Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 42 references

Gauge rigidity in an inverse problem for the prescribed Gaussian curvature equation

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-11 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Boundary measurements of graphs with prescribed Gaussian curvature uniquely determine the curvature inside a planar domain once a residual gauge is eliminated by the second variation.

desk verdict Solid uniqueness theorem that honestly isolates and kills a residual gauge left by gradient dependence; the math is dense but the skeleton holds under the stated hypotheses. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.04657 v1 pith:RIDSNAAT submitted 2026-07-06 math.AP

Yi-Hsuan Lin This is my paper
classification math.AP MSC 35R3035J6035J9653A05
keywords inverseproblemsprescribedGaussiancurvaturenonlinearDirichlet-to-Neumannmaphigher-orderlinearizationgaugeinvariancecomplexgeometricopticsuniquecontinuation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper asks whether the boundary response of the Dirichlet problem for graphs of prescribed Gaussian curvature determines the unknown interior curvature function K. After restricting to a common open class of admissible smooth boundary data for which both problems are well posed, equality of the nonlinear Dirichlet-to-Neumann maps, together with matching of the first boundary jet of the two curvatures, is shown to force the curvatures to coincide throughout a simply connected planar domain. The first linearization leaves a genuine residual gauge (a boundary-fixing change of variables and a scalar density factor) that cannot be removed by linear methods alone, because of the equation's gradient dependence. The second variation produces an interaction identity whose leading term involves the covariant Hessian of that residual gauge map. Testing the identity against two complementary families of complex geometric optics solutions yields a closed residual system; boundary unique continuation then forces the gauge to be trivial and recovers K.

What carries the argument

The second-linearized interaction identity written in the residual first-linearized gauge: after pull-back by the gauge map, the covariant Hessian of that map appears in the leading quadratic form; two complementary CGO families extract a closed residual system for the gauge variables that is then killed by boundary unique continuation.

What would settle it

Exhibit two distinct positive smooth curvatures on a simply connected planar domain that share a common open set of admissible boundary data, have identical first boundary jets, and produce identical nonlinear Dirichlet-to-Neumann maps on that set.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

If two positive smooth curvatures K1 and K2 admit a common open set of admissible boundary data on which both Dirichlet problems for the prescribed Gaussian curvature equation are uniquely solvable with positive Hessian, and if the associated nonlinear Dirichlet-to-Neumann maps agree on that set while the first boundary jets of K1 and K2 coincide, then K1 equals K2 everywhere in the domain.

Load-bearing premise

Both curvatures must share a nonempty open set of smooth boundary values for which their Dirichlet problems each admit a unique smooth admissible solution with positive Hessian; without that common class the comparison of boundary maps cannot even be stated.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proves a uniqueness theorem for the inverse boundary problem associated with the prescribed Gaussian curvature equation det D^{2}u = K(x)(1+|∇u|^{2})^{2} for graphs over a bounded simply connected planar domain. Under Assumption 1.1 (a common nonempty open set U of smooth boundary data for which both admissible Dirichlet problems are well posed) and first-order boundary matching of the two curvatures, equality of the nonlinear Dirichlet-to-Neumann maps on U forces K₁ = K₂ throughout Ω. The argument proceeds by first linearization in logarithmic form, which produces a residual boundary-fixing gauge (J, ρ) for a non-divergence elliptic operator with drift; a divergence-form density identity relates ρ to det DJ and the curvature ratio; a second-variation interaction identity is then tested against complementary CGO families to extract paired residual equations for the gauge variables; these close with the first-linearized drift and conductivity identities into an augmented residual system; boundary jets initiate a Carleman unique-continuation argument that eliminates the residual gauge.

