Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 25 references

Monotonicity of the periodic waves for the perturbed generalized defocusing mKdV equation

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · 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 for every positive integer n, the perturbed generalized defocusing mKdV equation has periodic traveling waves for small perturbation strength, and their limit wave speed c0(h) is strictly increasing in the energy h…

desk verdict The paper gives a clean extension of Chen et al. to all nonlinearity powers, but the main theorem rests on two unproved steps: Btilde_n(h) < 1 and the odd-n phase portrait. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.12027 v1 pith:MWVN42RX submitted 2025-01-21 math.AP math.DS

Lin Lu , Aiyong Chen , Xiaokai He This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.APmath.DS MSC 34C2534C6037C27
keywords periodictravelingwavesdefocusingmKdVequationgeometricsingularperturbationAbelianintegralinvolutionlimitwavespeedmonotonicityperturbed
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 studies traveling waves of the perturbed generalized defocusing mKdV equation U_t − U^n U_x + U_xxx + ε(U_xx + U_xxxx) = 0 for any positive integer n. It claims that for sufficiently small ε and each energy level h in (0, d_n), a periodic traveling wave persists, and the speed c(ε, h) tends, as ε goes to zero, to a limit c0(h) that is strictly increasing in h with c0(h) → 1 as h → 0. The significance is that this monotonicity — previously known only for the quadratic nonlinearity n = 2 — holds for every n, so faster waves carry higher energy in the singular limit. The proof reduces the perturbation problem to an Abelian integral whose sign controls existence, and converts monotonicity of the speed into monotonicity of a ratio of such integrals.

What carries the argument

The key object is the Abelian-integral ratio B̃_n(h) = B_n(h)/B_0(h), with B_n(h) = ∮_{Γ_h} u^n v du and B_0(h) = ∮_{Γ_h} v du around the periodic orbit at energy h. It enters the perturbed Abelian integral through I(h) = √c B_0(h) ((1 − 1/c) − B̃_n(h)), so a periodic orbit persists exactly when B̃_n(h) = 1 − 1/c0(h), giving c0(h) = 1/(1 − B̃_n(h)). The monotonicity proof proceeds by an involution η(u) on the u-axis defined by W(u) = W(η(u)); the ratio B̃_n is monotone because the auxiliary function T_n(u) = (n+1)∫_η^u t^n dt / ∫_η^u dt has positive derivative, a consequence of an algebraic identity (Lemma 4.1) valid for all n. Geometric singular perturbation (Lemma 3.1) supplies the reduction to a two-dimensional system on the slow manifold, and the implicit function theorem then promotes the zero-speed identity to an actual branch c(ε, h).

What would settle it

Compute B̃_n(h) by numerical quadrature up to h = d_n for an odd n not treated in the proof, say n = 3 or n = 5, using the integrals in Eq. (40); any value at or above 1 would make c_0(h) = 1/(1 − B̃_n(h)) infinite or negative and falsify the monotone-speed statement. Alternatively, numerically continue the periodic wave of the full system at a small fixed ε and check whether the selected speed c(ε, h) increases with h.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 2.1: fix any positive integer n and let d_n = n(n+1)^{2/n}/(2(n+2)) be the saddle energy of the unperturbed Hamiltonian system. For each sufficiently small ε and each h in (0, d_n), equation (4) has a traveling wave U = $c^{{1/n}}$ u(ε, h, c, τ), with c = c(ε, h), and the zero-perturbation limit c0(h) = lim_{ε→0} c(ε, h) satisfies c0′(h) > 0 and c0(h) → 1 as h → 0. The load-bearing identity expresses the limit speed as c0(h) = 1/(1 − B̃_n(h)), where B̃_n(h) is the ratio of the Abelian integrals B_n(h) = ∮ u^n v du and B_0(h) = ∮ v du around the unperturbed periodic orbit. Monotonicity of c0 follows from monotonicity of B̃_n, which the paper establishes through an involution argument on the potential W(u) = $u^{2}$/2 − $u^{{n+2}}$/((n+1)(n+2)). A corollary is that c0(h) > 1 for h > 0, giving the claimed lower bound.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the ratio B̃_n(h) = B_n(h)/B_0(h) stays strictly below 1 on the whole energy interval (0, d_n), because the limit speed is written as c_0(h) = 1/(1 − B̃_n(h)); the paper proves the ratio is increasing from 0 but leaves the endpoint value open, and if the ratio ever reached 1 the speed would become infinite or negative.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every positive integer n, small perturbative terms do not destroy the family of periodic waves of the defocusing mKdV equation; a full energy interval (0, d_n) of waves persists.
  • In the zero-perturbation limit, wave speed is an increasing function of energy, so among nearby periodic waves higher energy means faster propagation; the speed is always above 1 and tends to 1 at zero energy.
  • For n = 2, the formula reproduces the previously known limit speed 5/2 at the saddle energy; for n = 4 it yields an explicit upper bound consistent with numerical simulation.
  • The Abelian integral I(h) has at most one zero for fixed c, so the periodic branch is unique for each h and c, as stated in Proposition 4.2.
  • Monotonicity of B̃_n(h) is the exact condition that makes the speed formula (49) well-defined and strictly increasing on (0, d_n).

