Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 59 references

Compressible Navier-Stokes system with slip boundary from Boltzmann equations with reflection boundary: derivations and justifications

T0 review · 3 major / 5 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 This paper derives slip boundary conditions for the compressible Navier–Stokes–Fourier system from the Boltzmann equation under specular and almost-specular Maxwell reflection, and proves the specular approximation is accurate to…

desk verdict Formal slip-boundary derivation is new and worth serious attention; the rigorous CNS justification overreaches by omitting the angular-momentum condition (4.7) needed for axisymmetric domains. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.08715 v2 pith:N6ATR3QF submitted 2025-01-15 math.AP

Ning Jiang , Yulong Wu This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35Q2076P0576N06
keywords CompressibleNavier-StokesapproximationChapman-EnskogexpansionKnudsenlayerMaxwellreflectionboundaryconditionSlipconditionsSpecularConormalderivativesBoltzmannequation
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’s goal is to close the gap between kinetic and fluid descriptions at walls: it derives the correct boundary conditions for the compressible Navier–Stokes–Fourier system from the Boltzmann equation when the wall reflects particles almost specularly, and it proves that the Navier–Stokes approximation is accurate in bounded domains when the reflection is exactly specular. The derivation splits into three regimes controlled by the accommodation coefficient $\alpha_\varepsilon=0$ or $\alpha_\varepsilon=\chi\varepsilon^\beta$: $\beta>1$ gives the classical complete-slip conditions, $0<\beta<1$ gives slip of size $\varepsilon^{1-\beta}$ with coefficients fixed by a boundary-layer solvability condition, and $\beta=1$ gives $\varepsilon$-slip with an additional quadratic wall-slip temperature term. For specular reflection the paper proves an $O(\varepsilon^2)$ $L^2$ error and $O(\varepsilon)$ weighted $L^\infty$ error between the Boltzmann solution and the Chapman–Enskog expansion, provided the Navier–Stokes data start $O(\varepsilon^{3/2})$ close to equilibrium. The interest is that boundary conditions previously input by hand or left open are now consequences of the kinetic equation.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the first-order Chapman–Enskog ansatz $F_\varepsilon=M+\varepsilon G$, with $M$ the local Maxwellian and $G$ the Navier–Stokes correction, supplemented by a Knudsen layer correction $\varepsilon F^{bb}$ when the wall accommodation is not negligible at order $\varepsilon$. The layer correction is governed by the half-space kinetic equation $(\xi\cdot n)\partial_y f^{bb}=L_{\theta_w} f^{bb}$, and the solvability criterion (2.43) converts the requirement that the layer decays at infinity into explicit integrals that determine the slip coefficients $b^I_u,b^I_\theta,c^I_u,c^I_\theta$. For the rigorous part, the load-bearing device is the decomposition of the remainder $R$ into macroscopic part $PR$ and microscopic part $(I-P)R$, with a macroscopic $L^2$–$L^6$ estimate imported as Lemma 4.2, an $L^\infty$ estimate along specular backward characteristics, and conormal-energy estimates for the Navier–Stokes system based on Helmholtz decomposition and elliptic regularity for the Stokes-type system.