Significance. The result is a substantial contribution to inverse problems for fully nonlinear elliptic equations. The key conceptual point is that the gradient dependence in the prescribed-curvature equation leaves a genuine residual gauge after first linearization; this is not an artifact of the method, and the paper removes it by exploiting the nonlinear structure via a carefully derived second-linearized interaction identity. The logical skeleton is complete and the technical development (CGO asymptotics for both plus and mirror families, reduction of nonlocal Cauchy terms through localized drift-resolvent classes, and boundary Carleman propagation for the augmented system) is written in full. The work sits naturally in the line of higher-order linearization methods for nonlinear elliptic inverse problems and extends the planar Monge–Ampère analysis of LL25a to a setting with a nontrivial residual gauge.

major comments (2)
  1. Assumption 1.1 is an explicit hypothesis of Theorem 1.1 and is used consistently, but the manuscript never indicates whether a nonempty common open class U is known to exist for open sets of positive smooth curvatures (or for pairs that are close in C∞). A short remark after Assumption 1.1, citing the relevant local solvability theory for the prescribed-curvature Dirichlet problem (e.g., Guan-type results or the local IFT already used in Proposition 2.1), would clarify the scope of the uniqueness statement and prevent the impression that the comparison class is purely formal.
  2. Lemma 3.4 and the subsequent CGO construction rely heavily on the planar non-divergence gauge theorem and the critical CGO estimates of LL25a. The paper carefully matches DN conventions and records the necessary boundary normalizations, but several intermediate claims (e.g., the precise form of the first Neumann source V and the uniform translated estimates after the diam(ẽΩ)<2 normalization) are invoked rather than re-derived. For a self-contained reading of the residual-equation extraction in §§5–6, a short appendix or expanded remark listing exactly which statements of LL25a are imported, and under which coefficient hypotheses they apply to the present drift operators, would strengthen the load-bearing steps.
minor comments (5)
  1. The notation for the transformed domain oscillates between ẽΩ and (from §7 onward) simply Ω; a single sentence at the start of §7 already announces the change, but a consistent global convention would reduce cognitive load.
  2. In several places (e.g., the definitions of λα, κα and the polarizations A(T), B(T)) the complex-structure conventions are introduced mid-argument; collecting them once in a short “complex notation” paragraph at the beginning of §5 would help.
  3. Typographical: the repeated section headings in the table of contents (e.g., “1. Introduction1. Introduction 2”) appear to be an artifact of the source and should be cleaned before publication.
  4. References: the survey Las25 and the concurrent fully nonlinear inverse-source papers (LLW26, CG26, LJ26) are cited; a one-sentence comparison in the introduction clarifying how the residual-gauge phenomenon differs from pure inverse-source settings would orient the reader.
  5. Proposition 2.1 invokes the implicit-function theorem in Hölder spaces; the precise Schauder isomorphism for the linearized non-divergence operator is standard, but a pointer to a textbook reference (e.g., Gilbarg–Trudinger) would be welcome for non-specialists.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: residual gauge is defined from first linearization then forced to vanish by second-variation identities and Carleman; self-citations supply independent tools, not the target uniqueness.

  1. self citation load bearing [Lemma 3.4 / Proposition 3.5 (first linearization gauge)]
    "Applying [LL25a, Lemma 4.2] to Lj = −∆gj + Xj · ∇ gives a boundary-fixing diffeomorphism J and a positive function c, with c|∂Ω = 1, such that g1 = c J∗g2, X1 = c−1 J∗X2. ... Define ρ := c−1 ..."

    The planar non-divergence gauge theorem that produces the residual pair (J, ρ) is imported from the author’s own prior paper LL25a rather than re-proved. This is load-bearing for the first-linearized step, but not circular for the main claim: LL25a treats a different equation, its gauge result is a general tool for 2-D non-divergence operators, and the present paper’s novelty is the second-variation elimination of the residual gauge left by that tool. No reduction of K1 = K2 to an input of LL25a occurs.

