$L^q(L^p)$-theory of stochastic differential equations

Guohuan Zhao; Longjie Xie; Pengcheng Xia; Xicheng Zhang

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 24 references

$L^q(L^p)$-theory of stochastic differential equations

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The authors prove that strong solutions of multiplicative SDEs with locally integrable drift and diffusion gradient are weakly differentiable in the initial point, with a Bismut-Elworthy-Li derivative formula, and that the martingale…

desk verdict Subcritical part is solid and extends known results; the endpoint weak well-posedness theorem has an unproven uniqueness claim because the proof assumes a Krylov estimate not imposed in Definition 1.3. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.01255 v1 pith:L6WLCBV3 submitted 2019-08-04 math.PR

Pengcheng Xia , Longjie Xie , Xicheng Zhang , Guohuan Zhao This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.PR MSC 60H1060J60

keywords stochasticdifferentialequationsweakdifferentiabilityBismut-Elworthy-LiformulaL^q(L^p)maximalregularityZvonkintransformationKrylov'sestimatemartingaleproblemsingulardrift

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 shows that stochastic differential equations with multiplicative noise, whose drift and diffusion gradient are only locally integrable, still have solutions that depend weakly differentiably on the starting point. The main theorem proves that the unique strong solution $X_t(x)$ is weakly differentiable in $x$, satisfies $\sup_x \mathbb{E} \sup_{t\le T} |\nabla X_t(x)|^p < \infty$ for every $p\ge 1$, and obeys Bismut-Elworthy-Li's derivative formula expressing $\nabla \mathbb{E}\varphi(X_t(x))$ as a normalized stochastic integral. The assumptions allow locally integrable coefficients in the subcritical range $d/p_i + 2/q_i < 1$, which includes bounded drifts that earlier Zvonkin-transformation arguments could not handle. In the critical endpoint case where the drift lies in a localized $L^d$-type space, the paper proves uniqueness of martingale solutions. The new ingredient is an $L^q(L^p)$-maximal regularity estimate for parabolic equations with variable coefficients that works for all $p,q\in(1,\infty)$, not only $p\le q$.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the $\widetilde{\mathbb{L}}^p_q$-maximal regularity estimate of Theorem 3.1 for the parabolic equation $\partial_t u = a^{ij}\partial_i\partial_j u + b\cdot\nabla u - \lambda u + f$: for all $p,q\in(1,\infty)$ and $\alpha\in[0,2-2/q)$, $$\$lambda^{{1-\alpha/2-1/q}}$|||u|||_{\widetilde{H}^{\$\alpha$,p}_\infty(T)} + |||\partial_t u|||_{\widetilde{L}^p_q(T)} + |||u|||_{\widetilde{H}^{2,p}_q(T)} \le C|||f|||_{\widetilde{L}^p_q(T)}.$$ The novelty is that the estimate holds when $p>q$, not only $p\le q$; this is achieved by a duality method that studies the adjoint heat equation in negative Sobolev spaces $H^{-2,p}$, with the freezing-coefficient product estimate (3.13) and the interpolation bound (3.19). From this estimate the paper derives Krylov's inequality along the solution path, a generalized Itô formula for functions in $\widetilde{H}^{2,p'}_{q'}$, and the Zvonkin transformation that converts the singular-coefficient SDE into one with bounded Lipschitz coefficients.

