Monotonicity of isotropic tensor functions on the set of symmetric matrices: completing Rodney Hill's generalization of the Chandler Davis convexity theorem

Ionel-Dumitrel Ghiba; Jendrik Voss; Macro Valerio d'Agostino; Patrizio Neff; Robert J. Martin

Monotonicity of isotropic tensor functions on the set of symmetric matrices: completing Rodney Hill's generalization of the Chandler Davis convexity theorem

T0 review · 0 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For isotropic functions on symmetric matrices, a vector-valued map is monotone if and only if its induced tensor-valued map is monotone on the whole matrix space.

desk verdict A careful, complete proof of Hill's monotonicity equivalence with real extensions; the result isn't new, but the proof and consequences justify peer review. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.07087 v1 pith:ZAANUDNG submitted 2026-08-07 math.AP

Jendrik Voss , Robert J. Martin , Ionel-Dumitrel Ghiba , Macro Valerio d'Agostino , Patrizio Neff This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 74B2074A2074A10

keywords isotropictensorfunctionsmatrix-monotonicityvector-monotonicityChandlerDavisconvexitytheoremBaker-Erickseninequalitiesdoublystochasticmatricesnonlinearelasticityeigenvalue

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 proves that monotonicity of an isotropic tensor function on symmetric matrices is decided entirely by its eigenvalue representation. For any permutation-symmetric vector field $f$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$, the induced tensor function sending $Q^T\operatorname{diag}(\lambda)Q$ to $Q^T\operatorname{diag}(f(\lambda))Q$ is monotone in the trace inner product if and only if $f$ itself is monotone on $\mathbb{R}^n$, and the same holds for strict monotonicity. This is the non-potential analogue of the Chandler Davis convexity theorem, which previously covered only gradients of isotropic potentials. The paper also gives an independent proof of Hill's theorem, showing that his condensed argument was correct, and applies the equivalence to invertibility and to the strong Baker-Ericksen inequalities in isotropic elasticity.

What carries the argument

The central object is a maximization lemma over the orthogonal group: for diagonal matrices $A^{(k)},B^{(k)}$, the map $\Psi(Q)=\sum_{k=1}^m\langle A^{(k)}, Q^T B^{(k)} Q\rangle$ attains its maximum at a signed permutation matrix that diagonalizes every $B^{(k)}$, and under an identical-equality-blocks ordering condition every maximizer preserves the $B^{(k)}$. Its proof converts $\Psi$ into a linear function of a doubly stochastic matrix whose entries are $Q_{ij}^2$, applies the Birkhoff\,--\,von Neumann theorem to pass to permutation matrices, and uses the classical rearrangement inequality to control the aligned ordering. This allows the two-frame mixed terms in $\langle\Sigma_f(S)-\Sigma_f(T),S-T\rangle$ to be replaced by diagonal terms, reducing tensor monotonicity to vector monotonicity.

What would settle it

In the 2D case, Appendix A.4 computes the objective $\Psi$ explicitly and shows its critical points occur only at signed permutations; a single vector-monotone $f$ and diagonal $D_1,D_2$ for which a non-permutation orthogonal matrix strictly beats every signed permutation would falsify Lemma 3.26 and with it the theorem. Equivalently, a random search over polynomial symmetric $f$ on $\mathbb{R}^2$ finding any pair $S,T$ with negative $\langle\Sigma_f(S)-\Sigma_f(T),S-T\rangle$ while all diagonal inner products are nonnegative would settle the claim negatively.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Theorem 3.25 is the load-bearing result: a symmetric function $f:M\subset\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^n$ is (strictly) vector-monotone if and only if it is (strictly) matrix-monotone, where matrix-monotonicity is the inequality $\langle\Sigma_f(S)-\Sigma_f(T), S-T\rangle\ge 0$ for all symmetric $S,T$. The easy direction is diagonal insertion; the hard direction shows that the worst case over the two independently chosen orthogonal diagonalization frames is itself attained by a signed permutation, so the inner product can be compared with a diagonal pair where vector-monotonicity applies. The proof is independent of Hill's original argument and, in the strict case, uses the fact that strict vector-monotonicity forces eigenvalue lists and function-value lists to be ordered with identical equality blocks.

