Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 35 references

Second boundary value problem for the Hessian curvature flow

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For every k between 1 and n, the k-Hessian curvature flow with prescribed gradient image has a unique smooth strictly convex solution for all time and converges smoothly to a translating solution.

desk verdict Real new result for k-Hessian curvature flow with second boundary condition, but the convergence proof in Section 8 has a genuine gap that makes the main theorem conditional on companion papers. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.23067 v1 pith:ZZOMG44J submitted 2025-05-29 math.AP

Rongli Huang , Changzheng Qu , Zhizhang Wang , Weifeng Wo This is my paper
classification math.AP MSC 35K5553C4435J6035B45
keywords k-HessiancurvatureflowsecondboundaryvalueproblemtranslatingsolutionsstrictlyconvexhypersurfacesC^2estimatesorthogonalinvariancetechniqueLegendretransformGauss
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper aims to prove that the $k$-Hessian curvature flow, in which a strictly convex hypersurface moves with normal velocity given by the $k$-th root of the $k$-th elementary symmetric polynomial in its principal curvatures, can run for all time when the gradient image of the graphing function is fixed at the boundary. The payoff is a complete long-time picture: the flow has a unique smooth strictly convex solution for every $t \ge 0$, and it converges to a translating solution. This matters because the same second boundary condition, prescribing the image of the gradient map, is the natural one in optimal transport, and the result extends known theorems from the Gauss curvature case to every $k$ between $1$ and $n$.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the orthogonal invariance technique: a family of rotations $A_s$ acts on the hypersurface, and differentiating the rotated flow yields extra tangential evolution equations that provide the missing double tangential boundary estimates. Around this, the proof uses the support function and the Legendre transform to dualize the flow, barrier functions to turn strict obliqueness into a quantitative lower bound, and the maximum principle to convert these ingredients into uniform $C^2$ bounds for both $u$ and its Legendre dual $u^*$.

What would settle it

The key estimate is the boundary inequality $D_{\xi\xi\beta}u^*(y_0)\le C(C(\varepsilon)+\varepsilon M)\tilde M$. A concrete refutation would be to produce a sequence of strictly convex domains $\Omega$, $\Omega^*$ for which the ratio $D_{\xi\xi\beta}u^*/\tilde M$ is unbounded as $\varepsilon\to0$; then the double tangential estimate fails and the uniform $C^2$ bound of Lemma 7.2 cannot hold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the second boundary value problem for the $k$-Hessian curvature flow is globally well-posed among strictly convex graphs and asymptotically simple: every solution exists for all $t\ge0$ and converges smoothly to a translating solution $u_\infty(x)+at$. The translating solution is characterized by the elliptic equation $\sigma_k^{1/k}(\kappa[M_{u_\infty}])=a\sqrt{1+|Du_\infty|^2}$ together with the boundary condition $Du_\infty(\Omega)=\Omega^*$, where the constant $a$ is determined by the two domains. This extends the known Gauss-curvature-flow results to the whole range $1\le k\le n$, with $k=1$ giving mean curvature flow and $k=n$ giving Gauss curvature flow.

