Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Global well-posedness for intermediate NLS with nonvanishing conditions at infinity

T0 review · 5 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The intermediate NLS equation, which models finite-depth internal waves and admits dark solitons, is shown to be globally well-posed in a space that allows nonvanishing boundary conditions at infinity.

desk verdict A real first: well-posedness for INLS with dark-soliton boundary conditions in Z^2_rho, but the abstract overclaims a deep-water theorem and the uniqueness step is left as an omission that carries the weight of the global theory. read the letter →

arxiv 2512.18998 v3 pith:JC5SVL4M submitted 2025-12-22 math.AP

Takafumi Akahori , Rana Badreddine , Slim Ibrahim , Nobu Kishimoto This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35Q5535A0135Q51
keywords intermediatenonlinearSchrödingerequationwell-posednessdarksolitonsZhidkovspacenonvanishingboundaryconditionsmodifiedenergymethodCalogero-MoserderivativeNLSdeep-waterlimit
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 establishes that the intermediate nonlinear Schrödinger equation (INLS), which models envelope dynamics of internal waves in a finite-depth stratified fluid and admits dark solitons, has a well-posed Cauchy theory in a functional space that allows the modulus to tend to a nonzero constant ρ at infinity. Previously, well-posedness results for INLS were confined to spaces of decaying functions, so the dark solitons — the solutions of most physical interest — were outside the theory. The paper proves local well-posedness in the Zhidkov-type space Z^2_ρ for the generalized equation with arbitrary real coefficients, and then global well-posedness in the defocusing case α≠0, β≥0, using two new conserved quantities designed to be finite for nonvanishing data. A corollary gives a uniform bound on the full Z^2_ρ norm for the integrable defocusing case, and the deep-water limit to the Calogero-Moser derivative NLS is justified in the same spaces.

What carries the argument

The modified energy method is the engine. Rather than controlling ∥∂^2_x u∥^2 directly, the proof adds corrector integrals such as I_2(t)=β Re ∫ ζ H∂_x(ζ ∂_x P_{≥n0} ζ) ∂_x P_{≥n0} ζ dx whose time derivatives cancel the nonlocal, derivative-losing terms produced by the Hilbert transform in the nonlinearity; this is the cancellation step that makes a priori estimates possible. Frequency envelopes c_j[f] control how the solution's frequency distribution evolves, giving continuity of the flow map in Z^2_ρ without treating the space as a vector space. The conserved functionals H1 and H2 are the eventual payoff: they are the quantities that are finite and conserved on the whole solution class.

What would settle it

Find two smooth initial data in Z^∞_ρ that converge to the same element of Z^2_ρ but whose conserved quantities H1 or H2 converge to different limits; that would break the approximation bridge and with it the global well-posedness claim. Alternatively, a numerical simulation starting from a dark-soliton profile that shows E^2_ρ(u(t)) growing without bound would contradict the uniform bound of Corollary 4.2.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that (gINLS) is locally well-posed in Z^2_ρ for every δ>0, α,β∈R, and globally well-posed when α≠0 and β≥0: unique solutions exist in C([0,T];Z^2_ρ) (in fact on all of R in the global case), depend continuously on the initial data, and preserve additional regularity. The key novelty is that the conservation laws H1 and H2 are explicitly written so that every term is a function of the difference |u|^2−ρ^2 rather than |u|^2; this is what makes them well-defined in Z^2_ρ, where the traditional Lax-pair conservation laws do not make sense. In the integrable case β=±|α|, a further corrected conservation law H^{INLS}_2 yields the uniform bound sup_t E^2_ρ(u(t))<∞.

Load-bearing premise

The conservation laws are derived for smooth solutions and then extended to the whole space by a 'standard approximation argument' based on continuity of the flow map and persistence of regularity, but no approximation/density theorem is stated or proved, and the paper notes the Lax-pair quantities fail to be well-defined in Z^2_ρ.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Dark solitons of INLS now belong to a space where their Cauchy problem is well posed, opening the way to rigorous orbital stability and dynamics studies.
  • The proof does not use integrability, so the global result applies to the whole defocusing family β≥0, not only to the integrable parameter values.
  • The uniform bound sup_t E^2_ρ(u(t)) for the integrable defocusing case implies global-in-time control of the solution size, not just existence.
  • The deep-water limit is justified in Zhidkov spaces, so approximations of INLS by the Calogero-Moser derivative NLS are rigorous at the level of solutions.
  • Because the local theorem holds for arbitrary α,β, the same Z^2_ρ framework is ready for all parameter ranges, including focusing ones, up to whatever a priori bounds are available.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same corrected-energy construction may transfer to other integrable equations whose standard Lax conservation laws fail for nonvanishing boundary data; the paper's observation that such laws are not well-defined on Z^2_ρ is the signpost.
  • A natural testable extension is to check numerically whether dark-soliton collisions preserve E^2_ρ; the theorem predicts boundedness, so any observed growth would point to a hidden gap in the approximation argument.
  • The frequency-envelope technique suggests that well-posedness in Z^0_ρ (the formal scaling-critical space) may be approachable by a refined version of this method, although the paper leaves that open.
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