What would settle it

Exhibit a uniformly continuous, uniformly elliptic $a=\sigma\sigma^*/2$ and data $f\in L^q([0,T];L^p)$ with $p>q$ for which the solution of $\partial_t u=a^{ij}\partial_i\partial_j u+f$ has $\|\nabla^2 u\|_{L^p_q(T)}=\infty$, or for which the constant in the duality bound (3.19) diverges as the localization radius shrinks; either counterexample would break the Krylov estimate and the Zvonkin step on which Theorems 1.1 and 1.4 are built.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that under (Hσ), $\nabla\sigma\in\widetilde{\mathbb{L}}^{p_1}_{q_1}$ and $b\in\widetilde{\mathbb{L}}^{p_2}_{q_2}$ with $d/p_i+2/q_i<1$, the unique strong solution $X_t(x)$ of (1.2) is weakly differentiable in the initial point, with $\sup_x \mathbb{E} \sup_{t\in[0,T]} |\nabla X_t(x)|^p$ finite for every $p\ge 1$. For every $\varphi\in C^1_b$ and Lebesgue-almost every $x$, $$\nabla \mathbb{E}\varphi(X_t(x)) = \frac{1}{t}\mathbb{E}\left(\varphi(X_t(x))\int_0^t \$sigma^{{-1}}$(s,X_s(x))\nabla X_s(x)\,dW_s\right).$$ The proof runs through Zvonkin's transformation $\Phi(t,x)=x+u(t,x)$, where $u$ solves a backward parabolic equation; the transformed SDE has bounded, continuous coefficients, and the estimate on the difference of two solutions implies weak differentiability of the original flow. In the endpoint regime $b\in\widetilde{\mathbb{L}}^{d;\mathrm{uni}}_\infty$, the martingale problem is well posed, giving weak well-posedness beyond the reach of the subcritical strong-solution theorem.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the maximal regularity estimate (3.2) holding for every $p,q\in(1,\infty)$, including $p>q$, with constants independent of the localization centers and of $\lambda$; if the duality bounds (3.13), (3.17), or (3.19) fail for the uniformly continuous coefficient $a=\sigma\sigma^*/2$, the differentiability and endpoint uniqueness results lose their key input.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For each initial point $x$, the SDE has a unique strong solution whose dependence on $x$ is weakly differentiable, with $\sup_x \mathbb{E} \sup_{t\le T}|\nabla X_t(x)|^p$ finite for every $p\ge 1$.
The Bismut-Elworthy-Li formula holds for almost every starting point, expressing the gradient of $\mathbb{E}\varphi(X_t(x))$ as a normalized stochastic integral along the path; this is the basic tool for gradient estimates and for studying the associated semigroup.
Krylov's estimate holds along the solution path for functions in the localized spaces $\widetilde{\mathbb{L}}^p_q$, uniformly in the starting point, so path integrals of singular functions are controlled even with multiplicative noise.
In the critical endpoint case $b\in\widetilde{\mathbb{L}}^{d;\mathrm{uni}}_\infty$, the martingale problem is well posed, giving weak well-posedness that earlier strong-solution results did not cover.
Because the coefficients are only required to lie in localized spaces, bounded drifts and locally integrable diffusion gradients are included, extending the regime in which stochastic flows are Sobolev differentiable.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper does not develop it, but the same maximal regularity estimate should yield strong well-posedness and flow differentiability for drifts in critical or Lorentz-type spaces whenever the localized norm is finite, since the Zvonkin step only needs boundedness of the transformed coefficients.
A consequence left implicit is that the derivative formula gives a pathwise expression for gradient estimates of semigroups generated by singular-coefficient diffusions; combined with the uniform gradient bound it should produce Bismut-type gradient and coupling estimates.
One testable extension would be to relax the condition on $\nabla\sigma$ from a subcritical localized space to a critical one; the proof as written needs Theorem 3.1 with the drift term to control $\sigma$, so this does not follow immediately.
The duality method for negative Sobolev spaces is transferable: it should prove $L^q(L^p)$ maximal regularity for non-divergence parabolic operators with lower-order terms beyond the heat-type equation considered here.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

First thing to know: the subcritical part of this paper is solid and genuinely useful; the endpoint weak well-posedness theorem has a real gap. The uniqueness proof for Theorem 1.4 only works for martingale solutions that already satisfy the Krylov estimate (5.4), while Definition 1.3 does not require it. The limiting step that kills the commutator uses (5.4) explicitly. So as written, Theorem 1.4 does not rule out martingale solutions outside that subclass. The existence argument produces one solution with (1.6), but nothing shows every element of M^{σ,b} has that bound. This is not a nitpick: the endpoint case is one of the two advertised results. The theorem needs either a new argument that every martingale solution satisfies (5.4), or a reformulation that states uniqueness within the class satisfying the Krylov bound.

What is actually new and good: the localized ~L^p_q setup is a real extension beyond global L^p_q spaces, and it lets the authors get global bounds (1.4) and (1.5) with locally singular coefficients. Theorem 3.3, the duality argument for maximal regularity when p>q, looks like a genuine technical contribution and is interesting in its own right. The proof of Theorem 1.1 is clean: Zvonkin's transformation, Krylov's estimate from the PDE regularity, and the stochastic Gronwall inequality from prior work. The paper is well-organized and the machinery is used honestly. The dependence on earlier papers by the same group ([18,19,22,23]) is not a problem; those are published or available arXiv preprints with their own proofs.

