Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 44 references

Optimal higher derivative estimates for solutions of the Lam\'e system with closely spaced hard inclusions

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that every higher derivative of the displacement field in the Lamé system with two nearly touching hard inclusions blows up at a precise, dimension-dependent rate, and that these rates are optimal in two and three…

desk verdict Genuinely new upper bounds for all higher derivatives with a clean energy-iteration proof, but the 'optimal' claim leans on an unpublished preprint; the paper deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15498 v1 pith:NO4QX5QJ submitted 2024-11-23 math.AP

Hongjie Dong , Haigang Li , Huaijun Teng , Peihao Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35J5735Q7474E3035B44
keywords Lamésystemhigherderivativeestimateshardinclusionsstressconcentrationblow-uprateslinearelasticityoptimalneckregion
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 asks how strongly the displacement field of a linear elastic body concentrates when two hard inclusions are separated by a tiny gap of width ε. For the Lamé system with rigid inclusions, it proves that every m-th derivative of the solution in the narrow neck blows up at the rate (ε+|x'|²)^(-m/2) in two dimensions, with an extra |log ε|^(-1) factor in three dimensions and a faster rate in dimensions four and higher. The paper also shows these upper bounds are optimal in two and three dimensions under symmetry, by matching lower bounds and explicit asymptotic expansions. A sympathetic reader would care because this pins down the exact singular structure of stress concentration in composite materials, beyond the first-gradient estimates known previously.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a sequence of explicit auxiliary vector functions v^l_α, built as polynomials in the transverse coordinate with coefficients determined recursively so that each new term cancels the leading part of L_{λ,μ} applied to the previous sum. An energy-iteration framework (Proposition 7.4 with Lemmas 7.2 and 7.3) then shows that ∇^m of the remainder is bounded, reducing the singularity to the known neck profile δ. Sharpness uses a decomposition onto rigid-displacement basis functions ψ_α and coefficient asymptotics governed by the functionals b*_{1α}[φ].

What would settle it

Take two unit disks in R² with centers at (0,1) and (0,-1) and a Dirichlet datum φ with b*_{11}[φ] ≠ 0, then compute ∂^{m-1}_{x1}∂_{x2}$u^{{(1)}}$ at (r√ε,0); Theorem 5.7 predicts a magnitude at least C |b*_{11}[φ]| $ε^{{-m/2}}$. A direct numerical or asymptotic computation showing a weaker blow-up, or a different power of ε, would disprove the optimality claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the singularity of all higher derivatives of solutions to the Lamé system with hard inclusions is quantitatively captured by the neck profile δ(x') = ε + h1(x') + h2(x') ≈ ε + |x'|². Specifically, |∇^m u| ≤ C δ^(-m/2) in dimension two, |∇^m u| ≤ C (|log ε|^(-1) δ^(-(m+1)/2) + δ^(-m/2)) in dimension three, and |∇^m u| ≤ C δ^(-(m+1)/2) for d ≥ 4. Under symmetry assumptions, the leading terms admit explicit asymptotic formulas, and the 2D and 3D rates are shown optimal by matching lower bounds such as |∂^{m-1}_{x1}∂_{xd}$u^{{(1)}}$(r√ε,0)| ≥ C|b*_{11}[φ]| $ε^{{-m/2}}$ in 2D and the corresponding |log ε|^(-1) ε^(-(m+1)/2) bound in 3D. This is the first precise characterization of higher-derivative singularities for the Lamé system with hard inclusions.

