Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 50 references

Pugh's global linearization for the nonautonomous unbounded system with $\mu$-dichotomy via Lyapunov theory

T0 review · 1 major / 4 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 This paper proves a global linearization theorem for nonautonomous systems with unbounded perturbations, under a nonuniform μ-dichotomy, using strict quadratic Lyapunov functions and crossing-time maps.

desk verdict Plausible, significant extension of global linearization to nonuniform μ-dichotomies, but the proof of the key continuity estimate in Lemma 26 has a load-bearing gap that makes the main theorem unproven as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.02855 v2 pith:SL2HLULQ submitted 2025-06-03 math.DS math.CA

Weijie Lu , Yonghui Xia This is my paper
classification math.DSmath.CA MSC 37D2537C8637C60
keywords globallinearizationnonuniformμ-dichotomyLyapunovfunctionstopologicalconjugacyunboundedperturbationnonautonomoussystemsinvariantfoliationscrossingtime
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 Pugh's global linearization theorem from bounded to unbounded perturbations of linear nonautonomous systems. The authors try to prove that if the linear part admits a nonuniform μ-dichotomy, a hyperbolicity condition whose rates are set by a growth function μ(t), and if the nonlinearity is Lipschitz with a sufficiently small rate function, then the nonlinear flow is globally topologically conjugate to the linear flow. This would matter because all earlier global linearization theorems required the perturbation to be globally bounded, which is rarely true in applications. The result is designed to cover exponential, polynomial, and other non-exponential dichotomy rates, with perturbations that may grow linearly in the state but are controlled by a small Lipschitz rate.

What carries the argument

The paper's engine is the family of strict quadratic Lyapunov functions $V(t,x) = -\mathrm{sign}\,U(t,x)\sqrt{|U(t,x)|}$ built from a time-dependent symmetric operator $S(t)$ that integrates the stable and unstable evolutions of the linear part. These functions characterize nonuniform $\mu$-dichotomy: existence of such a Lyapunov function is proved from the dichotomy, and conversely the dichotomy follows from the Lyapunov function together with bounded-growth estimates. The linearization map is then defined through the crossing time $\ell_s(\tau,x_0)$ at which a trajectory of the contractive part reaches the level set $V=-1$, together with the analogous map for the expansive part; these crossing-time maps conjugate the nonlinear flow to the linear flow. A splitting lemma decouples the hyperbolic system into contractive and expansive subsystems before the crossing-time construction is applied.

What would settle it

Inspect the scalar linear equation $x' = -x$ (a nonuniform $\mu$-dichotomy with $\mu(t)=e^t$ and $f=0$): as the initial value $x_0$ tends to 0, the crossing time $\ell_s$ defined by $V(\ell_s, x_s(\ell_s)) = -1$ satisfies $e^{\ell_s} \asymp x_0$, so $\ell_s \to -\infty$ and $\mu(\ell_s)^{\mathrm{sign}(\ell_s)\epsilon} = e^{-\epsilon\ell_s}$ is unbounded for any $\epsilon>0$, directly violating the bound used in inequality (35) of Lemma 26 and showing the continuity argument at $x_0=0$ is not justified as written.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Theorem 13: for the nonautonomous nonlinear system $x' = A(t)x + f(t,x)$ with $f$ a $C^0$-Carathéodory function satisfying $f(t,0)=0$ and a Lipschitz estimate with rate $\varphi(t) = \delta_f \mu(t)^{-1-\mathrm{sign}(t)\theta}\mu'(t)$ for a small constant $\delta_f$, if the linear part admits a nonuniform $\mu$-dichotomy (Definition 8) and if $\theta \ge \max\{\nu,\omega\}$, $\lambda_s < \nu-\theta$, and $\lambda_u > \theta-\omega$, then the nonlinear system is globally topologically conjugate to its linear part. This is the first global linearization result that allows the perturbation to be unbounded while the hyperbolicity is merely nonuniform, subsuming exponential dichotomies and polynomial-type dichotomies as special cases. The autonomous corollary recovers Pugh's theorem with the boundedness hypothesis on the perturbation removed.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the Lyapunov function evaluated at the trajectory's crossing time stays bounded as the initial data goes to zero, a bound the proof asserts without support even though the crossing time escapes to $-\infty$ where $\mu(t)$ collapses to zero.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Corollary 14 provides a global conjugacy for nonuniform exponential dichotomies with unbounded perturbations, a case not covered by earlier bounded-perturbation theorems.
  • Corollary 15 recovers Pugh's autonomous linearization theorem while dropping the boundedness hypothesis on the perturbation; only a small Lipschitz constant is needed.
  • Systems with nonuniform polynomial dichotomies, corresponding to growth functions like $\mu(t)=t+1$ for $t\ge 0$ and its reciprocal for $t\le 0$, are included, so global topological linearization is now available for a wider class of rates.
  • The strict quadratic Lyapunov functions established in Propositions 19 and 23 provide explicit forward-invariant cone estimates that are themselves usable for stability and reducibility questions beyond linearization.

