Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 49 references

Sharp multiscale control for high order nonlinear equations

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A blowing-up family of solutions to a high-order critical equation is controlled uniformly on the whole manifold by a smooth limit plus finitely many standard peaks.

desk verdict Sharp multiscale bubble control for all orders: structure is sound, the result is the expected endpoint, and the only real risk is the dependency on the companion preprint. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.07517 v1 pith:J2NDWGU2 submitted 2025-09-09 math.AP

Frédéric Robert This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35J3535J6035B4435J0858J05
keywords criticalellipticequationsblow-upanalysispolyharmonicoperatorsconcentrationphenomenapointwiseestimatesGreen'sfunctionHardypotentialmulti-bumpsolutions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proves that when solutions to a high-order critical semilinear equation on a compact manifold blow up, the blow-up is tightly organized: the whole family is squeezed, point by point and uniformly in the parameter, between a smooth limiting solution and a finite sum of explicit standard peaks. This is the sharp multiscale control of Theorem 1.1, valid for every order 2 ≤ 2k < n, for sign-changing solutions, and for general coercive elliptic operators of the SCC type. It turns the qualitative weak decomposition of bubbling sequences into a quantitative pointwise estimate on the entire manifold. The proof writes the equation as a linear problem with a small Hardy-type potential and controls the Green's function with several poles, including poles that coalesce. This pointwise control is the known route to compactness and stability results for critical equations.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Green's function of the linearized operator P_α − V_α, where V_α = |u_α|^{2^*-2} behaves like a small Hardy potential λ R^{-2k} away from the N concentration points. The proof builds a partial order on the concentration points from the ratios of the scales μ_{α,i} and the mutual distances, decomposes the manifold into domains where only the maximal elements matter, and represents u_α on each domain by Green's formula. The new technical core is a uniform pointwise estimate for the Green's function with several poles, uniform over all pole configurations including coalescing poles (Theorem 5.2, inequality (85)); that uniformity, supplied by Lemma 9.1, is what con

What would settle it

Compute the Green's function for P − λR^{-2k} on a flat torus with two poles p1,p2 satisfying d(p1,p2) ≍ μ1 and μ2 = o(μ1); if the constant in estimate (85) diverges as the poles coalesce, the uniformity lemma fails. Alternatively, a sequence of two-bubble solutions whose pointwise profile near the larger bubble exceeds the right-hand side of (4) by a growing factor would refute Theorem 1.1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under the SCC condition (uniform coercivity and C^{i,θ} convergence of the coefficient tensors), whenever ∥u_α∥_{2^*} ≤ Λ and max_M |u_α| → ∞, Theorem 1.1 asserts that there exist u_∞ ∈ C^{2k}(M), an integer N ≥ 1, and concentration points z_{α,i} with μ_{α,i} = |u_α(z_{α,i})|^{-2/(n-2k)} such that |u_α(x)| ≤ C∥u_∞∥_∞ + C Σ_i (μ_{α,i}/(μ_{α,i}^2 + d_g(x,z_{α,i})^2))^{(n-2k)/2} for every x ∈ M. The family converges to u_∞ in C^{2k}_{loc} away from the limit points, and each rescaled peak converges in C^{2k}_{loc} away from the other bubbles to a nonzero solution of the Euclidean model Δ^k U = |U|^{2^*-2}U. The scales obey a clean alternative: either d_g(z_{α,i}, z_{α,j})/μ_{α,i} → +∞, or d_g(

