Uniform dispersive estimates for the semi-classical Hartree equation with long-range interaction

Sonae Hadama

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Uniform dispersive estimates for the semi-classical Hartree equation with long-range interaction

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For long-range Hartree interactions, the density of small-data solutions decays at the optimal $t^{-3}$ rate uniformly in $\hbar$.

desk verdict Uniform long-range Hartree decay is a meaningful target and the paper brings new tools, but Step 4 of Proposition 7.1 uses an FL1 estimate for the free propagator where a phase-corrected version is required, so the main theorem is not closed as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.12577 v1 pith:N7U5T3MO submitted 2025-07-16 math.AP

Sonae Hadama This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 35Q5535B4035Q40

keywords Hartreeequationsemi-classicallimitdispersiveestimateslong-rangeinteractionmodifiedscatteringdensityoperatorsSchattennormsphasecorrection

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 uniform-in-$\hbar$ dispersive estimate for the Hartree equation with a smooth long-range interaction in three dimensions. It proves that if the initial density operators satisfy an $\hbar$-independent smallness condition in the semi-classical norm $X^\sigma_\hbar$, then the solution's density decays as $\|\rho_\hbar(\gamma_\hbar(t))\|_{L^\infty_x} \lesssim \langle t\rangle^{-3}$ for every $\hbar \in (0,1]$, with constants independent of $\hbar$. For fixed $\hbar$ this was essentially known, but the prior smallness condition shrank to zero as $\hbar \to 0$ unless the data was trivial; the uniformity here is what permits a nontrivial semi-classical limit. The argument also supplies a new proof of modified scattering for the long-range nonlinear Schr\"odinger equation with Hartree nonlinearity, via phase-corrected wave operators and a phase-corrected dispersive estimate.

What carries the argument

The engine of the proof is the phase-corrected wave operator $e^{i\Psi(t,-i\hbar\nabla)} W^\hbar_V(t)\langle x\rangle^{-s}$, whose uniform-in-$\hbar$ boundedness (Proposition 4.1) replaces the ordinary weighted wave-operator boundedness that fails for long-range potentials. The phase $\Psi(t,\xi) = \hbar^{-1}\int_0^t V(\tau,\tau\xi)\,d\tau$ is chosen so that commutators of $x$ with $e^{i\Psi}W^\hbar_V$ nearly cancel the terms produced by $[x, W^\hbar_V]$. A second ingredient is the $L^1$--$L^\infty$ dispersive estimate $\|U^\hbar(t)e^{-i\Psi(t,-i\hbar\nabla)}\|_{L^1 \to L^\infty} \lesssim |t\hbar|^{-3/2}$ (Proposition 3.5), proved by stationary phase with a uniqueness-of-critical-point argument; it feeds Corollary 3.8, the phase-corrected density estimates. A large family of single and double commutator estimates in Schatten norms (Sections 5--6) then controls derivatives of the density, which the bootstrap needs because the identity $\partial_{x_j}\rho_\hbar(U^\hbar(t)A(t)U^\hbar(t)^*) = t^{-1}\rho_\hbar(U^\hbar(t)[x_j/(i\hbar), A(t)]U^\hbar(t)^*)$ forces commutators to be tracked. The identity (1.14), writing the nonlinear evolution as $U^\hbar_{w*\rho}(t)\gamma_0^\hbar U^\hbar_{w*\rho}(t)^*$, converts the Duhamel $1/\hbar$ loss into a closed equation for the density.

What would settle it

Compute exactly $\|\rho_\hbar(U^\hbar(t)e^{-i\Psi}Ae^{i\Psi}U^\hbar(t)^*)\|_{FL^1}$ for a Gaussian rank-one $A$ and a phase $\Psi(t,\xi) = \hbar^{-1}\int_0^t V(\tau,\tau\xi)\,d\tau$ with $V = w*\rho$ built from the solution's own density; if this quantity decays slower than $\hbar^{-3/2}\langle t\rangle^{-4+a}$, the Step 4 estimate of Proposition 7.1 fails and Theorem 1.4 cannot hold as stated.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.4: for $3/2 < \sigma < 2$ and long-range interaction $w \in C^3$ satisfying $|\partial^\alpha w(x)| \lesssim \langle x\rangle^{-1-|\alpha|}$, there exists $\varepsilon_0 > 0$ such that any family of self-adjoint initial data $\gamma_0^\hbar$ with $\sup_{\hbar \in (0,1]} \|\gamma_0^\hbar\|_{X^\sigma_\hbar} \le \varepsilon_0$ gives a unique global solution $\gamma_\hbar(t)$ to the semi-classical Hartree equation whose density satisfies $\sup_{t \ge 0} (\|\rho_\hbar(\gamma_\hbar(t))\|_{L^1_x} + \langle t\rangle^3 \|\rho_\hbar(\gamma_\hbar(t))\|_{L^\infty_x}) \lesssim 1$ uniformly in $\hbar$. This is the optimal decay rate, matching the free solution, and it holds for long-range interactions such as the regularized Coulomb potential $w(x) = \pm\langle x\rangle^{-1}$ (though not the singular Coulomb $|x|^{-1}$). The same solution exhibits modified scattering: after a phase correction $e^{i\Psi(t,-i\hbar\nabla)}$ with $\Psi(t,\xi) = \hbar^{-1}\int_0^t V(\tau,\tau\xi)\,d\tau$, the propagated density operator converges to a scattering state $\gamma_+^\hbar$ in operator norm, although the rate of that convergence is not uniform in $\hbar$.