Reading between the lines

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

  • If B̃_n(h) ever reaches 1 before the saddle energy for some n, the formula c0(h) = 1/(1 − B̃_n(h)) would blow up; the paper's own Remark 4.1 leaves this endpoint uncalculated for general n, so checking it numerically for n = 3 or n = 5 is the first direct test of the theorem's reach.
  • Because the monotonicity proof relies only on the algebraic identity (30) and the symmetry W(u) = W(η(u)), the same involution argument may apply to other Hamiltonian nonlinearities sharing this potential structure, not just the mKdV family.
  • The paper explicitly says the odd-n case can be handled by a similar discussion but does not write it out, so the theorem for odd n rests on the reader trusting that omitted verification; that gap could be closed by repeating the involution construction on the one-sided phase portrait.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper studies periodic traveling-wave solutions of the perturbed generalized defocusing mKdV equation U_t - U^n U_x + U_xxx + ε(U_xx + U_xxxx)=0 for positive integers n. After the scaling U=c^{1/n}u, ξ=√c τ, the unperturbed problem reduces to a planar Hamiltonian system with a center at the origin. The authors use geometric singular perturbation theory to obtain a reduced planar system on a slow manifold, compute a Melnikov-type function Ψ whose zeros determine the wave speed c, and express the zero-speed limit as c0(h)=1/(1−B̃_n(h)), where B̃_n(h)=B_n(h)/B_0(h) is a ratio of Abelian integrals over the periodic annulus. Proposition 4.1 asserts that B̃_n is increasing and vanishes as h→0, and the main theorem claims that for every n there is an ε* such that for all ε∈(0,ε*) and h∈(0,d_n) a periodic wave exists with c0'(h)>0 and lim_{h→0}c0(h)=1. The proof is completed by an implicit function theorem argument after checking ∂Ψ/∂c>0.

