Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

Nonradial stability of self-similar blowup to Keller-Segel equation in three dimensions

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that every sufficiently small nonradial $H^2$ perturbation of the explicit self-similar 3D Keller-Segel profile still blows up along that same self-similar solution, up to translation and scaling, with the error decaying…

desk verdict Strong paper that settles nonradial mode stability for 3D Keller-Segel, but the l=2 spherical class rests on an uncertified numerical integral that should be addressed before publication. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.07073 v2 pith:H5Y5DPZB submitted 2025-01-13 math.AP

Zexing Li , Tao Zhou This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35B4435B3535K5535Q92
keywords Keller-Segelsystemself-similarblowupnonradialstabilitymodenonlocallinearizedoperatorwavemethodGGMTboundsphericalharmonics
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 claims that the explicit self-similar blow-up solution $Q$ of the three-dimensional Keller-Segel system is stable against all sufficiently small nonradial $H^2$ perturbations, not just radial ones. Concretely, any such nearby initial datum produces a solution that blows up in finite time along the same self-similar profile, after an appropriate translation and scaling, with the error decaying like $(T-t)^{\tilde\epsilon}$. The proof rests on proving mode stability for the nonlocal linearized operator: every unstable mode is exactly the four modes generated by translation and scaling symmetries. The interest is that this removes the radial-symmetry assumption used in earlier stability proofs and introduces a wave-operator technique for nonlocal spectral problems.

What carries the argument

The argument decomposes $L^2(\mathbb{R}^3)$ into spherical harmonic classes, on which the linearized operator $L$ acts invariantly with an explicit radial formula involving the nonlocal integral operator $\Delta_l^{-1}$. For $l\ge3$, the nonlocal terms are controlled perturbatively against the strong angular coercivity. For $l=2$, a partial localization conjugated by $r^\alpha$ reduces the problem to a Schrödinger operator whose positivity is checked by the GGMT bound. For $l=1$, the paper constructs a wave operator $T = I - \frac{\partial_r Q}{D_3^{-1}\partial_r Q}D_3^{-1}$, where $D_3^{-1}$ is the radial integration operator $r^{-3}\int_0^r f(s)s^3\,ds$, which simultaneously localizes the operator and removes the translation-generated unstable mode; the resulting operator is conjugated to a symmetric Schrödinger operator with spectrum in $[2/5,\infty)$. The construction uses only the profile equation and the nonvanishing of $D_3^{-1}\partial_r Q$, not the explicit formula for $Q$.

What would settle it

Evaluate the two integrals in (2.28) — $\mu_{2,0.2}[W^{-1}]$ and $N_{p,l_{\mathrm{eff}}}(U)$ with the parameters in (2.27) — using rigorous interval arithmetic; if a certified lower bound for $N$ reaches or exceeds 1, the coercivity statement in Proposition 2.10 would not follow from the given argument.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Theorem 1.1: for any initial datum $Q+\varepsilon_0$ with $\|\varepsilon_0\|_{H^2}$ sufficiently small, there exist parameters $(\lambda_0,x_0)$ near $(1,0)$ such that the solution blows up at $T=\lambda_0^2$ and has the self-similar form $\frac{1}{\lambda_0^2-t}(Q+\varepsilon)(\frac{t}{\lambda_0^2},\frac{x-x_0}{\sqrt{\lambda_0^2-t}})$, with $\|\varepsilon(t)\|_{H^2}\lesssim (T-t)^{\tilde\epsilon}$. The supporting discovery is Theorem 1.2: the nonlocal linearized operator $L$ has no unstable modes other than the four symmetry-generated ones, namely $\mathrm{span}\{\partial_{x_1}Q,\partial_{x_2}Q,\partial_{x_3}Q\}$ with eigenvalue $-\frac12$ and $\mathrm{span}\{\Lambda Q\}$ with eigenvalue $-1$. This mode stability upgrades the authors' earlier finite-codimensional stability result to full nonradial stability by using translation and scaling to place the data on the stable manifold.

