Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 31 references

Reconstruction of the observable universe from the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that initial gravitational perturbations in a shell around the last-scattering surface can be stably recovered from integrated Sachs-Wolfe observations made near the observer.

desk verdict Partial-data ISW tomography with real microlocal content, but Lemma 5.1 has a gap that leaves Theorem 2.1 unproved as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.01399 v1 pith:B3SB5LIJ submitted 2025-07-02 math-ph cs.NAmath.MPmath.NA

Julianne Chung , Yiran Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math-phcs.NAmath.MPmath.NA MSC 35R3035L0553C6535S30
keywords integratedSachs-WolfeeffectcosmologicalX-raytomographylightraytransforminverseproblemsFourierintegraloperatorspartialdatawaveequationregularization
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 sets out to answer a practical question: can the state of the early universe be reconstructed from cosmic microwave background (CMB) measurements made only near the Earth, through the integrated Sachs-Wolfe (ISW) effect? It models the problem as a partial-data tomographic inverse problem for a scalar wave equation describing gravitational perturbations. The central claim is Theorem 2.1: initial data supported in the shell $R_{T-1,T+1}$ — a layer of thickness two just inside the backward light cone of the observer region — are uniquely and stably determined by the light ray transform measured on a unit ball at the final time. The result matters because it shows the observable-universe shell can in principle be recovered from line-of-sight ISW integrals, despite the transform itself being severely ill-posed. Numerical experiments in a simplified two-dimensional universe illustrate that with regularization the shell structure is recoverable.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing construction is the microlocal analysis of the backprojection of the light ray transform. The paper uses a modified transform $L_\epsilon = \varphi_\epsilon L$ with cutoff $\varphi_\epsilon$ supported in $B_{1-\epsilon}$ to avoid boundary artifacts, and two backprojections: $I h(x)=\int_{S^2} h(x,v)\,dv$ and a weighted version $I^\varphi h(x)=\int_{S^2}\varphi(v)h(x,v)\,dv$ with $\varphi$ chosen so that $\varphi(\xi/|\xi|)\neq \varphi(-\xi/|\xi|)$. Stationary phase decomposes $I L_\epsilon E^\pm_j$ into Fourier integral operators with canonical relations $C_a = \{(x,\xi;y,\eta): \xi=\eta,\ x=y-a\xi/|\xi|\}$; combining the two backprojections cancels the leading-order terms and yields, via parametrices $Q^\pm, W^\pm, S$, explicit inversion formulas for $f_2$ and $f_1$ modulo regularizing operators.

What would settle it

Run the paper's numerical discretization on initial data supported in the shell $R_{T-1,T+1}$ for a small detector grid such as $7\times7$ and inspect the singular values of the forward matrix restricted to that subspace; singular values at machine precision would indicate a nontrivial numerical null space, contradicting the claimed stability. Alternatively, attempt to construct nonzero compactly supported $(f_1,f_2)$ in the shell whose wave solution satisfies $Lu=0$ on $B\times S^2$; any such pair directly refutes Theorem 2.1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper proves a stability estimate for the cosmological X-ray transform with partial data. For the wave equation $P u=0$ with $P = \Box + a_0 \partial_t + \sum a_j D_j + b$, Theorem 2.1 states that if $f_1 \in H^{s+1}(\mathbb{R}^3)$ and $f_2 \in H^s(\mathbb{R}^3)$ are compactly supported in the spherical shell $R_{T-1,T+1}$, then the observations $Lu$ on $B \times S^2$ determine $f_1, f_2$ uniquely and $$\|f_1\|_{$H^{{s+1}}$} + \|f_2\|_{H^s} \leq C \|Lu\|_{$H^{{s+2}}$},$$ with $C$ uniform over data supported in a fixed compact subset of the shell. This is the first stable recovery result for the ISW problem in the realistic setting where observations are confined to a small region near the Earth rather than a full Cauchy surface. The paper also constructs an explicit microlocal inversion, formulas (4.16) and (4.17), that recovers $f_2$ and then $f_1$ up to smoother terms, and it reports two-dimensional numerical reconstructions showing the shell structure emerging from simulated noisy ISW data.

