound sup_epsilon (||epsilon E0||_{delta1} + ||B0||_{delta1}) <= C0 in (1.15).
    This is the initial data condition for Theorem 1.1 and implies quasineutrality of order epsilon via (1.18). It excludes data with unbounded initial magnetic or scaled electric energy.
  • domain assumption Uniform Sobolev bounds (1.16) hold on the whole interval [0,T] in Theorem 1.2.
    This is the key conditional hypothesis for the convergence proof. Theorem 1.1 only constructs such bounds on a small time interval eta, so the convergence statement is conditional on persistence up to T.
  • standard math Standard analytic norm estimates from Lemma 2.1 and Caflisch's Cauchy-Kovalevskaya theorem [22] are valid.
    Used to close a priori estimates in Section 3; these are external established results from the literature.
  • domain assumption The domain is the torus T^3 with a fixed neutral ion background rho_ion = 1.
    The whole analysis is set on the periodic torus; extension to R^3 is deferred in Remark 1.7 and would require additional dispersive estimates.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of From relativistic Vlasov-Maxwell to electron-MHD in the quasineutral regime." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/P3MCPQES

@misc{pith2026250511428,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: From relativistic Vlasov-Maxwell to electron-MHD in the quasineutral regime},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/P3MCPQES}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.11428}
}
abstract

We study the quasineutral limit for the relativistic Vlasov-Maxwell system in the framework of analytic regularity. Following the high regularity approach introduced by Grenier [44] for the Vlasov-Poisson system, we construct local-in-time solutions with analytic bounds uniform in the quasineutrality parameter $\varepsilon$. In contrast to the electrostatic case, the presence of a magnetic field and a solenoidal electric component leads to new oscillatory effects that require a refined decomposition of the electromagnetic fields and the introduction of dispersive correctors. We show that, after appropriate filtering, solutions converge strongly as $\varepsilon$ tends to zero to a limiting system describing kinetic electron magnetohydrodynamics (e-MHD). This is the first strong convergence result for the Vlasov-Maxwell system in the quasineutral limit under analytic regularity assumptions, providing a rigorous justification for the e-MHD reduction, widely used in modelling plasmas in tokamaks and stellarators.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Abidi and P

    H. Abidi and P. Zhang. On the global solution of a 3-D MHD sy stem with initial data near equilibrium. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 70(8):1509–1561, 2017

    2017

  2. [2]

    Asano and S

    K. Asano and S. Ukai. On the Vlasov–Poisson limit of the Vl asov–Maxwell equation. In Patterns and waves , volume 18 of Stud. Math. Appl. , pages 369–383. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1986

    1986

  3. [3]

    A. Baradat. Nonlinear instability in Vlasov type equati ons around rough velocity profiles. Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e C Anal. Non Lin´ eaire, 37(3):489–547, 2020

    2020

  4. [4]

    Bardos and N

    C. Bardos and N. Besse. The Cauchy problem for the Vlasov– Dirac–Benney equation and related issues in fluid mechanics and semi-classical limits. Kinet. Relat. Models , 6(4):893–917, 2013

    2013

  5. [5]

    Bardos and N

    C. Bardos and N. Besse. Hamiltonian structure, fluid repr esentation and stability for the Vlasov– Dirac–Benney equation. In Hamiltonian partial differential equations and applicatio ns, volume 75 of Fields Inst. Commun. , pages 1–30. Fields Inst. Res. Math. Sci., Toronto, ON, 2015 . 84

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Bardos, N

    C. Bardos, N. Besse, and T. T. Nguyen. Onsager-type conje cture and renormalized solutions for the relativistic Vlasov–Maxwell system. Quart. Appl. Math. , 78(2):193–217, 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Bardos, C

    C. Bardos, C. Sulem, and P.-L. Sulem. Longtime dynamics o f a conductive fluid in the presence of a strong magnetic field. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 305(1):175–191, 1988

    work page 1988

  8. [8]

    Bedrossian, N

    J. Bedrossian, N. Masmoudi, and C. Mouhot. Landau dampin g: paraproducts and Gevrey regu- larity. Ann. PDE , 2(1):Art. 4, 71, 2016

    work page 2016

Show all 84 references
  1. [9]