Load-bearing premise

The proof for the $l=2$ angular class depends on a numerically evaluated quantity being below 1 (reported as about 0.8687), and the paper gives no certified error bounds or interval arithmetic proving that the true value is below 1.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any $k\ge2$, the same $H^k$ stability statement holds with minor modifications, so the regularity threshold is not tied to $H^2$.
  • The same argument should establish nonradial stability for the analogous explicit self-similar profiles in dimensions $N\ge3$.
  • The wave-operator localization also works in the radial class, giving an alternative to the partial-mass variable that could apply to nonlocal operators where no partial-mass variable exists.
  • The linear theory in Proposition 2.16 gives exponential decay of the stable semigroup and bounded Riesz projections onto the four unstable directions, which is the input needed for nonlinear stability in nearby models such as Keller-Segel-Navier-Stokes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The $l=2$ estimate is the only computer-assisted step: if interval arithmetic later certifies the numerical bound (2.28), the proof becomes fully analytic, whereas a certified failure would expose a gap the paper does not close.
  • The wave-operator construction may generalize: any self-similar profile whose derivative defines a suitable weight could yield the same localization, reducing mode stability for nonlocal operators to the study of a one-dimensional Schrödinger operator plus one nonvanishing condition.
  • Because the reported numerical margin ($N\approx0.8687$ versus the threshold $1$) is not large, a sensitivity check over nearby parameters $\alpha$, $\theta$, and $W$ would be a cheap robustness test before investing in a full computer-assisted proof.
  • The authors' expectation that nonradial nonlinear stability reduces to radial mode stability for other profiles suggests a general division of labor: symmetry-generated modes are handled by parameter matching, and all spectral work happens in radial classes.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies the parabolic-elliptic Keller-Segel system in three dimensions and proves nonradial stability of the explicit self-similar blowup profile Q. The main analytic input is Theorem 1.2, a mode-stability statement for the nonlocal linearized operator L: in each spherical class the only unstable modes are the four symmetry-generated modes, namely span{∂_{x_j}Q} for λ=-1/2 and span{ΛQ} for λ=-1. For spherical classes l≥3 the proof uses direct coercivity, for l=2 it uses a partial localization, conjugation, symmetrization, and a GGMT bound with numerically evaluated constants, and for l=1 it constructs a wave operator that localizes L and removes the known translation mode. The mode-stability result is then combined with the authors' earlier abstract semigroup framework to produce a finite-codimensional stable manifold, and a Brouwer fixed-point argument with the scaling/translation symmetry yields the unconditional H^2 stability statement of Theorem 1.1.

Significance. If fully justified, the result would be a substantial step beyond the recent radial stability theorem of Glogić-Schörkhuber, and the wave-operator construction is of independent interest because it localizes a nonlocal operator without using the partial mass variable and without relying on the explicit formula of Q. The paper also gives clean quantitative coercivity estimates for l≥3 and an explicit conjugation for l=1. However, the l=2 proof currently rests on an uncertified numerical computation, and the nonlinear part depends on substantial results from the authors' unpublished preprint [37]; these points prevent the paper from being fully convincing in its present form.

