Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 60 references

Non-Gaussianity of invariant measures to SPDEs in Da Prato-Debussche regime

T0 review · 2 major / 4 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 Every invariant measure of these singular SPDEs with odd polynomial nonlinearity of degree at least 3 is non-Gaussian.

desk verdict Elegant algebraic proof of non-Gaussianity for DPD-regime SPDEs, but the advertised Phi^4_delta coverage rests on an unverified moment assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.06612 v2 pith:I3UFHJTD submitted 2025-01-11 math.PR

Ajay Chandra , Ilya Chevyrev This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PR MSC 60H1560H4081T08
keywords non-GaussianityinvariantmeasuresstochasticquantizationDaPrato-DebusscheregimeWickpowersgeneratorequationPhi^4singularSPDEs
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 proposes an elementary, mostly algebraic method to prove that invariant (equilibrium) measures of parabolic stochastic PDEs with polynomial nonlinearities are not Gaussian, in the Da Prato–Debussche regime where solutions exist but are rough distributions. The method uses the generator equation of the SPDE at stationarity, an integrated Dyson–Schwinger identity, to derive moment recursions that no Gaussian law can satisfy when the polynomial has odd degree at least 3. The advertised application covers the $\Phi^4_\delta$ measures for $\delta < \frac{14}{5}$, including cases where the invariant measure is singular with respect to the Gaussian free field, so the result gives an elementary proof of interaction for stochastic quantization equations in a regime beyond absolute continuity.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the generator equation at stationarity, $\mathbb{E}_{u_0\sim\mu}[\mathcal{L}F(u_0)] = 0$, where $\mathcal{L}$ is the limit in Lemma 3.20: $$\mathcal{L}F(u_0) = \sum_i \partial_i F(X_0)(\langle u_0,(\$\Delta$-1)\varphi_i\rangle + \langle :P(u_0):,\varphi_i\rangle) + \frac12 \sum_{i,j}\$partial^{2}$_{ij}F(X_0)\langle \mathrm{Cov}_\xi * \varphi_i,\varphi_j\rangle.$$ This is an infinite-dimensional Euler–Lagrange equation, equivalently an integrated second-order integration-by-parts (Dyson–Schwinger) identity. Applied to $F(x)=x^k$, it yields the recursion $\mathbb{E}[X^{k-1}(Y-Z)] = \frac{k-1}{2}\mathbb{E}[X^{k-2}]$ with $X=\langle u_0,\varphi\rangle$, $Y=\langle :P(u_0):,\varphi\rangle$, $Z=\langle u_0,(\Delta-1)\varphi\rangle$. Hermite polynomials $Q_k$ in the first Wiener chaos then force $\mathbb{E}[Q_k(\hat X)Y]=0$ for $k\geq 2$, and at the top chaos $k=p$ the leading term $\theta u_0^p$ of $:P(u_0):$ produces the integral $\theta\int (C\varphi)^p\varphi$, which cannot vanish for odd $p$.

What would settle it

Because the argument reduces Gaussianity to the identity $\int_{\mathbb{T}^d}(C\varphi)(x)^p\varphi(x)\,dx=0$ for all smooth $\varphi$, where $C$ is the covariance operator of the stationary field and $p\geq 3$ is odd, one can settle the claim by checking that identity for any candidate Gaussian invariant measure: for a translation-invariant $C$ on the torus, taking $\varphi$ to be a positive-eigenvalue eigenfunction makes the integral strictly positive, so the identity fails and no such Gaussian measure can exist.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central result is Theorem 3.24: under Assumptions 3.9, 3.19, and 3.21, if $P$ is a polynomial of odd degree $p \geq 3$ and $u$ is the Markov process defined through the Da Prato–Debussche decomposition of $(\partial_t + 1 - \Delta)u = P(u) + \xi$, then the invariant measure $\mu$ is not Gaussian. The proof assumes $\mu$ is Gaussian, writes the stationary field as $u_0 = g + \Phi$ with $\Phi$ a Gaussian free field and $g$ a regular remainder, and derives from the stationary generator equation the identity $\int_{\mathbb{T}^d} (C\varphi)(x)^p \varphi(x)\,dx = 0$ for every smooth test function $\varphi$, where $C$ is the covariance operator of $\mu$. Because $p$ is odd and $C$ has positive eigenfunctions, the integral is strictly positive for a suitable $\varphi$, a contradiction. The same argument, with a modified top-chaos computation, supplies non-Gaussianity for non-local polynomial models such as the $\Phi^3_2$ measure.

