Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Semi-discrete optimal transport techniques for the compressible semi-geostrophic equations

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that the three-dimensional compressible semi-geostrophic equations admit global weak solutions for any compactly supported probability-measure initial data, obtained as a uniform limit of particle discretisations.

desk verdict Novel measure-valued existence result for compressible SG equations, mostly solid, but Lemma 5.3 has an unproved uniform W^{1,∞} bound that needs a repair. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.20807 v2 pith:JV7TJ4HU submitted 2025-04-29 math.AP

David P. Bourne , Charlie P. Egan , Théo Lavier , Beatrice Pelloni This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35Q3549Q2235D3086A10
keywords semi-geostrophicequationscompressiblefluidsoptimaltransportsemi-discreteweaksolutionsmeasure-valuedinitialdataLaguerretessellationsparticlediscretisation
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 three-dimensional compressible semi-geostrophic equations, a model for large-scale atmospheric front formation, have global-in-time weak solutions for any compactly supported probability measure as initial data, not only for absolutely continuous densities of class $L^r$. The route is a particle discretisation: with $N$ weighted particles the equations reduce to a finite-dimensional ODE whose coefficients are fixed by semi-discrete optimal transport, and taking $N$ to infinity produces a weak solution as a uniform limit in the $W_1$ Wasserstein metric. The discrete solutions are unique, twice differentiable, and conserve the geostrophic energy, so the construction also gives a theoretical basis for numerical schemes that solve the equations by optimal-transport-based particle methods.

What carries the argument

The engine is the discrete ansatz $\alpha^N_t=\sum_{i=1}^N m_i\delta_{z_i(t)}$ and the finite-dimensional ODE $\dot z=J_N(z-C(z))$, where the centroid map $C(z)$ assigns to each seed the centroid of the corresponding cell in the c-Laguerre tessellation of the optimal source measure $\sigma^*[\alpha^N_t]$. A c-Laguerre cell is the set of points $x\in X$ satisfying $c(x,z_i)-w_i\le c(x,z_j)-w_j$ for all $j$; the cost $c(x,y)=\frac{1}{y_3}\left(\frac{f_{\mathrm{cor}}^2}{2}((x_1-y_1)^2+(x_2-y_2)^2)+gx_3\right)$ is twisted, so the optimal transport map from the source measure to the discrete target is unique and piecewise constant on these cells. A concave dual functional $G(w,z)$ characterises both the source density via $\sigma(x)=(f^*)'(-\min_i(c(x,z_i)-w_i))$ and the optimal weights, and an implicit-function argument makes $C$ continuously differentiable; a priori estimates keep the particles bounded and in distinct horizontal planes. In the limit, the imported compactness lemma and the equicontinuity of the optimal source measures pass the discrete solutions to a weak solution.

What would settle it

A concrete way to test the central claim is to construct a sequence $\beta^N\to\beta$ in the $W_1$ metric for which the optimal source densities $\sigma^*[\beta^N]$ have unbounded $W^{1,\infty}$ norm; that would contradict Lemma 5.3 and remove the equicontinuity used to pass the energy term to the limit. Alternatively, a numerical solution of the particle ODE showing $\sup_t W_1(\alpha^N_t,\alpha_t)$ not tending to zero would falsify the approximation statement of Theorem 1.2.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central result, Theorem 1.2, is that for every final time $\tau>0$ and every compactly supported probability measure $\alpha\in P_c(Y)$ on the geostrophic domain, the compressible semi-geostrophic equations admit a weak solution $\alpha_t\in C^{0,1}([0,\tau];P_c(Y))$ with $\alpha_0=\alpha$, in the sense of Definition 2.6. The weak formulation replaces the formal wind $W[\alpha_t]=J(\mathrm{id}-T_{\alpha_t}^{-1})$ by an expression that only uses the optimal transport map $T_{\alpha_t}$ from the energy-minimising source measure $\sigma^*[\alpha_t]$ to $\alpha_t$. The proof constructs discrete weak solutions $\alpha^N_t$ from the particle ODE and shows $\sup_{t\in[0,\tau]}W_1(\alpha^N_t,\alpha_t)\to0$; at the discrete level the solution is unique, $C^2$, and conserves $E(\sigma^*[\alpha^N_t],\alpha^N_t)$.