Load-bearing premise

The estimates require the two inclusion boundaries to be uniformly convex at the closest points, with ∇²(h1+h2) ≥ κ I, so the gap has the quadratic profile δ(x') ≈ ε+|x'|²; if the boundaries flatten or touch with higher-order contact, the stated rates need not hold.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The blow-up rates give a benchmark for numerical methods: any scheme for composites with nearly touching hard inclusions must resolve derivatives that scale like δ^{-m/2} in 2D and like |log ε|^{-1} δ^{-(m+1)/2} in 3D.
  • The asymptotic expansions in Theorems 5.2 and 5.5 provide explicit leading-order formulas for each entry of ∇^m u, not just norm bounds, so the singular character of individual stress components is now known.
  • The optimality results imply that the upper bounds cannot be improved under the stated convexity and symmetry assumptions, settling the sharp form of the higher-derivative blow-up in two and three dimensions.
  • The method extends the gradient estimates from [6,7] to all derivative orders, opening the way to higher-order asymptotics and refined numerical analysis for the Lamé system.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the quadratic neck profile assumption fails — for example, if the inclusion boundaries flatten so that δ(x') behaves like ε+|x'|^{2p} — the natural scaling would change, and the rates proved here would no longer apply; this is a testable extension not covered by the paper.
  • The |log ε| factor in three dimensions suggests that the neck's effective capacity governs the singularity, mirroring the scalar perfect-conductivity problem; the vector system may inherit refined asymptotics from scalar potential theory.
  • The sharp lower bounds require b*_{11}[φ] ≠ 0; for symmetric data with vanishing leading coefficient, subleading terms or other components may dominate, so optimality for the full matrix of derivatives remains open.
  • The explicit auxiliary functions could serve as asymptotic basis functions in enriched finite-element schemes, since they capture all singular terms of the higher derivatives up to O(1).
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the Lamé system with two closely spaced hard inclusions in a bounded domain, where the inclusions have infinite stiffness (partially infinite coefficients), as well as a Neumann version with holes. The main results are higher-derivative pointwise estimates in the narrow neck region: in two dimensions |∇^m u| ≤ C(ε+x_1^2)^{-m/2} (Theorem 1.1), in three dimensions |∇^m u| ≤ C|log ε|^{-1}(ε+|x'|^2)^{-(m+1)/2} + C(ε+|x'|^2)^{-m/2} (Theorem 1.3), and a similar estimate for the holes problem (Theorem 1.5). The proofs construct explicit auxiliary functions v_l^α, iteratively canceling the Lamé operator to high order, and then use an energy-iteration framework (Lemma 7.3, Proposition 7.4). Under symmetry assumptions on the domain and boundary data, the paper also derives asymptotic expansions for ∇^m u (Theorems 5.2 and 5.5) and uses them to prove lower bounds that match the upper bounds (Theorem 5.7). The optimality claim therefore rests on the asymptotic coefficients imported from the unpublished preprint [38].

