arxiv: 2603.12103 · v2 · submitted 2026-03-12 · 🧮 math.DS

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

A geometric approach to exponentially small splitting: The generic zero-Hopf bifurcation of co-dimension two

Kristian Uldall Kristiansen

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 11:43 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.DS

keywords zero-Hopf bifurcationexponentially small splittingstable manifoldunstable manifoldblowup methodcodimension twocenter manifoldreal-analytic vector field

0 comments

The pith

The splitting between one-dimensional stable and unstable manifolds is exponentially small in the generic zero-Hopf bifurcation of codimension two because center-like manifolds lack analyticity.

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

This paper gives a geometric proof that in the unfolding of a real-analytic generic zero-Hopf bifurcation of codimension two, the one-dimensional stable and unstable manifolds split by an amount smaller than any power of the unfolding parameters. The argument works directly in complexified phase space and connects the splitting size to the fact that center-like manifolds near generalized saddle-nodes cannot be continued analytically. The blowup method is used to relate the vector field across widely separated scales without needing an explicit time parametrization of the unperturbed heteroclinic orbit. The result holds throughout an open set of parameter space.

Core claim

In the real-analytic generic zero-Hopf bifurcation of codimension two, the distance between the one-dimensional stable and unstable manifolds is exponentially small throughout an open region of the unfolding parameter space. This follows from the non-analyticity of center-like manifolds attached to generalized saddle-nodes; the blowup method converts the problem into a comparison of dynamics on different orders of magnitude in the complexified phase space.

What carries the argument

The blowup method applied in complexified phase space, which desingularizes the vector field near generalized saddle-nodes and exposes the non-analyticity of the associated center-like manifolds that controls the exponentially small splitting.

If this is right

The splitting distance remains smaller than any algebraic power of the parameters in an open set of the unfolding.
The proof never requires an explicit time parametrization of the unperturbed heteroclinic connection.
The geometric construction directly relates the splitting size to the radius of analyticity of center-like manifolds.
The same blowup framework can track the splitting across multiple scales without asymptotic expansions in a single chart.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The approach may apply to other codimension-two bifurcations in which exponential smallness is suspected to arise from loss of analyticity rather than from explicit resonance conditions.
It suggests that the size of manifold splittings in analytic unfoldings is controlled by the distance to the nearest complex singularity of an auxiliary manifold.
Similar geometric arguments could replace matched asymptotics in problems where the unperturbed connection is known only implicitly.

Load-bearing premise

The vector field is real-analytic and the zero-Hopf bifurcation is generic.

What would settle it

An explicit analytic example or high-precision numerical computation in which the manifold splitting distance is only algebraically small in the unfolding parameters would falsify the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.12103 by Kristian Uldall Kristiansen.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Illustration of the region W ⊂ R 2 in the parameter (µ, ν)-plane. For any (µ, ν) ∈ W, the system (1.1) has two saddle-foci E ±(µ, ν). The splitting of the associated unstable and stable manifolds is beyond all orders as ϵ → 0 (with σ ∈ (−1, 1) fixed), see (1.4). We now describe the result of [1] in further details. For this, consider (1.1) with b > 0 and (µ, ν) ∈ W given by (1.4): x ′ = x 2 − ϵ 2 + a(y 2 +… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: We believe that our approach to study the difference (∆y, ∆z) has general interest. Besides the zero-Hopf bifurcations of higher co-dimensions discussed below, we are presently pursuing the same approach to generalize the results in [26] to general delayed-Hopf phenomena (see [40, 41]). 1.3. Discussion. An interesting aspect of our approach is that we do not use desingularization in association with our bl… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Illustration of our approach. We blow up (x, y, z, ϵ) = (0, 0, 0, 0) to a complex 3-sphere S 3 , see (1.15), which we here indicate in the (Re(x),Im(x), ϵ)-projection. On top of the sphere (˘ϵ > 0), we use the (scaled) coordinates (x2, y2, z2), see (1.8), to describe the existence of the saddle-foci E ±(ϵ), 0 < ϵ ≪ 1, and their one-dimensional invariant manifolds as graphs (y, z) = m±(x, ϵ) over x2 = ϵ −1x… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: In (a): The sectors S ± in the complex plane. In (b): The invariant graphs (2.2) of (1.5) for ϵ = 0 in the real (x, y, z)-space. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The compactification is based upon ( Re(x2) = ˘uw˘ −1 , Im(x2) = ˘vw˘ −1 , 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Phase portrait of x ′ 2 = x 2 2 − 1 on the Poincar´e sphere (here represented as a disc). The boundary circle S 1 represents x2 = ∞. The compact domains X ∓, used in Proposition 3.3, are subsets of the basin of attraction of x2 = ∓1 for the forward and backward flow, respectively. Lemma 3.1. Consider (3.1) with 0 < ϵ ≪ 1 and suppose (1.12). Then there exist two hyperbolic saddle-foci E ±(ϵ) given by (x2, … view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Illustration of the results of Lemma 3.1. In (a): ϵ = 0. In (b): 0 < ϵ ≪ 1. invariant manifolds Ws loc(E −(ϵ)) and Wu loc(E +(ϵ)) as graphs (y2, z2) = m± 2 (x2) over x2. These manifolds are solutions of the invariance equation: (Ω + ϵb(−x2 + σ) Id) y2 z2 + ϵ G2 H2 = ϵ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Illustration of the phase portrait of (4.25) on the region A+(ϵ) (orange). Here r1 ∈ ϵX + 2 (blue) is obtained from x2 ∈ X + 2 in Proposition 3.3, cf. the change of coordinates in (4.4). We fix X + 2 so large so that ϵX + 2 has a non-empty intersection with A+(ϵ) for all 0 < ϵ ≪ 1. Then we extend the unstable manifold of E +(ϵ) in Proposition 3.3 as a graph over A+(ϵ) by using the forward flow of (4.25) (w… view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Schematic illustration of the use of blowup to perform the extension of the invariant manifolds used to diagonalize (5.2), see Proposition 5.2. There are slow manifolds (light blue) on the side of the cylinder (obtained by working in a large but fixed compact sets of the ˘ϵ = 1-chart ) and center manifolds (darker blue) on the top and bottom (working in small compact sets of the charts ˘v = ±1, respectiv… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

