Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 48 references

Existence and multiplicity of normalized solutions to a large class of elliptic equations on bounded domains with general boundary conditions

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For any sufficiently small prescribed L² mass, normalized solutions exist on bounded domains—and odd nonlinearities give arbitrarily many.

desk verdict Genuinely useful perturbation-method core for Dirichlet/Neumann, but Lemma 3.1 and Theorem 5.3 have fixable errors that need a thorough revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.04624 v1 pith:ZFKPIFIC submitted 2025-07-07 math.AP

Claudianor O. Alves , Zhentao He , Chao Ji This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35A1535J2535Q55
keywords BoundeddomainNormalizedsolutionsGeneralNeumannboundaryconditionMultiplicityPerturbationmethodNonlinearSchrödingerequationPrescribedL2norm
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 establishes a small-mass threshold theorem for nonlinear Schrödinger-type equations on smooth bounded domains with general boundary conditions. If the nonlinearity $f$ is continuous and satisfies either the growth-plus-superlinearity conditions (f1)–(f3) or the growth condition together with the Ambrosetti–Rabinowitz condition (f1)+(f4), then for every sufficiently small prescribed mass $\mu$ the Dirichlet problem $-\Delta u=\lambda u+f(u)$, $u\in H^1_0(\Omega)$, $\int_\Omega u^2\,dx=\mu$ has a solution with $\lambda\in[0,\lambda_{1,0,0}]$. Under oddness of $f$, the same argument yields at least $m$ distinct solutions for any chosen $m$ once $\mu$ is small enough. The method transfers to the Robin problem and, modulo the two constant solutions, to the Neumann problem; the paper states these are the first multiplicity results for normalized Neumann solutions in this setting. Because the proof uses a penalized unconstrained functional rather than scaling or Pohozaev-type identities, it also covers exponential-critical growth in $\mathbb{R}^2$, magnetic fields, biharmonic equations, and Choquard equations.

What carries the argument

The machine is the penalized functional $E_{r,\mu}$ on the open set $U_\mu$, together with the barrier $H_{r,\mu}(u)=(\int_\Omega|u|^2\,dx/\mu)^r/(1-\int_\Omega|u|^2\,dx/\mu)$. As $r$ grows, the barrier uniformly vanishes on compact subsets of $U_\mu$ but still prevents Cerami sequences from crossing the mass sphere, and the truncated functional $J_{r,\mu}$ is $C^1$ on the whole space. The companion result that carries the argument is Lemma 2.5, a nonexistence statement for low-energy critical points of the unconstrained functional whose mass is smaller than a threshold $\mu_0$; it is proved by combining the growth bound (f1) with the Gagliardo–Nirenberg inequality (2.1) and, in the Ambrosetti–Rabinowitz case, an energy–norm estimate. This lemma is what distinguishes genuine normalized solutions from limits that have lost mass. For multiplicity, the same penalized functional is fed into the Fountain theorem on the subspaces $Y_j$ and $Z_j$, producing levels $c_{r,j}$ that separate at large enough eigenvalues.

