Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 36 references

Numerical analysis and coarsening dynamics of the Active Cahn-Hilliard equation

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that in the active Cahn–Hilliard model, activity and interface curvature together renormalize surface tension, so coarsening crosses over from $L(t)\sim t^{1/3}$ to $L(t)\sim t^{1/4}$ and then saturates at a finite…

desk verdict Rigorous FE analysis plus a formal, unproven coarsening theory—worth refereeing, but the saturation prediction is not confirmed by the numerics. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.07450 v1 pith:NQWSMYSZ submitted 2026-08-07 math.NA cs.NAmath.AP

Abramo Agosti , Andrea Giorgini This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.NAcs.NAmath.AP MSC 35K5535K3565M6035B40
keywords activeCahn–HilliardequationModelBphaseseparationcoarseningdynamicsLifshitz–Slyozovgrowthheteroclinictrajectoriessurfacetensionfiniteelementmethod
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 studies the active Cahn–Hilliard equation (active Model B), a diffuse-interface model for motility-induced phase separation, and argues that activity changes coarsening qualitatively. Using phase-plane heteroclinic trajectories instead of the earlier Newton-mapping construction, it recovers exact static-kink and spherical-droplet quantities and derives how activity plus local interface curvature renormalize surface tension. The central prediction is a crossover in domain growth $L(t)\sim t^{1/z}$ from the passive Lifshitz–Slyozov value $z=3$ to $z=4$, followed by saturation at a finite length controlled by $1/\lambda$. The paper also constructs a lowest-order finite element scheme, proves local-in-time existence and uniqueness of weak solutions in dimensions $d=2,3$ and global well-posedness in $d=1$ under a smallness condition on activity, and reports two-dimensional simulations showing the $z=3\to 4$ crossover before saturation.

What carries the argument

The central object is the phase-plane heteroclinic trajectory: static planar kinks and large spherical droplets are viewed as orbits connecting saddle equilibria in the $(\phi,\chi)$ plane, and the orbit is sought as a polynomial in $(\phi-\phi_a)(\phi-\phi_c)$ at each order in the small parameters $\lambda$ and $\xi=(d-1)/R$. Imposing polynomial identity in the first-order ODE system yields exact coefficients, including $\mu_{s,1}=4/15$ and $\xi=\sqrt{8}|\lambda|/5$, and, at second order, explicit corrections to the surface tension $\sigma$ and the interfacial moment $\beta$ that enter the interface balance. This machinery converts activity and curvature into the modified coefficients of the droplet-radius ODE, from which the growth-law crossover and the saturation length follow.

What would settle it

For a concrete check, compute the static spherical droplet solution of the active Cahn–Hilliard equation numerically to high precision at $\lambda=1$, where the paper's Table 1 predicts a saturation radius $\bar R\approx 95.24$, and compare the interface curvature $\xi=2/R$ with $\sqrt{8}|\lambda|/5$; a significant deviation would indicate that the polynomial heteroclinic ansatz is incomplete. Alternatively, simulate two-dimensional coarsening for $\lambda=1$ well beyond the time at which the solution of the droplet-radius ODE reaches its plateau and test whether $L(t)$ continues growing as $t^{1/4}$ instead of levelling off near the predicted saturation value.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the active term $\lambda|\nabla\phi|^2$ modifies the effective surface tension both through a constant activity-induced shift and through a curvature-dependent correction, so the usual Ostwald-ripening balance is altered. When the shrinking-droplet ODE for the typical droplet radius $R_0(t)$ is derived to second order in $\lambda$ and $1/R$, the metastable radius $\bar R(t)$, instead of diverging as supersaturation vanishes, approaches a finite positive value: coarsening crosses from $R_0\sim t^{1/3}$ to $R_0\sim t^{1/4}$ and then plateaus. This is offered as an explanation of the power-law crossover conjectured in the literature and as evidence that active Model B saturates at a finite domain size, unlike passive Model B, whose domains grow without bound. The same phase-plane method also fixes the static kink chemical potential $\mu_{s,1}=4/15$ and the spherical-droplet curvature $\xi=\sqrt{8}\,|\lambda|/5$, previously obtained only approximately by Newton mapping.