Load-bearing premise

The proof's load-bearing premise is the unproved unique-continuation step that $Lu=0$ forces the initial data supported in the shell $R_{T-1,T+1}$ to vanish; if that implication fails, the compactness argument collapses and the stability estimate may only hold modulo smoother terms.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Initial data in the shell $R_{T-1,T+1}$ can be recovered with a quantified loss of three Sobolev derivatives: data in $H^{s+1}\times H^s$ are controlled by observations in $H^{s+2}$.
  • The stability estimate is uniform over compact families of data, so small metric perturbations of the background can be handled by the same argument.
  • In the partial-data regime the discrete forward problem is severely ill-posed, with condition numbers growing rapidly as the detector grid shrinks, so regularization is essential; the paper's experiments with sparsity and edge-preserving priors demonstrate this.
  • The microlocal inversion formulas can in principle characterize which wave-front directions of data supported in the full ball $B_{T+1}$ are recoverable, extending the result beyond the shell.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the same stationary-phase decomposition should yield a precise visible wave-front set for data supported in the whole ball $B_{T+1}$; writing it out would turn the remark after Theorem 2.1 into a full microlocal uniqueness theorem.
  • Editorial inference: the physical model, not the ray transform alone, is what stabilizes the inversion; this suggests that other causal PDE constraints, such as sound-speed wave equations for fluids, could stabilize otherwise ill-posed ISW inversions similarly.
  • Editorial inference: the unproved unique-continuation step could be tested numerically by computing the singular value spectrum of the discretized forward operator restricted to shell-supported initial data; a nontrivial numerical null space would indicate the stability estimate needs modification.
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.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the inverse problem of recovering the initial Cauchy data (f1,f2) of a scalar perturbation solving a wave equation with lower-order terms from the light ray transform Lu of the solution, where the transform is observed on a unit ball at the final time t=T. The main result, Theorem 2.1, claims stable and unique recovery of data supported in the shell R_{T-1,T+1}, with the H^{s+2} norm of Lu controlling the H^{s+1} and H^s norms of f1 and f2. The proof combines a microlocal inversion based on backprojection (Sections 3-4) with a compactness argument (Section 5) that requires a uniqueness lemma for the light ray transform. The paper also contains a numerical study for a 2D model comparing several regularization approaches.