Significance. If the theorem were fully established, it would extend the n=2 result of Chen et al. (2018) to all positive integers n and provide a parameter-free formula for the limit speed c0(h) with a rigorous monotonicity statement. The approach via Abelian integrals and involutions is standard in this area, and the paper gives explicit values for n=2 and n=4. However, the central claim is currently conditional: the key inequality B̃_n(h)<1 is not proved, the odd-n case is omitted from Proposition 4.1, the reduction from the three-dimensional system to the planar system (19) contains an algebraic inconsistency, and the uniform small-ε statement is not justified by the implicit function theorem argument. These issues are substantial but appear fixable within the scope of the manuscript.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4, Eqs. (48)–(49) and Remark 4.1] The proof of Theorem 2.1 requires B̃_n(h)<1 for every h∈(0,d_n), because the limit speed is c0(h)=1/(1−B̃_n(h)) and must be positive and finite. Proposition 4.1 establishes only that B̃_n'(h)>0 and lim_{h→0} B̃_n(h)=0; an increasing function starting at 0 can reach or exceed 1 before h=d_n. Remark 4.1 explicitly states that lim_{h→d_n} B̃_n(h) is an open problem, so the required inequality is not proved. If B̃_n(h*)=1 for some h*, then equation (48) has no finite solution for c0(h*), and the periodic-wave family terminates there, invalidating the uniform claim in Theorem 2.1. The special cases n=2 and n=4 in (44)–(45) do not establish the general case.
  2. [§4, Proposition 4.1 proof, after Eq. (36)] The proof of Proposition 4.1 is carried out only when n is even; after constructing the involution for odd n, the paper says 'a similar discussion can be conducted, we omit it here.' Since Theorem 2.1 asserts the result for every positive integer n, this leaves half of the claimed cases without proof. The odd-n situation differs qualitatively from the even-n one: there is a single saddle, the level curve at h=d_n is a homoclinic loop through a negative turning point rather than a symmetric heteroclinic cycle, and the involution is defined on (n*,√{n+1}) with n*<0 rather than on the symmetric interval. Proposition 4.2's proof also refers to 'the heteroclinic orbit connecting the two saddles,' which is not the relevant object when n is odd. The odd-n case needs to be written out.
  3. [§3, Eqs. (14)–(19)] The reduction that produces the planar system (19) is algebraically inconsistent as written. System (14) has the term −ε√c v in its third equation; substituting w=−u+u^{n+1}/(n+1)+εg2(u,v)+O(ε^2) into that equation gives g2(u,v)=−√c u^n v, not the expression −√c(u^n+(−1+1/c))v that appears after (18). To obtain the stated g2, the third equation must contain −ε/√c v (and (18) must correspondingly read −εg2−ε/√c v), which is consistent with the scaling in Eq. (9) but not with the displayed system (14). Since the rest of the paper, including the Melnikov function (21) and the limit-speed formula (48)–(49), is built on (19), this derivation must be corrected.
  4. [§3–§4, Theorem 2.1 and Eqs. (51)–(52)] Theorem 2.1 asserts the existence of a single ε* that works for all h in the open interval (0,d_n), but the proof applies the implicit function theorem at each fixed h and gives no control of the size of the ε-neighborhood as h varies. Near h=0 the derivative in (51) is of order h, since both ∫ u''^2 dτ and ∫ u'^2 dτ vanish at the center, so the radius of the implicit function theorem can shrink to zero as h→0. The argument therefore does not establish a uniform ε*; it supports at most a statement with ε* depending on h, or a statement restricted to compact subintervals of (0,d_n). The uniformity claim in Theorem 2.1 needs to either be proved with explicit bounds or weakened.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2, Eq. (8)] The notation n√c is nonstandard and easily misread; it should be written as c^{1/n}.
  2. [§4, Lemma 4.3] The symbols '/nequivalence0' and '/nequal0' should be typeset as 'not identically zero' and '≠', respectively.
  3. [§4, Proposition 4.2 proof] The phrase 'the periodic annulus Γ_h go to the heteroclinic orbit connecting the two saddles' should say 'goes to', and the description is only valid for even n; see the corresponding major comment about the omitted odd-n case.
  4. [Abstract and Section 1] There are several spacing errors in the abstract and title (e.g., 'genera lized', 'l imit', 'Where c>0'), and the abstract's plural 'simulations' overstates the single numerical example presented in Figure 3.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the limit wave speed is computed from unperturbed Hamiltonian integrals, with no fitted parameters and no load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular. The limit wave speed c0(h) is obtained by computing the first-order Abelian integral of the perturbed system over the unperturbed periodic annulus: Eq. (28) gives the Melnikov function, Eq. (29) gives the root condition c0 * integral(u''^2) - integral(u'^2) = 0, and Eqs. (46)-(49) rewrite the same condition as c0 = 1/(1 - Btilde_n(h)), where Btilde_n(h) is the ratio of two integrals over the unperturbed level curve. No parameter is fitted to the target quantity; Btilde_n is computed directly from the unperturbed Hamiltonian system. Monotonicity of Btilde_n is proved through Lemma 4.2 (cited from [12,24]), a general transfer theorem, after checking T'_n(u) > 0 via the algebraic identity in Lemma 4.1. These citations are not self-citations and are not used as a substitute for proof; the paper supplies the necessary verification of the lemma's hypotheses for even n. The comparison with Chen et al. [13] for n = 2 is a consistency check, not an input. The manuscript does contain genuine proof gaps, explicitly acknowledged: Remark 4.1 states that lim_{h -> d_n} Btilde_n(h) is an open problem, so the required inequality Btilde_n(h) < 1 on (0, d_n) is never established, and the proof of Proposition 4.1 is carried out only for even n, with odd n dismissed as 'a similar discussion'. These are correctness risks in the proof, not circular reasoning; the claimed result does not reduce to its own inputs by definition. No instance of self-definition, fitted-input-as-prediction, imported uniqueness, or renaming of a known result was found.