Load-bearing premise

The proof assumes the invariant measure has finite moments of the state-space norm, $\mathbb{E}_{u_0\sim\mu}\lVert u_0\rVert_{\mathcal{C}}^q < \infty$ for every finite $q$ (Assumption 3.21), because only then can the $t\to 0$ limit be interchanged with the expectation over $\mu$ in Lemma 3.23; the paper does not verify this for the $\Phi^4_\delta$ measures and cites it as a separate task.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every $\Phi^4_\delta$ equilibrium measure with $\delta < \frac{14}{5}$, non-Gaussianity holds even when the measure is singular with respect to the Gaussian free field.
  • The stationary generator equation becomes a usable tool for SPDEs whose state space is a set of rough distributions, giving a second application of the Langevin dynamic to Euclidean quantum field theory.
  • The moment recursion in Lemma 3.23 is available as a quantitative stationarity identity for any invariant measure in this class, independent of the non-Gaussianity conclusion.
  • The method extends beyond local monomials to polynomial non-localities such as the normalised $\Phi^3_2$ model, and the authors indicate that the sine-Gordon model is a plausible but nontrivial next case.

Reading between the lines

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

  • We infer that if Assumption 3.21 is later established for $\Phi^4_\delta$ (for instance through coming-down-from-infinity estimates), Theorem 3.24 becomes unconditional for those measures; the paper explicitly leaves this verification open.
  • The top-chaos test is sensitive to the parity of $p$: for even-degree nonlinearities the same obstruction can vanish, suggesting that non-Gaussianity in those cases would need a different mechanism.
  • A similar generator-based obstruction could be sought for other singular Langevin dynamics whose nonlinearity has a single dominant Wick chaos, such as Yang–Mills–Higgs or tensor field theories, provided a state space and generator can be constructed.
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. This paper develops an elementary method, based on the generator equation at stationarity, to prove non-Gaussianity of invariant measures for parabolic SPDEs with polynomial nonlinearities in the Da Prato–Debussche (DPD) regime. The method is first presented in a classical one-dimensional setting (Section 2), where the generator identity is derived under mild assumptions and the Gaussianity contradiction is obtained via a Wiener–Itô chaos argument. The main result, Theorem 3.24, states that if Assumptions 3.9, 3.19, and 3.21 hold, then any invariant measure of the DPD-type SPDE (3.1) with odd-degree polynomial P of degree at least 3 is non-Gaussian. The paper also reviews the DPD solution theory, introduces a state space C for the Markov process, and discusses in Appendix A the relation between the DPD regime and singularity of the invariant measure with respect to the Gaussian free field.