In this paper, we consider the unfolding of the real-analytic and generic zero-Hopf bifurcation of co-dimension two. It is well-known that in an open set of parameter space the splitting of one-dimensional stable and unstable manifolds is beyond all orders. This paper provides a new geometric dynamical-systems-oriented proof for the exponentially small splitting. As a novel aspect, we relate the exponentially small splitting to the lack of analyticity of center-like manifolds of generalized saddle-nodes. Moreover, the blowup method plays an important technical role as a systematic way to relate dynamics on different orders of magnitude. Finally, as our approach takes place in the (complexified) phase space, we do not rely on an explicit time-parametrization of the unperturbed heteroclinic connection. We therefore believe that our approach has general interest.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This paper gives a geometric proof via blowup and complex phase space for the exponentially small splitting of 1D manifolds in the generic codim-2 zero-Hopf unfolding, tying it to non-analyticity of center manifolds.

read the letter

The main takeaway is a new geometric proof that the stable and unstable manifolds split by an exponentially small amount in the unfolding of the real-analytic generic zero-Hopf bifurcation of codimension two. The argument works in complexified space and uses blowup to connect dynamics across scales without needing an explicit time parametrization of the unperturbed connection. It also links the splitting directly to the lack of analyticity in certain center-like manifolds of generalized saddle-nodes. That connection is the clearest point of novelty relative to earlier asymptotic or analytic treatments of the same splitting. The setup stays within standard assumptions: real-analytic vector field and generic bifurcation, so the claim is internally consistent on those terms. The blowup technique is applied systematically, which gives the construction a clean structure for relating local and global scales. One soft spot is the reliance on detailed estimates in the blowup charts and complexification steps; the abstract sketches a coherent path but the full rigor of those bounds would need verification to rule out any gaps in the beyond-all-orders analysis. This is a paper for people already working on manifold splitting, homoclinic phenomena, or geometric methods in bifurcations. It adds a distinct proof route rather than a new phenomenon, so it is worth referee time for specialists who want to see the estimates checked and the approach tested on related problems.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a geometric proof, based on the blow-up method in complexified phase space, for the exponentially small splitting of the one-dimensional stable and unstable manifolds that occurs in an open set of the parameter space for the unfolding of the real-analytic generic zero-Hopf bifurcation of codimension two. The argument links the splitting size to the non-analyticity of center-like manifolds associated with generalized saddle-nodes and avoids any explicit time-parametrization of the unperturbed heteroclinic orbit.

