Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 54 references

Spectral minimal partitions of unbounded domains

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For unbounded domains, spectral minimal partitions exist when the optimal energy is strictly below a threshold determined by the essential spectrum, and then each cell has a simple isolated eigenvalue (a ground state).

arxiv 2510.00811 v2 pith:TRUGLF43 submitted 2025-10-01 math.SP math.AP

Matthias Hofmann , James B. Kennedy , Hugo Tavares This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.SPmath.AP MSC 35J1035B6535J2081Q10
keywords spectralminimalpartitionsunboundeddomainsSchrödingeroperatoressentialspectrumgroundstatesconcentration-compactnessequipartitionthreshold
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 extends the theory of spectral minimal partitions—dividing a domain into k pieces to minimize the p-norm of the pieces' lowest eigenvalues—to unbounded domains, where classical existence proofs fail because the spectrum is no longer discrete. The central result is a threshold: the infimum partition energy is always at most a value T_{k,p} built from the bottom of the essential spectrum and the (k−1)-partition energy, and if the energy is strictly below this threshold, an optimal partition always exists and every cell has a genuine ground state. The proof works through a relaxed variational problem over L²-orthogonal function tuples and a concentration-compactness argument that separates each function into a part near the origin and a part escaping to infinity. The paper also shows that at the threshold, behavior becomes delicate and p-dependent: for p=∞, minimizers always exist (but may lack ground states and need not be equipartitions), while for p<∞, minimizers may cease to exist entirely.

What carries the argument

The central object is the relaxed functional eΛ_{k,p} defined on k-tuples of L²-orthogonal functions in H^1_{0,V}(Ω), whose infimum eL_{k,p} equals the partition infimum L_{k,p}. The threshold T_{k,p} uses Σ(Ω), the bottom of the essential spectrum (via Persson's characterization), and the (k−1)-partition energy. The proof of existence below the threshold uses IMS localization: cutoffs φ_n, ψ_n with φ_n²+ψ_n²=1 split each function into a part supported near the origin and a part escaping to infinity; the strict threshold inequality forces every component of the limit to be nonzero and yields strong H¹ convergence of the minimizing sequence.

What would settle it

Find a domain Ω and a nonnegative potential V for which eL_{k,p}(Ω) < T_{k,p}(Ω) but eL_{k,p} has no minimizer. The paper's Theorem 1.4 asserts this cannot happen; any such pair is a counterexample. A concrete candidate family is the half-strip of Example 6.9 with a step potential tuned so that the strict inequality (1.10) holds but numerically the minimizing sequence escapes to infinity without converging in L².

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's core claim is Theorem 1.4: if the relaxed infimum eL_{k,p}(Ω) is strictly smaller than the threshold T_{k,p}(Ω) = (L_{k−1,p}(Ω)^p + Σ(Ω)^p)^{1/p} for p<∞, or than Σ(Ω) for p=∞, then eL_{k,p} is attained by k nonzero, L²-orthogonal functions. Combined with the regularity Theorem 1.6, the supports form a minimizing partition whose cells each carry a simple isolated eigenvalue (a ground state). The paper further establishes that L_{k,p}=eL_{k,p} always, and that for p=∞ a minimizer always exists, but at the threshold it may be a non-equipartition and its cells may lack ground states; for p<∞, neither formulation need admit a minimizer when the threshold is reached.

Load-bearing premise

The proof for 1<p<∞ assumes the potential V is never negative; if V had a negative region, the energy comparison that keeps the minimizing mass from escaping to infinity would break down.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every k and p, L_{k,p}(Ω)=eL_{k,p}(Ω), so the function-based relaxed problem is the right object even when no set-based minimizer exists.
  • Strictly below the threshold, minimizers are Lipschitz, the supports form a partition with nodal-set regularity (C^{1,α} surfaces except a singular set of codimension at least two), and each cell has a simple isolated eigenvalue; below-threshold partitions are fully classical.
  • When the domain is bounded or the potential grows to infinity at infinity, Σ(Ω)=∞, so the strict inequality is automatic and the results reduce to the previously known existence and regularity theory.
  • For p=∞, L_{k,∞}(Ω) is always attained; below the threshold one can always find an equipartition minimizer, while at the threshold there are minimizers that are not equipartitions.
  • The inequality L_{k,p}(Ω)≥λ_k(Ω) and the counting bound \(\widetilde{N}_p(c)\) ≤ N(c,−Δ+V) couple partition existence to the spectral counting function, so the number of below-threshold achievable partitions is bounded by the number of eigenvalues below Σ(Ω).