Load-bearing premise

The proof leans on a uniformity lemma: for any configuration of N poles, even as two poles coalesce, a solution of the linearized equation with a small Hardy-type potential decays at a fixed rate with one constant independent of the configuration; if that constant grows in the coalescing case, the main pointwise bound loses uniformity exactly where it is needed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every blowing-up family satisfying the hypotheses, the pointwise bound (4) holds on all of M, so the bubble description is global rather than only in a weak or local sense.
  • The number of bubbles is controlled by the energy: N ≤ Λ^{2^*} K(n,k)^{n/(2k)}; increasing the allowed energy can only add a bounded number of new peaks.
  • The scale alternative in (42) gives a sharp description of bubble accumulation: whenever two bubbles remain within distance comparable to the larger width, the smaller width must be infinitesimal relative to the larger.
  • For k=1 the theorem recovers the known pointwise control for sign-changing solutions and general operators, and for k>1 it provides what was previously available only for a single bubble or for special geometric operators with positive Green's functions.
  • The convergence statements in C^{2k}_{loc} away from the concentration set upgrade weak compactness to strong convergence of the rescaled profiles, including for sign-changing solutions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, this pointwise control should feed directly into compactness arguments: with it, the classical strategy of isolating simple blow-up points for second-order conformal problems can be rerun for fourth-order curvature equations in dimensions where compactness is known.
  • Beyond the paper, the multi-pole Green's function estimate looks adaptable to elliptic systems and to operators with unbounded coefficients, since the one-pole case has already been treated; the uniformity over coalescing poles is the property that would need to be re-proved.
  • Beyond the paper, a numerical check on a flat torus with two approaching poles could test the sharpness of the uniform constant: if the constant in the pointwise estimate diverges as d(p1,p2) becomes comparable to the larger bubble width and the smaller width tends to zero, the uniformity statement would fail.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proves a sharp pointwise blow-up profile for families of solutions to high-order (order 2k, 2 ≤ 2k < n) critical elliptic equations on compact Riemannian manifolds, under uniform L^{2*} bounds and a strong coefficient-convergence condition (SCC). Theorem 1.1 asserts that, up to extraction, any such family is bounded pointwise by C||u_∞||_∞ plus a finite sum of explicit standard bubbles, uniformly on the whole manifold, with bubble-normalized convergence away from the concentration sets. The proof combines an exhaustion argument that saturates the number of concentration points (Section 3), a partial order on those points that separates scales and locations (Section 4.1), and pointwise estimates for Green's functions with multiple Hardy-potential singularities (Sections 5-9). The main technical novelty is the uniform-in-configuration estimate for Green's functions when poles coalesce, Lemma 9.1.

Significance. If Theorem 1.1 is correct, it gives the first pointwise, uniform-on-M version of the Struwe/Lions bubble decomposition for arbitrary order 2k, sign-changing solutions, and general operators under a uniform energy bound. This goes substantially beyond the second-order results of Premoselli and earlier positive-solution results, and it does so without positivity, maximum-principle, or isolated-blow-up assumptions. The proof strategy is largely self-contained in structure: the exhaustion argument and the multiscale order are explicit, there are no fitted parameters, and the crucial Hardy-potential regularity lemma is proved in the paper. The main external dependence is on the companion preprint [41] for several foundational elliptic-regularity and Green's-function statements.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.3, after (84)] The assertion 'Since z_α ∈ D_{J0,α}(4R) for α→+∞' is not justified and is false in an important subcase. If z_α approaches z_{α,i} at the bubble scale μ_{α,i} for some i∈J0 (e.g., z_α = z_{α,i}), then z_α lies in the excluded ball B_{4R μ_{α,i}}(z_{α,i}), so (84) does not apply. This is a load-bearing step: it is exactly the case where the point is close to a smaller bubble inside a larger one. The proof should either split off this subcase and apply (43) at the smaller bubble, iterating along the finite chain of bubbles until a scale is reached where z_α lies in the good region, or modify the domain D_{J0,α}(R) so that the representation argument covers these points. As written, the pointwise bound is not established for all z_α satisfying (75).
  2. [§4.3, definition of l] The text sets 'l := min I for ⪯'. With the order defined in §4.1 this is inconsistent with the subsequent case split: if l is minimal, then I_l = {j≠l : d_g(z_{α,l}, z_{α,j}) = O(μ_{α,l})} is empty by (42), so the second case 'there exists i∈I_l with d_g(z_α,z_{α,i})=o(μ_{α,l})' cannot occur. The analysis only makes sense if l is a maximal element of I for ⪯ (the largest scale among the approached bubbles). I take this to be a typo, but it needs correction: as written, the case structure collapses and the proof of (77)/(84) is unclear.
  3. [Sections 5, 9 and companion [41]] Several essential tools are imported from the companion preprint [41]: the elliptic-regularity Theorems D.1-D.4, the uniqueness of the Green's function for P−V, and the N=1 Hardy-regularity estimates. These are used in the proof of Theorem 5.1, Theorem 5.2, and Lemma 9.1. Since [41] is itself an arXiv preprint, the present paper's central claim is not self-contained. I recommend that the editor require either (a) a public, stable version of [41] with the cited statements verified, or (b) inclusion of the needed statements/proofs in an appendix. This is a verifiability concern rather than a demonstrated mathematical error, but it is load-bearing because the Green's-function estimates feed directly into the main pointwise bound.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] Typo: 'MUL TISCALE' should be 'MULTISCALE'.
  2. [§3, Lemma 3.2] 'It follows form (3)' should be 'from (3)'.
  3. [§4.1] In the proof of antisymmetry of ⪯, the conclusion 'this contradicts (42) when i≠j' relies on the second alternative of (42); this is correct but could be made explicit for readability.
  4. [§4.2, §4.3] The notation M−Ω_{i,α}(R), x∈M−˜Ω_{p,α}(R) in Proposition 3.4 and Theorem 3.1 is ambiguous: it should read M − ⋃_i Ω_{i,α}(R) and M − ⋃_p ˜Ω_{p,α}(R).
  5. [Theorem 5.2] Typo in the statement: 'for any l_1, l_1 ≤ 2k−1' should be 'l_1, l_2 ≤ 2k−1'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the pointwise bubble control is an a priori estimate using the solution's own concentration centers/scales; self-citations are auxiliary.

