Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 10 minor 43 references

Ward identities expose why elastic turbulence resists standard renormalization

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · glm-5.2

2026-07-05 12:26 UTC pith:SITI2ZUT

load-bearing objection New systematic Ward-identity method for viscoelastic turbulence; one load-bearing identity needs rigorous justification the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2606.06496 v1 pith:SITI2ZUT submitted 2026-04-20 physics.flu-dyn cond-mat.stat-mech

Functional Renormalization for Elastic Burgulence

Johannes Conrad , Martin Oberlack This is my paper
classification physics.flu-dyn cond-mat.stat-mech PACS 47.57.-s47.27.ef05.10.Cc
keywords elasticidentitiesextendedturbulencewardadmissiblealgorithmbehaviour
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper develops a systematic algorithm to derive Ward identities—exact nonperturbative constraints on correlation functions—for viscoelastic turbulence by extending Lie-group symmetry analysis to the source-extended Euler-Lagrange equations of the Martin-Siggia-Rose path integral. Applied to a dimensionally reduced model called elastic Burgulence (a Burgers equation coupled to an elastic stress tensor via an Oldroyd-type constitutive law), the authors find that the symmetry structure is substantially weaker than in Navier-Stokes turbulence. In Navier-Stokes, Galilean invariance produces strong Ward identities that pin down the zero-momentum sector and enable controlled closure schemes. In the viscoelastic case, the stress and response-stress sectors carry no comparable protecting symmetry: the mean stress need not vanish, the effective action has a larger space of running couplings, and dynamical instabilities of the mean field can arise. The paper identifies which sectors are protected (the response-velocity sector does not renormalize) and which remain unconstrained, then uses these constraints to restrict the functional form of constitutive couplings in a derivative expansion and to outline two complementary closure strategies for the Wetterich renormalization-group flow equation.

Core claim

The central discovery is that the source-extended Lie-group algorithm systematically produces Ward identities for elastic Burgulence, and these identities reveal a structural deficit: unlike Navier-Stokes turbulence, where Galilean invariance constrains the zero-momentum sector and enables closure, the viscoelastic stress sector is comparatively unprotected. The response-velocity sector is shielded from renormalization (Eq. 147), and the constitutive couplings are restricted in a derivative expansion (Eqs. 178-190), but the stress and response-stress sectors remain largely unconstrained, making nonperturbative closures significantly harder.

What carries the argument

Ward identities derived via a source-extended Lie-group symmetry algorithm applied to the MSR action for viscoelastic Burgers equations; the Wetterich flow equation for the scale-dependent effective action; a derivative expansion ansatz for the effective action constrained by the derived identities.

Load-bearing premise

The Ward identity generated by the symmetry X_5 (Eqs. 149-150) involves a time integral with exponential growth that is formally divergent. The authors argue it exists because physical stress correlations decay exponentially in time, and propose factoring out the divergence as an ill-defined delta function. This regularization is not rigorously justified, and if it fails, the key constraint on the constitutive-sector closure in Section 7.3 is lost.

What would settle it

If the exponentially growing Ward identity (X_5) cannot be consistently regularized within the Wetterich flow, the momentum-resolving closure of Section 7.3 loses its primary constraint, and the derivative-expansion scheme of Section 7.2 must rely solely on the weaker identities X_1 and X_2, which do not constrain the stress sector.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The symmetry deficit identified here means that closure schemes for elastic turbulence cannot directly borrow the zero-momentum-sector strategy that proved successful for Navier-Stokes and KPZ; new approximation architectures are needed for the stress sector.
  • The derivative-expansion truncation (Eqs. 178-190) provides a concrete starting ansatz for numerical computation of the renormalization-group flow, including the stability boundary of mean-field stress configurations (Eq. 172).
  • The scaling exponent z=0 derived from constant energy-injection rate (Eq. 165) applies not only to 1D Burgulence but to elastic turbulence in arbitrary spatial dimensions, offering a universal constraint on the fixed-point structure.
  • The momentum-resolving closure outlined in Section 7.3, if numerically tractable, would yield the first nonperturbative prediction of kinetic and polymeric energy spectra for elastic turbulence, for which no analytical scaling exponents currently exist.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 10 minor

