The tangential cone condition for some coefficient identification model problems in parabolic PDEs

Barbara Kaltenbacher; Otmar Scherzer; Tram Thi Ngoc Nguyen

The tangential cone condition for some coefficient identification model problems in parabolic PDEs

T0 review · 0 major / 5 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 paper verifies the tangential cone condition — the inequality that guarantees Landweber convergence — for four coefficient identification problems in parabolic PDEs, in both reduced and all-at-once form.

desk verdict Solid, honest verification of the tangential cone condition for four parabolic coefficient identification problems; worth a careful referee, but scope is limited by the full-observation assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.01239 v2 pith:LFNTKZIU submitted 2019-08-03 math.AP cs.NAmath.DSmath.NAmath.OC

Barbara Kaltenbacher , Tram Thi Ngoc Nguyen , Otmar Scherzer This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.APcs.NAmath.DSmath.NAmath.OC MSC 65J2065M3235K5547J06

keywords tangentialconeconditionLandweberiterationparameteridentificationparabolicPDEall-at-onceformulationinverseproblemsill-posednonlinearevolutionequations

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 proves that the tangential cone condition holds for four benchmark inverse problems in time-dependent parabolic partial differential equations: recovering a potential, a diffusion coefficient, and two nonlinear source terms from observations of the full state. The tangential cone condition is the structural inequality that guarantees the Landweber iteration, a simple iterative method for ill-posed problems, converges and does not get trapped in local minima. The verification is carried out in two formulations: the classical reduced one, where the forward operator maps the parameter to the observations, and the all-at-once one, where parameter and state are unknowns together. Verifying this condition for time-dependent models has been a known bottleneck — earlier examples were static — and the paper supplies a reusable template: check an all-at-once estimate, then let the stability of the linearized state equation lift it to the reduced setting. If the paper is right, these four model problems join the short list of ill-posed equations on which iterative regularization provably works.

What carries the argument

The tangential cone condition is the central object: an inequality of the form $\|F(q)-F(\tilde q)-F'(q)(q-\tilde q)\|_Y \le c_{\rm tcc}\|F(q)-F(\tilde q)\|_Y$ with a small constant $c_{\rm tcc}$, the structural hypothesis under which Landweber-type iterations converge and the residual has no spurious local minima. The main technical mechanism is the all-at-once version (31), which bounds the residual of the model equation by the observation difference $\|C(u-\tilde u)\|_Y$; because $C$ is the full embedding $V\hookrightarrow Y$, this becomes a state-space estimate and bypasses the parameter-to-state map altogether. For the bilinear potential and diffusion coefficient problems the model residual reduces to the product $((B(q-\tilde q))(t))(u-\tilde u)$, controlled by product estimates in Sobolev spaces; for the nonlinear source problems it is controlled by the Hölder continuity conditions (45)–(46) on $\Phi'$ and $\Psi'$, with arbitrary growth exponents admitted as long as the state space is smooth enough (conditions (A.113)–(A.124)). The transformation $z=e^u$ converts the quadratic-gradient problem into a potential problem, so its verification inherits the potential-problem argument once positivity of $z$ is established.