5 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the intermediate nonlinear Schrödinger equation (INLS) with nonvanishing boundary conditions at infinity, aiming to establish local and global well-posedness in a Zhidkov-type space Z^2_ρ, together with analogous results for a generalized version (gINLS). The proof of local well-posedness uses mollified equations, energy estimates, a modified-energy corrector to handle derivative loss, and a frequency-envelope argument for continuity. Global well-posedness is based on two newly constructed modified conservation laws H_1 and H_2, with a stronger uniform bound in the integrable case. The abstract also claims a rigorous deep-water limit theorem to the generalized Calogero-Moser derivative NLS equation, but no such theorem appears in the body.

Significance. If fully substantiated, the result would be a significant advance: it provides the first well-posedness framework for INLS in spaces that accommodate its dark-soliton nonvanishing boundary conditions, and it demonstrates the viability of the modified-energy method and frequency envelopes in Zhidkov spaces. The construction of the mollified solutions, the uniform Z^2_ρ estimates, and the explicit frequency-envelope estimates (Lemma 3.4 and (3.27), proved in Appendix B) are valuable and largely coherent. However, the manuscript currently omits or only sketches several load-bearing steps (uniqueness, continuity of the flow map, the approximation argument for conservation laws, and the deep-water limit), so the central claims are not yet fully established.

major comments (5)
  1. [Theorem 1.1, Step 2 (p.17)] Uniqueness in C([0,T];Z^2_ρ) is asserted with 'We omit the details.' This is a load-bearing step: Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.2 state well-posedness, and the global theory in Section 4 relies on a unique maximal solution. The difference estimate (3.26) is proven only for the mollified sequence, and extending it to two arbitrary Z^2_ρ solutions requires rerunning the argument of Proposition 3.3 with the original equation, controlling the corrector J(t) and remainders R_2,R_3 using only ∂_x μ ∈ H^1. This missing estimate must be written out.
  2. [Theorem 1.1, Step 3 (p.17–18)] Continuity of the flow map in Z^2_ρ is only outlined. The proof of (3.27) is given in Appendix B, but the passage from (3.27) to the claimed continuity, especially the time-continuity of t↦u(t) in Z^2_ρ, is sketched. The text says the proof of evolution continuity in Z^k_ρ is omitted. Since continuous dependence is part of well-posedness, this step must be completed, not deferred.
  3. [Abstract and body] The abstract states: 'we rigorously justify the deep-water limit, proving that solutions of the generalized INLS converge to those of the generalized Calogero-Moser (CM) derivative NLS equation in Zhidkov-type spaces.' No theorem, statement, or proof of this convergence appears anywhere in Sections 1–4. This is a claimed main contribution that is entirely absent. The statement should either be removed or the theorem and proof must be added.
  4. [Section 4, proof of Theorem 4.1 (p.21)] The conservation laws are first derived for smooth solutions u∈Z^∞_ρ and then extended to Z^2_ρ by 'a standard approximation argument, which relies on continuity of the flow map and persistence of regularity.' No approximation theorem is stated or proved. One needs to show that P_{≤ℓ}ϕ→ϕ in Z^2_ρ (which is given by (2.11)), that the corresponding solutions converge in a suitable sense, and that H_1 and H_2 are continuous on Z^2_ρ under the estimates in Section 4. Because the continuity of the flow map in Z^2_ρ is itself incomplete (Step 3), this gap affects all global a priori bounds (4.2)–(4.3) and the uniform bound in Corollary 4.2.
  5. [Corollary 4.2 (p.23–24)] The coefficient assignment D_1,...,D_4 for the corrector I_2^{(14)} is not specified; the proof says only that the coefficients are 'successively determined' to cancel the remainder. The displayed formula for H^{INLS}_2 contains an α^4 term whose coefficients are explicit, but the D_i themselves are left undefined. Since the exact conservation law and the uniform bound (4.4) depend on this cancellation, the explicit coefficient assignment (or a precise algorithm) must be provided.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Title/header] The running title in the PDF header contains a typo: 'INTERMEDIA TE NLS' should be 'INTERMEDIATE NLS'.
  2. [Equation (3.19)] There is an extra closing parenthesis in the displayed equation: '...∂^2_x ω_{ℓ,m}(t))), ...' should have only one closing parenthesis before the comma.
  3. [Lemma 2.1 proof] The proof says 'A detailed verification is left to the reader.' Since Lemma 2.1 is used extensively, it would improve the paper to include at least a sketch of the interpolation argument, especially for the k≥1 cases.
  4. [Appendix A] In the proof of Lemma A.1, the phrase 'for all x∈R' after taking the limit should read 'for all ξ∈R' since the expression is in the Fourier variable.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: well-posedness and conservation laws are derived from explicit cancellations; self-citations are background only.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are not circular. Local well-posedness is established by a mollified-equation compactness argument: uniform a priori bounds in Z^2_rho, a Cauchy property in Z^1_rho, passage to the limit, and subsequent continuity arguments. No parameter is fitted to the target result, and no existing well-posedness theorem for Z^2_rho is assumed as an input. The modified energies H1 and H2 are constructed by explicit calculations from Lemma 4.1 through systematic cancellation of problematic terms; the paper even rejects the Lax-pair energies E_{n/2} as unusable in Z^2_rho, so the new conserved quantities are not re-labeled versions of an assumed result. Self-citations (e.g., [2], [4], [5], [6]) appear only in the literature review and are not load-bearing; no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work. The main rigor concerns are omissions rather than circularity: Theorem 1.1 Step 2 says “We omit the details” for uniqueness of arbitrary Z^2_rho solutions, and Theorem 4.1 relies on a “standard approximation argument” to pass conservation laws from smooth solutions to Z^2_rho. These are missing proofs, not a derivation that reduces to its own inputs. The paper is self-contained against external benchmarks, so the circularity score is 0.

