Modica type estimates and curvature results for overdetermined $p$-Laplace problems

Jing Wu; Yuanyuan Lian

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 48 references

Modica type estimates and curvature results for overdetermined $p$-Laplace problems

T0 review · 3 major / 3 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 For a bounded C^3 solution of the overdetermined p-Laplace problem with a nonpositive primitive satisfying the stated structural condition, the domain is either a half-space or has strictly negative mean curvature on the boundary.

desk verdict Genuine p-generalization of the RSW rigidity with two clean main lemmas, but the blow-up step applies C^3 machinery to C^{1,α} limits without justification. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.14579 v1 pith:IP3IJCJM submitted 2025-06-17 math.AP

Yuanyuan Lian , Jing Wu This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 35N2535B5035J92

keywords p-LaplacianoverdeterminedboundaryvalueproblemModicatypeestimaterigiditymeancurvaturehalf-spaceQ-functionmaximumprinciple

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proves a Modica-type pointwise bound for the overdetermined p-Laplace problem and shows that the bound has a sharp geometric consequence. For any bounded $C^{3}$ solution and any nonpositive primitive F of the nonlinearity, the quantity Q(x)=((p-1)/p)|∇u|^p+F(u) is bounded above by max{0, F(0)+((p-1)/p)κ^p}; if equality holds at an interior point, then Q is constant, the domain Ω is a half-space, and u depends on one coordinate only. From this, the authors derive the dichotomy that either Ω is a half-space with u parallel, or the mean curvature H(q) is strictly negative at every boundary point. This extends to the full quasilinear p-Laplace range, 1

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Q-function Q=(p-1)/p |∇u|^p+F(u), a Modica-type functional. Lemma 2.1 shows that wherever ∇u≠0, Q satisfies ΔQ + (p-2)/|∇u|^2 ⟨$D^{2}$Q ∇u, ∇u⟩ + p/|∇u|^p f ⟨∇Q, ∇u⟩ ≥ 0, making Q a subsolution of a degenerate elliptic operator and opening the door to the maximum principle. The proof combines a uniform gradient bound built from a barrier comparison (Lemma 2.2), a contradiction argument using blow-up rescaling near the boundary (Proposition 2.4), and a level-set argument that converts Q≡constant into the change of variables v=G(u) with |∇v|=1 and Δ_p v=0, forcing v to be affine and u to be parallel (Proposition 2.7).

What would settle it

Find a bounded domain and a $C^{3}$ solution of (1.1) with a nonpositive primitive F satisfying (1.3)-(1.4) whose boundary contains a point with mean curvature H(q)≥0 while Ω is not a half-space; this would directly contradict Theorem 1.1. Equivalently, exhibit a solution where Q attains its upper bound at an interior point yet u is not parallel, falsifying the rigidity part of Theorem 1.4.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the overdetermined boundary data u=0 and ∂νu=-κ tightly constrain the Q-function: Q is a subsolution of a degenerate elliptic equation wherever ∇u≠0, so the maximum of Q can only sit on the boundary or be forced to a constant. Theorem 1.4 states that Q(x)≤max{0, F(0)+((p-1)/p)κ^p} for all x∈Ω, with rigidity if equality is attained at an interior point (assuming the flatness condition F(u)=O(|u-u_0|^p) when F(u_0)=0 for p>2). Theorem 1.1 then converts this estimate into a clean geometric dichotomy: either Ω is a half-space and u(x)=g(a·x-b) is parallel, or the mean curvature of ∂Ω is strictly negative at every boundary point. In bounded domains this forces nonexistence: there is no nonpositive primitive F satisfying the structural conditions together with a bounded solution.