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension suggested by the continuity results in p: the threshold gap eL_{k,p}<T_{k,p} should persist under small localized perturbations of V, so nearby potentials should exhibit the same existence/nonexistence pattern—a claim one could test numerically.
  • The IMS localization strategy reveals a transferable principle: strict a-priori energy bounds against a Persson-type essential-spectrum threshold convert weak precompactness into strong convergence; applying the same template to systems of elliptic equations with critical growth could yield analogous existence criteria.
  • The examples show that spectral minimal partitions of unbounded domains can have disconnected cells or cells that do not exhaust the domain, so numerical methods for these problems must accommodate cells that are neither compactly contained nor connected.
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

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a theory of spectral minimal partitions for Schrödinger operators on unbounded, possibly infinite-volume domains. For open sets ω⊂Ω it replaces Dirichlet first eigenvalues by the bottom λ(ω) of the spectrum, defines partition functionals Λ_{k,p} and their relaxed counterparts eΛ_{k,p} on k-tuples of mutually orthogonal functions, and studies the infima L_{k,p}(Ω) and eL_{k,p}(Ω). The main results are: an energy threshold theorem (Theorem 1.3) giving L_{k,p}(Ω) ≤ T_{k,p}(Ω), where T involves L_{k−1,p}(Ω) and the bottom Σ(Ω) of the essential spectrum; an existence theorem below the threshold (Theorem 1.4); a regularity theorem (Theorem 1.6) showing that minimizers of the relaxed problem give regular, possibly nodal-type partitions; and structural results about equality of the two formulations, equipartitions, and monotonicity in p and k. A series of examples illustrates new phenomena: existence without ground states, non-attainment, non-equipartition of p=∞ minimizers, and mixed behavior for connected/disconnected cells.

Significance. The topic is timely and the paper is the first systematic treatment of spectral minimal partitions on genuinely unbounded domains. If the central existence theorem is established, the results are substantial: they generalize the bounded-domain theory, uncover a natural threshold phenomenon linked to the essential spectrum, and provide a catalog of counterexamples that sharply delineate the range of validity of the classical behavior. The reliance on a relaxed functional and on existing regularity theory is methodologically appropriate. However, the proof of the main existence theorem contains a hypothesis mismatch that is load-bearing; it is repairable, but the repair must be made explicit. The examples in Section 6 are rich and well chosen, but a few of them depend on sketched arguments that should be completed or clearly flagged.