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

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its free-parameter count is zero: the only constants are the unperturbed Hamiltonian and the small parameter eps. The heavy lifting is outsourced to four cited lemmas, the most important being Lemma 4.2, which already contains the monotonicity transfer. The one new analytic burden, proving T_n'(u) > 0, is discharged for even n and asserted by analogy for odd n.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Fenichel normal hyperbolicity (Lemma 3.1): the critical manifold M0 persists as a locally invariant manifold M_eps for small eps.
    Used in Section 3 to reduce the perturbed system to the two-dimensional system (19).
  • standard math Algebraic identity of Lemma 4.1 (cited from [12]) relating sums of powers of u and its involution eta.
    Used in Proposition 4.1, Eq. (38), to sign T_n'(u).
  • standard math Monotonicity criterion of Lemma 4.2 (cited from [12,24]): T_n'(u) > 0 implies Btilde_n'(h) > 0.
    This is the main workhorse; it transfers monotonicity from an algebraic derivative to the integral ratio without reproof.
  • standard math Limit cycle bifurcation criterion of Lemma 4.3 (cited from [25]) linking zeros of the Abelian integral to existence and uniqueness of limit cycles.
    Used in Proposition 4.2 to pass from I(h) = 0 to a unique periodic orbit.
  • ad hoc to paper The unproved inequality Btilde_n(h) < 1 on (0, d_n), needed for c0(h) in Eq. (49) to be finite and positive.
    Not stated or proved; without it the central speed formula can break down. Remark 4.1 says the end-point limit is open.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Monotonicity of the periodic waves for the perturbed generalized defocusing mKdV equation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MWVN42RX

@misc{pith2026250112027,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Monotonicity of the periodic waves for the perturbed generalized defocusing mKdV equation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MWVN42RX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.12027}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper, we study the existence of periodic waves for the perturbed generalized defocusing mKdV equation using the theory of geometric singular perturbation. By Abelian integral and involution operation, we prove that the limit wave speed c_0(h) is monotonic with respect to energy h,and the lower bound of the limit wave speed is found. These works extend the main result of Chen et al. (2018) to the generalized case. Some numerical simulations are conducted to verify the correctness of the theoretical analysis.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.12027 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The phase portraits of system (10) . Theorem 2.1. For any positive integer n, let dn = n(n + 1) 2 n 2(n + 2) . Then there exists ǫ ∗ n > 0 such that for each ǫ ∈ (0, ǫ∗ n ) and h ∈ (0, dn), equation (4) has a traveling wave solution U = √n cu(ǫ, h, c, τ), (12) where c = c(ǫ, h), and u(ǫ, h, c, τ) is a solution of equation (9). Furthermore, let c0(h) = lim ǫ→0 c(ǫ, h), then c0(h) satisfies c′ 0 (h) > 0 for h ∈ (0, dn… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The graph of image of W and the involution η. When n is an positive odd number, we obtain W′ (u) = u − u n+1 n+1 = u(1 − u n n+1 ) > 0 for 0 < u < √n n + 1, and the function W(u) : (0, √n n + 1) → (0, dn) is strictly increasing, and there exists the inverse function σ2 : (0, dn) → (0, √n n + 1) satisfies W(σ2(h)) ≡ h for all h ∈ (0, dn). Since W(0) = 0, lim u→−∞ W(u) = +∞ and W′ (u) = u(1− u n n+1 ) < 0 for u < 0, i… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The graph of the limit wave speed c0(h) for n = 4. Acknowledgements This work is supported by the Key Project of Education Department of Hunan Province (No.24A0667) and by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.12475049). Ethical approval All authors agree to publish this article. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests. Authors’ contributions All authors contrib… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Asymptotics, frequency mo dulation, and low regularity ill-posedness for canonical d efo- cusing equations