Load-bearing premise

The whole proof depends on the free-propagator Fourier--Lebesgue estimate continuing to hold when the free propagator is replaced by the phase-corrected propagator; that extension is asserted in Step 4 of Proposition 7.1 but not proved.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The smallness condition and all constants in the density bound are independent of $\hbar$, so nontrivial families of initial data can pass to the semi-classical limit without shrinking to zero.
At $\hbar = 1$ with rank-one data, the theorem gives a new proof of modified scattering for the long-range Hartree-type nonlinear Schr\"odinger equation.
The density decays at the free rate $\langle t\rangle^{-3}$, while its first derivatives decay at $\langle t\rangle^{-4+\varepsilon}$ and second derivatives at $\langle t\rangle^{-7/2+b}$, so derivatives decay faster than the density itself.
The construction of modified scattering states covers long-range interactions satisfying (A), including the regularized Coulomb potential, but the convergence rate of the scattering state is not uniform in $\hbar$, leaving the fully uniform modified scattering statement open.

Reading between the lines

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

If the phase-corrected dispersive estimate extends to the Fourier--Lebesgue norm that Step 4 of Proposition 7.1 needs, the same bootstrap scheme would likely give uniform bounds for slightly more singular long-range potentials such as the exact Coulomb interaction cut off only at the origin.
The uniform density decay proven here is the natural long-range analogue of the short-range semi-classical scattering diagram: it should let the Wigner transforms of the modified scattering states converge to the corresponding Vlasov scattering states as $\hbar \to 0$, but the paper only establishes the quantum-side ingredient.
The method suggests a route to uniform-in-$\hbar$ modified scattering: replace the scalar phase $e^{i\Psi}$ with a richer class of phase corrections so that the $1/\hbar$ factor in the convergence-rate estimate (7.1) is cancelled.

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

Worth a serious look, but there is a load-bearing hole in the proof. The problem is genuinely new: uniform-in-hbar optimal density decay for long-range Hartree, where previous uniform results were short-range and previous long-range results were fixed-hbar. The paper also ships genuinely new machinery—the phase-corrected wave-operator boundedness in Proposition 4.1, the L1–L∞ estimate for the modified propagator in Proposition 3.5, and the commutator estimates in Sections 5–6. The framing around the semiclassical scattering-state diagram is clear and the relation to Nguyen–You, Hadama–Hong, and Smith is spelled out honestly. The citation pattern looks careful, and the self-reliance on [28] is not an abuse given the tools are imported rather than fitted.

The soft spot is exactly where the reader says it is. Step 4 of Proposition 7.1 claims an FL1 bound for ∇ρ_hbar by invoking Lemmas 3.3 and 5.8. Lemma 3.3 is a free-propagator FL1 estimate: it requires control of the weighted operator itself, e.g. ||^σ A ^σ||_{S2}, where A is the operator being propagated. But the density derivative is ρ_hbar(U_hbar [x/hbar, W γ0 W*] U_hbar*), so A = [x/hbar, W γ0 W*]. Lemma 5.8 controls the phase-conjugated norm ||^σ e^{iΨ} A e^{-iΨ} ^σ||, not ||^σ A ^σ||. Since Ψ is of order hbar^{-1} log t, the phase conjugation does not commute harmlessly with the x-weights. What is needed is an FL1 estimate for U_hbar e^{-iΨ}, or equivalently a phase-corrected analogue of Lemma 3.3; the paper provides neither. This FL1 bound feeds directly into the Y^{a,b}_T bootstrap norm, so Theorem 1.4 is not established. The missing proof of Lemma 2.7 is a lesser concern—it looks like a routine albeit tedious commutator identity.