Load-bearing premise

The strict version of the proof depends on equal groups of eigenvalues in the stretch matrices being matched by equal groups in the stress eigenvalues, so that the ordering of the principal values transfers to every maximizing orthogonal transformation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In isotropic nonlinear elasticity, monotonicity conditions written in principal stretches and principal stresses become provably equivalent to monotonicity of the full tensorial stress\,--\,strain relation, so Drucker-type stability checks need only be verified on eigenvalue pairs.
An isotropic tensor function is injective or surjective if and only if its eigenvalue vector function is, so global invertibility of a constitutive law can be assessed in principal variables.
A continuously differentiable, injective Cauchy stress response whose symmetric tangent at the identity is positive definite satisfies the strong Baker-Ericksen inequalities throughout its domain.
The ordered-eigenvalue version of the theorem states that monotonicity of $\Sigma_\phi$ is equivalent to monotonicity of $\phi$ together with the ordering condition $\phi(x)\in\mathbb{R}^n_\downarrow$, directly generalizing Friedland's convexity criterion to non-potential tensor functions.
Non-singularity of the derivative of the eigenvalue function does not imply non-singularity of the derivative of the tensor function, so the monotonicity and invertibility equivalences do not descend to derivative-level statements.

Reading between the lines

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

Because the equivalence is representation-free, it suggests that stability and uniqueness checks for any isotropic material model can be implemented by testing only $n$ scalar principal-value functions, which would be a substantial simplification for numerical codes.
The equality-block condition points to repeated eigenvalues as the only delicate boundary of strictness, so material models with symmetric or nearly symmetric stretch states deserve special care when strict monotonicity is claimed.
The same rearrangement argument over doubly stochastic matrices may carry over to Hermitian matrices with unitary frames, giving a complex-matrix analogue of the theorem for quantum systems or complex elasticity.
The paper's black-box link between $f$ and its induced tensor map also implies that any symmetric monotone vector field yields a monotone tensor law even when no strain energy exists, which could be used to generate admissible non-potential constitutive models.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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

Colleague — this paper deserves a serious referee. It gives the first complete, self-contained proof of Hill's 1970 equivalence between vector- and matrix-monotonicity for isotropic tensor functions on symmetric matrices, and it does so with care. The central theorem is not new—Hill stated it—but the paper is explicit about that, and its proof fixes a genuine ambiguity: Hill's condensed argument and Ogden's ordered-eigenvalue interpretation left the general (unordered) case unclear. The strict version and the equality-block analysis are the real technical work.

The new material is solid. Theorem 3.25 with strictness, the generalization of Friedland's ordered-eigenvalue theorem (Theorem 3.27), the clean invertibility criterion (Theorem 4.1), and the Baker–Ericksen consequences (Theorem 4.2, Proposition 4.3) are all correct as far as I can see. Lemma 3.26 is the technical heart, and the proof via doubly stochastic matrices, Birkhoff–von Neumann, and rearrangement is sound. The appendices on Hill's proof are honest and instructive; the counterexample to the naive inequality chain (3.27) is well chosen.

Soft spots: the main theorem is Hill's, so the novelty lies in proof and consequences, not the statement. The paper is long, and a few appendix arguments are sketched rather than fully detailed. There are minor typos in the text—nothing load-bearing. The equality-block condition in Lemma 3.26(ii) is delicate, but I checked the invocation in the strict part of Theorem 3.25: when it matters, D1 = D2 and the relevant pairs reduce to (d1, f(d1)) and (f(d1), d1), which strict vector-monotonicity orders identically. So I agree with the stress-test: no gap. The citation pattern is heavily self-referential, but the self-citations point to directly relevant prior work on logarithmic strain and TSTS-M+; that is not a flaw.

Who this is for: researchers in isotropic elasticity, spectral matrix analysis, and monotone matrix functions. It deserves peer review. I would accept, with only typo-level revision and optional trimming.

Referee Report

0 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies isotropic tensor functions Σ_f on Sym(n) induced by symmetric vector functions f. Its main result, Theorem 3.25, states that vector-monotonicity and matrix-monotonicity are equivalent, including the strict versions. The proof reduces the problem to a maximization lemma over O(n) and uses the Birkhoff–von Neumann theorem together with the Hardy–Littlewood–Pólya rearrangement inequality. The paper also proves an ordered-eigenvalue version (Theorem 3.27), an invertibility equivalence (Theorem 4.1), and a result that injectivity plus positive definiteness of the tangent at the identity forces the strong Baker-Ericksen inequalities. The appendices revisit Hill's and Ogden's proofs, provide a direct two-dimensional verification of the main lemma, and discuss several constitutive examples.

Significance. If correct, the paper settles a natural non-potential analogue of the Chandler Davis convexity theorem and supplies a rigorous proof of a claim that Hill stated in a very condensed form. The main theorem is broadly applicable in nonlinear elasticity, as it equates principal-stress/principal-strain monotonicity with tensorial monotonicity for isotropic Cauchy-elastic response functions. The proof is self-contained and uses only standard tools, and the strict case is handled by a careful equality-block analysis. The paper also provides a clean invertibility criterion and a useful bridge between local linear response and the strong Baker-Ericksen inequalities. The examples and counterexamples, especially the derivative non-invertibility example, are instructive.

minor comments (6)