What would settle it

A direct numerical test for the potential problem in one space dimension would settle the claim: fix a smooth $q_0$, draw random perturbations $q,\tilde q$ inside a ball of radius $\rho$, solve (4)–(6) for each, and compute the ratio $\|F(q)-F(\tilde q)-F'(q)(q-\tilde q)\|_Y / \|F(q)-F(\tilde q)\|_Y$. Corollary 1 predicts the ratio stays bounded by a small constant independent of the pair; a single pair violating the inequality, or a ratio that grows with $\rho$, would falsify it. Repeating the same experiment with boundary-only observations should make the inequality fail, confirming the paper's full-observation requirement.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Theorem 3.2: if the all-at-once tangential cone condition (31) holds, the observation operator $C$ is the continuous embedding $V\hookrightarrow Y$, and the parameter-to-state map is well defined with a boundedly invertible linearization (Assumption 3.1, items (R1)–(R4)), then on a sufficiently small ball around the initial guess the reduced forward operator has a uniformly bounded derivative and satisfies the reduced tangential cone condition (52) with a small constant. Four corollaries instantiate this: potential identification in the linear heat equation with the diffusive Malthus interpretation, diffusion coefficient identification in the groundwater flow model, a source term with quadratic gradient nonlinearity, and a source term with cubic zero-order nonlinearity covering Ginzburg–Landau, Allen–Cahn, Zel'dovich, Fisher, and Nagumo type equations. The proofs verify (31) by bounding the nonlinear model residual through pointwise-in-time Hölder estimates in which the observation difference $\|u-\tilde u\|_Y$ enters; the all-at-once inequality then implies the reduced one through the stability of the linearized state equation (R3), without needing to differentiate the parameter-to-state map.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that observations cover the whole space-time state: the all-at-once inequality (31) is verified only with $C$ as the full embedding $V\hookrightarrow Y$, so the right-hand side $\|C(u-\tilde u)\|_Y$ is a full-state observation difference; with partial observations such as boundary traces, that right-hand side is too weak to dominate the model residual and the proof does not survive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Landweber iteration provably converges for the four inverse problems — potential, diffusion coefficient, quadratic-gradient source, and cubic source — whenever the full space-time state is observed.
Because the tangential cone condition enforces local convexity of the residual, the iteration cannot stall in local minima for these problems.
Each example admits a full Hilbert space setting with parameter and data spaces $L^2$ or $H^1$ as appropriate, so adjoint-based implementations are available, as noted in the remarks attached to each corollary.
The all-at-once condition carries over unchanged to wave equations and fractional diffusion by replacing the first time derivative, so those settings inherit the verified cone condition without new estimates.
The quadratic-gradient example is verified directly in its original variables, giving a second route beyond the $z=e^u$ transformation and different admissible function spaces.

Reading between the lines

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

The Hölder framework of (45)–(46) suggests the same verification should extend to any source nonlinearity with Hölder-continuous derivative, such as general polynomials in $u$ and $\nabla u$, by choosing the state space smooth enough; the paper itself shows only the quadratic and cubic cases.
The full-observation requirement (32) marks the boundary of the method: boundary-measurement or sparse-sensor versions would need a condition stronger than (31), plausibly an added smoothing estimate linking the model residual to the observed trace.
The positivity argument used to justify $z=e^u$ indicates a general recipe: any inverse problem transformable to a verified one by a state-dependent change of variables inherits the cone condition as long as the transform's positivity and regularity can be maintained.
Since the all-at-once inequality (31) does not involve the parameter-to-state map, it also supports convergence statements for the all-at-once iterative schemes cited in the paper's references, a consequence the paper leaves implicit.

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

Fast take: this is a solid verification paper, not a flashy one. It supplies the first examples of the tangential cone condition for parabolic coefficient identification problems, in both reduced and all-at-once formulations, with complete proofs. The transfer theorem (Proposition 4) and the four corollaries are the main new content; the examples are potential, diffusion, quadratic source, cubic source. I read the estimates carefully and they hold up. The paper does what it claims: it gives the structural condition needed for Landweber-type convergence for these four parabolic models.

The all-at-once section is clean and useful because it avoids differentiability of the parameter-to-state map, and Proposition 4 shows how the all-at-once TCC yields the reduced TCC under a bounded-invertibility condition on the linearized state equation. The corollaries give concrete Lebesgue/Sobolev index conditions, including Hilbert-space settings for low dimensions. That is genuinely useful for people who want to apply Landweber iteration in practice.

Soft spots, in proportion. The biggest one is full observations: condition (32) and the choice of C as the embedding V into Y are assumed throughout, so boundary-trace or partial-observation cases are not covered. This is explicit in the paper, not hidden, but it does limit the scope more than the title suggests. Second, the TCC constant in the reduced setting is C_lin times c_tcc, and the smallness needed for convergence proofs is only shown by shrinking the radius rho; there is no quantitative bound for a given ball. That is normal in this literature, but worth noting. Third, some well-posedness and differentiability results for the parameter-to-state map are quoted from a previous paper by one of the authors (Nguyen, Inverse Problems 2019). This is a mild self-citation, but the cited result appears in a peer-reviewed venue and the paper here supplies the reduction argument that makes it applicable. I do not see circularity.