Load-bearing premise

The proof assumes u is a genuine $C^{3}$ solution up to the boundary, because the maximum-principle argument needs Q to be twice differentiable; natural weak solutions are only $C^{{1,α}}$, and for p>2 an additional flatness condition on F at its zeros is required.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For bounded domains, the structural condition F(0) ≥ -((p-1)/p)κ^p (plus the flatness condition when p>2) is incompatible with the existence of a bounded C^3 solution: no such nonpositive primitive can coexist with a solution.
For unbounded domains, any bounded solution that is not one-dimensional forces H(q)<0 at every boundary point; in particular, if H(q)=0 at some boundary point, the solution must be parallel and the domain is a half-space or a slab.
The Modica estimate Q ≤ max{0, F(0)+((p-1)/p)κ^p} holds uniformly for all bounded C^3 solutions, including the case κ=0, giving a gradient bound that depends only on the data.
Equality at a single interior point propagates to full rigidity: Q becomes constant, the solution becomes one-dimensional, and the domain is identified as a half-space.

Reading between the lines

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

The C^3 regularity assumption is likely stronger than necessary; the argument may extend to the natural C^{1,α} regularity class by an approximation or limiting procedure, since the degeneracy set where ∇u=0 can be handled by the flatness condition.
The flatness condition (1.4) for p>2 is used only when F(u_0)=0; a weaker oscillation estimate of u near the level set where F attains its maximum might replace it, possibly yielding rigidity under milder growth assumptions.
The barrier construction in Proposition 2.4 appears flexible enough to transfer to other degenerate elliptic operators (for instance, k-Hessian equations) where comparison principles hold, giving analogous rigidity dichotomies.
Since the theorem does not classify unbounded domains with H<0 everywhere, a natural next step is to investigate whether such domains genuinely support solutions or whether further rigidity forces additional symmetry.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Here's my read of arXiv:2506.14579. The paper is a serious extension of the Ruiz–Sicbaldi–Wu p=2 result to the p-Laplace operator for every p>1, and most of the hard analysis is solid. The Q-function subsolution lemma (Lemma 2.1) is computed carefully with the right p-dependent coefficients in both regimes, and the new barrier in Lemma 2.2 is a genuine improvement: it avoids the linear decomposition used for p=2 and works uniformly. The geometric dichotomy in Theorems 1.1 and 1.7 is clean, and the proof is self-contained with no suspicious reliance on previous results (the overlap with [36] is structural, not circular).

The soft spot is real, though. In Proposition 2.4, the blow-up limits are only C^{1,α}: Case 1 uses interior regularity to get u∞∈C^{1,α}, Case 2 likewise. But then the strong maximum principle is applied to Q∞ = (p-1)/p |∇u∞|^p + F(u∞) in Case 1 and to |∇u∞|^p in Case 2, both of which require the subsolution inequality from Lemma 2.1. That lemma is proved for C^3 functions, with a Hessian computation, and the paper gives no viscosity or approximation argument to justify applying it to C^{1,α} solutions. In Case 2 the derivative computation (2.22)–(2.23) is exactly the kind of step that needs justification for weak p-harmonic functions. So as written, the central contradiction argument has a gap.

This is not a fatal objection to the result itself—I suspect the gap is fillable with standard viscosity techniques for the linearized p-Laplace operator, or a careful approximation argument—but the paper needs to address it. The referee should ask for that. Also worth mentioning: the C^3 assumption on u is strong and the paper doesn't discuss the natural regularity question; condition (1.4) for p>2 is restrictive but clearly flagged; and the abstract drops the κ≠0 hypothesis that Theorem 1.1 actually requires. The 'small gradient sequence' in Case 1 is used without citation, though that one is standard.