What would settle it

To settle whether the central claim is right, look for a solution of $-\Delta u=f(u)$ in $H^1_0(\Omega)$ with $E(u)\le\lambda_{1,0,0}/2$ and $\int_\Omega u^2\,dx=\nu$ for some $\nu<\mu_0$: a single such critical point under (f1)–(f3) contradicts Lemma 2.5. Concretely, for $f(t)=|t|^{p-2}t$ with $2+4/N<p<2^*$ on the unit ball, one can check numerically whether branches of small-mass, low-energy solutions exist for arbitrarily small $\nu$; the theorem predicts they do not.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the constrained problem can be solved by a two-step limit. For $r>1$, define $E_{r,\mu}(u)=\frac12\int_\Omega|\nabla u|^2\,dx-\int_\Omega F(u)\,dx-H_{r,\mu}(u)$ on $U_\mu=\{u\in H^1_0(\Omega):\int_\Omega|u|^2\,dx<\mu\}$, where $H_{r,\mu}(u)=f_r(\int_\Omega|u|^2\,dx/\mu)$ with $f_r(s)=s^r/(1-s)$; the barrier $H$ blows up as the mass approaches $\mu$, and after a smooth truncation the functional extends to all of $H^1_0(\Omega)$ with value $-1$ outside $U_\mu$. Mountain-pass arguments produce Cerami sequences whose levels $c_r$ increase with $r$ and stay below $\mu\lambda_{1,0,0}/2$, and the limit as $r\to\infty$ is a critical point of the original unconstrained functional with mass at most $\mu$. The key lemma is that under (f1)–(f3) or (f1)+(f4) there is a mass threshold $\mu_0$ below which no low-energy critical point of the unconstrained problem exists; this rules out loss of mass and forces the limiting solution to sit exactly on the sphere $\int_\Omega|u|^2\,dx=\mu$, with Lagrange multiplier $\lambda\in[0,\lambda_{1,0,0}]$. The same scheme, with Sobolev-trace inequalities replacing the usual Gagliardo–Nirenberg estimate, yields the Robin and Neumann theorems, with the caveat that constant functions solve the Neumann problem automatically.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is Lemma 2.5's uniform nonexistence of low-energy unconstrained critical points with mass below $\mu_0$; if such a critical point with mass $\nu<\mu_0$ existed, the limiting solution from the penalized family could converge to it, and the exact prescribed mass $\mu$ would never be attained.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any fixed smooth bounded domain and any continuous $f$ in the stated classes, there is a threshold $\mu_0$ such that all masses below it are admissible; no differentiability, monotonicity trick, or blow-up analysis is needed.
  • On a domain rescaled to have small first eigenvalue, a fixed prescribed mass $\mu$ becomes admissible: the corollary gives existence once $\lambda_{1,0,0}$ is small enough, so each fixed $\mu$ is solved by taking $\Omega$ large.
  • Odd $f$ produces arbitrarily many distinct normalized solutions for sufficiently small $\mu$ for the Dirichlet and Robin problems; for the Neumann problem the count is $m-1$ after excluding the two constant solutions.
  • The same penalized-functional scheme is claimed to cover Trudinger–Moser critical exponential growth in $\mathbb{R}^2$, magnetic Schrödinger operators, biharmonic problems, and Choquard equations.
  • On a star-shaped domain, with (f1),(f2),(f4) and $q>2+4/N$, the solution can be chosen to be a ground state and is a local minimizer on the mass sphere.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: because the proof never uses Pohozaev-type identities except in the ground-state section, the penalized-mass mechanism should transplant to systems with prescribed sums of masses and to sign-changing or non-autonomous nonlinearities, as long as the small-mass nonexistence lemma can be adapted.
  • Editorial inference: the explicit threshold under (f1)+(f4) suggests that a quantitative version of the (f1)–(f3) threshold should be derivable from the constants $K_2$, $K_p$, $p$, and $\lambda_{1,0,0}$ alone; if it is, the smallness condition becomes checkable rather than existential.
  • Editorial inference: the Neumann theorem leaves open whether the new solutions differ from constants; a Morse-index computation at small $\mu$, or a stability analysis of the constant states, would be the natural way to decide this.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a perturbation method, in the style of Buffoni–Esteban–Séré, for normalized solutions of semilinear elliptic problems with prescribed L2 mass on bounded domains under Dirichlet, Robin, and Neumann boundary conditions. The main Dirichlet results (Theorems 1.1, 1.2, 1.4) assert existence and multiplicity of solutions (u,λ) with λ in a low-energy interval, for sufficiently small mass μ, under either (f1)–(f3) or (f1)+(f4), with an oddness assumption for multiplicity. Analogous Robin results (Theorems 1.5, 1.6) and Neumann multiplicity (Theorem 1.7) are claimed, together with a ground-state theorem (Theorem 5.3) and several further applications to exponential-critical, magnetic, biharmonic, and Choquard equations. The core Dirichlet argument is mostly written out: a penalized functional on a truncated mass ball, compactness of Cerami sequences, a nonexistence lemma ruling out mass loss, and a mountain-pass/Fountain scheme.