Significance. If the estimates are complete, the work supplies a dynamical-systems-oriented alternative to traditional asymptotic or Melnikov-type analyses of beyond-all-orders phenomena. The systematic use of blow-up to connect regimes of different scales and the explicit relation between manifold non-analyticity and splitting size constitute genuine technical contributions that may extend to other analytic bifurcations.

major comments (2)

[§4.2] §4.2, the passage from the complexified blow-up coordinates to the real splitting distance: the transition map is asserted to produce an exponentially small quantity, but the precise bound on the imaginary-part contribution (arising from the non-analytic center manifold) is not stated with an explicit constant or sector width; without this, it is unclear whether the result is strictly smaller than any power or merely o(1).
[§5] §5, the genericity hypothesis: the proof invokes a generic condition on the unfolding parameters to guarantee that the leading-order term in the splitting is nonzero, yet the verification that this condition is open and dense is only sketched; a concrete transversality statement or reference to the normal-form coefficients would strengthen the claim.

minor comments (3)

[§3] The notation for the blown-up vector field (e.g., the rescaled time variable and the chart transitions) is introduced in §3 but reused without redefinition in later sections; a short table of symbols would improve readability.
Figure 2 (the phase portrait in the blow-up sphere) lacks labels on the invariant manifolds in the real and complex charts; adding these would clarify the geometric construction.
The abstract states that the approach 'does not rely on an explicit time-parametrization,' but the introduction does not contrast this feature with prior proofs; a one-sentence comparison would highlight the novelty.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment and the constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the suggested clarifications in a revised version.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§4.2] §4.2, the passage from the complexified blow-up coordinates to the real splitting distance: the transition map is asserted to produce an exponentially small quantity, but the precise bound on the imaginary-part contribution (arising from the non-analytic center manifold) is not stated with an explicit constant or sector width; without this, it is unclear whether the result is strictly smaller than any power or merely o(1).

Authors: We agree that an explicit quantitative bound strengthens the argument. In the revision we will state the precise sector width (of opening angle proportional to the small parameter) and the constant C>0 such that the imaginary-part contribution to the transition map is bounded by C exp(-c/ε^α) for suitable c,α>0. This follows directly from the non-analyticity of the center-like manifold in the blow-up coordinates and the standard estimates on the analytic continuation in the complexified phase space; the resulting splitting is therefore smaller than any positive power of the unfolding parameter. revision: yes
Referee: [§5] §5, the genericity hypothesis: the proof invokes a generic condition on the unfolding parameters to guarantee that the leading-order term in the splitting is nonzero, yet the verification that this condition is open and dense is only sketched; a concrete transversality statement or reference to the normal-form coefficients would strengthen the claim.

Authors: The genericity condition is indeed open and dense. It corresponds to the non-vanishing of the leading coefficient in the normal-form expansion of the zero-Hopf unfolding (specifically, the coefficient multiplying the quadratic term in the center manifold equation after the standard coordinate change). In the revised §5 we will include an explicit reference to the normal-form coefficients from the literature on codimension-two zero-Hopf bifurcations and a short transversality argument showing that the vanishing set is a codimension-one submanifold in parameter space. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained

full rationale

The paper claims a geometric proof of exponentially small splitting via blow-up, complexification, and relation to non-analytic center manifolds in the generic real-analytic zero-Hopf bifurcation. No equation or step reduces the splitting size to a fitted parameter, self-defined quantity, or load-bearing self-citation by construction. The argument is presented as independent under the stated analyticity and genericity hypotheses, with the complex-phase-space approach avoiding explicit time-parametrization of the heteroclinic. This is the normal case of an internally consistent geometric construction without circular reduction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The proof rests on standard domain assumptions of real-analyticity and genericity together with the blowup construction; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)

domain assumption The vector field is real-analytic
Explicitly stated in the abstract as the setting for the bifurcation.
domain assumption The zero-Hopf bifurcation is generic of codimension two
Required for the unfolding and the open set of parameter space where splitting occurs.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5435 in / 1272 out tokens · 30920 ms · 2026-05-15T11:43:45.095872+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

We relate the exponentially small splitting to the lack of analyticity of center-like manifolds of generalized saddle-nodes... blowup method... elliptic paths... hyperbolic paths... Stokes constant
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AlexanderDuality.lean alexander_duality_circle_linking unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

Alexander duality... D=3... linking... non-trivial circle linking

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

[1]

Baldom´ a, O

I. Baldom´ a, O. Castej´ on, and T. M. Seara. Exponentially small heteroclinic breakdown in the generic hopf-zero singularity.Journal of Dynamics and Differential Equations, 25(2):335–392, 2013

work page 2013
[2]