[Lemma 3.11 and Theorem 3.25] Lemma 3.11 is stated for f on R^n, but Theorem 3.25 applies it to a symmetric subset M⊂R^n. The proof only uses swaps of two coordinates, which remain in M by symmetry; the statement should be adjusted to M or a remark should be added.
[Theorem 4.2] The 'convex neighbourhood' of 1 should be chosen invariant under orthogonal conjugation, for instance a ball, so that strict monotonicity of σ on the neighbourhood gives strict vector-monotonicity of the eigenvalue function on all coordinate permutations of the relevant eigenvalue triples.
[Theorem 3.27 proof] The strictness argument in the case x↓=y↓ is compressed; a sentence explaining why at least one of the two rearrangement inequalities becomes strict for non-compatibly ordered vectors with distinct values would improve readability.
[Appendix A.7] The power-mean step (∑ a_i)^λ ≤ ∑ a_i^λ for 0<λ<1 is used without comment; adding one line would make the derivation of the Golden-Thompson-type inequality fully transparent.
[Throughout] There are numerous typographical slips in the text, for example 'On' instead of 'O(n)', inconsistent spacing in 'Σ f', and an unnumbered reference to (3.27) in Appendix A.1. A careful proofreading pass is needed.
[Table 4 and Example 4.6] The row in Table 4 marked 'future work' is a conjecture, not a proved equivalence; it should be labeled explicitly as an open problem. In Example 4.6, the expression 'Q_t^T 1 Q_t = 1' would be clearer as 'Q_t^T diag(1,1) Q_t = diag(1,1)'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: Theorem 3.25 is proved from external standard results, not from its own conclusion.

full rationale

The main claim (Theorem 3.25) is neither defined in terms of itself nor derived from a fitted input. Matrix-monotonicity implies vector-monotonicity by Lemma 2.11, and the converse is proved by reducing the matrix inner product to a maximization over O(n) in Lemma 3.26. The proof of Lemma 3.26 uses the Birkhoff-von Neumann theorem, the rearrangement inequality of Hardy-Littlewood-Pólya, and elementary properties of doubly stochastic matrices; these are external standard results, not conclusions of the paper. The delicate equality-block hypothesis in Lemma 3.26(ii) is supplied at the point of use by Lemma 3.11 together with the symmetry of f, not by assuming the theorem being proved. Self-citations appear only in the motivation and application sections (e.g., exp-Hencky examples) and are not load-bearing for the equivalence. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem from the authors' prior work is invoked to force the choice. The proof is self-contained against external benchmarks, so the honest finding is no circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted parameters and no new postulated entities. It relies on standard theorems from matrix analysis, convex analysis, and spectral theory, plus the classical isotropic representation theorem. These are external benchmarks, not assumptions that contain the target result.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption Isotropic tensor functions on Sym(n) admit a unique representation Sigma_f(Q^T diag(lambda) Q) = Q^T diag(f(lambda)) Q with f symmetric (Lemma 3.3, citing Silhavy).
This foundational representation defines the object of study and is cited as standard, not proved in detail.
standard math Birkhoff-von Neumann theorem: every doubly stochastic matrix is a convex combination of permutation matrices (Theorem 3.24).
Used in Lemma 3.26 to reduce the maximization over the doubly stochastic polytope to permutation matrices.
standard math Hardy-Littlewood-Polya rearrangement inequality with equality case (Lemma 3.13).
Used to bound trace terms and to characterize equality in the ordered case.
standard math Compactness of O(n) and continuity of the bilinear form, ensuring the maximum in Lemma 3.26 exists.
Basic topology used in the proof of Lemma 3.26(i).
domain assumption Isotropy is defined with respect to the full orthogonal group O(n) (Definition 2.5).
The representation and equivalence rely on invariance under all orthogonal transformations; restricting to SO(n) would change the statement.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Monotonicity of isotropic tensor functions on the set of symmetric matrices: completing Rodney Hill's generalization of the Chandler Davis convexity theorem." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZAANUDNG

@misc{pith2026260807087,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Monotonicity of isotropic tensor functions on the set of symmetric matrices: completing Rodney Hill's generalization of the Chandler Davis convexity theorem},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZAANUDNG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.07087}
}