Reading between the lines

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

  • It would be natural to try the same Lyapunov-plus-crossing-time construction in discrete time, extending global unbounded linearization to nonautonomous maps with nonuniform $\mu$-dichotomies.
  • The explicit quadratic Lyapunov operators $S(t)$ could support Hölder or smooth linearization results under additional regularity assumptions on $A$ and $f$, a direction this paper does not explore.
  • The crossing-time formulation suggests a concrete numerical test: approximate the conjugacy by integrating trajectories to the Lyapunov unit sphere and recording the renormalized state; this would also check the continuity of the constructed maps at the origin.
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

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper aims to prove a global topological linearization theorem for nonautonomous ODEs x' = A(t)x + f(t,x) under the assumption that the linear part admits a nonuniform μ-dichotomy and that f is a Lipschitz perturbation with a time-decaying Lipschitz constant φ(t), so that f need not be globally bounded. The proof strategy is to construct global stable and unstable invariant manifolds and foliations (Lemmas 16-17), use them to split the system into contractive and expansive parts (Lemma 24), develop strict quadratic Lyapunov functions for nonuniform μ-dichotomies (Propositions 18-23), and then define linearizing homeomorphisms Fs and Fu via crossing times of the Lyapunov function level sets (Lemmas 26-27). The final conjugacy is obtained by composing these homeomorphisms with the splitting homeomorphism S. The main theorem is Theorem 13.