The gap is specific and localized. The paper is not a random collection of estimates; the architecture is coherent and the missing piece is identifiable. If the author can supply a phase-corrected FL1 estimate, the rest of the argument may well go through. This deserves referee time, not a desk reject. My recommendation: send it to peer review, with the expectation of major revision focused on Step 4.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies the semi-classical Hartree equation (NLH) with a smooth long-range interaction w satisfying assumption (A), and claims an optimal uniform-in-hbar bound on the density: sup_{hbar in (0,1]} sup_{t>=0} ( ||rho_hbar(gamma_hbar(t))||_{L^1} + <t>^3 ||rho_hbar(gamma_hbar(t))||_{L^infty} ) <= C, provided the initial data are small in an hbar-independent way in the norm X^sigma_hbar. The proof is organized around a phase-corrected wave operator (Proposition 4.1), an L^1-L^infty estimate for the phase-corrected propagator (Proposition 3.5 and Corollary 3.8), a new FL1 bound for the free propagator (Lemma 3.3), and long commutator estimates (Sections 5 and 6). The bootstrap is carried out in a space Y^{a,b}_T whose norm includes L^1, L^infty, FL1, and L^2 decay information on derivatives of the density. The author also claims a new proof of modified scattering for the fixed-hbar long-range Hartree equation, with the caveat that the convergence rate in the scattering statement may depend on hbar.

Significance. If the main result were established, it would be a substantial contribution: it would give the first uniform-in-hbar optimal t^{-3} density decay for long-range Hartree interactions, filling the gap between the short-range uniform results and the fixed-hbar modified scattering result of Nguyen and You. The paper contains several interesting and potentially reusable ingredients: a self-contained proof of an L^1-L^infty dispersive estimate for a phase-corrected propagator, a uniform boundedness statement for phase-corrected wave operators, and a large set of Schatten-class commutator estimates. The bootstrap itself is a standard self-consistency argument and is not circular in the sense of fitting constants. However, the proof of the key a priori estimate contains a load-bearing gap: the FL1 component of the Y^{a,b}_T norm is obtained by applying the free-propagator FL1 estimate Lemma 3.3 to an expression involving the phase-corrected propagator, for which no FL1 estimate is proved. As a result, the main theorem is not established as written.

major comments (2)

[Prop. 7.1, Step 4 (Section 7.1)] The displayed estimate for ||nabla rho_hbar(gamma_hbar(t))||_{FL1} applies Lemma 3.3 to the phase-corrected expression, but Lemma 3.3 is a free-propagator estimate: it bounds rho_hbar(U_hbar(t) B U_hbar(t)*) by weighted norms of B itself, specifically ||<hbar nabla>^sigma B <hbar nabla>^sigma||_{S^2_hbar} or ||<x>^sigma B <x>^sigma||_{S^2_hbar}. In the second term of Step 4, the only available control is Lemma 5.8 (5.4), which bounds ||<x>^sigma e^{iPsi} [x/hbar, W V gamma0 W V*] e^{-iPsi} <x>^sigma||_{S^2_hbar}. To insert this into the free-propagator estimate one would have to apply Lemma 3.3 to B = e^{-iPsi} A e^{iPsi} and hence to the propagator U_hbar(t) e^{-iPsi}, i.e. one needs an FL1 estimate for the phase-corrected modified propagator. No such estimate is stated or proved: Proposition 3.5 gives only L^1 -> L^infty, and Corollary 3.8 gives L^r_x bounds but not FL1 bounds. Since Psi is of size hbar^{-1} log t, the phase factors do not commute with <x>^sigma, and no commutator estimate is supplied that converts the Lemma 5.8 norm into the norm required by Lemma 3.3. This FL1 bound is exactly the component of the Y^{a,b}_T norm that closes the bootstrap, so Theorem 1.4 is not established as written. The author needs to prove an FL1 analogue of Corollary 3.8 for U_hbar(t) e^{-iPsi}.
[Lemma 2.7 (Section 2.3.3)] Lemma 2.7 is stated without proof. The paragraph 'Proof of Lemmas 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7' explicitly proves only Lemma 2.5 and says that 'the same proof works for Lemma 2.6'; it does not discuss Lemma 2.7, which is a distinct mixed double commutator identity involving one derivative and one x/hbar commutator. Lemma 2.7 is used in Section 6.2.2 to estimate the mixed double commutator in the proof of Lemma 6.2. Without a proof of this identity, the double commutator estimates that feed into Proposition 7.1 are unsupported. Since the argument is algebraic, this item may be repairable, but it is not a presentation issue.