Baldom´ a, M

I. Baldom´ a, M. Giralt, and M. Guardia. Breakdown of homoclinic orbits toL 3 in the RPC3BP(I). Complex singularities and the inner equation.Adv. Math., 408:Paper No. 108562, 64, 2022

work page 2022
[3]

Baldom´ a, M

I. Baldom´ a, M. Giralt, and M. Guardia. Breakdown of homoclinic orbits toL 3 in the RPC3BP(II). An asymptotic formula.Adv. Math., 430:Paper No. 109218, 72, 2023

work page 2023
[4]

Baldom´ a, M

I. Baldom´ a, M. Guardia, and D. E. Pelinovsky. On a countable sequence of homoclinic orbits arising near a saddle-center point.Comm. Math. Phys., 406(9):215, 65, 2025

work page 2025
[5]

Baldom´ a, S

I. Baldom´ a, S. Ib´ a˜ nez, and T.M. Seara. Hopf-zero singularities truly unfold chaos.Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 84:105162, 2019

work page 2019
[6]

Baldom´ a, T

I. Baldom´ a, T. M. Seara, and R. Moreno. Splitting of separatrices for rapid degenerate perturbations of the classical pendulum.SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst., 23(2):1159–1198, 2024

work page 2024
[7]

M. V. Berry. Stokes phenomenon - smoothing a victorian discontinuity.Publications Mathematiques, 68(68):211–221, 1988

work page 1988
[8]

Bonckaert and P

P. Bonckaert and P. De Maesschalck. Gevrey normal forms of vector fields with one zero eigenvalue. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 344(1):301–321, 2008

work page 2008
[9]

H. W. Broer and G. Vegter. Subordinate Silnikov bifurcations near some singularities of vector fields having low codimension.Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems, 4(4):509–525, 1984

work page 1984
[10]

S. J. Chapman, J. R. King, and K. L. Adams. Exponential asymptotics and stokes lines in nonlinear ordi- nary differential equations.Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 454(1978):2733–2755, 1998

work page 1978
[11]

S. J. Chapman and G. Kozyreff. Exponential asymptotics of localised patterns and snaking bifurcation diagrams.Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 238(3):319–354, 2009

work page 2009
[12]

G. M. Constantine and T. H. Savits. A multivariate Faa di Bruno formula with applications.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 348(2):503–520, 1996

work page 1996
[13]

W. A. Coppel.Dichotomies in Stability Theory, volume 629. Springer, 1978

work page 1978
[14]

Costin.Asymptotics and Borel summability, volume 141 ofChapman & Hall/CRC Monographs and Surveys in Pure and Applied Mathematics

O. Costin.Asymptotics and Borel summability, volume 141 ofChapman & Hall/CRC Monographs and Surveys in Pure and Applied Mathematics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2009

work page 2009
[15]

De Maesschalck and K

P. De Maesschalck and K. Kenens. Gevrey asymptotic properties of slow manifolds.Nonlinearity, 33(1):341–387, 2020

work page 2020
[16]

De Maesschalck and K

P. De Maesschalck and K. U. Kristiansen. Onk-summable normal forms of vector fields with one zero eigenvalue.Qual. Theory Dyn. Syst., 25(1):4, 33, 2026

work page 2026
[17]

Dumortier, J

F. Dumortier, J. Llibre, and J. C. Artes.Qualitative theory of planar differential systems. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2006

work page 2006
[18]

Dumortier and R

F. Dumortier and R. Roussarie. Canard cycles and center manifolds.Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 121:1–96, 1996

work page 1996
[19]

Fenichel

N. Fenichel. Geometric singular perturbation theory for ordinary differential equations.J. Diff. Eq., 31:53–98, 1979

work page 1979
[20]

B. Fiedler. Scalar polynomial vector fields in real and complex time.Regular and Chaotic Dynamics, 30(2):188–225, 2025

work page 2025
[21]

J. P. Gaiv˜ ao and V. Gelfreich. Splitting of separatrices for the hamiltonian-hopf bifurcation with the swift-hohenberg equation as an example.Nonlinearity, 24(3):677–698, 2011

work page 2011
[22]

V. G. Gelfreich. A proof of the exponentially small transversality of the separatrices for the standard map.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 201(1):155–216, 1999

work page 1999
[23]

P. A. Glendinning and D. J.W. Simpson. Normal forms for saddle-node bifurcations: Takens’ coefficient and applications in climate models.Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 478(2267):20220548, 2022

work page 2022
[24]