    Bedrossian, N

    J. Bedrossian, N. Masmoudi, and C. Mouhot. Linearized Wa ve-Damping Structure of Vlasov– Poisson in R3. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 54(4):4379–4406, 2022

    2022

  2. [10]

    Belaouar, N

    R. Belaouar, N. Crouseilles, P. Degond, and E. Sonnendr ¨ ucker. An asymptotically stable semi- Lagrangian scheme in the quasi-neutral limit. J. Sci. Comput. , 41(3):341–365, 2009

    2009

  3. [11]

    Ben-Artzi, S

    J. Ben-Artzi, S. Calogero, and S. Pankavich. Concentra ting solutions of the relativistic Vlasov– Maxwell system. Commun. Math. Sci. , 17(2):377–392, 2019

    2019

  4. [12]

    Ben-Artzi, S

    J. Ben-Artzi, S. Pankavich, and J. Zhang. A toy model for the relativistic Vlasov–Maxwell system. Kinet. Relat. Models , 15(3):341–354, 2022

    2022

  5. [13]

    Benedetto, E

    D. Benedetto, E. Caglioti, A. Gagnebin, M. Iacobelli, a nd S Rossi. Scattering problem for Vlasov- type equations on the d-dimensional torus with Gevrey data, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Besse and P

    N. Besse and P. Bechouche. Regularity of weak solutions for the relativistic Vlasov–Maxwell system. J. Hyperbolic Differ. Equ. , 15(4):693–719, 2018

    2018

  7. [15]

    Bhatia, G

    H. Bhatia, G. Norgard, V. Pascucci, and P-T Bremer. The H elmholtz–Hodge decomposition—a survey. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics , 19(8):1386–1404, August 2013

    2013

  8. [16]

    Bigorgne

    L. Bigorgne. Sharp asymptotic behavior of solutions of the 3d Vlasov–Maxwell system with small data. Comm. Math. Phys. , 376(2):893–992, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    Bigorgne

    L. Bigorgne. Asymptotic properties of the solutions to the Vlasov–Maxwell system in the exterior of a light cone. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN , 1(5):3729–3793, 2021

    2021

  10. [18]

    Y. Brenier. Convergence of the Vlasov–Poisson system t o the incompressible Euler equations. Comm. Partial Differential Equations , 25:737–754, 2000

    2000

  11. [19]

    Brenier and E

    Y. Brenier and E. Grenier. Limite singuli` ere du syst` e me de Vlasov–Poisson dans le r´ egime de quasi neutralit´ e : le cas ind´ ependant du temps.C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris S´ er. I Math. , 318:121–124, 1994

    1994

  12. [20]

    Brenier, N

    Y. Brenier, N. Mauser, and M. Puel. Incompressible Eule r and e-MHD as scaling limits of the Vlasov–Maxwell system. Commun. Math. Sci. , 1:437–447, 2003

    2003

  13. [21]

    Brigouleix and D

    N. Brigouleix and D. Han-Kwan. The non-relativistic li mit of the Vlasov–Maxwell system with uniform macroscopic bounds. Ann. Fac. Sci. Toulouse Math. (6) , 31(2):545–594, 2022

    2022

  14. [22]

    R. Caflisch. A simplified version of the abstract Cauchy– Kovalevskaya theorem with weak singu- larities. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. , 23:495–500, 1990. 85

    1990

  15. [23]

    F. F. Chen. Introduction to Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion . Springer Cham, 2016

    2016

  16. [24]

    Constantin, T

    P. Constantin, T. D. Drivas, and D. Ginsberg. On quasisy mmetric plasma equilibria sustained by small force. Journal of Plasma Physics , 87(1):905870111, 2021

    2021

  17. [25]

    Constantin and H

    P. Constantin and H. Grayer II. Radiative Vlasov–Maxwe ll equations. arXiv:2504.01687, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Constantin, M

    P. Constantin, M. Ignatova, and F.-N. Lee. Interior ele ctroneutrality in Nernst–Planck–Navier– Stokes systems. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 242(2):1091–1118, 2021

    2021

  19. [27]

    Cordier and E

    S. Cordier and E. Grenier. Quasineutral limit of an Eule r–Poisson system arising from plasma physics. Comm. Partial Differential Equations , 25(5-6):1099–1113, 2000

    2000

  20. [28]