Who this is for: people working on iterative regularization for nonlinear parabolic inverse problems, and anyone who needs to verify TCC-style conditions for their own model. It has no numerics, so readers looking for practical algorithms should also look at the convergence theory literature. As a referee, I would send this out. The proofs are detailed, the claims are internally consistent, and the limitations are stated honestly. I would accept after minor revisions at most.

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proves the tangential cone condition for a class of time-dependent inverse problems governed by parabolic PDEs, in both the all-at-once and reduced formulations. The main result, Theorem 3.2, shows that under Assumption 3.1 (local Lipschitz continuity of the nonlinearity, well-definedness of the parameter-to-state map, stability of the linearized problem, and the all-at-once tangential cone condition) the reduced forward operator satisfies the tangential cone condition with a uniformly bounded derivative. The authors verify Assumption 3.1 for four benchmark problems: identification of a potential, a diffusion coefficient, a quadratic first-order source, and a cubic zero-order source. The verifications are carried out in the appendix through detailed Hölder, Sobolev embedding, and contraction estimates.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides the first systematic verification of the tangential cone condition for parabolic coefficient identification problems, a central structural assumption for the convergence of Landweber-type iterative regularization methods. The general framework and the explicit index conditions in Corollaries 1-4 are useful for future applications. The proofs are detailed and appear internally consistent; the all-at-once reduction in Proposition 4 is clean, and the example verifications convincingly establish the hypotheses. The main limitation, namely that the observation operator must provide full spatial observations of the state rather than boundary or partial observations, is explicitly stated in the assumptions and does not undermine the conditional claims of the paper.

minor comments (5)

[Section 2 (near (32))] The sentence before (32) suggests that surjectivity of the observation operator (R(C(t)) = Y) is necessary for the all-at-once condition (31), but the examples verify (31) through the pointwise estimate (39) without relying on this surjectivity; clarifying the precise role of (32) would prevent a misleading reading.
[Remark 4] The remark states that c_tcc must be 'sufficiently small' for the reduced constant c_red to satisfy the convergence condition, but it does not state the explicit bound (e.g., c_red < 1/2 for Landweber iteration); adding the exact condition used by the cited convergence results would make the smallness requirement precise.
[Section 3.4 (R2)] The verification of (R2) is partly delegated to [39, Proposition 4.2]; since this is a self-citation and a load-bearing step, restating the precise assumptions from [39] (or including a short proof sketch) would improve the paper's self-containedness.
[Appendix/Notation] The notation ≽ is used in (36) and earlier but defined only in the appendix; defining it at first use (or at the beginning of the notation list in the main text) would help the reader.
[General presentation] There are a few typographical errors (e.g., 'exsistence' in Remark 6) and the formulas in the appendix contain OCR artifacts in the arXiv version; these should be corrected in the final typeset version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the TCC verification is derived from PDE estimates and the bridge from all-at-once to reduced setting is a direct estimate.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is a conditional theorem: Theorem 3.2 states that if Assumption 3.1 holds (including the all-at-once tangential cone condition (R4)) and C is the embedding V into Y, then the reduced setting satisfies the tangential cone condition. This is not circular because (R4) is not the same as the conclusion; Proposition 4 derives the reduced TCC from the all-at-once TCC by a direct identity for the residual (equations (53)-(58)), using only the assumed bounded invertibility (R3) and the fact that C is the embedding. The concrete verifications in Sections 3.1-3.4 prove (R1)-(R4) from Hölder estimates, Sobolev embeddings, contraction arguments, and standard PDE well-posedness results; no fitted parameters or target-inclusive assumptions enter. The self-citations, notably [39] for well-definedness and differentiability of the parameter-to-state map, are auxiliary parameter-free results with stated assumptions that do not include the TCC, so they do not smuggle in the conclusion. The full-observation condition R(C(t)) = Y is an explicit scope restriction, not a hidden assumption. Overall, the derivation chain is independent and self-contained relative to its own assumptions.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard parabolic PDE theory and Sobolev embeddings, plus the explicit modeling choices of full observations and, in many cases, a sufficiently small neighborhood of the initial guess. There are no fitted constants or newly postulated physical entities.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The domain Ω is a bounded C^{1,1} domain.
Assumed at the start of Section 1 and used for Sobolev embeddings and regularity of parabolic solutions.
domain assumption The observation operator C is the continuous embedding V into Y, meaning full state observations are available.
Imposed around (32) and used throughout the verification of the all-at-once TCC; all examples set C = id.
standard math Standard existence, uniqueness, and regularity theory for linear and quasi-linear parabolic PDEs, including Evans and Roubicek.
Used to establish (R2) well-definedness of the parameter-to-state map and (R3) bounded invertibility of the linearized forward operator; cited in Remarks 5 and 6 and in the example verifications.
domain assumption The radius rho of the ball around the initial guess is sufficiently small in many of the contraction arguments for (R3).
Repeatedly stated in the proofs, for example with the condition that c_epsilon is less than 1 if theta-hat equals theta0 in L-infinity and rho is sufficiently small; this is part of the local nature of the results.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The tangential cone condition for some coefficient identification model problems in parabolic PDEs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LFNTKZIU