Significance. If Theorem 2.1 were fully established, the paper would be a significant contribution to cosmological X-ray tomography: it would provide a parameter-free stability estimate for partial-data recovery from the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect, extending the full-data results of Vasy and Wang. The microlocal construction in Sections 3-4 is substantial and plausible, and the numerical experiments with synthetic data illustrate the potential of regularized inversion. However, the central stability theorem currently rests on a uniqueness lemma that is false as stated and whose proof is invalid, so the significance is conditional on repairing the uniqueness argument.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 5, Lemma 5.1] The lemma as stated is false for arbitrary u in H^s. Take u(t,x)=a(t) with a in C_c^∞(0,T) and ∫_0^T a(t)dt=0; then Lu(y,v)=0 for all (y,v), but u is not zero on the set (5.2). Moreover, the proof does not establish the stated conclusion: in (5.3), the function A(t,x)=χ(t)φ(x−tv+Tv)u(t,x) depends on v, so the identity \hat A_v(−v·ξ,ξ)=0 is for a different function for each v. An entire function can vanish on the hyperplane τ=−v·ξ without being identically zero, and the union of these hyperplanes over v does not give a fixed analytic function vanishing on an open set. Thus the claim u=0 on (5.2) is not proved.
  2. [Section 5, Eq. (5.2)] The displayed visibility region is incorrect. A point (t,x) lies on a null ray through B at time T exactly when there exists v∈S² with |x−(t−T)v|<1, i.e., when T−t−1<|x|<T−t+1 (for T−t>1). The region T−t≤|x|<T−t+1 in (5.2) omits the inner shell T−t−1<|x|<T−t. At t=0 this means the lemma would only constrain T≤|x|<T+1, not the full support R_{T−1,T+1} of the data in Theorem 2.1, so the contradiction argument cannot force f1=f2=0.
  3. [Section 5, proof of Theorem 2.1] The passage from the a priori estimate (5.1) to the final estimate (2.5) depends entirely on removing the terms C∥f1∥_{H^s}+C∥f2∥_{H^{s−1}} by the compactness argument. Since that removal uses Lemma 5.1, and the lemma is neither true as stated nor proved for solutions of (2.4), the central stability estimate is not established. The proof must supply a valid unique continuation result for solutions of the wave equation with lower-order terms, or replace the compactness argument.
  4. [Section 3, Eqs. (3.7)-(3.8)] The stationary-phase assignments appear to be interchanged for the E+ contribution. The critical point v=+ξ/|ξ| yields the phase (x−y)·ξ+(2t−T−ϵ)|ξ|, while v=−ξ/|ξ| yields (x−y)·ξ+(T+ϵ)|ξ|; in (3.7) the phase factors e^{i(T+ϵ)|ξ|} and e^{-i(T+ϵ)|ξ|}e^{i2t|ξ|} are assigned to b+_{1,1} and b+_{1,2} respectively, while the symbols in (3.8) use the opposite arguments ±ξ/|ξ|. This inconsistency should be resolved, since the canonical relations and principal symbols from Lemma 3.1 feed into the parametrix construction in Section 4.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2, Theorem 2.1] The paper should state the assumption T>1, or explicitly invoke the convention R_{a,b}=B_b for a≤0, because the proof selects ϵ with the support contained in R_{T−1+2ϵ,T+1−2ϵ}.
  2. [Section 4, Eqs. (4.10)-(4.14)] There are apparent typos in the parametrix definitions; for example W+ is introduced as a parametrix of the f2 coefficient but is then used to isolate f1, and (4.11) appears to isolate f1 instead of f2. These need to be corrected and checked.
  3. [Section 5, Lemma 5.1] If the intended uniqueness statement is only for solutions of (2.4), the lemma should say so and the proof must use the equation; the present proof never uses it, and the counterexample in my major comment shows the unrestricted statement is false.
  4. [Section 6] The numerical experiments solve a 2D discrete inverse problem and do not directly validate the 3D stability estimate (2.5); the conclusions in Section 7 should describe the numerics as heuristic support rather than as a demonstration of Theorem 2.1.
  5. [Figure 1] The caption refers to visible structures 'in the region given by Theorem 2.1' for a 2D example; since the theorem is stated for R^3, the caption should clarify the relation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the new partial-data theorem is proved by the paper's own microlocal inversion and compactness argument; prior self-citations are motivational or technical, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central claim (Theorem 2.1) is not equivalent by construction to any of its inputs. The derivation starts from the forward transform (2.2), decomposes the backprojections into Fourier integral operators (Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2, and the analogous weighted versions in Section 4), then solves for f1 and f2 modulo regularizing terms through the parametrices leading to (4.16)-(4.17). The lower-order terms are removed in Section 5 by a compactness argument that uses the separate uniqueness statement of Lemma 5.1; even if that lemma has a mathematical gap, its use is not circular because Lemma 5.1 is not obtained from the theorem being proved. The cited prior work by the authors ([28], [30], [31], [5]) provides background, the backprojection approach, and a numerical discretization, but no load-bearing theorem is imported from those papers; the parametrices and estimates are constructed in this paper. Lemmas 4.1 and 4.2 are explicitly stated with proofs omitted, which is a completeness gap rather than a circularity, since the asserted decompositions are direct analogues of Lemmas 3.1-3.2 and are not derived from the theorem's conclusion. The numerical study is a synthetic test against known phantom images, with no fitted parameter being relabeled as a prediction. No circular step satisfying the quote-and-reduction standard was found.

