pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.02460 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-04 · 🧮 math.NA · cs.NA· math.AP

Structure-preserving LDG methods for linear and nonlinear transport equations with gradient noise

Thomas Christiansen , Kenneth H. Karlsen This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 19:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.NA cs.NAmath.AP
keywords local discontinuous Galerkinstochastic conservation lawsStratonovich transport noiseenergy stabilitystructure-preserving discretizationsKhasminskii argumentgradient noisenumerical fluxes
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

LDG methods for stochastic transport equations preserve discrete energy stability by balancing Stratonovich-Itô corrections with quadratic variation.

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

The paper constructs local discontinuous Galerkin methods for conservation laws with heterogeneous Stratonovich transport noise that may be linear or nonlinear. These semi-discretizations incorporate the noise cancellation mechanism from the continuous Itô formulation so that the second-order Stratonovich-Itô correction is offset by the quadratic variation at the discrete energy level, up to terms controlled by the numerical fluxes. As a result the hyperbolic stability structure carries over, yielding energy conservation or dissipation either pathwise or in expectation. Well-posedness of the high-order schemes then follows from energy estimates combined with a Khasminskii-type argument, without any linear growth restrictions on the fluxes. The approach targets models from turbulence, mean field games, and fluctuating hydrodynamics, and numerical tests verify both stability and accuracy.

Core claim

Starting from the Itô formulation, semi-discretizations are built that embed the cancellation mechanism of transport noise directly into the scheme. At the discrete energy level the second-order Stratonovich-Itô correction is balanced by the quadratic variation, up to numerical flux terms, so that the hyperbolic stability structure is retained. Suitable numerical fluxes then produce discrete energy conservation or dissipation, valid either pathwise or in expectation. The resulting high-order schemes are proved well-posed through stability estimates combined with a Khasminskii-type argument, without imposing linear growth assumptions on the stochastic fluxes.

What carries the argument

Local discontinuous Galerkin (LDG) semi-discretization whose numerical fluxes are chosen to balance the Stratonovich-Itô correction against the quadratic variation at the discrete energy level.

If this is right

  • Discrete energy estimates hold pathwise or in expectation and mimic the continuous hyperbolic structure.
  • Well-posedness follows for both linear and nonlinear stochastic conservation laws without linear growth conditions.
  • High-order spatial accuracy is retained while the energy structure is preserved.
  • The methods apply directly to heterogeneous stochastic fluxes arising in turbulence models and fluctuating hydrodynamics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same flux-balancing idea could be tested on other stochastic terms beyond gradient noise to check whether energy stability carries over.
  • Long-time simulations of the resulting schemes might remain stable without artificial damping, a property useful for mean-field game applications.
  • Extension to fully discrete schemes with time integrators that respect the same quadratic-variation balance would be a direct next step.

Load-bearing premise

Numerical fluxes exist that balance the quadratic variation exactly against the Stratonovich-Itô correction while still allowing the required energy estimates to close.