Load-bearing premise

The coarsening derivation assumes that the static spherical droplet profile can be represented as a polynomial heteroclinic orbit in $(\phi-\phi_a)(\phi-\phi_c)$ at each order in $\lambda$ and $1/R$, with the droplet radius large compared with the interface width; if the true heteroclinic orbit is not of that polynomial form, the derived surface-tension corrections and the predicted saturation length do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is correct, active Model B does not follow passive Lifshitz–Slyozov growth indefinitely: the characteristic domain size stops growing at a finite length set by the activity parameter.
  • The observed $z=4$ growth is a finite-time transient, not the true asymptotic law; simulations that see $L(t)\sim t^{1/4}$ are consistent with the system approaching a plateau rather than growing forever.
  • The static-kink chemical potential $\mu_{s,1}=4/15$ and the droplet curvature $\xi=\sqrt{8}|\lambda|/5$ provide exact reference values that earlier Newton-mapping treatments had only approximated numerically.
  • In the singular-potential case, the finite element analysis proves that discrete solutions remain in $(-1,1)$, giving local-in-time weak solutions in $d=2,3$ and global-in-time solutions in $d=1$ under small activity, which supports reliable late-time simulations.
  • Regular and singular potentials are shown numerically to produce qualitatively identical phase-separation dynamics, so polynomial-potential simulations are indicative of the behavior with the physically motivated Flory–Huggins potential.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension: if saturation is real, the final domain size for fixed $\lambda$ should be independent of the initial supersaturation and scale roughly as $\lambda^{-1}$; measuring $L(\infty)$ for several $\lambda$ values would separate genuine saturation from extremely slow growth.
  • The polynomial heteroclinic ansatz is stated perturbatively, so the exact static droplet solution at finite $\lambda$ may be transcendental; a rigorous existence proof for that droplet would be needed to make the predicted saturation length quantitative beyond leading order.
  • The same second-order surface-tension machinery could be applied to active Model B+ or to droplets in other geometries, yielding analogous saturation lengths and providing a template for curvature-aware coarsening theories in other non-equilibrium phase-separating systems.
  • The numerical observation that the crossover time decreases with $\lambda$ suggests a possible scaling collapse of $L(t)/L_{\mathrm{sat}}$ against $t\lambda^\alpha$, though the paper does not propose such a collapse.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the active Cahn–Hilliard equation (active Model B), Eq. (1.1), with regular and singular double-well potentials. In Section 2 the authors introduce a phase-plane method based on assumed polynomial heteroclinic trajectories to derive static kink and droplet properties, obtaining μ_{s,1}=4/15, the droplet curvature parameter ξ=√(8/5)|λ|, and an ODE (2.36) for the characteristic droplet radius. From this ODE they predict a crossover in domain growth from L(t)∼t^{1/3} to L(t)∼t^{1/4}, followed by finite-time saturation of the domain length, with numerical evidence reported in Section 5.3. Sections 3–4 contain formal a-priori estimates, a finite element scheme, stability and convergence analysis, and, for the singular potential, local-in-time existence and uniqueness in d=2,3 and global well-posedness in d=1 under a smallness condition on λ. The central coarsening claim, however, rests on a formal polynomial heteroclinic ansatz and on a quasi-static R≫1 reduction, and the only direct numerical confirmation is performed at λ=2, where the asymptotic assumptions are not satisfied.

