Classification of positive entire solutions of the CR Yamabe equation on the Heisenberg group

Jungang Li

Classification of positive entire solutions of the CR Yamabe equation on the Heisenberg group

T0 review · 0 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Every positive entire CR Yamabe solution is a Jerison–Lee bubble.

desk verdict A serious, mostly sound proof of the unconditional CR Yamabe classification with genuinely new tools; the headline theorem is already claimed by Liu, so the value is the method, and the flagged Appendix C gap is not real. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10642 v1 pith:OZ6HAQSE submitted 2026-08-11 math.AP math.DG

Jungang Li This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.APmath.DG MSC 35J6132V2035B5335B33

keywords CRYamabeequationHeisenberggroupLiouvilletheoremJerison–LeebubblesGreenrepresentationMorreyestimatesdefectquantizationconformalinvariance

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

This paper proves an unconditional classification statement for the critical CR Yamabe equation on the Heisenberg group: for every n≥2, every positive smooth solution is one of the explicit Jerison–Lee bubbles, obtained from a fixed profile by left translation and dilation. No integrability, decay, boundedness, or symmetry is assumed at the outset, and finite energy is shown to be a conclusion rather than a hypothesis. Together with the previously known case n=1, this identifies the positive entire solutions in every dimension. The proof avoids moving-plane and Kelvin-transform arguments, which fail on the Heisenberg group, and instead builds two exact identities from the Green representation: a convex deficit measuring the distance from a bubble, and a nonlinear barycentre law that forbids that deficit from concentrating at a single point of the CR sphere.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the bubble family U_{a,λ}(ξ)=$λ^{{-n}}$U_0(δ_{$λ^{{-1}}$}($a^{{-1}}$ξ)), the convex deficit D_U(W)=∫$U^{{p+1}}$-∫U^p W=(1/(p-1))∫$U^{{p+1}}$R_p(W/U-1)≥0, and the nonlinear barycentre identity ∫X_α R_p(f)dV_S=0 for α=1,...,Q on the CR sphere. These two identities use only conformal covariance and an exact positive Green representation, and they replace the missing Euclidean reflection and Kelvin-transform machinery. The proof also relies on the critical all-centre Morrey bound ∫_{B_R(a)}u^p≤CR^n, the m=0 Jerison–Lee divergence identity, and an annular estimate that turns energy growth into defect growth.

What would settle it

Apply the integration by parts of Lemma C.1 to a smooth cutoff η satisfying (C.9) with φ=$η^{8}$ and compare the exponent of η multiplying |∂η|^2 in the resulting estimate with the exponent in (C.11); if the weights do not match, Proposition C.4 and the annular estimate (5.13) are not established, and the proof of Theorem 1.1 loses its engine.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the only positive entire $C^{2}$ solutions of 4Δ_b u = $n^{2}$ $u^{{(Q+2)/(Q-2)}}$ on the Heisenberg group H^n are the Jerison–Lee bubbles U_{a,λ}. The central discovery is that two exact consequences of the Green representation — reciprocity with a bubble, giving a nonnegative convex deficit, and differentiation of the same reciprocity along the conformal orbit, giving a barycentre identity — isolate the bubble manifold without any energy bound. A defect budget derived from the m=0 Jerison–Lee divergence identity is then quantized and alternated with the critical Morrey bound to drive the energy-growth exponent below the threshold at which the defect must vanish, and zero defect triggers a pointwise rigidity theorem that identifies the solution as a bubble.

Load-bearing premise

The entire result rests on a single imported identity — the m=0 Jerison–Lee divergence formula — and on the cutoff computation that turns it into the annular estimate; if that cutoff step is not valid as written, the bounded classification and therefore the main theorem do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For every n≥1, the positive entire solutions of (1.1) are exactly the Jerison–Lee bubbles U_{a,λ}; the n=1 case completes the classification.
Finite energy is a theorem, not an assumption: every positive entire solution automatically belongs to L^{p+1}(H^n).
The two exact identities yield a new isolation theorem: any uniform exact-Riesz/Morrey sequence that converges locally to a bubble is eventually bubbles, with no energy bound required, giving a compactness principle usable near blow-up points.
The defect budget gives a quantitative improvement rule: an all-centre growth D>2 for ∫_{B_R}W^{p+1} is replaced by nD/(n+2), and once D≤2 the Jerison–Lee defect vanishes, forcing the bubble.
The same reciprocity and barycentre identities have direct Euclidean analogues, applying to critical exponents with p≤2, i.e. Euclidean dimensions N≥6.