Significance. If the result holds, the paper gives the first systematic characterization of the m-th order derivative blow-up for the Lamé system with hard inclusions, going substantially beyond the known first-order gradient estimates. The upper-bound part is a genuine technical achievement: the auxiliary-function construction is explicit, the constants are tracked in ε and the neck profile δ, and the energy iteration in the Appendix is self-contained. The claimed optimality would also settle the natural higher-order analogue of the gradient blow-up rates. However, the optimality portion is conditional on coefficient expansions and a symmetry reduction taken from the unpublished preprint [38], so the significance of the present manuscript as a standalone proof of optimality is limited unless those inputs are included or the claims are weakened.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 5, Lemmas 5.1, 5.4 and Eq. (5.1)] The optimality claims in the abstract and in Theorems 1.1 and 1.3 are justified only by the lower bounds in Theorem 5.7. The proof of Theorem 5.7 uses the asymptotic expansions in Theorems 5.2 and 5.5, which in turn rely on Lemmas 5.1 and 5.4 for the coefficient differences C_1^α - C_2^α and on the symmetry reduction C_1^α = C_2^α for rotational basis functions, all imported from the unpublished preprint [38]. None of these statements is proved in the present manuscript. Since the lower-bound argument subtracts terms of order √ε δ^{-m/2} and ε^{(1-m)/2} from a leading term of order √ε b*_{11} δ^{-(m+1)/2}, any hidden m-dependence or additional hypothesis in the [38] asymptotics would alter the claimed ε^{-m/2} and |log ε|^{-1} ε^{-(m+1)/2} rates. The upper-bound theorems are self-contained, but the word 'optimal' and the title's claim are not established within the manuscript. The authors should either prove Lemmas 5.1, 5.4 and Eq. (5.1) in an appendix, or explicitly state the optimality results as conditional on [38] and adjust the title and abstract accordingly.
  2. [Theorem 5.7 and proof of Theorem 5.7] The lower-bound theorem is stated for a single mixed derivative ∂_{x_1}^{m-1}∂_{x_d}u^{(1)} under the additional assumptions that φ is odd and b*_{11}[φ] ≠ 0. This is a legitimate way to prove that the derivative norm blows up at the claimed rate, because a lower bound for one component gives a lower bound for the full norm. However, the presentation in the abstract and introduction says the upper bounds are 'sharp' without making clear that sharpness is established only for this component, for odd boundary data, and under the symmetry assumptions that force the rotational coefficients to cancel. The statements of Theorems 1.1 and 1.3 should be cross-referenced to Theorem 5.7 with these qualifications, so that a reader does not infer unconditional optimality of every component of the full derivative tensor.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Introduction, page 3] There is a typo: 'Addtional related work' should be 'Additional related work'.
  2. [Section 5, Eqs. (5.6)-(5.10)] The recursion formulas for the coefficients P and Q use tildes and primes such as \tilde P'_{(l-1)2,i+1} without an explicit definition of the prime notation and of \tilde P in the text. Adding a sentence that defines \tilde P_{l,i} = P_{l,i} - ((ε+|x'|^2)^2/4) P_{l,i-1} and that primes denote ordinary x_1- or x'-derivatives would make the recursion verifiable.
  3. [Proof of Theorem 5.7, inequality (5.16)] The proof fixes a small r that may depend on m and then lets ε tend to zero. It would be clearer to state explicitly that all constants in the O(1) and error terms are allowed to depend on m (but not on ε), since the lower bound is asserted for each fixed m.
  4. [Section 6, proof of Theorem 1.5] The notation Q_{1,\sqrt{δ}} and Q_{1,1} is introduced before the set S is defined. Reordering these definitions would avoid a small readability hurdle, though the meaning is clear from context.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Central upper bounds are self-contained, but the claimed optimality/sharpness in 2D and 3D is load-bearing on coefficient asymptotics imported from the authors' unpublished preprint [38].

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 5.1, Lemma 5.1 and the line before Theorem 5.2]
    "For the coefficients C_i^alpha, i, alpha = 1,2, it was proven in [38, Proposition 3.7] that Lemma 5.1. ... C_1^1 - C_2^1 = 1/(pi mu) b*_11[phi] sqrt(epsilon) (1 + O(epsilon^{1/4})), C_1^2 - C_2^2 = 1/(pi(lambda + 2mu)) b*_12[phi] sqrt(epsilon) (1 + O(epsilon^{1/4})). Then, by using Lemma 5.1 and (5.1), we have Theorem 5.2."

    The 2D sharpness of Theorem 1.1 is not established in this manuscript. Theorem 5.7 obtains |partial_{x1}^{m-1} partial_{x2} u^{(1)}(r sqrt(epsilon),0)| >= C|b*_11[phi]| epsilon^{-m/2} only by subtracting lower-order terms from the leading term sqrt(epsilon) b*_11[phi] delta^{-(m+1)/2} supplied by Theorem 5.2. That leading amplitude is taken verbatim from [38, Proposition 3.7], an unpublished preprint by coauthor Li, and the symmetry reduction (5.1) is likewise attributed to [38, Proposition 5.4]. If those expansions carry a hidden m-dependence or require hypotheses not verified here, the lower bound and therefore the word "optimal" in the abstract do not follow.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section 5.2, Lemma 5.4 (used in Theorem 5.5 and Theorem 5.7)]
    "We will use the following asymptotics results from [38, Proposition 3.7]. Lemma 5.4. ... C_1^alpha - C_2^alpha = 1/(pi mu) b*_{1 alpha}[phi] |log epsilon|^{-1} (1 + O(1/|log epsilon|)), alpha = 1, 2, C_1^3 - C_2^3 = 1/(pi(lambda + 2mu)) b*_{13}[phi] |log epsilon|^{-1} (1 + O(1/|log epsilon|))."