major comments (3)
  1. [This concerns Section 2.3, Equations (2.27)-(2.28), and Proposition 2.10.] The exclusion of unstable modes in the l=2 spherical class is reduced to the GGMT bound (2.25), and the proof of Proposition 2.10 uses the numerical evaluation μ_{2,0.2}[W^{-1}]≈1.9137 and N_{p,l_eff}(U)≈0.8687<1 in (2.28). The paper states that 'one can compute the integrals numerically' but supplies no certified error bounds, no interval arithmetic, no code, and no explicit analytic estimate proving that the true value of N is below 1. This is load-bearing: if the true N were at least 1, the GGMT theorem would not imply positivity of H_{2,0.2;W}, the coercivity (2.26) would not follow, and the contradiction argument in Case 2, Step 3 of Theorem 1.2 would fail. The margin 1-0.8687≈0.13, together with the singular behavior of W near r=0 and its slow decay, makes an unchecked numerical evaluation an unsafe substitute for a proof. I ask the authors to provide a rigorous verification of (2.28), for example by certified numerics or by explicit rational bounds on the two integrals.
  2. [This concerns Sections 2.5, 2.6, and 3, where the proof invokes results from the preprint [37].] Theorem 1.2 uses [37, Lemma 2.9] to upgrade a hypothetical eigenfunction to H^∞ before applying the coercivity estimates of Section 2, and Proposition 2.16 together with the nonlinear bootstrap in Section 3 relies on [37, Propositions 2.7, 2.8, Corollary 2.13] for the Riesz projection, the semigroup decay, and the spectral decomposition. These are not standard published results, and they are load-bearing for both the mode-stability theorem and the nonlinear stability theorem. Since [37] is an unpublished preprint, the present paper should either state the needed results as precise assumptions, reproduce their proofs in an appendix, or verify that the statements hold for the present operator L; otherwise the claimed theorem is conditional on the correctness of another manuscript.
  3. [This concerns Section 2.5 and Appendix A, where regularity and decay of unstable eigenfunctions are used.] In the proof of Theorem 1.2 the authors use the eigenfunction equation and [37, Lemma 2.9] to obtain H^∞ regularity, and Appendix A derives decay of unstable eigenfunctions under the assumption ℜz<1/4. This is consistent, but the decay exponent in (A.1) is min{2,2(1-ℜz)-}; the notation with '-' is not defined explicitly, and the final bound is used to justify L^2 inclusions such as (2.53). Please make the exponent precise and check that the inequality ℜz<δ̃ is compatible with the threshold ℜz<1/4 used in Lemma A.1 when δ̃ is chosen from the later steps.
minor comments (6)
  1. [This concerns Lemma B.1, whose heading contains a spelling error.] The title 'Regularity of H(l) near the origion' should read 'near the origin'.
  2. [This concerns Lemma 3.4, whose heading contains a spelling error.] The heading 'A priori estiamte of ‖ε_s‖_{H^2}' should read 'estimate'.
  3. [This concerns Equation (2.24) and the surrounding notation in Lemma 2.8.] The definition of μ_{l,α}[W^{-1}] uses r as the outer integration variable in the first displayed line and s as the outer variable after exchanging the order of integration; please harmonize the notation to avoid confusion.
  4. [This concerns Section 3.1.3, in the paragraph entitled 'Brouwer's topological argument'.] The map Φ is initially defined on the boundary sphere, and the proof states that Brouwer's fixed point theorem is applied to -Φ on the closed ball. Please explicitly describe the continuous extension of -Φ to the closed unit ball, since the fixed-point theorem is stated for maps on the ball rather than only on the sphere.
  5. [This concerns Remark 2.13 and the extension claims in Section 1.2.] The claim that the method applies to other self-similar profiles is explicitly conditional on the numerically checked non-vanishing condition (2.34); this is appropriately flagged, but the wording 'should be applicable' and 'one should be able to establish' should remain clearly marked as conjectural in the final version.
  6. [This concerns the references to the authors' earlier work.] Reference [37] appears as an arXiv preprint; if it has been accepted or revised, please update the citation and indicate precisely which propositions of [37] are needed in Sections 2-3.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the mode-stability proof is self-contained; the l=2 numerical GGMT check is a rigor gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain does not assume its own conclusion. Theorem 1.2 is proved case by case: for l≥3, coercivity of L_l is obtained directly from explicit estimates on the profile Q and interpolation bounds; for l=2, Proposition 2.10 uses the GGMT criterion with the constants μ≈1.9137 and N≈0.8687 in (2.28) computed from explicit integrals involving Q, so the numerical values are inputs to a sufficient condition, not fitted to the target claim; for l=1, the wave operator T in (2.29) is constructed from ∂rQ, the commutator identity (2.31) is verified algebraically from the profile equation, and the conjugated operator is shown coercive in Proposition 2.15. The radial case l=0 is cited from the external work of Glogić–Schörkhuber [27], not from a self-citation. The paper does rely on the authors' earlier preprint [37] for the smoothing estimate of resolvents and for abstract semigroup and local-well-posedness facts, but these are auxiliary regularity and linearization tools that do not encode the mode-stability or nonlinear-stability conclusions. The main unresolved concern is a rigor gap, not a circular one: the l=2 GGMT bound rests on unverified decimal numerics in (2.28), with no certified error bounds or interval arithmetic showing N<1; if the true value were at least 1, Proposition 2.10 would not follow. That is a correctness risk, not a circular reduction of the paper's central claim.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The proof has no new physical entities and no data-fitting parameters. The free parameters are proof choices in the GGMT estimate. The main extra assumptions are the un-certified numerical evaluation in (2.28), the nonvanishing condition for the wave operator, and reliance on the authors' earlier preprint [37] for semigroup and resolvent facts.