abstract

Motivated by classical constitutive inequalities in isotropic nonlinear elasticity theory, we investigate the monotonicity of isotropic tensor functions of the form \[ \Sigma_f\colon\mathrm{Sym}(n)\to\mathrm{Sym}(n)\,,\quad \Sigma_f(Q^T\mathrm{diag}(\lambda_1,\dotsc,\lambda_n)\, Q) = Q^T\mathrm{diag}(f(\lambda_1,\dotsc,\lambda_n))\, Q \quad\forall\;Q\in\mathrm{O}(n) \] with a vector function $f=(f_1,\dotsc,f_n)\colon\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^n$ which is symmetric, i.e.\ satisfies \[ f_i(\lambda_{\pi(1)},\dotsc,\lambda_{\pi(n)}) = f_{\pi(i)}(\lambda_1,\dotsc,\lambda_n) \] for any permutation $\pi\colon\{1,\dotsc,n\}\to\{1,\dotsc,n\}$, where $\mathrm{Sym}(n)$ denotes the space of symmetric $n\times n$ matrices, $\mathrm{O}n$ is the orthogonal group and $\mathrm{diag}(\lambda_1,\dotsc,\lambda_n)$ is the diagonal matrix with diagonal entries $\lambda_1,\dotsc,\lambda_n\in\mathbb{R}$. We prove that vector-monotonicity of $f$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$ is equivalent to matrix-monotonicity of the induced isotropic tensor function $\Sigma_f$ on $\mathrm{Sym}(n)$. Our results generalize the Chandler Davis theorem for convex scalar isotropic functions and are obtained independently of Hill's original proof of this equivalence. We also discuss simple invertibility conditions for isotropic matrix functions. We conclude by showing that injectivity of the Cauchy stress $V\mapsto\sigma(V)$, continuous differentiability, and positive definiteness of $\mathrm{sym}\,\mathrm D\sigma(1\!\!\!\:1)$ in the natural state imply the strong Baker-Ericksen inequalities.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.07087 by the authors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages

[1]

Large isotropic elastic deformations: on a comprehensive model to correlate the theory and experiments for incompressible rubber-like materials

A. Anssari-Benam. “Large isotropic elastic deformations: on a comprehensive model to correlate the theory and experiments for incompressible rubber-like materials”.Journal of Elasticity153.2 (2023). Pp. 219–244

work page 2023
[2]

S. S. Antman.Nonlinear Problems of Elasticity. 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 2005

work page 2005
[3]

Lemma 3.4.Letf= (f 1,...,f n):M⊂R n →R n be symmetric

(3.10) and we can define the vector functionbσ:R 3→R 3 as bσi(d1,d 2,d 3) =α 0(d1,d 2,d 3) +α 1(d1,d 2,d 3)di +α 2(d1,d 2,d 3)d2 i .(3.11) The functionbσis symmetric in terms of Definition 2.4 because for each permutationπ:{1,2,3}→{1,2,3} bσi(dπ(1),dπ(2),dπ(3)) =α 0(dπ(1),dπ(2),dπ(3)) +α 1(dπ(1),dπ(2),dπ(3))dπ(i) +α 2(dπ(1),dπ(2),dπ(3))d2 π(i) =α 0(d1,d 2...

work page
[4]

Of course, stress tensors can be defined which are not conjugate to any strain measure in the present sense. One such is Cauchy stress for a compressible solid,

= (ε2,ε 1,ε 3), we get 2(σ2−σ 1)(ε2−ε 1)≥0.(3.33) Thereforeσ i andε i are ordered in the same way. By construction in (3.29),ε i andeεi are already sorted in the same algebraic order, therefore (3.31) holds. Finally we get W(ε)−W(ε) =g( εi)−g(ε i) =g(eεi)−g(ε i) ≥ nX i=1 ∂εig(εi)(eεi−εi) = nX i=1 ∂εig(εi)eεi−⟨DW(ε),ε⟩(3.34) ≥⟨DW(ε), ε⟩−⟨DW(ε),ε⟩=⟨DW(ε), ε...

work page
[5]

Convexity conditions and existence theorems in nonlinear elasticity

J. M. Ball. “Convexity conditions and existence theorems in nonlinear elasticity”.Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis63.4 (1976). Pp. 337–403

work page 1976
[6]

Hyperelastic stability landscape: A check for Hill stability of isotropic, incompressible hyperelasticity depending on material parameters

H. Baaser. “Hyperelastic stability landscape: A check for Hill stability of isotropic, incompressible hyperelasticity depending on material parameters”.Journal of Elasticity158.1 (2026). P. 8

work page 2026
[7]

Inequalities restricting the form of the stress-deformation relations for isotropic elastic solids and Reiner-Rivlin fluids

M. Baker and J. Ericksen. “Inequalities restricting the form of the stress-deformation relations for isotropic elastic solids and Reiner-Rivlin fluids”.Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences44.2 (1954). Pp. 33–35

work page 1954
[8]

Three observations on linear algebra

G. Birkhoff. “Three observations on linear algebra”.Universidad Nacional de Tucum´ an Revista Serie A5 (1946). Pp. 147–151

work page 1946

Show all 71 references

[9]

Hyperbolic polynomials and convex analysis

H. H. Bauschke, O. G¨ uler, A. S. Lewis, and H. S. Sendov. “Hyperbolic polynomials and convex analysis”.Canadian Journal of Mathematics53.3 (2001). Pp. 470–488

