Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Sharp well-posedness for the free boundary MHD equations

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Free boundary MHD is well-posed at the sharp Sobolev threshold s > d/2 + 1, in arbitrary dimensions and on general domains, with unique solutions depending continuously on the data.

desk verdict A genuinely new well-posedness framework for free boundary MHD at the sharp scale; the one load-bearing estimate is deferred to a previous paper, so referee scrutiny should focus there. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15625 v1 pith:2FYBUFG7 submitted 2024-12-20 math.AP

Mihaela Ifrim , Ben Pineau , Daniel Tataru , Mitchell A. Taylor This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35Q3576B0376B1576W05
keywords freeboundaryMHDHadamardwell-posednessTaylorsignconditionElsässervariableslow-regularitySobolevspaceswave-typeregularityEulerequationsnormalformcorrection
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 claims a complete Hadamard well-posedness theory for the free boundary incompressible MHD equations in Sobolev spaces of order s > d/2 + 1, in any dimension and on general, not necessarily simply connected, domains. The central assertion is that a state (v, B, Γ) with velocity and magnetic field in H^s, a boundary in H^s, the Taylor sign condition, and the wave-type regularity $\nabla_B v, \nabla_B B \in H^{s-1/2}$ evolves uniquely for a time depending only on the H^s size and the Taylor lower bound, with continuous dependence on the data. If correct, this settles the low-regularity well-posedness question that had been open for the free boundary MHD system. Taking B = 0 recovers the sharp free boundary Euler results.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the new H^s state space whose norm includes $\|\nabla_B v\|_{H^{s-1/2}} + \|\nabla_B B\|_{H^{s-1/2}}$; this captures the wave operator $D^2_t - \nabla_B^2$ hidden in the MHD system. The arguments are carried by Elsässer variables $W^\pm = v \pm B$; Alinhac-style good variables $G^\pm = D^\pm_t a - \nabla_n \Delta^{-1} D^\pm_t \Delta P$; a coercive energy functional $E_k \approx M_{s-1/2} \|(v,B,\Gamma)\|^2_{H^k}$ with rotational and irrotational parts; the regularizing effect $\nabla_B^2 a \in H^{k-2}(\Gamma)$ that follows from the magnetic tangency condition; and a stability functional measuring the $L^{2}$ distance of $W^\pm$ plus a weighted $L^{2}$ difference of pressures on the intersection of domains. Existence of regular solutions is built by a time-discretized Euler-plus-transport iteration with three regularization steps: parabolic surface and irrotational regularization, mild mollification, and elliptic regularization in the B direction.

