Solutions with large number of peaks for a slightly supercritical nonlinear equation in dimension three

Yixing Pu

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 22 references

Solutions with large number of peaks for a slightly supercritical nonlinear equation in dimension three

T0 review · 2 major / 3 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 A slightly supercritical Dirichlet problem in the 3D unit ball admits positive solutions whose number of peaks grows like $\mu^{-1/2}$.

desk verdict A serious attempt at a real open problem, but the proof has two fatal internal inconsistencies: the reduced system has no positive root and the ansatz scaling is off by a factor of epsilon^4. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.01652 v2 pith:3ZJEZOKZ submitted 2025-06-02 math.AP

Yixing Pu This is my paper

classification math.AP MSC 35J2535J61

keywords peaksolutionssupercriticalequationreductionmethodmulti-peakHénonboundaryconcentrationslightlyexponent

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 extend to dimension three the known construction of multi-peak positive solutions for slightly supercritical equations of Hénon type. Its main theorem states that, if the radial coefficient $K$ satisfies $K(1)>0$ and $K'(1)>0$, then for every sufficiently small $\mu>0$ the problem $-\Delta u=K(x)u^{5+\mu}$ in the unit ball $\mathbf{B}\subset\mathbb{R}^3$, with $u=0$ on $\partial\mathbf{B}$, has a positive solution whose number of strict local maxima is of order $\mu^{-1/2}$. The peaks all approach the boundary as $\mu\to0$, so the solutions are strongly non-radial and become spikier as the exponent approaches the critical value $6$. The result would fill the missing three-dimensional case after the previously known $n\geq4$ construction, and it would produce a family of solutions whose peak count is not fixed but grows with the small parameter.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the $k$-peak ansatz $W=\sum_{i=0}^{k-1}(U_i-U_i^*)$, built from the standard bubble $\Phi(x)=3^{1/4}(1+|x|^2)^{-1/2}$ and its scaled, reflected copies; the reflected terms $U_i^*$ make the ansatz vanish exactly on the boundary. Around this ansatz the paper runs a Lyapunov-Schmidt reduction: it solves the constrained linear problem in a symmetric subspace $H_k$ and then uses energy estimates and degree theory to choose the parameters so that the multipliers $c_1,c_2$ vanish. The pivot is the reduced system $L(\sigma)=0$ and $K'(1)A_1\lambda=A_2L'(\sigma)$, where $L(\sigma)=\sum_{j\in\mathbb{Z}\setminus\{0\}}(1/|j\pi|-1/\sqrt{(j\pi)^2+\sigma^2})$; the claimed positive root $(\lambda^*,\sigma^*)$ of this system is what provides the parameter rectangle around which the degree argument is centered.

What would settle it

Evaluate $L(\sigma)=\sum_{j\in\mathbb{Z}\setminus\{0\}}\bigl(1/|j\pi|-1/\sqrt{(j\pi)^2+\sigma^2}\bigr)$ for a specific positive value such as $\sigma=1$: every term is positive, so the sum is positive, and the same holds for every $\sigma>0$. That calculation makes the equation $L(\sigma)=0$ impossible to satisfy, so the positive root $(\lambda^*,\sigma^*)$ asserted in Section 2.3 and used in Section 4.2 does not exist.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the finite-dimensional reduction method can be made to work in $\mathbb{R}^3$ by building an ansatz with $k=\lfloor\mu^{-1/2}\rfloor$ bubbles centered at the vertices $r m_i$ of a regular $k$-gon near the boundary, together with reflected terms $U_i^*$ so that the whole ansatz $W=\sum_{i=0}^{k-1}(U_i-U_i^*)$ vanishes on $\partial\mathbf{B}$. The reduction leads to a two-parameter system in $(\lambda,\sigma)$, equation (2.21), which the paper asserts has a unique positive root $(\lambda^*,\sigma^*)$; around that root a degree argument is used to make the Lagrange multipliers vanish. At the resulting parameter choice the corrected function $u=W+\varphi$ solves the original equation, and the correction $\varphi$ is controlled in weighted norms so that the $k$ peaks survive as strict local maxima. Because $k=\lfloor\mu^{-1/2}\rfloor$, the number of peaks tends to infinity as $\mu\to0$.