Net: this deserves a serious referee. It is a genuine contribution to the subfield, with one load-bearing gap that is probably fixable. I'd send it to review with a request for a rigorous treatment of the blow-up step. I wouldn't cite it as a clean proof until that's in place.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies the overdetermined p-Laplace problem (1.1) on bounded or unbounded C^1 domains. Its main result, Theorem 1.1, is a geometric dichotomy: for a bounded C^3 solution u, if f admits a nonpositive primitive F with F(0) >= -(p-1) kappa^p / p (plus the flatness condition (1.4) when p > 2), then either Omega is a half-space and u is parallel, or the mean curvature of the boundary is strictly negative. The proof proceeds via a Modica-type estimate for the Q-function Q = ((p-1)/p)|nabla u|^p + F(u). Theorem 1.4 establishes Q <= max{0, F(0) + (p-1) kappa^p / p} and rigidity if equality is attained; Theorem 1.7 converts this estimate into a boundary curvature inequality. The technical core consists of Lemma 2.1 (a differential inequality for Q), Lemma 2.2 (a gradient bound via Harnack and a radial barrier), and Proposition 2.4 (a blow-up argument showing that sup Q cannot exceed the threshold).

Significance. The algebraic core of the paper is sound and represents a genuine extension of the Laplacian results of Ruiz-Sicbaldi-Wu [36] to the full range 1 < p < infinity. The proof of Lemma 2.1 is self-contained and the p-dependent coefficients are correct for both p >= 2 and 1 < p < 2; Lemma 2.2 also gives a cleaner gradient bound than the linear decomposition used in [36]. The geometric statement, splitting the alternative into half-space/parallel solution versus strictly negative mean curvature, is clear and falsifiable. However, the current version does not fully justify the application of the C^3 maximum-principle machinery to the C^{1,alpha} blow-up limits in Proposition 2.4, so the main estimate is not yet established as written. With a rigorous weak, viscosity, or approximation argument for the limiting step, the paper would be a valuable contribution to the overdetermined p-Laplace literature.

major comments (3)

[Section 2, Proposition 2.4, Case 2 (equations (2.19)-(2.23))] In Case 2, the blow-up limit u_infinity is obtained from interior C^{1,alpha} regularity and is in general only C^{1,alpha}; nevertheless the proof differentiates the p-harmonic equation (2.19) classically to derive (2.22), computes (a^{ij}(|nabla u_infinity|^p)_j)_i >= 0 in (2.23), and then applies the strong maximum principle to |nabla u_infinity|^p on the whole connected component Omega_tilde_infinity. All of these steps require second derivatives of u_infinity, or at least a weak or viscosity formulation, and none is supplied. At the maximum point z_infinity one has |nabla u_infinity(z_infinity)| > kappa > 0, so u_infinity is smooth in a small neighborhood of z_infinity, but this does not cover the component Omega_tilde_infinity on which the strong maximum principle is applied. Since this step is what makes u_infinity linear and feeds the barrier contradiction, Proposition 2.4 is not established as written; Theorems 1.4, 1.7, and 1.1 all depend on it. In Case 1 the corresponding issue is mitigated because beta > 0 forces nabla u_infinity(0) != 0 and hence local smoothness near each maximum point, but the paper does not state this explicitly.
[Section 1, Theorems 1.1 and 1.7; Section 2, equations (2.27)-(2.30)] The theorems state that Omega is a C^1 domain, but the mean curvature H(q) appearing in the conclusions and the boundary identities (2.28)-(2.30) require a C^2 boundary, or at least a second fundamental form defined in some specified sense. A C^1 boundary only has a continuous normal, so the statement as written is not well posed. The hypotheses should be changed to C^2 (or the notion of mean curvature for C^1 boundaries must be defined and its use justified).
[Proof of Theorem 1.7, final paragraph] The assertion 'By unique continuation, u is parallel and Omega is either a half-space or a slab' is made without a reference or proof. For p != 2, the p-Laplace equation is degenerate at critical points of nabla u, and the usual unique continuation theorem for uniformly elliptic equations does not apply directly. The argument needs either a precise citation for strong unique continuation for this quasilinear equation or a proof that the already established local affine structure propagates to all of Omega.

minor comments (3)

