Embeddedness and graphicality of the elastic flow for complete curves

Fabian Rupp; Tatsuya Miura

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Embeddedness and graphicality of the elastic flow for complete curves

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read An energy threshold set by the elastic pendant determines whether the elastic flow of a complete planar curve preserves embeddedness.

desk verdict Sharp thresholds for complete-curve elastic flow that look right in the main, with one imported-minimality step that deserves referee scrutiny. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.18979 v1 pith:ORGPD4FO submitted 2025-08-26 math.AP math.DG

Tatsuya Miura , Fabian Rupp This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.APmath.DG MSC 53E4053A0449Q10

keywords elasticflowcompletecurvesembeddednessgraphicalityenergythresholdadaptedLi–Yauinequalityborderlineelastica

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 proves that for the elastic flow of complete, infinite-length planar curves, a single energy number decides whether an embedded curve stays embedded for all time. The threshold is the energy of an explicit shape called the elastic pendant, about 10.906581; any embedded initial curve with adapted energy at or below this value remains embedded and converges to a straight line, and the threshold is optimal because slightly more energy allows embeddedness to break. The paper also proves a sharp graphicality threshold, 8−4√2, determined by an 'elastic serpent' shape, valid in every codimension. A companion Li–Yau type inequality says any complete planar self-intersecting curve has energy at least 8, with equality only for the borderline elastica. These results replace maximum-principle arguments, which are unavailable for fourth-order flows, with variational energy comparisons.

What carries the argument

The adapted elastic energy E[γ]=B[γ]+D[γ], where D[γ]=½∫|∂sγ−e1|²ds is the direction energy: it is finite for complete curves, equals the usual length up to a null Lagrangian on closed arcs, and decays along the flow. The proof pivots on four variational minimizers: semi-infinite borderline-elastica arcs for a prescribed initial angle (Theorem 3.1), the teardrop elastica for C¹-closed arcs with opposite endpoint tangents (Theorems 4.2–4.3), the elastic pendant for zero-rotation complete curves with a tangential self-intersection (Theorem 4.7), and the borderline elastica for self-intersecting curves in general (Theorem 5.6). These variational characterizations supply energy thresholds that p

What would settle it

Run the elastic flow numerically from an embedded curve obtained by perturbing the elastic pendant with energy just below E[γP] and check whether any self-intersection appears before convergence; independently, compute the closed two-teardrop quantity L[γ2T]B[γ2T] to verify the imported minimality constant that fixes the pendant energy.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that positivity preservation for the fourth-order elastic flow can be settled by minimizing the adapted elastic energy E=B+D, where D measures deviation of the tangent from a fixed direction, instead of the canonical elastic energy, which is infinite for complete curves. The paper identifies the elastic pendant as the minimizer of E among complete planar curves with zero rotation number and a tangential self-intersection, and shows its energy is the exact threshold: below it, embeddedness is preserved forever; above it, embeddedness can break in finite time. For graphicality, the elastic serpent, built from two reflected arcs of the borderline elastica, gives the sha

Load-bearing premise

The sharp threshold value E[γP]≈10.906581 rests on an imported minimality theorem for the closed two-teardrop and on the assumption that the first self-intersection encountered by the flow is tangential; if either fails, the pendant value is not the true threshold.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For any embedded complete planar initial curve with E≤E[γP]≈10.906581, the elastic flow remains embedded for all time and converges to a straight line, with all curvature derivatives tending to zero.
The threshold is sharp: for any ε>0 there is an embedded initial curve with E<E[γP]+ε whose flow self-intersects at some finite time, so no larger uniform threshold can hold.
For every codimension n≥2, a graphical complete initial curve with E≤8−4√2 remains graphical for all time, and this threshold is optimal.
Any complete planar self-intersecting curve has E≥8; consequently, a curve with E<8 must be embedded, and an elastic flow starting with E≤8 is either stationary at a borderline elastica or embedded for all time.
A smallness condition on E does not force boundedness or decay of the curve: it admits graphs of unbounded, highly oscillatory functions, so the threshold is genuinely about geometric positivity rather than confinement.