What would settle it

The decisive check is to evaluate the integrals in (2.43) with the source term (2.41) and confirm that they force $\iota=1-\beta$ and negative coefficients, since any other outcome would make the derived slip scaling (1.9) false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the formal side, Theorem 1.1 states that with Maxwell reflection and $\alpha_\varepsilon=0$ or $\alpha_\varepsilon=\chi\varepsilon^\beta$, the first-order Chapman–Enskog expansion $F_\varepsilon=M+\varepsilon G$ forces: complete slip (1.8) when $\beta>1$; slip velocity and temperature jumps of size $\varepsilon^{1-\beta}$ (1.9) with negative coefficients $b^I_u,b^I_\theta$ given by (2.45) when $0<\beta<1$; and $\varepsilon$-slip conditions (1.10) with an extra $|u-u_w|^2/4$ term when $\beta=1$. The transition is that for $\beta>1$ the diffuse part of the wall reflection is too weak to matter at order $\varepsilon$, so no Knudsen layer is needed, while for $0<\beta\le 1$ the layer must be solved and the solvability condition (2.43) selects the boundary data. On the rigorous side, Theorem 1.5 shows that for hard spheres with specular reflection in any smooth bounded domain, if the CNS solution starts within $O(\varepsilon^{3/2})$ of $(1,0,1)$ and the Boltzmann data are well prepared, the remainder satisfies the uniform bound (1.18), giving an $L^2$ error of $O(\varepsilon^2)$ and a weighted $L^\infty$ error of $O(\varepsilon)$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that two imported results hold exactly as used: the existence of decaying solutions to the thin kinetic boundary-layer problem under the stated solvability criterion, and the $L^2$–$L^6$ control of the fluid-like part of the linearized Boltzmann remainder in bounded domains with specular reflection, including its normalization for axially symmetric domains; if either imported result fails, the theorem built on it collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For exactly specular or extremely weak accommodation ($\beta>1$), the Navier–Stokes boundary data are fixed, not fitted: the wall sees complete slip (1.8).
  • For $0<\beta<1$, the slip velocity and temperature jump at the wall are $O(\varepsilon^{1-\beta})$ and are set by the half-space layer integrals (2.45), so different collision kernels give different slip coefficients instead of free parameters.
  • At the critical $\beta=1$, the wall temperature jump acquires a quadratic $|u-u_w|^2/4$ term that is invisible when $\beta<1$ because the slip velocity is higher order.
  • For specular reflection, the approximation error in bounded domains is $O(\varepsilon^2)$ in $L^2$ and $O(\varepsilon)$ in weighted $L^\infty$, matching the remainder scaling $\varepsilon^2\sqrt{\mu}R$ with no first-order boundary-layer singularity.
  • Because the derived slip coefficients are negative, the boundary contribution to the Navier–Stokes energy is dissipative, the property needed for well-posedness of the fluid system with these boundary conditions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The authors do not draw it out, but their three-regime result predicts an experimental signature: in a channel with almost specular walls, slip should first appear at scale $\varepsilon^{1-\beta}$ for $\beta<1$ and should be undetectable at Navier–Stokes order for $\beta>1$.
  • The same solvability-condition machinery should transfer to other wall mechanisms, such as incoming or temperature-dependent reflection, where the paper notes the derivation is open.
  • Because the $\beta>1$ case needs no Knudsen layer, the rigorous remainder argument for the specular case is the natural template for a proof at $\beta>1$, provided the Navier–Stokes regularity theorem adapts to the same complete-slip data.
  • The explicit integral formulas (2.45)–(2.46) let one test the theory quantitatively against direct-simulation Monte Carlo data for hard spheres without fitting any parameter.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Formalized claims in Lean

  1. Claim #1: On the formal side, Theorem 1.1 states that with Maxwell reflection and $\alpha_\varepsilon=0$ or $\alpha_\varepsilon=\chi\varepsilon^\beta$, the first-order Chapman–Enskog expansion $F_\varepsilon=M+\varepsilon G$ forces: complete slip (1.8) when $\beta>1$; slip velocity and temperature jumps of size $\varepsilon^{1-\beta}$ (1.9) with negative coefficients $b^I_u,b^I_\theta$ given by (2.45) when

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper has two main parts. In the formal part, the authors derive slip boundary conditions for the compressible Navier-Stokes-Fourier system from the scaled Boltzmann equation with Maxwell reflection boundary when the accommodation coefficient is α_ε = 0 or α_ε = χ ε^β, β > 0. They propose an ansatz with u - u_w = O(ε^ι), θ - θ_w = O(ε^ι), determine ι = 1 - β from the solvability of the Knudsen layer equation, and obtain the complete slip conditions (1.8) for β > 1, the slip conditions (1.9) for 0 < β < 1, and the critical condition (1.10) for β = 1, with coefficients (2.45) and (2.46). In the rigorous part, the paper proves a compressible Navier-Stokes approximation theorem for the Boltzmann equation with specular reflection: under smallness of the CNS data of order O(ε^{3/2}) and well-prepared Boltzmann data, the difference between the Boltzmann solution and the Chapman-Enskog expansion is O(ε^2) in L^2_{x,v} and O(ε) in a weighted L^∞_{x,v} norm. The rigorous proof combines conormal energy estimates for the CNS with the L^2-L^6-L^∞ framework for the remainder equation, using macroscopic estimates imported from Chen and Kim [15].