Significance. If the coarsening prediction is correct, it would resolve an open debate in the active matter literature: active Model B would exhibit a qualitatively different late-time behavior from passive Model B, with the characteristic domain size saturating at a finite length instead of following Lifshitz–Slyozov growth indefinitely. The rigorous parts of the paper are substantial: the finite element analysis in Sections 3–4, including the discrete Gagliardo–Nirenberg inequality of Lemma 4.4, the discrete Bihari-type inequality of Lemma 4.5, the existence and uniqueness result of Theorem 4.10, and the global one-dimensional well-posedness of Theorem 3.2 are careful and valuable contributions. The significance of the paper as a whole, however, is conditional on the coarsening theory, which is currently formal and validated only in a parameter regime where its own assumptions fail.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.1–2.3, Eqs. (2.11), (2.20), (A.1)] The central derivation assumes, without proof, that the heteroclinic trajectory connecting the two saddle points exists and, at every perturbative order, has the polynomial form (2.11), (2.20), or (A.1). All subsequent quantities—μ_{s,1}=4/15, ξ=√(8/5)|λ|, the surface-tension integrals σ and β, and the droplet-radius ODE (2.36)—are obtained by inserting this ansatz and applying polynomial identity. No argument establishes that the true heteroclinic structure is polynomial, and no error estimate controls the truncation at order O(λ², ξ², λξ). If the true heteroclinic differs from the ansatz, the predicted crossover and saturation could disappear or occur at a different length scale. I ask the authors either to provide a proof of the polynomial form, or to verify the derived coefficients by direct numerical solution of the ODEs (2.7) and (2.24) in the phase plane, or to present an explicit error bound showing the neglected terms cannot change the root structure of Eq. (2.36).
  2. [Section 2.3, Eqs. (2.24), (2.36); Table 1] The quasi-static droplet picture relies on R≫1: the factor 1/r is approximated by ξ=2/R, the profile is written as f(r−R), and the interface boundary conditions are imposed at ±∞. However, the numerical confirmation in Section 5.3 and Table 1 is performed only at λ=2, where the predicted saturation radius is Rbar≈3.65. At this value ξ=2/R≈0.55 and λ=2 are both O(1), so the expansion parameters are not small in exactly the regime used for validation. The paper itself states that saturation for λ<2 is too computationally demanding to simulate. Consequently, the numerical evidence does not test the asymptotic expansion in any controlled regime. Please provide evidence for small λ, or a direct numerical test of the full droplet ODE without the R≫1 reduction, or a quantitative estimate of the neglected O(λ³, λ²ξ, λξ²) terms.
  3. [Section 5.3, Figure 5] The saturation of L(t) is inferred from an ensemble of 20 runs in a 256² domain at λ=2, but no confidence intervals or ensemble spread are shown, and the saturation radius Rbar≈3.65 is of the same order as the interface width. In this regime the measured L(t) may be affected by finite-size effects, by the small number of droplets of size comparable to the interface thickness, or by the resolution of the structure-factor computation. The claim that the plateau is the saturation predicted by Eq. (2.36) would be much stronger if the time window were extended, if smaller λ values were accessed, or if the same plateau were observed for different domain sizes with convergence in the numerical parameters.
  4. [Section 2.3, Remark 2.1] Remark 2.1 admits that including the O(λ³) term changes the coefficient ξ0 and hence the values in Table 1, but asserts without proof that the qualitative behavior is unchanged. Since Eq. (2.36) is only a second-order expansion in (λ, ξ), there is no remainder estimate showing that higher-order terms cannot remove the positive root Rbar or move it to a completely different scale. This is load-bearing because the finite-time crossover and the saturation plateau are both read off from the root structure of this truncated ODE. Please provide either a rigorous remainder bound or a numerical check that the root Rbar is stable when additional terms are included.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Figure 3 vs. Section 5.1] The caption of Figure 3 lists parameter values λ=0,1,2 while the text in Section 5.1 says λ ranges over {0,0.1,1,2}; please clarify which values are actually shown and label the rows consistently.
  2. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors: 'Lifshit-Slyozov' in the Introduction should be 'Lifshitz–Slyozov', 'spyral' in Section 2.2 should be 'spiral', 'tat' in Section 3.2 should be 'that', and 'Bihary' in Section 4.1 should be 'Bihari'.
  3. [Section 5.2] The singular potential is regularized with α=0.001, but no sensitivity study with respect to α is reported; a sentence justifying this choice or showing robustness in α would be useful.
  4. [Abstract and Introduction] The abstract states that the method 'recovers the exact values of key quantities' and that the power-law shift is 'explained'; given the formal nature of the heteroclinic ansatz, the wording should be softened to indicate that the values are obtained within the assumed polynomial ansatz.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the coarsening predictions are derived algebraically from the stated model ODEs, and the confirming numerics are independent simulations rather than fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central chain (Sections 2.1–2.3 and Appendix A) solves the static kink and static droplet ODEs by imposing an explicit heteroclinic ansatz, e.g. Eq. (2.11), and applying polynomial identity. The coefficients μ_{s,1}=4/15, ξ=√8/5|λ|, the surface-tension integrals σ and β, and the droplet ODE (2.36) are all computed from the model equations rather than fitted to the numerical data. The polynomial ansatz is presented as an assumption, not imported from a prior work by citation, so this is not an ansatz-smuggling or self-citation-loaded step. The agreement with the earlier Newton-mapping value μ_{s,1}=4/15 from [36] is used as an independent check, not as the source of the result. The coarsening crossover and saturation emerge from the algebraic structure of (2.36), whose terms have fixed signs and magnitudes in the regime considered, rather than from parameters calibrated to the simulations. The numerical support in Section 5.3 is an ensemble simulation of the same active Cahn–Hilliard PDE, and while the R>>1 assumption is indeed questionable for λ=2 (where Table 1 gives Rbar≈3.65), that is a correctness/validity risk, not circularity. The only self-citations are minor and non-load-bearing: [1] is used only as a reference for computing the domain length scale from the structure factor, and the related context from [10,34] is not the basis of the derivation. No step reduces by definition or by construction to its own input.