Load-bearing premise

The whole result leans on a previously proved existence theorem for the frozen, time-independent version of the same boundary value problem; if that theorem has a gap, the translating solution used as the limit may not exist and the convergence claim collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The flow admits a unique smooth strictly convex solution for every $t \ge 0$, so the second boundary condition does not cause finite-time singularity formation.
  • As $t \to \infty$, every such solution converges smoothly to a translating solution $u_\infty(x)+at$, so the long-time profile is determined by the two domains alone.
  • The theorem covers every $k$ with $1 \le k \le n$, unifying mean curvature flow and Gauss curvature flow under one boundary-value framework.
  • The dual flow for $u^*$ converges as well, with the same translator read backwards through the Legendre transform, giving a symmetric long-time picture.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the same orthogonal-invariance technique should apply to any other rotation-invariant, concave curvature function with a dual of the same form, so the boundary $C^2$ machinery is likely portable beyond $\sigma_k^{1/k}$.
  • The proof does not estimate the rate at which $u$ approaches $u_\infty+at$; a natural next step is to extract an exponential decay rate from the linear parabolic equation that the difference $W$ satisfies.
  • Because the flow converges to a translator for every admissible initial hypersurface, one could try to use the flow itself as an existence proof for the static problem, bypassing the imported elliptic theorem; the current paper still needs that theorem to identify the limit.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper studies the evolution of strictly convex hypersurfaces by the k-Hessian curvature flow with the second boundary condition Du(Ω)=Ω*, where Ω and Ω* are bounded strictly convex domains with smooth boundaries in R^n. The main result (Theorem 1.1) asserts the existence of a unique smooth strictly convex graphical solution for all t ≥ 0 and its convergence to a translating solution u(x,t)=u∞(x)+at. The proof proceeds through a series of a priori estimates: C0 and C1 bounds, an estimate for the dual quantity w*(F*)^{-1}, strict obliqueness of the boundary condition, and global and boundary C2 estimates obtained with an orthogonal invariance technique. The paper is intended to extend results of Schnürer and Schnürer–Smoczyk for Gauss curvature flow to the k-Hessian setting.

Significance. If the estimates are correct, the orthogonal invariance technique for boundary C2 estimates is a valuable contribution and the main theorem would be a meaningful generalization to k-Hessian curvature flows. The paper is nevertheless heavily dependent on two companion papers by the same authors: the translating solution is imported from Theorem 1.3 of [17], and the convergence is imported from Theorem 1.1 of [18]. Moreover, the 'independent' convergence proof in Section 8 is incomplete as written. These issues make the result conditional rather than self-contained.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 8] The statement 'By the strong maximum principle, the oscillation of W tends to zero as t → ∞' is not a valid inference. The strong maximum principle for the uniformly parabolic operator in (8.1) gives only that sup W is nonincreasing and inf W is nondecreasing, so the oscillation is monotone; it does not force the limit of the oscillation to be zero. To conclude convergence one must show that any ω-limit of W(t_j) as t_j → ∞ is a stationary solution of (8.1) and then use Hopf's boundary point lemma and strict obliqueness of β to prove that this stationary solution is constant. Because the coefficients aij and bi depend on t through u and u∞, a time-independent linear theory cannot be applied without additional compactness and passage-to-the-limit arguments. Thus the convergence half of Theorem 1.1 is not proved independently and the sentence 'This completes the proof...' is premature.
  2. [Section 1 and Section 3, Eqs. (1.9) and (3.1)] The translating solution equation is stated incorrectly. Substituting u(x,t)=u∞(x)+at into the flow equation (1.5) gives σ_k^{1/k}(κ[Mu∞]) = a/√(1+|Du∞|²), since ut = a. However, (1.9) and (3.1) assert σ_k^{1/k} = a√(1+|Du∞|²), which is inconsistent with (3.2), where σ_k^{1/k} = a N·E = a/√(1+|Du|²). The same algebraic error appears in the dual equation in Section 3, where a√(1+|y|²) = (F*)^{-1} conflicts with the following line F* = √(1+|y|²)/a. These equations should be corrected, since the translating solution is the limit object named in Theorem 1.1.
  3. [Section 3] The existence and uniqueness of the translating solution u∞ are imported from Theorem 1.3 of [17], a companion paper by the same authors that is not stated or proved here. The constant a in (3.2) is said to be determined by Ω and Ω*, but no formula or argument is given. Because the convergence conclusion of Theorem 1.1 targets this translating solution, the main theorem is conditional on the correctness of [17]. The manuscript should at least state Theorem 1.3 of [17] and explain how a is fixed, or prove the required elliptic result.
  4. [Sections 6 and 7] Key boundary estimates are deferred to [17]. In the proof of Proposition 6.1, the second inequality (6.4) is not proved; the text says 'The proof for the second inequality (6.4) follows similarly... We refer to [17] for rest of the proof.' Strict obliqueness is a central input for the boundary C2 estimates and for the Hopf lemma argument needed in Section 8. Similarly, the double tangential boundary estimate in Section 7 depends on Proposition 5.2 of [17] and on a direct reference to Step 3 of [17]. These are load-bearing components of the long-time existence proof, so the paper would be materially stronger if these arguments were included or if the dependence on [17] were made explicit and verifiable.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Title] The title contains odd spacing: 'SECOND BOUNDAR Y V ALUE PROBLEM FOR THE HESSIAN CUR V A TURE FLOW' should be 'SECOND BOUNDARY VALUE PROBLEM FOR THE HESSIAN CURVATURE FLOW.'
  2. [Section 6] In the proof of Proposition 6.1, 'of ofh∗ pk' contains a doubled 'of'.
  3. [Section 7] In the definition of Φ below (7.24), 'where B) is a positive constant' should read 'where B is a positive constant.'
  4. [Section 7] The phrase 'Combing (7.3) (7.5) and the definitions' should read 'Combining (7.3), (7.5), and the definitions.'
  5. [Section 8] The sentence 'This completes the proof that any solution of flow (1.8) exists for all times and converges smoothly to a translating solution' appears in the middle of the convergence proof, before the boundary value problem for W is fully stated; it is premature and should be moved to the end.
  6. [Section 5] The proof of Proposition 5.1 invokes strict obliqueness from Lemma 3.1 of [23] before the strict obliqueness estimate is proved in Section 6; the ordering should be clarified to avoid an apparent circularity.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The translating-solution existence and the convergence half of Theorem 1.1 are imported from same-author results ([17] and [18]), and the Section 8 'independent proof' is a gap; the long-time existence estimates themselves are independently derived.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 3, equations (3.1)-(3.2)]
    "By Theorem 1.3 in [17], we know that there exists a unique solution u(x) to (3.2) ... where a is a constant determined by Ω and Ω*, N(X) = (−Du,1)/√(1+|Du|^2), and E = (0, · · ·, 0, 1). This shows the existence of a solution to (3.1) subject to the boundary condition, thus establishing the existence of translating solution to (1.9)."