Summary. This manuscript formulates elastic and elasto-inertial turbulence (Oldroyd-B model) within the Martin-Siggia-Rose (MSR) path-integral framework and develops a systematic, source-extended Lie-group algorithm to derive Ward identities directly from the Euler-Lagrange equations. As a dimensionally reduced model, the authors introduce an extended Burgers equation that retains the characteristic coupling between the extra stress and velocity gradient. The paper derives the Ward identities for this model, analyzes the resulting constraints on closure schemes, and outlines two complementary truncation strategies for the Wetterich flow equation: a leading-order derivative expansion and a momentum-resolving BMW-type closure. The central structural finding is that, unlike in Navier-Stokes turbulence, the stress and response-stress sectors in viscoelastic turbulence carry far fewer protecting symmetries, leading to a larger running theory space and potential mean-field instabilities.

Significance. The application of the functional renormalization group (fRG) to elastic turbulence is a genuinely novel undertaking with clear motivation. The source-extended Lie-group algorithm for systematically deriving Ward identities is a methodological contribution in its own right and is presented in a self-contained, algorithmic manner. The identification of the specific structural obstruction—namely, the comparative lack of constraints on the stress sector compared to the Galilean-protected velocity sector in Navier-Stokes—is a valuable insight for the community. The scaling analysis yielding z=0 from scale-invariant energy injection is a concrete, falsifiable prediction. The two proposed closure schemes (Eqs. 176–210) provide a concrete roadmap for future quantitative calculations.

major comments (4)
  1. §7, Eqs. (149)–(152): The Ward identity generated by X5 involves the function f(t) = exp(χt) (Eq. 115), where χ can be positive (e.g., A=0, B=1, α=1 gives χ = 1/(3W) > 0). The resulting identity (Eq. 150) involves integrals of the form ∫ φ(t) e^{χt} dt, which diverge for Schwartz-class test functions φ ∈ S (Eq. 151). The authors propose to regularize this by factoring out the divergence as an ill-defined δ(ω−i), drawing an analogy to the δ(0) factor in effective potential calculations. This analogy is imperfect: δ(0) in the effective potential arises from a volume divergence in a well-defined integral, whereas here the integrand itself grows exponentially, making the distributional pairing undefined before any volume factor appears. Furthermore, the physical argument (Eq. 152) that correlations decay as e^{−t/W} conflates properties of the full interacting theory with the bare-level Ward
  2. identity, which must hold at the level of the regularized action where bare correlations need not exhibit the physical decay rate. This issue is load-bearing: the BMW-type closure in §7.3 (Eqs. 203–210) relies on the X5 Ward identity as its key non-trivial constraint on the stress sector. If the identity is ill-defined, the closure reduces to the velocity-sector-only constraints already available from X1/X2. The authors should either provide a rigorous justification for the regularization (e.g., by demonstrating that the Ward identity can be defined as a distributional limit in a suitable test-function space) or explicitly delineate the status of the X5 identity as a formal/asymptotic relation whose validity must be verified a posteriori.
  3. §7.2.1, Eqs. (176)–(177) and surrounding text: The leading-order derivative expansion ansatz implements the X5 Ward identity (149) 'in its unmodified state,' explicitly assuming that 'the Ward identity be restored for k→0 and that the final fixed point that is approached is not influenced by the perturbation of the trajectory through enforcement along the entire flow.' This is an unverified assumption. The regulator preserving X5 (Eq. 157, a power-law R_k ∝ (|p|/k)^C) is acknowledged at the end of §7 to be insufficient to suppress all IR singularities of the propagator for all truncations. The authors should clarify whether the fixed point reached under this ansatz is robust to the regulator breaking, or at minimum discuss the potential sensitivity of the stability analysis (Eqs. 179–183) to this assumption.
  4. §7.3, Eqs. (203)–(210): The BMW-type closure relies on evaluating vertex functions at a complex frequency shift ω = iχ (Eqs. 203, 204). The closure in Eq. (206) then assumes |Ω| ≫ |χ| to replace σ-sector vertices by their zero-momentum values. The regime of validity of this approximation is not specified. Since χ = 1/(3W) for the Oldroyd-B case (A=0, B=1, α=1), the condition |Ω| ≫ |χ| may restrict the closure to frequencies well above the polymer relaxation rate, potentially excluding the physically relevant elastic subrange. The authors should discuss whether this closure is applicable in the scaling regime of interest or whether it is limited to a UV asymptotic regime.
minor comments (10)
  1. §1: 'teh econd' should be 'the second' (in the sentence beginning 'Within the Lundgren [23], Monin [26], Novikov [27] hierarchy...').
  2. §1: 'clssical Navier Stokes turublence' should be 'classical Navier-Stokes turbulence'.
  3. §1: 'nomber of degrees of freemdom' should be 'number of degrees of freedom'.
  4. §7: 'study pf' should be 'study of'.
  5. §7: 'fuction' should be 'function' (in the text following Eq. 149).
  6. §6.0.2, Eq. (111): The generator X5 is written with terms involving σ and σ̄, but the notation for the response stress field is inconsistent with the rest of the paper (sometimes σ̄, sometimes σ̃). Please standardize.
  7. §5.1, Eq. (60): The δ(0) prefactor is stated to be absorbable into a normalization defining a spatial density. It would help the reader to state explicitly that this is the standard volume factor V/(2π)^d.
  8. §7.1, Eq. (165): The dimension [ε] = 2z is derived, and z=0 follows from [ε]=0. It would strengthen the presentation to explicitly note that this result (z=0 for elastic turbulence) holds in arbitrary spatial dimension d, as mentioned in the parenthetical but not emphasized.
  9. §6.0.3: The symmetry X7 (Eq. 133) and its variation δX7(L) = d·f(t)·L (Eq. 134) are introduced but their implications are not discussed. If these are not used subsequently, a brief comment on their (ir)relevance would be helpful.
  10. References: Several entries have minor formatting issues (e.g., [16] uses a non-standard DOI format '10.1103/pbtf-rn7d').