2001
[10]

Bhatia.Matrix Analysis

R. Bhatia.Matrix Analysis. Vol. 169. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

2013
[11]

Analysis of intrinsic stability criteria for isotropic third-order Green elastic and compressible Neo-Hookean solids

J. Clayton and K. Bliss. “Analysis of intrinsic stability criteria for isotropic third-order Green elastic and compressible Neo-Hookean solids”.Mechanics of Materials68 (2014). Pp. 104–119

2014
[12]

Constitutive models of rubber elasticity: a review

M. C. Boyce and E. M. Arruda. “Constitutive models of rubber elasticity: a review”.Rubber Chemistry and Technology 73.3 (2000). Pp. 504–523

2000
[13]

A theorem of tensor calculus and its application to isotropic elasticity

P. Chadwick and R. Ogden. “A theorem of tensor calculus and its application to isotropic elasticity”.Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis44.1 (1971). Pp. 54–68

1971
[14]

All convex invariant functions of hermitian matrices

C. Davis. “All convex invariant functions of hermitian matrices”.Archiv der Mathematik8.4 (1957). Pp. 276–278

1957
[15]

On the thermostatics of continuous media

B. D. Coleman and W. Noll. “On the thermostatics of continuous media”.Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis 4.1 (1959). Pp. 97–128

1959
[16]

A constitutive condition for idealized isotropic Cauchy elasticity involving the logarithmic strain

M. V. d’Agostino, S. Holthausen, D. Bernardini, A. Sky, I.-D. Ghiba, R. J. Martin, and P. Neff. “A constitutive condition for idealized isotropic Cauchy elasticity involving the logarithmic strain”.Journal of Elasticity157.1 (2025). P. 23

2025
[17]

¨Uber die Abgrenzung der Eigenwerte einer Matrix

S. A. Gershgorin. “ ¨Uber die Abgrenzung der Eigenwerte einer Matrix”.Bulletin de l’Acad´ emie des Sciences de l’URSS. Classe des Sciences Math´ ematiques6 (1931). Pp. 749–754

1931
[18]

Elastic materials of coaxial type and inequalities sufficient to ensure strong ellipticity

J. E. Dunn. “Elastic materials of coaxial type and inequalities sufficient to ensure strong ellipticity”.International Journal of Solids and Structures20.5 (1984). Pp. 417–427

1984
[19]

Convex spectral functions

S. Friedland. “Convex spectral functions”.Linear and Multilinear Algebra9.4 (1981). Pp. 299–316

1981
[20]

A generalization of the Chandler Davis convexity theorem

Y. Grabovsky and O. Hijab. “A generalization of the Chandler Davis convexity theorem”.Advances in Applied Mathematics34.1 (2005). Pp. 192–212

2005
[21]

Polyconvexity implies Hill’s inequality in SL (2)

I.-D. Ghiba, M. P. Wollner, and P. Neff. “Polyconvexity implies Hill’s inequality in SL (2)”.European Journal of Mechanics-A/Solids(2026). P. 106296

2026
[22]

Lower bounds for the Helmholtz function

S. Golden. “Lower bounds for the Helmholtz function”.Physical Review137.4B (1965). B1127

1965
[23]

H. Hencky. “Das Superpositionsgesetz eines endlich deformierten relaxationsf¨ ahigen elastischen Kontinuums und seine Bedeutung f¨ ur eine exakte Ableitung der Gleichungen f¨ ur die z¨ ahe Fl¨ ussigkeit in der Eulerschen Form”.Annalen der Physik394.6 (1929). Pp. 617–630

1929
[24]

Application of a new constitutive model for the description of rubber-like materials under monotonic loading

Z. Guo and L. Sluys. “Application of a new constitutive model for the description of rubber-like materials under monotonic loading”.International Journal of Solids and Structures43.9 (2006). Pp. 2799–2819

2006
[25]

G. H. Hardy, J. E. Littlewood, and G. P´ olya.Inequalities. Cambridge University Press, 1952

1952
[26]

C. S. Jog.Continuum Mechanics. Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press, 2015

2015
[27]

Constitutive inequalities for isotropic elastic solids under finite strain

R. Hill. “Constitutive inequalities for isotropic elastic solids under finite strain”.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. Vol. 314. 1519. The Royal Society. 1970, pp. 457–472

1970
[28]

On constitutive inequalities for simple materials—I

R. Hill. “On constitutive inequalities for simple materials—I”.Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids16.4 (1968). Pp. 229–242. 27

1968
[29]

Polyconvexity does not imply true-stress-true-strain monotonicity in the incompressible three-dimensional case

D. K. Klein, M. P. Wollner, and P. Neff. “Polyconvexity does not imply true-stress-true-strain monotonicity in the incompressible three-dimensional case”.arXiv preprint,available at arXiv:2607.06568 (2026)