Load-bearing premise

The compactness lemma that guarantees a convergent subsequence of discrete solutions (Lemma 5.2) is imported without proof from the incompressible case, and the whole limit passage depends on it holding for the compressible ODE with the new centroid map; if it failed, no limiting weak solution would be constructed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Compactly supported measure-valued initial data, including sums of point masses, are admissible in three dimensions; the solution exists for every finite time horizon $\tau>0$.
  • The discrete approximations $\alpha^N_t$ converge uniformly to the weak solution in the $W_1$ metric, so particle approximations genuinely represent the continuum dynamics.
  • For discrete initial data the solution is unique, $C^2$, and global in time, so the particle ODE is not merely a formal reduction.
  • The discrete solution conserves the geostrophic energy $E(\sigma^*[\alpha^N_t],\alpha^N_t)$, giving numerical schemes an exact invariant to monitor.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One likely next step is to replace the vertical term $gx_3$ in the cost by the more general vertical dependence treated in the original theory; the main obstacle would be preserving the convexity and regularity structure used to differentiate the centroid map.
  • The paper's equi-Lipschitz bound on optimal source measures implies a stability property it does not state explicitly: the optimal source density is determined continuously from discrete approximations, so the source field cannot develop arbitrarily sharp fronts as the data varies in the $W_1$ metric.
  • A concrete numerical test of the construction would be to solve the concave dual maximisation and the particle ODE with a standard semi-discrete optimal-transport solver and compare energy drift against the predicted conservation; the paper stops at existence.
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 global-in-time existence of weak solutions of the three-dimensional compressible semi-geostrophic equations in geostrophic coordinates for arbitrary compactly supported measure-valued initial data. The proof strategy is to discretize the initial measure by N weighted particles, derive a concave dual problem for the internal-energy-regularized optimal transport problem (Theorem 3.4), prove that the resulting finite-dimensional ODE (1.6) has a unique global C^2 solution (Theorem 1.1), and then pass to the limit N to infinity using compactness of the discrete solutions and stability of the optimal source measures (Theorem 1.2). The paper also contains two explicit examples: a steady state solution and an elliptic orbit solution for a single particle with gamma=2.

Significance. If correct, Theorem 1.2 significantly extends earlier existence results for the compressible semi-geostrophic system, which were limited to L^r initial data, and it provides a theoretical foundation for numerical schemes based on semi-discrete optimal transport. The paper is particularly strong on the variational side: the duality theorem, the regularity of Laguerre-cell integrals in Lemma 3.6, the differentiability of the centroid map, and the energy-conservation argument are treated in detail. The two explicit examples are useful consistency checks. The main fragility is the limit passage in Section 5, which depends on two compactness statements that are either imported from [7] or proved via an under-justified uniformity claim; both appear repairable by short arguments.