What would settle it

A concrete numerical run with the proposed LDG scheme on a nonlinear flux that exhibits discrete energy growth exceeding the controllable flux terms, or a failure of the Khasminskii argument to produce a global solution, would falsify the stability claims.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.02460 by Kenneth H. Karlsen, Thomas Christiansen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Two adjacent elements K−, K+ ∈ Th (left: triangulation, right: quadrangulation). The outward unit normal ne on their common interface e is indicated. This theorem combines results from [49, Sec. 3] and [71, Sec. 2]. More refined global existence criteria under nonlinear growth conditions are available, notably via Lyapunov function techniques as in [49, Sec. 3]. We will return to this approach in Section 4… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Each plot depicts one realization of the true solution for Example 6.1 and the corresponding numerical approximations computed with k = 0 (red dashed), k = 1 (blue dashdotted), k = 2 (orange dotted) for the alternating flux pair (Feu, Feq) = (u + h , q− h ). Here σ = 1/2 = T, h = 2−3 , and ∆t = 6.25 · 10−6 view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (Evolution of the L 2 ω,x norm) The plots show the estimated L 2 w,x norm for two batches of M = 30 realizations of Example 6.1 with k = 1. We use (Feu, Feq) = ({{uh}}, {{qh}}), denoted CF, (u + h , q− h ), labeled +−, and (u + h , q− h + ηqsgn(σ)JuhK), denoted +−, ηq = 10. Here σ¯ = 1, h = 2−4 , and ∆t ≈ 4.88 · 10−6 . The behavior is in excellent agreement with Theorem 3.14 view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (Evolution of the pathwise L 2 x norm) The evolution of ∥uh(t)∥2 over [0, 1] for two realizations of Example 6.1 and different choices of (Feu, Feq), labeled as in view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (Evolution of the pathwise L 2 x norm) The plots show ∥uh(t)∥2 for two realizations of Example 6.2 and various choices of Fu and (Feu, Feq). Here γ ∈ [0, 1] is the interpolation parameter in (3.10), eγ ≥ 0 is the penalty parameter, and (Feu, Feq) is labeled as in view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (Evolution of the L 2 ω,x norm) The plot shows the estimated L 2 ω,x norm for Example 6.2, based on 30 realizations and different choices of Fu and (Feu, Feq). Here γ and eγ are the tunable parameters in (3.10), while (Feu, Feq) is labeled as in view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The left plot compares the exact solution (solid black), for a single realization of Example 6.2, to approximations computed with different polynomial degrees: k = 0 (red dashed), k = 1 (blue dashdotted), and k = 2 (orange dotted), where Fu = {{uh}} and (Feu, Feq) = (u + h , q− h ). The right plot compares the exact solution (same realization) to different approximations computed with k = 1 and different f… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (H1 -regular σ) Evolution of one realization of the numerical approximation of Example 6.3, computed on a quadrilateral mesh with k = 2, h = 2−3 , and ∆t = 3.13 · 10−6 for β = 3 4 . This corresponds to σ ∈ [H1 (R 2 )]2 . The approximation is displayed at t = m 10 for m = 0, . . . , 5. Despite the roughness of the noise, the scheme transports the initial four-lobed profile in a stable and coherent way. The … view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (H1 -regular σ) Surface plot (left) of the numerical approximation of Example 6.3 computed on a quadrilateral mesh, with k = 2, h = 2−3 , and ∆t = 6.25 · 10−6 for β = 3 4 , corresponding to σ ∈ [H1 (R 2 )]2 . The right plot displays the pathwise evolution of the L 2 x norm over [0, 1 2 ] for the flux (4.8) and the two penalty values ηq = 0 (red dashed) and ηq = 10 (blue dashdotted), both computed with k = … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (L 2 -regular σ) One realization of the numerical approximation of Example 6.3 computed on a quadrilateral mesh, with k = 1, ηq = 5, h = 2−3 , and ∆t = 8.68 · 10−6 for β = − 1 2 , corresponding to σ ∈ [L p (R 2 )]2 for p < 4. The approximation is shown at t = m 10 for m = 0, . . . , 5. Despite the roughness of the noise, which causes some deformation near ( 1 2 , 1 2 ), the scheme still transports the flo… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: (Burgers’ with stochastic flux) Snapshots of several numerical approximations for one realization of Example 6.4 at t = m 10 for m = 0, . . . , 5. The black solid line is a reference solution with h = 2.5 · 10−3 , k = 0, and ∆t ≈ 1.25 · 10−7 . The blue dashdotted and orange dotted curves correspond to the fluxes (4.8) and (4.35)–(4.36), respectively, both with ηq = 2.5, computed with k = 1, h = 2−5 , and … view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: (Burgers’ with stochastic flux and central flux) LDG approximation of Example 6.4 with central fluxes, corresponding to ηq = 0 in (4.8), computed with h = 2−5 and k = 1 (red dashed), compared with the numerical reference solution obtained with h = 2.5 · 10−3 and k = 0 (black solid). Snapshots are shown at t = m 10 for m = 0, . . . , 5, with ∆t ≈ 1.25 · 10−7 in both computations. The central flux captures … view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: (Pathwise evolution of the L 2 x norm) Evolution of ∥uh(t)∥2 for one realization of Example 6.4 over [0, 1 2 ] for various numerical fluxes. In the left plot, (Fg′(u)q, Fg(u)) is chosen according to (4.35)–(4.36) with ηq = 2.5 (orange dotted) and ηq = 0.07 (dark solid). In the right plot, the flux pair is based on (4.8) with ηq = 0 (red dashed) and ηq = 2.5 (blue dashdotted). Here h = 2−4 , ∆t = 6.25 · 10… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: (Evolution of the L 2 ω,x norm) Estimated root