    The translating solution is the target of convergence in Theorem 1.1. Its existence is not proved in this paper; it is imported verbatim from Theorem 1.3 of [17], a companion preprint by the same four authors. Equation (3.2) is identical to the translating equation (1.9) because aN·E = a/√(1+|Du|^2). Thus the paper's Section 3 'explores' translating solutions only by restating a same-author theorem. If [17] were false or incomplete, the limit object in Theorem 1.1 would not exist. This is load-bearing self-citation, not an independent derivation.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section 8, proof of Theorem 1.1 near (8.1)]
    "Since we have established the existence of the flow and obtained the uniform bounds for the solution, we can apply Theorem 1.1 from [18] for the second boundary value problem of nonlinear parabolic equations to derive the convergence. ... In addition to directly using the convergence theorem from [18], we provide an independent proof ... By the strong maximum principle, the oscillation of W tends to zero as t → ∞, implying that W converges to a constant."

    The convergence half of Theorem 1.1 is supported by Theorem 1.1 of [18], a result sharing the first author with this paper. The purported independent proof is not self-contained: after deriving the linear parabolic problem (8.1) with time-dependent coefficients aij, bi, it asserts that the strong maximum principle forces the oscillation of W to zero. The strong maximum principle only gives monotonicity of sup and inf; it does not imply decay without an additional compactness/omega-limit argument. Because the coefficients depend on t through u and u∞, the time-independent linear theory cannot be invoked as written. Hence the in-paper derivation is a gap, and the convergence conclusion reduces to the cited same-author theorem.

1 more flagged steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Section 6, Proposition 6.1 and its proof]
    "The proof integrates ideas from [28] and [29]. We adapt Lemma 4.2 in [17] from elliptic equations to the flow. A brief outline of the proof is provided below. ... The proof for the second inequality (6.4) follows similarly. Here we use the linear operator L* ... We refer to [17] for rest of the proof."