major comments (2)
  1. [Lemma 5.3 (p. 19-20)] The proof of Lemma 5.3 asserts that the maximum of ||zeta_i(.,w*(z),z)||_{C^1(X)} over z in D^N cap K^N is independent of N, and this uniformity is load-bearing for the pointwise convergence sigma*[alpha_t^N] -> sigma*[alpha_t] used in Theorem 1.2. As written, the assertion is not justified: equation (3.2) alone does not bound w_i, since a positive mass could in principle be supported on a Laguerre cell of arbitrarily small measure, forcing w_i and the density to be large. However, the missing uniform bound is true and can be supplied by a short argument: mass balance forces w_i > min_{X x K} c, because otherwise (f*)'(w_i - c(x,z_i)) vanishes on the whole i-th cell; and the coercivity estimate in the proof of Theorem 3.4, together with G(w*,z) >= G(0,z) and the boundedness of c on X x K, gives a uniform upper bound on the positive part of w*. The authors should add this argument; without it, Lemma 5.3 and the limit passage in (5.4) rest on an unproved claim.
  2. [Lemma 5.2 (p. 19)] Lemma 5.2 is imported verbatim from [7, Lemma 5.2] even though the compressible ODE (1.6) and the centroid map C differ from the incompressible setting, and the lemma provides the uniform convergence (5.1) on which Theorem 1.2 depends. The authors should either prove the lemma in the present setting (a short Arzela-Ascoli argument using the a priori estimates of Lemma 4.6 and the uniform Lipschitz bound in the W1 metric) or state explicitly which hypotheses of [7, Lemma 5.2] are verified by the compressible system. As it stands, this is a load-bearing gap in the exposition.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (5.3) and Lemma 5.2 statement] There are small typographical errors: 'seee (5.1)' in equation (5.3) and 'discrete discrete' in the statement of Lemma 5.2; these should be corrected.
  2. [Reference [43]] The bibliographic entry for [43] is corrupted: it concatenates the title of Villani's book with the title of [44]. This should be fixed.
  3. [Proposition 6.1] The verification that the constructed steady state is a weak solution cancels the two integrals in Definition 2.6, but this cancellation is only implicit; spelling it out would improve readability.
  4. [Proof of Theorem 1.2, p. 20] The passage from weak convergence of the marginals to weak convergence of the optimal plans gamma[alpha_t^N] cites [43, Theorem 5.20]; the authors should add one sentence explaining why the cited theorem applies, in particular why the limit optimal plan is unique (absolute continuity of sigma*[alpha_t] and the twist condition).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the discrete-to-continuum existence proof is self-contained except for legitimate reuse of [7]'s independent lemmas, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's main theorem is obtained by discretizing the initial measure, solving the finite-dimensional ODE (1.6), and then passing to the limit through compactness and stability of the optimal source measures. The core compressible ingredients are proved in the paper: the dual problem (Theorem 3.4), the regularity of the optimal weight and centroid maps (Lemmas 4.3 and 4.4), and the discrete existence result (Theorem 1.1). The self-cited work [7] is used for quantization and compactness lemmas (Lemmas 5.1 and 5.2) and as a proof template for Propositions 4.5 and 4.7. This is an overlapping-author citation, but [7] is an independent published result, and its compactness lemma is not the same as the target theorem for the compressible SG equations. The paper does not define any quantity in terms of the target solution, does not fit parameters to data, and does not import a uniqueness theorem to force its ansatz. The skeptical concern about Lemma 5.3 — the asserted uniform W^{1,∞} bound on σ*[β^N] — is a possible correctness gap in the proof, not a circularity: bounding the optimal source measures is a static optimal-transport estimate, and failing to prove that bound does not mean the theorem was assumed as an input. No equation in the paper reduces to another equation by construction, and no prediction is equivalent to a fitted output. Thus the derivation is not circular; the modest score above 0 reflects only the paper's heavy reliance on the authors' previous work, which is not itself a circular defect.

