An FBSDE Construction of the Sine-Gordon EQFT for $\beta^{2} < \frac{6}{7}\, 8\pi$ and Perturbative Renormalization in the Full Subcritical Regime

Sarah-Jean Meyer

An FBSDE Construction of the Sine-Gordon EQFT for $\beta^{2} < \frac{6}{7}\, 8\pi$ and Perturbative Renormalization in the Full Subcritical Regime

T0 review · 0 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For β² below (6/7)·8π the sine-Gordon measure exists in finite volume, and it equals the terminal law of a controlled diffusion with an explicitly constructed density; for all β²<8π the renormalized potential can be computed order by order.

desk verdict A serious, internally consistent construction of the sine-Gordon measure up to β²<(6/7)·8π with a genuinely new multipole renormalization-flow analysis; worth refereeing, but the scheme-independence gap and heavy reliance on the unpublished companion paper keep it from being a clean accept. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.20632 v1 pith:5EHQ6GUR submitted 2026-07-22 math-ph math.MPmath.PR

Sarah-Jean Meyer This is my paper

classification math-phmath.MPmath.PR MSC 81S2060H30

keywords stochasticquantizationforward-backwarddifferentialequationsEuclideanquantumfieldtheorysine-GordonmodelMayerseriesrenormalizationflowmultipoleexpansionlarge-fieldproblem

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 establishes that the two-dimensional sine-Gordon Euclidean quantum field theory can be constructed in finite volume whenever β² is below the seventh threshold, (6/7)·8π. It does so by rewriting the interacting measure as the terminal law of a diffusion whose drift is built from approximate effective potentials, weighted by an exponential remainder that comes from a weak stochastic control problem. In parallel, for the entire subcritical regime β²<8π, it develops a fully inductive, order-by-order solution of the renormalization flow using a multipole Mayer expansion, with explicit counterterms and an integrable remainder. A sympathetic reader would care because this extends measure construction past the previous 6π threshold and gives a systematic perturbative flow analysis across infinitely many thresholds for a non-polynomial model.

What carries the argument

The engine is a weak stochastic control problem: minimize the cost g(X_T)+∫H_s ds+½∫‖Q_s u_s‖² ds over predictable controls. The associated weak FBSDE decouples the forward SDE for X from the backward optimal control, so only sublinear growth of the effective force is needed. The perturbative side is a multipole Mayer expansion: potentials are expanded over admissible indices a=(L,Q,N,ν) tracking loop order, charge, cluster configuration, and localization degrees; coefficient kernels satisfy a triangular flow equation with a linear propagator Γ, pairing/raising/lowering maps, and charge-conjugation symmetry that cancels maximally localized neutral clusters.

What would settle it

Evaluate the raw bilinear kernel B^{b,c}_{ι,ȷ} for a configuration with loop order 7, nonzero charge, and three dipoles at localization α₂−1—the case flagged in Remark 3.31. If the Young-absorption step in Lemma 2.6 cannot close because K_F(β²)≥1 for some β²<6/7·8π, the sublinear force bound and hence Theorem 1.2 fail. Concretely, computing K_L(a)=K(a)=3(α₂−1) for that index decides whether the large-field exponent stays below 1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central result is that the finite-volume sine-Gordon measure exists for every β²<(6/7)·8π and every real coupling λ: the regularized measures converge to ν^ρ_{sG}, and the limit has the explicit representation ν^ρ_{sG}(O)=E[O(X^ρ_∞) e^{−∫_0^∞ H^ρ_s(X^ρ_s)ds}]/E[e^{−∫_0^∞ H^ρ_s(X^ρ_s)ds}], where X^ρ solves the untruncated SDE with drift built from the approximate effective forces. Equivalently, the Laplace transform of the measure satisfies −log Λ(g)=W(g)−W(0) for the weak control problem, the optimal control is unique up to the kernel of Q_s, and under the optimal measure the terminal law of X^ρ is exactly ν^ρ_{sG}. Alongside this, for the entire subcritical regime β²<8π the paper constr