full rationale

The claimed derivation chain is: Section 3 exhausts concentration points (Theorem 3.2, (45)) from the energy bound and Sobolev embedding; Section 4 converts that exhaustion into the pointwise bound (4) via Green's representation and the Hardy-potential Green's-function estimates (Theorems 5.1 and 5.2); Sections 5–9 prove those estimates, with Lemma 9.1 proved by contradiction, rescaling, and Poisson-kernel integration. I inspected the places where a reduction to the input might occur. The right-hand side of (4) is built from |u_α(z_{α,i})| and d_g(·, z_{α,i}), so at a peak point the inequality is trivially true; the content is the uniform control at all other points, and that control is obtained by a priori estimates, not by fitting. The quantities μ_{α,i} are not free parameters fitted to make the inequality hold; they are defined from the solution and then shown to satisfy (4). Lemma 9.1 is the most fragile step, but its uniformity over coalescing poles is argued by extracting a rescaled limit and deriving a contradiction from the Poisson kernel; it does not assume the conclusion. The only self-citations are to the author's [41] for elliptic-regularity statements (which the paper explicitly says are extracted from Agmon–Douglis–Nirenberg [1]) and for the N=1 Green's-function machinery; these are auxiliary and a verification dependency rather than a circular reduction. No fitted input is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem from the same authors is imported to force a choice, and no ansatz is smuggled in via citation. I therefore find no exhibited circular step.

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

Theorem 1.1 is an a priori estimate: no numerical parameter is fitted anywhere and all constants are existential consequences of the analysis. The auxiliary exponent γ ∈ (0, min{(n-2k)/2, k/(2*-1)}) is any admissible choice, not fitted to make the conclusion hold. The axioms are the theorem's own domain assumptions (SCC) plus standard background results (elliptic regularity, Hardy inequality, bubble classification, regularity of weak solutions). The one structural dependency worth noting is that the regularity statements of Agmon-Douglis-Nirenberg are used in the precise forms quoted from the author's companion [41], and the Hardy inequality is imported through [41] as well.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Uniform coercivity of the operator family (P_α) (Definition 2.1, SCC condition)
    Hypothesis of Theorem 1.1; yields the H^{2k} bound (11) from the energy bound (9) via (10); without it the blow-up analysis does not start.
  • domain assumption C^{i,θ} convergence of coefficients A^{(i)}_α to A^{(i)}_∞ (Definition 2.1)
    Used to pass to limits (Lemma 3.3) and to keep the rescaled lower-order coefficients bounded in Sections 3, 6 and 7.
  • standard math Agmon-Douglis-Nirenberg elliptic regularity, as quoted in Theorems D.1-D.4 of [41]
    The paper's standing reference ('Elliptic regularity theory', stated in Section 2) for C^{2k}, Sobolev and C^{0,θ} regularity of solutions of (P-V)φ = f; the precise statements are imported from the author's companion [41].
  • standard math Higher-order Hardy inequality on compact manifolds (Mitidieri [35], adapted in [41])
    Gives ||u/d(·,p)^k||_2 ≤ C_H ||u||_{H^{2k}}, uniformly in p; it underlies the Hardy-potential framework (|V| ≤ λR^{-2k}) in Sections 4, 5 and 9.
  • standard math Wei-Xu classification [48]: positive solutions of Δ^k U = |U|^{2*-2}U on R^n are exactly the standard bubbles U_{μ,x₀}
    Identifies the blow-up profiles in Lemmas 3.1-3.2 and yields the per-bubble energy lower bound (14); the peaks in (4) are these functions.
  • standard math Mazumdar [33]: weak H^{2k} solutions of critical polyharmonic equations are strong C^{2k} solutions
    Used in Lemma 3.3 to upgrade the weak limit u_∞ to a strong solution and to justify convergence in C^{2k}_{loc}.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Sharp multiscale control for high order nonlinear equations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/J2NDWGU2