What would settle it

Compute (analytically or numerically) the difference functional D between two nearby solutions in the collar with identical initial data but with the magnetic field difference switched on; if the cubic boundary term (4.11), namely $\int_A a^{-1}(P-P_h)(v-v_h)\cdot\nabla(P-P_h)\,dS$, cannot be bounded by $C_A (A^{1/2}+A^{1/2}_h)D(W,W_h)$ uniformly at the stated low regularity, then uniqueness or continuous dependence fails. Concretely, find a sequence of states at $s = d/2+1+\varepsilon$ whose Taylor coefficient is bounded below by $c_0$ but whose boundary develops a Lipschitz corner inside the collar; the proof's boundary-layer analysis must still control the pressure difference on the intersection $\tilde{\Gamma}$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the right state space for the free boundary MHD equations includes, beyond the natural H^s regularity of v, B and Γ, the half-derivative wave-type condition $\nabla_B v, \nabla_B B \in H^{s-1/2}$, and that this state space is dynamically propagated. Writing $W^\pm = v \pm B$ turns the system into two coupled free boundary Euler-like transport equations $D^\pm_t W^\mp = -\nabla P$ with both $D^\pm_t$ tangent to the free surface; the Taylor coefficient $a = -\nabla P \cdot n$ remains the good boundary variable, and the boundary evolution acquires the form $D^2_t a - \nabla_B^2 a + a N a = f$. On this basis the paper proves uniqueness at essentially $W^{1,\infty}$ control, stability via a nonlinear distance functional, local well-posedness at $s > d/2 + 1$, and a low-regularity continuation criterion.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the Taylor sign condition $a_0 = -\nabla P_0 \cdot n_{\Gamma_0} > c_0 > 0$, meaning the total pressure is a non-degenerate defining function of the initial boundary; the paper cites ill-posedness when it fails, and every theorem invokes it, with persistence of the lower bound being part of the proof. A secondary proof-level premise is that the delicate cubic boundary estimate (4.11), whose verification is deferred to [18] and explicitly omitted here, carries over to the MHD difference functional.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any smooth solution whose Taylor coefficient stays bounded away from zero and whose low-regularity norm stays bounded can be continued past time T; this is the paper's Theorem 1.11.
  • Taking B = 0 recovers the sharp well-posedness result for free boundary Euler equations, so the MHD coupling does not degrade the regularity threshold.
  • The wave-type condition $\nabla_B v, \nabla_B B \in H^{s-1/2}$ propagates from the initial data as part of the solution, rather than being an extra constraint imposed at every time.
  • Uniqueness holds in a much weaker class than existence: any two solutions with finite control parameters A and $A_{1/2}$ coincide.
  • The results hold in arbitrary dimensions and on not-necessarily-simply-connected domains, unlike previous existence proofs.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the state-space condition is formulated in Eulerian coordinates and avoids Lagrangian flow-map regularity, the same triple-step regularization scheme may transfer to other free boundary models with wave-type coupling, such as plasma-vacuum interfaces or MHD with surface tension.
  • The omitted verification of the cubic boundary estimate (4.11) means the uniqueness and continuous-dependence conclusions currently rest on the transfer of a delicate estimate from the Euler case; a self-contained proof in the MHD setting would remove the main proof-level gap a reader cannot check in this manuscript.
  • One can test the robustness of the Taylor sign assumption by examining whether the constructed solutions break down when a0 touches zero; the paper cites ill-posedness in that regime, so the threshold c0 > 0 is expected to be sharp.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a well-posedness theory for the free boundary incompressible MHD equations (1.1)-(1.4) on bounded connected domains in arbitrary dimension. Its central claims are Theorem 1.6 (enhanced uniqueness under only W^{1,∞}-type control), Theorem 1.8 (stability of an L^2-level distance functional), Theorem 1.9 (Hadamard well-posedness in the state space H^s of Definition 1.2 for s > d/2 + 1, with continuous dependence and persistence of the Taylor sign condition), Theorem 1.11 (continuation criterion), and a new construction of smooth solutions (Section 6). The key innovations are an Elsässer-variable reformulation of MHD as two coupled free-boundary Euler-type systems, a state space incorporating the wave-type regularity condition ∇_B v, ∇_B B ∈ H^{s-1/2}, a normal-form-corrected energy functional, and an Eulerian time-discretization scheme with carefully designed regularizations. For B ≡ 0 the results recover the sharp Euler theorems of [18].