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

There are no fitted numerical parameters and no invented physical entities; the free parameters are the model inputs delta, rho, alpha, beta, which are part of the equation rather than fitted to data. The load-bearing assumptions are standard analytic inequalities plus two unproved technical bridges: the smooth-approximation/density step in Section 4 and the existence of the exact-cancellation coefficients in Corollary 4.2.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Zhidkov spaces Z^k_rho are complete metric spaces and C([0,T];Z^1_rho) is complete, so contraction and Cauchy arguments apply.
    Used without proof in Propositions 3.1 and 3.3 and Step 1 of Theorem 1.1; completeness is asserted rather than demonstrated.
  • standard math Fourier symbol identity (1.1) for T_delta, with principal-value interpretation, and the resulting estimates (2.2)-(2.5) for L_delta and T_delta partial_x are valid.
    The symbol identity is proved in Appendix A, but the proof uses principal-value distributional machinery; the estimates are used throughout and are load-bearing for every energy bound.
  • standard math Standard harmonic-analysis tools: Gagliardo-Nirenberg, Sobolev embedding H^1(R) into L^infty(R), Bernstein inequalities, and Littlewood-Paley projection estimates in Zhidkov spaces hold as stated in Section 2.3.
    These inequalities are invoked repeatedly, often without proof, and control the frequency-localized arguments in Propositions 3.2 and 3.3.
  • domain assumption Smooth solutions in Z^infty_rho are dense enough in Z^2_rho, with enough continuity of the flow and nonlinear functionals, that formal energy identities extend from Z^infty_rho to Z^2_rho.
    In the proof of Theorem 4.1 the paper says 'we may assume that u in Z^infty_rho by a standard approximation argument, which relies on continuity of the flow map and persistence of regularity'; no theorem is supplied, and all conservation laws depend on it.
  • ad hoc to paper In Corollary 4.2, there exists a coefficient assignment (including D_1,...,D_4 for I_2^(14)) that makes the corrected quantity H_2^INLS exactly conserved for beta = pm |alpha|.
    The proof is an outline: the coefficients are said to be 'successively determined' to cancel remainders, but the resulting linear system and its solution are not exhibited.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Global well-posedness for intermediate NLS with nonvanishing conditions at infinity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JC5SVL4M

@misc{pith2026251218998,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Global well-posedness for intermediate NLS with nonvanishing conditions at infinity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JC5SVL4M}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.18998}
}
read the original abstract

The intermediate nonlinear Schr\"odinger equation (INLS) describes the dynamics of the envelope of weakly nonlinear internal waves in a stratified fluid of finite depth. While the INLS equation is known to admit dark soliton solutions, these solutions possess nonvanishing boundary conditions at spatial infinity and therefore fall outside the scope of existing well-posedness frameworks. This paper establishes the local and global well-posedness of a generalized INLS equation in Zhidkov-type spaces tailored to these nonvanishing boundary conditions. Furthermore, we rigorously justify the deep-water limit, proving that solutions of the generalized INLS converge to those of the generalized Calogero-Moser (CM) derivative NLS equation in Zhidkov-type spaces. Our well-posedness theory relies on the modified energy method combined with frequency envelopes, marking the first application of these techniques to Zhidkov-type spaces.