Load-bearing premise

The construction stands or falls on the uniform sublinear bound for the effective force, Assumption 2.4(c): after convolution with the heat kernel, the force may grow only like (1+[φ])^{K_F} with K_F<1; if any admissible configuration forces the exponent to 1 or above, the SDE is no longer controllable and the measure construction collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For every λ∈R and β²<(6/7)·8π, the finite-volume regularized sine-Gordon measures converge to a genuine probability measure, uniformly in the regularization parameter.
The Laplace transform of the measure is governed by the value function of the weak control problem, so structural properties such as the Laplace principle, rotation invariance, reflection positivity, non-Gaussianity, and singularity with the free field follow from existing arguments.
The order-by-order flow in the full subcritical regime yields effective potentials whose remainder is integrable in the ultraviolet, giving a well-defined perturbative renormalization at every order with only the expected counterterms.
For finite regularization the weak and strong FBSDE formulations coincide, yielding existence of solutions to the strong coupled system for all λ∈R, though not uniqueness.
The constructed measure is absolutely continuous with respect to the law of the terminal value of the untruncated SDE, with the explicit exponential density M^ρ_{0,∞}.

Reading between the lines

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

Because the weak formulation decouples the forward and backward equations, the real bottleneck is the large-field exponent K_F; improving the loop-order-7 margin flagged in Remark 3.31 (δκ>1/6 instead of 1/7) would likely extend the measure construction further toward the full subcritical regime.
The variational representation suggests a concrete numerical scheme: simulate the explicit untruncated SDE and reweight by exp(−∫H), with the control cost providing a finite-volume large-deviation rate; the paper does not pursue that direction.
The multipole Mayer machinery is organized purely around charge, loop order, and localization degree, so it should transplant to other non-polynomial interactions or to d-dimensional models with field-dependent renormalizations, as the paper itself anticipates.
The sharp margin at loop order 7—where three dipoles at localization α₂−1 force K_F above 1 unless δκ>1/6—is a concrete place to look for either an improved estimate or a genuine obstruction.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Worth your time, with conditions. The real news is two-fold. Theorem 1.2 extends the control/FBSDE construction of the finite-volume sine-Gordon measure from β²<6π to β²<(6/7)·8π for all λ∈R, using a weak formulation that decouples the forward and backward equations. And the perturbative machinery — the multipole Mayer expansion with fractional localization degrees, the admissible index set with raising/lowering/pairing maps, and the boundary analysis at the seventh threshold — is genuinely new, giving the first systematic order-by-order renormalization flow analysis in the full subcritical regime β²<8π.

The paper does its homework. I checked the arithmetic the reader flagged: α₂=2(1−2δκ), α₂−1=1−4δκ, sublinearity at L(a)=7 requiring δκ>1/6, consistent with the obstruction at β²₇=(6/7)·8π given the construction secures only δκ>1/7. That checks out. Limitations are stated honestly in Remarks 1.4, 2.12, and 3.31. The measure is defined as a T→∞ limit of genuinely regularized measures, and the scale interpolation is auxiliary, so I do not see circularity. If the central construction is correct, this is a real extension of [23].

The soft spots. First, the scheme-dependence question: the limiting measure is built from a particular admissible family of flow parameters (κ, the localization degrees, the Steiner rates r(a), the truncation order), and the paper never compares two different admissible choices. The theorem as stated does not require that comparison, but the title's claim to construct 'the' sine-Gordon measure does. This is not a demonstrated error, and it may be fixable by a comparison argument, but it is a genuine gap between what is proved and what the title asserts. Second, the proof leans on the author's own unpublished preprint [23] for several structural properties of the measure, and a few in-line proofs are deferred (Lemma 2.3, part of Proposition 2.2, Proposition 3.33). That makes the inductive closure not mechanically checkable as it stands. The charge-conjugation cancellations in Lemmas 4.4 and 4.9 are delicate and load-bearing; a referee should ask for those steps in full. None of these is a demonstrated error — the construction is internally consistent — but the correctness risk is medium, not low.

Who this is for: people in constructive QFT and in FBSDE/control approaches to Euclidean field theories. It deserves a serious referee; the new machinery and the threshold analysis warrant the time. My recommendation: send it to peer review, with referees asked specifically to (1) take a position on scheme-independence or require the paper to state clearly that the measure is defined relative to the chosen family, and (2) verify the deferred steps once [23] is available.