Reading between the lines

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

If the same energy-method transfers to higher codimension, the embeddedness threshold should be the borderline-elastica energy 8 rather than the planar pendant value, as the paper itself suggests; this would mirror the codimension-dependent thresholds already known for closed curves.
The proof structure suggests that embeddedness-breaking for complete planar curves always nucleates as a tangential self-intersection with zero rotation number, so numerical searches near the threshold could focus on one-loop tangential perturbations.
The Li–Yau inequality E≥8 for self-intersecting complete planar curves may extend to all codimensions, but the paper explains why the direct method fails there: semi-infinite arcs alone can have zero energy, so a free-boundary variational problem is needed.
An independent numerical computation of the closed two-teardrop quantity L[γ2T]B[γ2T] would directly test the load-bearing constant behind the pendant threshold.

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 take on Miura-Rupp. The paper does something real: it transplants the authors' closed-curve optimal-threshold program to complete, infinite-length curves using the adapted energy E = B + D, and gets the first sharp embeddedness and graphicality thresholds in that regime. The graphicality threshold 8-4√2 and the embeddedness threshold E[γP] ≈ 10.9066, with the elastic pendant as the unique extremal shape, are new. The Li-Yau type inequality E ≥ 8 for self-intersecting planar complete curves (Theorem 5.6) is a clean addition, and the direct-method argument in Theorem 5.1 with rotation-number control is a genuine piece of work, not a hand-wave. The paper is also honest about what is imported and what remains open (Conjecture 5.9, higher codimension).

The soft spots are in proportion to how the paper is built. The biggest is Theorem 4.2, where the exclusion of minimizers with |N| ≥ 3/2 is dispatched in one sentence by citing [14, Theorem 2.1]. The stress-test note is right that the hypotheses of that theorem are not stated, and the minimizer from the direct method is only an LB-minimizer under specific boundary conditions, not obviously a 'minimal elastic curve' in the sense of [14]. That is a real gap in self-containedness, but I would not call it fatal: the classification of planar elasticae is well-established, and the authors' prior work [11] already used the same two-teardrop minimality. Still, a referee should ask for a proof or a precise statement of the cited rigidity. The other weak spot is Lemma 4.9, whose cut-and-paste proof leans on a figure and terse description; it's probably right, but it needs more details. Theorem 3.1 is sketched as parallel to [13], which is acceptable for a paper in this line.

The citation pattern is heavily self-referential, but that's not a flaw when the prior results are formally verified or externally reproducible; here the core imports are from the authors' own published work, and they are clear about it. The numerical chain (E[γP] = 8-4√2+E[γ̂T], C2T ≈ 146.665 vs the printed 146.628) is consistent and the correction is a useful service.

Bottom line: this is a paper for people working on higher-order geometric flows and elastic curves. It deserves a serious referee, and I would send it with the specific request to check Theorem 4.2 and Lemma 4.9. I would not desk-reject it.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the elastic flow (EF) of complete, non-compact curves in Euclidean space, using the adapted elastic energy E = B + D introduced in the authors' prior work. The main results are: (1) Theorem 1.4: if a complete curve in R^n is graphical and E ≤ E(γS)=8−4√2, then graphicality is preserved, and the threshold is optimal; (2) Theorem 1.1: if a planar complete embedded curve has E ≤ E(γP)≈10.906581, then embeddedness is preserved and the flow converges to a line, and the threshold is optimal; (3) Theorem 5.6: a new Li–Yau type inequality for self-intersecting complete planar curves, E ≥ 8, with rigidity for the borderline elastica. The proofs combine variational minimization of E under geometric constraints (semi-infinite arcs, tangential self-intersections, self-intersections) with the energy-decay and well-posedness theory of [12].