mean energy for Example 6.4, based on 200 realizations, over [0, 1 2 ] for different numerical fluxes. Here k = 0, h = 2−5 , and ∆t ≈ 1.22 · 10−4 are fixed. In the left plot the fluxes are selected according to (4.35)–(4.36), with ηq = 2.5 (orange dotted) and 0.07 (dark solid), while in the right plot we use (4.8) with ηq = 0 (red dashed) and ηq = 2.5 (blue d… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: (Evolution nonconvex flux) The subplots compare a finer numerical solution (black solid), obtained with k = 0, h = 7.5 · 10−3 , and ∆t ≈ 2.10 · 10−8 , to two coarser approximations computed with k = 1, h = 2−5 , and the same time step. More precisely, the red dashed curve is obtained with the fluxes (4.8) and the dotted orange with (4.35)–(4.36), both with penalty value ηq = 7.5. The approximations are co… view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: (Evolution nonconvex for violated lower bound) A comparison of a finer numerical solution (black solid), obtained with k = 0, h = 7.5 · 10−3 , and ∆t ≈ 2.10 · 10−8 , to a coarser approximation (blue dashdotted) computed with k = 1, h = 2−5 , the same time step, and with the numerical fluxes selected according to (4.35)–(4.36) with ηq = 2.5. This penalty value does not satisfy the lower bound (4.37), and o… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: (Pathwise evolution of the L 2 x norm) The plots display the evolution of the pathwise L 2 x norm ∥uh(t)∥2 for one realization of Example 6.5 over the time interval [0, 1 4 ]. The flux pair (Fg′(u)q, Fg(u)) is chosen according to (4.35)–(4.36) with ηq = 5. Here the resolutions h = 2−3 and ∆t = 2.17 · 10−7 are used together with the polynomial degree k = 1. Consistent with Theorem 4.10, the curve decreases… view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Contour plots of a single realization of the approximation to Example 6.7, shown at the times t = 3m 250 for m = 0, . . . , 5. The solution is computed with k = 1, penalty values (ηq1 , ηq2 ) = (10, 10), and uniform resolutions h = 2−5 and ∆t ≈ 1.97 · 10−7 on a quadrilateral mesh. The initially saturated circular patch is rapidly dispersed over the time interval [0, 3 250 ]. This is further illustrated in view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Surface plots of the numerical solution of Example 6.7 at the times t = 1 20 (left) and t = 1 4 (right). The approximation is computed with k = 1, penalty values (ηq1 , ηq2 ) = (10, 10), and uniform resolutions h = 2−5 and ∆t ≈ 1.97 · 10−7 on a quadrilateral mesh. The plots show the rapid dispersion and anisotropic deformation of the initially saturated circular patch. 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 uh(t, y) t=0.0 t=0.0… view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Numerical solution of Example 6.7 along the cut x = 0, shown at the times t = 3m 50 for m = 0, . . . , 5. The approximation is computed with k = 1, penalty values (ηq1 , ηq2 ) = (10, 10), and uniform resolutions h = 5 · 10−2 and ∆t ≈ 5.05 · 10−7 on a quadrilateral mesh. The profiles display the composite shock–rarefaction structure of the solution. Mild over- and undershoots occur near steep fronts; these… view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Wiener paths and pathwise L 2 x norm for Example 6.7. The left plot shows the realizations of (W1 t , W2 t ) used for the numerical solution in view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: (Kraichnan-like model) Snapshots of the numerical solution of Example 6.8 at the times t = m 5 for m = 0, . . . , 5. The approximation is computed with polynomial degree k = 2, uniform resolutions h = 2−3 and ∆t ≈ 1.04 · 10−5 , and penalty values ηqℓ = 2 for all ℓ. The problem is driven by L = 56 Wiener processes. The Kraichnan velocity field produces irregular flow patterns from the initial low-frequency… view at source ↗
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: (Kraichnan-like model) Snapshots of the numerical solution from Example 6.8 along the cut x = 0, shown at the times t = m 5 for m = 0, . . . , 5. The approximation is computed on a quadrilateral mesh with k = 2, h = 2−3 , ∆t ≈ 1.04 · 10−5 , and ηqℓ = 2 for all ℓ. The solution along the cut develops fine-scale spatial structure as time evolves view at source ↗
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: (Kraichnan-like model) Six of the 56 Wiener processes driving Example 6.8. Four of the displayed processes correspond to wave vectors k ∈ K with |k| = 1. Together, these processes drive the solution in different spatial directions and generate the irregular velocity field. [12] D. Breit, E. Feireisl, M. Hofmanová, and E. Zatorska. Compressible Navier-Stokes system with transport noise. SIAM J. Math. Anal.… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We develop local discontinuous Galerkin (LDG) methods for conservation laws with heterogeneous stochastic fluxes, where the Stratonovich-driven transport terms may be linear or nonlinear. Such equations arise, for example, in simplified turbulence models, mean field games, and fluctuating hydrodynamics. Starting from the It\^{o} formulation, we construct semi-discretizations that build the cancellation mechanism of transport noise into the numerical method. At the discrete energy level, the second-order Stratonovich-It\^{o} correction is balanced by the quadratic variation, up to numerical flux terms, so that the hyperbolic stability structure is retained. Suitable numerical fluxes yield discrete energy conservation or energy dissipation, valid either pathwise or in expectation. The resulting high-order schemes are proved well posed through stability estimates combined with a Khasminskii-type argument, without imposing linear growth assumptions. Numerical experiments confirm stability and high-order accuracy.