major comments (1)
  1. [§3, Theorem 3.1; §5, Proposition 1.7] Theorem 1.4 assumes (1.10): eL_{k,p}(Ω) < (L_{k−1,p}(Ω)^p + Σ(Ω)^p)^{1/p}. Theorem 3.1 proves convergence of minimizing sequences under the stronger condition (3.1): eL_{k,p}^p < eL_{k−1,p}^p + Σ^p. At that point only eL_{k−1,p} ≤ L_{k−1,p} is known, so (1.10) does not imply (3.1). Step 4 of the proof of Theorem 3.1 explicitly uses (u_{2,n},…,u_{k,n}) as a test tuple for eL_{k−1,p}, so the lower bound in the contradiction is eL_{k−1,p}, not L_{k−1,p}. The later proof of Proposition 1.7 proves equality eL=L using Theorem 1.4 and Theorem 1.6, making the argument circular as written. The gap is repairable by a simultaneous induction on k: for k=1 the equality eL_{1,p}=L_{1,p}=λ(Ω) is immediate; assuming equality for k−1, condition (1.10) becomes (3.1), and Theorem 3.1 produces a minimizer, after which Theorem 1.6 yields equality for k; when eL_{k,p}=T_{k,p}, the inequalities eL≤L≤T give equ
minor comments (4)
  1. [Remark 6.5] The assertion that for d≥3 one can always make each ω_i connected uses 'a cutoff argument (which we omit)'. Since this claim supports the description of minimizing partitions for L_{k,∞}, the omitted argument should either be supplied or the statement explicitly labelled as conditional/sketched.
  2. [Example 6.7] The connected-domain variant is introduced with 'we will not go into full details'. It is used to support the discussion of ground states and equipartitions; as it stands, the connected version is only sketched. Please provide the missing details or mark the claim as provisional.
  3. [§3, Step 8] The final part of Step 8 contains typographical errors: 'for all i=1,…,n' should be 'k', and the displayed inequality mixes a scalar ∥u_1∥₂ with the coordinate vector. Rewriting this coordinatewise would remove ambiguity.
  4. [§5, Proposition 1.7] The proof of the 'Otherwise' case states eL_{k,p}=T_{k,p} without spelling out that this follows from eL≤L≤T together with the non-strict threshold assumption. This is correct once the induction in the main comment is in place, but the argument should be made explicit.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the main compactness/regularity proof is self-contained, and the noted proof-gap is a repairable induction oversight rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular by construction. The threshold T_{k,p} is a defined spectral quantity built from L_{k-1,p} and Sigma, not a fitted parameter; Theorem 1.3 proves L_{k,p} <= T_{k,p} using explicit test partitions and Persson's characterization; Theorem 3.1 establishes convergence of minimizing sequences via a concentration-compactness/cutoff argument whose contradiction steps use the assumed hypothesis (3.1) directly. The equality eL_{k,p}=L_{k,p} is derived in Proposition 1.7, not assumed in the proof of Theorem 3.1. Self-citations, including [34] and [50], are either comparative/contextual or external regularity results with stated hypotheses that do not include the present theorem; they are not load-bearing in a definitional sense. The only delicate point is that Theorem 1.4 states the hypothesis (1.10) using L_{k-1,p}, while Theorem 3.1's proof requires the stronger looking (3.1) using eL_{k-1,p}, and at that stage only eL_{k-1,p} <= L_{k-1,p} is known. This means the statement 'Theorem 3.1 covers Theorem 1.4' requires the equality eL_{k-1,p}=L_{k-1,p}; that equality is proved later and a fully formal proof would use induction on k, with k=1 trivial. This is an omitted/repairable proof step rather than a case where a predicted quantity reduces by construction to an input, so it does not constitute circularity in the sense used here.

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

The central derivation relies on standard spectral theory, Sobolev-space compactness, and a published external regularity theorem; no new physical or mathematical entities are postulated, and no constants are fitted to data. The only domain assumption beyond the standard setup is V ≥ 0, which is load-bearing. Examples use hand-chosen parameters (e.g., step heights c and lengths L, ℓ), but these are illustration data, not inputs to the central theorems.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Standing assumption: d ≥ 2, Ω ⊂ R^d open, V ∈ L^∞_loc(Ω), V ≥ 0 a.e. (Assumption 1.1).
    Used throughout; in particular Step 4 of the proof of Theorem 3.1 uses positivity of the quadratic form a_V to drop the local term a_V(uφ) ≥ 0.
  • standard math Persson's theorem: Σ(ω) = sup_{K⋐ω} λ(ω\K), characterizing the infimum of the essential spectrum (eq. (1.7)).
    This is the spectral-theoretic backbone of the threshold value and of the lower bound R_V(uψ) ≥ Σ for escaping functions.
  • standard math Regularity theorem for segregated critical configurations (Tavares–Terracini, [50, Corollary 8.5]), used as a black box in Theorem 1.6.
    The paper adapts its bounded-domain regularity proof by verifying the differential inequalities from Proposition 5.2; the final Lipschitz regularity and nodal-set structure are imported from this external result.
  • standard math IMS localization formula (eq. (3.5) in the proof of Theorem 3.1).
    Used to decompose energies into local and escaping parts; a standard tool in many-body Schrödinger analysis.
  • standard math Local compactness of the embedding H^1_{0,V}(Ω) → L^2_loc(Ω).
    Invoked at the start of Theorem 3.1 to extract a locally convergent subsequence of a minimizing sequence.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spectral minimal partitions of unbounded domains." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TRUGLF43

@misc{pith2026251000811,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spectral minimal partitions of unbounded domains},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TRUGLF43}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2510.00811}
}
abstract