minor comments (3)

[Corollary 3.8 and Remark 3.9] The claim that (3.9) is equivalent to (2.19) is correct only because e^{+-iPsi} is a Fourier multiplier and therefore commutes with <hbar nabla>; this should be stated explicitly, since the same equivalence is false for the <x>-weighted estimate (3.10).
[Section 7.1, Step 1] In the last line of Step 1 the notation switches from ||gamma0||_{X^sigma_hbar} to ||gamma0||_{X_hbar}; please standardize the notation for the initial-data norm.
[Section 7.3] In the proof of Remark 1.5, the convergence statement (7.1) is proved in B(L^2) after conjugation by <x>^{-1}, and the passage to convergence in S^1_hbar is compressed. Since the uniform S^1 bound is stated but not fully justified at that point, please expand this step for clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the uniform decay theorem is obtained by a standard bootstrap with independently proved dispersive and wave-operator estimates; self-citations occur only as auxiliary tools.

full rationale

The derivation leading to Theorem 1.4 is a standard bootstrap closure, not a fit or a renaming of an input. The paper defines the norm Y^a,b_T, proves the a priori estimate Proposition 7.1 for U^hbar_{w*ζ}(t) γ0^hbar U^hbar_{w*ζ}(t)^*, uses the identity (1.14) to identify the true solution's density with this expression, chooses ε0 = R/(2CC0), and closes via maximality of T*. No parameter is fitted to the claimed t^{-3} rate, and the phase-corrected L^1-L∞ estimate (Proposition 3.5) is proved self-contained by stationary phase under explicit hypotheses (∥∇²Ψ∥_{L∞} and L^{3,1} bounds). The phase correction is taken from Nguyen-You [49], which is external to the present author, and the key wave-operator bound Proposition 4.1 is original to this paper rather than imported. Self-citations to the author's prior work [28] occur for auxiliary tools, notably Lemma 2.3 (commutator identities for wave operators, cited as Lemma 3.3 of [28]) and Lemma 3.1 (free-propagator density estimates, cited as Proposition 3.1 of [28]); these are used as ingredients, not as the target theorem, and the long-range uniform result is not a restatement of them. The skeptical concern about Step 4 of Proposition 7.1, namely that Lemma 3.3 supplies an FL1 bound for the free propagator while the proof appears to require the same bound for the phase-corrected propagator U^hbar(t)e^{-iΨ}, is a possible missing argument or gap in the written proof, but it is not circularity: it does not exhibit a claimed output that is equivalent to an input by construction. The same applies to the terse proof of Lemma 2.7, which the text says follows by the same calculation as Lemma 2.5. Accordingly, the appropriate finding is no significant circularity, with only minor, non-load-bearing self-citation justifying the low score.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. The phase correction Ψ and modified propagator are mathematical constructions rather than new postulates. The auxiliary parameters a, b, δ are proof artifacts. The main external inputs are standard functional-analytic tools and two lemmas imported from the author's own preprint [28].

free parameters (3)

a, b = arbitrarily small satisfying 7b/8 < a < b < δ/100
Auxiliary exponents in the Y^{a,b}_T norm. They are proof parameters chosen by hand in Assumptions 5.1 and 6.1; the final theorem does not depend on their values.
δ = small absolute number in Proposition 4.1
A small constant introduced in the decay assumptions of Proposition 4.1; chosen by hand, not fitted to data.
R, C, C0, ε0 = ε0 = R/(2CC0)
Bootstrap constants: R is a sufficiently small radius in Y^{a,b}_T, C and C0 appear in Proposition 7.1 and local well-posedness. They are proof parameters, not empirical fits.

assumptions (5)

standard math Standard Schatten-class, Kato-Seiler-Simon, Lorentz-space and complex interpolation inequalities hold as stated.
Used throughout, e.g., (2.14), (2.15), Lemmas 2.8, 2.10. These are standard background.
standard math Hadamard's global inverse function theorem applies to C^2 maps with ∇^2ψ ≥ 1/2.
Invoked as Lemma 3.7 to obtain a unique critical point in the stationary-phase proof of Proposition 3.5.
standard math O'Neil's convolution inequality for Lorentz spaces gives w ∗ ζ estimates and the L^{3,1} convolution bound in Proposition 3.5.
Used in Lemma 5.3 and in the estimate of CR,2 in Proposition 3.5; cited to O'Neil [50].
domain assumption The commutator formulas of Lemma 2.3 (quoted from Lemma 3.3 of the author's prior preprint [28]) are valid.
Lemma 2.3 is used to derive commutator identities (2.9), (2.10) and the more involved Lemmas 2.5-2.7. It is imported from the same author's unpublished preprint [28] rather than proved in this paper.
domain assumption The free dispersive estimates of Lemma 3.1 (quoted from Proposition 3.1 of [28]) are valid uniformly in hbar.
Used as the starting point for the density decay estimates; imported from the same author's preprint [28].