Significance. If correct, the paper provides the first optimal energy thresholds for positivity-preservation of a fourth-order geometric flow in the complete, non-compact setting, with explicit extremal shapes (the elastic serpent and the elastic pendant) and optimality via explicit perturbations. The variational characterizations of the teardrop elastica and the pendant are of independent interest, and the Li–Yau inequality for complete curves is a new result. The paper is generally well-written and many computations are explicit and checkable (e.g., Lemma 3.5, Lemma 5.2). However, two load-bearing steps are not fully verified: the exclusion of higher-rotation-number minimizers in Theorem 4.2 and the application of Theorem 4.3 to cuspidal pieces in Lemma 4.9.

major comments (3)

[§4, proof of Theorem 4.2] The proof excludes minimizers with |N[γ]|≥3/2 by a single sentence: 'then by the well-known classification of planar elasticae ... this contradicts the minimality [14, Theorem 2.1].' This step is load-bearing: it identifies the teardrop as the unique LB-minimizer, which underlies Theorem 4.3, Theorem 4.7, and the sharp threshold in Theorem 1.1. The manuscript does not state the hypotheses of [14, Theorem 2.1] nor verify that the direct-method minimizer (which minimizes LB only among arcs with γ(0)=γ(1), ∂sγ(0)=-∂sγ(1)=e1) is a 'minimal elastic curve' in the sense of [14]. Please provide a full statement and a verification, or give a self-contained proof of the exclusion.
[§4, Lemma 4.9] The proof applies Theorem 4.3 to the compact part γ0 obtained by cutting a figure-eight elastica, but γ0 is described as a 'C^0-closed curve with a cusp.' Theorem 4.3 requires γ∈W^{2,2}(0,1;R^2) with γ(0)=γ(1) and ∂sγ(0)=-∂sγ(1); a cuspidal curve is not an immersion and cannot satisfy the C^1 boundary condition in the usual sense. Since Lemma 4.9 is used in Theorem 4.7 to rule out same-direction self-intersections, this gap must be addressed (e.g., by a regularization argument or a direct estimate for cuspidal loops).
[§4, proof of Theorem 4.7, Case 2] In the same-direction case with N[γ2]=0, the proof invokes [15, Theorem 1.2] to conclude E[γ2]≥E[γ8] for a closed curve γ2 with N[γ2]=0. The quoted theorem is not stated, and it is not clear that its hypotheses (e.g., curve class, length normalization) are met by γ2 after applying Lemma 2.1. Since this bound is used to prove the strict inequality E[γ]>E[γP], the authors should provide the precise statement and verify the applicability.

minor comments (5)

[§4, Remark 4.4] The numerical correction C2T≈146.664860 (as opposed to 146.628 in [11]) is stated without derivation. Since this corrects a published value, please include the computation or a precise reference.
[§3, proof of Theorem 3.1] The phrase 'the integrand of L and of D agree up to a null Lagrangian' is imprecise; the integrands differ pointwise, while the first variations coincide. Suggest rewording.
[General] Load-bearing results from [11], [12], [14], and [15] are invoked without stating their exact statements. Consider adding a 'Quoted theorems' subsection to make the manuscript more self-contained.
[Throughout] Typos: 'F ABIAN RUPP' in the author line; '∂xw0(0)=0 for x=1,...,4' in Lemma 3.5 should read '∂^k_x w0(0)=0 for k=1,...,4'.
[§4, Figure 5] The cut-and-paste procedure in Lemma 4.9 is central but only described in the figure caption; the text should define the cutting points and the inserted segments precisely, especially because the regularity of the resulting compact part is in question (see major comment).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: thresholds are genuine variational minimizers; self-citations are load-bearing but independent published results, not restatements of the target.