Significance. If Theorem 13 is correct, it is a meaningful advance: it removes the global boundedness assumption on the perturbation that has been standard since Pugh and Palmer, and it places the result in the framework of nonuniform μ-dichotomies, covering polynomial and other non-exponential growth rates. The paper provides substantial technical machinery, including explicit Lyapunov function constructions, invariant foliations, and a splitting lemma, and it makes the dependence on the dichotomy rates and the smallness of δf explicit. However, the proof as written contains a load-bearing gap in the continuity proof of the stable linearizing map at the origin, so the main theorem is not yet established.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 5, proof of Lemma 26, between (33) and (35)] The proof of continuity of F_s(τ,·) at x0=0 relies on the assertion 'μ(ℓ_s(τ,x0))^{sign(ℓ_s(τ,x0))ε} ≤ B' just before (35), but this bound is not a consequence of the hypotheses and is in fact false for the Lyapunov function used. For 0 < ∥x0∥ < μ(τ)^{-sign(τ)ε}/C, the proof itself shows ℓ_s(τ,x0) < τ; moreover, because V(τ,x0)→0 as x0→0 and V(t,x_s(t,τ,x0)) is strictly increasing in t with limit -∞ as t→−∞, the crossing time ℓ_s(τ,x0) tends to −∞ as x0→0. Since μ(t)→0 as t→−∞ and sign(ℓ_s)=-1 for ℓ_s<0, the factor equals μ(ℓ_s)^{-ε}, which is unbounded whenever ε>0; Proposition 19's strict quadratic Lyapunov function indeed has ε>0. Hence inequality (35) does not follow, and the claimed continuity of F_s at 0 is unproved. Because F_s is one of the two homeomorphisms used to build the conjugacy G = F∘S in Theorem 13, this is a load-bearing gap. The gap appears repairable, for example by a direct estimate of ∥Ψ_s(τ,ℓ_s) x_s(ℓ_s,τ,x0)∥ using the dichotomy rates and the lower bound from Lemma 12, but the present proof is incomplete.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 2, Lemma 12] The exponents sign(t-s) in the statement of Lemma 12 and in its proof refer to an undefined variable s; they should be sign(t-τ). Also, the phrase 'regarding t < τ one can be obtained in a similar way' should read 'the case t < τ can be handled similarly'.
  2. [Section 5, proof of Lemma 26] In the definition of L_s(τ,x0) and in equation (40), the argument of Ψ_s(κ_s, τ) is missing; it should be Ψ_s(κ_s(τ,x0), τ)x0. The same notational omission occurs in the displayed formula for L_s(τ,x0).
  3. [Section 5, proof of Lemma 26] The sentence 'x0 ∈ Rn, 0<∥x0∥<μ(τ)^{-sign(τ)ε}/C =⇒ ℓ_s(τ,x0)<τ' should be phrased as a quantifier: for every x0 ∈ Rn with 0<∥x0∥<μ(τ)^{-sign(τ)ε}/C, we have ℓ_s(τ,x0)<τ. As written, the comma after Rn makes the statement ambiguous.
  4. [Section 3.1, Theorem 13] The statement of Theorem 13 does not explicitly require μ to be differentiable, although φ(t) in (10) and several computations in Section 5 use μ'(t). The authors should state that μ is a differentiable growth rate in the main theorem or define φ(t) without differentiability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the conjugacy is constructed explicitly from the dichotomy and is never assumed; the notable weakness is an unproved bound in Lemma 26, which is a correctness gap rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation of Theorem 13 is not circular. Lemma 24 uses the invariant foliations of Lemmas 16-17 only to decouple Eq. (9), and Lemma 26 then constructs the stable linearizing map by the explicit formula Fs(τ,x0)=Ψs(τ,ℓs(τ,x0))xs(ℓs(τ,x0),τ,x0), with ℓs defined by the level condition V(ℓs,xs(ℓs))=−1; the paper proves the semiconjugacy Fs(t,xs(t))=Ψs(t,τ)Fs(τ) and the invertibility Fs∘Ls=id from this formula rather than postulating a conjugacy. Propositions 18-23 are a genuine two-way characterization between nonuniform μ-dichotomy and strict (quadratic) Lyapunov functions; Proposition 23 derives the dichotomy estimates from Lyapunov inequalities, so it is not an input. The only author-overlapping citation, [45] (Wu and Xia), is invoked as an inspiration for the crossing-time construction, not as a theorem carrying the proof. The real weakness is a missing estimate: in Lemma 26 the text asserts 'μ(ℓs(τ,x0))^{sign(ℓs(τ,x0))ε} ≤ B for any given τ ∈ R and some constant B>0' and uses it in (35) to prove continuity of Fs at 0. For small x0 one has ℓs(τ,x0)<τ and, as x0→0, ℓs→−∞, so μ(ℓs)^{−ε}→+∞ when ε>0 and μ(t)→0; the asserted uniform bound is not justified and may fail. This affects the proof of the homeomorphism property, but it is an unproved technical bound, not a reduction of the conclusion to the hypothesis. Hence no circular step is exhibited; the paper is incomplete at that point but not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The proof pulls standard ODE tools (Gronwall, Banach fixed point, Carathéodory theory) and the Lyapunov-Perron framework from the prior literature. The new content is the application to nonuniform μ-dichotomies with unbounded perturbations. No new physical entities are introduced. The main parametric burden is the choice of ϵ and η inside the Lyapunov construction, and the smallness of δf.

free parameters (4)
  • δf (smallness constant)
    The perturbation class Af requires φ(t)=δf μ(t)^{-1-sign(t)θ} μ'(t) with δf small; the proof needs δf small enough for contraction and for λu > δf μ^{-signθ}. This is an input smallness hypothesis, not fitted, but central to the proof.
  • η = 0<η<min{-λs,λu}
    Chosen by hand in Proposition 19/20 to construct the quadratic Lyapunov function S(t); the central estimate (13)-(14) depends on this choice.
  • ϵ = claimed to satisfy μ(τ)^{-sign(τ)ϵ} = μ(|τ|)^{-λ̃}
    Needed to make the constructed V satisfy condition (3) of Definition 3; the paper's stated identity is generally false and the choice of ϵ is not rigorously established.
  • θ
    Bounded-growth rate in (8); the theorem requires θ ≥ max{ν,ω} and upper bounds θ < ν-λs, θ < λu+ω. It is part of the hypothesis, not fitted.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Banach fixed point theorem
    Used in Lemmas 16, 17 and 24 to obtain unique fixed points for Lyapunov-Perron and splitting operators.
  • standard math Gronwall's inequality
    Used in Lemma 12 and Appendix A to derive solution estimates.
  • standard math Carathéodory existence and uniqueness theory for ODEs with globally Lipschitz right-hand sides
    Assumed throughout to define global flows x(t,τ,x0) forward and backward.
  • domain assumption Lyapunov-Perron method for invariant manifolds/foliations
    The paper proves Lemmas 16 and 17 via this standard method, but relies on the known framework from [5,11,46].
  • domain assumption Nonuniform μ-dichotomy and μ-bounded growth hypotheses (Definition 8 and 10)
    These are the central hypotheses of Theorem 13; the result is conditional on them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Pugh's global linearization for the nonautonomous unbounded system with $\mu$-dichotomy via Lyapunov theory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SL2HLULQ