Significance. If the stated results are correct, the paper would provide the first multiplicity theorems for normalized Neumann solutions in this generality and would extend normalized-solution theory on bounded domains to general nonlinearities with no differentiability assumptions. The paper also has useful expository content: the appendix gives a self-contained proof of the mountain-pass theorem for C1 functionals on open sets, and the explicit μ-thresholds in Theorem 1.2 and Corollary 1.3 are concrete. However, the Robin section and the ground-state section currently contain load-bearing errors, so the significance of the contribution depends on repairs that are local but not merely cosmetic.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3, Lemma 3.1] Lemma 3.1 is false as stated. Under (f4) and (g2) we have f(0)=g(0)=0, hence u=0 satisfies E'(0)=0 and E(0)=0≤M μ**, so the lemma's conclusion that no such u exists is contradicted by u=0. The proof divides by ||u||^2 and implicitly assumes u≠0. The statement that is actually needed for Theorem 1.5 is the Robin analogue of Lemma 2.5: for small ν>0 there is no nonzero critical point with ∫u^2=ν and E(u)≤M μ**. The current statement must be revised and the proof must treat u=0 separately; as written, Theorem 1.5 is not proven.
  2. [Section 3, proof of Lemma 3.1] The displayed estimates in the proof of Lemma 3.1 contain incorrect exponents. From ||u||^2 ≤ 2qM μ**/(q−2) one obtains ||u||^{p−2} ≤ (2qM μ**/(q−2))^{(p−2)/2}, not the displayed (2qM μ**/(q−2))^{p−2}; likewise for the exponent l−2 instead of l−2, and the coefficient C'_{p,Ω} should be C'_{l,Ω}. The existence of a small μ** can still be recovered after correcting the exponents, but the inequalities as written are invalid.
  3. [Section 5, Lemma 5.4 and Theorem 5.3] The quantity s := 2λ_{1,0,0}(q−2*)/(2*(q−2−4/N)) is not necessarily positive under the stated assumption q>2+4/N. For example, when N=3, q=4 satisfies q>2+4/N but q<2*=6, so the numerator is negative while the denominator is positive; the same possibility occurs for other N. The proof of Lemma 5.4 only yields the claimed lower bound for λ_u when q>2*, because the coefficient (1/2* − 1/q) must be nonnegative. When q<2*, the derived bound is negative and cannot support the definition of s as an equivalent-norm shift. Theorem 5.3 therefore needs an additional hypothesis such as q>2*, or a different argument, before the ground-state conclusion is valid.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 4] The problem displayed at the beginning of Section 4 is labeled (P)^μ_{1,0,0}, but the boundary condition shown is the Neumann condition, so the label should be (P)^μ_{0,1,0}.
  2. [Section 6.1] Theorem 6.1 states the solution has λ∈[0,λ_{1,1,1}], but for the Dirichlet problem in Ω⊂R^2 the relevant eigenvalue is λ_{1,0,0}; the subscript appears to be a typo.
  3. [Section 6.2] Theorems 6.3 and 6.4 refer to problem (6.1), but the magnetic-field problem is (6.2).
  4. [Throughout] There are several small typographical issues: 'the domain the domain' in the introduction, integrals written as ∫_Ω f(x,u) dx in Section 2 even though f is independent of x, and the notation (f1') containing f(x,t) with no x-dependence. These should be cleaned up.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the perturbation proof is self-contained; the nonexistence Lemma 2.5 is proved from the same growth assumptions without assuming the target, and the only real flaw (Lemma 3.1) is a correctness defect, not circularity.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. The main existence/multiplicity theorems for (P)^μ_{1,0,0} follow from: (i) a penalized functional E_{r,μ} on U_μ; (ii) a mountain-pass minimax level c_r (Lemmas 2.6–2.7); (iii) compactness of Cerami sequences (Lemma 2.1) and convergence as r→∞ (Lemmas 2.2–2.4) to a critical point of E either on S(μ) with λ∈[0,2c∞/μ] or on S(ν), ν<μ, with λ=0; and (iv) Lemma 2.5, which rules out the second alternative. Lemma 2.5 is a genuine nonexistence statement: it assumes E'=0 and E≤M (or Mμ*) and derives, through (f1)/(f4) and the Gagliardo–Nirenberg inequality, a lower bound on the mass ν; it does not assume the existence or normalization of the sought solution. The thresholds μ0 and μ* are computed from the constants in the hypotheses, not fitted to any solution. The abstract mountain pass theorem in the appendix is proved inside the paper using standard deformation arguments, and the perturbation method is imported from [15,22] as a technique rather than as a self-citation carrying the conclusion. The self-citations that appear ([1]–[3],[5],[34]) are background references or are used only to note that ground-state existence was already known; they are not load-bearing for the new theorems. There is no fitted-input-called-prediction, no ansatz smuggled in via citation, and no renaming of a known result. The reader's low score is therefore appropriate. One non-circular caveat merits separate attention: Lemma 3.1 in Section 3 is false as stated because u=0 satisfies E'(0)=0 and E(0)=0≤Mμ**, and its proof silently divides by ∥u∥; the displayed exponents also appear to have the wrong powers. This is a correctness gap in the Robin part (and possibly in Theorem 1.5), but it is not circularity and does not raise the circularity score.