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a scale-interpolation (continuous renormalization group) construction of the finite-volume massive sine-Gordon model. In the first part, assuming the existence of a family of approximate effective potentials with sublinear large-field growth of the force, the author proves convergence of the regularized measures (1.6) to a limiting probability measure represented through the terminal law of an untruncated SDE and an explicit density (Theorem 1.2), and establishes the associated weak stochastic control / FBSDE representation with uniqueness of the optimal control up to the kernel of Q_s (Proposition 1.3). In the second part, a multipole Mayer expansion with fractional 2n-point clusters, admissible index sets, pairing/raising/lowering maps, and a screening lemma is used to construct approximate solutions of the renormalization flow equation for every β²<8π (Theorem 1.1), with error decaying like ⟨t⟩^{-1-κ(β²)} and force growth exponent K_F(β²) finite but diverging as β²→8π. Below β²< (6/7)8π the force-growth exponent is <1, which closes the sublinearity assumption and yields the measure construction.

Significance. If the technical estimates are accepted, this is a substantial advance: it extends the stochastic-control / weak-FBSDE construction of the finite-volume sine-Gordon measure from the previously known β²<6π range to β²<(6/7)8π, and it provides an explicit order-by-order renormalization-flow analysis covering the entire subcritical regime β²<8π. The main structural devices — fractional localization degrees, charge-conjugation cancellations, the screening lemma, and the triangular flow on admissible indices — are presented with enough detail to be checked step by step. The paper does not rely on smallness of λ and gives explicit polynomial control in the coupling. These are genuine strengths. The main caveat is interpretive: the paper should state explicitly in what sense the limiting object is independent of the auxiliary flow parameters (κ, α, r(a), ℓ*), because the title and abstract speak of 'the' sine-Gordon measure.

minor comments (5)

[§1.1, Theorem 1.2; §2.1, Proposition 2.2] The construction depends on auxiliary choices (κ, α_{2n}, r(a), ℓ*) through the family (V^{ρ,T}_t). The manuscript never states that the limit is independent of these choices. This is easy to repair: every admissible family has terminal value V^{ρ,T}_T = λ_T ∫ρ cos(βφ) + C_T, and the constant C_T drops out of the normalized regularized measure (1.6). Hence the sequence ν^{ρ,T}_{sG} itself is common to all families, so once convergence is proved for one family the limit is automatically scheme-independent. Please add this observation explicitly. If independence from the heat-kernel regularization itself is also claimed, that requires a separate statement or reference.
[Assumption 2.4(e) vs Proposition 3.26(e)] Proposition 3.26(e) states convergence for each index a with an extra factor ⟨t⟩^ε in the error, whereas Assumption 2.4(e) is written without this factor. The cumulative bounds satisfy Assumption 2.4(e) only after using that the L(a)=1 contribution is exactly T-independent and that all L(a)≥2 terms have an additional ⟨t⟩^{-δκ L(a)} decay; one needs ε<δκ to absorb the ⟨t⟩^ε. This bookkeeping is not spelled out and should be stated in the proof of Corollary 3.30.
[Remark 1.4] Several structural properties of the measure (rotation invariance, non-Gaussianity, reflection positivity, singularity with the Gaussian free field) are asserted with the phrase 'same arguments as in [23]' but no proofs are included. Since these are not stated as theorems, they should be labelled as remarks/reproduced arguments rather than listed as unconditional results, or their proofs should be sketched.
[Abstract; §3.1] The phrase 'complete order-by-order analysis' should be qualified: the paper constructs finite truncations V^{[<ℓ*]} with ℓ*δκ>1 and proves uniform estimates, but it does not prove convergence of the full perturbative series as ℓ*→∞. This is consistent with the stated results, but the wording in the abstract could be read as claiming more.
[Notation; §§3.3–3.4] The combinatorial notation (A, A_adm, maps P,R,L, indices a=(L,Q,N,ν)) is heavy. The paper would benefit from a one-page glossary or a quick-reference table collecting the maps, their definitions, and the section where each estimate is proved; currently the reader must cross-reference Lemmas 4.1, 3.13, 3.14, 3.19, 3.20, and 3.22 repeatedly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the sine-Gordon measure is obtained as a genuine T→∞ limit of regularized measures, with the auxiliary FBSDE objects verified rather than assumed; only ancillary structural corollaries are deferred to a self-citation.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular. The regularized measures ν^{ρ,T}_{sG} in (1.6) are defined directly from the cosine interaction (1.5), with the counterterms fixed by the renormalization condition; Theorem 1.2 does not define the limiting measure by the SDE/H objects, but proves that the T→∞ limit of these regularized measures exists and admits the representation E[O(X^ρ_∞) e^{-∫H}]/E[e^{-∫H}]. The scale interpolation (V_t) is an auxiliary device: it is used to make H small and to control the SDE, and its existence is established later in Theorem 1.1 and Proposition 3.26 rather than assumed. Proposition 1.3 is an exact variational identity obtained from Girsanov and martingale representation, not a prediction forced by the choice of control. The only caveat is that several structural corollaries (rotation invariance, reflection positivity, non-Gaussianity, mutual singularity) are asserted by reference to the author's prior work [23] without proofs; since they are not used in the main existence theorem, this is a minor non-load-bearing self-citation. Additionally, the construction leaves freedom in κ, α, r(a), and ℓ*, and no comparison between different admissible choices is provided, so the uniqueness of the limiting object as 'the' sine-Gordon measure as opposed to a scheme-dependent limit is not addressed; this is a correctness/interpretation concern, not a circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The construction is largely self-contained: theorems are proved from the Gibbs formulation (1.1)–(1.6), heat-kernel estimates, the screening bound, and the renormalization condition (1.5). The free choices are scheme data (slack κ, truncation ℓ*, localization degrees α_{2n}, Steiner rate r(a), counterterm constants), all explicitly defined rather than fitted to a target answer. The main external input is the author's prior preprint [23] for standard analytic lemmas and the strong-FBSDE structural template.