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.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops local discontinuous Galerkin (LDG) methods for linear and nonlinear conservation laws with heterogeneous stochastic fluxes driven by Stratonovich processes. Starting from the Itô formulation, the authors construct semi-discretizations that incorporate the cancellation mechanism of transport noise. At the discrete energy level, the second-order Stratonovich-Itô correction is balanced by the quadratic variation up to numerical flux terms, retaining the hyperbolic stability structure. Suitable numerical fluxes are shown to yield discrete energy conservation or dissipation, valid pathwise or in expectation. Well-posedness is established through stability estimates combined with a Khasminskii-type argument without imposing linear growth assumptions on the stochastic fluxes. Numerical experiments confirm stability and high-order accuracy.

Significance. If the results hold, the work provides a valuable contribution to numerical methods for stochastic hyperbolic PDEs by constructing high-order schemes that preserve key energy structures in the presence of gradient noise. This is relevant for applications in turbulence modeling, mean-field games, and fluctuating hydrodynamics. The extension to nonlinear cases without linear growth assumptions, achieved via discrete energy estimates and a Khasminskii argument, strengthens the theoretical foundation and broadens applicability. The combination of structure preservation, provable well-posedness, and high-order accuracy represents a solid advance in the field.

minor comments (3)
  1. §3 (numerical flux definitions): the distinction between fluxes that achieve pathwise versus expectation-based energy dissipation could be made more explicit with a side-by-side comparison table to improve readability.
  2. Numerical experiments section: the convergence tables would benefit from reporting both L2 and energy-norm errors to directly illustrate the structure-preserving property.
  3. Notation: the quadratic variation term is introduced in the continuous setting but its discrete counterpart is referenced without an explicit equation number in the stability analysis; adding a cross-reference would aid clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive and constructive report on our manuscript. The summary accurately captures the main contributions regarding structure-preserving LDG discretizations for stochastic transport equations, the pathwise or expectation-based energy preservation, and the well-posedness analysis via discrete energy estimates combined with a Khasminskii-type argument. We appreciate the recommendation for minor revision and will incorporate any editorial or minor technical adjustments in the revised version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper constructs LDG semi-discretizations for stochastic transport equations by directly embedding the Stratonovich-Itô correction and quadratic variation cancellation (standard identities from stochastic calculus) into the numerical fluxes and energy estimates. Discrete energy conservation or dissipation then follows from this construction, either pathwise or in expectation, and well-posedness is obtained from the resulting stability bounds plus a Khasminskii-type argument. None of these steps reduces a claimed result to a fitted parameter, self-referential definition, or load-bearing self-citation; the derivation remains self-contained from first-principles discretization principles and stochastic analysis.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The approach rests on established tools from stochastic analysis and discontinuous Galerkin theory. No new free parameters, ad-hoc entities, or non-standard axioms are introduced at the level of the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • standard math The Stratonovich-to-Itô conversion formula and quadratic variation rules for stochastic integrals hold.
    Invoked to start from the Itô formulation and balance the second-order correction with quadratic variation.
  • domain assumption Standard energy estimates and flux consistency properties hold for local discontinuous Galerkin discretizations of hyperbolic conservation laws.
    Basis for constructing the semi-discretizations and proving discrete energy balance.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5455 in / 1435 out tokens · 35161 ms · 2026-05-08T19:21:33.016347+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

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

83 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Albeverio, Z

    S. Albeverio, Z. Brzeźniak, and A. Daletskii. Stochastic Camassa-Holm equation with convection type noise.J. Differential Equations, 276:404–432, 2021. 3

    2021

  2. [2]

    Alonso-Orán, C

    D. Alonso-Orán, C. Rohde, and H. Tang. A local-in-time theory for singular SDEs with applications to fluid models with transport noise.Journal of Nonlinear Science, 31(6):98, 2021. 3

    2021

  3. [3]

    Ambrosio

    L. Ambrosio. Transport equation and Cauchy problem forBVvector fields.Invent. Math., 158(2):227–260, 2004. 3

    2004

  4. [4]