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for a careful and substantive reading of the manuscript. The referee's comments identify genuine technical gaps in the treatment of the X5 Ward identity and its consequences for both closure schemes. We address each point below and indicate revisions where they are warranted.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §7, Eqs. (149)–(152): The Ward identity generated by X5 involves f(t) = exp(χt) with χ potentially positive, leading to divergent integrals. The δ(0) analogy is imperfect, and the physical argument conflates bare-level and interacting correlations. If the identity is ill-defined, the BMW closure reduces to velocity-sector-only constraints.

    Authors: The referee is correct that the regularization argument as currently stated is not rigorous. We acknowledge two distinct issues: (1) The pairing ⟨φ, e^{χt}⟩ is not defined for φ ∈ S when χ > 0, and the analogy to δ(0) in effective potential calculations is indeed imperfect—the δ(0) there arises from a volume divergence in an otherwise well-defined integral, whereas here the integrand itself grows exponentially. (2) The physical argument in Eq. (152) that correlations decay as e^{−t/W} is an argument about the full interacting theory, not about the bare-level Ward identity, which must hold at the level of the regularized action where bare correlations need not exhibit the physical decay rate. We cannot resolve this by simply invoking physical decay at the bare level. We will revise the manuscript to explicitly delineate the status of the X5 identity as a formal relation whose validity must be verified a posteriori—specifically, by checking at the level of the truncated effective action whether the full (dressed) correlators decay sufficiently fast to render the distributional pairing well-defined. We will also add a remark that a rigorous justification would require demonstrating that the Ward identity can be defined as a distributional limit in a test-function space restricted to functions with sufficient exponential decay (e.g., the Gelfand–Shilov space S_α rather than the full Schwartz space S), and we will note this as an open problem. We agree that the consequences for the BMW closure are significant: if the X5 identity is only formal, then the stress-sector constraints it provides are not guaranteed, and the closure does reduce to the velocity-sector-only constraints from X1/X2 unless and until the identity is validated at the dressed level. revision: partial

  2. Referee: §7.2.1, Eqs. (176)–(177): The assumption that the Ward identity is restored for k→0 and that the fixed point is not influenced by enforcement along the entire flow is unverified. The regulator preserving X5 is acknowledged to be insufficient to suppress all IR singularities.