Significance. If the results are correct, this is a useful contribution: it completes the formal program of Aoki et al. [2] for almost specular Maxwell reflection, gives explicit formulas for the slip coefficients, and provides the first rigorous CNS approximation theorem with a boundary condition derived from the Boltzmann equation in the specular case. The paper makes good use of existing technology — conormal Sobolev spaces, Helmholtz decomposition, Agmon-Douglis-Nirenberg elliptic estimates, and the L^2-L^6-L^∞ framework — and it states its main theorems clearly. The formal derivation has a genuine new ingredient in the ansatz for general β > 0, and the rigorous part gives a self-contained energy structure modulo the imported macroscopic lemma. The main caveat is that the rigorous Theorem 1.5 is stated more broadly than Lemma 4.8, which is the actual estimate used in the proof; this is a fixable but load-bearing gap.

major comments (3)
  1. [§1.4.2 and §4.3 (Theorem 1.5 vs. Lemma 4.8)] Theorem 1.5 is not proved for the full class of domains it states. Lemma 4.8, which constructs the remainder R and yields (1.18), assumes condition (4.7) whenever the domain is axisymmetric, i.e. dim R_Ω ≠ 0. Theorem 1.5, however, states 'any smooth bounded domain' and defines well-prepared initial data solely by (1.17) and the smallness condition on (ρ0, u0, θ0); it neither includes (4.7) nor shows that (1.17) implies it. The skeptic's counterexample is valid: for the unit ball, R_in = δ (x × v) · e √μ with small δ satisfies the smallness hypotheses of Lemma 4.8 but violates (4.7), since its angular-momentum projection is nonzero. The conserved angular momentum then prevents the macroscopic estimate (4.8) from holding, so the bound (1.18) and the approximation (1.19) collapse for this admissible datum. The fix is to add (4.7) to the hypotheses of Theorem 1.5 or to restrict the theorem to domains with dim R_Ω = 0.
  2. [§1.4.1, Remark 1.3 and §2.3] The claimed β-continuity of the boundary conditions is not supported by the displayed formulas. For 0 < β < 1, the derivation of (1.9) uses u - u_w = O(ε^{1-β}) and θ - θ_w = O(ε^{1-β}), with coefficients b_I^u and b_I^θ evaluated at θ_w and with no quadratic velocity term. In the critical case β = 1, the boundary condition (1.10) contains the additional term |u - u_w|^2/4 and coefficients c_I^u and c_I^θ evaluated at θ_B rather than θ_w. Since ε^{1-β} → 1 as β → 1⁻ and u - u_w is O(1) in that limit, the quadratic term does not vanish, and b_I(θ_w) does not coincide with c_I(θ_B) unless θ_B = θ_w. Remark 1.3 should be revised, or the precise scaling under which (1.9) tends to (1.10) should be stated.
  3. [§3.1-§3.2 (proofs of Lemmas 3.4 and 3.6)] Several estimates that carry the proof of Theorem 3.1 are delegated to 'tedious but trivial' or 'routine' computations. In Lemma 3.4 the bounds for the commutator terms involving C_i^α are asserted without details, and the proof of Lemma 3.6 states that the remaining terms are controlled by 'standard estimates' that are omitted. Since (3.13) and (3.37) are the base estimates for Corollary 3.8 and hence for the uniform regularity used in Theorem 1.5, these steps should be written out or replaced by a precise reference to the corresponding estimates in [18] or [47]. Without this, the rigorous part is not fully verifiable as written.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2.2.1, equation (2.9)] The far-field condition in (2.9) is written as 'F^bb → 0 as η → 0'; the intended statement is η → ∞.
  2. [§4.3, proof of Theorem 1.5] In the completing-proof paragraph, '(1.18) directly follows from Lemma 4.16' should refer to Lemma 4.8, not Lemma 4.16.
  3. [Abstract and §4] The notation 'L^2-L^6-L^8' is used in the abstract and in Section 4; the weighted bound in Lemma 4.6 is an L^∞ estimate, so the notation should be 'L^2-L^6-L^∞' or the symbol 8 should be explained as ∞.
  4. [§1.4.1 and §2.4] Remark 1.4 says the Knudsen layer 'is not needed' for α_ε = 0 or β > 1, while Section 2.4 says the Knudsen layer appears at higher order; the wording should be clarified to 'not needed at first order'.
  5. [§4.1, Lemma 4.2] The proof of Lemma 4.2 relies on [15] and includes a normalization argument with ̄a_0 and ̄c_0; the sentence 'Define ̄a_0 = ...' should explicitly state the conservation laws for mass and energy that justify the reduction, since these are not written out.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the formal slip-boundary derivation and the rigorous remainder estimates rely on external Knudsen-layer solvability and macroscopic estimates, not on fitted parameters or self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's formal derivation in Section 2 constructs a Chapman-Enskog ansatz (2.7) and a Knudsen-layer correction, then uses the solvability criterion (2.43) of Golse, Perthame and Sulem [22] to convert the layer boundary value problem (2.41) into the slip conditions (1.9) and (1.10). The target boundary conditions are not assumed as inputs; they are outputs of the solvability conditions, and the slip coefficients (2.45) and (2.46) are explicit integrals rather than fitted parameters. The rigorous half, Theorem 1.5, is built on the L2-L6-L8 framework with the macroscopic estimates of Chen and Kim [15], an external independent result, plus the paper's own energy estimates for the compressible Navier-Stokes system with slip boundary conditions. No parameter is fitted to a subset of data and then renamed as a prediction. The self-citations that appear (e.g., [34], [37]) are contextual literature references and are not load-bearing for either the formal derivation or the rigorous justification. One caveat affects completeness rather than circularity: Theorem 1.5 states 'any smooth bounded domain' and defines well-prepared data only via (1.17), while Lemma 4.8 and Lemma 4.2 require condition (4.7) for axisymmetric domains (dim R_Omega != 0). This is a hypothesis gap in the theorem statement, not a circular reduction, and it does not change the circularity score.