@misc{pith2026250907517,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Sharp multiscale control for high order nonlinear equations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/J2NDWGU2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.07517}
}
abstract

We analyze the behavior of families $(u_\alpha)_{\alpha>0}$ of solutions to the high-order critical equation $P_\alpha u_\alpha=\Delta_g^k u_\alpha +\hbox{lot}=|u_\alpha|^{2^\star-2}u_\alpha$ on a Riemannian manifold $M$, with a uniform bound on the Dirichlet energy. We prove a sharp pointwise control of the $u_\alpha$'s by a sum of bubbles uniformly with respect to $\alpha\to +\infty$, that is $|u_\alpha|\leq C\Vert u_\infty \Vert_\infty +C\sum_{i=1}^NB_{i,\alpha}$ where $u_\infty \in C^{2k}(M)$ and the $(B_{i,\alpha})_\alpha$, $i=1,...,N$ are explicit standard peaks.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [41]

    Fr´ ed´ eric Robert,Localization of bubbling for high order nonlinear equations, 2024.arXiv:2501.00531

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Agmon, A

    S. Agmon, A. Douglis, and L. Nirenberg,Estimates near the boundary for solutions of elliptic partial differential equations satisfying general boundary conditions. I, Comm. Pure Appl. Math.12(1959), 623–727

    work page 1959

  3. [2]

    Atkinson and Lambertus A

    Frederick V. Atkinson and Lambertus A. Peletier,Elliptic equations with nearly critical growth, J. Differential Equations70(1987), no. 3, 349–365. SHARP MULTISCALE CONTROL FOR HIGH ORDER NONLINEAR EQUATIONS 37

    work page 1987

  4. [3]

    Lorenzo Carletti,Attaining the optimal constant for higher-order Sobolev inequalities on manifolds via asymptotic analysis, J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2)111(2025), no. 5

    work page 2025

  5. [4]

    Hussein Cheikh-Ali and Bruno Premoselli,Compactness results for Sign-Changing Solutions of critical nonlinear elliptic equations of low energy, Analysis and PDEs, to appear (2024)

    work page 2024

  6. [5]

    Pure Appl

    Chiun-Chuan Chen and Chang-Shou Lin,Estimates of the conformal scalar curvature equa- tion via the method of moving planes, Comm. Pure Appl. Math.50(1997), no. 10, 971–1017

    work page 1997

  7. [6]

    ,Estimate of the conformal scalar curvature equation via the method of moving planes. II, J. Differential Geom.49(1998), no. 1, 115–178

    work page 1998

  8. [7]

    Differential Geom.63(2003), no

    Olivier Druet,From one bubble to several bubbles: the low-dimensional case, J. Differential Geom.63(2003), no. 3, 399–473

    work page 2003

Show all 49 references
  1. [8]

    ,Compactness for Yamabe metrics in low dimensions, Int. Math. Res. Not.23(2004), 1143–1191

    2004

  2. [9]

    PDE2(2009), no

    Olivier Druet and Emmanuel Hebey,Stability for strongly coupled critical elliptic systems in a fully inhomogeneous medium, Anal. PDE2(2009), no. 3, 305–359

    2009

  3. [10]

    45, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2004

    Olivier Druet, Emmanuel Hebey, and Fr´ ed´ eric Robert,Blow-up theory for elliptic PDEs in Riemannian geometry, Mathematical Notes, vol. 45, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2004

    2004

  4. [11]

    Olivier Druet and Paul Laurain,Stability of the Pohoˇ zaev obstruction in dimension 3, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS)12(2010), no. 5, 1117–1149