    The strict obliqueness estimate (6.1) is a key input to the boundary C2 estimates and hence to the long-time existence claim. The proof in this paper only sketches the first inequality (6.3) and explicitly refers to [17] for the second inequality (6.4). Since [17] is a companion paper by the same four authors, this technical load-bearing step is also an imported self-citation, not derived here. It does not make the whole argument definitionally circular, but it adds to the self-citation burden on the central proof.

full rationale

The long-time existence part of Theorem 1.1 is substantially self-contained: Sections 4-7 derive C0, C1, strict obliqueness and C2 estimates, with auxiliary lemmas (Lemma 2.1, Proposition 2.2, barrier functions) taken from [17]. Citing one's own earlier technical lemmas is normal and does not by itself make the argument circular. The circularity burden is concentrated in the asymptotic statement. The translating solution that Theorem 1.1 converges to is not constructed in this paper: Section 3 imports it from Theorem 1.3 of [17], a companion arXiv preprint by the same four authors, and (3.2) is exactly the translating equation (1.9). The convergence assertion is then imported from Theorem 1.1 of [18], whose first author overlaps with the present paper; the attempted independent proof in Section 8 is not a valid derivation, since the strong maximum principle only yields monotonicity of sup/inf and does not force the oscillation of W to tend to zero without an additional compactness/omega-limit argument. Thus the central convergence claim is supported by a chain of same-author citations rather than by an in-paper derivation. This is genuine load-bearing self-citation, but it is not a definitional or fitted-input circularity, and the a priori estimates have independent mathematical content, so the score is 4 rather than higher.

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

The paper has no data-fitted free parameters. The load-bearing inputs are standard PDE tools plus three results from the authors' own prior work: the elliptic existence theorem for the translating solution ([17]), the parabolic convergence theorem ([18]), and the vector-field construction for boundary C^2 estimates ([17]). These self-citations are not inherently circular, but they are not re-derived here, which raises the circularity burden.

assumptions (5)
  • ad hoc to paper Theorem 1.3 of [17]: existence of a unique strictly convex solution to σ_k^{1/k}(Mu)=a N·E with Du(Ω)=Ω*.
    Used in Section 3 to establish the translating solution that is the limit of the flow; [17] is by the same four authors.
  • ad hoc to paper Theorem 1.1 of [18]: a convergence result for second boundary value problems of parabolic equations.
    Used in Section 8 to conclude convergence to the translating solution; [18] shares the first author.
  • ad hoc to paper Proposition 5.2 of [17]: construction of tangential vector field T with |T|^2 ≤ 1+|y|^2.
    The double tangential derivative estimate in Section 7.2 relies on this construction.
  • standard math Standard parabolic maximum principle and Schauder/Evans-Krylov regularity for uniformly parabolic equations.
    Throughout Sections 5-8 for a priori bounds and higher-order regularity.
  • domain assumption Uniform strict convexity and smoothness of the domains Ω and Ω*, and existence of smooth defining functions h, h* with |Dh|=1.
    Assumed in Theorem 1.1 and used in the boundary estimates.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Second boundary value problem for the Hessian curvature flow." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZZOMG44J

@misc{pith2026250523067,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Second boundary value problem for the Hessian curvature flow},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZZOMG44J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.23067}
}
abstract

We investigate the evolution of strictly convex hypersurfaces driven by the $k$-Hessian curvature flow, subject to the second boundary condition. We first explore the translating solutions corresponding to this boundary value problem. Next, we establish the long-time existence of the flow and prove that it converges to a translating solution. To overcome the difficulty of driving boundary $C^2$ estimates, we employ an orthogonal invariance technique. Using this method, we extend the results of Schn\"urer-Smoczyk \cite{Schnurer2003} and Schn\"urer \cite{Schnurer2002} from the second boundary value problem of Gauss curvature flow to $k$-Hessian curvature flow.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [18]