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

The paper introduces no fitted constants and no new physical entities. All constants in the thresholds are determined by assumptions or by the Gagliardo-Nirenberg and Sobolev inequalities. The proof device H_{r,mu} is a mathematical construction, not an invented physical object. The main assumptions are standard regularity and growth conditions on bounded domains.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality and compact Sobolev embeddings on bounded smooth domains
    Used in (2.1), Lemma 2.6, boundedness arguments, and the nonexistence Lemma 2.5.
  • standard math Spectral theorem for the Laplacian with Dirichlet, Robin, and Neumann boundary conditions, giving discrete eigenvalues
    Used in Sections 2.5, 3, and 4 to construct the Fountain-theorem subspaces Yj and Zj.
  • domain assumption Pohozaev identity with boundary term and the star-shaped domain condition x.n(x)>0 on the boundary
    Used in Lemma 5.4 and Theorem 5.3 to force a lower bound on the Lagrange multiplier. The sign of x.n is essential and is not used in the main existence theorems.
  • standard math Trace embeddings of H^1(Omega) into L^l(dOmega) for 2<=l<2A, with compactness
    Needed for the nonlinear Robin problem (P)^mu_{1,1,1}, in particular inequalities (3.2) and (3.3).
  • standard math Standard deformation and mountain pass lemmas for C1 functionals, invoked for the globally defined functional J
    The appendix proves an abstract mountain pass theorem but relies on [46] for existence of Cerami sequences.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Existence and multiplicity of normalized solutions to a large class of elliptic equations on bounded domains with general boundary conditions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZFKPIFIC

@misc{pith2026250704624,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Existence and multiplicity of normalized solutions to a large class of elliptic equations on bounded domains with general boundary conditions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZFKPIFIC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.04624}
}
abstract

In this paper, by adapting the perturbation method, we study the existence and multiplicity of normalized solutions for the following nonlinear Schr\"odinger equation $$ \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} -\Delta u = \lambda u + f(u)\quad & \text{in } \Omega, \mathcal{B}_{\alpha,\zeta,\gamma}u = 0 & \text{on } \partial \Omega, \int_{\Omega} |u|^2\,dx = \mu, \end{array} \right. \leqno{(P)^\mu_{\alpha,\zeta,\gamma}} $$ where $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^N$ ($N \geq 1$) is a smooth bounded domain, $\mu>0$ is prescribed, $\lambda \in \mathbb{R}$ is a part of the unknown which appears as a Lagrange multiplier, $f,g:\mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ are continuous functions satisfying some technical conditions. The boundary operator $\mathcal{B}_{\alpha,\zeta,\gamma}$ is defined by $$ \mathcal{B}_{\alpha,\zeta,\gamma}u=\alpha u+\zeta \frac{\partial u}{\partial \eta }-\gamma g(u), $$ where $\alpha,\zeta,\gamma \in \{0,1\}$ and $\eta$ denotes the outward unit normal on $\partial\Omega$. Moreover, we highlight several further applications of our approach, including the nonlinear Schr\"{o}dinger equations with critical exponential growth in $\mathbb{R}^{2}$, the nonlinear Schr\"{o}dinger equations with magnetic fields, the biharmonic equations, and the Choquard equations, among others.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Alves, On existence of multiple normalized solutions to a class of elliptic problems in whole RN , Z

    C.O. Alves, On existence of multiple normalized solutions to a class of elliptic problems in whole RN , Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 73 (2022), no. 3, Paper No. 97, 17 pp. 2