    2010

  5. [12]

    Differential Equations320(2022), 510–557

    Nassif Ghoussoub, Saikat Mazumdar, and Fr´ ed´ eric Robert,The Hardy-Schr¨ odinger operator on the Poincar´ e ball: compactness, multiplicity, and stability of the Pohozaev obstruction, J. Differential Equations320(2022), 510–557

    2022

  6. [13]

    1415, 510–557

    ,Multiplicity and stability of the Pohozaev obstructions for Hardy-Schr¨ odinger equa- tions with boundary singularity, Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society285(2023), no. 1415, 510–557

    2023

  7. [14]

    Liuwei Gong, Seunghyeok Kim, and Juncheng Wei,Compactness of theQ-curvature problem, 2025.arXiv:2502.14237

    2025

  8. [15]

    Hans-Christoph Grunau and Fr´ ed´ eric Robert,Positivity and almost positivity of bihar- monic Green ’s functions under Dirichlet boundary conditions, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 195(2010), no. 3, 865–898

    2010

  9. [16]

    Hans-Christoph Grunau, Fr´ ed´ eric Robert, and Guido Sweers,Optimal estimates from below for biharmonic Green functions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.139(2011), no. 6, 2151–2161

    2011

  10. [17]

    Zheng-Chao Han,Asymptotic approach to singular solutions for nonlinear elliptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponent, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e C Anal. Non Lin´ eaire8(1991), no. 2, 159–174

    1991

  11. [18]

    Emmanuel Hebey,Sharp Sobolev inequalities of second order, J. Geom. Anal.13(2003), no. 1, 145–162

    2003

  12. [19]

    ,Compactness and stability for nonlinear elliptic equations, Zurich Lectures in Ad- vanced Mathematics, European Mathematical Society (EMS), Z¨ urich, 2014

    2014

  13. [20]

    Emmanuel Hebey and Fr´ ed´ eric Robert,Asymptotic analysis for fourth order Paneitz equa- tions with critical growth, Adv. Calc. Var.4(2011), no. 3, 229–275

    2011

  14. [21]

    Emmanuel Hebey, Fr´ ed´ eric Robert, and Yuliang Wen,Compactness and global estimates for a fourth order equation of critical Sobolev growth arising from conformal geometry, Commun. Contemp. Math.8(2006), no. 1, 9–65

    2006

  15. [22]

    J.79(1995), no

    Emmanuel Hebey and Michel Vaugon,The best constant problem in the Sobolev embedding theorem for complete Riemannian manifolds, Duke Math. J.79(1995), no. 1, 235–279

    1995

  16. [23]

    Khuri, Fernando C

    Marcus A. Khuri, Fernando C. Marques, and Richard M. Schoen,A compactness theorem for the Yamabe problem, J. Differential Geom.81(2009), no. 1, 143–196

    2009

  17. [24]

    YanYan Li,Prescribing scalar curvature onS n and related problems. I, J. Differential Equa- tions120(1995), no. 2, 319–410

    1995

  18. [25]

    ,Prescribing scalar curvature onS n and related problems. II. Existence and com- pactness, Comm. Pure Appl. Math.49(1996), no. 6, 541–597

    1996

  19. [26]

    YanYan Li and Jingang Xiong,Compactness of conformal metrics with constantQ-curvature. I, Adv. Math.345(2019), 116–160

    2019

  20. [27]

    II, Calc

    YanYan Li and Lei Zhang,Compactness of solutions to the Yamabe problem. II, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations24(2005), no. 2, 185–237

    2005

  21. [28]

    ,Compactness of solutions to the Yamabe problem. III, J. Funct. Anal.245(2007), no. 2, 438–474. 38 FR ´ED ´ERIC ROBERT

    2007

  22. [29]

    Zhu,Yamabe type equations on three-dimensional Riemannian manifolds, Commun

    YanYan Li and Meijun J. Zhu,Yamabe type equations on three-dimensional Riemannian manifolds, Commun. Contemp. Math.1(1999), no. 1, 1–50

    1999

  23. [30]

    III, Comm

    Chang-Shou Lin,Estimates of the scalar curvature equation via the method of moving planes. III, Comm. Pure Appl. Math.53(2000), no. 5, 611–646

    2000

  24. [31]