@misc{pith2026190801239,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The tangential cone condition for some coefficient identification model problems in parabolic PDEs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LFNTKZIU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.01239}
}

read the original abstract

The tangential condition was introduced in [Hanke et al., 95] as a sufficient condition for convergence of the Landweber iteration for solving ill-posed problems. In this paper we present a series of time dependent benchmark inverse problems for which we can verify this condition.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages

[1]

S. M. A/l.pc/l.pc/e.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc J. W. C/a.pc/h.pc/n.pc, Ground state structures in ordered binary alloys with secon d neighbor interactions, Acta Met. 20, 423, (1972)

work page 1972
[2]

A. B. B/a.pc/k.pc/u.pc/s.pc/h.pc/i.pc/n.pc/s.pc/k.pc/y.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc M. Y . K/o.pc/k.pc/u.pc/r.pc/i.pc/n.pc, Iterative Methods for Approximate Solution of Inverse Problems, vol. 577 of Mathematics and Its Applications, Springer, Do rdrecht, 2004

work page 2004
[3]

H. T. B/a.pc/n.pc/k.pc/s.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc K. K/u.pc/n.pc/i.pc/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc, Estimation Techniques for Distributed Parameter Systems , Birkhauser, Boston, Basel, Berlin, 1989

work page 1989
[4]

B/a.pc/t.pc/t.pc/e.pc/r.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc M

A. B/a.pc/t.pc/t.pc/e.pc/r.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc M. H/e.pc/i.pc/n.pc/k.pc/e.pc/n.pc/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc/l.pc/o.pc/s.pc/s.pc, Preconditioners for Karush-Kuhn-Tucker matrices arising in the optimal control of distributed systems , in Control and Estimation of Distributed Parameter Systems: International Conference in Vorau, Aus tria, July 14-20,...

work page 1996
[5]

B/a.pc/t.pc/t.pc/e.pc/r.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc E

A. B/a.pc/t.pc/t.pc/e.pc/r.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc E. S/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/s.pc, Block preconditioner for KKT systems in PDE-governed opti- mal control problems, in Workshop on Fast Solutions of Discretized Optimization Problems, R. Hoppe, K.-H. Hoﬀmann, and V . Schulz, eds., Birkhäuser, 2001, pp. 1–18

work page 2001
[6]

B/r.pc/o.pc/n.pc/s.pc/a.pc/r.pc/d.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc B

L. B/r.pc/o.pc/n.pc/s.pc/a.pc/r.pc/d.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc B. S/t.pc/o.pc/t.pc/h.pc, The Ginzburg-Landau equations of superconductivity and th e one-phase Stefan problem, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré, 15, No. 3 (1998), pp. 371–397

work page 1998
[7]

B/u.pc/r.pc/g.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc W

M. B/u.pc/r.pc/g.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc W. M/udieresis.pc/h.pc/l.pc/h.pc/u.pc/b.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Iterative regularization of parameter identiﬁcation problems by sequential quadratic programming methods, Inverse Problems, 18 (2002), pp. 943–969. The tangential cone condition for parabolic inverse proble ms 39

work page 2002
[8]

, Numerical approximation of an SQP-type method for paramete r identiﬁcation , SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 40 (2002), pp. 1775–1797

work page 2002

Show all 49 references

[9]

C/h.pc/a.pc/v.pc/e.pc/n.pc/t.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc K