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

No free parameters are fitted: γ, κ, f_cor, and g are physical constants from the prior literature, and the explicit example in Section 6.2 uses the nonphysical choice γ=2, κ=1/2 outside the main claim. No new physical entities are postulated. The axioms are a mix of standard mathematical background, the physical model assumptions, and two imported lemmas from the authors' earlier work [7] that the paper does not re-prove.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Standard optimal transport theory: existence, uniqueness and stability of optimal plans and maps for twisted costs, Kantorovich duality.
    Used in Definitions 2.2 and 2.5, Theorem 3.4, and in the limit passage of Theorem 1.2 (e.g., [39], [43]).
  • standard math Standard ODE and analysis tools: Picard-Lindelöf, implicit function theorem, Ascoli-Arzelà, dominated convergence, area formula.
    Used in Propositions 4.7, Lemma 4.3, Lemma 5.3, and throughout Appendix B.
  • domain assumption Standing domain assumption: X is compact, nonempty, connected, equals the closure of its interior, and Φ^{-1}(X) is convex (Assumption (A.1)); Y = R^2 × (δ, 1/δ); Coriolis f_cor is constant.
    Assumption (A.1) is used to prove c-convexity and the regularity of Laguerre-cell integrals in Lemma 3.6 and Appendix B; Remark A.3 acknowledges rectangular domains need a separate argument in [35].
  • domain assumption The compressible SG model in geostrophic variables (Eq. 1.1), the cost c (2.2), and the energy (1.2) with γ∈(1,2), κ>0 are taken as the mathematical model.
    The paper proves existence for this model; the derivation from meteorological balances is cited from [18] and not re-derived.
  • domain assumption Initial discrete measures are well-prepared (seeds in distinct horizontal planes, Eq. (2.8)), and any compactly supported measure can be approximated by well-prepared discrete measures (Lemma 5.1 from [7]).
    Well-preparedness ensures differentiability of the centroid map and uniqueness in Theorem 3.4; the quantization lemma is quoted from [7].
  • domain assumption Compactness of discrete solutions (Lemma 5.2) transfers from [7, Lemma 5.2] to the compressible ODE (1.6) with the new centroid map C.
    The paper states Lemma 5.2 without proof; it is load-bearing for extracting the limiting measure in Theorem 1.2.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Semi-discrete optimal transport techniques for the compressible semi-geostrophic equations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JV7TJ4HU

@misc{pith2026250420807,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Semi-discrete optimal transport techniques for the compressible semi-geostrophic equations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JV7TJ4HU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.20807}
}
read the original abstract

We prove existence of weak solutions of the 3D compressible semi-geostrophic (SG) equations with compactly supported measure-valued initial data. These equations model large-scale atmospheric flows. Our proof uses a particle discretisation and semi-discrete optimal transport techniques. We show that, if the initial data is a discrete measure, then the compressible SG equations admit a unique, twice continuously differentiable, energy-conserving and global-in-time solution. In general, by discretising the initial measure by particles and sending the number of particles to infinity, we show that for any compactly supported initial measure there exists a global-in-time solution of the compressible SG equations that is Lipschitz in time. This significantly generalises the original results due to Cullen and Maroofi (2003), and it provides the theoretical foundation for the design of numerical schemes using semi-discrete optimal transport to solve the 3D compressible SG equations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.20807 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. On the left is the source space X coloured by the density of the optimal source measure σ∗[α N t ]. The boundaries and centroids Cj (z(t)) of the corresponding c-Laguerre cells are plotted in black, with the boundary of the i-th cell, L i c , highlighted in red. On the right is the target space Y with the seeds z j (t) in blue. The i-th seed, z i (t), corresponding to the i-th cell is highlighted in red. The union o… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. c-Laguerre tessellations (see Definition 2.8) in the (x1, x3)-plane for the cost function c = c2d (see (2.9)). The colours distinguish the cells. For each plot, X = [0, 1]2 , fcor = 1, g = 1, the seeds z i were sampled uniformly from X , and the weights w i were chosen so that the cells have equal area (by maximising the dual function as in (2.12)). 3. The dual problem In this section we derive a dual formulation of… view at source ↗

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. Entropic approximations of the semigeostrophic shallow water equations

    math.NA 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    An entropy-regularized, Sinkhorn-based optimal transport discretization of the semigeostrophic shallow water equations is proposed, with a debiasing correction and numerical evidence of convergence.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [7]

    D. P. Bourne, C. P. Egan, B. Pelloni, and M. Wilkinson. Semi-discrete optimal transport methods for the semi-geostrophic equations. Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations, 61(1):39, 2022

    work page 2022

  2. [1]

    Ambrosio, M

    L. Ambrosio, M. Colombo, G. De Philippis, and A. Figalli. Existence of Eulerian solu- tions to the semi-geostrophic equations in physical space: The 2-dimensional periodic case. Communications in Partial Differential Equations , 37(12):2209–2227, 2012

    work page 2012

  3. [2]

    Ambrosio, M

    L. Ambrosio, M. Colombo, G. De Philippis, and A. Figalli. A global existence result for the semigeostrophic equations in three dimensional convex domains. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A , 34(4):1251–1268, 2014

    work page 2014

  4. [3]