Significance. If correct, Theorem 1.9 resolves the low-regularity well-posedness of free boundary incompressible MHD on general domains, a genuinely open problem, and it does so without fitted parameters: the s > d/2 + 1 threshold matches the known sharp Euler threshold, and setting B ≡ 0 recovers known results as a consistency check. The linearized energy (Prop. 2.1), the explicit good-variable construction, and the 'regularizing effect' inequality (Lemma 5.12) are concrete, checkable contributions, and the existence scheme in Section 6 is an original route that avoids Lagrangian coordinates and simple-connectivity assumptions. The main reservation is verification: several load-bearing estimates, most importantly the cubic boundary estimate (4.11) behind uniqueness and continuous dependence, are explicitly left to the reader or deferred to the authors' companion paper [18], and the manuscript itself acknowledges this in §1.5.3 and §4.1.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.1, Eq. (4.11); §1.5.3] The estimate (4.11) is load-bearing but is not proved. The manuscript states on p. 23 that "(4.11) is far from trivial" and that it "has exactly the same structure as the delicate cubic term in our previous work [18, Equation (4.11)]", and it "leave[s] the verification of (4.11) to the reader"; §1.5.3 adds that the proof is "omitted from this manuscript" and requires "a subtle boundary layer analysis on the intersection of two domain states, which in general has only Lipschitz regularity." Theorem 4.1 is the engine behind Theorem 1.6 (uniqueness), Theorem 1.8 (stability), and the continuous-dependence conclusion of Theorem 1.9 (see §1.4.2 and §7), so the omitted estimate is load-bearing for the central claims. The transfer from [18] is not automatic: the MHD pressure solves (1.5) with source tr(∇B)^2 − tr(∇v)^2, so P − P_h contains magnetic contributions that have no Euler counterpart, and the boundary-layer analysis in [18, §4.4] would have to be re-verified against these terms; a check that only substitutes p − p_h by P − P_h is insufficient as written. Please include a proof of (4.11), or at least a detailed verification that the new quadratic magnetic source does not alter the structure of the estimate.
  2. [§5.3.1, §5.3.4, §5.4.1; §6.3] Several lemmas on which the main proofs explicitly rely are deferred to [18] or "left to the reader". Lemma 5.4 supplies the bounds (4.4) used inside the proof of Theorem 4.1, and its proof reads "entirely similar to [18, Lemmas 7.5 and 7.9], so we leave the details to the reader"; Proposition 5.10 is invoked as "a consequence of Proposition 7.14 in [18]" with the remark that the proof "applies almost verbatim"; the surface-regularity control in §5.3.4 is declared "virtually identical" to [18, §7.4] with the proof omitted. A similar pattern recurs in Section 6 (e.g., Lemma 6.7 "We omit the details" and Corollary 6.14 "left to the reader"), where those computations feed the energy-monotonicity bound (6.21). Since the pressure now depends on B through the magnetic sources, and since the new state-space condition (iv) modifies the a priori regularity available in these estimates, the transfer of each item from the Euler case should be documented rather than asserted, even in a paper of this length.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§4.1, Eqs. (4.2)-(4.3)] The regions A, A_h and the intersection hypersurface Γ̃ are central to the proof of Theorem 4.1, but their geometry (in particular the Lipschitz character of Γ̃ and the behavior of the weight b near Γ ∩ Γ_h) is described only in words; a figure or a short coordinate description would substantially aid the reader.
  2. [§6.1, §6.3] The notation O_{H^{k-3}}(τ^2) (used, for instance, in "B̃_τ · n_τ = O_{H^{k-3}}(τ^2)") and O_{C^3}(ε^2) is never defined; the subscripted big-O convention should be stated at first use.
  3. [§1.4.1] The claim that the control parameter A_{1/2} in (1.10) is "straightforward" to control by ‖(v,B,Γ)‖_{H^s} for any s > d/2 + 1 is what places H^s solutions in the uniqueness class of Theorem 1.6, but no pointer to the relevant estimate is given; a reference to Corollary 5.6 together with the boundary Sobolev embedding would improve verifiability.
  4. [Abstract, p. 1; §6.3] There are several typographical errors: "magnetohyrodynamics" appears in the abstract and in the header, and "satisifes" appears in §6.3; these should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the MHD well-posedness claim is a genuine extension, though it is not fully self-contained at the boundary estimate (4.11).