free parameters (1)
  • GGMT proof parameters (alpha, theta, p, W) = alpha=0.2, theta=0.5, p=4, W(r)=(0.01+r^2)^-1.2+0.02
    These are chosen by hand in Proposition 2.10 to make the GGMT functional N less than 1. They are not fitted to physical data but are ad hoc proof parameters that the coercivity estimate depends on.
assumptions (5)
  • ad hoc to paper The numerical evaluation in (2.28), mu≈1.9137 and N≈0.8687, is sufficiently accurate to conclude N<1.
    No error bounds or interval arithmetic are supplied; the conclusion N<1 is load-bearing for the l=2 mode stability proof.
  • domain assumption Nonvanishing condition D_3^{-1}(partial_r Q) != 0 on R_+ (Remark 2.13, equation (2.34)).
    The wave operator T in (2.29) is well-defined only when the denominator is nonzero. For the explicit Q it is plausible from partial_r Q<0, but the paper does not give a separate proof for the explicit profile.
  • domain assumption Abstract semigroup, resolvent smoothing, and spectral projection facts from the authors' previous paper [37].
    Used in Section 2.5 to upgrade eigenfunctions to H^infty and in Section 2.6 for the linear theory; these are quoted rather than proved in the present preprint.
  • standard math GGMT bound as stated in Theorem 2.9, taken from [26, Theorem A.1].
    The l=2 coercivity argument relies on this external spectral bound for Schrödinger operators on the half-line.
  • domain assumption H^2 local well-posedness of the renormalized Keller-Segel system.
    Invoked in Section 3.1 for the nonlinear bootstrap and to propagate estimates to tau=0; the paper cites standard fixed-point arguments.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nonradial stability of self-similar blowup to Keller-Segel equation in three dimensions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/H5Y5DPZB

@misc{pith2026250107073,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nonradial stability of self-similar blowup to Keller-Segel equation in three dimensions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/H5Y5DPZB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.07073}
}
read the original abstract

In three dimensions, the parabolic-elliptic Keller-Segel system exhibits a rich variety of singularity formations. Notably, it admits an explicit self-similar blow-up solution whose radial stability, conjectured more than two decades ago in [Brenner-Constantin-Kadanoff-Schenkel-Venkataramani, 1999], was recently confirmed by [Glogi\'c-Sch\"orkhuber, 2024]. This paper aims to extend the radial stability to the nonradial setting, building on the finite-codimensional stability analysis in our previous work [Li-Zhou, 2024]. The main input is the mode stability of the linearized operator, whose nonlocal nature presents essential challenges for the spectral analysis. Besides a quantitative perturbative analysis for the high spherical classes, we adapt in the first spherical class the wave operator method of [Li-Wei-Zhang, 2020] for the fluid stability to localize the operator and remove the known unstable mode simultaneously. Our method provides localization beyond the partial mass variable and is independent of the explicit formula of the profile, so it potentially sheds light on other linear nonlocal problems.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Mode stability for self-similar blowup of slightly supercritical NLS: I. low-energy spectrum

    math.AP 2025-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    For slightly mass-supercritical NLS in any dimension, the low-energy unstable spectrum of the self-similar linearized operator consists exactly of the symmetry modes 0, -bi, and -2bi.

  2. Finite time blow-up for an inhomogeneous parabolic equation

    math.AP 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    For large n, a codimension-n Lipschitz manifold of nonradial data produces finite-time blow-up to the homogeneous self-similar profile Φ_n for the inhomogeneous heat equation in R^3 with p>5.