    The 3D lower bound in Theorem 5.7 is assembled in exactly the same way: the claimed |log epsilon|^{-1} epsilon^{-(m+1)/2} rate is the product of the |log epsilon|^{-1} coefficient differences of Lemma 5.4 and the model solutions v_l^alpha. Lemma 5.4 is introduced as 'we will use' and is sourced only to [38, Proposition 3.7]; no proof appears in the present paper. Consequently the optimality claim of Remark 1.4 and Theorem 5.7 rests on a self-cited preprint rather than on a derivation contained in this work.

full rationale

The paper's main upper-bound theorems (1.1, 1.3, 1.5) are self-contained: they are proved by explicit auxiliary functions and an energy-iteration framework in Sections 2-4 and the Appendix, with no fitted parameters and no reliance on the data being predicted. The uses of [6,7,32] in those sections are citations to published, peer-reviewed results for gradient bounds and exponential decay of regular parts; they are not the source of the new m-th derivative rates. The circularity is concentrated in the sharpness/optimality half of the paper. Theorem 5.7, which is the only place where the upper bounds are shown to be sharp, reduces through Theorem 5.2/5.5 to Lemma 5.1/5.4 and equation (5.1), all imported from the unpublished preprint [38] by coauthor Li. The lower-bound proof explicitly subtracts the terms involving v_l^i from the leading b*_{11}[phi] term; if that leading coefficient or its error estimate is not valid, the claimed epsilon^{-m/2} and |log epsilon|^{-1} epsilon^{-(m+1)/2} rates are not forced. This is a load-bearing self-citation for the central 'optimal' claim, although the independent upper-bound content prevents the whole derivation from being equivalent to its input. Score 6 reflects partial circularity: the upper bounds are genuine, but the optimality conclusion is inherited from an unverified self-cited preprint.

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

The paper introduces no fitted parameters or new physical entities. The auxiliary functions v_l^α are mathematical constructs defined by explicit integrals or polynomials, not entities with independent evidence requirements. The main free inputs are the Lamé constants, the boundary data, and the geometry of the inclusions, all provided by the problem.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Standard ellipticity conditions: μ>0, dλ+2μ>0 (and similarly for the inclusion constants)
    These are the standard Legendre-Hadamard conditions for the Lamé system, stated in the problem setup (Section 1).
  • domain assumption Uniform convexity and C^{m+1,γ} smoothness of the two inclusion boundaries, with ∇²(h1+h2) ≥ κI (condition (1.4))
    This geometry ensures the gap profile δ(x') ≈ ε+|x'|²; all blow-up rates are expressed in terms of this profile.
  • domain assumption Existence, uniqueness and regularity of the limit problem (1.6) with rigid inclusions, and convergence of finite-contrast solutions to it
    Taken from Bao-Li-Li [6, Appendix]. The paper models hard inclusions by this limiting system.
  • standard math W^{2,p} estimates for elliptic systems with partially vanishing boundary data (Agmon-Douglis-Nirenberg) and Korn's inequality
    Used in the energy-iteration framework, Proposition 7.1 and Lemma 7.2.
  • domain assumption Coefficient estimates for the decomposition (3.1): |C_i^α|≤C and |C_1^α-C_2^α| ≤ C√ε (2D) or C/|log ε| (3D)
    Quoted from [6] and [7] (Lemma 3.2, Lemma 4.4); these estimates control the leading singular terms in the decomposition (3.4).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Optimal higher derivative estimates for solutions of the Lam\'e system with closely spaced hard inclusions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NO4QX5QJ