    Christ M, Colliander J, Tao T. Asymptotics, frequency mo dulation, and low regularity ill-posedness for canonical d efo- cusing equations. American Journal of Mathematics, 2003, 1 25(6): 1235-1293

    work page 2003

  2. [2]

    Inverse scattering transforms and solito n solutions of focusing and defocusing nonlocal mKdV equati ons with non-zero boundary conditions

    Zhang G, Yan Z. Inverse scattering transforms and solito n solutions of focusing and defocusing nonlocal mKdV equati ons with non-zero boundary conditions. Physica D: Nonlinear Ph enomena, 2020, 402: 132170

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Focusing and defocusing mKdV equations wi th nonzero boundary conditions: Inverse scattering trans- forms and soliton interactions

    Zhang G, Yan Z. Focusing and defocusing mKdV equations wi th nonzero boundary conditions: Inverse scattering trans- forms and soliton interactions. Physica D: Nonlinear Pheno mena, 2020, 410: 132521

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Long-time asymptotic behavior for the disc rete defocusing mKdV equation

    Chen M, Fan E. Long-time asymptotic behavior for the disc rete defocusing mKdV equation. Journal of Nonlinear Scienc e, 2020, 30(3): 953-990

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    The complete classification of solut ions to the Riemann problem of the defocusing complex modified KdV equation

    Wang DS, Xu L, Xuan Z. The complete classification of solut ions to the Riemann problem of the defocusing complex modified KdV equation. Journal of Nonlinear Science, 2022, 3 2(1): 3

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Dark breathers on a snoidal wa ve background in the defocusing mKdV equation

    Mucalica A, Pelinovsky DE. Dark breathers on a snoidal wa ve background in the defocusing mKdV equation. Letters in Mathematical Physics, 2024, 114(4): 100. 10

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    On the Cauchy problem of defocusing mK dV equation with finite density initial data: Long time asymptotics in soliton-less regions

    Xu T, Zhang Z, Fan E. On the Cauchy problem of defocusing mK dV equation with finite density initial data: Long time asymptotics in soliton-less regions. Journal of Di fferential Equations, 2023, 372: 55-122

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Existence of solitary waves and peri odic waves to a perturbed generalized KdV equation

    Yan W, Liu Z, Liang Y . Existence of solitary waves and peri odic waves to a perturbed generalized KdV equation. Mathe- matical Modelling and Analysis, 2014, 19(4): 537-555

    work page 2014

Show all 25 references
  1. [9]

    Travelling wave solutions to a perturbed Kortew eg-de Vries equation

    Ogawa T. Travelling wave solutions to a perturbed Kortew eg-de Vries equation. Hiroshima Mathematical Journal, 199 4, 24(2): 401-422

  2. [10]

    Limit speed of traveling wave so lutions for the perturbed generalized KdV equation

    Chen A, Zhang C, Huang W. Limit speed of traveling wave so lutions for the perturbed generalized KdV equation. Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems - Series S, 2023, 16: 379-4 02

    2023

  3. [11]

    Monotonicity of limit wave spee d of traveling wave solutions for a perturbed generalized KdV equation

    Chen A, Zhang C, Huang W. Monotonicity of limit wave spee d of traveling wave solutions for a perturbed generalized KdV equation. Applied Mathematics Letters, 2021, 121: 1073 81