full rationale

The paper's central claim, Hadamard well-posedness of free-boundary MHD in the H^s state space of Definition 1.2, is not equivalent to any of its inputs by construction. The energy functionals in Section 5 are designed to control the norms they propagate, but the coercivity and propagation estimates are nontrivial elliptic and energy arguments rather than tautologies. The distance functional (1.11) is chosen to match the linearized energy (2.11), but the difference bound in Theorem 4.1 requires a real cubic estimate, not merely the definition of D. No fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and the Taylor-sign assumption is an external stability hypothesis, not an output of the proof. The most serious non-circular concern is the treatment of (4.11): Section 4 states that the estimate 'has exactly the same structure as the delicate cubic term in our previous work [18, Equation (4.11)]' and 'we leave the verification of (4.11) to the reader,' while Section 1.5.3 says the proof is 'omitted from this manuscript.' This is a load-bearing self-citation to an analogous Euler estimate and a gap in self-containment, because the MHD pressure solves (1.5) with a magnetic source. However, it is not a circular reduction: the paper does not define MHD well-posedness in terms of [18]'s Euler estimate, nor does it fit any parameter so that (4.11) holds. Under the given rules, self-citation becomes circular only when the argument reduces to an unverified self-citation chain; here the central energy estimates and solution construction are carried out in the paper, and the cited prior result is independent support for the Euler substructure. The verdict is therefore no significant circularity, with a clear self-containment caveat at (4.11).

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

All constants in the paper (M, c0, epsilon, delta, K(M), C(M)) are universal or data-size-dependent bounds, not fitted parameters; the state space and the energy functional are constructed, not calibrated to data. The axioms list the modeling and data conditions: the Taylor sign condition (1.6), the new wave-type regularity condition (iv) of Definition 1.2, the perfect-conductor boundary condition (1.4), and the wholesale import of the [18] framework. The invented_entities list is empty because the paper's new objects (good variables G^pm, energy E_k, distance functional D, regularization flows) are internal proof devices with no independent physical postulation; the state space condition (iv) is tracked in axioms rather than as an entity.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Taylor sign condition: a := -grad P dot n_Gamma > c0 > 0 on Gamma (equation 1.6), assumed for all initial data.
    The paper itself cites [16] for ill-posedness when (1.6) fails, so the Taylor condition is the gatekeeping hypothesis for every theorem in the paper; the persistence of the uniform lower bound on [0,T] is part of the proof of Theorem 1.9.
  • ad hoc to paper Wave-type regularity condition (iv): grad_B v and grad_B B lie in H^{s-1/2}(Omega); part of the definition of the state space H^s (Definition 1.2).
    Introduced in Remark 1.3 as a novelty; it is natural by the scaling of the wave-type operator D^2 - grad_B^2, but it is an additional regularity requirement on the data that the rest of the theory must propagate.
  • domain assumption Perfect-conductor boundary condition B dot n_Gamma = 0 (1.4), with propagation claimed for v in L^1([0,T]; C^1).
    Physical boundary condition for a perfectly conducting fluid; the propagation identity Dt(B dot n) = (B dot n)(n dot grad v dot n) requires the stated velocity regularity.
  • domain assumption The well-posedness framework, balanced elliptic estimates, and key difference estimates of the authors' prior free boundary Euler paper [18] are valid as cited.
    Sections 3, 4, 5, and Appendix A repeatedly import results from [18] without reproducing their proofs, notably the boundary-layer analysis behind equation (4.11), which Section 1.5.3 states was 'omitted from this manuscript'.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Sharp well-posedness for the free boundary MHD equations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2FYBUFG7

@misc{pith2026241215625,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Sharp well-posedness for the free boundary MHD equations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2FYBUFG7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15625}
}
abstract

In this article, we provide a definitive well-posedness theory for the free boundary problem in incompressible magnetohyrodynamics. Despite the clear physical interest in this system and the remarkable progress in the study of the free boundary Euler equations in recent decades, the low regularity well-posedness of the free boundary MHD equations has remained completely open. This is due, in large part, to the highly nonlinear wave-type coupling between the velocity, magnetic field and free boundary, which has forced previous works to impose restrictive geometric constraints on the data. To address this problem, we introduce a novel Eulerian approach and an entirely new functional setting, which better captures the wave equation structure of the MHD equations and permits a complete Hadamard well-posedness theory in low-regularity Sobolev spaces. In particular, we give the first proofs of existence, uniqueness and continuous dependence on the data at the sharp $s>\frac{d}{2}+1$ Sobolev regularity, in addition to a blowup criterion for smooth solutions at the same low regularity scale. Moreover, we provide a completely new method for constructing smooth solutions which, to our knowledge, gives the first proof of existence (at any regularity) in our new functional setting. All of our results hold in arbitrary dimensions and in general, not necessarily simply connected, domains. By taking the magnetic field to be zero, they also recover the corresponding sharp well-posedness theorems for the free boundary Euler equations. The methodology and tools that we employ here can likely be fruitfully implemented in other free boundary models.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Physical Vacuum Problems for the Full Compressible Euler Equations: Low-regularity Hadamard-style Local Well-posedness