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

The analysis assumes the standard tools of FIO calculus and well-posedness of the Cauchy problem; these are standard_math. The physical modeling choices (scalar-field perturbation, flat background, observers on a ball B, observable proportional to the light ray transform of the perturbation) are domain_assumptions. The critical uniqueness step (u=0 on S implies f=0 on the shell) is listed as ad_hoc_to_paper because Section 5 asserts it without proof; it is load-bearing for the stability estimate. No free parameters enter the theorem; the numerical regularization parameters are tuning choices for the synthetic experiments and are not load-bearing.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Hormander FIO calculus: graph FIO composition, Sobolev mapping properties, elliptic parametrices exist.
    Used throughout Sections 3-5 to decompose and invert backprojection operators; standard background.
  • standard math Oscillatory integral representation of solutions to (2.3) with elliptic amplitudes (Treves).
    Section 3, eq. (3.1)-(3.3); standard construction.
  • standard math Well-posedness and energy estimates for the Cauchy problem (2.4) with smooth coefficients.
    Section 5 uses the standard energy estimate ||u||_{H^{s+1}} <= C(||f1||_{H^{s+1}} + ||f2||_{H^s}).
  • domain assumption Linearized cosmology: scalar-field perturbation Phi satisfies the damped wave equation (1.2), and the ISW effect is proportional to the integral of d_s Phi along null geodesics.
    Section 1; this connects the physical problem to the mathematical transform. The paper does not derive the proportionality factors for the FLRW background.
  • domain assumption Observation geometry: detectors fill a unit ball B at t=T, all directions v in S^2 are observed, and initial data are supported in the shell R_{T-1,T+1}.
    Section 2, Theorem 2.1; the result is stated for this specific partial-data geometry.
  • ad hoc to paper Unique continuation: if a solution u of (2.4) vanishes on S (5.2), then the Cauchy data supported in R_{T-1,T+1} vanish.
    Section 5, proof of Theorem 2.1: asserted as 'Lemma 5.1 and finite speed of propagation' without proof; it is the load-bearing step that converts injectivity into the stability estimate via compactness.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Reconstruction of the observable universe from the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/B3SB5LIJ

@misc{pith2026250701399,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Reconstruction of the observable universe from the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/B3SB5LIJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.01399}
}
read the original abstract

