Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Averaging principles for time-inhomogeneous multi-scale SDEs with partially dissipative coefficients

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For time-inhomogeneous slow-fast SDEs, a fast drift with only a dissipative tail is enough for strong and weak averaging.

desk verdict Genuine extension of averaging to partially dissipative time-inhomogeneous fast drift, but Lemma 2.8 has a repairable gap in the conditioning step that both main theorems rely on. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.18558 v1 pith:HEPMCG7L submitted 2025-06-23 math.PR

Xiaobin Sun , Jian Wang , Yingchao Xie This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PR MSC 34D0834D2560H20
keywords averagingprincipletime-inhomogeneousSDEmulti-scalepartiallydissipativedriftevolutionsystemofmeasuresasymptoticreflectioncouplingL1-Wassersteincontractionmartingaleproblem
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 establishes averaging principles for two-scale SDEs with time-dependent coefficients, where the fast component's drift is only partially dissipative: it may fail to contract nearby trajectories but must push them together at a uniform rate when they are far apart. Under these assumptions the slow component is shown to converge to a single averaged SDE, strongly in mean square when the slow diffusion coefficient is independent of the fast variable, and weakly in path space when the slow diffusion depends on the fast variable. The averaged coefficients are explicit integrals of the time-averaged coefficients against the invariant measure of a limiting autonomous frozen equation. The proof builds a unique evolution system of measures for the time-inhomogeneous frozen equation via asymptotic reflection coupling, and that construction is the new ingredient that makes averaging work without uniform dissipation.

What carries the argument

The machine that carries the argument is the asymptotic reflection coupling for the time-inhomogeneous frozen fast equation, defined by building two copies of the diffusion that share noise when they are far apart and reflect one copy's noise off the other. It produces the exponential $L^1$-Wasserstein contraction $W_1(\delta_{y_1}P^{x_1}_{s,t},\delta_{y_2}P^{x_2}_{s,t})\le C e^{-\beta(t-s)}|y_1-y_2|+C|x_1-x_2|$, which then yields a unique evolution system of measures $\{\mu^x_t\}$ and the convergence of $\mu^x_t$ to the invariant measure $\mu^x$ of the limiting autonomous frozen equation. This contraction is also what controls the difference between the true fast process and the auxiliary process $\hat Y^\varepsilon$ with the slow variable frozen on short intervals, giving the strong averaging error, and it underpins the tightness and martingale-problem identification used in the weak result.

What would settle it

A direct numerical check would settle the claim: take the one-dimensional fast drift $f(y)=\sin(y)+\alpha y$ with small $\alpha>0$, which satisfies Assumption A2 with $K=\alpha$ and $C=1$; the theorem predicts $\sup_{t\in[0,T]}\mathbb{E}|X^\varepsilon_t-\bar X_t|^2\to0$ as $\varepsilon\to0$. If the empirical distance does not vanish, the assumptions are not sufficient; if it vanishes but at a rate much worse than the bound (3.22), the stated rate is not sharp.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a time-inhomogeneous fast drift that is only partially dissipative is still sufficient for averaging: under Assumptions A1, A2, A3 and A4, the slow component $X^\varepsilon$ converges in mean square, uniformly on $[0,T]$, to the unique solution $\bar X$ of the averaged SDE $d\bar X_t=\bar b(\bar X_t)dt+\bar\sigma(\bar X_t)dW^1_t$, with $\bar b(x)=\int \hat b(x,y)\mu^x(dy)$; under A1, A2, A3 and A5 it converges weakly in $C([0,T];\mathbb{R}^n)$ to the solution of the same-drift averaged SDE with diffusion $\Theta(x)=(\int\Sigma(x,y)\mu^x(dy))^{1/2}$. The measure $\mu^x$ is the unique invariant measure of the limiting autonomous frozen equation $d\bar Y_t=\bar f(x,\bar Y_t)dt+dW^2_t$, and the time-inhomogeneous frozen equation is shown to have a unique evolution system of measures that converges to $\mu^x$ as the frozen time goes to infinity. This gives the first averaging-principle treatment in which the fast drift is only partially dissipative rather than uniformly dissipative.