Significance. Conditional on the assumptions, the theorem is clean and the method is genuinely different from existing non-Gaussianity proofs: it avoids skeleton inequalities and instead uses an integrated Dyson–Schwinger identity. The paper is also transparent about the role of the moment assumption, explicitly marking Assumption 3.21 as unverified for the Φ^4_δ models advertised in the abstract. If the missing moment estimate is supplied, the result would cover singular regimes where the invariant measure is mutually singular with respect to the Gaussian free field, which would be a valuable addition to the literature. The careful presentation of the DPD generator and the new state space C are useful contributions in their own right.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.3, Assumption 3.21 and Remark 3.22] The proof of Theorem 3.24 depends critically on Assumption 3.21, since Lemma 3.23 passes the t→0 limit inside E_{u0∼µ} by dominated convergence using the bound from Lemma 3.20; however, Assumption 3.21 is not established for the Φ^4_δ measures with δ<14/5 that the abstract claims to cover. Remark 3.22 explicitly defers this verification to separate a priori estimates. The abstract's unconditional coverage claim is therefore not supported by the present proof; the theorem should be stated conditionally, or the moment estimate should be supplied.
  2. [Section 3.1, Assumption 3.19] The global well-posedness and the bound (3.19) are assumed for the DPD equations, but the paper does not demonstrate that these hold for the Φ^4_δ models in the advertised range δ<14/5. The cited literature gives related a priori estimates, but the implication is not spelled out, so the applicability of Theorem 3.24 to those models is not fully established. This is a second assumption that stands between the theorem and the abstract's coverage claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Introduction, page 3] The statement that the state space has 'empty intersection with smooth functions' is inaccurate, since Lemma 3.13 implies that all sufficiently regular functions belong to C; please clarify the intended meaning.
  2. [Section 3.3, proof of Theorem 3.24] The existence of a nonzero eigenfunction of the covariance operator C and the approximation argument should be elaborated, since C is only established as a bounded operator L^q→L^{2p} and not as a compact operator on L^2.
  3. [Appendix A] The mapping of parameters to [HKN24, Sec. 3] is quite compressed; a short explanation of the notation m, σ, k, and n_i would improve readability.
  4. [Section 2, Lemma 2.5] The measure µ in Lemma 2.5 is not introduced before its use; consider defining µ explicitly in the lemma statement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the non-Gaussianity theorem is a conditional mathematical derivation whose only nontrivial gap is an unverified moment assumption, not a reduction of the conclusion to its inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claim (Theorem 3.24) is derived from the generator identity of Lemma 3.23, which in turn follows from Lemma 3.20 (the finite-dimensional generator formula for the Da Prato–Debussche process) and invariance of the measure μ. The passage from the pointwise limit to the expectation under μ uses dominated convergence with the bound |t^{-1}E[F(X_t)-F(X_0)]| ≤ (2+8u0_8_q)^q and therefore requires Assumption 3.21, E_{u0∼μ} 8u0_8_q^q < ∞. This is an explicit analytic regularity hypothesis, not a restatement of Gaussianity or non-Gaussianity, and no fitted parameter is involved. The assumption is not 'predicted' by the dynamics but is a hypothesis of the theorem; Remark 3.22 explicitly says verifying it for the advertised Φ^4_δ models is 'a separate task' and points to prior a priori estimates. That makes Theorem 3.24 conditional but does not make it circular. The Gaussian contradiction in Theorem 3.24 is also independent of the conclusion: under μ Gaussian, the top-chaos integral ∫(Cφ)^p φ dx is shown to be both zero, via the generator identity, and strictly positive, since p is odd, a genuine contradiction based on Wiener chaos orthogonality and the covariance operator of μ. Self-citations are used for background, notation, and prior a priori estimates, not to assume non-Gaussianity or to exclude alternatives, and the paper credits earlier non-Gaussianity results such as [Dim74], [MS77], [BFS83], [GH21], [HS22], and [AK25]. No circular step could be located, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

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

The proof introduces no data-fitted numerical parameters and no new physical entities. The auxiliary regularity exponent gamma in (3.6) is an analytic choice, not a fitted constant. The main input the reader must supply is a set of analytic assumptions on the noise, the global dynamics, and the invariant measure, with Assumption 3.21 being the least verified in this paper.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Heat semigroup smoothing, Banach fixed point theorem, and classical local well-posedness theory for the remainder equation.
    Used in Proposition 3.2 and throughout the DPD decomposition; these are standard analytic tools, not assumptions specific to this paper.
  • domain assumption Assumption 3.9: the spatial covariance of the noise satisfies the Holder-type bound |Cov_nu(x)| < |x|^rho with rho > max{-d/p, 2 alpha}.
    This is needed for the existence and regularity of Wick powers (Propositions 3.10 and 3.12). It is an analytic condition on the model, not proved in the paper.
  • domain assumption Assumption 3.14 and 3.19: global well-posedness of the remainder equation and a polynomial a priori bound of the form ||v_s||_C^gamma <= (2 + ||Psi||_B + s^{-1})^m.
    These are essential for the global definition of the Markov process and for the moment bounds used in the generator argument (Lemma 3.20). The paper does not prove them in general.
  • domain assumption Assumption 3.21: the invariant measure mu has finite moments E_{u0 ~ mu} ||u0||_C^q < infinity for all finite q.
    Needed to pass from the generator identity at fixed initial condition to the stationary identity in Lemma 3.23, via dominated convergence. This is the main unverified input for the advertised Phi^4_delta application.
  • standard math Wiener chaos decomposition, Hermite polynomial orthogonality, and the structure of the Wiener isometry for Gaussian measures.
    Used in the contradiction argument in Theorems 2.7 and 3.24 to show that a Gaussian measure cannot satisfy the stationary identities unless the nonlinearity vanishes.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Non-Gaussianity of invariant measures to SPDEs in Da Prato-Debussche regime." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/I3UFHJTD