    Notes Comput

    D.N.Arnold, F.Brezzi, B.Cockburn, andL.D.Marini.Discontinuousgalerkinmethodsforellipticproblems.InDiscontinuous Galerkin methods for elliptic problems, volume 11 ofLect. Notes Comput. Sci. Eng., pages 89–101. Springer, 2000. 4, 16

    2000

  5. [5]

    D. N. Arnold, F. Brezzi, B. Cockburn, and L. D. Marini. Unified analysis of discontinuous galerkin methods for elliptic problems.SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 39(5):1749–1779, 2002. 4, 16

    2002

  6. [6]

    Attanasio and F

    S. Attanasio and F. Flandoli. Renormalized solutions for stochastic transport equations and the regularization by bilinear multiplication noise.Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 36(8):1455–1474, 2011. 3

    2011

  7. [7]

    Bauzet, J

    C. Bauzet, J. Charrier, and T. Gallouët. Convergence of flux-splitting finite volume schemes for hyperbolic scalar conservation laws with a multiplicative stochastic perturbation.Math. Comp., 85(302):2777–2813, 2016. 4

    2016

  8. [8]

    Bauzet, J

    C. Bauzet, J. Charrier, and T. Gallouët. Convergence of monotone finite volume schemes for hyperbolic scalar conservation laws with multiplicative noise.Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput., 4(1):150–223, 2016. 4

    2016

  9. [9]

    Baňas, Z

    L. Baňas, Z. Brzeźniak, M. Neklyudov, and A. Prohl.Stochastic ferromagnetism, volume 58 ofDe Gruyter Studies in Mathematics. De Gruyter, Berlin, 2014. Analysis and numerics. 4

    2014

  10. [10]

    L. Beck, F. Flandoli, M. Gubinelli, and M. Maurelli. Stochastic ODEs and stochastic linear PDEs with critical drift: regularity, duality and uniqueness.Electron. J. Probab., 24:Paper No. 136, 72, 2019. 3

    2019

  11. [11]

    Breit, E

    D. Breit, E. Feireisl, and M. Hofmanová.Stochastically forced compressible fluid flows, volume 3 ofDe Gruyter Series in Applied and Numerical Mathematics. De Gruyter, Berlin, 2018. 1 STRUCTURE-PRESER VING LDG METHODS 53 0.50 0.25 0.00 0.25 uh(t, y) t=0.0 t=0.2 t=0.4 0 2 4 6 y 0.50 0.25 0.00 0.25 uh(t, y) t=0.6 0 2 4 6 y t=0.8 0 2 4 6 y t=1.0 Figure 23.(Kr...

    2018

  12. [12]

    Breit, E

    D. Breit, E. Feireisl, M. Hofmanová, and E. Zatorska. Compressible Navier-Stokes system with transport noise.SIAM J. Math. Anal., 54(4):4465–4494, 2022. 3

    2022

  13. [13]

    Castillo

    P. Castillo. An optimal estimate for the local discontinuous galerkin method. InDiscontinuous Galerkin methods for elliptic problems, volume 11 ofLect. Notes Comput. Sci. Eng., pages 285–290. Springer, 2000. 4, 39

    2000

  14. [14]

    Castillo

    P. Castillo. Performance of discontinuous galerkin methods for elliptic pdes.SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 24(2):524–547, 2002. 4

    2002

  15. [15]

    Castillo, B

    P. Castillo, B. Cockburn, I. Perugia, and D. Schötzau. An a priori error analysis of the local discontinuous galerkin method for elliptic problems.SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 38(5):1676–1807, 2001. 16

    2001

  16. [16]

    Chen and C.-W

    T. Chen and C.-W. Shu. Entropy stable high order discontinuous Galerkin methods with suitable quadrature rules for hyperbolic conservation laws.J. Comput. Phys., 345:427–461, 2017. 44

    2017

  17. [17]

    Cheng, X

    Y. Cheng, X. Meng, and Q. Zhang. Application of generalized Gauss–Radau projections for the local discontinuous Galerkin method for linear convection-diffusion equations.Math. Comp., 86(305):1233–1267, 2017. 27

    2017

  18. [18]

    Chow.Stochastic partial differential equations

    P.-L. Chow.Stochastic partial differential equations. Advances in Applied Mathematics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, second edition, 2015. 1, 5

    2015

  19. [19]

    Cockburn

    B. Cockburn. Discontinuous Galerkin methods for convection-dominated problems. InHigh-order methods for computational physics, volume 9 ofLect. Notes Comput. Sci. Eng., pages 69–224. Springer, Berlin, 1999. 2, 4, 7, 9, 44

    1999

  20. [20]

    Cockburn and C.-W

    B. Cockburn and C.-W. Shu. The local discontinuous Galerkin method for time-dependent convection-diffusion systems. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 35(6):2440–2463 (electronic), 1998. 2, 4, 16, 19, 39