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Alves, C

    C.O. Alves, C. Ji and O.H. Miyagaki, Normalized solutions for a Schr¨ odinger equation with critical growth inRN , Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 61 (2022), no. 1, Paper No. 18, 24 pp. 2

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Alves and C

    C.O. Alves and C. Ji, Normalized solutions for the Schr¨ odinger equations withL2-subcritical growth and different type of potentials, J. Geom. Anal. 32 (2022), no. 5, Paper No. 165, 25 pp. 2

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Shen, On existence of normalized solutions to a class of elliptic problems with L2−supercritical growth

    C.O Alves and L. Shen, On existence of normalized solutions to a class of elliptic problems with L2−supercritical growth. To appear in J. Differential. Equations, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2025.02.059. 3

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jde.2025.02.059 2025

  5. [5]

    Alves and N.V

    C.O. Alves and N.V. Thin, On existence of multiple normalized solutions to a class of elliptic problems in whole RN via Lusternik-Schnirelmann category, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 55 (2023), no. 2, 1264–1283. 2

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Bartsch, L

    T. Bartsch, L. Jeanjean and N. Soave, Normalized solutions for a system of coupled cubic Schr¨ odinger equations on R3, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 106 (2016), 583–614. 2

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    Bartsch, R

    T. Bartsch, R. Molle, M. Rizzi and G. Verzini, Normalized solutions of mass supercritical Schr¨ odinger equations with potential, Comm. Partial Differential Equations 46 (2021), no. 9, 1729–1756. 2

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Bartsch and N

    T. Bartsch and N. Soave, Multiple normalized solutions for a competing system of Schr¨ odinger equations , Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 58 (2019), no. 1, Paper No. 22, 24 pp. 2

    work page 2019

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    Bartsch and S

    T. Bartsch and S. De Valeriola, Normalized solutions of nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equations, Arch. Math. 100 (2013), 75–83. 2

    2013

  2. [10]

    Bartsch, S.J

    T. Bartsch, S.J. Qi and W.M. Zou, Normalized solutions to Schr¨ odinger equations with potential and inhomogeneous nonlinearities on large smooth domains , Math. Ann. (2024), https://doi.org/10.1007/s00208-024-02857-1. 2, 3

    2024 doi

  3. [11]

    Bartolo, V

    P. Bartolo, V. Benci and D. Fortunato, Abstract critical point theorems and applications to some nonlinear problems with ”strong” resonance at infinity , Nonlinear Anal. 7(1983), 981-1012. 16, 31 32 C.O. AL VES, Z. HE, AND C. JI

    1983

  4. [12]

    Bellazzini, L

    J. Bellazzini, L. Jeanjean and T. Luo, Existence and instability of standing waves with prescribed norm for a class of Schr¨ odinger-Poisson equations, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3), 107 (2013), no. 2, 303-339. 2

    2013

  5. [13]

    Bieganowski and J

    B. Bieganowski and J. Mederski, Normalized ground states of the nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation with at least mass critical growth, J. Funct. Anal. 280 (2021), no. 11, Paper No. 108989, 26 pp. 2

    2021

  6. [14]

    Brezis and P

    H. Brezis and P. Mironescu, Where Sobolev interacts with Gagliardo-Nirenberg , J. Funct. Anal. 277(2019), 2839-2864. 28

    2019

  7. [15]

    Buffoni, M.J

    B. Buffoni, M.J. Esteban and E. S´ er´ e,Normalized solutions to strongly indefinite semilinear equations , Adv. Nonlinear Stud. 6(2006), 323-347. 3, 7, 23, 29

    2006

  8. [16]

    T. Cazenave, Semilinear Schr¨ odinger equations, Courant Lecture Notes in Mathematics 10 (New York University, Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New York; American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2003, 323 pp. ISBN: 0-8218-3399-5. 2

    2003

  9. [17]

    Cazenave and P.L

    T. Cazenave and P.L. Lions, Orbital stability of standing waves for some nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equations , Comm. Math. Phys. 85(4) (1982), 549-561. 2

    1982

  10. [18]

    Cerami, Un criterio de esistenza per i punti critici su varieta ilimitate , Istit