@misc{pith2026250106612,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Non-Gaussianity of invariant measures to SPDEs in Da Prato-Debussche regime},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/I3UFHJTD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.06612}
}
abstract

We propose an elementary method to show non-Gaussianity of invariant measures of parabolic stochastic partial differential equations with polynomial non-linearities in the Da Prato--Debussche regime. The approach is essentially algebraic and involves using the generator equation of the SPDE at stationarity. Our results in particular cover the $\Phi^4_\delta$ measures in dimensions $\delta<\frac{14}{5}$, which includes cases where the invariant measure is singular with respect to the invariant measure of the linear solution.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type url doi eprint volume year label extra.label sort.label INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 'mid.sentence := ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in capitalize " " * FUNCT...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Albeverio and S

    S. Albeverio and S. Kusuoka . The invariant measure and the flow associated to the ^4_3 -quantum field model. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5) 20, no. 4, (2020), 1359--1427. doi:10.2422/2036-2145.201809_008 http://dx.doi.org/10.2422/2036-2145.201809_008

    arXiv 2020

  4. [4]

    Construction of a non-Gaussian and rotation-invariant $\Phi ^4$-measure and associated flow on ${\mathbb R}^3$ through stochastic quantization

    S. Albeverio and S. Kusuoka . Construction of a non-Gaussian and rotation-invariant ^4 -measure and associated flow on R ^3 through stochastic quantization . arXiv e-prints (2021). arXiv:2102.08040 http://arxiv.org/abs/2102.08040

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

  5. [5]

    Bringmann and S

    B. Bringmann and S. Cao . Global well-posedness of the dynamical sine-Gordon model up to 6 . arXiv e-prints (2024). arXiv:2410.15493 http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.15493

    arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Bringmann and S

    B. Bringmann and S. Cao . Global well-posedness of the stochastic Abelian-Higgs equations in two dimensions . arXiv e-prints (2024). arXiv:2403.16878 http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.16878

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Bruned , A

    Y. Bruned , A. Chandra , I. Chevyrev , and M. Hairer . Renormalising SPDE s in regularity structures. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 23, no. 3, (2021), 869--947. doi:10.4171/jems/1025 http://dx.doi.org/10.4171/jems/1025

    doi:10.4171/jems/1025 2021

  8. [8]

    Bruned , I

    Y. Bruned , I. Chevyrev , and P. K. Friz . Examples of renormalized SDE s. In Stochastic partial differential equations and related fields, vol. 229 of Springer Proc. Math. Stat., 303--317. Springer, Cham, 2018. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-74929-7\_19 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74929-7\_19

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-74929-7 2018

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Bruned , I

    Y. Bruned , I. Chevyrev , P. K. Friz , and R. Prei . A rough path perspective on renormalization. J. Funct. Anal. 277, no. 11, (2019), 108283, 60. doi:10.1016/j.jfa.2019.108283 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2019.108283

    2019

  2. [10]

    Berglund

    N. Berglund . An introduction to singular stochastics PDE s--- A llen- C ahn equations, metastability, and regularity structures . EMS Series of Lectures in Mathematics. EMS Press, Berlin, [2022] 2022, x+220. doi:10.4171/ELM/34 http://dx.doi.org/10.4171/ELM/34

    2022 doi

  3. [11]

    D. C. Brydges , J. Fr\" o hlich , and A. D. Sokal . A new proof of the existence and nontriviality of the continuum 4 2 and 4 3 quantum field theories. Comm. Math. Phys. 91, no. 2, (1983), 141--186. doi:10.1007/BF01211157 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01211157

    1983 doi

  4. [12]

    Barashkov and M

    N. Barashkov and M. Gubinelli . A variational method for ^4_3 . Duke Math. J. 169, no. 17, (2020), 3339--3415. doi:10.1215/00127094-2020-0029 http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00127094-2020-0029

    2020 doi

  5. [13]

    Bern , M

    Z. Bern , M. B. Halpern , L. Sadun , and C. Taubes . Continuum regularization of quantum field theory. I . S calar prototype. Nuclear Phys. B 284, no. 1, (1987), 1--34. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(87)90025-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(87)90025-3

    1987 doi

  6. [14]