2026 arXiv
[30]

Conditions for the onset of elastic and material instabilities in hyperelastic materials

C. S. Jog and K. Patil. “Conditions for the onset of elastic and material instabilities in hyperelastic materials”.Archive of Applied Mechanics83 (2013). Pp. 1–24

2013
[31]

Large strain viscoelastic constitutive models for rubber, part I: Formulations

A. Johnson, C. Quigley, and J. Mead. “Large strain viscoelastic constitutive models for rubber, part I: Formulations”. Rubber Chemistry and Technology67.5 (1994). Pp. 904–917

1994
[32]

On the convexity of the functionC→f(detC) on positive definite matrices

S. Lehmich, P. Neff, and J. Lankeit. “On the convexity of the functionC→f(detC) on positive definite matrices”. Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids19 (2014). Pp. 369–375

2014
[33]

Sur les fonctions de matrices convexes et isotropes

H. Le Dret. “Sur les fonctions de matrices convexes et isotropes”.Comptes Rendus de l’Acadˆ emie des Sciences310 (1990). Pp. 617–620

1990
[34]

A constitutive inequality for hyperelastic materials in finite strain

J. Leblond. “A constitutive inequality for hyperelastic materials in finite strain”.European Journal of Mechanics. A. Solids11.4 (1992). Pp. 447–466

1992
[35]

Eigenvalue optimization

A. S. Lewis and M. L. Overton. “Eigenvalue optimization”.Acta Numerica Vol. 5. Cambridge University Press, 1996, pp. 149–190

1996
[36]

Convex analysis on the Hermitian matrices

A. S. Lewis. “Convex analysis on the Hermitian matrices”.SIAM Journal on Optimization6.1 (1996). Pp. 164–177

1996
[37]

The mathematics of eigenvalue optimization

A. S. Lewis. “The mathematics of eigenvalue optimization”.Mathematical Programming97.1-2 (B) (2003). Pp. 155– 176

2003
[38]

Isotropie et convexit´ e dans l’espace des tenseurs symˆ etriques

M. Marques and J. Moreau. “Isotropie et convexit´ e dans l’espace des tenseurs symˆ etriques”.Travaux du Seminaire d’Analyse Convexe, Montpellier12.6 (1982)

1982
[39]

Derivatives of spectral functions

A. S. Lewis. “Derivatives of spectral functions”.Mathematics of Operations Research21.3 (1996). Pp. 576–588

1996
[40]

Group invariance and convex matrix analysis

A. S. Lewis. “Group invariance and convex matrix analysis”.SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications17.4 (1996). Pp. 927–949

1996
[41]

On the trace of matrix products

L. Mirsky. “On the trace of matrix products”.Mathematische Nachrichten20.3-6 (1959). Pp. 171–174

1959
[42]

Some remarks on the monotonicity of primary matrix functions on the set of symmetric matrices

R. J. Martin and P. Neff. “Some remarks on the monotonicity of primary matrix functions on the set of symmetric matrices”.Archive of Applied Mechanics85.12 (2015). Pp. 1761–1778

2015
[43]

6 It reads TSTS-M+ :⟨σ(logV)−σ(log V),logV−log V⟩>0, V̸= V∈Sym ++(3).(2.36) 3Also sometimes written as⟨dσ,dε⟩>0 or⟨˙σ,˙ε⟩>0 and referred to asDrucker-stabilitycondition

has been put forward as a new stability condition. 6 It reads TSTS-M+ :⟨σ(logV)−σ(log V),logV−log V⟩>0, V̸= V∈Sym ++(3).(2.36) 3Also sometimes written as⟨dσ,dε⟩>0 or⟨˙σ,˙ε⟩>0 and referred to asDrucker-stabilitycondition. 4In nonlinear elasticity the Cauchy stress is not in gen...
[44]

How to characterize a nonlinear elastic material? A review on nonlinear constitutive parameters in isotropic finite elasticity

L. A. Mihai and A. Goriely. “How to characterize a nonlinear elastic material? A review on nonlinear constitutive parameters in isotropic finite elasticity”.Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences473.2207 (2017). P. 20170607

2017
[45]

Geometry of logarithmic strain measures in solid mechanics

P. Neff, B. Eidel, and R. J. Martin. “Geometry of logarithmic strain measures in solid mechanics”.Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis222.2 (2016). Pp. 507–572

2016
[46]

The exponentiated Hencky-logarithmic strain energy. Part I: Constitutive issues and rank-one convexity

P. Neff, I.-D. Ghiba, and J. Lankeit. “The exponentiated Hencky-logarithmic strain energy. Part I: Constitutive issues and rank-one convexity”.Journal of Elasticity121.2 (2015). Pp. 143–234

2015
[47]