  3. Finite-time blow-up for the three dimensional axially symmetric Keller-Segel system

    math.AP 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    For any finite set of points in the half-plane of axial symmetry, there exists a 3D Keller-Segel solution whose mass concentrates at those points with a precisely quantified finite-time blow-up rate.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [37]

    Finite-time blowup for Keller-Segel-Navier-Stokes system in three dimensions

    Z. Li and T. Zhou , Finite-time blowup for Keller-Segel-Navier-Stokes syste m in three di- mensions. Preprint, arXiv:2404.17228 [math.AP] (2024), 2024

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Bahouri, J.-Y

    H. Bahouri, J.-Y. Chemin, and R. Danchin , Fourier analysis and nonlinear partial differ- ential equations , vol. 343 of Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschafte n [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences], Springer, Heidelbe rg, 2011

    work page 2011

  3. [2]

    Biler , Singularities of solutions to chemotaxis systems , vol

    P. Biler , Singularities of solutions to chemotaxis systems , vol. 6 of De Gruyter Series in Mathematics and Life Sciences, De Gruyter, Berlin, [2020] © 2020

    work page 2020

  4. [3]

    Biler, I

    P. Biler, I. Guerra, and G. Karch , Large global-in-time solutions of the parabolic- parabolic Keller-Segel system on the plane , Commun. Pure Appl. Anal., 14 (2015), pp. 2117– 2126

    work page 2015

  5. [4]

    Blanchet, J

    A. Blanchet, J. Dolbeault, and B. Per thame , Two-dimensional Keller-Segel model: optimal critical mass and qualitative properties of the sol utions, Electron. J. Differential Equa- tions, (2006), pp. No. 44, 32

    work page 2006

  6. [5]

    M. P. Brenner, P. Constantin, L. P. Kadanoff, A. Schenkel, an d S. C. Venka taramani, Diffusion, attraction and collapse , Nonlinearity, 12 (1999), pp. 1071–1098

    work page 1999

  7. [6]

    Buseghin, J

    F. Buseghin, J. Da vila, M. del Pino, and M. Musso , Existence of finite time blow-up in Keller-Segel system , arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.01475, (2023)

    arXiv 2023

  8. [7]

    J. A. Carrillo, K. Craig, and Y. Yao , Aggregation-diffusion equations: dynamics, asymp- totics, and singular limits , in Active particles. Vol. 2. Advances in theory, models, an d appli- cations, Model. Simul. Sci. Eng. Technol., Birkhäuser/Spr inger, Cham, 2019, pp. 65–108

    work page 2019

Show all 51 references
  1. [8]

    Collot, T.-E

    C. Collot, T.-E. Ghoul, N. Masmoudi, and V. T. Nguyen , Refined description and stability for singular solutions of the 2D Keller-Segel sys tem, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 75 (2022), pp. 1419–1516

    2022

  2. [9]

    PDE, 8 (2022), pp

    , Spectral analysis for singularity formation of the two dime nsional Keller-Segel system , Ann. PDE, 8 (2022), pp. Paper No. 5, 74

    2022

  3. [10]

    , Collapsing-ring blowup solutions for the Keller-Segel sys tem in three dimensions and higher, J. Funct. Anal., 285 (2023), pp. Paper No. 110065, 41

    2023

  4. [11]

    Preprint, arXiv:2409.05363 [math.AP] (2024), 2024

    , Singularity formed by the collision of two collapsing solit ons in interaction for the 2d Keller-Segel system . Preprint, arXiv:2409.05363 [math.AP] (2024), 2024. 40 Z. LI AND T. ZHOU

    2024 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Collot, F

    C. Collot, F. Merle, and P. Raphaël , Strongly anisotropic type II blow up at an isolated point, J. Amer. Math. Soc., 33 (2020), pp. 527–607

    2020

  6. [13]

    Collot, P

    C. Collot, P. Raphaël, and J. Szeftel , On the stability of type I blow up for the energy super critical heat equation , Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 260 (2019), pp. v+97

    2019

  7. [14]

    Collot and K

    C. Collot and K. Zhang , On the stability of Type I self-similar blowups for the Kelle r-Segel system in three dimensions and higher . Preprint, arXiv:2406.11358 [math.AP] (2024), 2024