Load-bearing premise

The whole proof rests on the fast drift having a dissipative tail: two fast trajectories that are far apart must be pushed toward each other at a uniform rate, and this exponential contraction is what allows every later averaging step to go through.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • When the slow noise coefficient does not depend on the fast variable, the slow path converges in mean square on any finite time horizon to the averaged SDE, with error of order $\varepsilon^{1/3}$ up to the rates at which the time-average errors $\phi_1,\phi_2,\phi_3$ vanish.
  • When the slow noise coefficient depends on the fast variable, the path laws converge weakly in $C([0,T];\mathbb{R}^n)$ to the unique solution of the averaged SDE with diffusion matrix $\Theta(x)=(\bar\Sigma(x))^{1/2}$.
  • The averaged drift and diffusion coefficients are explicit: integrate the time-averaged coefficient against the invariant measure of the limiting autonomous frozen equation.
  • The time-inhomogeneous frozen equation admits one and only one evolution system of measures with finite first moment, so the averaging limit is well defined and unambiguous.
  • The exponential $L^1$-Wasserstein contraction of the frozen fast semigroup replaces the uniform dissipativity used in earlier averaging results, so the same style of proof covers drifts that are only weakly contracting near the origin.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: because the argument only needs the Wasserstein contraction plus moment bounds, the averaging limit should also hold when the fast noise is multiplicative or the fast dynamics are hypoelliptic, as long as an analogous exponential contraction is available; the paper notes the multiplicative case but leaves the degenerate-noise details open.
  • Editorial inference: the $\varepsilon^{1/3}$ strong rate reflects the choice $\delta=\varepsilon^{2/3}$ and is not optimal; sharper time-average estimates should push the strong rate toward $\varepsilon^{1/2}$, matching classical averaging rates.
  • Editorial inference: the weak limit is identified via the martingale problem, which leaves room for a subsequent central limit theorem or large-deviation analysis of the fluctuations $X^\varepsilon-\bar X$ when $\sigma$ depends on the fast variable.
  • Editorial inference: the evolution system of measures gives an interpretation of the averaged coefficients as pullback averages of the nonautonomous frozen dynamics; this suggests the same averaging limits should hold under almost periodic or other recurrent time dependence, not only the Cesàro conditions in Assumption A3.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proves strong and weak averaging principles for the two-scale SDE system (1.6), where all coefficients are time-inhomogeneous and the fast drift is only partially dissipative in the sense of Assumption A2. Under Assumptions A1, A2, A3, and A4 the authors establish L2 convergence of the slow component X^ε to the averaged diffusion (1.17), with an explicit rate of order ε^{1/3}. Under A1, A2, A3, and A5 they establish weak convergence in C([0,T];R^n) to the solution of (1.20), identified through a martingale problem. The technical core is the construction of an evolution system of measures for the time-inhomogeneous frozen SDE (1.21) with partially dissipative drift, using asymptotic reflection couplings to obtain exponential Wasserstein contraction, followed by a priori moment bounds and a quantitative comparison between the fast component and a piecewise-constant auxiliary process. Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 are the central load-bearing assertions.

Significance. If the results are correct, they substantially extend the available averaging principles for time-inhomogeneous slow-fast SDEs beyond the uniformly dissipative and periodic settings; the partial dissipativity condition (1.9) is a genuine structural novelty in this context. The use of asymptotic reflection coupling to obtain contraction (2.3) and to construct the evolution system of measures is elegant and appears to be new for averaging problems. The paper is largely self-contained, gives explicit convergence rates, and the main estimates (Lemmas 2.1, 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3) are written in detail. The results are falsifiable and quantitatively precise, and I see no circularity or hidden free parameters. However, as detailed below, one key estimate (Lemma 2.8) has a gap in its proof as written, and one step in the weak-convergence identification ((4.10)) is only sketched.