Hypo-elasticity, Cauchy-elasticity, corotational stability and monotonicity in the logarithmic strain

P. Neff, S. Holthausen, M. V. d’Agostino, D. Bernardini, A. Sky, I.-D. Ghiba, and R. J. Martin. “Hypo-elasticity, Cauchy-elasticity, corotational stability and monotonicity in the logarithmic strain”.Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids202 (2025). P. 106074

2025
[48]

On Grioli’s minimum property and its relation to Cauchy’s polar decomposition

P. Neff, J. Lankeit, and A. Madeo. “On Grioli’s minimum property and its relation to Cauchy’s polar decomposition”. International Journal of Engineering Science80 (2014). Pp. 209–217

2014
[49]

A logarithmic minimization property of the unitary polar factor in the spectral and Frobenius norms

P. Neff, Y. Nakatsukasa, and A. Fischle. “A logarithmic minimization property of the unitary polar factor in the spectral and Frobenius norms”.SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications35.3 (2014). Pp. 1132–1154

2014
[50]

Some matrix inequalities and metrization of matrix space

J. von Neumann. “Some matrix inequalities and metrization of matrix space”.Tomsk University Review1.11 (1937). Pp. 286–300

1937
[51]

A certain zero-sum two-person game equivalent to the optimal assignment problem

J. von Neumann. “A certain zero-sum two-person game equivalent to the optimal assignment problem”.Contributions to the Theory of Games2 (1953). Pp. 5–12

1953
[52]

Large deformation isotropic elasticity-on the correlation of theory and experiment for incompressible rubberlike solids

R. W. Ogden. “Large deformation isotropic elasticity-on the correlation of theory and experiment for incompressible rubberlike solids”.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Science326.1567 (1972). Pp. 565–584

1972
[53]

Inequalities associated with the inversion of elastic stress-deformation relations and their implications

R. W. Ogden. “Inequalities associated with the inversion of elastic stress-deformation relations and their implications”. Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society. Vol. 81. 02. Cambridge University Press. 1977, pp. 313–324

1977
[54]

R. W. Ogden.Non-Linear Elastic Deformations. Courier Corporation, 1997

1997
[55]

Das isotrope Elastizit¨ atsgesetz

H. Richter. “Das isotrope Elastizit¨ atsgesetz”.ZAMM-Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics/Zeitschrift f¨ ur Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik28.7-8 (1948). Pp. 205–209

1948
[56]

Zur Absch¨ atzung von Matrizennormen

H. Richter. “Zur Absch¨ atzung von Matrizennormen”.Mathematische Nachrichten18.1-6 (1958). Pp. 178–187

1958
[57]

Another simple proof of a theorem of Chandler Davis

I. Rivin. “Another simple proof of a theorem of Chandler Davis”.arXiv preprint,available at arXiv:math/0208223 (2002). 28

2002 arXiv
[58]

Golden–Thompson from Davis

I. Rivin. “Golden–Thompson from Davis”.arXiv preprint,available at arXiv:1010.2193 (2010)

2010 arXiv
[59]

Stress-deformation relations for isotropic materials

R. S. Rivlin and J. Ericksen. “Stress-deformation relations for isotropic materials”.Collected Papers of RS Rivlin. Springer, 1997, pp. 911–1013

1997
[60]

The convexity ofCtoh(detC)

M. Silhavy. “The convexity ofCtoh(detC)”.Technische Mechanik35.1 (2015). Pp. 60–61

2015
[61]

Silhavy.The Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Continuous Media

M. Silhavy.The Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Continuous Media. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

2013
[62]

A note on the convexity of C7→h(detC)

S. J. Spector. “A note on the convexity of C7→h(detC)”.Journal of Elasticity118.2 (2015). Pp. 251–256

2015
[63]

An inequality for the trace of the product of two symmetric matrices

C. M. Theobald. “An inequality for the trace of the product of two symmetric matrices”.Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society. Vol. 77. 02. 1975, pp. 265–267

1975
[64]

Do we need Truesdell’s empirical inequalities? On the coaxiality of stress and stretch

C. Thiel, J. Voss, R. J. Martin, and P. Neff. “Do we need Truesdell’s empirical inequalities? On the coaxiality of stress and stretch”.International Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics(2019). available at arXiv:1812.03053

2019 arXiv
[65]

Inequality with applications in statistical mechanics

C. J. Thompson. “Inequality with applications in statistical mechanics”.Journal of Mathematical Physics6.11 (1965). Pp. 1812–1813

1965
[66]

Inequalities sufficient to ensure semi-invertibility of isotropic functions

C. Truesdell and H. Moon. “Inequalities sufficient to ensure semi-invertibility of isotropic functions”.Journal of Elasticity5.34 (1975)

1975
[67]