free parameters (5)

Localization degrees α_{2n} = 2(1−δκ·2n) = 2(1−δκ·2n), with δκ > 1/ℓ*
Maximum localization degree allowed for a 2n-point neutral cluster (Def. 3.9(b)). Chosen at the integrability boundary so that ⟨s⟩^{−δκ·2n−α/2} is integrable; the discrete allowed set {0, (α−1)∨0, α} is a scheme choice, not fitted to data.
Slack κ(β²) = sufficiently small so that δκ := δ(β²)−κ > δ(β²_ℓ*) = 1/ℓ* (eq. 1.26)
Hand-picked positive slack that trades decay rate against the field-growth exponents. Enters every estimate through δκ.
Truncation order ℓ* = ℓ* = 7 for the measure part; any ℓ* with ℓ*δκ>1 for Theorem 1.1
Choice of where to truncate the Picard iteration (3.6). The value 7 is required for K_F<1; larger orders are needed as β²→8π. Affects K_V, K_F, deg^H_∇.
Steiner weight rate r(a) = 6^{−L(a)}(1+½Θ(N(a))) = as in eq. (3.54)
Explicitly declared to be 'for technical convenience only; any strictly decreasing rate would work' (Remark 3.17). A scheme parameter.
Counterterm constants c^{ρ,T}_a for a ∈ A_ren = integrals of the sources, e.g. (3.29) for the dipole constant
Determined by the renormalization condition (1.5), i.e. the terminal conditions (4.5). Up to a finite constant they are the normal-ordering subtractions; the finite ambiguity does not affect the normalized measure but is a free choice of scheme.

assumptions (6)

standard math Massive Gaussian free field with covariance (m²−Δ)^{−1}, realized through the heat-kernel decomposition G_t = ∫₀^t Q_s² ds with Q_t as in (1.24)
The scale interpolation is the backbone of the flow equation; properties are collected in Appendix B (some cited from [23]).
standard math Brownian martingale representation of the free field and Girsanov/martingale-representation theorems applied on [0,T] and as T→∞
Used in Prop. 2.2 and Prop. 1.3 (Section 2); requires the uniform integrability and integrability conditions that the paper proves.
standard math Screening bound (Lemma B.6) and heat-kernel estimates (Lemmas B.1, B.4, B.5)
The Γ-estimate (3.63) and all kernel estimates depend on these. B.1, B.4, B.5 are cited to [23]; B.6 is proved in the appendix.
standard math Fernique-type exponential integrability of sup_T ∥W∥_γ and sup_T ∥W_T∥_{H^{−ϵ}(χ)} (Lemma C.3)
Needed for the uniform integrability of the density e^{−∫H} (Lemma 2.11, Prop. 2.5(ii)). Proof is sketched via Gaussian maximal estimates.
domain assumption Only vacuum constants and the first-order cosine term require renormalization in the full subcritical regime (A_ren = {m(a)=0} ∪ A¹_adm)
This is the standard renormalization structure of the continuum sine-Gordon model (normal ordering only). It is built into the terminal conditions (4.5); if field-dependent counterterms were needed, the ansatz would break.
domain assumption Finite-volume cut-off ρ ≺ 1, massive case m² > 0, and choice of the weighted spaces with χ(x)=⟨x⟩^{−3}
The whole construction is in finite volume; infinite volume is explicitly left open (Remark 1.4).