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

No free parameters are fitted to simulation data; lambda, theta, theta_0 are model inputs from prior literature. The cost is instead in structural assumptions: the polynomial heteroclinic ansatz and the quasi-static droplet reduction, which are not proven and which control the coarsening prediction.

assumptions (6)
  • ad hoc to paper A static kink and droplet heteroclinic trajectory exists and, at order O(lambda^N), has the polynomial form (2.11), (2.20), (A.1).
    No existence proof is given; the coefficients are solved by polynomial identity, so the recovered values and the growth-law ODE depend on this ansatz.
  • domain assumption The droplet radius is much larger than the interface width, R>>1, so 1/r is nearly constant through the interface and the droplet profile is f(r-R).
    Stated before Eq. (2.24); used to reduce the radial equation to a one-dimensional heteroclinic problem. It is violated for lambda=2 in Table 1, where the saturation radius is about 3.65 interface widths.
  • ad hoc to paper The chemical potential of a static droplet is mu = mu_s(lambda) + rho max(1/R, 1/r), and the singularity at the origin is disregarded.
    The paper acknowledges the singularity issue and argues the factor 1/r is nearly constant across the interface; this is an approximation, not a consequence of the model.
  • domain assumption The bulk phases outside the interface are described by the supersaturated values (2.29), with small epsilon(t), and the chemical potential solves the Laplace equation in each bulk region.
    This is the standard Lifshitz-Slyozov quasi-static closure imported from [6,27]; the paper assumes it applies to active Model B without deriving it from (1.1).
  • standard math Standard analytic background: Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequalities, elliptic regularity on convex polygonal/polyhedral domains, Bihari and Gronwall inequalities, maximal monotone operator theory, finite element inverse estimates and interpolation properties.
    These tools are used throughout Sections 3 and 4 and are accepted background results.
  • domain assumption Initial data and parameters satisfy (IC), (ICR), 0<theta<theta_0, and the numerical restrictions Delta t < lambda^{-4} F(h)^2 and smallness conditions on lambda in Theorems 3.2, 4.6 and 4.8.
    The rigorous statements hold under these hypotheses; outside them the existence, stability and convergence results are not asserted.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Numerical analysis and coarsening dynamics of the Active Cahn-Hilliard equation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NQWSMYSZ

@misc{pith2026260807450,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Numerical analysis and coarsening dynamics of the Active Cahn-Hilliard equation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NQWSMYSZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.07450}
}
abstract

We investigate the analysis and phase ordering dynamics of the active Cahn--Hilliard equation, providing novel results beyond the current state of the art concerning the well-posedness and the characterization of its coarsening dynamics. We consider both regular polynomial and singular logarithmic potentials. In particular, we exploit a new method based on heteroclinic trajectories in the phase plane to characterize static kink profiles and spherical droplet states, recovering the exact values of key quantities related to static phase-separated configurations; moreover, we develop a theory accounting for surface tension modifications driven by activity and local interface curvature, which explains the power-law shift $L(t)\sim t^{\frac{1}{z}}$ from $z=3$ to $z=4$ induced by activity for the characteristic domain length conjectured in the literature. This shows that there is a transitory effect before the attainment of a finite saturation length. We also design an efficient numerical scheme, based on finite elements, to approximate the model, proving its well-posedness and stability both for regular and singular potentials. In dimensions $d=2,3$ with singular potential, the convergence analysis of the finite element approximation proves the local-in-time existence and uniqueness of weak solutions satisfying the physical constraint $\phi \in (-1, 1)$. In dimension $d=1$ with singular potential, we establish global-in-time well-posedness and regularity of weak solutions under a smallness condition on the activity parameter. Finally, we show numerical simulations for different test cases which prove that our numerical algorithm correctly reproduces the expected phase separation dynamics. Moreover, we show the results for coarsening dynamics at late times which present a power law shift from $z=3$ to $z=4$ prior to reaching late-time length saturation, which confirms our theoretical findings.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Agosti, P .F