G. C/h.pc/a.pc/v.pc/e.pc/n.pc/t.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc K. K/u.pc/n.pc/i.pc/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc, On weakly nonlinear inverse problems , SIAM J. Appl. Math., 56 (1996), pp. 542–572

1996
[10]

D/u.pc/n.pc/k.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc T

F. D/u.pc/n.pc/k.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc T. H/o.pc/h.pc/a.pc/g.pc/e.pc, On parameter identiﬁcation in stochastic diﬀerential equa - tions by penalized maximum likelihood , Inverse Problems, 30 (2014), p. 095001 (20 pages). arXiv:1404.0651 [stat.CO]

2014 arXiv
[11]

L. C. E/v.pc/a.pc/n.pc/s.pc, Partial Diﬀerential Equations , Graduate Studies in Mathematics 19. AMS, Providence, RI, 1998

1998
[12]

W. H. F/l.pc/e.pc/m.pc/i.pc/n.pc/g.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc H. M. S/o.pc/n.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Controlled Markov Processes and Viscosity Solutions , Springer, USA, 2006

2006
[13]

B. H. G/i.pc/l.pc/d.pc/i.pc/n.pc/g.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc R. K/e.pc/r.pc/s.pc/n.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Travelling Waves in Nonlinear Diﬀusion-Convection Reaction, Springer Basel AG, Switzerland, 2004

2004
[14]

G/r.pc/i.pc/s.pc/v.pc/a.pc/r.pc/d.pc, Elliptic problems in nonsmooth domains, Pitman Advanced Pub

P . G/r.pc/i.pc/s.pc/v.pc/a.pc/r.pc/d.pc, Elliptic problems in nonsmooth domains, Pitman Advanced Pub. Program Boston, 1985

1985
[15]

H/a.pc/b.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc U

E. H/a.pc/b.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc U. M. A/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Preconditioned all-at-once methods for large, sparse parameter estimation problems, Inverse Problems, 17 (2001), p. 1847

2001
[16]

H/a.pc/n.pc/k.pc/e.pc, A regularizing Levenberg-Marquardt scheme, with applications to inverse ground- water ﬁltration problems , Inverse Problems, 13 (1997), pp

M. H/a.pc/n.pc/k.pc/e.pc, A regularizing Levenberg-Marquardt scheme, with applications to inverse ground- water ﬁltration problems , Inverse Problems, 13 (1997), pp. 79–95

1997
[17]

H/a.pc/n.pc/k.pc/e.pc, A

M. H/a.pc/n.pc/k.pc/e.pc, A. N/e.pc/u.pc/b.pc/a.pc/u.pc/e.pc/r.pc, /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc O. S/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc/z.pc/e.pc/r.pc, A convergence analysis of the Landweber iteration for nonlinear ill-posed problems, Numer. Math., 72 (1995), pp. 21–37

1995
[18]

H/o.pc/f.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc, On the degree of ill-posedness for nonlinear problems, J

B. H/o.pc/f.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc, On the degree of ill-posedness for nonlinear problems, J. Inverse Ill-Posed Prob., 2 (1994), pp. 61–76

1994
[19]

H/u.pc/b.pc/m.pc/e.pc/r.pc, E

S. H/u.pc/b.pc/m.pc/e.pc/r.pc, E. S/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc/i.pc/n.pc/a.pc, A. N/e.pc/u.pc/b.pc/a.pc/u.pc/e.pc/r.pc, /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc O. S/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc/z.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Lamé parameter estimation from static displacement ﬁeld measurements in the framework of n onlinear inverse prob...

2018
[20]

I/s.pc/a.pc/k.pc/o.pc/v.pc, Inverse Problems for Partial Diﬀerential Equations , Applied Mathematical Sci- ences, Springer, USA, 2006

V . I/s.pc/a.pc/k.pc/o.pc/v.pc, Inverse Problems for Partial Diﬀerential Equations , Applied Mathematical Sci- ences, Springer, USA, 2006

2006
[21]

K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Regularization based on all-at-once formulations for inve rse problems, SIAM Journal of Numerical Analysis, 54 (2016), pp

B. K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Regularization based on all-at-once formulations for inve rse problems, SIAM Journal of Numerical Analysis, 54 (2016), pp. 2594–261 8

2016
[22]

K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc, All-at-once versus reduced iterative methods for time depe ndent inverse problems, Inverse Problems, 33 (2017)

B. K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc, All-at-once versus reduced iterative methods for time depe ndent inverse problems, Inverse Problems, 33 (2017)

2017
[23]

K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc, A

B. K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc, A. K/i.pc/r.pc/c.pc/h.pc/n.pc/e.pc/r.pc, /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc B. V/e.pc/x.pc/l.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Goal oriented adaptivity in the IRGNM for parameter identiﬁcation in PDEs II: all-at once formulatio ns, Inverse Problems, 30 (2...