    2024 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Corrias, B

    L. Corrias, B. Per thame, and H. Zaag , Global solutions of some chemotaxis and angio- genesis systems in high space dimensions , Milan J. Math., 72 (2004), pp. 1–28

    2004

  9. [16]

    Costin, R

    O. Costin, R. Donninger, and I. Glogić , Mode stability of self-similar wave maps in higher dimensions , Comm. Math. Phys., 351 (2017), pp. 959–972

    2017

  10. [17]

    Costin, R

    O. Costin, R. Donninger, I. Glogić, and M. Huang , On the stability of self-similar solutions to nonlinear wave equations , Comm. Math. Phys., 343 (2016), pp. 299–310

    2016

  11. [18]

    Demanet and W

    L. Demanet and W. Schlag , Numerical verification of a gap condition for a linearized nonlinear Schrödinger equation, Nonlinearity, 19 (2006), pp. 829–852

    2006

  12. [19]

    Dolbeault and B

    J. Dolbeault and B. Per thame, Optimal critical mass in the two-dimensional Keller-Segel model in R2, C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris, 339 (2004), pp. 611–616

    2004

  13. [20]

    Donninger , Spectral theory and self-similar blowup in wave equations , Bull

    R. Donninger , Spectral theory and self-similar blowup in wave equations , Bull. Am. Math. Soc., New Ser., 61 (2024), pp. 659–685

    2024

  14. [21]

    Donninger and B

    R. Donninger and B. Schörkhuber , On blowup in supercritical wave equations , Comm. Math. Phys., 346 (2016), pp. 907–943

    2016

  15. [22]

    Engel and R

    K.-J. Engel and R. Nagel , One-parameter semigroups for linear evolution equations , vol. 194 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag , New York, 2000

    2000

  16. [23]

    Giga and R

    Y. Giga and R. V. Kohn , Asymptotically self-similar blow-up of semilinear heat eq uations, Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 38 (1985), pp. 297–319. [24] , Characterizing blowup using similarity variables , Indiana Univ. Math. J., 36 (1987), pp. 1–40

    1985

  17. [25]

    , Nondegeneracy of blowup for semilinear heat equations , Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, 42 (1989), pp. 845–884

    1989

  18. [26]

    Glogić and B

    I. Glogić and B. Schörkhuber , Nonlinear stability of homothetically shrinking Yang-Mil ls solitons in the equivariant case , Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 45 (2020), pp. 887–9 12

    2020

  19. [27]

    , Stable Singularity Formation for the Keller–Segel System i n Three Dimensions , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 248 (2024), p. 4

    2024

  20. [28]

    M. A. Herrero, E. Medina, and J. J. L. Velázquez , Self-similar blow-up for a reaction- diffusion system , J. Comput. Appl. Math., 97 (1998), pp. 99–119

    1998

  21. [29]

    Horstmann , From 1970 until present: the Keller-Segel model in chemotax is and its con- sequences

    D. Horstmann , From 1970 until present: the Keller-Segel model in chemotax is and its con- sequences. I, Jahresber. Deutsch. Math.-Verein., 105 (2003), pp. 103–1 65

    2003

  22. [30]

    II, Jahresber

    , From 1970 until present: the Keller-Segel model in chemotax is and its consequences. II, Jahresber. Deutsch. Math.-Verein., 106 (2004), pp. 51–69

    2004

  23. [31]

    Z. Hu, A. Kiselev, and Y. Yao , Suppression of chemotactic singularity by buoyancy , to appear in Geom. Funct. Anal., (2023). A vailable at arXiv:23 05.01036

    2023

  24. [32]

    Lenzmann , Uniqueness of ground states for pseudorelativistic Hartre e equations , Anal

    E. Lenzmann , Uniqueness of ground states for pseudorelativistic Hartre e equations , Anal. PDE, 2 (2009), pp. 1–27

    2009

  25. [33]

    T. Li, D. Wei, and Z. Zhang , Pseudospectral and spectral bounds for the Oseen vortices operator, Ann. Sci. Éc. Norm. Supér. (4), 53 (2020), pp. 993–1035