    A. Agosti, P .F. Antonietti, P . Ciarletta, M. Grasselli, M. V erani, A Cahn–Hilliard-type equation with application to tumor growth dynamics, Math. Meth. Appl. Sci. 40 (2017), 7598–7626

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    V . Barbu, Nonlinear semigroups and differential equations in Banach spaces , Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste Romˆania, Bucharest; Noordhoff International Publishing, Leiden., 1976, . ACTIVE CAHN-HILLIARD EQUA TION 57

    work page 1976

  3. [3]

    J. W. Barrett, J. F. Blowey and H. Garcke, Finite element approximation of the Cahn–Hilliard equation with degenerate mobility, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 37 (1999), 286–318

    work page 1999

  4. [4]

    J. W. Barrett, R. N ¨urnberg, and V . Styles, Finite element approximation of a phase field model for void electromigration, SIAM J. Num. Anal. 42(2) (2004), 738–772

    work page 2004

  5. [5]

    Bihari, A generalisation of a lemma of Bellman and its application to uniqueness problems of differential equations, Math

    I. Bihari, A generalisation of a lemma of Bellman and its application to uniqueness problems of differential equations, Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar. 7 (1956), 81–94

    work page 1956

  6. [6]

    Bray, Theory of phase ordering kinetics, Adv

    A.J. Bray, Theory of phase ordering kinetics, Adv. Phys. 43 (1994), 357–459

    work page 1994

  7. [7]

    S. C. Brenner and L. R. Scott, The Mathematical Theory of Finite Element Methods , Springer-V erlag, New Y ork, 2008

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    Brezis, Functional Analysis, Sobolev Spaces and partial Differential Equations , Springer-V erlag, New Y ork, 2010

    H. Brezis, Functional Analysis, Sobolev Spaces and partial Differential Equations , Springer-V erlag, New Y ork, 2010

    work page 2010

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    Brezis and P

    H. Brezis and P . Mironescu, Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequalities and non-inequalities: the full story, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar ´e - Anal. Non Lin ´eaire 35 (2018), 1355–1376

    2018

  2. [10]

    Burekovi ´c, F

    S. Burekovi ´c, F. De Luca, M. E. Cates, C. Nardini, Active Cahn–Hilliard theory for non-equilibrium phase separation: quantitative macroscopic predictions and a microscopic derivation, arXiv:2601.16539 (2026)

    2026 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Cahn, J.E

    J.W. Cahn, J.E. Hilliard, Free energy of a nonuniform system. I. Interfacial free energy, J. Chem. Phys. 28 (1958), 258–267

    1958

  4. [12]

    Cahn, J.E

    J.W. Cahn, J.E. Hilliard, Spinodal decomposition: a reprise, Acta Metallurgica 19 (1971), 151–161

    1971

  5. [13]

    Calgaro, C

    C. Calgaro, C. Cance‘s, E. Creus ´e, Discrete Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality and application to the finite volume approxi- mation of a convectiondiffusion equation with a Joule effect term, IMA J. Numer. Anal. 44 (2024), 2394–2436

    2024

  6. [14]

    Cialvaldini, Analyse Numerique d’un Probleme de Stefan a Deux Phases Par une Methode d’Elements Finis, SIAM J

    J.F. Cialvaldini, Analyse Numerique d’un Probleme de Stefan a Deux Phases Par une Methode d’Elements Finis, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 123 (1975), 464–487

    1975

  7. [15]

    Cates, E

    M.E. Cates, E. Tjhung, Theories of binary fluid mixtures: from phase-separation kinetics to active emulsions, J. Fluid Mech. 836 (2018), P1

    2018

  8. [16]

    Copetti, C

    M.I.M. Copetti, C. Elliott, Numerical analysis of the Cahn–Hilliard equation with a logarithmic free energy , Numer. Math. 63 (1992), 39-65

    1992

  9. [17]

    Dauge, Neumann and mixed problems on curvilinear polyhedra , ntegr

    M. Dauge, Neumann and mixed problems on curvilinear polyhedra , ntegr. equ. oper. theory 15 (1992), 227–261

    1992

  10. [18]

    Elliott, The Cahn-Hilliard model for the kinetics of phase separation, Mathematical models for phase change problems ( ´Obidos, 1988), 35–73, Internat

    C.M. Elliott, The Cahn-Hilliard model for the kinetics of phase separation, Mathematical models for phase change problems ( ´Obidos, 1988), 35–73, Internat. Ser. Numer. Math. 88, Birkh ¨auser, Basel, 1989