    Authors: The referee correctly identifies that the assumption stated in the text surrounding Eqs. (176)–(177) is unverified. We agree that this should be made explicit rather than presented as a working hypothesis without qualification. In the revised manuscript, we will add a discussion of the potential sensitivity of the stability analysis (Eqs. 179–183) to this assumption. Specifically, we will note that: (a) the power-law regulator R_k ∝ (|p|/k)^C that preserves X5 is, as we already acknowledge at the end of §7, insufficient to suppress all IR singularities of the propagator for general truncations; (b) the fixed point reached under the ansatz (177) may therefore depend on the manner in which the X5 identity is enforced (or approximately enforced) along the flow; and (c) a robustness check would require varying the regulator shape and verifying that the fixed-point structure is stable, which we leave as a numerical task for future work. We will reframe the presentation to make clear that Eqs. (176)–(177) constitute a working ansatz whose self-consistency must be verified, not a rigorously justified truncation. revision: partial

  3. Referee: §7.3, Eqs. (203)–(210): The BMW-type closure assumes |Ω| ≫ |χ|, which may restrict the closure to frequencies well above the polymer relaxation rate, potentially excluding the physically relevant elastic subrange.

    Authors: The referee raises a valid and important point. For the Oldroyd-B case (A=0, B=1, α=1), we have χ = 1/(3W), so the condition |Ω| ≫ |χ| restricts the closure to frequencies well above the polymer relaxation rate 1/W. This is indeed the regime of the elastic subrange's UV tail, not the elastic subrange itself where Ω ~ 1/W. We will add an explicit discussion of the regime of validity in the revised manuscript. We note that the closure as written is an asymptotic approximation valid in the UV regime |Ω| ≫ |χ|, and that extending it to the physically relevant elastic subrange would require retaining the full frequency dependence of the σ-sector vertices rather than replacing them by their zero-momentum values. This is a nontrivial extension that increases the computational cost substantially, as it prevents the algebraic reduction of the stress-sector vertices. We will state this limitation clearly and note that the closure in its present form should be understood as a UV asymptotic scheme, with the elastic subrange requiring either a modified closure strategy or a full numerical treatment of the frequency-dependent vertices. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity found — derivation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. Ward identities are derived algorithmically from the action's symmetries via the source-extended Lie-group method (Eqs. 78-91), not fitted to data or defined in terms of their own outputs. The constitutive model restriction g(σ)=Aσ²+Bσ (Eq. 114) emerges from requiring the X5 variation's quadratic part to vanish — a genuine symmetry constraint, not an input renamed as output. The scaling z=0 follows from the standard physical postulate of scale-invariant energy injection combined with canonical dimensions. The closure scheme (Section 7.3) is constructed from the Ward identities via the standard BMW approach. The self-citation [28] (Oberlack) provides background context on statistical symmetries and is not load-bearing for any derivation step. The X5 convergence issue (Eqs. 149-152) is a correctness/validity concern, not a circularity problem: the identity is derived from the symmetry, not defined in terms of its own prediction. No step reduces to its inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. The free parameters (α, β, W, A, B) are either physical inputs from the Oldroyd-B model or derived from the symmetry requirement. The key axioms are the Ito discretization (standard), the scale-invariant energy injection (standard physical postulate), and the ad hoc regularization of the divergent Ward identity integral (specific to this paper).