    Bruned , M

    Y. Bruned , M. Hairer , and L. Zambotti . Algebraic renormalisation of regularity structures. Invent. Math. 215, no. 3, (2019), 1039--1156. doi:10.1007/s00222-018-0841-x http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00222-018-0841-x

    2019 doi

  7. [15]

    Catellier and K

    R. Catellier and K. Chouk . Paracontrolled distributions and the 3-dimensional stochastic quantization equation. Ann. Probab. 46, no. 5, (2018), 2621--2679. doi:10.1214/17-AOP1235 http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/17-AOP1235

    2018 doi

  8. [16]

    Chandra , I

    A. Chandra , I. Chevyrev , M. Hairer , and H. Shen . Langevin dynamic for the 2D Yang-Mills measure . Publ. math. IHÉS (2022). arXiv:2006.04987 http://arxiv.org/abs/2006.04987 . doi:10.1007/s10240-022-00132-0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10240-022-00132-0

    2022 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Chandra , I

    A. Chandra , I. Chevyrev , M. Hairer , and H. Shen . Stochastic quantisation of Yang-Mills-Higgs in 3D . arXiv e-prints (2022). arXiv:2201.03487 http://arxiv.org/abs/2201.03487

    2022 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Chandra and L

    A. Chandra and L. Ferdinand . A stochastic analysis approach to tensor field theories. arXiv e-prints (2024). arXiv:2306.05305 http://arxiv.org/abs/2306.05305

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Chandra and M

    A. Chandra and M. Hairer . An analytic BPHZ theorem for regularity structures . ArXiv e-prints (2016). arXiv:1612.08138 http://arxiv.org/abs/1612.08138

    2016 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Chevyrev

    I. Chevyrev . Hopf and pre-Lie algebras in regularity structures . arXiv e-prints (2022). arXiv:2206.14557 http://arxiv.org/abs/2206.14557

    2022 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Chevyrev

    I. Chevyrev . Norm inflation for a non-linear heat equation with gaussian initial conditions. Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput. 12, no. 3, (2024), 1745--1768. doi:10.1007/s40072-023-00317-6 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40072-023-00317-6

    2024 doi

  14. [22]

    Chevyrev , B

    I. Chevyrev , B. Hambly , and A. Mayorcas . A stochastic model of chemorepulsion with additive noise and nonlinear sensitivity. Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput. 11, no. 2, (2023), 730--772. doi:10.1007/s40072-022-00244-y http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40072-022-00244-y

    2023 doi

  15. [23]

    Chandra , M

    A. Chandra , M. Hairer , and H. Shen . The dynamical sine-gordon model in the full subcritical regime. arXiv e-prints (2018). arXiv:1808.02594 http://arxiv.org/abs/1808.02594

    2018 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Chevyrev and H

    I. Chevyrev and H. Mirsajjadi . Local well-posedness of subcritical non-linear heat equations with Gaussian initial data . arXiv e-prints (2024). arXiv:2410.11638 http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.11638

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Chandra , A

    A. Chandra , A. Moinat , and H. Weber . A P riori B ounds for the ^4 E quation in the F ull S ub-critical R egime. Archive for R ational M echanics and A nalysis 247, no. 3, (2023), 48. doi:10.1007/s00205-023-01876-7 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00205-023-01876-7

    2023 doi

  18. [26]

    Chevyrev , T

    I. Chevyrev , T. Oh , and Y. Wang . Norm inflation for the cubic nonlinear heat equation above the scaling critical regularity . arXiv e-prints (2022). To appear in Funkcialaj Ekvacioj. arXiv:2205.14488 http://arxiv.org/abs/2205.14488

    2022 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Chevyrev and H

    I. Chevyrev and H. Shen . Invariant measure and universality of the 2d yang-mills langevin dynamic, 2023. arXiv:2302.12160 http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.12160 . ://arxiv.org/abs/2302.12160

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Chandra and H

    A. Chandra and H. Weber . Stochastic PDE s, regularity structures, and interacting particle systems. Ann. Fac. Sci. Toulouse Math. (6) 26, no. 4, (2017), 847--909. doi:10.5802/afst.1555 http://dx.doi.org/10.5802/afst.1555

    2017 doi

  21. [29]

    Caravenna and L

    F. Caravenna and L. Zambotti . Hairer's reconstruction theorem without regularity structures. EMS Surv. Math. Sci. 7, no. 2, (2020), 207--251. doi:10.4171/emss/39 http://dx.doi.org/10.4171/emss/39