invented entities (2)

Fractional 2n-point cluster vertex fields ψ^ν_0(ξ_{1:2n}) = (ψ(ξ_{1:2n})−1)/δ(ξ_{1:2n})^ν
purpose: Building blocks of the multipole ansatz (3.38); fractional localization ν absorbs heat-kernel divergences while preserving sublinear field growth and charge-conjugation cancellations
A purely mathematical device internal to the proof; it has no falsifiable handle outside the paper.
Admissible index set A_adm with indices a = (L(a), Q(a), N(a), ν(a))
purpose: Bookkeeping structure for the renormalization induction (triangular partial order (3.44), relevant/irrelevant classification)
Internal proof machinery; its constraints (Definition 3.9) are justified by the needs of the induction, not by external evidence.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of An FBSDE Construction of the Sine-Gordon EQFT for $\beta^{2} < \frac{6}{7}\, 8\pi$ and Perturbative Renormalization in the Full Subcritical Regime." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5EHQ6GUR

@misc{pith2026260720632,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: An FBSDE Construction of the Sine-Gordon EQFT for $\beta^2 < \frac67\, 8\pi$ and Perturbative Renormalization in the Full Subcritical Regime},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5EHQ6GUR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.20632}
}

abstract

We construct the sine-Gordon measure and its renormalized effective potential in finite volume up to the seventh threshold. The construction relies on a weak stochastic control problem, its associated weak FBSDE, and an analysis of the renormalization flow equation using a multipole Mayer expansion. The analysis is fully inductive, and we include a complete order-by-order analysis in the subcritical regime $\beta^{2}<8\pi$.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

[23]

Construction of

Duch, Pawe. Construction of. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2403.18562 , urldate =. arXiv , keywords =:2403.18562 , primaryclass =

arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.18562
[1]

Antonelli, Fabio and Ma, Jin , year = 2003, month = jan, journal =. Weak. doi:10.1081/SAP-120020423 , urldate =

work page doi:10.1081/sap-120020423 2003
[2]

Fourier Analysis and Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations , author =
[3]

and Hofstetter, Michael , year = 2023, month = dec, journal =

Barashkov, Nikolay and Gunaratnam, Trishen S. and Hofstetter, Michael , year = 2023, month = dec, journal =. Multiscale. doi:10.1007/s00220-023-04850-2 , urldate =

work page doi:10.1007/s00220-023-04850-2 2023
[4]

A Stochastic Control Approach to

Barashkov, Nikolay , year = 2022, month = oct, eprint =. A Stochastic Control Approach to. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2203.06626 , urldate =

arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.06626 2022
[5]

On the Variational Method for

Barashkov, Nikolay and Gubinelli, Massimiliano , year = 2023, month = nov, journal =. On the Variational Method for. doi:10.2140/pmp.2023.4.761 , urldate =

work page doi:10.2140/pmp.2023.4.761 2023
[6]

and Gubinelli, M

Barashkov, N. and Gubinelli, M. , year = 2020, month = nov, journal =. A Variational Method for. doi:10.1215/00127094-2020-0029 , urldate =. arXiv , keywords =:1805.10814 , primaryclass =

arXiv 2020
[7]

Bauerschmidt, Roland and Webb, Christian , year = 2023, month = may, journal =. The. doi:10.4171/jems/1329 , urldate =

work page doi:10.4171/jems/1329 2023

Show all 47 references

[8]

Bauerschmidt, Roland and Bodineau, Thierry , year = 2021, journal =. Log-. doi:10.1002/cpa.21926 , urldate =

2021 doi
[9]

Maximum and Coupling of the Sine-

Bauerschmidt, Roland and Hofstetter, Michael , year = 2022, month = mar, journal =. Maximum and Coupling of the Sine-. doi:10.1214/21-AOP1537 , urldate =

2022 doi
[10]

Stochastic Dynamics and the

Bauerschmidt, Roland and Bodineau, Thierry and Dagallier, Benoit , year = 2024, month = jan, journal =. Stochastic Dynamics and the. doi:10.1214/24-PS27 , urldate =

2024 doi
[11]

Bauerschmidt, Roland and Mason, Scott and Webb, Christian , year = 2025, month = aug, eprint =. Twisted. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2508.14806 , urldate =

2025 doi arXiv
[12]