    1998

  21. [21]

    Coghi and M

    M. Coghi and M. Maurelli. Existence and uniqueness by Kraichnan noise for 2d Euler equations with unbounded vorticity. arXiv:2308.03216, 2023. 49

    work page arXiv 2023

  22. [22]

    Cotter, D

    C. Cotter, D. Crisan, D. D. Holm, W. Pan, and I. Shevchenko. Numerically modeling stochastic Lie transport in fluid dynamics.Multiscale Model. Simul., 17(1):192–232, 2019. 4 STRUCTURE-PRESER VING LDG METHODS 54

    2019

  23. [23]

    Crisan, F

    D. Crisan, F. Flandoli, and D. D. Holm. Solution properties of a 3D stochastic Euler fluid equation.J. Nonlinear Sci., 29(3):813–870, 2019. 3

    2019

  24. [24]

    Da Prato and J

    G. Da Prato and J. Zabczyk.Stochastic equations in infinite dimensions, volume 152 ofEncyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, second edition, 2014. 1

    2014

  25. [25]

    D. A. Di Pietro and A. Ern.Mathematical Aspects of Discontinuous Galerkin Methods, volume 69 ofMathématiques & Applications. Springer, Heidelberg, 1 edition, 2012. 4, 9

    2012

  26. [26]

    R. J. DiPerna and P.-L. Lions. Ordinary differential equations, transport theory and Sobolev spaces.Invent. Math., 98(3):511–547, 1989. 3

    1989

  27. [27]

    Dolejší and M

    V. Dolejší and M. Feistauer.Discontinuous Galerkin Method: Analysis and Applications to Compressible Flow, volume 48 ofSpringer Series in Computational Mathematics. Springer, 2015. 7

    2015

  28. [28]

    Dotti and J

    S. Dotti and J. Vovelle. Convergence of the finite volume method for scalar conservation laws with multiplicative noise: an approach by kinetic formulation.Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput., 8(2):265–310, 2020. 4

    2020

  29. [29]

    G. L. Eyink and J. Xin. Self-similar decay in the kraichnan model of a passive scalar.J. Stat. Phys., 100:679–741, 2000. 49

    2000

  30. [30]

    Fehrman and B

    B. Fehrman and B. Gess. Non-equilibrium large deviations and parabolic-hyperbolic PDE with irregular drift.Invent. Math., 234:573–636, 2023. 2

    2023

  31. [31]

    Fehrman and B

    B. Fehrman and B. Gess. Well-posedness of the dean–kawasaki and the nonlinear dawson–watanabe equation with correlated noise.Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 248:20, 2024. 3

    2024

  32. [32]

    Fehrman and B

    B. Fehrman and B. Gess. Conservative stochastic pdes on the whole space.Stoch. PDE: Anal. Comp., 2025. 3

    2025

  33. [33]

    U. S. Fjordholm, K. H. Karlsen, and P. H. Pang. Convergent finite difference schemes for stochastic transport equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 63(1):149–192, 2025. 4, 5, 8, 31, 34, 35

    2025

  34. [34]

    Flandoli, M

    F. Flandoli, M. Gubinelli, and E. Priola. Well-posedness of the transport equation by stochastic perturbation.Invent. Math., 180(1):1–53, 2010. 3, 40

    2010

  35. [35]

    Flandoli and D

    F. Flandoli and D. Luo. Convergence of transport noise to Ornstein–Uhlenbeck for 2D Euler equations under the enstrophy measure.Ann. Probab., 48(1):264–295, 2020. 3

    2020

  36. [36]

    Flandoli and E

    F. Flandoli and E. Luongo.Stochastic Partial Differential Equations in Fluid Mechanics, volume 2328 ofLecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer, 2023. 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 18, 49

    2023

  37. [37]

    Funaki, Y

    T. Funaki, Y. Gao, and D. Hilhorst. Convergence of a finite volume scheme for a stochastic conservation law involving a Q-Brownian motion.Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. B, 23(4):1459–1502, 2018. 4

    2018

  38. [38]

    Galimberti, H

    L. Galimberti, H. Holden, K. H. Karlsen, and P. H. Pang. Global existence of dissipative solutions to the Camassa–Holm equation with transport noise.J. Differential Equations, 387:1–103, 2024. 3

    2024

  39. [39]

    Gawedzki

    K. Gawedzki. Stochastic processes in turbulent transport.arXiv:0806.1949, 2008. 49

    work page arXiv 1949

  40. [40]