major comments (2)
  1. [Lemma 2.8, proof (second displayed equality in the block after (2.18))] The conditioning step is not justified for the interval containing t0. In the displayed equality the authors write E[Z_{t0}(F(Y_s)-F(\hat Y_s))] = E[Z_{t0} E(F(Y_s)-F(\hat Y_s)|F_{kδ})] for s in [kδ,(k+1)δ]. This is valid only if Z_{t0} is F_{kδ}-measurable. For the unique interval with kδ < t0 ≤ s, the hypothesis gives only Z_{t0} ∈ F_{t0}, which is generally not contained in F_{kδ}. Since Lemma 2.8 is used in Lemma 3.2 (estimate (3.5) for I1) and in the proof of Theorem 1.2 (the bound on Q^{ε_k}_{11}), the proofs of Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 are incomplete as written. The gap is repairable: the contribution from the single interval containing t0 can be bounded directly by Cauchy-Schwarz and the moment bounds of Lemmas 2.6-2.7, giving O(δ) (which is stronger than the claimed O(δ^{1/2})), while for all later intervals kδ ≥ t0 one has F_{t0} ⊂ F_{kδ} and the displayed conditioning is valid. I request that this argument be added and the proof be rewritten accordingly.
  2. [Section 4, proof of Theorem 1.2, treatment of (4.10)] The verification of (4.10) is dismissed with 'one can follow the proof of (4.9)', but the function C(t,x,y) = Tr[((σσ*)(t,x,y) - \bar Σ(x))∇²U(x)] is not uniformly Lipschitz in y; its y-Lipschitz constant grows as 1+|x|+|y|. The argument for (4.9) critically uses the uniform y-Lipschitz property of B, so the reduction is not immediate and requires weighted estimates exploiting the moment bounds from Lemma 2.6 and Lemma 2.7. Since (4.10) is needed to identify the diffusion coefficient of the limiting process, please provide the detailed estimates (or a precise reference to a stated weighted contraction estimate) rather than an omission.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Lemma 3.2 and equations (3.3)-(3.7)] The notation '|y 2|' appears in several places and should read '|y|²' (e.g., in the statement of Lemma 3.2 and in the displays (3.3), (3.4), and (3.7)).
  2. [Lemma 2.8, proof] The symbol s(δ) = [s/δ]δ is used before it is defined; please define it at the start of the proof.
  3. [Proof of Theorem 1.2, bound for Q^{ε_k}_2 (4.13)] The symbol ϕ_5 appears without definition; based on the analogous estimate (3.21), it should presumably be the function \tilde ϕ_2 defined in (3.20). Please correct the notation.
  4. [Section 3, paragraph after (3.8)] The ergodicity properties (i)-(iii) of the limit frozen SDE (1.14) are asserted by saying that one can follow the proofs of Lemmas 2.1 and 2.3. Since the partially dissipative setting is a novelty of the paper, it would be helpful to include at least a brief indication of the argument, rather than a direct omission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the averaging limits are derived from the stated hypotheses, not assumed or fit from the target result.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. Assumptions A1-A5 are hypotheses on the coefficients of the original multi-scale SDE; the averaged coefficients are defined by explicit integrals of the given coefficient functions against invariant measures (or evolution systems of measures) of the fast equation, and the strong and weak convergence theorems are proved via coupling estimates, a priori moment bounds, and a martingale-problem identification. There are no fitted parameters: nothing is calibrated to a subset of the data and then renamed a prediction. The central estimate chain (asymptotic reflection coupling in Lemma 2.1, the auxiliary fast process in Lemma 2.8, the strong-averaging decomposition in Lemma 3.2, the evolution-system-to-invariant-measure comparison in Lemma 3.3, and the weak-limit identification in Theorem 1.2) is carried out in the text with explicit inequalities. The self-citations are to the same authors' companion work [29] and earlier papers, but they are used only for auxiliary facts: the periodic example in Assumption A3, a convolution-tail limit, and a proof template for evolution systems of measures. None of these cited facts encodes the averaging principle or the form of the averaged coefficients; even if the citations were removed, the quoted facts are standard and the main argument is present in this paper. The stated scope restriction to additive noise in the fast component is explicitly described as a notational convenience, not as a hidden input. The potential issue in Lemma 2.8 identified by a skeptical reader is a possible conditioning/measurability gap in a proof detail, which is a correctness concern, not circularity: it does not make the theorem's conclusion equivalent to any hypothesis or fitted quantity. Overall, the paper's claims are not forced by definition or by self-citation, so the circularity score is low.