    Crispel, P

    P. Crispel, P. Degond, and M.-H. Vignal. An asymptotic p reserving scheme for the two-fluid Euler–Poisson model in the quasineutral limit. J. Comput. Phys. , 223(1):208–234, 2007

    2007

  21. [29]

    P. Degond. Local existence of solutions of the Vlasov–M axwell equations and convergence to the Vlasov–Poisson equations for infinite light velocity. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. , 8(4):533–558, 1986

    1986

  22. [30]

    Degond, F

    P. Degond, F. Deluzet, and D. Doyen. Asymptotic-preser ving particle-in-cell methods for the Vlasov–Maxwell system in the quasi-neutral limit. J. Comput. Phys. , 330:467–492, 2017

    2017

  23. [31]

    Degond, F

    P. Degond, F. Deluzet, and D. Savelief. Numerical appro ximation of the Euler–Maxwell model in the quasineutral limit. J. Comput. Phys. , 231(4):1917–1946, 2012

    1917

  24. [32]

    Degond, J.-G

    P. Degond, J.-G. Liu, and M.-H. Vignal. Analysis of an as ymptotic preserving scheme for the Euler–Poisson system in the quasineutral limit. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. , 46(3):1298–1322, 2008

    2008

  25. [33]

    Deng and P

    W. Deng and P. Zhang. Large time behavior of solutions to 3-D MHD system with initial data near equilibrium. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 230(3):1017–1102, 2018

    2018

  26. [34]

    Donatelli and P

    D. Donatelli and P. Marcati. Analysis of oscillations a nd defect measures for the quasineutral limit in plasma physics. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 206(1):159–188, 2012

    2012

  27. [35]

    Gagnebin and M

    A. Gagnebin and M. Iacobelli. Landau damping on the toru s for the Vlasov–Poisson system with massless electrons. J. Differential Equations , 376:154–203, 2023

    2023

  28. [36]

    G´ erard-Varet, D

    D. G´ erard-Varet, D. Han-Kwan, and F. Rousset. Quasine utral limit of the Euler–Poisson system for ions in a domain with boundaries. Indiana Univ. Math. J. , 62(2):359–402, 2013

    2013

  29. [37]

    G´ erard-Varet, D

    D. G´ erard-Varet, D. Han-Kwan, and F. Rousset. Quasine utral limit of the Euler–Poisson system for ions in a domain with boundaries II. J. ´Ec. polytech. Math. , 1:343–386, 2014

    2014

  30. [38]

    Glassey, S

    R. Glassey, S. Pankavich, and J. Schaeffer. Large time beh avior of the relativistic Vlasov–Maxwell system in low space dimension. Differential Integral Equations , 23(1-2):61–77, 2010

    2010

  31. [39]

    R. T. Glassey and W. A. Strauss. Singularity formation i n a collisionless plasma could occur only at high velocities. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. , 92(1):59–90, 1986

    1986

  32. [40]

    Golse and L

    F. Golse and L. Saint-Raymond. L’approximation centre -guide pour l’´ equation de Vlasov–Poisson 2D. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris S´ er. I Math. , 327(10):865–870, 1998. 86

    1998

  33. [41]

    Golse and L

    F. Golse and L. Saint-Raymond. The Vlasov–Poisson syst em with strong magnetic field. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) , 78(8):791–817, 1999

    1999

  34. [42]

    Goudon, A

    T. Goudon, A. J¨ ungel, and Y.-J. Peng. Zero-mass-elect rons limits in hydrodynamic models for plasmas. Appl. Math. Lett. , 12(4):75–79, 1999

    1999

  35. [43]

    E. Grenier. Defect measures of the Vlasov–Poisson syst em in the quasineutral regime. Comm. Partial Differential Equations , 20:1189–1215, 1995

    1995

  36. [44]

    E. Grenier. Oscillations in quasineutral plasmas. Comm. Partial Differential Equations , 21:363– 394, 1996

    1996

  37. [45]

    Grenier, T

    E. Grenier, T. Nguyen, and I. Rodnianski. Landau dampin g for analytic and Gevrey data. Math. Res. Lett., 28(6):1679–1702, 2021

    2021

  38. [46]

    Grenier, T

    E. Grenier, T. Nguyen, and I. Rodnianski. Plasma echoes near stable Penrose data. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 54(1):940–953, 2022