Reading between the lines

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

The two-identity mechanism should transfer to other conformally covariant equations with a positive Green kernel and a transitive conformal orbit; a natural test case is the Euclidean Yamabe equation in dimensions N≥6, where the critical exponent already satisfies p≤2.
Sequential bubble isolation without energy bounds suggests a CR analogue of the Riemannian Yamabe compactness theory, where sequences of solutions on compact pseudoconvex manifolds could be controlled at isolated concentration points without uniform energy assumptions.
The natural-scale defect quantum can be read as a quantitative stability statement: any non-bubble solution must deviate from the bubble manifold by at least a fixed amount in an appropriate sense, which may connect to sharp stability inequalities for the Folland–Stein Sobolev inequality.

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

Bottom line: this is a serious proof of the unconditional CR Yamabe classification, with a new method and no load-bearing gap I can find. The main caveat is that the theorem is not new as a result: Liu [30] has a moving-spheres proof of the same statement, and the paper acknowledges it. So the contribution is the method and the verification, not the classification itself.

What is actually new is the pair of exact identities: Green reciprocity with a bubble and the nonlinear barycentre law on the CR sphere. They make the sequential isolation theorem work without any energy bound, and the defect-budget alternation that follows is a genuinely different route from the Euclidean moving-plane arguments. I read Section 4 closely; the modulation via the implicit function theorem, the L1 convergence, the concentration of the normalized defect at the missing point, and the contradiction from the barycentre identity all hold together. The paper's claim that there is no circularity is accurate: Theorem 1.3 is proved before any defect estimates are introduced.

The reader's Appendix C concern does not survive a direct check. With φ=η^8 in Lemma C.1, φ^{-1}|∂φ|^2 = 64η^6|∂η|^2, so there is no η^{-2} singularity and the η^6 weight in (C.11) is exactly what the cutoff produces. The absorbing of the ρR^2I term in (C.13) is legitimate, and I do not see a missing factor. The heavier algebraic input is the pointwise m=0 divergence identity taken from Jerison-Lee [24, Prop 4.1]; it is quoted rather than re-derived, which is standard but means the annular estimate rests on a nontrivial external computation. I did not find an error in how it is translated and used.

Two soft spots are worth noting. First, the framing for the referee should make clear that if Liu's preprint is correct, the headline theorem is already in the literature; the new part is the independent proof and the intermediate tools. Second, the proof is long and the cutoff estimates in C.2-C.3 are exactly the kind of detail where sign errors hide; a referee should be asked to check them line by line.

This paper deserves a serious referee. The new machinery is likely to be useful beyond the classification, for example in compactness questions near blow-up points. I would cite it.

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proves that for every n≥2 every positive C^2 solution of the critical CR Yamabe equation 4Δ_b u = n^2 u^{(Q+2)/(Q-2)} on the Heisenberg group H^n is a Jerison–Lee bubble, with no a priori L^{p+1}, decay, boundedness, or symmetry assumption. The proof first establishes an exact Green–Riesz representation and a critical Morrey bound for all positive solutions. Green reciprocity with a bubble produces a nonnegative convex deficit; differentiating reciprocity along the conformal orbit gives a nonlinear barycentre identity on the CR sphere. These ingredients yield the sequential bubble-isolation theorem (Theorem 1.3). For bounded solutions, the m=0 Jerison–Lee divergence identity, localized by a cutoff (Appendix C), gives an annular estimate linking the defect integral to the energy; a discrete Riccati lemma converts energy growth into defect growth, and a height-layer packing argument with a uniform defect quantum closes the loop. Iteration drives the energy-growth exponent below 2, forcing the defect to vanish, and the zero-defect rigidity theorem identifies the solution as a bubble. Unbounded entire solutions are excluded by a Poláčik–Quittner–Souplet doubling argument that reduces to the bounded case and sequential isolation. Together with the known H^1 theorem, this classifies all dimensions.