free parameters (5)
  • α
    Parametrizes the objective derivative L^α_u; α=0 is corotational, α=±1 is upper/lower convected. Not fitted but a model choice.
  • β
    Ratio of solvent to total viscosity. A physical parameter of the Oldroyd-B model, not fitted.
  • W (Weissenberg number)
    Polymer relaxation time in dimensionless units. Physical input parameter.
  • A, B (constitutive parameters)
    Parameters of g(σ)=Aσ²+Bσ, determined by the requirement that the X5 Ward identity holds (Eq. 114). Derived from symmetry, not fitted to data.
  • χ
    Exponential rate in f(t)=exp(χt), determined by A, B, α, W (Eq. 115). Not independently fitted.
axioms (4)
  • standard math Ito discretization yields a unit Jacobian determinant
    Section 3: The authors choose Ito's prescription to simplify the path integral by setting the functional determinant to unity. This is a standard choice in MSR formalism.
  • domain assumption Scale-invariant energy injection rate [ε]=0
    Section 7.1, Eq. 165: The critical exponent z=0 is derived by enforcing a constant rate of energy injection/dissipation across scales. This is a physical postulate analogous to Kolmogorov's constant-flux assumption.
  • ad hoc to paper The Ward identity integral for X5 exists despite exponential growth
    Section 7, Eq. 151: The integral of exp(t/3W) diverges, but the authors argue it exists due to causal decay of correlations (Eq. 152) and propose factoring out the divergence as δ(ω-i). This regularization is not rigorously justified.
  • ad hoc to paper The Ward identity is restored for k→0 despite regulator breaking
    Section 7.2.1: The derivative expansion ansatz (Eq. 176) implements the Ward identity in its unmodified state, assuming it is restored at the fixed point and that the perturbation from the regulator does not influence the final fixed point.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-glm · 31006 in / 2191 out tokens · 185734 ms · 2026-07-05T12:26:21.551508+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We formulate elastic and elasto-inertial turbulence in the Martin-Siggia-Rose path-integral formalism and develop a systematic source-extended symmetry algorithm to derive Ward identities directly from the Euler-Lagrange equations. These identities provide nonperturbative constraints and a principled foundation for constructing closure schemes. As a dimensionally reduced model for elastic turbulence, we propose an extended Burgers equation that preserves the characteristic coupling between the extra stress and velocity gradient, while remaining simple enough for first controlled calculations. In particular, we obtain an extended set of Ward identities that strongly constrains admissible closures and provides insight into the scaling behaviour near the fixed point.

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Calculations on the Two-Point Func- tion of the$O(N)$Model

    F. Benitez, R. M´ endez-Galain, and N. Wschebor. “Calculations on the Two-Point Func- tion of the$O(N)$Model”. In:Phys. Rev. B77.2 (Jan. 2008), p. 024431.doi:10.1103/ PhysRevB.77.024431

    work page 2008

  2. [2]

    Elastic Turbulence in 2D Viscoelastic Flows

    S. Berti, A. Bistagnino, G. Boffetta, A. Celani, and S. Musacchio. “Elastic Turbulence in 2D Viscoelastic Flows”. In:Advances in Turbulence XI. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 280–282.doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72604-3_88

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72604-3_88

  3. [3]

    A New Method to Solve the Non- Perturbative Renormalization Group Equations

    J.-P. Blaizot, R. M´ endez-Galain, and N. Wschebor. “A New Method to Solve the Non- Perturbative Renormalization Group Equations”. In:Physics Letters B632.4 (Jan. 2006), pp. 571–578.doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.10.086

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.10.086 2006

  4. [4]

    Nonperturbative Renormalization Group and Momentum Dependence of$n$-Point Functions. I

    J.-P. Blaizot, R. M´ endez-Galain, and N. Wschebor. “Nonperturbative Renormalization Group and Momentum Dependence of$n$-Point Functions. I”. In:Phys. Rev. E74.5 (Nov. 2006), p. 051116.doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.74.051116

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.74.051116 2006

  5. [5]

    Functional Renormalisation Group for Turbulence

    L. Canet. “Functional Renormalisation Group for Turbulence”. In:J. Fluid Mech.950 (2022).doi:10.1017/jfm.2022.808

    work page doi:10.1017/jfm.2022.808 2022

  6. [6]

    General Framework of the Non-Perturbative Renormalization Group for Non-Equilibrium Steady States

    L. Canet, H. Chat´ e, and B. Delamotte. “General Framework of the Non-Perturbative Renormalization Group for Non-Equilibrium Steady States”. In:J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 44.49 (Nov. 2011), p. 495001.doi:10.1088/1751-8113/44/49/495001

    work page doi:10.1088/1751-8113/44/49/495001 2011

  7. [7]

    Nonperturbative Renormalization Group for the Kardar-Parisi-Zhang Equation

    L. Canet, H. Chat´ e, B. Delamotte, and N. Wschebor. “Nonperturbative Renormalization Group for the Kardar-Parisi-Zhang Equation”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.104.15 (Apr. 2010), p. 150601.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.150601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.104.150601 2010