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

No free parameters are fitted; chi and beta are physical boundary inputs, and the slip coefficients b and c are defined by integrals of the linearized collision data a and b. The paper introduces no new particles or forces. Its main axiomatic content is external theorems and the boundary-layer ansatz, not invented entities.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The half-space Knudsen layer problem (2.42) has a decaying solution if and only if the solvability condition (2.43) holds.
    Invoked in Section 2.2.3 to turn the layer equation into the slip boundary conditions (2.44); the existence theory is cited from [22] and not reproved.
  • domain assumption The macroscopic estimate of Lemma 4.2, taken from Chen and Kim [15], applies to the specular-reflection remainder equation in the bounded domain with the stated normalization (4.7).
    Used without proof to estimate the macroscopic part of the remainder; Theorem 1.5 depends on it, as acknowledged in Remark 4.4.
  • ad hoc to paper The ansatz F_epsilon = M + epsilon G + epsilon F_bb with u-u_w = O(epsilon^iota), theta-theta_w = O(epsilon^iota), and iota = 1-beta correctly describes the boundary layer to the claimed order.
    Section 2.2 uses this ansatz to obtain the formal slip conditions; the paper explicitly leaves rigorous justification of the almost specular case to a later paper.
  • domain assumption The solution remains in the near-equilibrium regime with (rho,u,theta) close to (1,0,1), hard-sphere collision kernel, and well-prepared initial data.
    Theorems 1.5 and 3.1 impose a smallness condition O(epsilon^{3/2}) and the hard-sphere kernel; the remainder framework is built on this regime.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Compressible Navier-Stokes system with slip boundary from Boltzmann equations with reflection boundary: derivations and justifications." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/N6ATR3QF