Significance. If correct, this is a major result: it removes finite energy and all growth assumptions for n≥2, settles the unconditional classification in the Heisenberg setting, and shows that L^{p+1} integrability is a consequence rather than a hypothesis. The proof is methodologically novel, combining exact Green reciprocity with a nonlinear barycentre law to isolate the bubble manifold without energy control, and then using defect quantization to bootstrap to rigidity. The paper is unusually explicit about logical dependencies: the two external algebraic inputs are localized (the Jerison–Lee divergence identity and Bedford's characterization of CR-pluriharmonic functions), and Appendix C supplies the full cutoff argument. I checked the contested step in Proposition C.4: applying Lemma C.1 with φ=η^8 gives φ^{-1}|∂φ|^2 = 64 η^6 |∂η|^2, so the η^6 weight in (C.11) is correct; the reader's worry about an η^{-2} singularity does not materialize. I found no load-bearing error or circularity in the central argument.

minor comments (5)

[Appendix C, Eq. (C.13)] The displayed constant in front of the R^{-4} term appears to be a typing slip: with φ=η^6, σ=1/3 and ε=ρR^2, the term ε^{-2}φ^{1-2σ} equals ρ^{-2}R^{-4}η^2, so the coefficient should be C(1+ρ^{-2}) or Cρ^{-2} rather than Cρ. This does not affect the absorption argument, since only the coefficient of the I^2 term matters for choosing ρ small, and the corrected constant merely enlarges the final constant in (C.10).
[Cross-references] Please harmonize the internal references: Section 5.3 refers to 'Theorem C.4' while Appendix C states Proposition C.4; Section 7.1 refers to 'Theorem 5.4' for Lemma 5.4; Section 4.3 refers to 'Theorem 4.3' and Corollary 4.6 refers to 'Theorem 4.5' for Lemmas 4.3 and 4.5.
[Section 7, proof of Corollary 1.2] The proof following Theorem 7.4 is headed 'Proof of Theorem 1.2', but the statement it proves is Corollary 1.2.
[Proposition 6.5] The dyadic partition of the range of W^{-1/n} should explicitly include negative dyadic powers μ<1; as written, the phrase 'dyadic values' could be read as μ≥1 only. The geometric convergence of the first sum as μ→0 makes this harmless, but a clarifying sentence would help.
[Lemma 4.3] The quantitative implicit function theorem is invoked in one sentence to obtain the modulation parameters v_j. Since this is the only point where the orthogonality normalization is constructed, a brief statement of the required C^1 dependence of Φ on v for F∈L^1 would make the step easier to verify.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the proof is self-contained, uses no fitted parameters, and its cited external inputs are genuine, standard results not authored by the present author.

full rationale

The derivation chain is logically sequential and non-circular. Section 3 derives the exact Green-Riesz representation and the all-centre critical Morrey bound directly from positivity and the fundamental solution, with no decay or integrability hypothesis. Section 4 proves the sequential isolation theorem using only Green reciprocity, the convex deficit, and the barycentre identity; the proof does not invoke any later defect or annular estimate. Sections 5-7 then use Theorem 1.3 to obtain the defect quantum and energy improvement, and the paper explicitly records this order in Section 1.6: 'The logical order is strictly Section 3 → Section 4 → Section 6 → Section 7' and 'In Theorem 6.2 the limiting profile is identified as a bubble by the pointwise rigidity of Theorem A.1, not by the bounded classification of Theorem 7.4. There is therefore no circularity in the alternation of the two budgets.' No parameter is fitted to data and then renamed as a prediction; no quantity that the theorem seeks to classify is inserted into the hypotheses. The external algebraic inputs are the Jerison-Lee divergence identity from [24, Proposition 4.1] and standard CR-pluriharmonic characterization [3, 26]; these are cited as independent mathematical facts, are not authored by the present author, and are used as lemmas rather than as substitutes for the conclusion. The zero-defect rigidity in Appendix A is proved locally and does not presuppose the target classification. Although the reader's weakest-assumption note flags a possible gap in the Appendix C cutoff estimate, that is a correctness concern about a stated estimate, not a circularity: even if the cutoff step needed repair, the argument would not be reducing its conclusion to its hypothesis. The claimed Appendix C issue is also not present in the form stated, since applying Lemma C.1 with phi = eta^8 produces the weight eta^6 in (C.11). Overall, the central claim is derived from independent identities and external rigidity facts, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The proof introduces no fitted constants or ad hoc parameters and no new physical or geometric entities. It relies on standard axioms of subelliptic PDE and on two algebraic inputs from prior literature: the Jerison-Lee divergence identity and the CR-pluriharmonic characterization. The exact Green representation is derived in Section 3, not assumed.