The integrated Sachs-Wolfe (ISW) effect is a property of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), in which photons from the CMB are gravitationally redshifted, causing the anisotropies in the CMB. An intriguing question is whether one can infer the gravitational perturbations from the ISW effect observed near the Earth. In this work, we address the question using a tomographic reconstruction approach, similar to X-ray CT reconstruction in medical imaging. We develop the mathematical analysis for the stable inversion of the X-ray transform in the cosmological setting. In addition, we provide a numerical study of reconstruction methods, thereby demonstrating the feasibility and potential of the tomography method.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.01399 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Cosmological X-ray tomography for a 2D Universe. The left figure is the true image which represents a collection of cosmic strings or gravitational plane waves at time t = 0. The middle figure shows the simulated ISW effect observed at t = T by several detectors near the center of the image. One can see the “anisotropies” but the line structures are hardly discernible. The right figure shows the reconstruction using… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The setup of the partial data problem. The marked set on t = 0 is the visible set in Theorem 2.1. 2. The mathematical formulation and main results For T > 0, let M = [0, T] × R 3 and (t, x), t ∈ [0, T], x ∈ R 3 be the local coordinates. Let g = −dt2 + P3 i=1 dx2 i be the Minkowski metric on M. We study the problem for a 3D universe for physical relevance, but remark that our method applies to dimensions n ≥ 2. For t… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Illustration of the modified light ray transform Lϵ. where each a ± jk is homogeneous of degree −j−k. They are determined via transport equations. Here, we recall the construction of the leading order terms for k = 0. They satisfy (3.3) ∂ta ± j0 ∓ X 3 l=1 ξl |ξ| ∂la ± j0 ± 1 2 (a0(t, x) +X 3 l=1 al(t, x) ξl |ξ| )a ± j0 = 0, see [27, Chapter VI, (1.49)]. The initial condition at t = 0 is given by (see [27, Chapter VI… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Singular values σi for matrices A corresponding to different sized detector grids. In the legend, m corresponds to the number of observed mea￾surements. For the 7 × 7 grid, we provide in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Picard plot for the 7 × 7 detector grid demonstrating the impact of noise on the SVD and solution coefficients. 6.3. Full data reconstruction problem. For the full data problem set up, we have 512 detectors and the corresponding matrix A has a condition number of 60.18…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: We provide two example true images, where the box identifies the region [−3, 3] × [−3, 3] used for the full data problem. We provide the reconstructions for the full data problem using iterative method LSQR (after 100 iterations) and the LS solution. Relative reconstru…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Partial data reconstructions for the 7 × 7 detector grid for the random dots example (top) and the random lines example (bottom). Relative reconstruction error norms are provided in the titles. For a smaller 3 × 3 detector grid, we compare reconstructions for LSQR, FIS…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Relative residual norms (left) and relative reconstruction error norms (right) per iteration for the partial data reconstruction problems. These results correspond to the 7×7 detector grid for the random dots example (top) and random lines example (bottom). polarizatio…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Reconstructions for LSQR, FISTA, and IGMRF for the partial data problem with a 3×3 detector grid. The top row contains reconstructions for the random dots example and the bottom row contains reconstructions for the random lines example. Relative reconstruction error no…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J. M. Bardsley. Computational Uncertainty Quantification for Inverse Problems . SIAM, 2018. 27 Figure 9. Reconstructions for LSQR, FISTA, and IGMRF for the partial data problem with a 3 × 3 detector grid. The top row contains reconstructions for the random dots example and the bottom row contains reconstructions for the random lines example. Relative reco...

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Beck and M

    A. Beck and M. Teboulle. A fast iterative shrinkage-thresholding algorithm for linear inverse problems. SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences , 2(1):183–202, 2009

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    Bj¨ orck.Numerical Methods for Least Squares Problems

    ˚A. Bj¨ orck.Numerical Methods for Least Squares Problems . SIAM, 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Caselles, A

    V. Caselles, A. Chambolle, and M. M. Novaga. Total variation in imaging. Handbook of mathematical methods in imaging , 1(2):1455–1499, 2015

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    Chung, L

    J. Chung, L. Onisk, and Y. Wang. Iterative reconstruction methods for cosmological x-ray tomography. SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences, to appear , 2025

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Dodelson

    S. Dodelson. Modern Cosmology. Academic Press, Amsterdam (Netherlands), 2003

    work page 2003

  7. [7]

    F. X. Dup´ e, A. Rassat, J. L. Starck, and M. J. Fadili. Measuring the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect. Astronomy and Astrophysics , 534:A51, 2011

    work page 2011

  8. [8]

    R. Durrer. The Cosmic Microwave Background . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2008

    work page 2008

Show all 31 references
  1. [9]

    Gazzola, P

    S. Gazzola, P. C. Hansen, and J. G. Nagy. IR Tools: a MATLAB package of iterative regularization methods and large-scale test problems. Numerical Algorithms, 81(3):773–811, 2019

    2019

  2. [10]

    Gonz´ alez, V

    G. Gonz´ alez, V. Kolehmainen, and A. Sepp¨ anen. Isotropic and anisotropic total variation regularization in electrical impedance tomography. Computers & Mathematics with Applications , 74(3):564–576, 2017

    2017

  3. [11]

    Guillemin

    V. Guillemin. Cosmology in (2+ 1)-dimensions, cyclic models, and deformations of M2, 1 . Number 121. Princeton University Press, 1989

    1989

  4. [12]