[Section 2, Proposition 2.7, Step 2] Before defining G(u) via the integral with integrand (alpha_hat - F(s))^{-1/p}, the case alpha_hat = 0 should be explicitly excluded. It is in fact excluded by Step 1, since Q = alpha_hat and nabla u != 0 would be impossible when alpha_hat = 0, but the nonsingularity of the integral should be stated.
[Section 2, Lemma 2.1] In the line treating p >= 2, 'nonnegtive' is a typo for 'nonnegative'. This does not affect the mathematics.
[Section 2, Proposition 2.4, Case 2] After the statement 'up to a rotation and a translation, z_infinity = 0 and u_infinity(x) = a x_n', the paper also uses u_infinity(0) = 0. The reader has to infer that the origin is being moved to the specific zero point z_infinity; this should be said explicitly to avoid confusion about which point is at the origin.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity; core estimates are proved directly and the coauthor-overlap citation [36] is not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are derived in-text rather than imported. Lemma 2.1 proves the Q-subsolution inequality by direct differentiation of (2.6)-(2.7), explicitly noting that although the fact was previously proved in [3, Theorem 2.2], 'we present here another different proof for the sake of completeness.' Proposition 2.4's two contradiction cases use the gradient bound of Lemma 2.2, interior C^{1,alpha} regularity from [13,24,43], independent comparison and Harnack results [9,38], and explicitly constructed barriers; Remark 2.3 stresses that the [36] method 'cannot be used in nonlinear equations directly' and that the authors 'use a barrier function here.' Proposition 2.7's v=G(u) reduction is computed in (2.25)-(2.26). The threshold in (1.6) is the boundary value of Q obtained from u=0 and partial_nu u=-kappa, not a fitted parameter. The overlap citation [36] (J. Wu is a coauthor) is used only as a structural template ('Proceeding as [36, Proposition 3.2]', 'Inspired by ... [36, Proposition 3.1]'), and none of its unproved content is load-bearing. The C^{1,alpha} regularity of blow-up limits raises a possible proof gap, but that is a correctness and regularity concern, not a circular reduction.

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

The paper's contribution is an analytic proof; it introduces no free parameters, no new entities, and only standard regularity, Harnack, and maximum-principle tools as background. The only nonstandard input is the assumed smoothness of the solution and the technical condition (1.4) for p>2.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Existence of a bounded C^3 solution u of (1.1) up to the boundary.
The theorems are conditional on this regularity; the p-Laplace equation alone only guarantees C^{1,alpha} solutions. It enters in Lemma 2.1, which requires u in C^3 to define Q in C^2.
standard math Harnack inequality and local boundedness for quasilinear elliptic equations of p-Laplace type.
Invoked in Lemma 2.2, Eq. (2.13), via Serrin [38, Theorems 5, 6, 9].
standard math Comparison principle for the p-Laplace operator.
Used in Lemma 2.2 to compare the rescaled solution with the barrier v; cited to Damascelli [9, Theorem 1.2].
standard math Interior C^{1,alpha} regularity of weak solutions of p-Laplace equations.
Used in Proposition 2.4 to pass to C^{1,alpha} limits of rescaled solutions; cited to DiBenedetto [13], Lewis [24], Tolksdorf [43].
standard math Strong maximum principle and Hopf lemma for the linearized p-Laplace operator away from critical points.
Applied to the subsolution Q in Lemma 2.1 and Proposition 2.4, and to |nabla u_infty|^p in Eq. (2.23).
domain assumption A bounded solution on an unbounded domain admits a sequence of points with gradient tending to zero.
Used without citation in Proposition 2.4, Case 1, to derive the contradiction. Standard in the literature but should be proved or referenced.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Modica type estimates and curvature results for overdetermined $p$-Laplace problems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IP3IJCJM