    2020 doi

  22. [30]

    Duch , M

    P. Duch , M. Gubinelli , and P. Rinaldi . Parabolic stochastic quantisation of the fractional ^4_3 model in the full subcritical regime. arXiv e-prints (2024). arXiv:2303.18112 http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.18112

    2024

  23. [31]

    A symptotic perturbation expansion in the P ( )_2 quantum field theory

    Dimock, Jonathan . A symptotic perturbation expansion in the P ( )_2 quantum field theory. Communications in Mathematical Physics 35, no. 4, (1974), 347--356

    1974

  24. [32]

    Da Prato and A

    G. Da Prato and A. Debussche . Two-dimensional N avier- S tokes equations driven by a space-time white noise. J. Funct. Anal. 196, no. 1, (2002), 180--210. doi:10.1006/jfan.2002.3919 http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jfan.2002.3919

    2002

  25. [33]

    Da Prato and A

    G. Da Prato and A. Debussche . Strong solutions to the stochastic quantization equations. Ann. Probab. 31, no. 4, (2003), 1900--1916. doi:10.1214/aop/1068646370 http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/aop/1068646370

    2003

  26. [34]

    Da Prato and L

    G. Da Prato and L. Tubaro . Wick powers in stochastic PDE s: an introduction. In Quantum and stochastic mathematical physics, vol. 377 of Springer Proc. Math. Stat., 1--15. Springer, Cham, [2023] 2023. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-14031-0\_1 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14031-0\_1

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    P. Duch . Flow equation approach to singular stochastic PDEs . arXiv e-prints (2021). arXiv:2109.11380 http://arxiv.org/abs/2109.11380

    2021 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Esquivel and H

    S. Esquivel and H. Weber . A priori bounds for the dynamic fractional ^4 model on T ^3 in the full subcritical regime. arXiv e-prints (2024). arXiv:2411.16536 http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.16536

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Gubinelli and M

    M. Gubinelli and M. Hofmanov\' a . A PDE construction of the E uclidean _3^4 quantum field theory. Comm. Math. Phys. 384, no. 1, (2021), 1--75. doi:10.1007/s00220-021-04022-0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-021-04022-0

    2021 doi

  30. [38]

    Gubinelli , M

    M. Gubinelli , M. Hofmanov \'a , and N. Rana . Decay of correlations in stochastic quantization: the exponential euclidean field in two dimensions. Stochastics and Partial Differential Equations: Analysis and Computations (2024). doi:10.1007/s40072-024-00328-x http://dx.doi.or...

    2024 doi

  31. [39]

    Gubinelli , P

    M. Gubinelli , P. Imkeller , and N. Perkowski . Paracontrolled distributions and singular PDE s. Forum Math. Pi 3, (2015), e6, 75. arXiv:1210.2684v3 http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.2684v3 . doi:10.1017/fmp.2015.2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/fmp.2015.2

    2015 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Glimm and A

    J. Glimm and A. Jaffe . Quantum physics. Springer-Verlag, New York, second ed., 1987, xxii+535. A functional integral point of view. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4728-9 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4728-9

    1987 doi

  33. [41]

    Gubinelli and S.-J

    M. Gubinelli and S.-J. Meyer . The FBSDE approach to sine-Gordon up to 6 . arXiv e-prints arXiv:2401.13648. arXiv:2401.13648 http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.13648 . doi:10.48550/arXiv.2401.13648 http://dx.doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.13648

    doi arXiv

  34. [42]

    Gubinelli and N

    M. Gubinelli and N. Perkowski . The infinitesimal generator of the stochastic B urgers equation. Probab. Theory Related Fields 178, no. 3-4, (2020), 1067--1124. doi:10.1007/s00440-020-00996-5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00440-020-00996-5

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    M. Hairer . Solving the KPZ equation. Ann. of Math. (2) 178, no. 2, (2013), 559--664. arXiv:1109.6811 http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.6811 . doi:10.4007/annals.2013.178.2.4 http://dx.doi.org/10.4007/annals.2013.178.2.4

    2013 arXiv

  36. [44]

    M. Hairer . Singular stochastic PDE s. In Proceedings of the I nternational C ongress of M athematicians--- S eoul 2014. V ol. 1 , 685--709. Kyung Moon Sa, Seoul, 2014

    2014

  37. [45]