assumptions (7)

standard math Every nonnegative L-harmonic function on H^n is constant.
Used in Theorem 3.1 to eliminate the harmonic remainder in the Green-Riesz representation; cited to [5].
standard math The killed heat kernels of the sub-Laplacian increase to the full heat kernel, hence the Friedrichs Dirichlet Green kernels increase to Γ_H.
Used in Theorem 3.1 to pass from exhaustions to the exact Green representation; cited to [6].
domain assumption The m=0 Jerison-Lee divergence identity, formula (4.2) of [24], is valid and, when translated to this paper's conventions, yields the coercive inequality (C.2)-(C.3).
External algebraic input from prior literature on which the annular estimate (5.13) and hence the bounded classification depend. The paper's Appendix C performs the translation but does not prove the original identity.
standard math Bedford's local characterization of CR-pluriharmonic functions holds on H^n.
Used in Theorem A.1 to conclude that A_f ≡ 0 forces the solution to be a Jerison-Lee bubble; cited to [3] and used by [24] at the same point.
standard math The spherical spectral decomposition of the conformal sub-Laplacian has kernel spanned by the coordinate functions X_1,...,X_Q.
Used in Lemma 4.2 to identify ker A_S; cited to the Frank-Lieb spectral computation [20].
standard math Harnack inequalities and interior Schauder-type estimates for Hörmander sums of squares with bounded potential hold on H^n.
Used in Lemma 2.3 and Lemma 5.1 for compactness and relative derivative estimates; cited to [7], [14], [18], [19].
standard math The Poláčik-Quittner-Souplet doubling lemma holds on complete metric spaces.
Used in Lemma 2.2 and Proposition 7.5 to select natural scales; cited to [34].

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Classification of positive entire solutions of the CR Yamabe equation on the Heisenberg group." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OZ6HAQSE

@misc{pith2026260810642,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Classification of positive entire solutions of the CR Yamabe equation on the Heisenberg group},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OZ6HAQSE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10642}
}

abstract

We prove that, for every $n\ge 2$, every positive entire solution of the critical CR Yamabe equation $4\Delta_b u = n^2 u^{(Q+2)/(Q-2)}$, $Q=2n+2$, on the Heisenberg group $\mathbb H^n$ is a Jerison-Lee bubble. No integrability, decay, boundedness, or symmetry is assumed. Together with the theorem of Catino, Li, Monticelli, and Roncoroni in $\mathbb H^1$, this classifies the positive entire solutions in every dimension. Both Euclidean routes to such a statement lose their starting configuration here. Hyperplane reflections are not CR automorphisms, and a CR inversion preserves its Koranyi sphere only setwise, so the difference between a solution and its Kelvin transform need not vanish on the sphere one inverts in. Nor is there a substitute a priori bound to fall back on: the only scale-invariant estimate available for every positive solution is a critical Morrey bound, which concentration saturates and which yields neither decay nor a small-mass regularity principle. We proceed instead from two exact consequences of the Green representation, which every positive solution is shown to satisfy. Reciprocity with a bubble $U$ converts the distance from $U$ into a nonnegative convex deficit, so that no information about the sign of a linearized quadratic form is required; differentiating the same reciprocity along the conformal orbit of $U$ gives a nonlinear barycentre identity, which forbids that deficit from concentrating at a single point of the CR sphere. Together these isolate the bubble manifold in a class carrying no energy bound. Quantizing the Jerison-Lee tensor defect against this isolation, and alternating the resulting budget with the Morrey bound, drives the energy-growth exponent into the range where the defect must vanish. Both identities use only conformal covariance and an exact positive Green representation.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

[30]

Congwen Liu,CR Yamabe equation on the Heisenberg group via the method of moving spheres, 2025, arXiv:2512.22458v1, 21 pp

work page arXiv 2025
[1]

Math.305(2020), no

Claudio Afeltra,Singular periodic solutions to a critical equation in the Heisenberg group, Pacific J. Math.305(2020), no. 2, 385–406

work page 2020
[2]

,Singular solutions of the Yamabe problem in the Heisenberg group and their bifurcation, Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (2026), Published online 12 January 2026; forthcoming in print; 19 pp

work page 2026
[3]

Eric Bedford, ( ∂∂)b and the real parts of CR functions, Indiana Univ. Math. J.29 (1980), no. 3, 333–340

work page 1980
[4]

Prajapat,Nonlinear Liouville theorems in the Heisenberg group via the moving plane method, Comm

Isabeau Birindelli and Jyotshana V. Prajapat,Nonlinear Liouville theorems in the Heisenberg group via the moving plane method, Comm. Partial Differential Equations 24(1999), no. 9–10, 1875–1890

work page 1999
[5]