Soft spots beyond Theorem 1.4: the proof of Theorem 3.3 has several interpolation and freezing steps where constants are claimed but not fully pinned down. I did not find an obvious error, and the reader's check was consistent, but this is the kind of thing that wants a careful referee. Minor point: the paper says the proof of weak differentiability is 'much simpler than [10]' while relying on some heavy analytic machinery; that is a matter of taste.

Bottom line: the paper deserves a serious referee, but not acceptance in its current form. The subcritical theorems are presumably correct and valuable. The endpoint theorem is the headline claim for critical drifts, and it is not established as stated. I would send it back for a major revision: either prove the missing automatic Krylov estimate or state the uniqueness result for the smaller class. The technical content is strong enough that the fix is likely straightforward.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops an L^q(L^p) maximal regularity theory for second-order parabolic equations with uniformly continuous, uniformly elliptic coefficients, including the previously open case p > q via a duality argument in negative Sobolev spaces (Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.3). This estimate is then applied to SDEs (1.2) with diffusion coefficient sigma that is bounded, uniformly continuous, and nondegenerate, with grad sigma in ~L^{p1}_{q1} and drift b in ~L^{p2}_{q2}, where d/p_i + 2/q_i < 1. For this subcritical regime, the paper proves existence and uniqueness of strong solutions, weak differentiability of the flow, and the Bismut-Elworthy-Li derivative formula (Theorem 1.1). In the endpoint case b in ~L^{d;uni}_infty, the paper claims weak well-posedness of martingale solutions (Theorem 1.4). The main technical novelty is the extension of Krylov-type maximal regularity to localized spaces and to all p,q in (1,infty), with the p>q case handled by duality.

Significance. If correct, the localized L^q(L^p) maximal regularity estimate of Theorem 3.1/3.3 is a substantial improvement over earlier results that were restricted to p <= q, and it is of independent interest for PDEs with rough coefficients. The subcritical flow theorem (Theorem 1.1) unifies and extends several earlier results on Sobolev differentiable stochastic flows and derivative formulas, and the localized spaces allow global-in-space conclusions from local integrability assumptions. The endpoint weak well-posedness result (Theorem 1.4) would be new for multiplicative noise with critical drift. The paper is generally well structured, and the subcritical part is convincingly reduced to the maximal regularity estimate and standard stochastic tools. However, the endpoint uniqueness proof has a restrictive assumption that is not present in the definition of martingale solution, and the core duality argument in Theorem 3.3 contains a potentially circular use of an estimate whose proof is only announced as 'similar'. These issues affect load-bearing claims and require attention before the paper can be accepted as stated.

major comments (2)

[5, proof of Theorem 1.4, Eq. (5.4)] The uniqueness proof in Theorem 1.4 assumes that any two martingale solutions P^(i)_x in M^{sigma,b}_{0,x} satisfy the Krylov bound (5.4). However, Definition 1.3 of a martingale solution only requires the C^2_b martingale property; it does not include (5.4). No lemma is provided showing that every element of M^{sigma,b}_{s,x} automatically satisfies (5.4). The passage to the limit in the commutator term (L^{sigma,b}u)*rho_n - L^{sigma,b}(u*rho_n) uses (5.4) essentially. Consequently, the proof establishes uniqueness only within the subclass of martingale solutions satisfying (5.4), not in the full class M^{sigma,b}_{s,x} as the theorem states. Since the existence construction supplies at least one solution satisfying (1.6), the written argument does not rule out additional martingale solutions that fail (5.4). The theorem should be weakened to assert uniqueness in the class of solutions satisfying (5.4), or an additional argument must be supplied showing that (5.4) holds for every martingale solution.
[3.1, proof of Theorem 3.3, Step (v), Eq. (3.21)] In Step (ii) the authors state that they will prove (3.10) and (3.12) for p <= q and that (3.9) and (3.11) are 'similar'. However, in Step (v), inequality (3.21) explicitly invokes (3.9) to bound the term involving integral of ||nabla^2 w||^q_{-2,p}. Since (3.9) for p <= q has not been proved before this point and its proof is not displayed anywhere, the proof of (3.10) is circular as written. The authors should either provide the proof of (3.9) for p <= q before using it, or restructure the argument so that the bound on nabla^2 w in Step (v) does not depend on (3.9).