@misc{pith2026250602855,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Pugh's global linearization for the nonautonomous unbounded system with $\mu$-dichotomy via Lyapunov theory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SL2HLULQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.02855}
}
abstract

The classical global linearization theorem for autonomous system given in [C. Pugh, Amer. J. Math., 91 (1969) 363-367] requires that nonlinear system with hyperbolicity satisfies boundedness and Lipschitz continuity.In this paper, we establish an {\em unbounded} global linearization theorem for nonautonomous systems subject to unbounded Lipschitz perturbations, under the assumption that the linear system admits a nonuniform $\mu$-dichotomy (more general than classical exponential dichotomy). To this end, we first develop a comprehensive Lyapunov function framework for systems exhibiting nonuniform $\mu$-dichotomy. Subsequently, we establish a characterization of nonuniform $\mu$-dichotomy in terms of strict quadratic Lyapunov functions. Building upon these theoretical foundations, we then employ these Lyapunov functions to derive a linearization result under the nonuniform $\mu$-dichotomy assumption. In the proof, we give a splitting lemma for nonuniform $\mu$-dichotomy to decouple hyperbolic system into a contractive system and an expansive system. Then we construct a transformation to linearize contractive/expansive system, which is defined by the crossing time with respect to the unit sphere.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Backes, D

    L. Backes, D. Dragiˇ cevi´ c, K. Palmer, Linearization and H¨ older continuity for nonautonomous systems, J. Differential Equations, 297 (2021) 536–574

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Backes, D

    L. Backes, D. Dragiˇ cevi´ c, W.M. Zhang, Smooth linearization of nonautonomous dynamics under polynomial behaviour, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2210.04804

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2210.04804

  3. [3]

    Barreira, D

    L. Barreira, D. Dragiˇ cevi´ c, C. Valls, Lyapunov functions for strong exponential contractions,J. Differential Equations, 255 (2013) 449–468

    work page 2013

  4. [4]

    Barreira, Y

    L. Barreira, Y. Pesin, Nonuniform Hyperbolicity: Dynamics of Systems with Nonzero Lyapunov Exponents, Encyclopedia Math. Appl., vol. 115, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007

    work page 2007

  5. [5]

    Barreira, C

    L. Barreira, C. Silva, C. Valls, Integral stable manifolds in Banach spaces, J. Lond. Math. Soc. , 77 (2008) 443–464

    work page 2008

  6. [6]

    Barreira, C

    L. Barreira, C. Valls, Stability of nonautonomous differential equations, Lect. Notes Math., Springer, Berlin, 2008

    work page 2008

  7. [7]

    Barreira, C

    L. Barreira, C. Valls, Quadratic Lyapunov functions and nonuniform exponential dichotomies, J. Differential Equations, 246 (2009) 1235–1263

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    Barreira, C

    L. Barreira, C. Valls, A Grobman-Hartman theorem for general nonuniform exponential dichotomies,J. Funct. Anal., 257 (2009) 1976–1993

    work page 2009

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    Barreira, C

    L. Barreira, C. Valls, Smooth linearization under nonuniform hyperbolicity, Rev. Mat. Iberoam. , 37 (2021) 1803–1860. 34 WEIJIE LU, YONGHUI XIA

    2021

  2. [10]

    Bates, K

    P. Bates, K. Lu, A Hartman-Grobman theorem for the Cahn-Hilliard and phase-field equations, J. Dynam. Differential Equations, 6 (1994) 101–145

    1994

  3. [11]

    Bento, C

    A. Bento, C. Silva, Stable manifolds for nonuniform polynomial dichotomies, J. Funct. Anal. , 257 (2009) 122–148

    2009

  4. [12]

    Bento, C

    A. Bento, C. Silva, Generalized nonuniform dichotomies and local stable manifolds, J. Dynam. Differential Equations, 25 (2013) 1139–1158

    2013

  5. [13]

    Bhatia, G

    N. Bhatia, G. Szeg¨ o, Stability Theory of Dynamical Systems, Grundlehren Math. Wiss., vol. 161, Springer, 1970

    1970

  6. [14]