    math.AP 2024-11 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    A low-regularity Hadamard-style local well-posedness theorem is proved for the full compressible Euler equations with a physical vacuum boundary in all space dimensions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [18]

    Mihaela Ifrim, Ben Pineau, Daniel Tataru, and Mitchell A. Taylor. Sharp Hadamard local well-posedness, enhanced uniqueness and pointwise continuation criterion for the in compressible free boundary Euler equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.05625, 2023

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  2. [1]

    Alazard, N

    T. Alazard, N. Burq, and C. Zuily. On the Cauchy problem fo r gravity water waves. Invent. Math. , 198(1):71–163, 2014

    work page 2014

  3. [2]

    O˙ za´ n ski, and Amjad Tuffaha

    Mustafa Sencer Aydin, Igor Kukavica, W ojciech S. O˙ za´ n ski, and Amjad Tuffaha. Construction of the free-boundary 3D incompressible Euler flow under limited regularity. J. Differential Equations , 394:209–236, 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [3]

    J. T. Beale, T. Kato, and A. Majda. Remarks on the breakdow n of smooth solutions for the 3-D Euler equations. Comm. Math. Phys. , 94(1):61–66, 1984

    work page 1984

  5. [4]

    Strong ill-posedness of the in compressible Euler equation in borderline Sobolev spaces

    Jean Bourgain and Dong Li. Strong ill-posedness of the in compressible Euler equation in borderline Sobolev spaces. Invent. Math., 201(1):97–157, 2015

    work page 2015

  6. [5]

    Caflisch, Isaac Klapper, and Gregory Steele

    Russel E. Caflisch, Isaac Klapper, and Gregory Steele. Re marks on singularities, dimension and energy dissipation f or ideal hydrodynamics and MHD. Comm. Math. Phys. , 184(2):443–455, 1997

    work page 1997

  7. [6]

    A priori estimates for water waves with emerging bottom

    Thibault de Poyferr´ e. A priori estimates for water waves with emerging bottom. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 232(2):763–812, 2019

    work page 2019

  8. [7]

    Disconzi, Mihaela Ifrim, and Daniel Tataru

    Marcelo M. Disconzi, Mihaela Ifrim, and Daniel Tataru. T he relativistic Euler equations with a physical vacuum boun dary: Hadamard local well-posedness, rough solutions, and conti nuation criterion. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 245(1):127–182, 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 39 references
  1. [8]

    Disconzi, Igor Kukavica, and Amjad Tuffaha

    Marcelo M. Disconzi, Igor Kukavica, and Amjad Tuffaha. A L agrangian interior regularity result for the incompressib le free boundary Euler equation with surface tension. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 51(5):3982–4022, 2019

    2019

  2. [9]

    David G. Ebin. The equations of motion of a perfect fluid wi th free boundary are not well posed. Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 12(10):1175–1201, 1987

    1987

  3. [10]

    Lawrence C. Evans. Partial differential equations , volume 19 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics . American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, second edition, 2010. SHARP WELL-POSEDNESS FOR THE FREE BOUNDARY MHD EQUATIONS 13 5

    2010

  4. [11]

    Zero surface te nsion limit of the free-boundary problem in incompressible magnetohydrodynamics

    Xumin Gu, Chenyun Luo, and Junyan Zhang. Zero surface te nsion limit of the free-boundary problem in incompressible magnetohydrodynamics. Nonlinearity, 35(12):6349–6398, 2022