minor comments (4)

[2, Eq. (2.3) and Section 5] The notation ~L^d_infty is used in Lemma 5.2 and in the proof of Theorem 1.4, but the paper only defines ~L^{p;uni}_infty in (2.3); please clarify whether ~L^d_infty means the same space or the localized space with q = infinity.
[5, Lemma 5.1 and Lemma 5.2] Lemma 5.1 is stated for f in C^infty_c, but Lemma 5.2 applies it to |b_n|, which is not compactly supported; please add a truncation/approximation argument or extend the statement of Lemma 5.1.
[References] The proofs rely heavily on results from the same group's preprints or to-appear papers, especially [18, Theorem 1.1] and [19, Theorem 5.7]; the authors should ensure these references are publicly available with precise theorem numbers, and update reference [19] if it has appeared.
[General presentation] The extracted text contains many LaTeX artifacts such as '/greaterorequalslant' and broken symbols; the final version should be carefully proofread for these typographical issues.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the Lp-q maximal regularity backbone is proved in-paper; Theorem 1.4's uniqueness proof has an unproved Krylov-subclass restriction that is a correctness gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

No circular step meeting the required standard is present. Section 3 proves the L^p_q-maximal regularity estimate (Theorem 3.1) through duality, freezing, and negative-Sobolev bounds (Theorem 3.3, Lemma 2.3) without invoking Theorem 1.1 or 1.4. Section 4 derives Krylov's estimate, Zvonkin's transformation, pathwise stability, and the Bismut-Elworthy-Li formula from that estimate, via limiting arguments rather than fitted parameters; the use of [18, Theorem 1.1] to pass from (4.8) to gradient bounds is an external published result with its own proof, not a restatement of the target theorem. Citations to [19,22,23,24] supply technical lemmas with independent proofs. The one genuine concern is in the proof of Theorem 1.4: after defining M^{sigma,b}_{s,x} in Definition 1.3 without any Krylov bound, the uniqueness proof assumes 'Let P^{(i)}_x in M^{sigma,b}_{0,x}, i=1,2 be any two martingale solutions of SDE (1.2) so that for any T>0, there is a constant C>0 such that ... (5.4).' Since (5.4) is not derived from Definition 1.3, uniqueness is proved only in that subclass. This is an unproven restriction in the theorem as stated, but it is not circular: the conclusion is not defined in terms of the assumption, and no parameter or normalization is fitted and relabeled as a prediction. Hence score 0 under the circularity rubric.

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

The paper introduces no new empirical parameters or entities. It relies on standard analytic machinery and on several prior results by the same group (Zhang, Xie, Zhao) for Krylov estimates, stochastic Gronwall, and gradient estimates; those are published or externally available, so they are listed as axioms rather than free parameters.

assumptions (6)

standard math Marcinkiewicz interpolation theorem and Bessel potential space embeddings
Used in Theorem 3.3 steps (ii) and (v) to interpolate between spaces and to control negative Sobolev norms.
standard math Lemma 2.3 product estimate for frozen-coefficient parabolic equations
Imported from Krylov [8] and Kim [5]; it is the nonlinear product bound that makes the freezing argument in Theorem 3.3 go through.
standard math Lemma 2.2 freezing lemma for localized norms
Imported from [23, Lemma 4.1]; connects localized sup norms to global H^{alpha,p} norms.
domain assumption Krylov estimate, Khasminskii estimate, and stochastic Gronwall inequalities from [19]
Lemma 4.1(i)-(ii) are delegated to [19, Theorem 5.7] and [19, Lemma 3.5]; the pathwise uniqueness argument uses [19, Lemma 3.7].
domain assumption Gradient-flow regularity theorem [18, Theorem 1.1]
Converts the Lipschitz-in-starting-point estimate (4.8) into the sup_x E sup_t |gradient Y_t|^p bound in Theorem 1.1(ii).
standard math Yamada-Watanabe theorem and tightness criteria [15, Theorem 1.3.2], [23, Lemma 2.7]
Used to pass from existence to pathwise uniqueness in Section 4 and to extract accumulation points in Section 5.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of $L^q(L^p)$-theory of stochastic differential equations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L6WLCBV3