    Gess and M

    B. Gess and M. Maurelli. Well-posedness by noise for scalar conservation laws.Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 43(12):1702–1736, 2018. 3

    2018

  41. [41]

    Gess and P

    B. Gess and P. E. Souganidis. Long-time behavior, invariant measures, and regularizing effects for stochastic scalar conservation laws.Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 70(8):1562–1597, 2017. 3

    2017

  42. [42]

    J. S. Hesthaven and T. Warburton.Nodal discontinuous Galerkin methods, volume 54 ofTexts in Applied Mathematics. Springer, New York, 2008. Algorithms, analysis, and applications. 7, 44

    2008

  43. [43]

    Hiltebrand and S

    A. Hiltebrand and S. Mishra. Entropy stable shock capturing space-time discontinuous Galerkin schemes for systems of conservation laws.Numer. Math., 126(1):103–151, 2014. 44

    2014

  44. [44]

    H. Hoel, K. H. Karlsen, N. H. Risebro, and E. B. Storrøsten. Numerical methods for conservation laws with rough flux. Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput., 8(1):186–261, 2020. 4, 42

    2020

  45. [45]

    Holden, K

    H. Holden, K. H. Karlsen, K.-A. Lie, and N. H. Risebro.Splitting Methods for Partial Differential Equations with Rough Solutions: Analysis and MATLAB programs. EMS Series of Lectures in Mathematics. European Mathematical Society (EMS), Zürich, 2010. 43

    2010

  46. [46]

    D. Holm. Variational principles for stochastic fluid dynamics.Proc. R. Soc. A, 471:20140963, 2015. 1

    2015

  47. [47]

    Jentzen and P

    A. Jentzen and P. E. Kloeden.Taylor approximations for stochastic partial differential equations, volume 83 ofCBMS-NSF Regional Conference Series in Applied Mathematics. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA, 2011. 4

    2011

  48. [48]

    K. H. Karlsen, K. Brusdal, H. K. Dahle, S. Evje, and K.-A. Lie. The corrected operator splitting approach applied to a nonlinear advection-diffusion problem.Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 167(3-4):239–260, 1998. 48

    1998

  49. [49]

    Khasminskii.Stochastic stability of differential equations, volume 66 ofStochastic Modelling and Applied Probability

    R. Khasminskii.Stochastic stability of differential equations, volume 66 ofStochastic Modelling and Applied Probability. Springer, Heidelberg, second edition, 2012. 5, 7, 23, 28

    2012

  50. [50]

    P. E. Kloeden and E. Platen.Numerical Solution of Stochastic Differential Equations. Stochastic Modelling and Applied Probability. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1992. 5, 36, 37

    1992

  51. [51]

    R. H. Kraichnan. Inertial ranges in two-dimensional turbulence.Phys. Fluids, 10(7):1417–1423, 1967. 2, 49

    1967

  52. [52]

    R. H. Kraichnan. Anomalous scaling of a randomly advected passive scalar.Phys. Rev. Lett, 72:1016–1019, 1994. 2, 49

    1994

  53. [53]

    Kröker and C

    I. Kröker and C. Rohde. Finite volume schemes for hyperbolic balance laws with multiplicative noise.Appl. Numer. Math., 62(4):441–456, 2012. 4

    2012

  54. [54]

    S. N. Kružkov. First order quasilinear equations with several independent variables.Mat. Sb. (N.S.), 81 (123):228–255, 1970. 3

    1970

  55. [55]

    Kunita.Stochastic flows and stochastic differential equations, volume 24 ofCambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics

    H. Kunita.Stochastic flows and stochastic differential equations, volume 24 ofCambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990. 5

    1990

  56. [56]

    Lasry and P.-L

    J.-M. Lasry and P.-L. Lions. Mean field games.Jpn. J. Math., 2(1):229–260, 2007. 2

    2007

  57. [57]

    Lê and C

    K. Lê and C. Ling. Taming singular stochastic differential equations: A numerical method.Ann. Probab., 53(5):–, 2025. 4

    2025

  58. [58]

    Le Jan and O

    Y. Le Jan and O. Raimond. Integration of Brownian vector fields.Ann. Probab., 30:826–873, 2002. 49 STRUCTURE-PRESER VING LDG METHODS 55

    2002

  59. [59]

    Li, C.-W

    Y. Li, C.-W. Shu, and S. Tang. A discontinuous Galerkin method for stochastic conservation laws.SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 42(1):A54–A86, 2020. 4

    2020

  60. [60]

    Li, C.-W

    Y. Li, C.-W. Shu, and S. Tang. A local discontinuous Galerkin method for nonlinear parabolic SPDEs.ESAIM Math. Model. Numer. Anal., 55:S187–S223, 2021. 4, 10, 12