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

The paper introduces no new objects beyond the standard evolution system of measures and the asymptotic reflection coupling. The claims rest on the four structural assumptions on the coefficients (A1-A5); these are domain assumptions, not data-fitted parameters. No free parameters are fitted to data or chosen ad hoc to match a target result; all constants in the proofs are auxiliary choices that do not enter the statement of the theorems.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Assumption A1: b and sigma are Lipschitz in (x,y) and grow at most linearly in x, uniformly in t.
    Used for existence and uniqueness of strong solutions and the a priori moment bounds of the slow component. Stated as conditions (1.7)-(1.8).
  • domain assumption Assumption A2: the fast drift f is partially dissipative in y, satisfying (1.9), with dissipativity outside a ball and only bounded growth inside.
    The entire ergodic theory of the frozen SDE via asymptotic reflection coupling rests on this: it gives the W1 contraction (2.3) and the evolution system of measures (Lemma 2.3, Proposition 2.5). Without A2 the proof collapses.
  • domain assumption Assumption A3: time averages of b converge to \hat b and f(T,.) converges to \bar f as T goes to infinity, with rates phi1 and phi2, as in (1.11)-(1.12).
    Needed to identify the limit averaged drift \bar b and to show W1(mu^t, mu) -> 0 (Lemma 3.3) so that the epsilon-dependent averaged SDE (1.22) converges to the final averaged SDE.
  • domain assumption Assumption A4 (strong case): sigma does not depend on the fast variable y, and its time averages converge, as in (1.15).
    This is the condition under which pathwise L2 convergence of X^epsilon to \bar X is proved in Theorem 1.1; the authors note it is crucial.
  • domain assumption Assumption A5 (weak case): sigma sigma* has a limit Sigma with uniform ellipticity and time-average convergence, as in (1.18)-(1.19).
    Used for tightness and to ensure the averaged diffusion Theta = \bar Sigma^{1/2} is Lipschitz, giving strong uniqueness of the limit SDE and identification via the martingale problem.
  • standard math Standard Ito calculus, Gronwall, Burkholder-Davis-Gundy inequalities, Lyapunov conditions, tightness criteria in C([0,T]), and existence of strong solutions for SDEs with Lipschitz coefficients (e.g., [19, Theorem 3.1.1]).
    Used throughout Sections 2-4 without proof; these are background results.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Averaging principles for time-inhomogeneous multi-scale SDEs with partially dissipative coefficients." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HEPMCG7L

@misc{pith2026250618558,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Averaging principles for time-inhomogeneous multi-scale SDEs with partially dissipative coefficients},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HEPMCG7L}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.18558}
}
abstract

In this paper, we study averaging principles for a class of time-inhomogeneous stochastic differential equations (SDEs) with slow and fast time-scales, where the drift term in the fast component is time-dependent and only partially dissipative. Under asymptotic assumptions on the coefficients, we prove that the slow component $(X^{\varepsilon}_t)_{t\geq 0}$ converges strongly to the unique solution $(\bar{X}_t)_{t\geq 0}$ to an averaged SDE, when the diffusion coefficient in the slow component is independent of the fast component; on the other hand, we establish the weak convergence of $(X_t^{\varepsilon})_{t\ge0}$ in the space $C([0,T];\mathbb{R}^n)$ and identify the limiting process by the martingale problem approach, when the diffusion coefficient of the slow component depends on the fast component. The proofs of strong and weak averaging principles are partly based on the study of the existence and uniqueness of an evolution system of measures for time-inhomogeneous SDEs with partially dissipative drift.