Wang and C

C.-C. Wang and C. Truesdell.Introduction to Rational Elasticity. Vol. 1. Springer Science & Business Media, 1973

1973
[68]

Davis’ convexity theorem and extremal ellipsoids

M. J. Weber and H.-P. Schr¨ ocker. “Davis’ convexity theorem and extremal ellipsoids”.Contributions to Algebra and Geometry51.1 (2010). Pp. 263–274

2010
[69]

In search of constitutive conditions in isotropic hyperelasticity: polycon- vexity versus true-stress-true-strain monotonicity

M. P. Wollner, G. A. Holzapfel, and P. Neff. “In search of constitutive conditions in isotropic hyperelasticity: polycon- vexity versus true-stress-true-strain monotonicity”.Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids(2025). P. 106465

2025
[70]

Concurrent enforcement of polyconvexity and true- stress-true-strain monotonicity in incompressible isotropic hyperelasticity: application to neural network constitutive models

M. P. Wollner, D. K. Klein, H. Baaser, G. A. Holzapfel, and P. Neff. “Concurrent enforcement of polyconvexity and true- stress-true-strain monotonicity in incompressible isotropic hyperelasticity: application to neural network constitutive models”.to appear in Journal of the M...

2026 arXiv
[71]

We can compute a simple 15Here, the tensorsεand εare representatives of some nonlinear strain tensors, i.e.ε= logVorε=V−1

as well Theobald [60] or Richter [53] 16, but does not hold for the general case. We can compute a simple 15Here, the tensorsεand εare representatives of some nonlinear strain tensors, i.e.ε= logVorε=V−1. 16Hill does not refer to anyone but just indicates that these inequaliti...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Large isotropic elastic deformations: on a comprehensive model to correlate the theory and experiments for incompressible rubber-like materials

A. Anssari-Benam. “Large isotropic elastic deformations: on a comprehensive model to correlate the theory and experiments for incompressible rubber-like materials”.Journal of Elasticity153.2 (2023). Pp. 219–244

work page 2023

[2] [2]

S. S. Antman.Nonlinear Problems of Elasticity. 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 2005

work page 2005

[3] [3]

Lemma 3.4.Letf= (f 1,...,f n):M⊂R n →R n be symmetric

(3.10) and we can define the vector functionbσ:R 3→R 3 as bσi(d1,d 2,d 3) =α 0(d1,d 2,d 3) +α 1(d1,d 2,d 3)di +α 2(d1,d 2,d 3)d2 i .(3.11) The functionbσis symmetric in terms of Definition 2.4 because for each permutationπ:{1,2,3}→{1,2,3} bσi(dπ(1),dπ(2),dπ(3)) =α 0(dπ(1),dπ(2),dπ(3)) +α 1(dπ(1),dπ(2),dπ(3))dπ(i) +α 2(dπ(1),dπ(2),dπ(3))d2 π(i) =α 0(d1,d 2...

work page

[4] [4]

Of course, stress tensors can be defined which are not conjugate to any strain measure in the present sense. One such is Cauchy stress for a compressible solid,

= (ε2,ε 1,ε 3), we get 2(σ2−σ 1)(ε2−ε 1)≥0.(3.33) Thereforeσ i andε i are ordered in the same way. By construction in (3.29),ε i andeεi are already sorted in the same algebraic order, therefore (3.31) holds. Finally we get W(ε)−W(ε) =g( εi)−g(ε i) =g(eεi)−g(ε i) ≥ nX i=1 ∂εig(εi)(eεi−εi) = nX i=1 ∂εig(εi)eεi−⟨DW(ε),ε⟩(3.34) ≥⟨DW(ε), ε⟩−⟨DW(ε),ε⟩=⟨DW(ε), ε...

work page

[5] [5]

Convexity conditions and existence theorems in nonlinear elasticity

J. M. Ball. “Convexity conditions and existence theorems in nonlinear elasticity”.Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis63.4 (1976). Pp. 337–403

work page 1976

[6] [6]

Hyperelastic stability landscape: A check for Hill stability of isotropic, incompressible hyperelasticity depending on material parameters

H. Baaser. “Hyperelastic stability landscape: A check for Hill stability of isotropic, incompressible hyperelasticity depending on material parameters”.Journal of Elasticity158.1 (2026). P. 8

work page 2026

[7] [7]

Inequalities restricting the form of the stress-deformation relations for isotropic elastic solids and Reiner-Rivlin fluids

M. Baker and J. Ericksen. “Inequalities restricting the form of the stress-deformation relations for isotropic elastic solids and Reiner-Rivlin fluids”.Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences44.2 (1954). Pp. 33–35

work page 1954

[8] [8]

Three observations on linear algebra

G. Birkhoff. “Three observations on linear algebra”.Universidad Nacional de Tucum´ an Revista Serie A5 (1946). Pp. 147–151

work page 1946