    Huang and Y

    R. Huang and Y. Ye, A convergence result on the second boundary value problem for parabolic equations, Pacific J. Math. 310 (2021), 159-179

    work page 2021

  2. [17]

    Huang, C

    R. Huang, C. Qu, Z. Wang, W. Wo, Hessian curvature hypersurfaces with prescribed Gauss image . arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.09159, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  3. [1]

    Altschuler, L

    S. Altschuler, L. Wu, Translating surfaces of the non-parametric mean curvature flow with prescribed contact angle, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 2 (1994), 101-111

    work page 1994

  4. [2]

    Angenent, P

    S. Angenent, P. Daskalopoulos and N. Seˇ sum, Unique asymptotics of ancient convex mean curvature flow solutions, J. Differential Geom., bf 111(2019): 381-455

    work page 2019

  5. [3]

    Angenent, P

    S. Angenent, P. Daskalopoulos and N. Seˇ sum, Uniqueness of two-convex closed ancient solutions to the mean curvature flow, Ann. of Math. (2) 192 (2020), 353-436

    work page 2020

  6. [4]

    Andrews et al., Extrinsic geometric flows , Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 206, Amer

    B. Andrews et al., Extrinsic geometric flows , Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 206, Amer. Math. Soc., Prov- idence, RI, 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [5]

    Andrews, Gauss curvature flow: the fate of the rolling stones, Invent

    B. Andrews, Gauss curvature flow: the fate of the rolling stones, Invent. Math. 138 (1999), 151-161

    work page 1999

  8. [6]

    Andrews, P

    B. Andrews, P. Guan and L. Ni, Flow by powers of the Gauss curvature, Adv. Math. 299 (2016), 174-201

    work page 2016

Show all 35 references
  1. [7]

    Brendle and M

    S. Brendle and M. Warren, A boundary value problem for minimal Lagrangian graphs , J. Differential Geom., 84 (2010), 267-287

    2010

  2. [8]

    Brendle, K

    S. Brendle, K. Choi and P. Daskalopoulos, Asymptotic behavior of flows by powers of the Gaussian curvature , Acta Math. 219 (2017), 1-16

    2017

  3. [9]

    Caffarelli, L

    L. Caffarelli, L. Nirenberg, and J. Spruck, Nonlinear second order elliptic equations. IV. Starshaped compact Weingarten hypersurfaces, in Current topics in partial differential equations, Kinokuniya, Tokyo, 1986, 1-26

    1986

  4. [10]

    Chen and A

    S. Chen and A. Figalli, Stability results on the smoothness of optimal transport maps with general costs , J. Math. Pures Appl. 106 (2016), 280-295

    2016

  5. [11]

    S. Chen, J. Liu, and X.J. Wang, Global regularity for the Monge-Amp` ere equation with natural boundary con- dition, Ann. of Math. 194 (2021), 745-793

    2021

  6. [12]

    B. Choi, K. Choi and P. Daskalopoulos, Convergence of Gauss curvature flows to translating solitons , Adv. Math. 397 (2022), Paper No. 108207, 30 pp

    2022

  7. [13]

    Ecker and G

    K. Ecker and G. Huisken, Interior estimates for hypersurfaces moving by mean curvature, Invent. Math. 105 (1991), 547-569

    1991

  8. [14]

    Firey, Shapes of worn stones , Mathematika 21 (1974), 1-11

    W. Firey, Shapes of worn stones , Mathematika 21 (1974), 1-11

    1974

  9. [15]

    Huang, On the second boundary value problem for Lagrangian mean curvature flow , J

    R. Huang, On the second boundary value problem for Lagrangian mean curvature flow , J. Funct. Anal. 269 (2015), 1095-1114

    2015

  10. [16]

    Huang and Q

    R. Huang and Q. Ou, On the second boundary value problem for a class of fully nonlinear equations , J. Geom. Anal. 27 (2017), 2601C2617

    2017

  11. [19]