Load-bearing premise

The construction depends on the reduced system (2.21) having a positive solution $(\lambda^*,\sigma^*)$; if the sum $L(\sigma)$ appearing there is positive for every positive $\sigma$, as its definition suggests, no such solution exists and the degree argument in Section 4.2 has no zero to work with.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For every sufficiently small $\mu>0$, the equation $-\Delta u=K(x)u^{5+\mu}$ in the unit ball would have a positive non-radial solution with peak count of order $\mu^{-1/2}$, all peaks lying near $\partial\mathbf{B}$.
As $\mu\to0$, the number of peaks diverges, so the construction would give positive solutions with arbitrarily many boundary peaks accumulating at the critical exponent.
For $K(x)=|x|^\alpha$, the result would give the same conclusion for the Hénon equation, a concrete family of coefficients satisfying the hypotheses.
The symmetry of the ansatz would produce solutions with the dihedral symmetry of a regular $k$-gon, making the non-radial character of the solutions explicit.
The peak count $\mu^{-1/2}$ identifies the correct bubble number in dimension three, differing from the order $\mu^{-1/(n-1)}$ used in the earlier $n\geq4$ construction.

Reading between the lines

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

If, as its definition suggests, $L(\sigma)>0$ for every $\sigma>0$, then the reduced system (2.21) has no positive root, and the degree argument in Section 4.2 would have no zero to surround; this is a direct check a reader can perform.
The normalization of the ansatz bubbles in (2.6) appears inconsistent with the equation $-\Delta U_i=K(r)U_i^5$ and with the scaling used in Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3, because the prefactor $K^{-1/4}(r)\varepsilon^{1/2}$ does not match the powers of $\varepsilon$ and $\mu$ in the nonlinearity.
A repaired construction would need either a reduced system with a genuine positive root or an additional parameter able to cancel the positive lattice sum $L(\sigma)$; numerically evaluating $L$ at a few values of $\sigma$ would test this directly.
If the theorem survives a corrected argument, the method suggests that the boundary-peaked dihedral pattern is stable under small perturbations of $K$ near $r=1$ that keep $K'(1)>0$.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague

The paper is a legitimate attack on a real open problem: the 3D case of Liu-Peng's many-peaked supercritical construction. That's the good news. The bad news is that the proof as written has two load-bearing internal errors, and the central argument collapses.

What's good: the statement is new and would be significant if true. The paper correctly identifies the gap left by Liu-Peng (n≥4) and adopts a sensible ansatz from Hao-Chen-Zhang's critical case. The reduction framework is detailed and the estimates are carefully laid out; the author is clearly in command of the method.

Where it fails. First, the reduced system (2.21) is L(σ)=0 with L(σ) defined in (2.19) as Σ_{j∈Z\{0}} (1/|jπ| − 1/√((jπ)^2+σ^2)). For every σ>0 each term is positive, so L(σ)>0 for all positive σ; the only zero is σ=0. The paper asserts, after (2.21), that this system has a unique positive root (λ*,σ*), but that is false. Consequently the admissible intervals (2.4) are empty, and the degree argument in Section 4.2 has no point to search for. This is fatal.

Second, the ansatz (2.6) sets U_i = K^{-1/4}(r) ε^{1/2} Φ((x-rm_i)/ε). A direct calculation gives −ΔU_i = K^{-1/4}(r) ε^{-3/2} Φ^5, while K(r)U_i^5 = K^{-1/4}(r) ε^{5/2} Φ^5; the claimed identity −ΔU_i=K(r)U_i^5 fails by a factor ε^4. The correct bubble amplitude in R^3 is ε^{-1/2}. The estimates later in the paper (e.g., Lemma 2.2) implicitly use the ε^{-1/2} scaling, so the written ansatz is inconsistent with the rest of the proof. This is not a typo that can be brushed aside; it changes all the power counting.

Neither issue is a matter of disagreement with a consensus; they are internal inconsistencies in the manuscript. So the proof of Theorem 1.1 does not go through.

Is the approach salvageable? Possibly. The reduction scaffolding is standard, and the errors are specific and identifiable. If the author can find the correct reduced system (maybe a different definition of L) and fix the ansatz scaling, the paper could be reshaped. But the present version does not establish the claimed result.