    2022

  5. [12]

    Local well-pos edness of the free-boundary incompressible magnetohydrod y- namics with surface tension

    Xumin Gu, Chenyun Luo, and Junyan Zhang. Local well-pos edness of the free-boundary incompressible magnetohydrod y- namics with surface tension. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) , 182:31–115, 2024

    2024

  6. [13]

    On the construction of solutio ns to the free-surface incompressible ideal magnetohydrod y- namic equations

    Xumin Gu and Yanjin W ang. On the construction of solutio ns to the free-surface incompressible ideal magnetohydrod y- namic equations. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) , 128:1–41, 2019

    2019

  7. [14]

    On the motion of free interface in ideal i ncompressible MHD

    Chengchun Hao. On the motion of free interface in ideal i ncompressible MHD. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 224(2):515–553, 2017

    2017

  8. [15]

    A priori estimates for free bo undary problem of incompressible inviscid magnetohydrody - namic flows

    Chengchun Hao and Tao Luo. A priori estimates for free bo undary problem of incompressible inviscid magnetohydrody - namic flows. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 212(3):805–847, 2014

    2014

  9. [16]

    Ill-posedness of free bounda ry problem of the incompressible ideal MHD

    Chengchun Hao and Tao Luo. Ill-posedness of free bounda ry problem of the incompressible ideal MHD. Comm. Math. Phys., 376(1):259–286, 2020

    2020

  10. [17]

    On the motion of the closed f ree surface in three-dimensional incompressible ideal MHD with surface tension

    Chengchun Hao and Siqi Yang. On the motion of the closed f ree surface in three-dimensional incompressible ideal MHD with surface tension. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.09473 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    The compressible Eule r equations in a physical vacuum: A comprehensive Eulerian approach

    Mihaela Ifrim and Daniel Tataru. The compressible Eule r equations in a physical vacuum: A comprehensive Eulerian approach. Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e C Anal. Non Lin´ eaire, 41(2):405–495, 2024

    2024

  12. [20]

    W ell-posedness of the free bound ary problem in incompressible MHD with surface tension

    Changyan Li and Hui Li. W ell-posedness of the free bound ary problem in incompressible MHD with surface tension. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations , 61(5):Paper No. 191, 51, 2022

    2022

  13. [21]

    Anisotropic regularit y of the free-boundary problem in compressible ideal magnet ohy- drodynamics

    Hans Lindblad and Junyan Zhang. Anisotropic regularit y of the free-boundary problem in compressible ideal magnet ohy- drodynamics. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 247(5):Paper No. 89, 94, 2023

    2023

  14. [22]

    Local Well-posedness of t he Incompressible Current-Vortex Sheet Problems

    Sicheng Liu and Zhouping Xin. Local Well-posedness of t he Incompressible Current-Vortex Sheet Problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.03534, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    On the Free Boundary Probl ems for the Ideal Incompressible MHD Equations

    Sicheng Liu and Zhouping Xin. On the Free Boundary Probl ems for the Ideal Incompressible MHD Equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.06581, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    A regularity result for th e incompressible magnetohydrodynamics equations with fre e surface boundary

    Chenyun Luo and Junyan Zhang. A regularity result for th e incompressible magnetohydrodynamics equations with fre e surface boundary. Nonlinearity, 33(4):1499–1527, 2020

    2020

  17. [25]

    A priori estimates for the incompressible free-boundary magnetohydrodynamics equa tions with surface tension

    Chenyun Luo and Junyan Zhang. A priori estimates for the incompressible free-boundary magnetohydrodynamics equa tions with surface tension. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 53(2):2595–2630, 2021

    2021

  18. [26]

    Finite energy solutio ns of Maxwell’s equations and constructive Hodge decomposi tions on nonsmooth Riemannian manifolds

    Dorina Mitrea and Marius Mitrea. Finite energy solutio ns of Maxwell’s equations and constructive Hodge decomposi tions on nonsmooth Riemannian manifolds. J. Funct. Anal. , 190(2):339–417, 2002