    Hanke and P

    M. Hanke and P. C. Hansen. Regularization methods for large-scale problems. Surv. Math. Ind , 3(4):253– 315, 1993

    1993

  5. [13]

    P. C. Hansen. Discrete Inverse Problems: Insight and Algorithms . SIAM, 2010

    2010

  6. [14]

    H¨ ormander.The analysis of linear partial differential operators IV: Fourier integral operators

    L. H¨ ormander.The analysis of linear partial differential operators IV: Fourier integral operators. Springer, 2009

    2009

  7. [15]

    J. A. Kable, G. Benevento, N. Frusciante, A. De Felice, and S. Tsujikawa. Probing modified gravity with integrated Sachs-Wolfe CMB and galaxy cross-correlations. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2022(09):002, 2022

    2022

  8. [16]

    Krauss, S

    M. Krauss, S. Dodelson, and S. Meyer. Primordial gravitational waves and cosmology. Science, 328(5981):989–992, 2010. 28 JULIANNE CHUNG AND YIRAN W ANG

    2010

  9. [17]

    Krolewski and S

    A. Krolewski and S. Ferraro. The integrated Sachs Wolfe effect: unWISE and Planck constraints on dynamical dark energy. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics , 2022(04):033, 2022

    2022

  10. [18]

    H. P. Langtangen and S. Linge. Finite difference computing with PDEs: a modern software approach . Springer Nature, 2017

    2017

  11. [19]

    Lassas, L

    M. Lassas, L. Oksanen, P. Stefanov, and G. Uhlmann. On the inverse problem of finding cosmic strings and other topological defects. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 357:569–595, 2018

    2018

  12. [20]

    Manzotti and S

    A. Manzotti and S. Dodelson. Mapping the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect. Physical Review D , 90(12):123009, 2014

    2014

  13. [21]

    R. B. Melrose. Geometric scattering theory, volume 1. Cambridge University Press, 1995

    1995

  14. [22]

    Muir and D

    J. Muir and D. Huterer. Reconstructing the integrated Sachs-Wolfe map with galaxy surveys. Physical Review D, 94:043503, 2016

    2016

  15. [23]

    V. F. Mukhanov, H. A. Feldman, and R. H. Brandenberger. Theory of cosmological perturbations.Physics Reports, 215(5-6):203–333, 1992

    1992

  16. [24]

    C. C. Paige and M. A. Saunders. LSQR: An algorithm for sparse linear equations and sparse least squares. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS) , 8(1):43–71, 1982

    1982

  17. [25]

    R. K. Sachs and A. M. Wolfe. Perturbations of a cosmological model and angular variations of the microwave background. The Astrophysical Journal , 1967

    1967

  18. [26]

    Shajib and E

    A. Shajib and E. Wright. Measurement of the integrated Sachs–Wolfe effect using the allwise data release. The Astrophysical Journal , 827(2):116, 2016

    2016

  19. [27]

    Tr` eves.Introduction to pseudodifferential and Fourier integral operators Volume 2: Fourier integral operators, volume 2

    F. Tr` eves.Introduction to pseudodifferential and Fourier integral operators Volume 2: Fourier integral operators, volume 2. Springer Science & Business Media, 1980

    1980

  20. [28]

    Vasy and Y

    A. Vasy and Y. Wang. On the light ray transform of wave equation solutions. Communications in Math- ematical Physics, 384:503–532, 2021

    2021

  21. [29]

    Y. Wang. Microlocal analysis of the light ray transform on globally hyperbolic Lorentzian manifolds. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.08576 , 2021

    2021 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Y. Wang. Some integral geometry problems for wave equations. Inverse Problems, 38(8):084001, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Y. Wang. Inverse problems in cosmological x-ray tomography. Microlocal Analysis and Inverse Problems in Tomography and Geometry, Radon Series on Computational and Applied Mathematics , 30:139–165, 2024. Julianne Chung Department of Mathematics, Emory University Email address :...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.