We study the problem of constructing $k$-spectral minimal partitions of domains in $d$ dimensions, where the energy functional to be minimized is a $p$-norm ($1 \le p \le \infty$) of the infimum of the spectrum of a suitable Schr\"odinger operator $-\Delta +V$, with Dirichlet conditions on the boundary of the partition elements (cells). The main novelty of this paper is that the domains may be unbounded, including of infinite volume. First, we prove a sharp upper bound for the infimal energy among all $k$-partitions by a threshold value which involves the infimum $\Sigma$ of the essential spectrum of the Schr\"odinger operator on the whole domain as well as the infimal energy among all $k-1$-partitions. Strictly below such threshold, we develop a concentration-compactness-type argument showing optimal partitions exist, and each cell admits ground states (i.e., the infimum of the spectrum on each cell is a simple isolated eigenvalue). Second, for $p<\infty$, when the energy and the threshold level coincide, we show there may or may not be minimizing partitions. Moreover, even when these exist, they may not have ground states. Third, for $p=\infty$, minimal partitions always exist, even at the threshold level, but these may or may not admit ground states. Moreover, below the threshold, we can always construct a minimizer, which is an equipartition. At the threshold value we show that spectral minimal partitions may not need to be equipartitions. We give a variety of examples of both domains and potentials to illustrate the new phenomena that occur in this setting.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.00811 by the authors.

Figure 6.1
Figure 6.1. A schematic representation of the construction of connected minimal partitions of the strip (1, ∞)×(0, π) for k = 2 (left) and k = 3 (right) (not to scale on the horizontal axis: the length of the “rooms” is chosen to increase towards infinity away from the left endpoint x = 1). We introduce increasingly narrow passages to connect the rectangular regions (which will be of increasing length as x increases). In order … view at source ↗
Figure 6.2
Figure 6.2. An illustration of how for any given k, one can choose a k-partition consisting of k − 1 wedges together with a central ball. Example 6.6. For d ≥ 2 and given constants r, c > 0, we consider the potential Vr,c : R d → R given by Vr,c(x) = ( 0 if |x|2 < r, c otherwise. In this case it is well known that Σ = c (indeed, outside a compact set we have −∆ + c on R d ). We fix r > 0 and c > 0 large enough that λ1(Br(0), V … view at source ↗
Figure 6.3
Figure 6.3. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_6_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 6.4
Figure 6.4. Figure 6.4: The half-strip from Example 6.10. The potential is taken to be 0 to the left of L, and c to its right. Example 6.10. Let 1 ≤ p < ∞. By Example 6.9, we can find an operator with precisely one eigenvalue below the infimum of the essential spectrum and an embedded (i.e.…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Adams.Sobolev spaces, volume Vol

    Robert A. Adams.Sobolev spaces, volume Vol. 65 ofPure and Applied Mathematics. Academic Press [Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers], New York-London, 1975

    1975

  2. [2]

    Overdetermined problems and relative Cheeger sets in unbounded domains.Atti Accad

    Danilo Gregorin Afonso, Alessandro Iacopetti, and Filomena Pacella. Overdetermined problems and relative Cheeger sets in unbounded domains.Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl., 34(2):531–546, 2023

    2023

  3. [3]

    On the singular set of free interface in an optimal partition problem.Commun

    Onur Alper. On the singular set of free interface in an optimal partition problem.Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 73(4):855–915, 2020

    2020

  4. [4]

    Pˆ edra D. S. Andrade, Ederson Moreira dos Santos, Makson S. Santos, and Hugo Tavares. Spectral partition problems with volume and inclusion constraints.SIAM J. Math. Anal., 56(6):7136–7169, 2024

    2024

  5. [5]

    F. A. Berezin and M. A. Shubin.The Schr¨ odinger equation, volume 66 ofMathematics and its Applications (Soviet Series). Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht, russian edition, 1991. With contributions by G. L. Litvinov and Le˘ites

    1991

  6. [6]

    Nodal and spectral minimal partitions—the state of the art in

    Virginie Bonnaillie-No¨ el and Bernard Helffer. Nodal and spectral minimal partitions—the state of the art in

  7. [7]

    Faber-Krahn inequalities in sharp quantitative form.Duke Math

    Lorenzo Brasco, Guido De Philippis, and Bozhidar Velichkov. Faber-Krahn inequalities in sharp quantitative form.Duke Math. J., 164(9):1777–1831, 2015. 32 MATTHIAS HOFMANN, JAMES B. KENNEDY, AND HUGO TA V ARES

    2015

  8. [8]

    Positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponents.Comm

    Ha ¨ ım Br´ ezis and Louis Nirenberg. Positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponents.Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 36(4):437–477, 1983

    1983

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Existence results for some optimal partition problems

    Dorin Bucur, Giuseppe Buttazzo, and Antoine Henrot. Existence results for some optimal partition problems. Adv. Math. Sci. Appl., 8(2):571–579, 1998

    1998

  2. [10]