@misc{pith2026190801255,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: $L^q(L^p)$-theory of stochastic differential equations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/L6WLCBV3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.01255}
}

abstract

In this paper we show the weak differentiability of the unique strong solution with respect to the starting point $x$ as well as Bismut-Elworthy-Li's derivative formula for the following stochastic differential equation in $\mathbb R^d$: $$ {\rm d} X_t=b(t,X_t){\rm d} t+\sigma(t,X_t){\rm d} W_t,\ \ X_0=x\in\mathbb R^d, $$ where $\sigma$ is bounded, uniformly continuous and nondegenerate, $\nabla\sigma\in \widetilde{\mathbb L}^{p_1}_{q_1}$ and $b\in \widetilde{\mathbb L}^{p_2}_{q_2}$ for some $p_i,q_i\in[2,\infty)$ with $\frac{d}{p_i}+\frac{2}{q_i}<1$, $i=1,2$, where $\widetilde{\mathbb L}^{p_i}_{q_i}, i=1,2$ are some localized spaces. Moreover, in the endpoint case $b\in \widetilde{\mathbb L}^{d; {\rm uni}}_\infty$, we also show the weak well-posedness.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

24 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

[10]

P. O. Menoukeu, B. T. Meyer, T. Nilssen, F. Proske, and T. Zhang, A variational approach to the construction and Malliavin diﬀerentiability of stro ng solutions of SDE’s. Math. Ann. , 357 (2013), 761–799

work page 2013
[1]

L. Beck, F. Flandoli, M Gubinelli, and M. Maurelli, Stoch astic ODEs and stochastic linear PDEs with critical drift: regularity, duality and uniquene ss. Available at arXiv: 1401.1530

work page Pith review arXiv
[2]

Bergn and J

J. Bergn and J. Lofstrom, Interpolation spaces . Grundlehren der math, Vol.223. Springer- Verlag, 1976

work page 1976
[3]

Flandoli, M

F. Flandoli, M. Gubinelli, and E. Priola, W ell-posednes s of the transport equation by sto- chastic perturbation. Invent. Math. , 180 (2010), 1–53

work page 2010
[4]

Brownian motion with general drift

D. Kinzebulatov and Y. A. Semenov, Brownian motion with g eneral drift. Available at arXiv:1710.06729v1

work page Pith review arXiv
[5]

K. H. Kim, Lq(Lp)-theory of parabolic PDEs with variable coeﬃcients. Bull. Korean Math. Society, 45 (2008), 169–190

work page 2008
[6]

N. V. Krylov, Controlled diﬀusion processes . Translated from the Russian by A.B. Aries. Applications of Mathematics, Vol.14. Springer-Verlag, Ne w York-Berlin, 1980

work page 1980
[7]

N. V. Krylov, Lectures on elliptic and parabolic equations in H¨ older spaces. Graduate Studies in Mathematics, Vol.12. American Mathematical Society, Pr ovidence, RI, 1996

work page 1996

Show all 24 references

[8]

N. V. Krylov, The heat equation in Lq((0, T ), L p)-spaces with weights. SIAM Journal Math. Anal, 32 (2001), 1117–1141

2001
[9]

N. V. Krylov and M. R¨ ockner, Strong solutions of stochas tic equations with singular time dependent drift. Probab. Theory Related Fields , 131 (2005), 154–196

2005
[11]

S. E. A. Mohammed, T. Nilssen, and F. Proske, Sobolev diﬀ erentiable stochastic ﬂows of SDE’s with singular coeﬃcients. Ann. Prob., 43 (2015), 1535–1576

2015
[12]

Nam, Stochastic diﬀerential equations with critica l drifts

K. Nam, Stochastic diﬀerential equations with critica l drifts. Available at arXiv:1802.00074

arXiv
[13]

Scheutzow, A stochastic Gronwall’s lemma

M. Scheutzow, A stochastic Gronwall’s lemma. Inﬁnite Dimensional Analysis, Quantum Probability and Related Topics , 16 (2013)

2013
[14]

E. M. Stein, Singular integrals and diﬀerentiability properties of fun ctions. Princeton Math- ematical Series, Vol.30. Princeton University Press, Prin ceton, NJ, 1970

1970
[15]

D. W. Stroock and S. R. S. Varadhan, Multidimensional diﬀusion processes . Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, Vol.233. Springer-Ve rlag, Berlin-New York, 1979