@misc{pith2026241115498,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Optimal higher derivative estimates for solutions of the Lam\'e system with closely spaced hard inclusions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NO4QX5QJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15498}
}
abstract

We investigate higher derivative estimates for the Lam\'e system with hard inclusions embedded in a bounded domain in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$. As the distance $\varepsilon$ between two closely spaced hard inclusions approaches zero, the stress in the narrow regions between the inclusions increases significantly. This stress is captured by the gradient of the solution. The key contribution of this paper is a detailed characterization of this singularity, achieved by deriving higher derivative estimates for solutions to the Lam\'e system with partially infinite coefficients. These upper bounds are shown to be sharp in two and three dimensions when the domain exhibits certain symmetries. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to precisely quantify the singular behavior of higher derivatives in the Lam\'e system with hard inclusions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.15498 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Our domain with a small distance ε = dist(D1, D2) > 0. where u = (u (1) , u (2) , · · · , u (d) ) T : D → R d denotes the displacement field, e(u) := 1 2 (∇u + (∇u) T) is the strain tensor. Here χD is the characteristic functions of D. We assume the standard ellipticity conditions: µ > 0, dλ+ 2µ > 0, and µ1 > 0, dλ1 + 2µ1 > 0. The existence and uniqueness of the solution to (1.1) have been well established. Signific… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The domain R 2\B1 ∪ B2. solution. A natural question is: when ε > 0, can we find explicit approximate functions, which captures the singular behavior of the solution to (2.1) in the narrow region ΩR? How about the Dirichlet problem for the Lam´e system? Assume that D1 and D2 have a small separation distance ε > 0. In this section, we will establish higher derivative estimates of the solution to the following Dirichl… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [38]

    H.G. Li; L.J. Xu. Second derivative estimates and gradi ent asymptotics for closely located inclusions in linear elasticity. arXiv:2310.09498. (2023)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  2. [1]

    Ammari; E

    H. Ammari; E. Bonnetier; F. Triki; M. Vogelius. Elliptic estimates in composite media with smooth inclusions: an integral equation approach. Ann. Sci. ´ ec. N orm. Sup´ er. (4) 48 (2015), no. 2, 453-495

    work page 2015

  3. [2]

    Agmon; A

    S. Agmon; A. Douglis; L. Nirenberg. Estimates near the bo undary for solutions of elliptic partial differ- ential equations satisfying general boundary conditions. II. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 17 (1964), 35-92

    work page 1964

  4. [3]

    Ammari; H

    H. Ammari; H. Kang; M. Lim. Gradient estimates to the cond uctivity problem. Math. Ann. 332 (2005), 277-286

    work page 2005

  5. [4]

    Ammari; H

    H. Ammari; H. Kang; H. Lee; J. Lee; M. Lim. Optimal estimat es for the electrical field in two dimensions. J. Math. Pures Appl. 88 (2007), 307-324

    work page 2007

  6. [5]

    Babuˇ ska; B

    I. Babuˇ ska; B. Andersson; P. Smith; K. Levin. Damage ana lysis of fiber composites. I. Statistical analysis on fiber scale. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 172 (1999), 2 7-77

    work page 1999

  7. [6]

    Bao; H.G

    J.G. Bao; H.G. Li; Y.Y. Li. Gradient estimates for soluti ons of the Lam´ e system with partially infinite coefficients. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 215 (2015), no. 1, 307 -351

    work page 2015

  8. [7]

    Bao; H.G

    J.G. Bao; H.G. Li; Y.Y. Li. Gradient estimates for soluti ons of the Lam´ e system with partially infinite coefficients in dimensions greater than two. Adv. Math. 305 (2 017), 298-338

    work page

Show all 44 references
  1. [8]

    Bao; Y.Y

    E.S. Bao; Y.Y. Li; B. Yin. Gradient estimates for the perf ect conductivity problem. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 193 (2009), 195-226. 36 H.J. DONG, H.G. LI, H.J. TENG, AND P.H. ZHANG