    1988

  11. [19]

    Gilardi, A

    G. Gilardi, A. Miranville, G., Schimperna, On the CahnHilliard equation with irregular potentials and dynamic boundary conditions, Commun. Pure Appl. Anal. 8 (2009), 881–912

    2009

  12. [20]

    Grisvard,Elliptic Problems in Non Smooth Domains , Monogr

    P . Grisvard,Elliptic Problems in Non Smooth Domains , Monogr. Stud. Math., vol. 24, Pitman, 1985,

    1985

  13. [21]

    I: Cellular Physiology, Springer New York, NY, ISSN 0939-6047, 2010

    Keener, J., Sneyd, J., Mathematical Physiology. I: Cellular Physiology, Springer New York, NY, ISSN 0939-6047, 2010

    2010

  14. [22]

    Leoni, A First Course in Sobolev Spaces: Second Edition

    G. Leoni, A First Course in Sobolev Spaces: Second Edition. Graduate Studies in Mathematics. 181 , American Mathemat- ical Society, 2017,

    2017

  15. [23]

    Y . Liu, W. Chen, C. Wang, S. M. Wise, Error analysis of a mixed finite element method for a Cahn–Hilliard–Hele–Shaw system, Numer. Math. 135 (2017), 679–709

    2017

  16. [24]

    I. M. Lifshitz, V . V . Slyozov, The kinetics of precipitation from supersaturated solid solutions, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 19(1–2)(1961), 35–50

    1961

  17. [25]

    Miranville, S

    A. Miranville, S. Zelik, Robust exponential attractors for Cahn-Hilliard type equations with singular potentials, Math. Methods. Appl. Sci. 27 (2004), 545–582

    2004

  18. [26]

    Miranville, The Cahn-Hilliard Equation: Recent Advances and Applications , CBMS-NSF Regional Conf

    A. Miranville, The Cahn-Hilliard Equation: Recent Advances and Applications , CBMS-NSF Regional Conf. Ser. in Appl. Math. 95, SIAM, Philadelphia, PA., 2019

    2019

  19. [27]

    Pattanayak, S

    S. Pattanayak, S. Mishra, S. Puri, Ordering kinetics in the active model B , Phys. Rev. E 104 (2021), 014606

    2021

  20. [28]

    Pattanayak, S

    S. Pattanayak, S. Mishra, S. Puri, Domain Growth in the Active Model B: Critical and Off-critical Composition , Soft Materials 19 (2021), 286–296

    2021

  21. [29]

    B. G. Pachpatte, Integral Inequalities of the Bihari type , Math. Inequal. Appl. 5 (649–6572002), 4

  22. [30]

    D. Kay, V . Styles and E. Suli, Discontinuous Galerkin Finite Element Approximation of the Cahn–Hilliard Equation with Convection, SIAM J. NUMER. ANAL. 47 (2660–26852009), 4. 58 ACTIVE CAHN-HILLIARD EQUA TION

  23. [31]

    Quarteroni and A

    A. Quarteroni and A. V alli, Numerical Approximation of Partial Differential Equations, Springer-V erlag, Berlin, 2008

    2008

  24. [32]

    Temam, Infinite-dimensional dynamical systems in mechanics and physics , Springer-V erlag, New Y ork, 1997

    R. Temam, Infinite-dimensional dynamical systems in mechanics and physics , Springer-V erlag, New Y ork, 1997

    1997

  25. [33]

    Temam, Convex Analysis and V ariational Problems, SIAM, 1999,

    R. Temam, Convex Analysis and V ariational Problems, SIAM, 1999,

    1999

  26. [34]

    Tjhung, C

    E. Tjhung, C. Nardini, M. E. Cates, Cluster phases and bubbly phase separation in active fluids: reversal of the Ostwald process, Phys. Rev. X 8 (2018), 031080

    2018

  27. [35]

    Tjhung, A

    E. Tjhung, A. Tiribocchi, D. Marenduzzo, M. E. Cates, A minimal physical model captures the shapes of crawling cells , Nat. Commun. 6 (2015), 5420

    2015

  28. [36]

    Wittkowski, A

    R. Wittkowski, A. Tiribocchi, J. Stenhammar, R. J. Allen, D. Marenduzzo, M. E. Cates, Scalar φ4 field theory for active- particle phase separation, Nat. Commun. 5 (2014), 4351

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.