    Huisken, Flow by mean curvature of convex surfaces into spheres , J

    G. Huisken, Flow by mean curvature of convex surfaces into spheres , J. Differential Geom. 20 (1984), 237-266. 23

    1984

  12. [20]

    Huisken, Nonparametric mean curvature evolution with boundary conditions , J

    G. Huisken, Nonparametric mean curvature evolution with boundary conditions , J. Differential Equations 77 (1989), 369-378

    1989

  13. [21]

    Jiang and N

    F. Jiang and N. Trudinger, On the second boundary value problem for Monge-Amp` ere type equations and geo- metric optics , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 229 (2018), 547-567

    2018

  14. [22]

    Kitagawa, A parabolic flow toward solutions of the optimal transportation problem on domains with boundary , J

    J. Kitagawa, A parabolic flow toward solutions of the optimal transportation problem on domains with boundary , J. Reine Angew. Math. 672 (2012), 127-160

    2012

  15. [23]

    Schn¨ urer,Translating solutions to the second boundary value problem for curvature flows, Manuscripta Math

    O. Schn¨ urer,Translating solutions to the second boundary value problem for curvature flows, Manuscripta Math. 108 (2002), 319-347

    2002

  16. [24]

    Schn¨ urer,The Dirichlet problem for Weingarten hypersurfaces in Lorentz manifolds , Math

    O. Schn¨ urer,The Dirichlet problem for Weingarten hypersurfaces in Lorentz manifolds , Math. Z. 242 (2002), 159–181

    2002

  17. [25]

    Schn¨ urer and K

    O. Schn¨ urer and K. Smoczyk,Neumann and second boundary value problems for Hessian and Gauss curvature flows, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e C Anal. Non Lin´ eaire20 (2003), 1043-1073

    2003

  18. [26]

    Trudinger and X

    N. Trudinger and X. Wang, On the second boundary value problem for Monge-Amp` ere type equations and optimal transportation, Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5) 8 (2009), 143-174

    2009

  19. [27]

    Tso, Deforming a hypersurface by its Gauss-Kronecker curvature , Comm

    K. Tso, Deforming a hypersurface by its Gauss-Kronecker curvature , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 38 (1985), 867-882

    1985

  20. [28]

    Urbas, On the second boundary value problem for equations of Monge-Amp` ere type, J

    J. Urbas, On the second boundary value problem for equations of Monge-Amp` ere type, J. Reine Angew. Math. 487 (1997), 115-124

    1997

  21. [29]

    Urbas, The second boundary value problem for a class of Hessian equations , Comm

    J. Urbas, The second boundary value problem for a class of Hessian equations , Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 26 (2001), 859-882

    2001

  22. [30]

    Urbas, Weingarten hypersurfaces with prescribed gradient image , Math

    J. Urbas, Weingarten hypersurfaces with prescribed gradient image , Math. Z. 240 (2002), 53-82

    2002

  23. [31]

    C. Wang, R. Huang, and J. Bao, On the second boundary value problem for Lagrangian mean curvature equation, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 62 (2023), Paper No. 74

    2023

  24. [32]

    C. Wang, R. Huang, and J. Bao, On the second boundary value problem for a class of fully nonlinear flow III , J. Evol. Equ. 24 (2024), Paper No. 52

    2024

  25. [33]

    Wang and L

    Z. Wang and L. Xiao, Entire self-expanders for power of σk-curvature flow in Minkowski space . J. Funct. Anal. 284 (2023), no. 8, Paper No. 109866, 27 pp

    2023

  26. [34]

    Wang and L

    Z. Wang and L. Xiao, Entire convex curvature flow in Minkowski space. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 62 (2023), no. 9, Paper No. 252, 27 pp

    2023

  27. [35]

    Wang and L

    Z. Wang and L. Xiao, Entire σk curvature flow in Minkowski space , Preprint. School of Mathematics and Statistics, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin, China Email address : ronglihuangmath@gxnu.edu.cn School of Mathematics and Statistics, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China Email ...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.