full rationale

This is a pure uniqueness theorem for the inverse boundary problem of the prescribed Gaussian curvature equation. The residual variables (θ, s, W) and the gauge pair (J, ρ) are constructed from the first-linearized intertwining identity (Prop. 3.5, Lemmas 3.4 and 3.8) and then shown to vanish by a closed system of residual equations extracted from the second variation (5.40, 6.16, 7.11) plus boundary jets (Prop. 7.3) and Carleman unique continuation (Prop. 8.17). Nothing is fitted to data, and no quantity is predicted from a parameter that already encodes it. The only self-citations of note are to the author’s prior work LL25a for the planar non-divergence gauge theorem (Lemma 3.4 cites [LL25a, Lemma 4.2]) and the CGO construction (Sections 5–6). Those results concern a different equation (Monge–Ampère source problem) and supply general tools whose conclusions are not the target of Theorem 1.1; they do not assume K1 = K2. Assumption 1.1 is an explicit hypothesis of the theorem, not a hidden circular premise. Score 1 only for the minor, non-load-bearing self-citation of independent lemmas.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The paper is a pure existence/uniqueness theorem in analysis. It imports standard elliptic theory, a planar non-divergence gauge theorem from prior work, CGO constructions, and Carleman estimates. No free parameters are fitted. The only domain-level assumptions are the geometric setting (simply connected smooth planar domain, positive smooth curvatures) and the common solvability class U. Residual gauge variables are derived objects, not postulated entities.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Planar non-divergence form gauge theorem: equality of conormal DN maps for two uniformly elliptic operators without zeroth-order term implies existence of a boundary-fixing diffeomorphism J and positive density ρ intertwining the operators (Lemma 3.4, citing LL25a Lemma 4.2).
    Load-bearing input from prior work; the entire residual-gauge analysis begins from this intertwining pair.
  • domain assumption Assumption 1.1: existence of a nonempty open set U of smooth boundary values for which both Dirichlet problems admit unique smooth admissible solutions with positive Hessian.
    Defines the common domain of the nonlinear DN maps; without it the comparison is undefined.
  • standard math Global isothermal coordinates exist for a smooth uniformly positive definite metric on a simply connected planar domain (PSU23, Ahlfors, AIM09).
    Used to reduce the principal tensor to a conformal multiple of the identity before CGO construction.
  • standard math Existence and asymptotic expansions of complex geometric optics solutions for two-dimensional non-divergence elliptic operators with drift (GT11, LL25a §5).
    Supplies the test functions that extract the residual equations from the second integral identity.
  • standard math Local Carleman estimates with convexified logarithmic weights for first- and second-order operators in the plane (GT11, LL25a).
    Used in §8 to propagate vanishing of the residual system from the boundary into the interior.
  • domain assumption First-order boundary jet matching of K1 and K2 (condition (1.2)).
    Normalizes the residual gauge on ∂Ω so that unique continuation can start from zero Cauchy data.
invented entities (1)
  • Residual gauge variables (θ, s, W) with W = J − Id, s = q − 2θ
    purpose: Coordinates the residual freedom left by the first linearization so that the second-variation residual equations close into a system amenable to unique continuation.
    Derived from the first-linearized gauge pair (J, ρ) and the conductivity identity; not postulated a priori. independent_evidence is false only in the sense that they are intermediate analytic objects, not physical entities.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gauge rigidity in an inverse problem for the prescribed Gaussian curvature equation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RIDSNAAT

@misc{pith2026260704657,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gauge rigidity in an inverse problem for the prescribed Gaussian curvature equation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RIDSNAAT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.04657}
}
abstract

We prove a uniqueness result for an inverse boundary problem associated with the prescribed Gaussian curvature equation \[ \det D^2u=K(x)(1+|\nabla u|^2)^2 \] for graphs over a planar domain. The comparison is made on a common open class of smooth boundary values for which both admissible Dirichlet problems are well posed. We show that, if the corresponding nonlinear Dirichlet-to-Neumann maps agree on this class and the two prescribed curvatures have the same first boundary jet, then the curvatures agree in the whole domain. The main difficulty comes from a gauge obstruction already present at the first linearization. In logarithmic form, the linearized equation is a two-dimensional non-divergence form elliptic equation with drift. Its boundary data determine the coefficients only up to a boundary-fixing change of variables and a scalar gauge factor. For the prescribed Gaussian curvature equation this gauge is not an artifact of the method: the gradient dependence leaves a residual gauge which cannot be removed by the first variation. The proof uses the nonlinear structure to remove this remaining gauge. We derive a second-linearized interaction identity in the first-linearized gauge. In this identity, the covariant Hessian of the gauge map appears in the leading part. Testing the identity with two complementary CGO families gives a pair of residual equations for the gauge variables. Combined with the drift and conductivity identities from the first linearization, these equations form a closed system for the residual gauge. A boundary unique continuation argument for this system gives the trivial gauge and hence determines the prescribed curvature.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 6 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Determining a R iemannian metric from minimal areas