Review history (2 revisions) →

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. Strong averaging principle for nonautonomous slow-fast SPDEs driven by $\alpha$-stable processes

    math.PR 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Strong L^p averaging principle with rates for nonautonomous slow-fast SPDEs driven by α-stable processes, extending prior autonomous and Gaussian-noise results.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [29]

    X. Sun, J. Wang and Y. Xie: Averaging principles for time-inhomogeneous multi-scale SDEs via nonautonomous Poisson equations, arXiv:2412.09850

    arXiv

  2. [1]

    Billingsley:Convergence of Probability Measuraes, second edition, John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York, 1999

    P. Billingsley:Convergence of Probability Measuraes, second edition, John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York, 1999

    work page 1999

  3. [2]

    Bréhier: The averaging principle for stochastic differential equations driven by a Wiener process revisited, C

    C.E. Bréhier: The averaging principle for stochastic differential equations driven by a Wiener process revisited, C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris, 360 (2022), 265–273. TIME-INHOMOGENEOUS MULTI-SCALE SDES WITH PARTIALLY DISSIPATIVE COEFFICIENTS 27

    work page 2022

  4. [3]

    W. Cao, F. Wu and M. Wu: Weak convergence and stability of functional diffusion systems with singularly perturbed regime switching,Nonlinear Anal. Hybrid Syst., 53 (2024), Paper no. 101487, 17 pp

    work page 2024

  5. [4]

    Cerrai and A

    S. Cerrai and A. Lunardi: Averaging principle for nonautonomous slow-fast systems of stochastic reaction-diffusion equations: the almost periodic case,SIAM J. Math. Anal., 49 (2017) 2843–2884

    work page 2017

  6. [5]

    Chen:From Markov Chains to Non-Equilibrium Particle Systems, second edition, World Scientific, Singa- pore, 2004

    M.-F. Chen:From Markov Chains to Non-Equilibrium Particle Systems, second edition, World Scientific, Singa- pore, 2004

    work page 2004

  7. [6]

    Cheng, Z

    M. Cheng, Z. Hao and M. Röckner: Strong and weak convergence for the averaging principle of DDSDE with singular drift,Bernoulli, 30 (2024), 1586–1610

    work page 2024

  8. [7]

    Da Prato and M

    G. Da Prato and M. Röckner: Dissipative stochastic equations in Hilbert space with time dependent coefficients, Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl., 17 (2006), 397–403

    work page 2006

Show all 35 references
  1. [8]

    Da Prato and M

    G. Da Prato and M. Röckner: A note on evolution systems of measures for time-dependent stochastic differential equations, in:Seminar on Stochastic Analysis, Random Fields and Applications, vol. 59, 2008, 115–122

    2008

  2. [9]

    Durmus, A

    A. Durmus, A. Eberle, A. Guillin and R. Zimmer: An elementary approach to uniform in time propagation of chaos,Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 148 (2020), 5387–5398

    2020

  3. [10]

    W. E. and B. Engquist: Multiscale modeling and computations,Notice of AMS, 50 (2003), 1062–1070

    2003

  4. [11]

    Eberle: Reflection couplings and contraction rates for diffusions,Probab

    A. Eberle: Reflection couplings and contraction rates for diffusions,Probab. Theory Related Fields, 166 (2016), 851–886

    2016

  5. [12]

    Freidlin and A.D

    M. Freidlin and A.D. Wentzell:Random Perturbations of Dynamical Systems,third edition, Springer, Heidelberg, 2012

    2012

  6. [13]

    Galtier and G

    M. Galtier and G. Wainrib: Multiscale analysis of slow-fast neuronal learning models with noise,J. Math. Neurosci., 2 (2012), 1–64

    2012

  7. [14]

    Givon, I

    D. Givon, I. G. Kevrekidis and R. Kupferman: Strong convergence of projective integeration schemes for singu- larly perturbed stochastic differential systems,Comm. Math. Sci., 4 (2006), 707–729

    2006

  8. [15]

    Hairer and X.-M

    M. Hairer and X.-M. Li: Averaging dynamics driven by fractional Brownian motion,Ann. Probab., 48 (2020), 1826–1860

    2020

  9. [16]

    W. Hong, S. Li, W. Liu and X. Sun: Central limit type theorem and large deviations for multi-scale McKean- Vlasov SDEs,Probab. Theory Related Fields187 (2023), 133–201

    2023

  10. [17]

    Khasminskii: On an averging principle for Itô stochastic differential equations,Kibernetica, 4 (1968), 260– 279

    R.Z. Khasminskii: On an averging principle for Itô stochastic differential equations,Kibernetica, 4 (1968), 260– 279

    1968

  11. [18]

    Liu: Strong convergence of principle of averaging for multiscale stochastic dynamical systems,Commun