    2009

  2. [9]

    Bonnetier; F

    E. Bonnetier; F. Triki. On the spectrum of the Poincar´ e v ariational problem for two close-to-touching inclusions in 2D. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 209 (2013), no. 2 , 541-567

    2013

  3. [10]

    touching

    E. Bonnetier; M. Vogelius. An elliptic regularity resu lt for a composite medium with “touching” fibers of circular cross-section. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 31 (2000) 651 -677

    2000

  4. [11]

    Budiansky; G.F

    B. Budiansky; G.F. Carrier. High shear stresses in stiff fiber composites. J. App. Mech. 51 (1984), 733-735

    1984

  5. [12]

    Chipot, D

    M. Chipot, D. Kinderlehrer, G. Vergara-Caffarelli, Smo othness of linear laminates. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 96(1), 81-96 (1986)

    1986

  6. [13]

    Dong, Gradient estimates for parabolic and ellipt ic systems from linear laminates

    H.J. Dong, Gradient estimates for parabolic and ellipt ic systems from linear laminates. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 205 (2012), no. 1, 119–149

    2012

  7. [14]

    Dong; H.G

    H.J. Dong; H.G. Li, Optimal Estimates for the Conductiv ity Problem by Green’s Function Method. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 231 (2019), no. 3, 1427-1453

    2019

  8. [15]

    Dong; L.J

    H.J. Dong; L.J. Xu, Gradient estimates for divergence f orm elliptic systems arising from composite material. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 51 (2019), no. 3, 2444-2478

    2019

  9. [16]

    Dong, Y.Y

    H.J. Dong, Y.Y. Li, Z.L. Yang, Optimal gradient estimat es of solutions to the insulated conductivity problem in dimension greater than two. To appear in J. Eur. Ma th. Soc.(2023). DOI 10.4171/JEMS/1432

    2023 doi

  10. [17]

    H.J. Dong, H. Zhang, On an elliptic equation arising fro m composite materials. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 222(1), 47-89, 2016

    2016

  11. [18]

    Dong, Y.Y

    H.J. Dong, Y.Y. Li, Z.L. Yang, Gradient estimates for th e insulated conductivity problem: The non- umbilical case. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 189 (2024), 103587

    2024

  12. [19]

    Dong; Z.L

    H.J. Dong; Z.L. Yang, Optimal estimates for transmissi on problems including relative conductivities with different signs. Adv. Math. 428 (2023), Paper No. 109160 , 28 pp

    2023

  13. [20]

    Hou; H.G

    Y.Y. Hou; H.G. Li. The convexity of inclusions and gradi ent’s concentration for the Lam´ e systems with partially infinite coefficients. to appear in Anal. Theory App l 2024

    2024

  14. [21]

    Y-G. Ji, H. Kang, Spectrum of the Neumann-Poincar´ e ope rator and optimal estimates for transmission problems in presence of two circular inclusions, Int. Math. Res. Not. 2023 (9) (2023) 7638-7685

    2023

  15. [22]

    H. Kang; H. Lee; K. Yun. Optimal estimates and asymptoti cs for the stress concentration between closely located stiff inclusions. Math. Ann. 363 (2015), no. 3-4, 128 1-1306

    2015

  16. [23]

    H. Kang; M. Lim; K. Yun. Asymptotics and computation of t he solution to the conductivity equation in the presence of adjacent inclusions with extreme conduct ivities. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 99 (2013), 234-249

    2013

  17. [24]

    H. Kang; M. Lim; K. Yun. Characterization of the electri c field concentration between two adjacent spherical perfect conductors. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 74 (2014) , 125-146

    2014

  18. [25]

    H. Kang, S. Yu, Quantitative characterization of stres s concentration in the presence of closely spaced hard inclusions in two-dimensional linear elasticity, Arc h. Ration. Mech. Anal. 232 (2019), 121–196