    Spyros Alexakis, Tracey Balehowsky, and Adrian Nachman. Determining a R iemannian metric from minimal areas. Adv. Math. , 366:107025, 71, 2020

    2020

  2. [2]

    Lars V. Ahlfors. Lectures on quasiconformal mappings , volume 38 of University Lecture Series . American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, second edition, 2006. With supplemental chapters by C. J. Earle, I. Kra, M. Shishikura and J. H. Hubbard

    2006

  3. [3]

    Elliptic partial differential equations and quasiconformal mappings in the plane , volume 48 of Princeton Mathematical Series

    Kari Astala, Tadeusz Iwaniec, and Gaven Martin. Elliptic partial differential equations and quasiconformal mappings in the plane , volume 48 of Princeton Mathematical Series . Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2009

    2009

  4. [4]

    Direct and inverse problems for the nonlinear time-harmonic M axwell equations in K err-type media

    Yernat M Assylbekov and Ting Zhou. Direct and inverse problems for the nonlinear time-harmonic M axwell equations in K err-type media. J. Spectr. Theory , 11:1--38, 2021

    2021

  5. [5]

    C\^arstea, Ali Feizmohammadi, Yavar Kian, Katya Krupchyk, and Gunther Uhlmann

    C at alin I. C\^arstea, Ali Feizmohammadi, Yavar Kian, Katya Krupchyk, and Gunther Uhlmann. The C alder\'on inverse problem for isotropic quasilinear conductivities. Adv. Math. , 391:Paper No. 107956, 31, 2021

    2021

  6. [6]

    C\^arstea and Tuhin Ghosh

    C at alin I. C\^arstea and Tuhin Ghosh. An inverse source problem for the monge--ampere equation from large boundary data. arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.07064 , 2026

    arXiv 2026

  7. [7]

    C\^arstea, Matti Lassas, Tony Liimatainen, and Lauri Oksanen

    C at alin I. C\^arstea, Matti Lassas, Tony Liimatainen, and Lauri Oksanen. An inverse problem for the R iemannian minimal surface equation. J. Differential Equations , 379:626--648, 2024

    2024

  8. [8]

    An inverse problem for general minimal surfaces

    C a t a lin I C \^a rstea, Matti Lassas, Tony Liimatainen, and Leo Tzou. An inverse problem for general minimal surfaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.14268 , 2023

    arXiv 2023

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Cârstea, Tony Liimatainen, and Leo Tzou

    Cătălin I. Cârstea, Tony Liimatainen, and Leo Tzou. The C alder\'on problem on R iemannian surfaces and of minimal surfaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.16944 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Reconstruction for the coefficients of a quasilinear elliptic partial differential equation

    C a t a lin I C \^a rstea, Gen Nakamura, and Manmohan Vashisth. Reconstruction for the coefficients of a quasilinear elliptic partial differential equation. Applied Mathematics Letters , 98:121--127, 2019

    2019

  3. [11]

    The M onge- A mp\`ere equation and its applications

    Alessio Figalli. The M onge- A mp\`ere equation and its applications . Zurich Lectures in Advanced Mathematics. European Mathematical Society (EMS), Z\"urich, 2017

    2017

  4. [12]

    An inverse problem for a semilinear elliptic equation on conformally transversally anisotropic manifolds

    Ali Feizmohammadi, Tony Liimatainen, and Yi-Hsuan Lin. An inverse problem for a semilinear elliptic equation on conformally transversally anisotropic manifolds. Ann. PDE , 9(2):Paper No. 12, 54, 2023

    2023

  5. [13]