    The limit case

    Pierre-Louis Lions,The concentration-compactness principle in the calculus of variations. The limit case. II, Revista Matem´ atica Iberoamericana1(1985), no. 2, 45–121, available at https://eudml.org/doc/39321

    1985

  25. [32]

    Marques,A priori estimates for the Yamabe problem in the non-locally confor- mally flat case, J

    Fernando C. Marques,A priori estimates for the Yamabe problem in the non-locally confor- mally flat case, J. Differential Geom.71(2005), no. 2, 315–346

    2005

  26. [33]

    Differential Equations261(2016), no

    Saikat Mazumdar,GJMS-type operators on a compact Riemannian manifold: best constants and Coron-type solutions, J. Differential Equations261(2016), no. 9, 4997–5034

    2016

  27. [34]

    1, 311–330

    ,Struwe’s decomposition for a polyharmonic operator on a compact Riemannian man- ifold with or without boundary, Communications on Pure and Applied Analysis16(2017), no. 1, 311–330

    2017

  28. [35]

    Zametki67(2000), no

    Enzo Mitidieri,A simple approach to Hardy inequalities, Mat. Zametki67(2000), no. 4, 563–572; English transl., Math. Notes67(2000), no. 3-4, 479–486

    2000

  29. [36]

    Bruno Premoselli,A priori estimates for finite-energy sign-changing blowing-up solutions of critical elliptic equations, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN6(2024), 5212–5273

    2024

  30. [37]

    6, 110808

    Bruno Premoselli and Fr´ ed´ eric Robert,One-bubble nodal blow-up for asymptotically critical stationary Schr¨ odinger-type equations, Journal of Functional Analysis288(2025), no. 6, 110808

    2025

  31. [38]

    Bruno Premoselli and J´ erˆ ome V´ etois,Stability and instability results for sign-changing solu- tions to second-order critical elliptic equations, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9)167(2022), 257–293

    2022

  32. [39]

    Math.410(2022), Paper No

    ,Sign-changing blow-up for the Yamabe equation at the lowest energy level, Adv. Math.410(2022), Paper No. 108769, 50

    2022

  33. [40]

    https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.07823

    ,Nonexistence of minimizers for the second conformal eigenvalue near the round sphere in low dimensions. https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.07823

    arXiv

  34. [42]

    Differential Geom

    Fr´ ed´ eric Robert and J´ erˆ ome V´ etois,Examples of non-isolated blow-up for perturbations of the scalar curvature equation on non-locally conformally flat manifolds, J. Differential Geom. 98(2014), no. 2, 349–356

    2014

  35. [43]

    Richard M. Schoen,Variational theory for the total scalar curvature functional for Riemann- ian metrics and related topics, Topics in calculus of variations (Montecatini Terme, 1987), Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 1365, Springer, Berlin, 1989, pp. 120–154

    1987

  36. [44]

    https://sites.math.washington.edu/ pollack/research/Schoen-1988-notes.html

    ,Notes from graduate lectures in Stanford University(1988). https://sites.math.washington.edu/ pollack/research/Schoen-1988-notes.html

    1988

  37. [45]

    Schoen and Dong Zhang,Prescribed scalar curvature on then-sphere, Calc

    Richard M. Schoen and Dong Zhang,Prescribed scalar curvature on then-sphere, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations4(1996), no. 1, 1–25

    1996

  38. [46]

    Michael Struwe,A global compactness result for elliptic boundary value problems involving limiting nonlinearities, Mathematische Zeitschrift187(1984), 511–517, available athttps: //eudml.org/doc/173508

    1984

  39. [47]

    R. C. A. M. Van der Vorst,Best constant for the embedding of the spaceH 2 ∩H 1 0 (Ω)into L2N/(N−4) (Ω), Differential Integral Equations6(1993), no. 2, 259–276

    1993

  40. [48]

    Ann.313(1999), no

    Juncheng Wei and Xingwang Xu,Classification of solutions of higher order conformally invariant equations, Math. Ann.313(1999), no. 2, 207–228

    1999

  41. [49]

    1-2, 123–164

    Juncheng Wei and Chunyi Zhao,Non-compactness of the prescribedQ-curvature problem in large dimensions, Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations46(2013), no. 1-2, 123–164. Fr´ed´eric Robert, Institut ´Elie Cartan, Universit´e de Lorraine, CNRS, IECL, F-54000 Na...

    2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.