@misc{pith2026250614579,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Modica type estimates and curvature results for overdetermined $p$-Laplace problems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IP3IJCJM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.14579}
}

abstract

In this paper we prove Modica type estimates for the following overdetermined $p$-Laplace problem \begin{equation*} \begin{cases} \mathrm{div} \left(|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u\right)+f(u) =0& \mbox{in $\Omega$, } u>0 &\mbox{in $\Omega$, } u=0 &\mbox{on $\partial\Omega$, } \partial_{\nu} u=-\kappa &\mbox{on $\partial\Omega$, } \end{cases} \end{equation*} where $1<p<+\infty$, $f\in C^1(\mathbb{R})$, $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^n$ ($n\geq 2$) is a $C^1$ domain (bounded or unbounded), $\nu$ is the exterior unit normal of $\partial \Omega$ and $\kappa\geq 0$ is a constant. Based on Modica type estimates, we obtain rigidity results for bounded solutions. In particular, we prove that if there exists a nonpositive primitive $F$ of $f$ satisfying $F(0)\geq -(p-1)\kappa^p / p$ (for $p>2$ we also assume that if $F(u_0)=0$, $F(u)=O(|u-u_0|^p)$ as $u\rightarrow u_0$), then either the mean curvature of $\partial \Omega$ is strictly negative or $\Omega$ is a half-space.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

[36]

Modica-type estimates and curvature results for overdetermined elliptic problems

D. Ruiz, P . Sicbaldi, and J. Wu. “Modica-type estimates and curvature results for overdetermined elliptic problems”. In: Commun. Contemp. Math. (Sept. 2024)

work page 2024
[1]

Monotonicity for elliptic equations in unbounded Lipschitz domains

H. Berestycki, L. A. Caffarelli, and L. Nirenberg. “Monotonicity for elliptic equations in unbounded Lipschitz domains”. In: Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 50.11 (1997), pp. 1089–1111

work page 1997
[2]

A symmetry result for an overdetermined elliptic problem using continuous rearrangement and domain derivative

F. Brock and A. Henrot. “A symmetry result for an overdetermined elliptic problem using continuous rearrangement and domain derivative”. In:Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2) 51.3 (2002), pp. 375–390

work page 2002
[3]

A gradient bound for entire solu- tions of quasi-linear equations and its consequences

L. Caffarelli, N. Garofalo, and F. Seg `ala. “A gradient bound for entire solu- tions of quasi-linear equations and its consequences”. In: Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 47.11 (1994), pp. 1457–1473

work page 1994
[4]

D. Cao, J. Wei, and W. Zhan. Symmetry in Serrin-type overdetermined problems

work page
[5]

The soap bubble-theorem and a p-Laplacian overdetermined problem

F. Colasuonno and F. Ferrari. “The soap bubble-theorem and a p-Laplacian overdetermined problem”. In:Commun. Pure Appl. Anal.19.2 (2020), pp. 983– 1000

work page 2020
[6]

A symmetry result for the p-Laplacian equation via the mov- ing planes method

A. Colesanti. “A symmetry result for the p-Laplacian equation via the mov- ing planes method”. In: Appl. Anal. 55.3-4 (1994), pp. 207–213

work page 1994
[7]

G. Dai, P . Sicbaldi, and Y. Zhang. Overdetermined elliptic problems in nontrivial exterior domains of the hyperbolic space. 2024. arXiv:2405.04348 [math.AP]. 15

arXiv 2024

Show all 48 references

[8]

Sign-changing solution for an overdetermined ellip- tic problem on unbounded domain

G. Dai and Y. Zhang. “Sign-changing solution for an overdetermined ellip- tic problem on unbounded domain”. In: J. Reine Angew. Math. 803 (2023), pp. 267–293

2023
[9]

Comparison theorems for some quasilinear degenerate el- liptic operators and applications to symmetry and monotonicity results

L. Damascelli. “Comparison theorems for some quasilinear degenerate el- liptic operators and applications to symmetry and monotonicity results”. In: Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e C Anal. Non Lin´ eaire15.4 (1998), pp. 493–516

1998
[10]

Monotonicity and symmetry of solutions of p-Laplace equations, 1 < p < 2, via the moving plane method