2014
[24]

K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc A

B. K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc A. K/l.pc/a.pc/s.pc/s.pc/e.pc/n.pc, On convergence and convergence rates for Ivanov and Morozov regularization and application to some parameter i dentiﬁcation problems in elliptic PDEs, Inverse Proble...

2018
[25]

K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc, A

B. K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc, A. N/e.pc/u.pc/b.pc/a.pc/u.pc/e.pc/r.pc, /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc O. S/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc/z.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Iterative Regularization Methods for Nonlinear Problems, de Gruyter, Berlin, New Y ork, 2008. Radon Series on Computa ...

2008
[26]

K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc M

B. K/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/e.pc/n.pc/b.pc/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc M. L. P/r.pc/e.pc/v.pc/i.pc/a.pc/t.pc/t.pc/i.pc /d.pc/e.pc S/o.pc/u.pc/z.pc/a.pc, Convergence and adaptive discretization of the IRGNM Tikhonov and the IRGNM Ivanov method under a tang ential cone cond...

2018
[27]

K/i.pc/n.pc/d.pc/e.pc/r.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc, Convergence of the gradient method for ill-posed problems, Inverse Problems and Imaging, 11 (2017), pp

S. K/i.pc/n.pc/d.pc/e.pc/r.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc, Convergence of the gradient method for ill-posed problems, Inverse Problems and Imaging, 11 (2017), pp. 703–720. arXiv:1606.00274 [mat h.NA]

2017 arXiv
[28]

K/i.pc/r.pc/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc, An Introduction to the Mathematical Theory of Inverse Probl ems, Springer New Y ork Dordrecht Heidelberg London, 2011

A. K/i.pc/r.pc/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc, An Introduction to the Mathematical Theory of Inverse Probl ems, Springer New Y ork Dordrecht Heidelberg London, 2011

2011
[29]

K/u.pc/n.pc/i.pc/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc E

K. K/u.pc/n.pc/i.pc/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc E. W. S/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/s.pc, Reduced SQP methods for parameter identiﬁcation problems , SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 29 (1992), pp. 1793–182 0

1992
[30]

K/u.pc/p.pc/f.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc E

F. K/u.pc/p.pc/f.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc E. S/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/s.pc, Numerical solution of a nonlinear parabolic control proble m by a reduced SQP method, Computational Optimization and Applications, 1 (1992), p p. 113–135

1992
[31]

O. A. L/a.pc/d.pc/y.pc/z.pc/h.pc/e.pc/n.pc/s.pc/k.pc/a.pc/y.pc/a.pc, V . S/o.pc/l.pc/o.pc/n.pc/n.pc/i.pc/k.pc/o.pc/v.pc , /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc N. N. U/r.pc/a.pc/l.pc ’/t.pc/s.pc/e.pc/v.pc/a.pc, Linear and Quasilinear Equations of Parabolic Type , Izd. Nauka, Moscow, 1967. (Engl. Tr...

1967
[32]

O. A. L/a.pc/d.pc/y.pc/z.pc/h.pc/e.pc/n.pc/s.pc/k.pc/a.pc/y.pc/a.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc N. N. U/r.pc/a.pc/l.pc ’/t.pc/s.pc/e.pc/v.pc/a.pc, Linear and Quasilinear Equations of Elliptic Type, Izd. Nauka, Moscow, 1964. (Engl. Transl.: Acad. Press, New Y ork, 1968.)