    2021

  61. [61]

    Y. Li, W. Zhao, and W. Zhao. An oscillation-free discontinuous galerkin method for a nonlinear stochastic convection- dominated diffusion problem and its error analysis.J. Comput. Math., 2025. 4

    2025

  62. [62]

    Y. Li, W. Zhao, and W. Zhao. An oscillation-free discontinuous Galerkin method for a nonlinear stochastic convection- dominated diffusion problem and its error analysis.J. Comput. Math., 43(5):1264–1289, 2025. 46, 47

    2025

  63. [63]

    Lions, B

    P.-L. Lions, B. Perthame, and P. Souganidis. Scalar conservation laws with rough (stochastic) fluxes.Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput., 1(4):664–686, 2013. 2, 3

    2013

  64. [64]

    Liu and Y

    H. Liu and Y. Xing. An invariant preserving discontinuous galerkin method for the camassa–holm equation.SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 38(4):A1919–A1934, 2016. 4

    2016

  65. [65]

    Liu and S

    X.-D. Liu and S. Osher. Nonoscillatory high order accurate self-similar maximum principle satisfying shock capturing schemes I.SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 33(2):760–779, 1996. 44

    1996

  66. [66]

    Liu, C.-W

    Y. Liu, C.-W. Shu, and M. Zhang. Sub-optimal convergence of discontinuous Galerkin methods with central fluxes for linear hyperbolic equations with even degree polynomial approximations.J. Comput. Math., 39(4):518–537, 2021. 39

    2021

  67. [67]

    G. J. Lord, C. E. Powell, and T. Shardlow.An introduction to computational stochastic PDEs. Cambridge Texts in Applied Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, New York, 2014. 4

    2014

  68. [68]

    S. V. Lototsky and B. L. Rozovsky.Stochastic Partial Differential Equations. Universitext. Springer, 2017. 2, 3, 5

    2017

  69. [69]

    J. Lu, Y. Liu, and C.-W. Shu. An oscillation-free discontinuous Galerkin method for scalar hyperbolic conservation laws. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 59(3):1299–1324, 2021. 46, 47

    2021

  70. [70]

    A. K. Majee. Convergence of a flux-splitting finite volume scheme for conservation laws driven by Lévy noise.Appl. Math. Comput., 338:676–697, 2018. 4

    2018

  71. [71]

    Mao.Stochastic Differential Equations and Applications

    X. Mao.Stochastic Differential Equations and Applications. Horwood Publishing Limited, Chichester, 2 edition, 2008. 5, 7

    2008

  72. [72]

    Maurelli

    M. Maurelli. Wiener chaos and uniqueness for stochastic transport equation.C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris, 349(11-12):669–672,

  73. [73]

    Mikulevicius and B

    R. Mikulevicius and B. Rozovskii. Stochastic Navier-Stokes equations for turbulent flows.SIAM J. Math. Anal., 35:1250–1310,

  74. [74]

    Ondreját, A

    M. Ondreját, A. Prohl, and N. Walkington. Numerical approximation of nonlinear SPDE’s.Stoch PDE: Anal Comp, 2022. 4

    2022

  75. [75]

    Perthame.Kinetic formulation of conservation laws, volume 21 ofOxford Lecture Series in Mathematics and its Applications

    B. Perthame.Kinetic formulation of conservation laws, volume 21 ofOxford Lecture Series in Mathematics and its Applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002. 3

    2002

  76. [76]

    P. E. Protter.Stochastic integration and differential equations, volume 21 ofStochastic Modelling and Applied Probability. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2005. Second edition. Version 2.1, Corrected third printing. 5, 14

    2005

  77. [77]

    Schöberl

    J. Schöberl. C++11 implementation of finite elements in NGSolve. ASC Report 30/2014, Institute for Analysis and Scientific Computing, Vienna University of Technology, 2014. 36

    2014

  78. [78]

    Xu and C.-W

    Y. Xu and C.-W. Shu. A local discontinuous galerkin method for the camassa–holm equation.SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 46(4):1998–2021, 2008. 4

    1998

  79. [79]

    Xu and C.-W

    Y. Xu and C.-W. Shu. Local discontinuous galerkin method for the hunter–saxton equation and its zero-viscosity and zero-dispersion limits.SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 31(2):1249–1268, 2009. 4

    2009

  80. [80]

    Xu and C.-W

    Y. Xu and C.-W. Shu. Dissipative numerical methods for the hunter–saxton equation.J. Comput. Math., 28(5):606–620,

Showing first 80 references.