    M. Hairer . A theory of regularity structures. Invent. Math. 198, no. 2, (2014), 269--504. arXiv:1303.5113 http://arxiv.org/abs/1303.5113 . doi:10.1007/s00222-014-0505-4 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00222-014-0505-4

    2014 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Hairer , S

    M. Hairer , S. Kusuoka , and H. Nagoji . Singularity of solutions to singular SPDEs . arXiv e-prints (2024). arXiv:2409.10037 http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.10037

    2024

  39. [47]

    Hairer and H

    M. Hairer and H. Shen . The dynamical sine- G ordon model. Comm. Math. Phys. 341, no. 3, (2016), 933--989. arXiv:1409.5724 http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.5724 . doi:10.1007/s00220-015-2525-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-015-2525-3

    2016 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Hairer and R

    M. Hairer and R. Steele . The _3^4 measure has sub- G aussian tails. J. Stat. Phys. 186, no. 3, (2022), Paper No. 38, 25. doi:10.1007/s10955-021-02866-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10955-021-02866-3

    2022 doi

  41. [49]

    Kupiainen

    A. Kupiainen . Renormalization group and stochastic PDE s. Annales Henri Poincar \'e 17, no. 3, (2016), 497--535. arXiv:1410.3094 http://arxiv.org/abs/1410.3094 . doi:10.1007/s00023-015-0408-y http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00023-015-0408-y

    2016 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Linares , F

    P. Linares , F. Otto , M. Tempelmayr , and P. Tsatsoulis . A diagram-free approach to the stochastic estimates in regularity structures. Invent. Math. 237, no. 3, (2024), 1469--1565. doi:10.1007/s00222-024-01275-z http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00222-024-01275-z

    2024 doi

  43. [51]

    T. J. Lyons . Differential equations driven by rough signals. Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana 14, no. 2, (1998), 215--310

    1998

  44. [52]

    M agnen and R

    J. M agnen and R. S \'e n \'e or . P hase space cell expansion and B orel summability for the euclidean _3^4 theory. Communications in Mathematical Physics 56, no. 3, (1977), 237--276. doi:10.1007/BF01614211 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01614211

    1977 doi

  45. [53]

    Mourrat and H

    J.-C. Mourrat and H. Weber . The dynamic ^4_3 model comes down from infinity. Comm. Math. Phys. 356, no. 3, (2017), 673--753. arXiv:1601.01234 http://arxiv.org/abs/1601.01234 . doi:10.1007/s00220-017-2997-4 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-017-2997-4

    2017 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Mourrat and H

    J.-C. Mourrat and H. Weber . Global well-posedness of the dynamic ^4 model in the plane. Ann. Probab. 45, no. 4, (2017), 2398--2476. doi:10.1214/16-AOP1116 http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/16-AOP1116

    2017 doi

  47. [55]

    Moinat and H

    A. Moinat and H. Weber . Local bounds for stochastic reaction diffusion equations. Electron. J. Probab. 25, (2020), Paper No. 17, 26. doi:10.1214/19-ejp397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/19-ejp397

    2020 doi

  48. [56]

    Moinat and H

    A. Moinat and H. Weber . Space-time localisation for the dynamic ^4_3 model. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 73, no. 12, (2020), 2519--2555. doi:10.1002/cpa.21925 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpa.21925

    2020 doi

  49. [57]

    Otto and H

    F. Otto and H. Weber . Quasilinear SPDE s via rough paths. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 232, no. 2, (2019), 873--950. doi:10.1007/s00205-018-01335-8 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00205-018-01335-8

    2019 doi

  50. [58]

    Parisi and Y

    G. Parisi and Y. S. Wu . Perturbation theory without gauge fixing. Sci. Sinica 24, no. 4, (1981), 483--496

    1981

  51. [59]

    H. Shen . Stochastic quantization of an A belian gauge theory. Comm. Math. Phys. 384, no. 3, (2021), 1445--1512. doi:10.1007/s00220-021-04114-x http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-021-04114-x

    2021 doi

  52. [60]

    Tsatsoulis and H

    P. Tsatsoulis and H. Weber . Spectral gap for the stochastic quantization equation on the 2-dimensional torus. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar\' e Probab. Stat. 54, no. 3, (2018), 1204--1249. doi:10.1214/17-AIHP837 http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/17-AIHP837

    2018 doi

Pith tools

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