    An inverse problem for a semi-linear elliptic equation in R iemannian geometries

    Ali Feizmohammadi and Lauri Oksanen. An inverse problem for a semi-linear elliptic equation in R iemannian geometries. Journal of Differential Equations , 296(6):4683–4719, 2020

    2020

  6. [14]

    Calder\'on inverse problem with partial data on R iemann surfaces

    Colin Guillarmou and Leo Tzou. Calder\'on inverse problem with partial data on R iemann surfaces. Duke Math. J. , 158(1):83--120, 2011

    2011

  7. [15]

    The D irichlet problem for M onge- A mp\`ere equations in non-convex domains and spacelike hypersurfaces of constant G auss curvature

    Bo Guan. The D irichlet problem for M onge- A mp\`ere equations in non-convex domains and spacelike hypersurfaces of constant G auss curvature. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 350(12):4955--4971, 1998

    1998

  8. [16]

    Simultaneous recovery of piecewise analytic coefficients in a semilinear elliptic equation

    Bastian Harrach and Yi-Hsuan Lin. Simultaneous recovery of piecewise analytic coefficients in a semilinear elliptic equation. Nonlinear Anal. , 228:Paper No. 113188, 14, 2023

    2023

  9. [17]

    On uniqueness in inverse problems for semilinear parabolic equations

    Victor Isakov. On uniqueness in inverse problems for semilinear parabolic equations. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis , 124(1):1--12, 1993

    1993

  10. [18]

    Partial data inverse problems for quasilinear conductivity equations

    Yavar Kian, Katya Krupchyk, and Gunther Uhlmann. Partial data inverse problems for quasilinear conductivity equations. Math. Ann. , 385(3-4):1611--1638, 2023

    2023

  11. [19]

    Yaroslav Kurylev, Matti Lassas, and G. Uhlmann. Inverse problems for L orentzian manifolds and non-linear hyperbolic equations. Invent. Math. , 212(3):781--857, 2018

    2018

  12. [20]

    Identification of nonlinearity in a conductivity equation via the D irichlet-to- N eumann map

    Hyeonbae Kang and Gen Nakamura. Identification of nonlinearity in a conductivity equation via the D irichlet-to- N eumann map. Inverse Problems , 18:1079--1088, 2002

    2002

  13. [21]

    Partial data inverse problems for semilinear elliptic equations with gradient nonlinearities

    Katya Krupchyk and Gunther Uhlmann. Partial data inverse problems for semilinear elliptic equations with gradient nonlinearities. Mathematical Research Letters , 27(6):1801--1824, 2020

    2020

  14. [22]

    A remark on partial data inverse problems for semilinear elliptic equations

    Katya Krupchyk and Gunther Uhlmann. A remark on partial data inverse problems for semilinear elliptic equations. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 148:681--685, 2020

    2020

  15. [23]

    Introduction to inverse problems for non-linear partial differential equations

    Matti Lassas. Introduction to inverse problems for non-linear partial differential equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.12448 , 2025

    2025 arXiv

  16. [24]

    An inverse source problem for a quasilinear elliptic equation

    Tony Liimatainen and Shubham Jaiswal. An inverse source problem for a quasilinear elliptic equation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.28311 , 2026

    2026

  17. [25]

    Global uniqueness for the fractional semilinear S chr\"odinger equation

    Ru-Yu Lai and Yi-Hsuan Lin. Global uniqueness for the fractional semilinear S chr\"odinger equation. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 147(3):1189--1199, 2019

    2019

  18. [26]

    Inverse problems for fractional semilinear elliptic equations

    Ru-Yu Lai and Yi-Hsuan Lin. Inverse problems for fractional semilinear elliptic equations. Nonlinear Anal. , 216:Paper No. 112699, 21, 2022

    2022

  19. [27]

    An inverse problem for the M onge- A mp\`ere equation

    Tony Liimatainen and Yi-Hsuan Lin. An inverse problem for the M onge- A mp\`ere equation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.11572 , 2025

    2025

  20. [28]