@misc{pith2026250108715,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Compressible Navier-Stokes system with slip boundary from Boltzmann equations with reflection boundary: derivations and justifications},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/N6ATR3QF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.08715}
}
abstract

This is the first in a series of papers connecting the boundary conditions for the compressible Navier-Stokes system from the Boltzmann equations with the Maxwell reflection boundary. The slip boundary conditions are formally derived from the Boltzmann equation with both specular and almost specular reflection boundary conditions. That is, the accommodation coefficient $\alpha_\eps=O(\eps^\beta)$ with $\beta>0$ or $\alpha_\eps =0$. Here, the small number $\eps>0$ denotes the Knudsen number. The systematic formal analysis is based on the Chapman-Enskog expansion and the analysis of the Knudsen layer. In particular, for the first time, we employ the appropriate ansatz for the general $\beta>0$. This completes the program started in \cite{aoki2017slip}. In the second part, the compressible Navier-Stokes-Fourier approximation for the Boltzmann equation with specular reflection in general bounded domains is rigorously justified. The uniform regularity for the compressible Navier-Stokes system with the derived boundary conditions is investigated. For the remainder equation, the $L^2\mbox{-}L^6\mbox{-}L^\infty$ framework is employed to obtain uniform estimates in $\eps$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 57 canonical work pages

  1. [15]

    Chen and C

    H. Chen and C. Kim, Macroscopic estimate of the linear Boltzmann and Landau equations with specular reflection boundary, Kinet. Relat. Models 17 (2024), no. 5, 774–806

    work page 2024

  2. [22]

    Golse, B

    F. Golse, B. Perthame, and C. Sulem, On a boundary layer problem for the nonlinear Boltzmann equation , Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 103 (1988), no. 1, 81–96

    work page 1988

  3. [2]

    K. Aoki, C. Baranger, M. Hattori, S. Kosuge, G. Martal` o, J. Mathiaud, and L. Mieussens, Slip boundary conditions for the compressible Navier-Stokes equations , J. Stat. Phys. 169 (2017), no. 4, 744–781

    work page 2017

  4. [18]

    Duan and S

    R. Duan and S. Liu, Compressible Navier-Stokes approximation for the Boltzmann equation in bounded domains, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 374 (2021), no. 11, 7867–7924

    work page 2021

  5. [47]

    Masmoudi and F

    N. Masmoudi and F. Rousset, Uniform regularity for the Navier-Stokes equation with Navier boundary condition, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 203 (2012), no. 2, 529–575

    work page 2012

  6. [1]

    Agmon, A

    S. Agmon, A. Douglis, and L. Nirenberg, Estimates near the boundary for solutions of elliptic partial differential equations satisfying general boundary conditions. II , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 17 (1964), 35– 92

    work page 1964

  7. [3]

    K. Aoki, K. Nishino, Y. Sone, and H. Sugimoto, Numerical analysis of steady flows of a gas condensing on or evaporating from its plane condensed phase on the basis of kinetic theory: Effect of gas motion along the condensed phase , Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics 3 (199109), no. 9, 2260–2275

    work page

  8. [4]

    Bardos, R

    C. Bardos, R. E. Caflisch, and B. Nicolaenko, The Milne and Kramers problems for the Boltzmann equation of a hard sphere gas , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 39 (1986), no. 3, 323–352

    work page 1986

Show all 59 references
  1. [5]

    Bardos, F

    C. Bardos, F. Golse, and C. D. Levermore, Fluid dynamic limits of kinetic equations. II. Convergence proofs for the Boltzmann equation , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 46 (1993), no. 5, 667–753

    1993

  2. [6]

    Bardos, F

    C. Bardos, F. Golse, and D. Levermore, Fluid dynamic limits of kinetic equations. I. Formal derivations , J. Statist. Phys. 63 (1991), no. 1-2, 323–344

    1991

  3. [7]

    Bardos and S

    C. Bardos and S. Ukai, The classical incompressible Navier-Stokes limit of the Boltzmann equation , Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 1 (1991), no. 2, 235–257