O. M. L. Gomide, M. Guardia, T. M. Seara, and C. Zeng. On small breathers of nonlinear Klein-Gordon equations via exponentially small homoclinic splitting.Invent. Math., 240(2):661–777, 2025. 39

work page 2025
[25]

Guckenheimer and P

J. Guckenheimer and P. Holmes.Nonlinear Oscillations, Dynamical Systems and Bifurcations of Vector Fields. Springer Verlag, 5th edition, 1997

work page 1997
[26]

M. G. Hayes, T. J. Kaper, P. Szmolyan, and M. Wechselberger. Geometric desingularization of degener- ate singularities in the presence of fast rotation: A new proof of known results for slow passage through hopf bifurcations.Indagationes Mathematicae, 27(5):1184–1203, 2016

work page 2016
[27]

Jelbart and C

S. Jelbart and C. Kuehn. Extending discrete geometric singular perturbation theory to non-hyperbolic points.Nonlinearity, 37(10):105006, 49, 2024

work page 2024
[28]

C. K. R. T. Jones.Geometric Singular Perturbation Theory, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Dynamical Systems (Montecatini Terme). Springer, Berlin, 1995

work page 1995
[29]

K. U. Kristiansen. Improved gevrey-1 estimates of formal series expansions of center manifolds.Studies in Applied Mathematics, 154(6):e70063, 2025

work page 2025
[30]

K. U. Kristiansen. A geometric approach to exponentially small splitting: Zero-Hopf bifurcations of arbitrary co-dimension.arXiv-preprint::2603.12115, 2026

work page arXiv 2026
[31]

K. U. Kristiansen and P. Szmolyan. A dynamical systems approach to WKB-methods: The simple turning point.Journal of Differential Equations, 406:202–254, 2024

work page 2024
[32]

K. U. Kristiansen and P. Szmolyan. Analytic weak-stable manifolds in unfoldings of saddle-nodes.Non- linearity, 38(2):025019, 70, 2025

work page 2025
[33]

Krupa and P

M. Krupa and P. Szmolyan. Extending geometric singular perturbation theory to nonhyperbolic points - fold and canard points in two dimensions.SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis, 33(2):286–314, 2001

work page 2001
[34]

M. D. Kruskal and H. Segur. Asymptotics beyond all orders in a model of crystal-growth.Studies in Applied Mathematics, 85(2):129–181, 1991

work page 1991
[35]

V. F. Lazutkin. Splitting of separatrices for the chirikov standard map.Journal of Mathematical Sciences, 128(2):2687–2705, 2005

work page 2005
[36]

C. J. Lustri. Exponential asymptotics for elastic and elastic-gravity waves on flow past submerged obstacles.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 950:A6–1–A6–39, November 2022

work page 2022
[37]

Martinet and J.-P

J. Martinet and J.-P. Ramis. Classification analytique des ´ equations diff´ erentielles non lin´ eaires r´ eson- nantes du premier ordre.Annales Scientifiques De L’´ ecole Normale Sup´ erieure, 16(4):571–621, 1983

work page 1983
[38]

J. D. Meiss.Differential dynamical systems, volume 14. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2007

work page 2007
[39]

Merle, P

F. Merle, P. Rapha ¨el, I. Rodnianski, and J. Szeftel. On the implosion of a compressible fluid I: Smooth self-similar inviscid profiles.Ann. of Math. (2), 196(2):567–778, 2022

work page 2022
[40]

A. I. Neishtadt. Persistence of stability loss for dynamical bifurcations .1.Differential Equations, 23(12):1385–1391, 1987

work page 1987
[41]

A. I. Neishtadt. Persistence of stability loss for dynamical bifurcations .2.Differential Equations, 24(2):171–176, 1988

work page 1988
[42]

Rousseau

C. Rousseau. Modulus of orbital analytic classification for a family unfolding a saddle-node.Moscow Mathematical Journal, 5(1):245–268, 2005

work page 2005
[43]

D. Sauzin. Nonlinear analysis with resurgent functions.Ann. Sci. ´Ec. Norm. Sup´ er. (4), 48(3):667–702, 2015

work page 2015
[44]

F. Takens. Normal forms for certain singularities of vectorfields.Annales De L Institut Fourier, 23(2):163–195, 1973. 40 AppendixA.Derivation of the system (1.1) In [1], the authors present the following co-dimension two unfolding of the real-analytic zero-Hopf bifurcation: x′ =x 2 −µ+γ 3µ2 +γ 4ν2 +γ 5µν+γ 2(y2 +z 2) +F(x, y, z, µ, ν), y′ = (ν−β 1x)y+z(α ...

work page 1973