Recommendation: I would not cite this version. It deserves a serious referee only in the sense that a referee could quickly identify these issues; but the result is not proven. I'd send it back for major revision with a clear explanation of these two problems.

Best,

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper claims existence of positive multi-peak solutions to -Δu = K(x) u^{5+μ} in the unit ball B ⊂ R^3 with zero Dirichlet boundary condition, for μ > 0 sufficiently small and radial K satisfying K(1) > 0 and K'(1) > 0. The construction places k = ⌊μ^{-1/2}⌋ peaks on a regular polygon of radius r = 1 - σ μ^{1/2}, uses a reflected bubble ansatz W = Σ_i(U_i - U_i^*), solves a constrained nonlinear problem by a finite-dimensional reduction, and then finds (λ,σ) by a degree argument based on the reduced system L(σ) = 0 and K'(1)A_1 λ = A_2 L'(σ). The theorem states the number of strict local maxima is of order μ^{-1/2} as μ→0.

Significance. If the theorem were established, it would extend Liu-Peng's higher-dimensional supercritical result to dimension three, and it would provide boundary-peak solutions for the Hénon-type equation with a count of peaks growing as μ^{-1/2}. The reduction framework follows earlier work by Wei-Yan and Hao-Chen-Zhang, and the paper contains a substantial amount of technical estimation. However, the two load-bearing issues described below are internal inconsistencies in the construction itself; as written, the proof does not establish the theorem. The significance of the intended result is therefore conditional on a successful repair of the reduced system and the ansatz scaling.

major comments (2)

[§2.3, Eqs. (2.19)–(2.21) and §4.2] The reduced system (2.21) has no positive solution. With L(σ) defined in (2.19) as Σ_{j∈Z\{0}}(1/|jπ| - 1/√((jπ)^2+σ^2)), every summand is strictly positive for every σ > 0 because (jπ)^2+σ^2 > (jπ)^2. Hence L(σ) > 0 for all σ > 0, with the only zero at σ = 0. The assertion after (2.21) that there is a unique positive root (λ*,σ*) is therefore false, and the admissible rectangle in (2.4) is empty. This is not a cosmetic issue: Lemma 4.3 gives ∂_λ J = λ^{-2} A_2 L(σ) + O(μ^{1/2}|ln μ|), so the first component of the reduced gradient cannot vanish for any positive σ in the claimed range. The degree argument in §4.2, which searches for a zero of this vector field in a rectangle around (λ*,σ*), consequently has no object to find. The proof of Theorem 1.1 fails at this point.
[§2.1, Eq. (2.6); §2.4, Lemma 2.2] The ansatz scaling in (2.6) is inconsistent with the claimed identity -ΔU_i = K(r) U_i^5. Writing Φ((x-rm_i)/ε), if U_i = K^{-1/4}(r) ε^{1/2} Φ, then a direct computation gives -ΔU_i = K^{-1/4}(r) ε^{-3/2} Φ^5, while K(r)U_i^5 = K^{-1/4}(r) ε^{5/2} Φ^5; these differ by a factor ε^4. The correct bubble scaling for the critical equation in R^3 is ε^{-1/2}. The inconsistency is not confined to (2.6): Lemma 2.2 and the subsequent estimates use U_i = λ^{1/2} K^{-1/4}(r) Φ(0) / (μ^{1/2} d_i), which is effectively ε^{-1/2} scaling, and Remark 1 also writes ε^{-1/2}. Because the error estimates in Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3 and the energy estimates in Lemma 4.3 are derived from the asserted amplitude, the manuscript's computations do not form a coherent proof of the ansatz's leading-order behavior. If (2.6) is meant to be a typo, the change to ε^{-1/2} must be propagated through all subsequent estimates, which is a substantial revision.

minor comments (3)