    Inverse P roblems for I ntegro-differential O perators , volume 222 of Applied Mathematical Sciences

    Yi-Hsuan Lin and Hongyu Liu. Inverse P roblems for I ntegro-differential O perators , volume 222 of Applied Mathematical Sciences . Springer, Cham, 2025

    2025

  21. [29]

    Partial data inverse problems and simultaneous recovery of boundary and coefficients for semilinear elliptic equations

    Matti Lassas, Tony Liimatainen, Yi-Hsuan Lin, and Mikko Salo. Partial data inverse problems and simultaneous recovery of boundary and coefficients for semilinear elliptic equations. Revista Matem \'a tica Iberoamericana , 37(4):1553--1580, 2020

    2020

  22. [30]

    Inverse problems for elliptic equations with power type nonlinearities

    Matti Lassas, Tony Liimatainen, Yi-Hsuan Lin, and Mikko Salo. Inverse problems for elliptic equations with power type nonlinearities. Journal de math \'e matiques pures et appliqu \'e es , 145:44--82, 2021

    2021

  23. [31]

    Inverse problems for elliptic equations with fractional power type nonlinearities

    Tony Liimatainen, Yi-Hsuan Lin, Mikko Salo, and Teemu Tyni. Inverse problems for elliptic equations with fractional power type nonlinearities. J. Differential Equations , 306:189--219, 2022

    2022

  24. [32]

    An inverse source problem for a fully nonlinear elliptic equation

    Ching-Lung Lin, Yi-Hsuan Lin, and Jenn-Nan Wang. An inverse source problem for a fully nonlinear elliptic equation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.06431 , 2026

    2026 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Increasing stability in the linearized inverse S chr\"odinger potential problem with power type nonlinearities

    Shuai Lu, Mikko Salo, and Boxi Xu. Increasing stability in the linearized inverse S chr\"odinger potential problem with power type nonlinearities. Inverse Problems , 38(6):Paper No. 065009, 25, 2022

    2022

  26. [34]

    Calder\'on problem for the quasilinear conductivity equation in dimension 2

    Tony Liimatainen and Ruirui Wu. Calder\'on problem for the quasilinear conductivity equation in dimension 2 . arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.11047 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Allgemeine Lehrs \"a tze \"u ber die konvexen Polyeder

    Hermann Minkowski. Allgemeine Lehrs \"a tze \"u ber die konvexen Polyeder . Springer, 1897

  28. [36]

    Volumen und O berfl\"ache

    Hermann Minkowski. Volumen und O berfl\"ache. Math. Ann. , 57(4):447--495, 1903

    1903

  29. [37]

    An inverse problem for the minimal surface equation in the presence of a R iemannian metric

    Janne Nurminen. An inverse problem for the minimal surface equation in the presence of a R iemannian metric. Nonlinearity , 37(9):Paper No. 095029, 22, 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    Paternain, Mikko Salo, and Gunther Uhlmann

    Gabriel P. Paternain, Mikko Salo, and Gunther Uhlmann. Geometric inverse problems---with emphasis on two dimensions , volume 204 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2023. With a foreword by Andr\'as Vasy

    2023

  31. [39]

    Inverse problems for semilinear elliptic PDE with measurements at a single point

    Mikko Salo and Leo Tzou. Inverse problems for semilinear elliptic PDE with measurements at a single point. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 151(5):2023--2030, 2023

    2023

  32. [40]

    Inverse problems in quasilinear anisotropic media

    Ziqi Sun and Gunther Uhlmann. Inverse problems in quasilinear anisotropic media. American journal of mathematics , 119(4):771--797, 1997

    1997

  33. [41]

    On a quasilinear inverse boundary value problem

    Ziqi Sun. On a quasilinear inverse boundary value problem. Mathematische Zeitschrift , 221(1):293--305, 1996

    1996

  34. [42]

    An inverse boundary-value problem for semilinear elliptic equations

    Ziqi Sun. An inverse boundary-value problem for semilinear elliptic equations. Electronic Journal of Differential Equations (EJDE)[electronic only] , 37:1--5, 2010

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed July 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.