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Uniform dispersive estimates for the semi-classical Hartree equation with long-range interaction." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/N7U5T3MO

@misc{pith2026250712577,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Uniform dispersive estimates for the semi-classical Hartree equation with long-range interaction},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/N7U5T3MO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.12577}
}

abstract

In this paper, we consider the Hartree equation with smooth but long-range interaction in the semi-classical regime, in three-dimensional space. We show that the density function of small-data solution decays at the optimal rate. When the semi-classical parameter $\hbar \in (0,1]$ is fixed, our result is essentially covered by the recent work by Nguyen and You [arXiv:2408.15860]; however, the novelty of this paper is the uniformity with respect to $\hbar$. Namely, both smallness condition for initial data and bounds for the solution are independent of $\hbar$. Moreover, the argument in this paper provides a new proof of the modified scattering for the long-range nonlinear Schr\"{o}dinger equation with a Hartree type nonlinearity. Our proof relies on three main ingredients. First, we prove the boundedness of finite-time wave operators modified by phase corrections. Second, we show an $L^1$--$L^\infty$ dispersive estimate for the modified propagator. Third, we give various kinds of commutator estimates for density operators. By combining them, we can apply the usual bootstrap argument to obtain the main result.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

The non-relativistic limit of scattering states for the Vlasov equation with short-range interaction potentials
math.AP 2025-09 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

Relativistic scattering states of the Vlasov equation converge to their non-relativistic counterparts at order c^{-2} as c tends to infinity, proven through a new classical wave operator method.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[28]

Hadama and Y

S. Hadama and Y. Hong, Semi-classical limit of quantum scattering states for the nonlinear Hartree equation, arXiv Preprint (2025)

work page 2025
[1]

Amour, M

L. Amour, M. Khodja, and J. Nourrigat, The classical limit of the Heisenberg and time-dependent Hartree–Fock equations: the Wick symbol of the solution , Math. Res. Lett. 20 (2013), no. 1, 119–139

work page 2013
[2]

Amour, M

L. Amour, M. Khodja, and J. Nourrigat, The semiclassical limit of the time dependent Hartree–Fock equation: the Weyl symbol of the solution , Anal. PDE 6 (2013), no. 7, 1649–1674

work page 2013
[3]

Athanassoulis, T

A. Athanassoulis, T. Paul, F. Pezzotti, and M. Pulvirenti, Strong semiclassical approximation of Wigner functions for the Hartree dynamics , Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl. 22 (2011), no. 4, 525–552

work page 2011
[4]

Benedikter, M

N. Benedikter, M. Porta, and B. Schlein, Mean-field evolution of fermionic systems , Comm. Math. Phys. 331 (2014), no. 3, 1087–1131

work page 2014
[5]

Benedikter, V

N. Benedikter, V. Jakˇ si´ c, M. Porta and B. Schlein, Mean-field evolution of fermionic mixed states , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 69 (2016), no. 12, 2250–2303

work page 2016
[6]

Benedikter, M

N. Benedikter, M. Porta, C. Saffirio, and B. Schlein, From the Hartree dynamics to the Vlasov equation , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 221 (2016), no. 1, 273–334

work page 2016
[7]

N. Bez, Y. Hong, S. Lee, S. Nakamura and Y. Sawano, On the Strichartz estimates for orthonormal systems of initial data with regularity , Adv. Math. 354 (2019), 106736, 37 pp

work page 2019

Show all 59 references

[8]

A. Bove, G. Da Prato, and G. Fano, An existence proof for the Hartree-Fock time-dependent problem with bounded two-body interaction, Comm. Math. Phys. 37 (1974), 183–191

1974
[9]

A. Bove, G. Da Prato, and G. Fano, On the Hartree-Fock time-dependent problem, Comm. Math. Phys. 49 (1976), 25–33

1976
[10]

Chadam, The time-dependent Hartree-Fock equations with Coulomb two-body interaction , Comm

J.M. Chadam, The time-dependent Hartree-Fock equations with Coulomb two-body interaction , Comm. Math. Phys. 46 (1976), 99–104