  8. [8]

    Nonperturbative Renormaliza- tion Group for the Kardar-Parisi-Zhang Equation: General Framework and First Applica- tions

    L. Canet, H. Chat´ e, B. Delamotte, and N. Wschebor. “Nonperturbative Renormaliza- tion Group for the Kardar-Parisi-Zhang Equation: General Framework and First Applica- tions”. In:Phys. Rev. E84.6 (Dec. 2011), p. 061128.doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.84.061128

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.84.061128 2011

  9. [9]

    Fully Developed Isotropic Turbulence: Non- perturbative Renormalization Group Formalism and Fixed-Point Solution

    L. Canet, B. Delamotte, and N. Wschebor. “Fully Developed Isotropic Turbulence: Non- perturbative Renormalization Group Formalism and Fixed-Point Solution”. In:Phys. Rev. E93.6 (June 2016), p. 063101.doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.93.063101

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.93.063101 2016

  10. [10]

    Reasons to Fall (More) in Love with Combinatorial Reconfiguration

    P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu, and D. S´ en´ echal.Conformal Field Theory. Graduate Texts in Contemporary Physics. New York, NY: Springer, 1997.doi:10.1007/978- 1- 4612- 2256-9

    work page doi:10.1007/978- 1997

  11. [11]

    TECHNIQUES DE RENORMALISATION DE LA TH ´EORIE DES CHAMPS ET DYNAMIQUE DES PH ´ENOM`ENES CRITIQUES

    C. de Dominicis. “TECHNIQUES DE RENORMALISATION DE LA TH ´EORIE DES CHAMPS ET DYNAMIQUE DES PH ´ENOM`ENES CRITIQUES”. In:J. Phys. Colloq. 37.C1 (1976), pp. C1-247-C1–253.doi:10.1051/jphyscol:1976138

    work page doi:10.1051/jphyscol:1976138 1976

  12. [12]

    The Bottleneck Effect and the Kolmogorov Constant in Isotropic Turbulence

    D. A. Donzis and K. R. Sreenivasan. “The Bottleneck Effect and the Kolmogorov Constant in Isotropic Turbulence”. In:J. Fluid Mech.657 (Aug. 2010), pp. 171–188.doi:10.1017/ S0022112010001400

    work page 2010

  13. [13]

    The Nonperturbative Functional Renormalization Group and Its Applica- tions

    N. Dupuis, L. Canet, A. Eichhorn, W. Metzner, J. M. Pawlowski, M. Tissier, and N. Wschebor. “The Nonperturbative Functional Renormalization Group and Its Applica- tions”. In:Physics Reports. The Nonperturbative Functional Renormalization Group and Its Applications 910 (May 2021), pp. 1–114.doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2021.01.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2021.01.001 2021

  14. [14]

    Unified View of Elastic and Elasto-Inertial Turbulence in Channel Flows at Low and Moderate Reynolds Numbers

    G. Foggi Rota, C. Amor, S. Le Clainche, and M. E. Rosti. “Unified View of Elastic and Elasto-Inertial Turbulence in Channel Flows at Low and Moderate Reynolds Numbers”. In:Phys. Rev. Fluids9.12 (Dec. 2024), p. l122602.doi:10. 1103/physrevfluids .9 . l122602

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    Large-Distance and Long-Time Properties of a Randomly Stirred Fluid

    D. Forster, D. R. Nelson, and M. J. Stephen. “Large-Distance and Long-Time Properties of a Randomly Stirred Fluid”. In:Phys. Rev. A16.2 (Aug. 1977), pp. 732–749.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.16.732. 28

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.16.732 1977

  16. [16]

    Elastic Turbulence Hides in the Small Scales of Inertial Poly- meric Turbulence

    P. Garg and M. E. Rosti. “Elastic Turbulence Hides in the Small Scales of Inertial Poly- meric Turbulence”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.135.7 (Aug. 2025).doi:10.1103/pbtf-rn7d

    work page doi:10.1103/pbtf-rn7d 2025

  17. [17]