1964
[33]

L/e.pc/c.pc/h.pc/l.pc/e.pc/i.pc/t.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc A

A. L/e.pc/c.pc/h.pc/l.pc/e.pc/i.pc/t.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc A. R/i.pc/e.pc/d.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Newton regularizations for impedance tomography: conver- gence by local injectivity , Inverse Problems, 24 (2008), pp. 065009, 18

2008
[34]

L/e.pc/i.pc/b.pc/f.pc/r.pc/i.pc/t.pc/z.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc E

F. L/e.pc/i.pc/b.pc/f.pc/r.pc/i.pc/t.pc/z.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc E. W. S/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/s.pc, Inexact SQP interior point methods and large scale optimal control problems, SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, 38 (1999), pp. 27 2–293

1999
[35]

L/e.pc/o.pc/n.pc/i.pc, A ﬁrst course in Sobolev spaces , vol

G. L/e.pc/o.pc/n.pc/i.pc, A ﬁrst course in Sobolev spaces , vol. 105 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2009

2009
[36]

M/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/h.pc/u.pc/s.pc, An Essay on the Principles of Population , J

T. M/a.pc/l.pc/t.pc/h.pc/u.pc/s.pc, An Essay on the Principles of Population , J. Johnson, London, 1798
[37]

N/a.pc/g.pc/u.pc/m.pc/o.pc, S

J. N/a.pc/g.pc/u.pc/m.pc/o.pc, S. Y/o.pc/s.pc/h.pc/i.pc/z.pc/a.pc/w.pc/a.pc, /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc A/r.pc/i.pc/n.pc/o.pc/m.pc/o.pc/t.pc/o.pc, Bistable transmission lines, IEEE Transactions On Circuit Theory, CT-12, NO. 3 (1965), pp. 400–412

1965
[38]

A. A. N/e.pc/p.pc/o.pc/m.pc/n.pc/y.pc/a.pc/s.pc/h.pc/c.pc/h.pc/y.pc, Coarsening versus pattern formation , Elsevier, Comptes Rendus Physique, (2016), pp. 1–14

2016
[39]

T. T. N. N/g.pc/u.pc/y.pc/e.pc/n.pc, Landweber-Kaczmarz for parameter identiﬁcation in time-dependent inverse problems: All-at-once versus reduced version, Inverse Problems, 35 (2019). Art. ID. 035009

2019
[40]

C. E. O/r.pc/o.pc/z.pc/c.pc/o.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc O. N. G/h.pc/a.pc/t.pc/t.pc/a.pc/s.pc, A reduced SAND method for optimal design of non-linear structures, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineeri ng, 40 (1997), pp. 2759– 2774

1997
[41]

C. V . P/a.pc/o.pc, Nonlinear Parabolic and Elliptic Equations, Plenum Press, New Y ork, 1992

1992
[42]

P/a.pc/z.pc/y.pc, Semigroups of Linear Operators and Applications to Partial Diﬀerential Equations , Springer, Verlag New Y ork, 1983

A. P/a.pc/z.pc/y.pc, Semigroups of Linear Operators and Applications to Partial Diﬀerential Equations , Springer, Verlag New Y ork, 1983

1983
[43]

R/o.pc/u.pc/b.pc/iacute.pc/ccaron.pc/e.pc/k.pc, Nonlinear Partial Diﬀerential Equations with Application s, International Series of Numerical Mathematics, Basel

T. R/o.pc/u.pc/b.pc/iacute.pc/ccaron.pc/e.pc/k.pc, Nonlinear Partial Diﬀerential Equations with Application s, International Series of Numerical Mathematics, Basel . Boston . Berlin, 2013

2013
[44]

S/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc/z.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Convergence criteria of iterative methods based on Landweb er iteration for nonlinear problems, J

O. S/c.pc/h.pc/e.pc/r.pc/z.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Convergence criteria of iterative methods based on Landweb er iteration for nonlinear problems, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 194 (1995), pp. 911–933

1995
[45]

S/c.pc/h.pc/odieresis.pc/b.pc/e.pc/r.pc/l.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc W

J. S/c.pc/h.pc/odieresis.pc/b.pc/e.pc/r.pc/l.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc W. Z/u.pc/l.pc/e.pc/h.pc/n.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Symmetric indeﬁnite preconditioners for saddle point prob - lems with applications to PDE-constrained optimization pr oblems, SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applicatio...