, year = 1985, month = nov, journal =

Benfatto, G. , year = 1985, month = nov, journal =. An Iterated. doi:10.1007/BF01009027 , urldate =

1985 doi
[13]

On the Massive Sine-

Benfatto, G and Gallavotti, G and Nicolo, Francesco , year = 1982, journal =. On the Massive Sine-

1982
[14]

Massive Holomorphicity of Near-Critical Dimers and Sine-

Berestycki, Nathana. Massive Holomorphicity of Near-Critical Dimers and Sine-. doi:10.48550/ARXIV.2603.06498 , urldate =

doi
[15]

A Variational Representation for Certain Functionals of

Bou. A Variational Representation for Certain Functionals of. Ann. Probab. , volume =
[16]

Global Well-Posedness of the Dynamical Sine-

Bringmann, Bjoern and Cao, Sky , year = 2026, month = may, journal =. Global Well-Posedness of the Dynamical Sine-. doi:10.1214/25-AOP1797 , urldate =

2026 doi
[17]

Debye Screening , author =. Commun. Math. Phys. , volume =. doi:10.1007/BF01197700 , urldate =

doi
[18]

Mayer Expansions and the

Brydges, David C and Kennedy, T , year = 1987, journal =. Mayer Expansions and the

1987
[19]

The Dynamical Sine-

Chandra, Ajay and Hairer, Martin and Shen, Hao , year = 2018, month = aug, number =. The Dynamical Sine-. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1808.02594 , urldate =. arXiv , keywords =:1808.02594 , primaryclass =

2018 doi arXiv
[20]

A Priori Bounds for 2-d Generalised

Chandra, Ajay and Feltes, Guilherme de Lima and Weber, Hendrik , year = 2024, month = feb, number =. A Priori Bounds for 2-d Generalised. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2402.05544 , urldate =. arXiv , keywords =:2402.05544 , primaryclass =

2024 doi
[21]

Quantum Sine-

Coleman, Sidney , year = 1975, month = apr, journal =. Quantum Sine-. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.11.2088 , urldate =

1975 doi
[22]

Dimock, Jonathan and Hurd,. Sine-. Ann. Henri Poincar\'e , volume =
[24]

Flow Equation Approach to Singular Stochastic

Duch, Pawe. Flow Equation Approach to Singular Stochastic. Probab. Math. Phys. , volume =. doi:10.2140/pmp.2025.6.327 , urldate =

2025 doi
[25]

Stochastic Quantisation of the Fractional

Duch, Pawe. Stochastic Quantisation of the Fractional. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2303.18112 , urldate =. arXiv , keywords =:2303.18112 , primaryclass =

doi
[26]

Critical Exponents of the Two Dimensional

Falco, Pierluigi , year = 2013, month = nov, eprint =. Critical Exponents of the Two Dimensional

2013
[27]

Fr. Local. Ann. Henri Poincar\'e , issn =. doi:10.1007/s00023-025-01565-z , urldate =

doi
[28]

Gentle Introduction to Rigorous

Giuliani, Alessandro and Mastropietro, Vieri and Rychkov, Slava , year = 2021, month = jan, journal =. Gentle Introduction to Rigorous. doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2021)026 , urldate =

2021 doi
[29]

and Meyer, S

Gubinelli, M. and Meyer, S. , year = 2026, journal =. The

2026
[30]

Gubinelli, Massimiliano and Hofmanov. A. Commun. Math. Phys. , volume =
[31]

A Simple Construction of the Sine-

Gubinelli, Massimiliano and Hairer, Martin and Oh, Tadahiro and Zine, Younes , year = 2025, journal =. A Simple Construction of the Sine-. doi:10.1112/jlms.70214 , urldate =

2025 doi
[32]

A Coupling for the

Hofstetter, Michael , year = 2025, month = oct, eprint =. A Coupling for the. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2510.21563 , urldate =

2025 doi
[33]

Brownian

Karatzas, Ioannis and Shreve, Steven , year = 1998, publisher =. Brownian. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-0949-2 , file =

1998 doi
[34]

Backward Stochastic Differential Equations and Partial Differential Equations with Quadratic Growth , author =. Ann. Probab. , volume =
[35]

A Probabilistic Approach of Ultraviolet Renormalization in the Boundary

Lacoin, Hubert and Rhodes, R. A Probabilistic Approach of Ultraviolet Renormalization in the Boundary. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields , issn =. doi:10.1007/s00440-022-01174-5 , urldate =

doi
[36]