    2020

  26. [34]

    Pure Appl

    , Pseudospectral bound and transition threshold for the 3d Ko lmogorov flow , Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 73 (2020), pp. 465–557

    2020

  27. [35]

    Li , Mode stability for self-similar blowup of L2 slightly supercritical NLS , in preparation

    Z. Li , Mode stability for self-similar blowup of L2 slightly supercritical NLS , in preparation

  28. [36]

    , On stability of self-similar blowup for mass supercritical NLS, arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.02078, (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  29. [38]

    Merle, P

    F. Merle, P. Raphaël, I. Rodnianski, and J. Szeftel , On blow up for the energy super critical defocusing nonlinear Schrödinger equations , Invent. Math., 227 (2022), pp. 247–413

    2022

  30. [39]

    Nagai , Blow-up of radially symmetric solutions to a chemotaxis sys tem, Adv

    T. Nagai , Blow-up of radially symmetric solutions to a chemotaxis sys tem, Adv. Math. Sci. Appl., 5 (1995), pp. 581–601

    1995

  31. [40]

    Korean Math

    , Behavior of solutions to a parabolic-elliptic system model ling chemotaxis , J. Korean Math. Soc., 37 (2000), pp. 721–733

    2000

  32. [41]

    Naito and T

    Y. Naito and T. Suzuki , Self-similarity in chemotaxis systems , Colloq. Math., 111 (2008), pp. 11–34. 41

    2008

  33. [42]

    Nakanishi and W

    K. Nakanishi and W. Schlag , Invariant manifolds and dispersive Hamiltonian evolution equations, Zurich Lectures in Advanced Mathematics, European Mathem atical Society (EMS), Zürich, 2011

    2011

  34. [43]

    Nguyen, N

    V. Nguyen, N. Nouaili, and H. Zaag , Construction of type I-Log blowup for the Keller- Segel system in dimensions 3 and 4, arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.13932, (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  35. [44]

    Oga w a and H

    T. Oga w a and H. W akui , Non-uniform bound and finite time blow up for solutions to a drift–diffusion equation in higher dimensions , Anal. Appl. (Singap.), 14 (2016), pp. 145–183

    2016

  36. [45]

    Perelman , On the formation of singularities in solutions of the critic al nonlinear Schrödinger equation, Ann

    G. Perelman , On the formation of singularities in solutions of the critic al nonlinear Schrödinger equation, Ann. Henri Poincaré, 2 (2001), pp. 605–673

    2001

  37. [46]

    Raphaël and R

    P. Raphaël and R. Schweyer , On the stability of critical chemotactic aggregation , Math. Ann., 359 (2014), pp. 267–377

    2014

  38. [47]

    Reed and B

    M. Reed and B. Simon , Methods of modern mathematical physics. II. Fourier analys is, self-adjointness, Academic Press [Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers], New York-London, 1975

    1975

  39. [48]

    Simon , Harmonic analysis

    B. Simon , Harmonic analysis. A comprehensive course in analysis, par t 3 , Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS), 2015

    2015

  40. [49]

    Souplet and M

    P. Souplet and M. Winkler , Blow-up profiles for the parabolic-elliptic Keller-Segel s ystem in dimensions n ≥ 3, Comm. Math. Phys., 367 (2019), pp. 665–681

    2019

  41. [50]

    E. M. Stein and G. Weiss , Introduction to Fourier analysis on Euclidean spaces , vol. No. 32 of Princeton Mathematical Series, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1971

    1971

  42. [51]

    D. Wei, Z. Zhang, and W. Zhao , Linear inviscid damping and enhanced dissipation for the Kolmogorov flow , Adv. Math., 362 (2020), p. 103. Id/No 106963

    2020

  43. [52]

    M. I. Weinstein , Modulational stability of ground states of nonlinear Schrö dinger equations, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 16 (1985), pp. 472–491. Labora toire AGM, CY Cergy P aris Université, 2 a venue Adolph e Chauvin, 95300 Pontoise, France Email address : zexing.li@u-cergy.fr Dep...

    1985

Pith tools

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