[Lemma 2.3, proof] The last sentence of the proof of Lemma 2.3 says 'Combining all these estimates above, we obtain the assertion of Lemma 4.3'; this should refer to Lemma 2.3.
[Eq. (2.19)] The derivative formula L'(σ) = Σ_{j∈Z} σ/(σ^2+(jπ)^2)^{3/2} includes the j = 0 term, which is not the derivative of any term in L(σ) as defined; the sum should be over j ∈ Z\{0}, or L(σ) should be defined consistently. For σ > 0 this does not change positivity, but it is a mathematical mismatch in a definition used in the main system.
[Remark 1 and Eq. (2.6)] Remark 1 states that the solution has the form u(x) = max_i ε^{-1/2} Φ((x-rm_i)/ε) + O(1), which is incompatible with the ε^{1/2} amplitude written in Eq. (2.6). This reinforces the need to correct the ansatz scaling.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the construction imports its reduced-system root from independent prior work [12] and derives the peak count from the chosen ansatz; the identified failures (L(σ)=0 has no positive root; ansatz scaling inconsistent) are mathematical errors, not circular reductions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. Theorem 1.1 is proved by a finite-dimensional reduction: an ansatz with k≈μ^{-1/2} peaks is inserted, the reduced equations (2.21) are obtained from the energy expansion Lemma 4.3, and a degree argument around the root (λ*,σ*) is used to find (λ̂,σ̂) with c1=c2=0. Every load-bearing ingredient is either derived in the paper (Lemmas 2.3, 3.1, 4.3, Propositions 3.2, 4.2) or imported from an external source: the unique positive root of (2.21) is cited to Section 2.1 of Hao–Chen–Zhang [12], which is not the present author's work and is used as an independent lemma; the basic estimates in Appendix A are also quoted from [12]. There is no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, no self-citation chain, and no equation that is defined in terms of the target result. The concerns raised by a careful reader—L(σ)>0 for every σ>0, so (2.21) has no positive root, and the bubble normalization in (2.6) is inconsistent with -ΔU_i=K(r)U_i^5—are internal mathematical errors that would invalidate the construction, but they are not circularity: the proof does not assume the conclusion by definition, and the cited root, if valid, would be independent evidence. Hence score 0.

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

The paper introduces no new physical entities. The main assumed inputs are the existence of the root of (2.21) and the standard kernel characterization. The root is the fragile assumption.

free parameters (2)

λ* and σ* (root of system (2.21)) = No positive solution exists for L(σ) as defined
The paper determines λ* and σ* as the unique positive root of (2.21). Since L(σ)>0 for all σ>0, the equation L(σ)=0 cannot be satisfied, so the parameters are not well-defined.
bubble amplitude scaling ε^{1/2} in (2.6) = N/A
The ansatz uses ε^{1/2}, but the identity -ΔU_i=K(r)U_i^5 forces ε^{-1/2}. Later estimates use ε^{-1/2}. This is a free choice that is internally inconsistent.

assumptions (2)

ad hoc to paper System (2.21) has a unique positive root, as claimed from [12].
The paper cites [12, Section 2.1] for this fact, but the function L(σ) in this paper is strictly positive for σ>0, so the cited result cannot apply directly.
standard math The kernel of the linearized operator is controlled by the symmetries of H_k and characterized by the four-dimensional kernel of -ΔΦ-5Φ^4.
Used in Proposition 3.2 via reference [1, Theorem 2.1]. This is standard in the finite-dimensional reduction method.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Solutions with large number of peaks for a slightly supercritical nonlinear equation in dimension three." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3ZJEZOKZ

@misc{pith2026250601652,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Solutions with large number of peaks for a slightly supercritical nonlinear equation in dimension three},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3ZJEZOKZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.01652}
}

abstract

We investigate the existence of solutions to the semilinear equation with a slightly supercritical exponent in dimension three, \begin{align*} -\Delta u=K(x) u^{5+\mu},\quad u>0 ~\text{in}~ \mathbf{B}, \quad u=0 ~\text{on}~ \partial \mathbf{B}, \end{align*} where $\mu >0$, $\mathbf{B}$ is the unit ball in $\mathbb{R}^3$, $K(x)$ is a nonnegative radial function under suitable condition on $K$. We prove the existence of positive multi-peak solutions for $\mu>0$ small enough. All peaks of our solutions approach the boundary $\partial\mathbf{B}$ as $\mu\rightarrow 0$. Moreover, the number of peaks varies with the parameter $\mu$ as $\mu$ goes to $0^+$. Note that the case $n\geq 4$ was considered by Liu and Peng \cite{LiuPeng2016}.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