    2019

  19. [26]

    J.B. Keller. Conductivity of a medium containing a dens e array of perfectly conducting spheres or cylinders or nonconducting cylinders. J. Appl. Phys. 34 (19 63), 991-993

  20. [27]

    J.B. Keller. Stresses in narrow regions. Trans. ASME J. Appl. Mech. 60 (1993), 1054-1056

    1993

  21. [28]

    Y.Y. Li, Z.L. Yang, Gradient estimates of solutions to t he insulated conductivity problem in dimension greater than two. Math. Ann. 385 (2023), no. 3-4, 1775–1796

    2023

  22. [29]

    B.Y. Li; H.G. Li; Y.L. Li; P.H. Zhang. High-order accura te scheme for the perfect conductivity problem with close-to-touching inclusions. Preprint

  23. [30]

    H.G. Li. Lower bounds of gradient’s blow-up for the Lam´ e system with partially infinite coefficients. J. Math. Pures Appl. 149 (2021), 98–134

    2021

  24. [31]

    H.G. Li. Asymptotics for the electric field concentrati on in the perfect conductivity problem. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 52 (2020), no.4, 3350-3375

    2020

  25. [32]

    H.G. Li; Y.Y. Li; E.S. Bao; B. Yin. Derivative estimates of solutions of elliptic systems in narrow regions. Quart. Appl. Math. 72 (2014), no. 3, 589-596

    2014

  26. [33]

    H.G. Li; Y.Y. Li; Z.L. Yang. Asymptotics of the gradient of solutions to the perfect conductivity problem. Multiscale Model. Simul. 17 (2019), no. 3, 899-925

    2019

  27. [34]

    H.G. Li; Y. Zhao, Optimal gradient estimates for the ins ulated conductivity problem with general convex inclusions case. arXiv:2404.17201. Submitted

    arXiv

  28. [35]

    Y.Y. Li; L. Nirenberg. Estimates for elliptic system fr om composite material. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 56 (2003), 892-925

    2003

  29. [36]

    H.G. Li; F. Wang; L.J. Xu. Characterization of Electric Fields between two Spherical Perfect Conductors with general radii in 3D. J. Differential Equations 267 (2019 ), 6644-6690. OPTIMAL HIGHER DERIV ATIVE ESTIMATES 37

    2019

  30. [37]

    Y.Y. Li; M. Vogelius. Gradient estimates for solutions to divergence form elliptic equations with discon- tinuous coefficients. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 153 (2000), 91-151

    2000

  31. [39]

    M. Lim; S. Yu. Asymptotics of the solution to the conduct ivity equation in the presence of adjacent circular inclusions with finite conductivities. J. Math. An al. Appl. 421 (2015), 131-156

    2015

  32. [40]

    M. Lim; S. Yu. Stress concentration for two nearly touch ing circular holes. arXiv: 1705.10400v1. (2017)

    2017 arXiv

  33. [41]

    M. Lim; K. Yun. Blow-up of electric fields between closel y spaced spherical perfect conductors. Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 34 (2009), 1287-1315

    2009

  34. [42]

    Markenscoff, Stress amplification in vanishingly sma ll geometries

    X. Markenscoff, Stress amplification in vanishingly sma ll geometries. Computational Mechanics 19 (1996), 77-83

    1996

  35. [43]

    Weinkove, The insulated conductivity problem, effec tive gradient estimates and the maximum prin- ciple, Math

    B. Weinkove, The insulated conductivity problem, effec tive gradient estimates and the maximum prin- ciple, Math. Ann. 385 (2023), no. 1-2, 1–16

    2023

  36. [44]

    K. Yun. Estimates for electric fields blown up between cl osely adjacent conductors with arbitrary shape. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 67 (2007), 714-730. (H.J. Dong) Division of Applied Mathematics, Brown University, 182 Geo rge Street, Provi- dence, RI 02912, USA Email address : Hongj...

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.