L. Damascelli and F. Pacella. “Monotonicity and symmetry of solutions of p-Laplace equations, 1 < p < 2, via the moving plane method”. In: Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (4) 26.4 (1998), pp. 689–707

1998
[11]

Monotonicity and symmetry results for p- Laplace equations and applications

L. Damascelli and F. Pacella. “Monotonicity and symmetry results for p- Laplace equations and applications”. In:Adv. Differential Equations5.7-9 (2000), pp. 1179–1200

2000
[12]

Serrin’s overdetermined problem and constant mean curvature surfaces

M. Del Pino, F. Pacard, and J. Wei. “Serrin’s overdetermined problem and constant mean curvature surfaces”. In:Duke Math. J. 164.14 (2015), pp. 2643– 2722

2015
[13]

C1+α local regularity of weak solutions of degenerate el- liptic equations

E. DiBenedetto. “ C1+α local regularity of weak solutions of degenerate el- liptic equations”. In: Nonlinear Anal. 7.8 (1983), pp. 827–850

1983
[14]

Remarks on an overdetermined boundary value problem

A. Farina and B. Kawohl. “Remarks on an overdetermined boundary value problem”. In: Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations31.3 (2008), pp. 351–357

2008
[15]

Splitting theorems on complete Riemannian man- ifolds with nonnegative Ricci curvature

A. Farina and J. Oc ´ariz. “Splitting theorems on complete Riemannian man- ifolds with nonnegative Ricci curvature”. In: Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 41.4 (2021), pp. 1929–1937

2021
[16]

A pointwise gradient estimate in possibly un- bounded domains with nonnegative mean curvature

A. Farina and E. Valdinoci. “A pointwise gradient estimate in possibly un- bounded domains with nonnegative mean curvature”. In: Adv. Math. 225.5 (2010), pp. 2808–2827

2010
[17]

Flattening results for elliptic PDEs in unbounded domains with applications to overdetermined problems

A. Farina and E. Valdinoci. “Flattening results for elliptic PDEs in unbounded domains with applications to overdetermined problems”. In: Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 195.3 (2010), pp. 1025–1058

2010
[18]

A pointwise gradient bound for elliptic equa- tions on compact manifolds with nonnegative Ricci curvature

A. Farina and E. Valdinoci. “A pointwise gradient bound for elliptic equa- tions on compact manifolds with nonnegative Ricci curvature”. In: Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 30.4 (2011), pp. 1139–1144

2011
[19]

A symmetry result related to some overdeter- mined boundary value problems

N. Garofalo and J. L. Lewis. “A symmetry result related to some overdeter- mined boundary value problems”. In: Amer. J. Math. 111.1 (1989), pp. 9–33

1989
[20]

Constrained radial symmetry for monotone elliptic quasilinear operators

A. Greco. “Constrained radial symmetry for monotone elliptic quasilinear operators”. In: J. Anal. Math. 121 (2013), pp. 223–234

2013
[21]

Comparison principle and constrained radial symmetry for the subdiffusivep-Laplacian

A. Greco. “Comparison principle and constrained radial symmetry for the subdiffusivep-Laplacian”. In: Publ. Mat. 58.2 (2014), pp. 485–498

2014
[22]

Improvements on overdetermined problems asso- ciated to thep-Laplacian

A. Greco and F. Pisanu. “Improvements on overdetermined problems asso- ciated to thep-Laplacian”. In: Math. Eng. 4.3 (2022), Paper No. 017, 14

2022
[23]

Structure of one-phase free boundaries in the plane

D. Jerison and N. Kamburov. “Structure of one-phase free boundaries in the plane”. In: Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 19 (2016), pp. 5922–5987

2016
[24]

Regularity of the derivatives of solutions to certain degenerate elliptic equations

J. L. Lewis. “Regularity of the derivatives of solutions to certain degenerate elliptic equations”. In: Indiana Univ. Math. J. 32.6 (1983), pp. 849–858

1983
[25]