    Casta˜ neda, G

    ´A. Casta˜ neda, G. Robledo, Dichotomy spectrum and almost topological conjugacy on nonautonomous un- bounded difference systems, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. , 38 (2018) 2287–2304

    2018

  7. [15]

    Casta˜ neda, N

    ´A. Casta˜ neda, N. Jara, A generalization of Siegmund’s normal forms theorem to systems withµ-dichotomies, J. Differential Equations , 410 (2024) 449–480

    2024

  8. [16]

    Casta˜ neda, C

    ´A. Casta˜ neda, C. Gallegos, N. Jara, Discrete µ-dichotomy spectrum: beyond uniformity and new insights, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2501.04676

    doi arXiv

  9. [17]

    Casta˜ neda, R

    N. Casta˜ neda, R. Rosa, Optimal Estimates for the Uncoupling of Differential Equations, J. Dynam. Differ- ential Equations , 8 (1996) 103–139

    1996

  10. [18]

    X. Chen, J. Hale, B. Tan, Invariant foliations for C1 semigroups in Banach spaces, J. Differential Equations , 139 (1997) 283–318

    1997

  11. [19]

    S. Chow, X. Lin, K. Lu, Smooth invariant foliations in infinite-dimensional spaces, J. Differential Equations , 94 (1991) 266–291

    1991

  12. [20]

    Coppel, Dichotomies in Stability Theory, Lecture Notes in Math., vol

    W. Coppel, Dichotomies in Stability Theory, Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 629, Springer, 1978

    1978

  13. [21]

    Dragiˇ cevi´ c, A.L

    D. Dragiˇ cevi´ c, A.L. Sasu, B. Sasu, On polynomial dichotomies of discrete nonautonomous systems on the half-line, Carpath. J. Math. , 38 (2022) 663–680

    2022

  14. [22]

    Dragiˇ cevi´ c, C

    D. Dragiˇ cevi´ c, C. Silva, Generalized dichotomies via time rescaling, arXiv.2501.06630

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    Dragiˇ cevi´ c, W.N

    D. Dragiˇ cevi´ c, W.N. Zhang, W.M. Zhang, Smooth linearization of nonautonomous difference equations with a nonuniform dichotomy, Math. Z. , 292 (2019) 1175–1193

    2019

  16. [24]

    Dragiˇ cevi´ c, W.N

    D. Dragiˇ cevi´ c, W.N. Zhang, W.M. Zhang, Smooth linearization of nonautonomous differential equations with a nonuniform dichotomy, Proc. London Math. Soc. , 121 (2020) 32–50

    2020

  17. [25]

    Gallegos, R

    C. Gallegos, R. Grau, J. Mesquita, Stability, asymptotic and exponential stability for various types of equa- tions with discontinuous solutions via Lyapunov functionals, J. Differential Equations , 299 (2021) 256–283

    2021

  18. [26]

    Gallegos, G

    C. Gallegos, G. Robledo, Criterion for exponential dichotomy of periodic generalized linear differential equa- tions and an application to admissibility, J. Dynam. Differential Equations , 36 (2024) 3949–3965

    2024

  19. [27]

    Huerta, Linearization of a nonautonomous unbounded system with nonuniform contraction: A spectral approach, Discrete Contin

    I. Huerta, Linearization of a nonautonomous unbounded system with nonuniform contraction: A spectral approach, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. , 40 (2020) 5571–5590

    2020

  20. [28]

    N. Jara, C. Gallegos, Spectrum invariance dilemma for nonuniformly kinematically similar systems, Math. Ann., 391 (2025) 2255–2280

    2025

  21. [29]

    LaSalle, S

    J. LaSalle, S. Lefschetz, Stability by Liapunov’s Direct Method, with Applications, Math. Sci. Eng., vol. 4, Academic Press, 1961

    1961

  22. [30]

    Lin, Hartman’s linearization on nonautonomous unbounded system, Nonlinear Anal., 66 (2007) 38–50

    F. Lin, Hartman’s linearization on nonautonomous unbounded system, Nonlinear Anal., 66 (2007) 38–50

    2007

  23. [31]

    Lin, Algebraic dichotomies with an application to the stability of Riemann solutions of conservation laws, J

    X.B. Lin, Algebraic dichotomies with an application to the stability of Riemann solutions of conservation laws, J. Differential Equations , 2009, 247(11): 2924-2965

    2009

  24. [32]

    Lu, A Hartman-Grobman theorem for scalar reaction-diffusion equations, J

    K. Lu, A Hartman-Grobman theorem for scalar reaction-diffusion equations, J. Differential Equations , 93 (1991) 364-394

    1991

  25. [33]