22 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

[1]

A Sobolev inequality with re- mainder term and critical equations on domains with topology for the polyharmonic operator

Thomas Bartsch, Tobias Weth, and Michel Willem. A Sobolev inequality with re- mainder term and critical equations on domains with topology for the polyharmonic operator. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 18(3):253–268, 2003

work page 2003
[2]

On the Hénon equation: asymptotic profile of ground states II.J

Jaeyoung Byeon and Zhi-Qiang Wang. On the Hénon equation: asymptotic profile of ground states II.J. Differential Equations, 216(1):78–108, 2005

work page 2005
[3]

On the Hénon equation: asymptotic profile of ground states I.Ann

Jaeyoung Byeon and Zhi-Qiang Wang. On the Hénon equation: asymptotic profile of ground states I.Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré C Anal. Non Linéaire, 23(6):803–828, 2006

work page 2006
[4]

The asymptotic behaviour of the ground state solu- tions for Hénon equation.J

Daomin Cao and Shuangjie Peng. The asymptotic behaviour of the ground state solu- tions for Hénon equation.J. Math. Anal. Appl., 278(1):1–17, 2003

work page 2003
[5]

Asymptotic behaviour of ground state solutions for the Hénon equation.IMA J

Daomin Cao, Shuangjie Peng, and Shusen Yan. Asymptotic behaviour of ground state solutions for the Hénon equation.IMA J. Appl. Math., 74(3):468–480, 2009

work page 2009
[6]

Algorithms and visualization for so- lutions of nonlinear elliptic equations

Goong Chen, Jianxin Zhou, and Wei-Ming Ni. Algorithms and visualization for so- lutions of nonlinear elliptic equations. Internat. J. Bifur. Chaos Appl. Sci. Engrg., 10(7):1565–1612, 2000

work page 2000
[7]

Symmetry and related properties via the maximum principle.Comm

Basilis Gidas, Wei-Ming Ni, and Louis Nirenberg. Symmetry and related properties via the maximum principle.Comm. Math. Phys., 68(3):209–243, 1979

work page 1979
[8]

Supercritical elliptic problem with nonau- tonomous nonlinearities

Francesca Gladiali and Massimo Grossi. Supercritical elliptic problem with nonau- tonomous nonlinearities. J. Differ. Equations, 253(9):2616–2645, 2012

work page 2012

Show all 22 references

[9]

Francesca Gladiali, Massimo Grossi, and Sérgio L. N. Neves. Nonradial solutions for the Hénon equation inRN. Adv. Math., 249:1–36, 2013

2013
[10]

Infinitely many non-radial solutions for the polyharmonic Hénonequationwithacriticalexponent

Yuxia Guo, Bo Li, and Yi Li. Infinitely many non-radial solutions for the polyharmonic Hénonequationwithacriticalexponent. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A,147(2):371– 396, 2017

2017
[11]

Bubble solutions for a supercritical polyharmonic Hénon-type equation

Yuxia Guo and Ting Liu. Bubble solutions for a supercritical polyharmonic Hénon-type equation. Manuscripta Math., 167(1-2):37–64, 2022

2022
[12]

Infinitely many spike solutions for the Hénon equation with critical growth.J

Jianghao Hao, Xinfu Chen, and Yajing Zhang. Infinitely many spike solutions for the Hénon equation with critical growth.J. Differential Equations, 259(9):4924–4946, 2015

2015
[13]

Numerical experiments on the stability of spherical stellar systems

Michel Hénon. Numerical experiments on the stability of spherical stellar systems. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 24:229, 1973

1973
[14]

Existence of positive solutions for the Hénon equation involving critical Sobolev terms.J

Norimichi Hirano. Existence of positive solutions for the Hénon equation involving critical Sobolev terms.J. Differential Equations, 247(5):1311–1333, 2009

2009
[15]

Asymptotic behavior on the Hénon equation with supercritical exponent

ShuJuan Li and Shuangjie Peng. Asymptotic behavior on the Hénon equation with supercritical exponent. Sci. China Ser. A, 52(10):2185–2194, 2009