1979
[16]

A. J. Veretennikov, On the strong solutions of stochast ic diﬀerential equations. Theory Probab. Appl., 24 (1979), 354–366

1979
[17]

W ang, L

L. W ang, L. Xie, and X. Zhang, Derivative formulae for SD Es driven by multiplicative α -stable-like processes. Stoch. Proc. Appl. , 125 (2015), 867–885

2015
[18]

Xie and X

L. Xie and X. Zhang, Sobolev diﬀerentiable ﬂows of SDEs w ith local Sobolev and super-linear growth coeﬃcients. Ann. Probab., 44 (2016), 3661–3687

2016
[19]

Xie and X

L. Xie and X. Zhang, Ergodicity of stochastic diﬀerenti al equations with jumps and singular coeﬃcients. To appear in Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincar´ e - Probabilit´ es et Statistiques. Available at arXiv:1705.01402v1

arXiv
[20]

Zhang, Strong solutions of SDES with singular drift a nd Sobolev diﬀusion coeﬃcients

X. Zhang, Strong solutions of SDES with singular drift a nd Sobolev diﬀusion coeﬃcients. Stochastic Process. Appl. , 115 (2005), 1805–1818

2005
[21]

Zhang, Stochastic homemomorphism ﬂows of SDEs with s ingular drifts and Sobolev dif- fusion coeﬃcients

X. Zhang, Stochastic homemomorphism ﬂows of SDEs with s ingular drifts and Sobolev dif- fusion coeﬃcients. Electron. J. Probab. , 16 (2011), 1096–1116

2011
[22]

Zhang, Stochastic diﬀerential equations with Sobol ev coeﬃcients and applications

X. Zhang, Stochastic diﬀerential equations with Sobol ev coeﬃcients and applications. Annals of Applied Prob. , 26 (2016), 2697–2732

2016
[23]

Zhang and G

X. Zhang and G. Zhao, Heat kernel and ergodicity of SDEs w ith distributional drifts. Available at arXiv:1710.10537v2

arXiv
[24]

Zhang and G

X. Zhang and G. Zhao, Stochastic Lagrangian path for Ler ay solutions of 3D Navier-Stokes equations. Available at arXiv:1904.04387. Pengcheng Xia: School of Mathematics and Statistics, Wuhan Un iversity, Wuhan, Hubei 430072, P.R.China, Email: pcxia@whu.edu.cn 22 PENGCHENG XIA,...

1904 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [10]

P. O. Menoukeu, B. T. Meyer, T. Nilssen, F. Proske, and T. Zhang, A variational approach to the construction and Malliavin diﬀerentiability of stro ng solutions of SDE’s. Math. Ann. , 357 (2013), 761–799

work page 2013

[2] [1]

L. Beck, F. Flandoli, M Gubinelli, and M. Maurelli, Stoch astic ODEs and stochastic linear PDEs with critical drift: regularity, duality and uniquene ss. Available at arXiv: 1401.1530

work page Pith review arXiv

[3] [2]

Bergn and J

J. Bergn and J. Lofstrom, Interpolation spaces . Grundlehren der math, Vol.223. Springer- Verlag, 1976

work page 1976

[4] [3]

Flandoli, M

F. Flandoli, M. Gubinelli, and E. Priola, W ell-posednes s of the transport equation by sto- chastic perturbation. Invent. Math. , 180 (2010), 1–53

work page 2010

[5] [4]

Brownian motion with general drift

D. Kinzebulatov and Y. A. Semenov, Brownian motion with g eneral drift. Available at arXiv:1710.06729v1

work page Pith review arXiv

[6] [5]

K. H. Kim, Lq(Lp)-theory of parabolic PDEs with variable coeﬃcients. Bull. Korean Math. Society, 45 (2008), 169–190

work page 2008

[7] [6]

N. V. Krylov, Controlled diﬀusion processes . Translated from the Russian by A.B. Aries. Applications of Mathematics, Vol.14. Springer-Verlag, Ne w York-Berlin, 1980

work page 1980

[8] [7]

N. V. Krylov, Lectures on elliptic and parabolic equations in H¨ older spaces. Graduate Studies in Mathematics, Vol.12. American Mathematical Society, Pr ovidence, RI, 1996

work page 1996