    D. Liu: Strong convergence of principle of averaging for multiscale stochastic dynamical systems,Commun. Math. Sci., 8 (2010), 999–1020

    2010

  12. [19]

    Liu and M

    W. Liu and M. Röckner:Stochastic Partial Differential Equations: An Introduction, Universitext, Springer, 2015

    2015

  13. [20]

    W. Liu, M. Röckner, X. Sun and Y. Xie: Averaging principle for slow-fast stochastic differential equations with time dependent locally Lipschitz coefficients,J. Differential Equations, 268 (2020), 2910–2948

    2020

  14. [21]

    Lorenzi, A

    L. Lorenzi, A. Lunardi, and A. Zamboni: Asymptotic behavior in time periodic parabolic problems with un- bounded coefficients,Journal of Differential Equations, 249 (2010), 3377–3418

    2010

  15. [22]

    Luo and J

    D. Luo and J. Wang: Exponential convergence inLp-Wasserstein distance for diffusion processes without uni- formly dissipative drift,Math. Nachr., 289 (2016), 1909–1926

    2016

  16. [23]

    G. A. Pavliotis and A.M. Stuart:Multiscale Methods: Averaging and Homogenization, Springer, New York, 2008

    2008

  17. [24]

    B. Pei, Y. Inahama and Y. Xu: Averaging principle for fast-slow system driven by mixed fractional Brownian rough path,J. Differential Equations, 301 (2021), 202–235

    2021

  18. [25]

    Priola and F.-Y

    E. Priola and F.-Y. Wang: Gradient estimates for diffusion semigroups with singular coefficient,J. Funct. Anal., 236 (2006), 244–264

    2006

  19. [26]

    Röckner, X

    M. Röckner, X. Sun and Y. Xie: Strong convergence order for slow-fast McKean-Vlasov stochastic differential equations,Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré Probab. Stat., 57 (2021), 547–576

    2021

  20. [27]

    G. Shen, J. Xiang and J.-L. Wu: Averaging principle for distribution dependent stochastic differential equations driven by fractional Brownian motion and standard Brownian motion,J. Differential Equations, 321 (2022), 381–414

    2022

  21. [28]

    Y. Shi, X. Sun, L. Wang and Y. Xie: Asymptotic behavior for multi-scale SDEs with monotonicity coefficients driven by Lévy processes,Potential Anal., 61 (2024), 111–152

    2024

  22. [30]

    X. Sun, L. Xie and Y. Xie: Strong and weak convergence rates for slow-fast stochastic differential equations driven byα-stable process,Bernoulli, 28 (2022), 343–369

    2022

  23. [31]

    Uda: Averaging principle for stochastic differential equations in the random periodic regime,Stochastic Process

    K. Uda: Averaging principle for stochastic differential equations in the random periodic regime,Stochastic Process. Appl., 139 (2021), 1–36

    2021

  24. [32]

    Veretennikov: On the averaging principle for systems of stochastic differential equations,Math

    A.Y. Veretennikov: On the averaging principle for systems of stochastic differential equations,Math. USSR Sborn, 69 (1991), 271–284. 28 XIAOBIN SUN, JIAN W ANG, AND YINGCHAO XIE

    1991

  25. [33]

    Wainrib: Double averaging principle for periodically forced slow-fast stochastic systems,Electron

    G. Wainrib: Double averaging principle for periodically forced slow-fast stochastic systems,Electron. Commun. Probab., 18 (2013), 1–12

    2013

  26. [34]

    Wang: Exponential ergodicity for non-dissipative McKean-Vlasov SDEs,Bernoulli, 29 (2023), 1035–1062

    F.-Y. Wang: Exponential ergodicity for non-dissipative McKean-Vlasov SDEs,Bernoulli, 29 (2023), 1035–1062

    2023

  27. [35]

    J. Xu, J. Liu and Y. Miao: Strong averaging principle for two-time-scale SDEs with non-Lipschitz coefficients, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 468 (2018), 116–140. Current address, Sun, X.: School of Mathematics and Statistics/RIMS, Jiangsu Normal University, Xuzhou, 221116, P.R. China ...

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.