2009
[16]

Solutions with large number of peaks for the supercritical Hénon equation.Pacific J

Zhongyuan Liu and Shuangjie Peng. Solutions with large number of peaks for the supercritical Hénon equation.Pacific J. Math., 280(1):115–139, 2016. 21

2016
[17]

A nonlinear Dirichlet problem on the unit ball and its applications

Wei-Ming Ni. A nonlinear Dirichlet problem on the unit ball and its applications. Indiana Univ. Math. J., 31(6):801–807, 1982

1982
[18]

Multiple boundary concentrating solutions to Dirichlet problem of Hénon equation

Shuangjie Peng. Multiple boundary concentrating solutions to Dirichlet problem of Hénon equation. Acta Math. Appl. Sin. Engl. Ser., 22(1):137–162, 2006

2006
[19]

Multi-peak solutions for the Hénon equation with slightly subcritical growth.Math

Angela Pistoia and Enrico Serra. Multi-peak solutions for the Hénon equation with slightly subcritical growth.Math. Z., 256(1):75–97, 2007

2007
[20]

On the eigenfunctions of the equation∆u +λf(u) = 0

Stanislav Ivanovich Pohožaev. On the eigenfunctions of the equation∆u +λf(u) = 0. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 165:36–39, 1965

1965
[21]

Non-radial ground states for the Hénon equation

Didier Smets, Michel Willem, and Jiabao Su. Non-radial ground states for the Hénon equation. Commun. Contemp. Math., 4(3):467–480, 2002

2002
[22]

Infinitely many nonradial solutions for the Hénon equation with critical growth.Rev

Juncheng Wei and Shusen Yan. Infinitely many nonradial solutions for the Hénon equation with critical growth.Rev. Mat. Iberoam., 29(3):997–1020, 2013. 22

2013

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

A Sobolev inequality with re- mainder term and critical equations on domains with topology for the polyharmonic operator

Thomas Bartsch, Tobias Weth, and Michel Willem. A Sobolev inequality with re- mainder term and critical equations on domains with topology for the polyharmonic operator. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 18(3):253–268, 2003

work page 2003

[2] [2]

On the Hénon equation: asymptotic profile of ground states II.J

Jaeyoung Byeon and Zhi-Qiang Wang. On the Hénon equation: asymptotic profile of ground states II.J. Differential Equations, 216(1):78–108, 2005

work page 2005

[3] [3]

On the Hénon equation: asymptotic profile of ground states I.Ann

Jaeyoung Byeon and Zhi-Qiang Wang. On the Hénon equation: asymptotic profile of ground states I.Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré C Anal. Non Linéaire, 23(6):803–828, 2006

work page 2006

[4] [4]

The asymptotic behaviour of the ground state solu- tions for Hénon equation.J

Daomin Cao and Shuangjie Peng. The asymptotic behaviour of the ground state solu- tions for Hénon equation.J. Math. Anal. Appl., 278(1):1–17, 2003

work page 2003

[5] [5]

Asymptotic behaviour of ground state solutions for the Hénon equation.IMA J

Daomin Cao, Shuangjie Peng, and Shusen Yan. Asymptotic behaviour of ground state solutions for the Hénon equation.IMA J. Appl. Math., 74(3):468–480, 2009

work page 2009

[6] [6]

Algorithms and visualization for so- lutions of nonlinear elliptic equations

Goong Chen, Jianxin Zhou, and Wei-Ming Ni. Algorithms and visualization for so- lutions of nonlinear elliptic equations. Internat. J. Bifur. Chaos Appl. Sci. Engrg., 10(7):1565–1612, 2000

work page 2000

[7] [7]

Symmetry and related properties via the maximum principle.Comm

Basilis Gidas, Wei-Ming Ni, and Louis Nirenberg. Symmetry and related properties via the maximum principle.Comm. Math. Phys., 68(3):209–243, 1979

work page 1979

[8] [8]

Supercritical elliptic problem with nonau- tonomous nonlinearities

Francesca Gladiali and Massimo Grossi. Supercritical elliptic problem with nonau- tonomous nonlinearities. J. Differ. Equations, 253(9):2616–2645, 2012

work page 2012