full rationale

The claimed derivations do not reduce to their inputs by construction. The graphicality threshold 8−4√2 is obtained in Theorem 3.1/Corollary 3.4 as an explicit lower bound for E on semi-infinite arcs (with equality by the borderline-elastica piece), and the optimality in Theorem 1.4 is shown by an explicit local perturbation (Lemmas 3.5–3.6). The embeddedness threshold E[γP] is obtained in Theorem 4.7 by splitting a self-intersecting zero-rotation curve into two semi-infinite arcs and one closed arc and then applying Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 4.3; Theorem 4.3 is a Cauchy–Schwarz consequence of the scale-invariant two-teardrop minimality, quoted verbatim as Theorem 4.1 = [11, Theorem 1.4]. No parameter is fitted to the flow's behavior, and the optimality examples are constructed at energy E[γP]+ε by explicit competitors, not obtained by reversing the threshold definition. The main caveat is completeness, not circularity: in the proof of Theorem 4.2 the exclusion of |N|≥3/2 minimizers is a single sentence, 'the only possibility is an orbitlike elastica with more than one period of the curvature, but this contradicts the minimality [14, Theorem 2.1]', and the hypotheses of [14, Theorem 2.1] are not stated or verified for the direct-method minimizer; likewise the numerical constant mT comes from [11, Prop. 2.13], and Remark 4.4 even corrects a numerical value in [11]. These are real completeness/rigor risks in an otherwise variational proof, and the cited results are themselves externally published rigidity theorems rather than disguised restatements of this paper's theorem, so they do not amount to circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central claims sit on three stacked layers: (1) variational lower bounds for the adapted energy E = B + D, largely derived in this paper but with Theorem 3.1 sketched from [13]; (2) external benchmarks from the authors' own papers, especially the two-teardrop minimality [11, Theorem 1.4] and the complete-flow theory [12]; (3) numerical localization of the teardrop parameter mT ≈ 0.731183 inherited from [11]. No genuinely postulated entity is introduced; the serpent and pendant are explicit minimizers. The honest bottom line: the threshold numbers are derived, not fitted, but the pipeline certifying them is mostly self-authored.

free parameters (1)

mT (teardrop elastica parameter) = ≈ 0.731183 (unique root of an explicit integral equation, from [11, Proposition 2.13])
Defines the teardrop elastica γT; the numerical values E[γ̂T] ≈ 8.563436 and E[γP] ≈ 10.906581 flow through it. Not fitted to data: mT is fixed by a uniqueness theorem, but it is a numerically located constant inherited from prior work rather than a closed-form value, and the theorems' decimal labels depend on it.

assumptions (6)

standard math Sobolev embedding W^{m,p}(I) ⊂ C^{m-1}(I) for any m ∈ N, p ≥ 1, and any interval I ⊂ R
Stated at the start of Section 2 as the working background for all compactness and regularity steps.
standard math Classification of planar elasticae: finite-energy elasticae are lines or pieces of the borderline elastica γb; orbitlike elasticae with multiple curvature periods are ruled out by stability
Used in Theorem 3.1 (minimizer is a line or borderline piece), Theorem 4.2 (|N[γ̄]| ≥ 3/2 forces an orbitlike elastica), and Theorem 5.1 (an N = 0 minimizer with a self-intersection cannot be an elastica). Cited to [9, 17, 14].
domain assumption Two-teardrop minimality: for immersed closed planar curves with |N| = 1, L[γ]B[γ] ≥ L[γ2T]B[γ2T], equality only for the two-teardrop
Quoted as Theorem 4.1 from the authors' [11, Theorem 1.4]. It is the quantitative source of Theorem 4.3 (E[γ] ≥ E[γ̂T] for arcs with C¹-match endpoints) and hence of the pendant threshold E[γP].
domain assumption Dynamical theory of the complete elastic flow: global well-posedness, adapted-energy decay (1.1), rotation-number preservation, and classification of subsequential limits as lines or γb
Imported from the authors' companion paper [12, Theorems A.2, A.3, 2.2, 7.11, 7.12]. Powers the preservation parts of Theorems 1.1 and 1.4 and the convergence claims.
standard math Hopf's Umlaufsatz and the N = 0 closed-curve figure-eight energy bound of [15, Theorems A.5 and 1.2]
Used in Case 2 of Theorem 4.7: a C¹-closed loop with N = 0 is not embedded and has E ≥ E[γ8] (figure-eight elastica).
standard math Fenchel's theorem: a closed curve has total curvature at least 2π
Used in Theorem 5.1, Step 1, to derive the lower bound s_j > 0 by concatenating each self-intersecting arc with its point reflection.

invented entities (2)

Elastic serpent γS (Definition 3.3) independent evidence
purpose: Unique minimizer of E among complete non-graphical curves; sets the graphicality threshold E[γS] = 8 − 4√2
Explicitly parametrized, arclength-regular (C^{1,1}), plotted in Figure 2; its energy is computed in closed form, so it is a verifiable construction rather than a postulated object.
Elastic pendant γP (Definition 4.5) independent evidence
purpose: Unique minimizer of E among complete planar curves with N = 0 and a tangential self-intersection; sets the embeddedness threshold E[γP] ≈ 10.906581
Explicitly constructed by gluing a reflected borderline-elastica limb, the rescaled teardrop, and a second limb; stated to be C^{2,1} (Remark 4.6); plotted in Figure 1. The energy value combines the closed-form E[γS] with E[γ̂T] ≈ 8.563436.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Embeddedness and graphicality of the elastic flow for complete curves." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ORGPD4FO