Representation Formula for the Entropy and Functional Inequalities , author =. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar
[37]

Exact Expectation Values of Local Fields in the Quantum Sine-

Lukyanov, Sergei and Zamolodchikov, Alexander , year = 1997, month = jun, journal =. Exact Expectation Values of Local Fields in the Quantum Sine-. doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(97)00123-5 , urldate =

1997 doi
[38]

and Zamolodchikov, A

Lukyanov, S. and Zamolodchikov, A. , year = 2001, month = jul, journal =. Form Factors of Soliton-Creating Operators in the Sine-. doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(01)00262-0 , urldate =. arXiv , keywords =:hep-th/0102079 , pages =

2001 arXiv
[39]

Mourrat, Jean-Christophe and Weber, Hendrik , year = 2017, month = dec, journal =. The. doi:10.1007/s00220-017-2997-4 , urldate =

2017 doi
[40]

On the Massive Sine-

Nicol. On the Massive Sine-. Commun. Math. Phys. , volume =. doi:10.1007/BF01211960 , urldate =

doi
[41]

On the Massive Sine-

Nicolo, F and Renn, J and Steinmann, A , year = 1986, journal =. On the Massive Sine-

1986
[42]

Nicol. The. Commun. Math. Phys. , volume =. doi:10.1007/BF01238809 , urldate =

doi
[43]

The Subcritical Finite-Volume Massive Sine-

Pelai. The Subcritical Finite-Volume Massive Sine-. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2508.13778 , urldate =. arXiv , langid =:2508.13778 , primaryclass =

doi arXiv
[44]

Global Well-Posedness for

Shen, Hao and Zhu, Rongchan and Zhu, Xiangchan , year = 2025, month = may, journal =. Global Well-Posedness for. doi:10.1007/s40072-025-00358-z , urldate =

2025 doi
[45]

De and Fresta, Luca and Gubinelli, Massimiliano , year = 2025, month = may, journal =

Vecchi, Francesco C. De and Fresta, Luca and Gubinelli, Massimiliano , year = 2025, month = may, journal =. A Stochastic Analysis of Subcritical. doi:10.1214/24-AOP1714 , urldate =

2025 doi
[46]

The Massless Sine-

Vihko, Sami , year = 2026, month = jun, eprint =. The Massless Sine-. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2606.06657 , urldate =

2026 doi arXiv
[47]

Hyperbolic Sine-

Zine, Younes , year = 2025, month = may, eprint =. Hyperbolic Sine-. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2504.07944 , urldate =

2025 doi arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [23]

Construction of

Duch, Pawe. Construction of. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2403.18562 , urldate =. arXiv , keywords =:2403.18562 , primaryclass =

arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.18562

[2] [1]

Antonelli, Fabio and Ma, Jin , year = 2003, month = jan, journal =. Weak. doi:10.1081/SAP-120020423 , urldate =

work page doi:10.1081/sap-120020423 2003

[3] [2]

Fourier Analysis and Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations , author =

[4] [3]

and Hofstetter, Michael , year = 2023, month = dec, journal =

Barashkov, Nikolay and Gunaratnam, Trishen S. and Hofstetter, Michael , year = 2023, month = dec, journal =. Multiscale. doi:10.1007/s00220-023-04850-2 , urldate =

work page doi:10.1007/s00220-023-04850-2 2023

[5] [4]

A Stochastic Control Approach to

Barashkov, Nikolay , year = 2022, month = oct, eprint =. A Stochastic Control Approach to. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2203.06626 , urldate =

arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.06626 2022

[6] [5]

On the Variational Method for

Barashkov, Nikolay and Gubinelli, Massimiliano , year = 2023, month = nov, journal =. On the Variational Method for. doi:10.2140/pmp.2023.4.761 , urldate =

work page doi:10.2140/pmp.2023.4.761 2023

[7] [6]

and Gubinelli, M

Barashkov, N. and Gubinelli, M. , year = 2020, month = nov, journal =. A Variational Method for. doi:10.1215/00127094-2020-0029 , urldate =. arXiv , keywords =:1805.10814 , primaryclass =

arXiv 2020

[8] [7]

Bauerschmidt, Roland and Webb, Christian , year = 2023, month = may, journal =. The. doi:10.4171/jems/1329 , urldate =

work page doi:10.4171/jems/1329 2023