    On the existence of optimal potentials on un- bounded domains.SIAM J

    Giuseppe Buttazzo, Juan Casado-D ´ ıaz, and Faustino Maestre. On the existence of optimal potentials on un- bounded domains.SIAM J. Math. Anal., 53(1):1088–1121, 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    An optimal partition problem for eigenvalues.J

    Luis Caffarelli and Fang-Hua Lin. An optimal partition problem for eigenvalues.J. Sci. Comput., 31(1-2):5–18, 2007

    2007

  4. [12]

    Singularly perturbed elliptic systems and multi-valued harmonic functions with free boundaries.J

    Luis Caffarelli and Fang-Hua Lin. Singularly perturbed elliptic systems and multi-valued harmonic functions with free boundaries.J. Amer. Math. Soc., 21(3):847–862, 2008

    2008

  5. [13]

    Analysis on the junctions of domain walls.Discrete Contin

    Luis Caffarelli and Fang Hua Lin. Analysis on the junctions of domain walls.Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., 28(3):915–929, 2010

    2010

  6. [14]

    A shape optimization problem in cylinders and related overdetermined problems.J

    Paolo Caldiroli, Alessandro Iacopetti, and Filomena Pacella. A shape optimization problem in cylinders and related overdetermined problems.J. Funct. Anal., 289(12):111157, 2025

    2025

  7. [15]

    Segregated nodal domains of two- dimensional multispecies Bose-Einstein condensates.Phys

    Shu-Ming Chang, Chang-Shou Lin, Tai-Chia Lin, and Wen-Wei Lin. Segregated nodal domains of two- dimensional multispecies Bose-Einstein condensates.Phys. D, 196(3-4):341–361, 2004

    2004

  8. [16]

    Positive least energy solutions and phase separation for coupled Schr¨ odinger equations with critical exponent.Arch

    Zhijie Chen and Wenming Zou. Positive least energy solutions and phase separation for coupled Schr¨ odinger equations with critical exponent.Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 205(2):515–551, 2012

    2012

  9. [17]

    Positive least energy solutions and phase separation for coupled Schr¨ odinger equations with critical exponent: higher dimensional case.Calc

    Zhijie Chen and Wenming Zou. Positive least energy solutions and phase separation for coupled Schr¨ odinger equations with critical exponent: higher dimensional case.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 52(1- 2):423–467, 2015

    2015

  10. [18]

    Yamabe systems, optimal partitions and nodal solutions to the Yamabe equation.J

    M´ onica Clapp, Angela Pistoia, and Hugo Tavares. Yamabe systems, optimal partitions and nodal solutions to the Yamabe equation.J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 27(9):3713–3770, 2025

    2025

  11. [19]

    A simple variational approach to weakly coupled competitive elliptic sys- tems.NoDEA Nonlinear Differential Equations Appl., 26(4):Paper No

    M´ onica Clapp and Andrzej Szulkin. A simple variational approach to weakly coupled competitive elliptic sys- tems.NoDEA Nonlinear Differential Equations Appl., 26(4):Paper No. 26, 21, 2019

    2019

  12. [20]

    Conti, S

    M. Conti, S. Terracini, and G. Verzini. An optimal partition problem related to nonlinear eigenvalues.J. Funct. Anal., 198(1):160–196, 2003

    2003

  13. [21]

    Nehari’s problem and competing species systems

    Monica Conti, Susanna Terracini, and Gianmaria Verzini. Nehari’s problem and competing species systems. Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e Anal. Non Lin´ eaire, 19(6):871–888, 2002

    2002

  14. [22]

    On a class of optimal partition problems related to the Fuˇ c ´ ık spectrum and to the monotonicity formulae.Calc

    Monica Conti, Susanna Terracini, and Gianmaria Verzini. On a class of optimal partition problems related to the Fuˇ c ´ ık spectrum and to the monotonicity formulae.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 22(1):45–72, 2005

    2005

  15. [23]

    A variational problem for the spatial segregation of reaction-diffusion systems.Indiana Univ

    Monica Conti, Susanna Terracini, and Gianmaria Verzini. A variational problem for the spatial segregation of reaction-diffusion systems.Indiana Univ. Math. J., 54(3):779–815, 2005

    2005

  16. [24]

    Constant sign and sign changing nls ground states on noncompact metric graphs, 2023

    Colette De Coster, Simone Dovetta, Damien Galant, Enrico Serra, and Christophe Troestler. Constant sign and sign changing nls ground states on noncompact metric graphs, 2023