    Elastic Turbulence in a Polymer Solution Flow

    A. Groisman and V. Steinberg. “Elastic Turbulence in a Polymer Solution Flow”. In: Nature405.6782 (2000), pp. 53–55.doi:10.1038/35011019

    work page doi:10.1038/35011019 2000

  18. [18]

    Elastic Turbulence in Curvilinear Flows of Polymer Solutions

    A. Groisman and V. Steinberg. “Elastic Turbulence in Curvilinear Flows of Polymer Solutions”. In:New J. Phys.6 (Mar. 2004), pp. 29–29.doi:10.1088/1367-2630/6/1/029

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/6/1/029 2004

  19. [19]

    Statistical Hydromechanics and Functional Calculus

    E. Hopf. “Statistical Hydromechanics and Functional Calculus”. In:Indiana Univ. Math. J.(1952)

    work page 1952

  20. [20]

    On a Lagrangean for Classical Field Dynamics and Renormalization Group Calculations of Dynamical Critical Properties

    H.-K. Janssen. “On a Lagrangean for Classical Field Dynamics and Renormalization Group Calculations of Dynamical Critical Properties”. In:Z Physik B23.4 (Dec. 1976), pp. 377–380.doi:10.1007/BF01316547

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01316547 1976

  21. [21]

    Dynamic Scaling of Growing Interfaces

    M. Kardar, G. Parisi, and Y.-C. Zhang. “Dynamic Scaling of Growing Interfaces”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.56.9 (Mar. 1986), pp. 889–892.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.56.889

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.56.889 1986

  22. [22]

    J. R. Klauder.A Modern Approach to Functional Integration. 1st ed. SpringerLink B¨ ucher. Boston: Birkh¨ auser Boston, 2011.doi:10.1007/978-0-8176-4791-9

    work page doi:10.1007/978-0-8176-4791-9 2011

  23. [23]

    Distribution Functions in the Statistical Theory of Turbulence

    T. S. Lundgren. “Distribution Functions in the Statistical Theory of Turbulence”. In: Phys. Fluids10.5 (1967), pp. 969–975

    work page 1967

  24. [24]

    J. E. Marsden and T. J. R. Hughes.Mathematical Foundations of Elasticity. Dover ed., ... an unabridged, corr. republ. of the first publ. Dover Books on Mathematics. New York: Dover Publications, INC, 2015

    work page 2015

  25. [25]

    Statistical Dynamics of Classical Systems

    P. C. Martin, E. D. Siggia, and H. A. Rose. “Statistical Dynamics of Classical Systems”. In:Phys. Rev. A8.1 (July 1973), pp. 423–437.doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.8.423

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.8.423 1973

  26. [26]

    Equations of Turbulent Motion

    A. Monin. “Equations of Turbulent Motion”. In:J. Appl. Math. Mech.31.6 (1967), pp. 1057–1068

    work page 1967

  27. [27]

    Kinetic Equations for a Vortex Field

    E. A. Novikov. “Kinetic Equations for a Vortex Field”. In:Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR177.2 (1967), pp. 299–301

    work page 1967

  28. [28]

    New Statistical Symmetries of the Multi-Point Equations and Its Importance for Turbulent Scaling Laws

    M. Oberlack and A. Rosteck. “New Statistical Symmetries of the Multi-Point Equations and Its Importance for Turbulent Scaling Laws”. In:Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. - S3.3 (2010), pp. 451–471.doi:10.3934/dcdss.2010.3.451

    work page doi:10.3934/dcdss.2010.3.451 2010

  29. [29]

    On the Formulation of Rheological Equations of State

    J. G. Oldroyd. “On the Formulation of Rheological Equations of State”. In:Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. Math. Phys. Sci.200.1063 (1950), pp. 523–541.doi:10.1098/rspa.1950. 0035

    work page doi:10.1098/rspa.1950 1950

  30. [30]

    P. J. Olver.Applications of Lie Groups to Differential Equations. Vol. 107. Graduate Texts in Mathematics. New York, NY: Springer US, 1986.doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-0274-2

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-0274-2 1986

  31. [31]

    Fluctuations and Irreversible Processes

    L. Onsager and S. Machlup. “Fluctuations and Irreversible Processes”. In:Phys. Rev.91.6 (Sept. 1953), pp. 1505–1512.doi:10.1103/PhysRev.91.1505