1976
[11]

T. Chen, Y. Hong, and N. Pavlovi´ c,Global well-posedness of the NLS system for infinitely many fermions, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 224 (2017), no. 1, 91–123

2017
[12]

T. Chen, Y. Hong, and N. Pavlovi´ c,On the scattering problem for infinitely many fermions in dimensions d ≥ 3 at positive temperature, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e Anal. Non Lin´ eaire35 (2018), no. 2, 393–416

2018
[13]

J. J. Chong, L. Lafleche, and C. Saffirio, Global-in-time semiclassical regularity for the Hartree-Fock equation, J. Math. Phys. 63 (2022), no. 8, Paper No. 081904, 9 pp

2022
[14]

J. J. Chong, L. Lafleche, and C. Saffirio, On the L2 rate of convergence in the limit from the Hartree to the Vlasov-Poisson equation , J. ´Ec. polytech. Math. 10 (2023), 703–726

2023
[15]

J. J. Chong, L. Lafleche, and C. Saffirio, From many-body quantum dynamics to the Hartree-Fock and Vlasov equations with singular potentials , J. Eur. Math. Soc. 26 (2024), no. 12, 4923–5007

2024
[16]

Dunford and B

N. Dunford and B. J. Pettis, Linear operations on summable functions , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 47 (1940), 323–392. UNIFORM DISPERSIVE ESTIMATES 63

1940
[17]

Figalli, M

A. Figalli, M. Ligab` o, and T. Paul,Semiclassical limit for mixed states with singular and rough potentials, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 61 (2012), no. 1, 193–222

2012
[18]

R. L. Frank, M. Lewin, E.H. Lieb and R. Seiringer, Strichartz inequality for orthonormal functions , J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 16 (2014), no.7, 1507–1526

2014
[19]

R. L. Frank and J. Sabin, Restriction theorems for orthonormal functions, Strichartz inequalities , and uniform Sobolev estimates. Amer. J. Math. 139 (2017), no. 6, 1649–1691

2017
[20]

Gasser, R

I. Gasser, R. Illner, P. A. Markowich, and C. Schmeiser, Semiclassical, t → ∞asymptotics and dispersive effects for Hartree-Fock systems, RAIRO Mod´ el. Math. Anal. Num´ er.32 (1998), no. 6, 699–713

1998
[21]

Golse and T

F. Golse and T. Paul, The Schr¨ odinger equation in the mean-field and semiclassical regime, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 223 (2017), no. 1, 57–94

2017
[22]

Golse and T

F. Golse and T. Paul, Empirical measures and quantum mechanics: applications to the mean-field limit , Comm. Math. Phys. 369 (2019), no. 3, 1021–1053

2019
[23]

Golse, C

F. Golse, C. Mouhot, and T. Paul, On the mean field and classical limits of quantum mechanics , Comm. Math. Phys. 343 (2016), no 1, 165–205

2016
[24]

Grafakos, Classical Fourier analysis, Third edition , Grad

L. Grafakos, Classical Fourier analysis, Third edition , Grad. Texts in Math., 249, Springer, New York,
[25]

Graffi, A

S. Graffi, A. Martinez, and M. Pulvirenti, Mean-field approximation of quantum systems and classical limit, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 13 (2003), no 1, 59–73

2003
[26]

Hadama, Asymptotic stability of a wide class of stationary solutions for the Hartree and Schr¨ odinger equations for infinitely many particles , Ann

S. Hadama, Asymptotic stability of a wide class of stationary solutions for the Hartree and Schr¨ odinger equations for infinitely many particles , Ann. Henri Lebesgue, 8 (2025), pp. 181–218

2025
[27]

Hadama and Y

S. Hadama and Y. Hong, Global well-posedness of the nonlinear Hartree equation for infinitely many particles with singular interaction , J. Funct. Anal. 289, Issue 9, 111102, (2025)

2025
[29]

Hayashi and P

N. Hayashi and P. I. Naumkin, Asymptotics for large time of solutions to the nonlinear Schr¨ odinger and Hartree equations, Amer. J. Math. 120 (1998), no.2, 369–389

1998
[30]

Hayashi and P

N. Hayashi and P. I. Naumkin, Remarks on scattering theory and large time asymptotics of solutions to Hartree type equations with a long range potential , SUT J. Math. 34 (1998), no. 1, 13–24

1998
[31]

Hayashi, P

N. Hayashi, P. I. Naumkin, and T. Ozawa, Scattering theory for the Hartree equation , SIAM J. Math. Anal. 29 (1998), no.5, 1256–1267