    1991

  4. [8]

    A. V. Bobylev, Instabilities in the Chapman-Enskog expansion and hyperbolic Burnett equations , J. Stat. Phys. 124 (2006), no. 2-4, 371–399

    2006

  5. [9]

    Briant, From the Boltzmann equation to the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations on the torus: a quantitative error estimate , J

    M. Briant, From the Boltzmann equation to the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations on the torus: a quantitative error estimate , J. Differential Equations 259 (2015), no. 11, 6072–6141

    2015

  6. [10]

    Briant, S

    M. Briant, S. Merino-Aceituno, and C. Mouhot, From Boltzmann to incompressible Navier-Stokes in Sobolev spaces with polynomial weight , Anal. Appl. (Singap.) 17 (2019), no. 1, 85–116

    2019

  7. [11]

    R. E. Caflisch, The fluid dynamic limit of the nonlinear Boltzmann equation , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 33 (1980), no. 5, 651–666

    1980

  8. [12]

    Y. Cao, J. Jang, and C. Kim, Passage from the Boltzmann equation with diffuse boundary to the incom- pressible Euler equation with heat convection , J. Differential Equations 366 (2023), 565–644

    2023

  9. [13]

    Cercignani, R

    C. Cercignani, R. Illner, and M. Pulvirenti, The mathematical theory of dilute gases, Applied Mathematical Sciences, vol. 106, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1994

    1994

  10. [14]

    Chapman and T

    S. Chapman and T. G. Cowling, The mathematical theory of non-uniform gases. An account of the kinetic theory of viscosity, thermal conduction and diffusion in gases , Cambridge University Press, London, 1970. Third edition, prepared in co-operation with D. Burnett

    1970

  11. [16]

    Cho and H

    Y. Cho and H. Kim, Existence results for viscous polytropic fluids with vacuum , Journal of Differential Equations 228 (2006), no. 2, 377–411

    2006

  12. [17]

    Coron, Derivation of slip boundary conditions for the Navier-Stokes system from the Boltzmann equa- tion, J

    F. Coron, Derivation of slip boundary conditions for the Navier-Stokes system from the Boltzmann equa- tion, J. Statist. Phys. 54 (1989), no. 3-4, 829–857

    1989

  13. [19]

    Esposito, Y

    R. Esposito, Y. Guo, C. Kim, and R. Marra, Non-isothermal boundary in the Boltzmann theory and Fourier law , Comm. Math. Phys. 323 (2013), no. 1, 177–239

    2013

  14. [20]

    Esposito, Y

    R. Esposito, Y. Guo, C. Kim, and R. Marra, Stationary solutions to the Boltzmann equation in the hydrodynamic limit, Ann. PDE 4 (2018), no. 1, Paper No. 1, 119

    2018

  15. [21]

    Gallagher and I

    I. Gallagher and I. Tristani, On the convergence of smooth solutions from Boltzmann to Navier-Stokes , Ann. H. Lebesgue 3 (2020), 561–614

    2020

  16. [23]

    Golse and L

    F. Golse and L. Saint-Raymond, The Navier-Stokes limit of the Boltzmann equation for bounded collision kernels, Invent. Math. 155 (2004), no. 1, 81–161

    2004

  17. [24]

    Golse and L

    F. Golse and L. Saint-Raymond, Hydrodynamic limits for the Boltzmann equation , Riv. Mat. Univ. Parma (7) 4** (2005), 1–144

    2005

  18. [25]

    Golse and L

    F. Golse and L. Saint-Raymond, The incompressible Navier-Stokes limit of the Boltzmann equation for hard cutoff potentials , J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 91 (2009), no. 5, 508–552

    2009

  19. [26]

    Guo, The Vlasov-Poisson-Boltzmann system near Maxwellians , Comm

    Y. Guo, The Vlasov-Poisson-Boltzmann system near Maxwellians , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 55 (2002), no. 9, 1104–1135

    2002

  20. [27]