    2002

  19. [27]

    W ell-posedness of the plasma-vacuum interface problem

    Paolo Secchi and Yuri Trakhinin. W ell-posedness of the plasma-vacuum interface problem. Nonlinearity, 27(1):105–169, 2014

    2014

  20. [28]

    Geometry and a priori e stimates for free boundary problems of the Euler equation

    Jalal Shatah and Chongchun Zeng. Geometry and a priori e stimates for free boundary problems of the Euler equation. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 61(5):698–744, 2008

    2008

  21. [29]

    A priori estimates for fluid interface problems

    Jalal Shatah and Chongchun Zeng. A priori estimates for fluid interface problems. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 61(6):848–876, 2008

    2008

  22. [30]

    Local well-posedness for fluid interface problems

    Jalal Shatah and Chongchun Zeng. Local well-posedness for fluid interface problems. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 199(2):653– 705, 2011

    2011

  23. [31]

    Elias M. Stein. Singular integrals and differentiability properties of fun ctions. Princeton Mathematical Series, No. 30. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1970

    1970

  24. [32]

    Nonlinear st ability of the current-vortex sheet to the incompressible M HD equations

    Yongzhong Sun, W ei W ang, and Zhifei Zhang. Nonlinear st ability of the current-vortex sheet to the incompressible M HD equations. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 71(2):356–403, 2018

    2018

  25. [33]

    W ell-posedn ess of the plasma-vacuum interface problem for ideal incom- pressible MHD

    Yongzhong Sun, W ei W ang, and Zhifei Zhang. W ell-posedn ess of the plasma-vacuum interface problem for ideal incom- pressible MHD. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 234(1):81–113, 2019

    2019

  26. [34]

    On well-posedness of the plasma-vacuu m interface problem: the case of non-elliptic interface sym bol

    Yuri Trakhinin. On well-posedness of the plasma-vacuu m interface problem: the case of non-elliptic interface sym bol. Commun. Pure Appl. Anal. , 15(4):1371–1399, 2016

    2016

  27. [35]

    On violent instability of a plasma-vac uum interface for an incompressible plasma flow and nonzero d is- placement current in vacuum

    Yuri Trakhinin. On violent instability of a plasma-vac uum interface for an incompressible plasma flow and nonzero d is- placement current in vacuum. Commun. Math. Sci. , 18(2):321–337, 2020. 136 MIHAELA IFRIM, BEN PINEAU, DANIEL TATARU, AND MITCHELL A . TAYLOR

    2020

  28. [36]

    W ell-posedness of free bou ndary problem in non-relativistic and relativistic ideal c ompress- ible magnetohydrodynamics

    Yuri Trakhinin and Tao W ang. W ell-posedness of free bou ndary problem in non-relativistic and relativistic ideal c ompress- ible magnetohydrodynamics. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 239(2):1131–1176, 2021

    2021

  29. [37]

    W ell-posedness for the fre e-boundary ideal compressible magnetohydrodynamic equat ions with surface tension

    Yuri Trakhinin and Tao W ang. W ell-posedness for the fre e-boundary ideal compressible magnetohydrodynamic equat ions with surface tension. Math. Ann. , 383(1-2):761–808, 2022

    2022

  30. [38]

    Local well-posedness and break-down criterion of the incom - pressible Euler equations with free boundary

    Chao W ang, Zhifei Zhang, W eiren Zhao, and Yunrui Zheng. Local well-posedness and break-down criterion of the incom - pressible Euler equations with free boundary. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. , 270(1318):v + 119, 2021

    2021

  31. [39]

    Local well-posedness of the free-bounda ry problem in compressible resistive magnetohydrodynamic s

    Junyan Zhang. Local well-posedness of the free-bounda ry problem in compressible resistive magnetohydrodynamic s. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations , 62(4):Paper No. 124, 60, 2023. Department of Mathematics, University of Wisconsin - Madiso n Email address : ifrim@wisc....

    2023

Pith tools

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