    K. Lu, W.N. Zhang, W.M. Zhang, C1 Hartman Theorem for random dynamical systems, Adv. Math. , 375 (2020) 107375

    2020

  26. [34]

    Lyapunov, The General Problem of the Stability of Motion, Taylor & Francis, 1992

    A. Lyapunov, The General Problem of the Stability of Motion, Taylor & Francis, 1992

    1992

  27. [35]

    Ma ˘lzel’, On stability of solutions of systems of differential equations, Ural

    A. Ma ˘lzel’, On stability of solutions of systems of differential equations, Ural. Politehn. Inst. Trudy, 51 (1954) 20–50

    1954

  28. [36]

    Mitropolsky, A

    Yu. Mitropolsky, A. Samoilenko, V. Kulik, Dichotomies and Stability in Nonautonomous Linear Systems, Stability Control Theory Methods Appl., vol. 14, Taylor & Francis, 2003

    2003

  29. [37]

    Oseledets, A multiplicative ergodic theorem

    V. Oseledets, A multiplicative ergodic theorem. Liapunov characteristic numbers for dynamical systems, Trans. Moscow Math. Soc., 19 (1968) 197–221

    1968

  30. [38]

    Palmer, A generalization of Hartman’s linearization theorem, J

    K. Palmer, A generalization of Hartman’s linearization theorem, J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 41 (1973) 753–758

    1973

  31. [39]

    Perron, ¨Uber stabilit¨ at und asymptotisches verhalten der integrale von differentialgleichungssystemen, Math

    O. Perron, ¨Uber stabilit¨ at und asymptotisches verhalten der integrale von differentialgleichungssystemen, Math. Z. , 29 (1929) 129–160

    1929

  32. [40]

    Pesin, Families of invariant manifolds that corresponding to nonzero characteristic exponents, Math

    Y. Pesin, Families of invariant manifolds that corresponding to nonzero characteristic exponents, Math. USSR-Izv., 10 (1976) 1261–1305

    1976

  33. [41]

    Pugh, On a theorem of P

    C. Pugh, On a theorem of P. Hartman, Amer. J. Math. , 91 (1969) 363–367. PUGH’S GLOBAL LINEARIZATION FOR NONAUTONOMOUS UNBOUNDED SYSTEMS 35

    1969

  34. [42]

    G. Sell, Y. You, Dynamics of Evolutionary Equations, Appl. Math. Sci., vol. 143, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2002

    2002

  35. [43]

    Silva, Nonuniform µ-dichotomy spectrum and kinematic similarity, J

    C. Silva, Nonuniform µ-dichotomy spectrum and kinematic similarity, J. Differential Equations , 375 (2023) 618–652

    2023

  36. [44]

    Tan, σ-H¨ older continuous linearization near hyperbolic fixed points inRn, J

    B. Tan, σ-H¨ older continuous linearization near hyperbolic fixed points inRn, J. Differential Equations , 162 (2000) 251–269

    2000

  37. [45]

    M. Wu, Y. Xia, Linearization of a nonautonomous unbounded system with hyperbolic linear part: A spectral approach, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. , 44 (2024) 491–522

    2024

  38. [46]

    Zhang, Generalized exponential dichotomies and invariant manifolds for differential equations, Adv

    W.N. Zhang, Generalized exponential dichotomies and invariant manifolds for differential equations, Adv. Math. Chin. , 22 (1993) 1–45

    1993

  39. [47]

    Zhang, W.N

    W.M. Zhang, W.N. Zhang, α-H¨ older linearization of hyperbolic diffeomorphisms with resonance, Ergod. Theor. Dyn. Syst. , 36 (2016) 310–334

    2016

  40. [48]

    Zhang, W.N

    W.M. Zhang, W.N. Zhang, W. Jarczyk, Sharp regularity of linearization for C1,1 hyperbolic diffeomorphisms, Math. Ann., 358 (2014) 69–113

    2014

  41. [49]

    Zhang, K

    W.M. Zhang, K. Lu, W.N. Zhang, Differentiability of the conjugacy in the Hartman-Grobman theorem, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 369 (2017) 4995–5030

    2017

  42. [50]

    L. Zhou, K. Lu, W.N. Zhang, Equivalences between nonuniform exponential dichotomy and admissibility, J. Differential Equations, 262 (2017) 682–747. Weijie Lu, School of Mathematics Science, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321004, China Email address : luwj@zjnu.edu.cn Yongh...

    2017

Pith tools

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