    2022

  39. [47]

    Griffin-Pickering and M

    M. Griffin-Pickering and M. Iacobelli. Singular limits f or plasmas with thermalised electrons. J. Math. Pures Appl. , 135:199–255, 2020

    2020

  40. [48]

    Griffin-Pickering and M

    M. Griffin-Pickering and M. Iacobelli. Recent developme nts on quasineutral limits for Vlasov-type equations. In Recent advances in kinetic equations and applications , volume 48 of Springer INdAM Ser., pages 211–231. Springer, Cham, 2021

    2021

  41. [49]

    Griffin-Pickering and M

    M. Griffin-Pickering and M. Iacobelli. Recent developme nts on the well-posedness theory for Vlasov-type equations. In From particle systems to partial differential equations , volume 352 of Springer Proc. Math. Stat. , pages 301–319. Springer, Cham, 2021

    2021

  42. [50]

    Griffin-Pickering and M

    M. Griffin-Pickering and M. Iacobelli. Stability in quas ineutral plasmas with thermalized electrons. arXiv:2307.07561, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Han-Kwan

    D. Han-Kwan. Quasineutral limit of the Vlasov–Poisson system with massless electrons. Comm. Partial Differential Equations , 36:1385–1425, 2011

    2011

  44. [52]

    Han-Kwan

    D. Han-Kwan. Stabilit´ e, limites singuli` eres et cond itions de contrˆ ole g´ eom´ etrique en th´ eorie cin´ etique, 09 2017. M´ emoire pr´ esente´ e ` a Universit´ e Paris-Diderot pour l’obtention de l’habilitation ` a diriger des recherches

    2017

  45. [53]

    Han-Kwan and M

    D. Han-Kwan and M. Hauray. Stability issues in the quasi neutral limit of the one-dimensional Vlasov–Poisson equation. Comm. Math. Phys. , 334:1101–1152, 2015

    2015

  46. [54]

    Han-Kwan and M

    D. Han-Kwan and M. Iacobelli. The quasineutral limit of the Vlasov–Poisson equation in Wasser- stein metric. Comm. Math. Sci. , 15:481–509, 2014

    2014

  47. [55]

    Han-Kwan and M

    D. Han-Kwan and M. Iacobelli. Quasineutral limit for Vl asov–Poisson via Wasserstein stability estimates in higher dimension. J. Differential Equations , 263:1–25, 2017

    2017

  48. [56]

    Han-Kwan and M

    D. Han-Kwan and M. Iacobelli. The quasineutral limit of the Vlasov–Poisson equation in Wasser- stein metric. Comm. Math. Sci. , 15:481–509, 2017. 87

    2017

  49. [57]

    Han-Kwan and T

    D. Han-Kwan and T. Nguyen. Nonlinear instability of Vla sov–Maxwell systems in the classical and quasineutral limits. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 48:3444–3466, 2016

    2016

  50. [58]

    Han-Kwan, T

    D. Han-Kwan, T. Nguyen, and F. Rousset. Asymptotic stab ility of equilibria for screened Vlasov– Poisson systems via pointwise dispersive estimates. Ann. PDE , 7(2):Paper No. 18, 37, 2021

    2021

  51. [59]

    Han-Kwan, T

    D. Han-Kwan, T. Nguyen, and F. Rousset. Linear Landau da mping for the Vlasov–Maxwell system in R3. arXiv:2402.11402, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Han-Kwan and T

    D. Han-Kwan and T. T. Nguyen. Nonlinear instability of V lasov–Maxwell systems in the classical and quasineutral limits. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 48(5):3444–3466, 2016

    2016

  53. [61]

    Han-Kwan, T

    D. Han-Kwan, T. T. Nguyen, and F. Rousset. Long time esti mates for the Vlasov–Maxwell system in the non-relativistic limit. Comm. Math. Phys. , 363(2):389–434, 2018

    2018

  54. [62]

    Han-Kwan and F

    D. Han-Kwan and F. Rousset. Quasineutral limit for Vlas ov–Poisson with Penrose stable data. Ann. Sci. ´Ec. Norm. Sup´ er., 49:1445–1495, 2016

    2016

  55. [63]

    L.-B. He, L. Xu, and P. Yu. On global dynamics of three dim ensional magnetohydrodynamics: nonlinear stability of Alfv´ en waves. Ann. PDE , 4(1):Paper No. 5, 105, 2018