1998
[32]

Hayashi and Y

N. Hayashi and Y. Tsutsumi, Scattering theory for Hartree type equations, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e Phys. Th´ eor.46 (1987), no. 2, 187–213

1987
[33]

Hoshiya, Orthonormal Strichartz estimates for Schr¨ odinger operator and their applications to infin- itely many particle systems , arXiv Preprint (2023), arXiv:2312.08314

A. Hoshiya, Orthonormal Strichartz estimates for Schr¨ odinger operator and their applications to infin- itely many particle systems , arXiv Preprint (2023), arXiv:2312.08314

2023 arXiv
[34]

Hoshiya, Orthonormal Strichartz estimate for dispersive equations with potentials , J

A. Hoshiya, Orthonormal Strichartz estimate for dispersive equations with potentials , J. Funct. Anal. 286 (2024), no. 11, Paper No. 110425, 63 pp

2024
[35]

Hoshiya, Uniform resolvent and orthonormal Strichartz estimates for repulsive Hamiltonian , arXiv Preprint (2024), arXiv:2407.05707

A. Hoshiya, Uniform resolvent and orthonormal Strichartz estimates for repulsive Hamiltonian , arXiv Preprint (2024), arXiv:2407.05707

2024 arXiv
[36]

Hyt¨ onen, J

T. Hyt¨ onen, J. van Neerven, M. Veraar, and L. Weis, Analysis in Banach spaces. Vol. I. Martingales and Littlewood–Paley theory, Ergeb. Math. Grenzgeb. (3), 63, Springer, Cham, 2016. xvi+614 pp

2016
[37]

Lafleche, Propagation of moments and semiclassical limit from Hartree to Vlasov equation , J

L. Lafleche, Propagation of moments and semiclassical limit from Hartree to Vlasov equation , J. Stat. Phys. 177 (2019), no. 1, 20–60

2019
[38]

Lafleche, Global semiclassical limit from Hartree to Vlasov equation for concentrated initial data, Ann

L. Lafleche, Global semiclassical limit from Hartree to Vlasov equation for concentrated initial data, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e C Anal. Non Lin´ eaire38 (2021), no. 6, 1739–1762

2021
[39]

Lafleche, On quantum Sobolev inequalities , J

L. Lafleche, On quantum Sobolev inequalities , J. Funct. Anal. 286 (2024), no. 10, Paper No. 110400, 40 pp

2024
[40]

Lafleche and C

L. Lafleche and C. Saffirio, Strong semiclassical limits from Hartree and Hartree-Fock to Vlasov-Poisson equations, Anal. PDE 16 (2023), no. 4, 891–926

2023
[41]

Lewin and J

M. Lewin and J. Sabin, The Hartree equation for infinitely many particles, II: Dispersion and scattering in 2D , Anal. PDE 7 (2014), no.6, 1339–1363

2014
[42]

Lewin and J

M. Lewin and J. Sabin, The Hartree equation for infinitely many particles I. Well-posedness theory , Comm. Math. Phys. 334 (2015), no.1, 117–170

2015
[43]

Lewin and J

M. Lewin and J. Sabin, The Hartree and Vlasov equations at positive density , Comm. Partial Differential Equations 45 (2020), no. 12, 1702–1754. 64 S. HADAMA

2020
[44]

Lions and T

P.-L. Lions and T. Paul, Sur les mesures de Wigner , Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana 9 (1993), no. 3, 553–618

1993
[45]

P. A. Markowich and N. J. Mauser, The classical limit of a self-consistent quantum–Vlasov equation in 3D, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 3 (1993), no. 1, 109–124

1993
[46]

Nakanishi, Modified wave operators for the Hartree equation with data, image and convergence in the same space, Commun

K. Nakanishi, Modified wave operators for the Hartree equation with data, image and convergence in the same space, Commun. Pure Appl. Anal. 1 (2002), no. 2, 237–252

2002
[47]

Nakanishi, Modified wave operators for the Hartree equation with data, image and convergence in the same space

K. Nakanishi, Modified wave operators for the Hartree equation with data, image and convergence in the same space. II , Ann. Henri Poincar´ e3 (2002), no. 3, 503–535

2002
[48]

T. T. Nguyen and C. You, Plasmons for the Hartree equations with Coulomb interaction , Probab. Math. Phys. 6 (2025), No. 3, 913–960

2025
[49]

T. T. Nguyen and C. You, Modified scattering for long-range Hartree equations of infinite rank near vacuum, arXiv Preprint (2024), arXiv:2408.15860