1, 111–124

Andrea Bonfiglioli and Ermanno Lanconelli,Liouville-type theorems for real sub- Laplacians, Manuscripta Math.105(2001), no. 1, 111–124

work page 2001
[6]

Andrea Bonfiglioli, Ermanno Lanconelli, and Francesco Uguzzoni,Stratified Lie groups and potential theory for their sub-Laplacians, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin, 2007

work page 2007
[7]

Jean-Michel Bony,Principe du maximum, in´ egalit´ e de Harnack et unicit´ e du probl` eme de Cauchy pour les op´ erateurs elliptiques d´ eg´ en´ er´ es, Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble)19 (1969), no. 1, 277–304

work page 1969

Show all 35 references

[8]

Caffarelli, Basilis Gidas, and Joel Spruck,Asymptotic symmetry and local behavior of semilinear elliptic equations with critical Sobolev growth, Comm

Luis A. Caffarelli, Basilis Gidas, and Joel Spruck,Asymptotic symmetry and local behavior of semilinear elliptic equations with critical Sobolev growth, Comm. Pure Appl. Math.42(1989), no. 3, 271–297

1989
[9]

Monticelli, and Alberto Roncoroni,A Liouville theorem in the Heisenberg group, J

Giovanni Catino, Yanyan Li, Dario D. Monticelli, and Alberto Roncoroni,A Liouville theorem in the Heisenberg group, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (2025), Published online first

2025
[10]

Monticelli, and Alberto Roncoroni,On the critical p-Laplace equation, Adv

Giovanni Catino, Dario D. Monticelli, and Alberto Roncoroni,On the critical p-Laplace equation, Adv. Math.433(2023), 109331

2023
[11]

Lu Chen, Zhao Fan, and Guozhen Liao,Sharp quantitative stability of the Jerison–Lee bubbles on the Heisenberg group, arXiv preprint (2025), arXiv:2506.11404

2025 arXiv
[12]

J.63(1991), no

Wenxiong Chen and Congming Li,Classification of solutions of some nonlinear elliptic equations, Duke Math. J.63(1991), no. 3, 615–622

1991
[13]

Pure Appl

Wenxiong Chen, Congming Li, and Biao Ou,Classification of solutions for an integral equation, Comm. Pure Appl. Math.59(2006), no. 3, 330–343

2006
[14]

Giovanna Citti, Nicola Garofalo, and Ermanno Lanconelli,Harnack’s inequality for sum of squares of vector fields plus a potential, Amer. J. Math.115(1993), no. 3, 699–734

1993
[15]

Jacek Cygan,Subadditivity of homogeneous norms on certain nilpotent Lie groups, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.83(1981), no. 1, 69–70

1981
[16]

Joshua Flynn and J´ erˆ ome V´ etois,Liouville-type result for the CR Yamabe equation in the Heisenberg group, Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (2024), Published online 10 October 2024; forthcoming in print; 15 pp.; arXiv:2310.14048

2024 arXiv
[17]

Folland,A fundamental solution for a subelliptic operator, Bull

Gerald B. Folland,A fundamental solution for a subelliptic operator, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc.79(1973), 373–376

1973
[18]

Folland and Elias M

Gerald B. Folland and Elias M. Stein,Estimates for the ∂b complex and analysis on the Heisenberg group, Comm. Pure Appl. Math.27(1974), 429–522

1974
[19]

28, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1982

,Hardy spaces on homogeneous groups, Mathematical Notes, vol. 28, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1982. CLASSIFICATION FOR THE CR YAMABE EQUATION ONH n 35

1982
[20]

Frank and Elliott H

Rupert L. Frank and Elliott H. Lieb,Sharp constants in several inequalities on the Heisenberg group, Ann. of Math. (2)176(2012), no. 1, 349–381

2012
[21]

J.106(2001), no

Nicola Garofalo and Dimiter Vassilev,Symmetry properties of positive entire solutions of Yamabe-type equations on groups of Heisenberg type, Duke Math. J.106(2001), no. 3, 411–448

2001
[22]

Basilis Gidas, Wei-Ming Ni, and Louis Nirenberg,Symmetry and related properties via the maximum principle, Comm. Math. Phys.68(1979), no. 3, 209–243

1979
[23]