    G. Cerami, Un criterio de esistenza per i punti critici su varieta ilimitate , Istit. Lombardo Accad. Sci. Lett. Rend. 112(1978), 332-336. 16, 31

    1978

  11. [19]

    Chang, V.D

    X. Chang, V.D. Rˇ adulescu,Y. Zhang,Solutions with prescribed mass for L2-supercritical NLS equations under Neumann boundary conditions, To appear in Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A, https://doi.org/10.1017/prm.2025.24. 3, 4, 22, 23

    2025 doi

  12. [20]

    Cirant, Multi-population mean field games systems with Neumann boundary conditions , J

    M. Cirant, Multi-population mean field games systems with Neumann boundary conditions , J. Math. Pures Appl. 103 (2015), 1294–1315. 3

    2015

  13. [21]

    Cirant, A

    M. Cirant, A. Cosenza and G. Verzini, Ergodic Mean Field Games: existence of local minimizers up to the Sobolev critical case, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 63 (2024), 134. 3

    2024

  14. [22]

    Esteban, E

    M.J. Esteban, E. S´ er´ e,Solutions of the Dirac-Fock equations for atoms and molecules , Comm. Math. Phys. 203 (1999), 499-530. 3, 7, 29

    1999

  15. [23]

    Evans, Partial differential equations, Second edition , Grad

    L.C. Evans, Partial differential equations, Second edition , Grad. Stud. Math., 19, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2010. xxii+749 pp, ISBN:978-0-8218-4974-3. 16, 20

    2010

  16. [24]

    Fibich, The Nonlinear Schr¨ odinger Equation: Singular Solutions and Optical Collapse Applied Mathematical Sci- ences, (2015), Berlin, Springer

    G. Fibich, The Nonlinear Schr¨ odinger Equation: Singular Solutions and Optical Collapse Applied Mathematical Sci- ences, (2015), Berlin, Springer. 2

    2015

  17. [25]

    Fiorenza, M.R

    A. Fiorenza, M.R. Formica, T.G. Roskovec, F. Soudsk´ y, Detailed proof of classical Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality with historical remarks , Z. Anal. Anwend. 40 (2021), no. 2, 217–236. 8

    2021

  18. [26]

    Hirata and K

    J. Hirata and K. Tanaka, Nonlinear scalar field equations with L2 constraint: mountain pass and symmetric mountain pass approaches, Adv. Nonlinear Stud. 19 (2019), no. 2, 263–290. 2

    2019

  19. [27]

    Huang, M.R.P

    M. Huang, M.R.P. Malham´ e and P. E. Caines,Large population stochastic dynamic games: closed-loop McKeanVlasov systems and the Nash certainty equivalence principle . Commun. Inf. Syst. 6 (2006), 221–251. 3

    2006

  20. [28]

    Jeanjean, Existence of solutions with prescribed norm for semilinear elliptic equations , Nonlinear Anal

    L. Jeanjean, Existence of solutions with prescribed norm for semilinear elliptic equations , Nonlinear Anal. 28 (1997), 1633–1659. 2

    1997

  21. [29]

    Jeanjean, J

    L. Jeanjean, J. Jendrej, T.T. Le and N. Visciglia, Orbital stability of ground states for a Sobolev critical Schr¨ odinger equation, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 164 (2022), 158–179. 2

    2022

  22. [30]

    Jeanjean and S.S

    L. Jeanjean and S.S. Lu, Nonradial normalized solutions for nonlinear scalar field equations , Nonlinearity 32 (2019), no. 12, 4942–4966. 2

    2019

  23. [31]

    Jeanjean and S.S

    L. Jeanjean and S.S. Lu, A mass supercritical problem revisited , Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 59 (2020), no. 5, Paper No. 174, 43 pp. 2

    2020

  24. [32]

    Jeanjean and S.S

    L. Jeanjean and S.S. Lu, On global minimizers for a mass constrained problem, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 61 (2022), no. 6, Paper No. 214, 18 pp. 2

    2022

  25. [33]

    Jeanjean and T.T

    L. Jeanjean and T.T. Le, Multiple normalized solutions for a Sobolev critical Schr¨ odinger equations, Math. Ann. 384 (2022), no. 1–2, 101–134. 2

    2022

  26. [34]