2024 arXiv
[50]

O’Neil, Convolution operators and L(p, q) spaces, Duke Math

R. O’Neil, Convolution operators and L(p, q) spaces, Duke Math. J. 30, (1963) 129–142

1963
[51]

Pezzotti and M

F. Pezzotti and M. Pulvirenti, Mean-field limit and semiclassical expansion of a quantum particle system, Ann. Henri Poincar´ e10 (2009), no 1, 145–187

2009
[52]

Pusateri and I

F. Pusateri and I. M. Sigal, Long-time behaviour of time-dependent density functional theory , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 241 (2021), no. 1, 447–473

2021
[53]

Saffirio, From the Hartree equation to the Vlasov-Poisson system: strong convergence for a class of mixed states, SIAM J

C. Saffirio, From the Hartree equation to the Vlasov-Poisson system: strong convergence for a class of mixed states, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 52 (2020), no. 6, 5533–5553

2020
[54]

Saffirio, Semiclassical limit to the Vlasov equation with inverse power law potentials , Comm

C. Saffirio, Semiclassical limit to the Vlasov equation with inverse power law potentials , Comm. Math. Phys. 373 (2020), no. 2, 571–619

2020
[55]

Seiler and B

E. Seiler and B. Simon, Bounds in the Yukawa 2 quantum field theory: upper bound on the pressure, Hamiltonian bound and linear lower bound , Comm. Math. Phys. 45, 99–114 (1975)

1975
[56]

Simon, Trace ideals and their applications, Second edition , Math

B. Simon, Trace ideals and their applications, Second edition , Math. Surveys Monogr., 120, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2005. viii+150 pp

2005
[57]

Smith, Phase mixing for the Hartree equation and Landau damping in the semiclassical limit , arXiv Preprint (2024), arXiv:2412.14842v2

M. Smith, Phase mixing for the Hartree equation and Landau damping in the semiclassical limit , arXiv Preprint (2024), arXiv:2412.14842v2

2024 arXiv
[58]

You, Phase mixing estimates for the nonlinear Hartree equation of infinite rank , arXiv Preprint (2024), arXiv:2408.15972

C. You, Phase mixing estimates for the nonlinear Hartree equation of infinite rank , arXiv Preprint (2024), arXiv:2408.15972

2024 arXiv
[59]

Zagatti, The Cauchy problem for Hartree-Fock time-dependent equations, Ann

S. Zagatti, The Cauchy problem for Hartree-Fock time-dependent equations, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e Phys. Th´ eor.56 (1992), 357–374

1992

Pith tools

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

[1] [28]

Hadama and Y

S. Hadama and Y. Hong, Semi-classical limit of quantum scattering states for the nonlinear Hartree equation, arXiv Preprint (2025)

work page 2025

[2] [1]

Amour, M

L. Amour, M. Khodja, and J. Nourrigat, The classical limit of the Heisenberg and time-dependent Hartree–Fock equations: the Wick symbol of the solution , Math. Res. Lett. 20 (2013), no. 1, 119–139

work page 2013

[3] [2]

Amour, M

L. Amour, M. Khodja, and J. Nourrigat, The semiclassical limit of the time dependent Hartree–Fock equation: the Weyl symbol of the solution , Anal. PDE 6 (2013), no. 7, 1649–1674

work page 2013

[4] [3]

Athanassoulis, T

A. Athanassoulis, T. Paul, F. Pezzotti, and M. Pulvirenti, Strong semiclassical approximation of Wigner functions for the Hartree dynamics , Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl. 22 (2011), no. 4, 525–552

work page 2011

[5] [4]

Benedikter, M

N. Benedikter, M. Porta, and B. Schlein, Mean-field evolution of fermionic systems , Comm. Math. Phys. 331 (2014), no. 3, 1087–1131

work page 2014

[6] [5]

Benedikter, V

N. Benedikter, V. Jakˇ si´ c, M. Porta and B. Schlein, Mean-field evolution of fermionic mixed states , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 69 (2016), no. 12, 2250–2303

work page 2016

[7] [6]

Benedikter, M

N. Benedikter, M. Porta, C. Saffirio, and B. Schlein, From the Hartree dynamics to the Vlasov equation , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 221 (2016), no. 1, 273–334

work page 2016

[8] [7]

N. Bez, Y. Hong, S. Lee, S. Nakamura and Y. Sawano, On the Strichartz estimates for orthonormal systems of initial data with regularity , Adv. Math. 354 (2019), 106736, 37 pp

work page 2019