    Guo, Boltzmann diffusive limit beyond the Navier-Stokes approximation , Comm

    Y. Guo, Boltzmann diffusive limit beyond the Navier-Stokes approximation , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 59 (2006), no. 5, 626–687

    2006

  21. [28]

    Guo, Decay and continuity of the Boltzmann equation in bounded domains , Arch

    Y. Guo, Decay and continuity of the Boltzmann equation in bounded domains , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 197 (2010), no. 3, 713–809. COMPRESSIBLE NA VIER-STOKES APPROXIMATION FOR THE BOLTZMANN EQUATION 51

    2010

  22. [29]

    Y. Guo, F. Huang, and Y. Wang, Hilbert expansion of the Boltzmann equation with specular boundary condition in half-space, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 241 (2021), no. 1, 231–309

    2021

  23. [30]

    Y. Guo, J. Jang, and N. Jiang, Local Hilbert expansion for the Boltzmann equation , Kinet. Relat. Models 2 (2009), no. 1, 205–214

    2009

  24. [31]

    Y. Guo, J. Jang, and N. Jiang, Acoustic limit for the Boltzmann equation in optimal scaling , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 63 (2010), no. 3, 337–361

    2010

  25. [32]

    Jang and N

    J. Jang and N. Jiang, Acoustic limit of the Boltzmann equation: classical solutions , Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 25 (2009), no. 3, 869–882

    2009

  26. [33]

    Jang and C

    J. Jang and C. Kim, Incompressible Euler limit from Boltzmann equation with diffuse boundary condition for analytic data , Ann. PDE 7 (2021), no. 2, Paper No. 22, 103

    2021

  27. [34]

    Jiang, Y.-L

    N. Jiang, Y.-L. Luo, and S. Tang, Compressible Euler limit from Boltzmann equation with Maxwell reflec- tion boundary condition in half-space , arXiv:2101.11199 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Jiang, Y.-L

    N. Jiang, Y.-L. Luo, and S. Tang,Compressible Euler limit from Boltzmann equation with complete diffusive boundary condition in half-space , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 377 (2024), no. 8, 5323–5359

    2024

  29. [36]

    Jiang and N

    N. Jiang and N. Masmoudi, Boundary layers and incompressible Navier-Stokes-Fourier limit of the Boltz- mann equation in bounded domain I , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 70 (2017), no. 1, 90–171

    2017

  30. [37]

    Jiang and Y

    N. Jiang and Y. Wu, Kinetic-fluid boundary layers and acoustic limit for the boltzmann equation with general maxwell reflection boundary condition , Kinetic and Related Models 18 (2025), no. 4, 633–663

    2025

  31. [38]

    Jiang, C.-J

    N. Jiang, C.-J. Xu, and H. Zhao, Incompressible Navier-Stokes-Fourier limit from the Boltzmann equation: classical solutions, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 67 (2018), no. 5, 1817–1855

    2018

  32. [39]

    Jiang and X

    N. Jiang and X. Zhang, The Boltzmann equation with incoming boundary condition: global solutions and Navier-Stokes limit , SIAM J. Math. Anal. 51 (2019), no. 3, 2504–2534

    2019

  33. [40]

    Jiang and X

    N. Jiang and X. Zhang, Global renormalized solutions and Navier-Stokes limit of the Boltzmann equation with incoming boundary condition for long range interaction , J. Differential Equations 266 (2019), no. 5, 2597–2637

    2019

  34. [41]

    Kawashima, A

    S. Kawashima, A. Matsumura, and T. Nishida, On the fluid-dynamical approximation to the Boltzmann equation at the level of the Navier-Stokes equation , Comm. Math. Phys. 70 (1979), no. 2, 97–124

    1979

  35. [42]

    Kim and T

    C. Kim and T. T Nguyen, Validity of prandtl’s boundary layer from the Boltzmann theory , arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.16160 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  36. [43]

    Lachowicz, On the initial layer and the existence theorem for the nonlinear Boltzmann equation , Math

    M. Lachowicz, On the initial layer and the existence theorem for the nonlinear Boltzmann equation , Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 9 (1987), no. 3, 342–366