    Ji, Existence and multiplicity of normalized solutions to Schr¨ odinger equations with general nonlinearities in bounded domains, arXiv No.2409.15089, 2024

    W. Ji, Existence and multiplicity of normalized solutions to Schr¨ odinger equations with general nonlinearities in bounded domains, arXiv No.2409.15089, 2024. 6

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    J. M. Lasry and P. L. Lions, Mean field games, Jpn. J. Math. 2 (2007), 229–260. 3

    2007

  28. [36]

    J. Neˇ cas,Direct methods in the theory of elliptic equations , Translated from the 1967 French original by Gerard Tronel and Alois Kufner, Editorial coordination and preface by ˇS´ arka Neˇ casov´ a and a contribution by Christian G. Simader, Springer Monogr. Math., Springer,...

    1967

  29. [37]

    Noris, H

    B. Noris, H. Tavares and G. Verzini, Existence and orbital stability of the ground states with prescribed mass for the L2-critical and supercritical NLS on bounded domains , Anal. PDE. 7 (2014), no. 8, 1807–1838. 3

    2014

  30. [38]

    Noris, H

    B. Noris, H. Tavares and G. Verzini, Normalized solutions for nonlinear Schr¨ odinger systems on bounded domains , Nonlinearity 32 (2019), no. 3, 1044–1072. 3 A LARGE CLASS OF ELLIPTIC EQUATIONS ON BOUNDED DOMAINS 33

    2019

  31. [39]

    Pellacci, A

    B. Pellacci, A. Pistoia, G. Vaira and G. Verzini, Normalized concentrating solutions to nonlinear elliptic problems , J. Differential Equations 275 (2021), 882–919. 4

    2021

  32. [40]

    Pierotti and G

    D. Pierotti and G. Verzini, Normalized bound states for the nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation in bounded domains, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 56 (2017), no. 5, Paper No. 133, 27 pp. 2, 3

    2017

  33. [41]

    Santambrogio, Lecture notes on variational mean field games, Mean field games , 159–201, Lecture Notes in Math., 2281, Fond

    F. Santambrogio, Lecture notes on variational mean field games, Mean field games , 159–201, Lecture Notes in Math., 2281, Fond. CIME/CIME Found. Subser., Springer, Cham, 2020, ISBN:978-3-030-59837-2, ISBN:978-3-030-59836-5. 3

    2020

  34. [42]

    Soave, Normalized ground states for the NLS equation with combined nonlinearities , J

    N. Soave, Normalized ground states for the NLS equation with combined nonlinearities , J. Differential Equations 269 (2020), no. 9, 6941–6987. 2

    2020

  35. [43]

    Soave, Normalized ground states for the NLS equation with combined nonlinearities: the Sobolev critical case , J

    N. Soave, Normalized ground states for the NLS equation with combined nonlinearities: the Sobolev critical case , J. Funct. Anal. 279 (2020), no. 6, 108610, 43 pp. 2

    2020

  36. [44]

    Song and W

    L. Song and W. Zou, On multiple sign-changing normalized solutions to the B´ rezis-Nirenberg problem , Math. Z. 309 (2025), no. 4, Paper No. 61, 23 pp. 3

    2025

  37. [45]

    T. Tao, M. Visan and X. Zhang, The nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation with combined power-type nonlinearities, Commun. PDE 32 (2007), 1281–1343. 2

    2007

  38. [46]

    Willem, Minimax Theorems, Birkh¨ auser, Boston, 1996

    M. Willem, Minimax Theorems, Birkh¨ auser, Boston, 1996. 16, 24, 31

    1996

  39. [47]

    Zhang, Variational, Topological and Partial Order Methods with their Applications , (2013) Berlin, Springer

    Z. Zhang, Variational, Topological and Partial Order Methods with their Applications , (2013) Berlin, Springer. 2

    2013

  40. [48]

    Zhong and W

    X. Zhong and W. Zou, Ground state and multiple solutions via generalized Nehari manifold , Nonlinear Anal. 102 (2014), 251-263. 5 (C.O. Alves) Unidade Acadˆemica de Matem´atica Universidade Federal de Campina Grande PB CEP:58429-900, Brazil Email address : coalves@mat.ufcg.edu...

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.