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. Sub-critical well-posedness for the intermediate nonlinear Schr\"{o}dinger equation on the line

    math.AP 2026-08 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    The intermediate nonlinear Schrodinger equation is locally well-posed in H^s for all s>0, and its integrable cases are globally well-posed for small L2 data when 0<s<1/2.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 6 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    M. J. Ablowitz, D. J. Kaup, A. C. Newell, and H. Segur. The inverse scattering transform-Fourier analysis for nonlinear problems.Studies in Appl. Math., 53(4):249–315, 1974

    1974

  2. [2]

    T. Akahori. Asymptotic behavior of dark multi-solitons to the intermediate nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation.Partial Differential Equations in Applied Mathematics, page 101273, 2025

    2025

  3. [3]

    Alazard, N

    T. Alazard, N. Burq, M. Ifrim, D. Tataru, and C. Zuily. Nonlinear interpolation and the flow map for quasilinear equations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.06909, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    Badreddine

    R. Badreddine. On the global well-posedness of the Calogero-Sutherland derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation. Pure Appl. Anal., 6(2):379–414, 2024

    2024

  5. [5]

    Badreddine

    R. Badreddine. Zero-dispersion limit of the Calogero-Moser derivative NLS equation.SIAM J. Math. Anal., 56(6):7228–7249, 2024

    2024

  6. [6]

    Badreddine

    R. Badreddine. Traveling waves and finite gap potentials for the Calogero-Sutherland derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation.Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e C Anal. Non Lin´ eaire, 42(4):1037–1092, 2025

    2025

  7. [7]

    Barros, R

    V. Barros, R. de Moura, and G. Santos. Local well-posedness for the nonlocal derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation in Besov spaces.Nonlinear Anal., 187:320–338, 2019

    2019

  8. [8]

    J. L. Bona and R. Smith. The initial-value problem for the Korteweg-de Vries equation.Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A, 278(1287):555–601, 1975

    1975

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    Chapouto, J

    A. Chapouto, J. Forlano, and T. Laurens. On the well-posedness of the intermediate nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation on the line.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.00302, 2025

    2025

  2. [10]

    X. Chen. The defocusing Calogero–Moser derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation with a nonvanishing condition at infinity.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.17968, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  3. [11]

    X. Chen. Scattering of the defocusing Calogero–Moser derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.06432, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Christ, J

    M. Christ, J. Colliander, and T. Tao. Ill-posedness for nonlinear Schr¨ odinger and wave equations.arXiv preprint arXiv:math/0311048, 2003

    2003 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Colliander, M

    J. Colliander, M. Keel, G. Staffilani, H. Takaoka, and T. Tao. Sharp global well-posedness for KdV and modified KdV onRandT.J. Amer. Math. Soc., 16(3):705–749, 2003

    2003

  6. [14]

    R. P. de Moura. Well-posedness for the nonlocal nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation.J. Math. Anal. Appl., 326(2):1254– 1267, 2007

    2007

  7. [15]

    R. P. de Moura and D. Pilod. Local well posedness for the nonlocal nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation below the energy space.Adv. Differential Equations, 15(9-10):925–952, 2010

    2010

  8. [16]

    L. D. Faddeev and L. A. Takhtajan.Hamiltonian methods in the theory of solitons. Springer Series in Soviet Math- ematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987. Translated from the Russian by A. G. Reyman [A. G. Re ˘ ıman]

    1987

  9. [17]

    R. L. Frank and L. Read. Jost solutions and direct scattering for the continuum Calogero-Moser equation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.11403, 2025

    2025

  10. [18]

    G´ erard

    P. G´ erard. The Cauchy problem for the Gross-Pitaevskii equation. volume 23, pages 765–779, 2006

    2006

  11. [19]

    G´ erard and E

    P. G´ erard and E. Lenzmann. The Calogero-Moser derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation.Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 77(10):4008–4062, 2024

    2024

  12. [20]

    Gr´ ebert and T

    B. Gr´ ebert and T. Kappeler.The defocusing NLS equation and its normal form. EMS Series of Lectures in Mathe- matics. European Mathematical Society (EMS), Z¨ urich, 2014

    2014

  13. [21]