@misc{pith2026250818979,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Embeddedness and graphicality of the elastic flow for complete curves},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ORGPD4FO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.18979}
}

read the original abstract

We study positivity-preserving properties for the elastic flow of non-compact, complete curves in Euclidean space. Despite the fact that the canonical elastic energy is infinite in this context, we extend our recent work based on the adapted elastic energy to derive nontrivial optimal thresholds for maintaining planar embeddedness and graphicality, respectively. We also obtain a new Li--Yau type inequality for complete planar curves.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.18979 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Elastic pendant γP : the optimal shape for planar embeddedness-preservation (see Definition 4.5). The space C˙ ∞ used in the sequel denotes smooth functions with bounded derivatives and appears in the well-posedness theory for (EF) developed in [12] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Elastic serpent γS: the optimal shape for graphicalitypreservation (see Definition 3.3) Theorem 1.4. Let n ≥ 2 and γ0 ∈ C˙ ∞(R; Rn) with infR |∂xγ0| > 0. Suppose that γ0 is graphical and E[γ0] ≤ E[γS] = 8 − 4 √ 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** The borderline elastica, parametrized as in (2.1). 3. Graphicality preservation The goal of this section is to prove the graphicality-preservation property of the elastic flow, Theorem 1.4. An important observation here is that a piece of the borderline elastica can be used to produce an optimal threshold for the energy E below which all curves are graphical. We define the borderline elastica with initial angle (cf.… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The borderline elastica γ φ b with initial angle φ ∈ {π, 2 3 π, 1 3 π}. a vector b ∈ Rn and an orthogonal matrix A ∈ O(n) with Ae1 = e1 such that Φ(x) = Ax + b for x ∈ Rn. Theorem 3.1. Let φ ∈ (0, π]. Let γ : [0, ∞) → Rn be an immersion such that infR |∂xγ| > 0 and γ|[…

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Cut-and-paste procedure (top to bottom). The vertical bars correspond to cutting points that are separated after translation. The dots mark points that are joined tangentially after translation. The dashed lines represent the additional segments added in the process. …

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

One thousand and one higher-order geometric flows of networks
math.AP 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

For every order m≥2 and every admissible set of junction/endpoint conditions, the L²-gradient flow of ∫|∂s^m γ|²/2 + length/2 exists uniquely up to reparametrization for a short time, and either runs forever or degene...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[14]

Miura and K

T. Miura and K. Yoshizawa, General rigidity principles for stable and minimal elastic curves , J. Reine Angew. Math. 810 (2024), 253–281. MR4739246

work page 2024
[11]

Miura, M

T. Miura, M. M¨ uller, and F. Rupp,Optimal thresholds for preserving embeddedness of elastic flows, Amer. J. Math. 147 (2025), no. 1, 33–80

work page 2025
[13]

Miura and G

T. Miura and G. Wheeler, Uniqueness and minimality of Euler’s elastica with monotone curvature, arXiv:2402.12771, to appear in J. Eur. Math. Soc. (2024). 22 T. MIURA AND F. RUPP

arXiv 2024
[12]

Miura and F

T. Miura and F. Rupp, A new energy method for shortening and straightening complete curves, arXiv:2504.03395 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[1]

Blatt, Loss of convexity and embeddedness for geometric evolution equations of higher order, J

S. Blatt, Loss of convexity and embeddedness for geometric evolution equations of higher order, J. Evol. Equ. 10 (2010), no. 1, 21–27. MR2602925

work page 2010
[2]

Dall’Acqua, C.-C

A. Dall’Acqua, C.-C. Lin, and P. Pozzi, Elastic flow of networks: short-time existence result , J. Evol. Equ. 21 (2021), no. 2, 1299–1344. MR4278396

work page 2021
[3]