    2018

  56. [64]

    M. Herda. On massless electron limit for a multispecies kinetic system with external magnetic field. J. Differential Equations , 260(11):7861–7891, 2016

    2016

  57. [65]

    Iacobelli

    M. Iacobelli. A new perspective on Wasserstein distanc es for kinetic problems. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 244(1):27–50, 2022

    2022

  58. [66]

    Iacobelli, S

    M. Iacobelli, S. Rossi, and K. Widmayer. On the stabilit y of vacuum in the screened Vlasov–Poisson equation. arXiv:2410.17978, 2024

    2024

  59. [67]

    Ionescu, B

    A. Ionescu, B. Pausader, X. Wang, and K. Widmayer. Nonli near Landau damping for the Vlasov- Poisson system in R3: the Poisson equilibrium. arXiv:2205.04540, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Chapter 1: Overview and sum mary

    ITER Physics Basis Editors. Chapter 1: Overview and sum mary. Nucl. Fusion , 39:2137–2174, 1999

    1999

  61. [69]

    Klainerman and G

    S. Klainerman and G. Staffilani. A new approach to study th e Vlasov–Maxwell system. Commun. Pure Appl. Anal. , 1(1):103–125, 2002

    2002

  62. [70]

    Lions and B

    P.-L. Lions and B. Perthame. Propagation of moments and regularity for the 3-dimensional Vlasov– Poisson system. Invent. Math. , 105(2):415–430, 1991

    1991

  63. [71]

    Luk and R

    J. Luk and R. M. Strain. A new continuation criterion for the relativistic Vlasov–Maxwell system. Comm. Math. Phys. , 331(3):1005–1027, 2014

    2014

  64. [72]

    Luk and R

    J. Luk and R. M. Strain. Strichartz estimates and moment bounds for the relativistic Vlasov– Maxwell system. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 219(1):445–552, 2016

    2016

  65. [73]

    Masmoudi

    N. Masmoudi. From Vlasov–Poisson system to the incompr essible Euler system. Comm. Partial Differential Equations , 26:1913–1928, 2001. 88

    1913

  66. [74]

    Mouhot and C

    C. Mouhot and C. Villani. On Landau damping. Acta Math. , 207(1):29–201, 2011

    2011

  67. [75]

    Peng and S

    Y.-J. Peng and S. Wang. Rigorous derivation of incompre ssible e-MHD equations from compressible Euler–Maxwell equations. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 40(2):540–565, 2008

    2008

  68. [76]

    Peng and V

    Y.-J. Peng and V. Wasiolek. Global quasi-neutral limit of Euler–Maxwell systems with velocity dissipation. J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 451(1):146–174, 2017

    2017

  69. [77]

    O. Penrose. Electrostatic instabilities of a uniform n on-maxwellian plasma. Phys. Fluids , 3, 1960

    1960

  70. [78]

    Pfaffelmoser

    K. Pfaffelmoser. Global classical solutions of the Vlaso v–Poisson system in three dimensions for general initial data. J. Differential Equations , 95(2):281–303, 1992

    1992

  71. [79]

    Puel and L

    M. Puel and L. Saint-Raymond. Quasineutral limit for th e relativistic Vlasov–Maxwell system. Asymptot. Anal. , 40:303–352, 2004

    2004

  72. [80]

    Schaeffer

    J. Schaeffer. The classical limit of the relativistic Vla sov–Maxwell system. Comm. Math. Phys. , 104(3):403–421, 1986

    1986

  73. [81]

    Thomas H. Stix. Waves in Plasmas . American Institute of Physics, New York, 1992

    1992

  74. [82]

    F.W. Warner. Foundations of Differentiable Manifolds and Lie Groups . Springer New York, NY, 1983

    1983

  75. [83]

    Wei and Z

    D. Wei and Z. Zhang. Global well-posedness of the MHD equ ations in a homogeneous magnetic field. Anal. PDE , 10(6):1361–1406, 2017

    2017

  76. [84]

    Yang and H

    J. Yang and H. Wang. Convergence of a singular Euler–Max well approximation of the incompress- ible Euler equations. J. Appl. Math. , pages Art. ID 942024, 13, 2011. 89

    2011

Pith tools

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