2007
[46]

A. R. S/h.pc/e.pc/n.pc/o.pc/y.pc , M. H/e.pc/i.pc/n.pc/k.pc/e.pc/n.pc/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc/l.pc/o.pc/s.pc/s.pc, /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc E. M. C/l.pc/i.pc/f.pc/f.pc, Airfoil design by an all-at-once method, International Journal for Computational Fluid Mechanics, 11 (1998), pp. 3–25

1998
[47]

one shot

S. T/a.pc ’ /a.pc/s.pc/a.pc/n.pc, “one shot” methods for optimal control of distributed param eter systems: I ﬁnite dimensional control, tech. rep., Institute for Computer Applications in Science and Engineering : NASA Langley Research Center, 1991

1991
[48]

F. T/r.pc/odieresis.pc/l.pc/t.pc/z.pc/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc, Optimal Control of Partial Diﬀerential Equations Theory, M ethods and Appli- cations, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, American Mathematical S ociety, 2010

2010
[49]

/v.pc/a.pc/n.pc L/e.pc/e.pc/u.pc/w.pc/e.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc F

T. /v.pc/a.pc/n.pc L/e.pc/e.pc/u.pc/w.pc/e.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc F. J. H/e.pc/r.pc/r.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc, A penalty method for PDE-constrained optimization in inverse problems, Inverse Problems, 32 (2016), p. 015007

2016

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

S. M. A/l.pc/l.pc/e.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc J. W. C/a.pc/h.pc/n.pc, Ground state structures in ordered binary alloys with secon d neighbor interactions, Acta Met. 20, 423, (1972)

work page 1972

[2] [2]

A. B. B/a.pc/k.pc/u.pc/s.pc/h.pc/i.pc/n.pc/s.pc/k.pc/y.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc M. Y . K/o.pc/k.pc/u.pc/r.pc/i.pc/n.pc, Iterative Methods for Approximate Solution of Inverse Problems, vol. 577 of Mathematics and Its Applications, Springer, Do rdrecht, 2004

work page 2004

[3] [3]

H. T. B/a.pc/n.pc/k.pc/s.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc K. K/u.pc/n.pc/i.pc/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc, Estimation Techniques for Distributed Parameter Systems , Birkhauser, Boston, Basel, Berlin, 1989

work page 1989

[4] [4]

B/a.pc/t.pc/t.pc/e.pc/r.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc M

A. B/a.pc/t.pc/t.pc/e.pc/r.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc M. H/e.pc/i.pc/n.pc/k.pc/e.pc/n.pc/s.pc/c.pc/h.pc/l.pc/o.pc/s.pc/s.pc, Preconditioners for Karush-Kuhn-Tucker matrices arising in the optimal control of distributed systems , in Control and Estimation of Distributed Parameter Systems: International Conference in Vorau, Aus tria, July 14-20,...

work page 1996

[5] [5]

B/a.pc/t.pc/t.pc/e.pc/r.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc E

A. B/a.pc/t.pc/t.pc/e.pc/r.pc/m.pc/a.pc/n.pc/n.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc E. S/a.pc/c.pc/h.pc/s.pc, Block preconditioner for KKT systems in PDE-governed opti- mal control problems, in Workshop on Fast Solutions of Discretized Optimization Problems, R. Hoppe, K.-H. Hoﬀmann, and V . Schulz, eds., Birkhäuser, 2001, pp. 1–18

work page 2001

[6] [6]

B/r.pc/o.pc/n.pc/s.pc/a.pc/r.pc/d.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc B

L. B/r.pc/o.pc/n.pc/s.pc/a.pc/r.pc/d.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc B. S/t.pc/o.pc/t.pc/h.pc, The Ginzburg-Landau equations of superconductivity and th e one-phase Stefan problem, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré, 15, No. 3 (1998), pp. 371–397

work page 1998

[7] [7]

B/u.pc/r.pc/g.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc W

M. B/u.pc/r.pc/g.pc/e.pc/r.pc /a.pc/n.pc/d.pc W. M/udieresis.pc/h.pc/l.pc/h.pc/u.pc/b.pc/e.pc/r.pc, Iterative regularization of parameter identiﬁcation problems by sequential quadratic programming methods, Inverse Problems, 18 (2002), pp. 943–969. The tangential cone condition for parabolic inverse proble ms 39

work page 2002

[8] [8]

, Numerical approximation of an SQP-type method for paramete r identiﬁcation , SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 40 (2002), pp. 1775–1797

work page 2002