    2021

  4. [12]

    Monotonicity of limit wave speed of peri odic traveling wave solutions via Abelian integral

    Patra K, Rao CS. Monotonicity of limit wave speed of peri odic traveling wave solutions via Abelian integral. arXiv preprint, 2024, arXiv: 2411.18096

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Existence of kink waves and period ic waves for a perturbed defocusing mKdV equation

    Chen A, Guo L, Huang W. Existence of kink waves and period ic waves for a perturbed defocusing mKdV equation. Qualitative theory of dynamical systems, 2018, 17: 495-517

    2018

  6. [14]

    Periodic solutions with equal pe riod for the Friedmann-Robertson-Walker model

    Chen A, Tian C, Huang W. Periodic solutions with equal pe riod for the Friedmann-Robertson-Walker model. Applied Mathematics Letters, 2018, 77:101-107

    2018

  7. [15]

    Existence of solitary waves and per iodic waves for a perturbed generalized BBM equation

    Chen A, Guo L, Deng X. Existence of solitary waves and per iodic waves for a perturbed generalized BBM equation. Journal of Differential Equations, 2016, 261(10): 5324-5349

    2016

  8. [16]

    Bifurcations analysis and monotonici ty of the period function of the Lakshmanan-Porsezian-Dani el equation with Kerr law of nonlinearity

    Lu L, He X, Chen A. Bifurcations analysis and monotonici ty of the period function of the Lakshmanan-Porsezian-Dani el equation with Kerr law of nonlinearity. Qualitative Theory of Dynamical Systems, 2024, 23(4): 179

    2024

  9. [17]

    Monotonicity and asymptotic analysis of the period function of nearly parallel vortex filaments model

    Lu L, He X, Chen A. Monotonicity and asymptotic analysis of the period function of nearly parallel vortex filaments model. Applied Mathematics Letters, 2023, 144: 108717

    2023

  10. [18]

    Stability of smooth periodic travelling waves in the Camassa-Holm equation

    Geyer A, Martins RH, Natali F, et al. Stability of smooth periodic travelling waves in the Camassa-Holm equation. Studies in Applied Mathematics, 2022, 148(1): 27-61

    2022

  11. [19]

    Behavior of per iodic solutions of viscous conservation laws under localiz ed and nonlocalized perturbations

    Johnson MA, Noble P , Rodrigues LM, et al. Behavior of per iodic solutions of viscous conservation laws under localiz ed and nonlocalized perturbations. Inventiones Mathematica e, 2014, 197(1): 115-213

    2014

  12. [20]

    Periodic wave solutions for a KP-MEW equation under delay perturbation

    Wei M, Fan F, Chen X. Periodic wave solutions for a KP-MEW equation under delay perturbation. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 2024, 462: 134143

    2024

  13. [21]

    Traveling waves in a quintic BBM equation un der both distributed delay and weak backward di ffusion

    Fan F, Wei M. Traveling waves in a quintic BBM equation un der both distributed delay and weak backward di ffusion. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 2024, 458: 133995

    2024

  14. [22]

    Method of bifurcation theory

    Chow SN, Hale JK. Method of bifurcation theory. Springe r-V erlag, New Y ork, 1981

    1981

  15. [23]

    Singular nonlinear traveling wave equations: bi furcation and exact solutions

    Li JB. Singular nonlinear traveling wave equations: bi furcation and exact solutions. Science Press, Beijing, 201 3

  16. [24]

    Traveling Waves in a generalized KdV equation with arbitrarily high-order nonlinearity and different distributed delays

    Wei M, Dai Y , Zou R. Traveling Waves in a generalized KdV equation with arbitrarily high-order nonlinearity and different distributed delays. Qualitative Theory of Dynamical Syste ms, 2025, 24(1): 22

    2025

  17. [25]

    Limit cycles of di fferential equations

    Christopher C, Li C, Torregrosa J. Limit cycles of di fferential equations. Birkh¨ auser V erlag, Berlin, 2007. 11

    2007

Pith tools

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