Lian and P

Y. Lian and P . Sicbaldi. Rigidity results for the capillary overdetermined problem
[26]

On the stability for Alexandrov’s soap bub- ble theorem

R. Magnanini and G. Poggesi. “On the stability for Alexandrov’s soap bub- ble theorem”. In: J. Anal. Math. 139.1 (2019), pp. 179–205. 16

2019
[27]

arXiv: 2503.14215 [math.AP]

arXiv
[28]

Gradient bounds for Liouville’s type theorems for the Poisson equation on complete Riemannian manifolds

A. Ratto and M. Rigoli. “Gradient bounds for Liouville’s type theorems for the Poisson equation on complete Riemannian manifolds”. In: Tohoku Math. J. (2) 47.4 (1995), pp. 509–519

1995
[29]

A gradient bound and a Liouville theorem for nonlinear Poisson equations

L. Modica. “A gradient bound and a Liouville theorem for nonlinear Poisson equations”. In: Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 38.5 (1985), pp. 679–684

1985
[30]

Mean curvature, the Laplacian, and soap bubbles

R. C. Reilly. “Mean curvature, the Laplacian, and soap bubbles”. In: Amer. Math. Monthly 89.3 (1982), pp. 180–188, 197–198

1982
[31]

Radial symmetry for elliptic boundary-value problems on ex- terior domains

W. Reichel. “Radial symmetry for elliptic boundary-value problems on ex- terior domains”. In: Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 137.4 (1997), pp. 381–394

1997
[32]

Solutions to overdetermined elliptic prob- lems in nontrivial exterior domains

A. Ros, D. Ruiz, and P . Sicbaldi. “Solutions to overdetermined elliptic prob- lems in nontrivial exterior domains”. In:J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS)22.1 (2020), pp. 253–281

2020
[33]

A rigidity result for overdetermined elliptic problems in the plane

A. Ros, D. Ruiz, and P . Sicbaldi. “A rigidity result for overdetermined elliptic problems in the plane”. In: Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 70.7 (2017), pp. 1223– 1252

2017
[34]

The p-Laplacian overdetermined problem on Riemannian manifolds

Q. Ruan, Q. Huang, and F. Chen. “The p-Laplacian overdetermined problem on Riemannian manifolds”. In:Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4)203.2 (2024), pp. 647– 662

2024
[35]

Geometry and topology of some overdetermined elliptic problems

A. Ros and P . Sicbaldi. “Geometry and topology of some overdetermined elliptic problems”. In: J. Differential Equations 255.5 (2013), pp. 951–977

2013
[37]

Overdetermined elliptic problems in onduloid- type domains with general nonlinearities

D. Ruiz, P . Sicbaldi, and J. Wu. “Overdetermined elliptic problems in onduloid- type domains with general nonlinearities”. In: J. Funct. Anal. 283.12 (2022), Paper No. 109705, 26

2022
[38]

Local behavior of solutions of quasi-linear equations

J. Serrin. “Local behavior of solutions of quasi-linear equations”. In: Acta Math. 111 (1964), pp. 247–302

1964
[39]

Bifurcating extremal domains for the first eigen- value of the Laplacian

F. Schlenk and P . Sicbaldi. “Bifurcating extremal domains for the first eigen- value of the Laplacian”. In: Adv. Math. 229.1 (2012), pp. 602–632

2012
[40]

New extremal domains for the first eigenvalue of the Laplacian in flat tori

P . Sicbaldi. “New extremal domains for the first eigenvalue of the Laplacian in flat tori”. In: Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 37.3-4 (2010), pp. 329– 344

2010
[41]

A symmetry problem in potential theory

J. Serrin. “A symmetry problem in potential theory”. In: Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 43 (1971), pp. 304–318

1971
[42]

R. P . Sperb. Maximum principles and their applications. Vol. 157. Mathematics in Science and Engineering. Academic Press, Inc. [Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers], New York-London, 1981, pp. ix+224