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.91.1505 1953

  32. [32]

    M. E. Peskin.An Introduction To Quantum Field Theory. Boca Raton: CRC Press, May 2018.doi:10.1201/9780429503559

    work page doi:10.1201/9780429503559 2018

  33. [33]

    S. B. Pope.Turbulent Flows. 1. publ., 12. print. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2015

    work page 2015

  34. [34]

    IV. On the Dynamical Theory of Incompressible Viscous Fluids and the Determination of the Criterion

    O. Reynolds. “IV. On the Dynamical Theory of Incompressible Viscous Fluids and the Determination of the Criterion”. In:Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A186 (1895), pp. 123– 164.doi:10.1098/rsta.1895.0004

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.1895.0004

  35. [35]

    Large Is Different: Nonmonotonic Behavior of Elastic Range Scaling in Polymeric Turbulence at Large Reynolds and Deborah Numbers

    M. E. Rosti, P. Perlekar, and D. Mitra. “Large Is Different: Nonmonotonic Behavior of Elastic Range Scaling in Polymeric Turbulence at Large Reynolds and Deborah Numbers”. In:Sci. Adv.9.11 (Mar. 2023).doi:10.1126/sciadv.add3831. 29

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.add3831 2023

  36. [36]

    One-Dimensional Kardar-Parisi-Zhang Equation: An Exact Solution and Its Universality

    T. Sasamoto and H. Spohn. “One-Dimensional Kardar-Parisi-Zhang Equation: An Exact Solution and Its Universality”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.104.23 (June 2010), p. 230602.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.230602

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.104.230602 2010

  37. [37]

    J.; Li, J.; Edgar, J

    R. K. Singh, P. Perlekar, D. Mitra, and M. E. Rosti. “Intermittency in the Not-so-Smooth Elastic Turbulence”. In:Nat. Commun.15.1 (May 2024).doi:10.1038/s41467- 024- 48460-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467- 2024

  38. [38]

    Harmonic rigidity at fixed spectral gap in one dimension

    M. Tarpin, L. Canet, C. Pagani, and N. Wschebor. “Stationary, Isotropic and Homo- geneous Two-Dimensional Turbulence: A First Non-Perturbative Renormalization Group Approach”. In:J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.52.8 (Jan. 2019), p. 085501.doi:10.1088/1751- 8121/aaf3f0

    work page doi:10.1088/1751- 2019

  39. [39]

    Critical Exponents from the Effective Average Action

    N. Tetradis and C. Wetterich. “Critical Exponents from the Effective Average Action”. In: Nuclear Physics B422.3 (July 1994), pp. 541–592.doi:10.1016/0550-3213(94)90446-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(94)90446-4 1994

  40. [40]

    Small-Scale Shear Layers in Isotropic Turbulence of Viscoelastic Fluids

    T. Watanabe, H. Abreu, K. Nagata, and C. B. da Silva. “Small-Scale Shear Layers in Isotropic Turbulence of Viscoelastic Fluids”. In:J. Fluid Mech.1005 (Feb. 2025).doi: 10.1017/jfm.2024.1233

    work page doi:10.1017/jfm.2024.1233 2025

  41. [41]

    Exact Evolution Equation for the Effective Potential

    C. Wetterich. “Exact Evolution Equation for the Effective Potential”. In:Physics Letters B301.1 (Feb. 1993), pp. 90–94.doi:10.1016/0370-2693(93)90726-X

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(93)90726-x 1993

  42. [42]

    Renormalization Group and Critical Phenomena. I. Renormalization Group and the Kadanoff Scaling Picture

    K. G. Wilson. “Renormalization Group and Critical Phenomena. I. Renormalization Group and the Kadanoff Scaling Picture”. In:Phys. Rev. B4.9 (Nov. 1971), pp. 3174– 3183.doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.4.3174

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.4.3174 1971

  43. [43]

    Renormalization-Group Analysis of Turbulence

    V. Yakhot and S. A. Orszag. “Renormalization-Group Analysis of Turbulence”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.57.14 (1986), pp. 1722–1724.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.57.1722. 30

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.57.1722 1986