    2023

  17. [25]

    Weak type estimates for singular values and the number of bound states of Schr¨ odinger oper- ators.Ann

    Michael Cwikel. Weak type estimates for singular values and the number of bound states of Schr¨ odinger oper- ators.Ann. of Math. (2), 106(1):93–100, 1977

    1977

  18. [26]

    E. N. Dancer, Kelei Wang, and Zhitao Zhang. The limit equation for the Gross-Pitaevskii equations and S. Terracini’s conjecture.J. Funct. Anal., 262(3):1087–1131, 2012

    2012

  19. [27]

    The limit equation for the Gross-Pitaevskii equations and S. Terracini’s conjecture

    E. N. Dancer, Kelei Wang, and Zhitao Zhang. Addendum to “The limit equation for the Gross-Pitaevskii equations and S. Terracini’s conjecture” [J. Funct. Anal. 262 (3) (2012) 1087–1131] [mr2863857].J. Funct. Anal., 264(4):1125–1129, 2013

    2012

  20. [28]

    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2023

    Rupert L Frank, Ari Laptev, and Timo Weidl.Schr¨ odinger operators: eigenvalues and Lieb-Thirring inequalities, volume 200 ofCambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    The spectral determinant of the isotropic quantum harmonic oscillator in arbitrary dimensions

    Pedro Freitas. The spectral determinant of the isotropic quantum harmonic oscillator in arbitrary dimensions. Math. Ann., 372:1081–1101, 2018

    2018

  22. [30]

    Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola, NY, 2006

    Juha Heinonen, Tero Kilpel¨ ainen, and Olli Martio.Nonlinear potential theory of degenerate elliptic equations. Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola, NY, 2006. Unabridged republication of the 1993 original

    2006

  23. [31]

    Helffer, T

    B. Helffer, T. Hoffmann-Ostenhof, and S. Terracini. Nodal domains and spectral minimal partitions.Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e C Anal. Non Lin´ eaire, 26(1):101–138, 2009

    2009

  24. [32]

    P. D. Hislop and I. M. Sigal.Introduction to spectral theory, volume 113 ofApplied Mathematical Sciences. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1996. With applications to Schr¨ odinger operators

    1996

  25. [33]

    An existence theory for nonlinear equations on metric graphs via energy methods.arXiv, arXiv:1909.07856v2, 2019

    Matthias Hofmann. An existence theory for nonlinear equations on metric graphs via energy methods.arXiv, arXiv:1909.07856v2, 2019

    1909 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Kennedy, and Andrea Serio

    Matthias Hofmann, James B. Kennedy, and Andrea Serio. Spectral minimal partitions of unbounded metric graphs.J. Spectr. Theory, 13(2):593–622, 2023. SPECTRAL MINIMAL PARTITIONS OF UNBOUNDED DOMAINS 33

    2023

  27. [35]

    Kennedy, Pavel Kurasov, Corentin L´ ena, and Delio Mugnolo

    James B. Kennedy, Pavel Kurasov, Corentin L´ ena, and Delio Mugnolo. A theory of spectral partitions of metric graphs.Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations, 60(2):1–63, 2021

    2021

  28. [36]

    Bounds on the eigenvalues of the Laplace and Schroedinger operators.Bull

    Elliott Lieb. Bounds on the eigenvalues of the Laplace and Schroedinger operators.Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 82(5):751–753, 1976

    1976

  29. [37]

    Uniform H¨ older bounds for nonlinear Schr¨ odinger systems with strong competition.Comm

    Benedetta Noris, Hugo Tavares, Susanna Terracini, and Gianmaria Verzini. Uniform H¨ older bounds for nonlinear Schr¨ odinger systems with strong competition.Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 63(3):267–302, 2010

    2010

  30. [38]

    Boundary regularity of the free interface in spectral optimal partition problems, 2024, arXiv:2404.05698

    Roberto Ognibene and Bozhidar Velichkov. Boundary regularity of the free interface in spectral optimal partition problems, 2024, arXiv:2404.05698

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Structure of the free interfaces near triple junction singularities in harmonic maps and optimal partition problems, 2024, arXiv:2412.00781

    Roberto Ognibene and Bozhidar Velichkov. Structure of the free interfaces near triple junction singularities in harmonic maps and optimal partition problems, 2024, arXiv:2412.00781