    Harrop-Griffiths, R

    B. Harrop-Griffiths, R. Killip, and M. Vi¸ san. Sharp well-posedness for the cubic NLS and mKdV inH s(R).Forum Math. Pi, 12:Paper No. e6, 86, 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Hogan and M

    J. Hogan and M. Kowalski. Turbulent threshold for continuum Calogero-Moser models.Pure Appl. Anal., 6(4):941– 954, 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    Ifrim and D

    M. Ifrim and D. Tataru. Local well-posedness for quasi-linear problems: a primer.Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.), 60(2):167–194, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    Jeong and T

    U. Jeong and T. Kim. Quantized blow-up dynamics for Calogero–Moser derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.12518, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Killip, T

    R. Killip, T. Laurens, and M. Vi¸ san. Scaling-critical well-posedness for continuum Calogero-Moser models on the line.Commun. Am. Math. Soc., 5:284–320, 2025

    2025

  18. [26]

    K. Kim, T. Kim, and S. Kwon. Construction of smooth chiral finite-time blow-up solutions to Calogero–Moser derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.09603, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Kim and S

    T. Kim and S. Kwon. Soliton resolution for Calogero–Moser derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.12843, 2024. GWP OF gINLS WITH NONV ANISHING CONDITIONS AT INFINITY 29

    2024

  20. [28]

    Kishimoto

    N. Kishimoto. A remark on norm inflation for nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equations.Commun. Pure Appl. Anal., 18(3):1375–1402, 2019

    2019

  21. [29]

    Y. C. Ma and M. J. Ablowitz. The periodic cubic Schr¨ odinger equation.Stud. Appl. Math., 65(2):113–158, 1981

    1981

  22. [30]

    Y. Matsuno. Multiperiodic and multisoliton solutions of a nonlocal nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation for envelope waves. Phys. Lett. A, 278(1-2):53–58, 2000

    2000

  23. [31]

    Y. Matsuno. Linear stability of multiple dark solitary wave solutions of a nonlocal nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation for envelope waves.Phys. Lett. A, 285(5-6):286–292, 2001

    2001

  24. [32]

    Matsuno.N-soliton formulae for the intermediate nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation.Inverse Problems, 17(3):501– 514, 2001

    Y. Matsuno.N-soliton formulae for the intermediate nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation.Inverse Problems, 17(3):501– 514, 2001

    2001

  25. [33]

    Y. Matsuno. Calogero-Moser-Sutherland dynamical systems associated with nonlocal nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation for envelope waves.J. Phys. Soc. Japan, 71(6):1415–1418, 2002

    2002

  26. [34]

    Y. Matsuno. Asymptotic solutions of the nonlocal nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation in the limit of small dispersion. Phys. Lett. A, 309(1-2):83–89, 2003

    2003

  27. [35]

    Y. Matsuno. A Cauchy problem for the nonlocal nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation.Inverse Problems, 20(2):437–445, 2004

    2004

  28. [36]

    Y. Matsuno. Multiphase solutions and their reductions for a nonlocal nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation with focusing nonlinearity.Stud. Appl. Math., 151(3):883–922, 2023

    2023

  29. [37]

    Pelinovsky

    D. Pelinovsky. Intermediate nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation for internal waves in a fluid of finite depth.Phys. Lett. A, 197(5-6):401–406, 1995

    1995

  30. [38]

    D. E. Pelinovsky and R. H. J. Grimshaw. A spectral transform for the intermediate nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation. J. Math. Phys., 36(8):4203–4219, 1995

    1995

  31. [39]

    D. E. Pelinovsky and R. H. J. Grimshaw. Nonlocal models for envelope waves in a stratified fluid.Stud. Appl. Math., 97(4):369–391, 1996

    1996

  32. [40]

    J. Shatah. Normal forms and quadratic nonlinear Klein-Gordon equations.Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 38(5):685–696, 1985

    1985

  33. [41]

    Sulem and P.-L

    C. Sulem and P.-L. Sulem.The nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation: Self-focusing and wave collapse, volume 139 of Applied Mathematical Sciences. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1999

    1999

  34. [42]

    T. Tao. Global regularity of wave maps. II. Small energy in two dimensions.Comm. Math. Phys., 224(2):443–544, 2001

    2001

  35. [43]

    V. E. Zakharov and A. B. Shabat. Exact theory of two-dimensional self-focusing and one-dimensional self-modulation of waves in nonlinear media. ˇZ. `Eksper. Teoret. Fiz., 61(1):118–134, 1971. translation in Soviet Physics JETP 34 (1972), no. 1, 62–69. F aculty of Engineering, ...

    1971

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.