    Ambrosio, N

    L. Ambrosio, N. Fusco, and D. Pallara. Functions of Bounded Variation and Free Discon- tinuity Problems. Oxford, 2000

    work page 2000

  5. [4]

    Ambrosio and W

    L. Ambrosio and W. Gangbo. Hamiltonian ODEs in the Wasserstein space of probability measures. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics , 61(1):18–53, 2008

    work page 2008

  6. [5]

    Benamou and Y

    J.-D. Benamou and Y. Brenier. Weak existence for the semi-geostrophic equations formu- lated as a coupled Monge–Amp` ere transport problem. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathe- matics, 58(5):1450–1461, 1998

    work page 1998

  7. [6]

    Benamou, C

    J.-D. Benamou, C. J. Cotter, and H. Malamut. Entropic optimal transport solutions of the semi-geostrophic equations. Journal of Computational Physics , 500:112745, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    D. P. Bourne, B. Schmitzer, and B. Wirth. Semi-discrete unbalanced optimal transport and quantization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1808.01962 , 2024

    arXiv 2024

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Y. Brenier. Polar factorization and monotone rearrangement of vector-valued functions. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics , 44(4):375–417, 1991

    1991

  2. [10]

    Cagnetti, M

    F. Cagnetti, M. G. Mora, and M. Morini. A second order minimality condition for the Mumford-Shah functional. Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations , 33:37–74, 2008

    2008

  3. [11]

    Carlier and H

    G. Carlier and H. Malamut. Well-posedness and convergence of entropic approximation of semi-geostrophic equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.17387 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    M. J. P. Cullen. The use of semi-geostrophic theory to diagnose the behaviour of an atmospheric GCM. Fluids, 3(4):72, 2018

    2018

  5. [13]

    M. J. P. Cullen. The Mathematics of Large-Scale Atmosphere And Ocean. World Scientific, 2021

    2021

  6. [14]

    M. J. P. Cullen and M. Feldman. Lagrangian solutions of semi-geostrophic equations in physical space. SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis , 37(5):1371–1395, 2006

    2006

  7. [15]

    M. J. P. Cullen and W. Gangbo. A variational approach for the 2-dimensional semi- geostrophic shallow water equations. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis , 156(3):241–273, 2001

    2001

  8. [16]

    M. J. P. Cullen, W. Gangbo, and G. Pisante. The semi-geostrophic equations discretized in reference and dual variables. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 185(2):341–363, 2007

    2007

  9. [17]

    M. J. P. Cullen, D. K. Gilbert, and B. Pelloni. Solutions of the fully compressible semi- geostrophic system. Communications in Partial Differential Equations , 39(4):591–625, 2014

    2014

  10. [18]

    M. J. P. Cullen and H. Maroofi. The fully compressible semi-geostrophic system from meteorology. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis , 167(4):309–336, 2003

    2003

  11. [19]

    M. J. P. Cullen and R. J. Purser. An extended Lagrangian theory of semi-geostrophic frontogenesis. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences , 41(9):1477–1497, 1984

    1984

  12. [20]

    de Gournay, J

    F. de Gournay, J. Kahn, and L. Lebrat. Differentiation and regularity of semi-discrete optimal transport with respect to the parameters of the discrete measure. Numerische Mathematik, 141(2):429–453, 2019

    2019

  13. [21]

    C. P. Egan, D. P. Bourne, C. J. Cotter, M. J. P. Cullen, B. Pelloni, S. M. Roper, and M. Wilkinson. A new implementation of the geometric method for solving the Eady slice 32 equations. Journal of Computational Physics , 469:111542, 2022

    2022

  14. [22]

    Eliassen

    A. Eliassen. The Quasi-static Equations of Motion with Pressure as Independent Variable . Grøndahl, 1949

    1949

  15. [23]

    L. C. Evans and R. F. Gariepy. Measure Theory and Fine Properties of Functions, Revised Edition. Chapman & Hall, 2015

    2015

  16. [24]

    J. Faria. On the existence and weak stability of solutions to the compressible semi- geostrophic equations. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 406(2):447–463, 2013