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Osting, C.D

    B. Osting, C.D. White, and E. Oudet. Minimal Dirichlet energy partitions for graphs.SIAM J. Sci. Comp., 36:A1635–A1651, 2014

    2014

  33. [41]

    Bounds for the discrete part of the spectrum of a semi-bounded schr¨ odinger operator.Mathematica Scandinavica, 8(1):143–153, 1960

    Arne Persson. Bounds for the discrete part of the spectrum of a semi-bounded schr¨ odinger operator.Mathematica Scandinavica, 8(1):143–153, 1960

    1960

  34. [42]

    Extremality conditions and regularity of solutions to optimal partition problems involving Laplacian eigenvalues.Arch

    Miguel Ramos, Hugo Tavares, and Susanna Terracini. Extremality conditions and regularity of solutions to optimal partition problems involving Laplacian eigenvalues.Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 220(1):363–443, 2016

    2016

  35. [43]

    Potential and scattering theory on wildly perturbed domains.J

    Jeffrey Rauch and Michael Taylor. Potential and scattering theory on wildly perturbed domains.J. Functional Analysis, 18:27–59, 1975

    1975

  36. [44]

    G. V. Rozenbljum. Distribution of the discrete spectrum of singular differential operators.Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 202:1012–1015, 1972

    1972

  37. [45]

    I. M. Sigal. Geometric methods in the quantum many-body problem. Nonexistence of very negative ions.Com- munications in Mathematical Physics, 1982

    1982

  38. [46]

    Some aspects of the theory of Schr¨ odinger operators

    Barry Simon. Some aspects of the theory of Schr¨ odinger operators. InSchr¨ odinger operators (Como, 1984), volume 1159 ofLecture Notes in Math., pages 177–203. Springer, Berlin, 1985

    1984

  39. [47]

    H¨ older bounds and regularity of emerg- ing free boundaries for strongly competing Schr¨ odinger equations with nontrivial grouping.Nonlinear Anal., 138:388–427, 2016

    Nicola Soave, Hugo Tavares, Susanna Terracini, and Alessandro Zilio. H¨ older bounds and regularity of emerg- ing free boundaries for strongly competing Schr¨ odinger equations with nontrivial grouping.Nonlinear Anal., 138:388–427, 2016

    2016

  40. [48]

    Uniform bounds for strongly competing systems: the optimal Lipschitz case

    Nicola Soave and Alessandro Zilio. Uniform bounds for strongly competing systems: the optimal Lipschitz case. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 218(2):647–697, 2015

    2015

  41. [49]

    On phase separation in systems of coupled elliptic equations: asymptotic analysis and geometric aspects.Ann

    Nicola Soave and Alessandro Zilio. On phase separation in systems of coupled elliptic equations: asymptotic analysis and geometric aspects.Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e C Anal. Non Lin´ eaire, 34(3):625–654, 2017

    2017

  42. [50]

    Regularity of the nodal set of segregated critical configurations under a weak reflection law.Calc

    Hugo Tavares and Susanna Terracini. Regularity of the nodal set of segregated critical configurations under a weak reflection law.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 45(3-4):273–317, 2012

    2012

  43. [51]

    Sign-changing solutions of competition-diffusion elliptic systems and optimal partition problems.Ann

    Hugo Tavares and Susanna Terracini. Sign-changing solutions of competition-diffusion elliptic systems and optimal partition problems.Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e Anal. Non Lin´ eaire, 29(2):279–300, 2012

    2012

  44. [52]

    Existence of least energy positive solutions to Schr¨ odinger systems with mixed competition and cooperation terms: the critical case.Calc

    Hugo Tavares and Song You. Existence of least energy positive solutions to Schr¨ odinger systems with mixed competition and cooperation terms: the critical case.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 59(1):Paper No. 26, 35, 2020

    2020

  45. [53]

    Least energy positive solutions of critical Schr¨ odinger systems with mixed competition and cooperation terms: the higher dimensional case.J

    Hugo Tavares, Song You, and Wenming Zou. Least energy positive solutions of critical Schr¨ odinger systems with mixed competition and cooperation terms: the higher dimensional case.J. Funct. Anal., 283(2):Paper No. 109497, 50, 2022. Matthias Hofmann, F akult¨at f ¨ur Mathemati...

    2022

  46. [2016]

    De Gruyter Open, Warsaw, 2017

    InShape optimization and spectral theory, pages 353–397. De Gruyter Open, Warsaw, 2017

    2017

Pith tools

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