1981
[43]

Overdetermined Elliptic Problems in Physics

B. Sirakov. “Overdetermined Elliptic Problems in Physics”. In: Nonlinear PDE’s in Condensed Matter and Reactive Flows. Ed. by H. Berestycki and Y. Pomeau. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2002, pp. 273–295

2002
[44]

Symmetry and regularity for general regions having a solution to certain overdetermined boundary value problems

A. L. Vogel. “Symmetry and regularity for general regions having a solution to certain overdetermined boundary value problems”. In: Atti Sem. Mat. Fis. Univ. Modena 40.2 (1992), pp. 443–484. 17

1992
[45]

Regularity for a more general class of quasilinear elliptic equa- tions

P . Tolksdorf. “Regularity for a more general class of quasilinear elliptic equa- tions”. In: J. Differential Equations 51.1 (1984), pp. 126–150

1984
[46]

Remark on the preceding paper of Serrin

H. F. Weinberger. “Remark on the preceding paper of Serrin”. In: Arch. Ra- tional Mech. Anal. 43 (1971), pp. 319–320. (Y. L IAN ) D EPARTAMENTO DE AN ´ALISIS MATEM ´ATICO , U NIVERSIDAD DE GRANADA , C AMPUS FUENTENUEVA , 18071 G RANADA , SPAIN Email address: lianyuanyuan.hthk@...

1971
[47]

On Serrin’s overdetermined problem and a conjecture of Berestycki, Caffarelli and Nirenberg

K. Wang and J. Wei. “On Serrin’s overdetermined problem and a conjecture of Berestycki, Caffarelli and Nirenberg”. In: Comm. Partial Differential Equa- tions 44.9 (2019), pp. 837–858

2019
[2025]

arXiv: 2506.02423 [math.AP]

arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [36]

Modica-type estimates and curvature results for overdetermined elliptic problems

D. Ruiz, P . Sicbaldi, and J. Wu. “Modica-type estimates and curvature results for overdetermined elliptic problems”. In: Commun. Contemp. Math. (Sept. 2024)

work page 2024

[2] [1]

Monotonicity for elliptic equations in unbounded Lipschitz domains

H. Berestycki, L. A. Caffarelli, and L. Nirenberg. “Monotonicity for elliptic equations in unbounded Lipschitz domains”. In: Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 50.11 (1997), pp. 1089–1111

work page 1997

[3] [2]

A symmetry result for an overdetermined elliptic problem using continuous rearrangement and domain derivative

F. Brock and A. Henrot. “A symmetry result for an overdetermined elliptic problem using continuous rearrangement and domain derivative”. In:Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2) 51.3 (2002), pp. 375–390

work page 2002

[4] [3]

A gradient bound for entire solu- tions of quasi-linear equations and its consequences

L. Caffarelli, N. Garofalo, and F. Seg `ala. “A gradient bound for entire solu- tions of quasi-linear equations and its consequences”. In: Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 47.11 (1994), pp. 1457–1473

work page 1994

[5] [4]

D. Cao, J. Wei, and W. Zhan. Symmetry in Serrin-type overdetermined problems

work page

[6] [5]

The soap bubble-theorem and a p-Laplacian overdetermined problem

F. Colasuonno and F. Ferrari. “The soap bubble-theorem and a p-Laplacian overdetermined problem”. In:Commun. Pure Appl. Anal.19.2 (2020), pp. 983– 1000

work page 2020

[7] [6]

A symmetry result for the p-Laplacian equation via the mov- ing planes method

A. Colesanti. “A symmetry result for the p-Laplacian equation via the mov- ing planes method”. In: Appl. Anal. 55.3-4 (1994), pp. 207–213

work page 1994

[8] [7]

G. Dai, P . Sicbaldi, and Y. Zhang. Overdetermined elliptic problems in nontrivial exterior domains of the hyperbolic space. 2024. arXiv:2405.04348 [math.AP]. 15

arXiv 2024