    2013

  17. [25]

    Feldman and A

    M. Feldman and A. Tudorascu. On Lagrangian solutions for the semi-geostrophic system with singular initial data. SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis, 45(3):1616–1640, 2013

    2013

  18. [26]

    Feldman and A

    M. Feldman and A. Tudorascu. On the semi-geostrophic system in physical space with general initial data. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis , 218(1):527–551, 2015

    2015

  19. [27]

    Feldman and A

    M. Feldman and A. Tudorascu. Lagrangian solutions for the semi-geostrophic shallow water system in physical space with general initial data. St. Petersburg Mathematical Journal , 27(3):547–568, 2016

    2016

  20. [28]

    Feldman and A

    M. Feldman and A. Tudorascu. The semi-geostrophic system: Weak-strong uniqueness un- der uniform convexity.Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations, 56(6):158, 2017

    2017

  21. [29]

    M. C. L. Filho and H. J. N. Lopes. Existence of a weak solution for the semi-geostrophic equation with integrable initial data. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Section A Mathematics, 132(2):329–339, 2002

    2002

  22. [30]

    T. O. Gallou¨ et and Q. M´ erigot. A Lagrangian scheme ` a la Brenier for the incompressible Euler equations. Foundations of Computational Mathematics , 18(4):835–865, 2018

    2018

  23. [31]

    T. O. Gallou¨ et, Q. M´ erigot, and A. Natale. Convergence of a Lagrangian discretization for barotropic fluids and porous media flow. SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis , 54(3):2990–3018, 2022

    2022

  24. [32]

    B. J. Hoskins. The geostrophic momentum approximation and the semi-geostrophic equa- tions. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences , 32(2):233–242, 1975

    1975

  25. [33]

    Kitagawa, Q

    J. Kitagawa, Q. M´ erigot, and B. Thibert. Convergence of a Newton algorithm for semi- discrete optimal transport. Journal of the European Mathematical Society, 21(9):2603–2651, 2019

    2019

  26. [34]

    T. Lavier. A semi-discrete optimal transport scheme for the 3d incompressible semi- geostrophic equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.00575 , 2024

    2024

  27. [35]

    T. Lavier. Semi-Discrete Optimal Transport Techniques for the Compressible Semi- Geostrophic Equations. PhD thesis, Heriot-Watt University, to appear

  28. [36]

    Leclerc, Q

    H. Leclerc, Q. M´ erigot, F. Santambrogio, and F. Stra. Lagrangian discretization of crowd motion and linear diffusion. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis , 58(4):2093–2118, 2020

    2020

  29. [37]

    G. Loeper. A fully nonlinear version of the incompressible Euler equations: The semi- geostrophic system. SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis , 38(3):795–823, 2006

    2006

  30. [38]

    M´ erigot and B

    Q. M´ erigot and B. Thibert. Optimal transport: discretization and algorithms. In A. Bonito and R. H. Nochetto, editors, Handbook of Numerical Analysis , volume 22, pages 133–212. Elsevier, 2021

    2021

  31. [39]

    Santambrogio

    F. Santambrogio. Optimal Transport for Applied Mathematicians . Birkh¨ auser, 2015

    2015

  32. [40]

    Sarrazin

    C. Sarrazin. Lagrangian discretization of variational mean field games. SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization , 60(3):1365–1392, 2022

    2022

  33. [41]

    L. Silini. Local existence of smooth solutions for the semigeostrophic equations on curved domains. SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis , 55(6):6554–6579, 2023

    2023

  34. [42]

    C. Villani. Topics in optimal transportation . American Mathematical Society, 2003

    2003

  35. [43]

    C. Villani. Optimal Transport: Old and NewA vertical slice frontogenesis test case for compressible nonhydrostatic dynamical cores of atmospheric models . Springer, 2009

    2009

  36. [44]

    Yamazaki and C

    H. Yamazaki and C. J. Cotter. A vertical slice frontogenesis test case for compressible nonhydrostatic dynamical cores of atmospheric models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.09752 , 2025. 33

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.