Lee,The Yamabe problem on CR manifolds, J

David Jerison and John M. Lee,The Yamabe problem on CR manifolds, J. Differential Geom.25(1987), no. 2, 167–197

1987
[24]

,Extremals for the Sobolev inequality on the Heisenberg group and the CR Yamabe problem, J. Amer. Math. Soc.1(1988), no. 1, 1–13

1988
[25]

Khuri, Fernando C

Marcus A. Khuri, Fernando C. Marques, and Richard M. Schoen,A compactness theorem for the Yamabe problem, J. Differential Geom.81(2009), no. 1, 143–196

2009
[26]

Lee,Pseudo-Einstein structures on CR manifolds, Amer

John M. Lee,Pseudo-Einstein structures on CR manifolds, Amer. J. Math.110(1988), no. 1, 157–178

1988
[27]

Yanyan Li,Remark on some conformally invariant integral equations: the method of moving spheres, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS)6(2004), no. 2, 153–180

2004
[28]

Yanyan Li and Lei Zhang,Liouville-type theorems and Harnack-type inequalities for semilinear elliptic equations, J. Anal. Math.90(2003), 27–87

2003
[29]

J.80(1995), no

Yanyan Li and Meijun Zhu,Uniqueness theorems through the method of moving spheres, Duke Math. J.80(1995), no. 2, 383–417

1995
[31]

Math.413(2023), 108851

Xi-Nan Ma and Qianzhong Ou,A Liouville theorem for a class semilinear elliptic equations on the Heisenberg group, Adv. Math.413(2023), 108851

2023
[32]

Differential Geometry6(1971), no

Morio Obata,The conjectures on conformal transformations of Riemannian manifolds, J. Differential Geometry6(1971), no. 2, 247–258

1971
[33]

Ann.392(2025), no

Qianzhong Ou,On the classification of entire solutions to the critical p-Laplace equation, Math. Ann.392(2025), no. 2, 1711–1729

2025
[34]

Part I: Elliptic equations and systems, Duke Math

Peter Pol´ aˇ cik, Pavol Quittner, and Philippe Souplet,Singularity and decay estimates in superlinear problems via Liouville-type theorems. Part I: Elliptic equations and systems, Duke Math. J.139(2007), no. 3, 555–579

2007
[35]

Prajapat and Anoop Skaria Varghese,Symmetry and classification of solutions to an integral equation in the Heisenberg group Hn, Math

Jyotshana V. Prajapat and Anoop Skaria Varghese,Symmetry and classification of solutions to an integral equation in the Heisenberg group Hn, Math. Ann.392(2025), no. 1, 659–700. University of Science and Technology of China Email address:jungangli@ustc.edu.cn

2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [30]

Congwen Liu,CR Yamabe equation on the Heisenberg group via the method of moving spheres, 2025, arXiv:2512.22458v1, 21 pp

work page arXiv 2025

[2] [1]

Math.305(2020), no

Claudio Afeltra,Singular periodic solutions to a critical equation in the Heisenberg group, Pacific J. Math.305(2020), no. 2, 385–406

work page 2020

[3] [2]

,Singular solutions of the Yamabe problem in the Heisenberg group and their bifurcation, Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (2026), Published online 12 January 2026; forthcoming in print; 19 pp

work page 2026

[4] [3]

Eric Bedford, ( ∂∂)b and the real parts of CR functions, Indiana Univ. Math. J.29 (1980), no. 3, 333–340

work page 1980

[5] [4]

Prajapat,Nonlinear Liouville theorems in the Heisenberg group via the moving plane method, Comm

Isabeau Birindelli and Jyotshana V. Prajapat,Nonlinear Liouville theorems in the Heisenberg group via the moving plane method, Comm. Partial Differential Equations 24(1999), no. 9–10, 1875–1890

work page 1999

[6] [5]

1, 111–124

Andrea Bonfiglioli and Ermanno Lanconelli,Liouville-type theorems for real sub- Laplacians, Manuscripta Math.105(2001), no. 1, 111–124

work page 2001

[7] [6]

Andrea Bonfiglioli, Ermanno Lanconelli, and Francesco Uguzzoni,Stratified Lie groups and potential theory for their sub-Laplacians, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin, 2007

work page 2007

[8] [7]

Jean-Michel Bony,Principe du maximum, in´ egalit´ e de Harnack et unicit´ e du probl` eme de Cauchy pour les op´ erateurs elliptiques d´ eg´ en´ er´ es, Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble)19 (1969), no. 1, 277–304

work page 1969