Dziuk, E

G. Dziuk, E. Kuwert, and R. Sch¨ atzle, Evolution of elastic curves in Rn: existence and computation, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 33 (2002), no. 5, 1228–1245. MR1897710

work page 2002
[4]

C. M. Elliott and S. Maier-Paape, Losing a graph with surface diffusion , Hokkaido Math. J. 30 (2001), no. 2, 297–305. MR1844821

work page 2001

Show all 17 references

[5]

Kemmochi and T

T. Kemmochi and T. Miura, Migrating elastic flows , J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 185 (2024), 47–62. MR4717710

2024
[6]

Mantegazza, A

C. Mantegazza, A. Pluda, and M. Pozzetta, A survey of the elastic flow of curves and net- works, Milan J. Math. 89 (2021), no. 1, 59–121. MR4277362

2021
[7]

Miura, Elastic curves and phase transitions , Math

T. Miura, Elastic curves and phase transitions , Math. Ann. 376 (2020), no. 3-4, 1629–1674. MR4081125

2020
[8]

Miura, Li-Yau type inequality for curves in any codimension, Calc

T. Miura, Li-Yau type inequality for curves in any codimension, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 62 (2023), no. 8, Paper No. 216, 28. MR4631455

2023
[9]

Miura, Elastic curves and self-intersections, arXiv:2408.03020, to appear in 2024 MATRIX Annals (2024)

T. Miura, Elastic curves and self-intersections, arXiv:2408.03020, to appear in 2024 MATRIX Annals (2024)

2024
[10]

Miura, Migrating elastic flows II, Int

T. Miura, Migrating elastic flows II, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN11 (2025), Paper No. rnaf148,

2025
[15]

M¨ uller and F

M. M¨ uller and F. Rupp, A Li-Yau inequality for the 1-dimensional Willmore energy , Adv. Calc. Var. 16 (2023), no. 2, 337–362. MR4565935

2023
[16]

Novaga and S

M. Novaga and S. Okabe, Curve shortening-straightening flow for non-closed planar curves with infinite length , J. Differential Equations 256 (2014), no. 3, 1093–1132. MR3128933

2014
[17]

D. A. Singer, Lectures on elastic curves and rods , Curvature and variational modeling in physics and biophysics, 2008, pp. 3–32. (T. Miura) Department of Mathematics, Graduate School of Science, Kyoto Univer- sity, Kitashirakawa Oiwake-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan Ema...

2008

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [14]

Miura and K

T. Miura and K. Yoshizawa, General rigidity principles for stable and minimal elastic curves , J. Reine Angew. Math. 810 (2024), 253–281. MR4739246

work page 2024

[2] [11]

Miura, M

T. Miura, M. M¨ uller, and F. Rupp,Optimal thresholds for preserving embeddedness of elastic flows, Amer. J. Math. 147 (2025), no. 1, 33–80

work page 2025

[3] [13]

Miura and G

T. Miura and G. Wheeler, Uniqueness and minimality of Euler’s elastica with monotone curvature, arXiv:2402.12771, to appear in J. Eur. Math. Soc. (2024). 22 T. MIURA AND F. RUPP

arXiv 2024

[4] [12]

Miura and F

T. Miura and F. Rupp, A new energy method for shortening and straightening complete curves, arXiv:2504.03395 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025

[5] [1]

Blatt, Loss of convexity and embeddedness for geometric evolution equations of higher order, J

S. Blatt, Loss of convexity and embeddedness for geometric evolution equations of higher order, J. Evol. Equ. 10 (2010), no. 1, 21–27. MR2602925

work page 2010

[6] [2]

Dall’Acqua, C.-C

A. Dall’Acqua, C.-C. Lin, and P. Pozzi, Elastic flow of networks: short-time existence result , J. Evol. Equ. 21 (2021), no. 2, 1299–1344. MR4278396

work page 2021

[7] [3]

Dziuk, E

G. Dziuk, E. Kuwert, and R. Sch¨ atzle, Evolution of elastic curves in Rn: existence and computation, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 33 (2002), no. 5, 1228–1245. MR1897710

work page 2002

[8] [4]

C. M. Elliott and S. Maier-Paape, Losing a graph with surface diffusion , Hokkaido Math. J. 30 (2001), no. 2, 297–305. MR1844821

work page 2001