    1987

  37. [44]

    Lachowicz, Solutions of nonlinear kinetic equations on the level of the Navier-Stokes dynamics , J

    M. Lachowicz, Solutions of nonlinear kinetic equations on the level of the Navier-Stokes dynamics , J. Math. Kyoto Univ. 32 (1992), no. 1, 31–43

    1992

  38. [45]

    Lions, Mathematical topics in fluid mechanics

    P.-L. Lions, Mathematical topics in fluid mechanics. Vol. 1 , Oxford Lecture Series in Mathematics and its Applications, vol. 3, The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 1996. Incompressible models, Oxford Science Publications

    1996

  39. [46]

    S. Liu, T. Yang, and H. Zhao, Compressible Navier-Stokes approximation to the Boltzmann equation , J. Differential Equations 256 (2014), no. 11, 3770–3816

    2014

  40. [48]

    Masmoudi and L

    N. Masmoudi and L. Saint-Raymond, From the Boltzmann equation to the Stokes-Fourier system in a bounded domain, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 56 (2003), no. 9, 1263–1293

    2003

  41. [49]

    Nishida, Fluid dynamical limit of the nonlinear Boltzmann equation to the level of the compressible Euler equation, Comm

    T. Nishida, Fluid dynamical limit of the nonlinear Boltzmann equation to the level of the compressible Euler equation, Comm. Math. Phys. 61 (1978), no. 2, 119–148

    1978

  42. [50]

    J. C. Robinson, J. L. Rodrigo, and W. Sadowski, The three-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations , Cam- bridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 157, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016. Classical theory

    2016

  43. [51]

    Saint-Raymond, Convergence of solutions to the Boltzmann equation in the incompressible Euler limit , Arch

    L. Saint-Raymond, Convergence of solutions to the Boltzmann equation in the incompressible Euler limit , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 166 (2003), no. 1, 47–80

    2003

  44. [52]

    Saint-Raymond, Hydrodynamic limits of the Boltzmann equation , Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol

    L. Saint-Raymond, Hydrodynamic limits of the Boltzmann equation , Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1971, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2009

    1971

  45. [53]

    Saint-Raymond, Hydrodynamic limits: some improvements of the relative entropy method , Ann

    L. Saint-Raymond, Hydrodynamic limits: some improvements of the relative entropy method , Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e C Anal. Non Lin´ eaire26 (2009), no. 3, 705–744

    2009

  46. [54]

    Sone, Kinetic theory and fluid dynamics , Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Tech- nology, Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2002

    Y. Sone, Kinetic theory and fluid dynamics , Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Tech- nology, Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2002

    2002

  47. [55]

    Sone, Molecular gas dynamics , Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Technology, Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2007

    Y. Sone, Molecular gas dynamics , Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Technology, Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2007. Theory, techniques, and applications

    2007

  48. [56]

    Temam, Navier-Stokes equations

    R. Temam, Navier-Stokes equations. Theory and numerical analysis , Studies in Mathematics and its Ap- plications, vol. Vol. 2, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam-New York-Oxford, 1977

    1977

  49. [57]

    Wang, Uniform regularity and vanishing dissipation limit for the full compressible Navier-Stokes system in three dimensional bounded domain , Arch

    Y. Wang, Uniform regularity and vanishing dissipation limit for the full compressible Navier-Stokes system in three dimensional bounded domain , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 221 (2016), no. 3, 1345–1415. 52 N. JIANG AND Y.-L. WU

    2016

  50. [58]

    Xiao and Z

    Y. Xiao and Z. Xin, On the vanishing viscosity limit for the 3D Navier-Stokes equations with a slip boundary condition, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 60 (2007), no. 7, 1027–1055

    2007

  51. [59]

    Xiao and Z

    Y. Xiao and Z. Xin, On 3D Lagrangian Navier-Stokes α model with a class of vorticity-slip boundary conditions, J. Math. Fluid Mech. 15 (2013), no. 2, 215–247. (N. Jiang) School of Mathematics and Statistics, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China Email address : njiang@whu.edu....

    2013

Pith tools

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