Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 8 minor 36 references

Mass threshold for global existence in chemotaxis systems with critical flux limitation

T0 review · 2 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read At the critical flux-limited exponent α=N/(N−1), radial solutions of the Keller-Segel system in the unit ball are classified by a single mass threshold: supercritical mass gives finite-time blow-up, subcritical mass gives global…

desk verdict Sharp and credible critical-mass result for flux-limited Keller-Segel, with one load-bearing but likely fixable gap in the cited local well-posedness. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.19866 v1 pith:OHO2SVKW submitted 2025-07-26 math.AP

Xuan Mao , Hengling Wang , Jianlu Yan This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35B4035B3335B4435K6592C17
keywords chemotaxisfluxlimitationcriticalmassfinite-timeblow-upglobalboundednessradialsymmetryparabolic-ellipticsystemstationarybubble
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 a Keller-Segel chemotaxis system with flux limitation in the unit ball of R^N at the critical exponent α=N/(N-1). It claims that for radially symmetric cell densities the dynamics are governed entirely by total mass: a number mc=ω_N($N^{2}$/(N-1))^{N-1} separates finite-time blow-up from global existence. Above mc the density blows up in finite time with an explicit time bound; below mc it is globally bounded and converges in L∞ to the stationary profile Xλ carrying the same mass; at exactly mc it exists globally and aggregates all mass at the center as time goes to infinity. The result extends the classical 8π critical-mass phenomenon for two-dimensional Keller-Segel systems to every dimension in this critical flux-limited setting.

What carries the argument

The central object is the accumulated radial density U(ξ,t)=∫$_0^{{ξ^{1/N}}$} u(r,t)$r^{{N−1}}$dr, which turns the system into the scalar parabolic equation U_t=$N^{2}$$ξ^{{2−2/N}}$U_{ξξ}+$Nξ^{{1−2/N}}$$U^{{1/(N−1)}}$U_ξ with boundary values U(0,t)=0 and U(1,t)=m/ω_N. Its stationary solutions Wλ are accumulated densities of the explicit profiles Xλ, each carrying total mass mc. Blow-up is detected through the moment ψ(t)=∫$_0^{1}$ $Uξ^{{2/N−1}}$dξ, whose derivative satisfies ψ′(t) ≥ ($N^{2}$m/ω_N)((m/mc)^{1/(N−1)}−1), forcing finite-time singularity when m>mc. Global boundedness for m<mc follows from comparing U with stationary supersolutions and an ε-regularity estimate, while the critical case m=mc is handled by a contradiction argument showing that finite-time blow-up would concentrate at least mass mc, which the strong maximum principle forbids.

What would settle it

One could numerically integrate the scalar equation for U in three dimensions with smooth radial initial data of mass 0.99mc: the paper predicts U(ζ,t)<A=(9/2)^2 for all time and U_ξ bounded uniformly, so observing U ever reach A would contradict the ε-regularity and global boundedness claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is a complete mass dichotomy for the critical flux-limited chemotaxis system u_t=Δu−∇·(u|∇v|^{α−2}∇v), 0=Δv+u on the unit ball with no-flux and homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions, for radially symmetric initial data. With α=N/(N−1), it proves that the threshold mass is mc=ω_N($N^{2}$/(N−1))^{N−1}: if the initial mass m exceeds mc, the solution blows up in finite time with Tmax ≤ (1/(2N))(((m/mc)^{1/(N−1)}−1)^{-1}); if m<mc, the solution is globally bounded and converges in L∞ to the stationary profile Xλ uniquely determined by mass; if m=mc, the solution exists globally and concentrates the complete mass at the origin as t→∞. The proof reduces the whole dynamics to a scalar parabolic equation for the accumulated radial density, and the threshold emerges because the explicit stationary profiles Xλ each have exactly mass mc.

Load-bearing premise

The entire classification rests on Proposition 2.1's imported assertion that bounded weak solutions of the singular flux-limited system exist, are unique, conserve mass, and satisfy the extensibility criterion, even though the flux u|∇v|^{α−2}∇v is singular where ∇v=0 when N>2.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For N=2 the critical mass is mc=8π, exactly recovering the classical Keller-Segel threshold from the radial 8π-problem.
  • For any supercritical radial initial mass, blow-up occurs no later than the explicit time T⋆, so the theorem gives a quantitative universal upper bound on blow-up time.
  • For any subcritical radial initial mass, the solution not only exists globally but is attracted in L∞ to the unique stationary bubble Xλ with the same mass, so mass selects the asymptotic steady state.
  • At critical mass the solution is global yet never stationary: it collapses completely to a Dirac mass at the center in infinite time.
  • The threshold is dimension-dependent and equals the mass of the explicit stationary family Xλ, giving a constructive interpretation of mc rather than merely an abstract constant.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the explicit blow-up bound suggests a scaling law Tmax ∼ C(m/mc−1)^{−1/(N−1)} near the threshold; numerical experiments could test whether this bound is sharp.
  • The scalar reduction uses radial symmetry essentially, so whether the same mass threshold persists for non-radial initial data in the unit ball is a natural open extension that the paper does not address.
  • If the imported local-existence theory fails for the singular flux at ∇v=0 when N>2, the threshold classification would need to be re-proved from scratch, because every later step starts from Proposition 2.1.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 8 minor

Summary. The paper studies a parabolic-elliptic chemotaxis system with critical flux limitation α=N/(N−1) in the unit ball, with no-flux for u and Dirichlet for v, and radially symmetric initial data. The main theorem identifies a mass threshold m_c (the mass of the stationary family X_λ) and claims: (1) for m>m_c the solution blows up in finite time with an explicit T* bound; (2) for m<m_c the solution is global, bounded, and converges in L∞ to X_λ; (3) for m=m_c the solution is global and aggregates complete mass at the center in infinite time. The proofs proceed through a reformulation in terms of the accumulated density U, a moment inequality for blow-up, a comparison-based ε-regularity criterion for boundedness, stationary-solution analysis, and Lyapunov-type dissipation functionals for convergence.

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper settles a clean dichotomy for the critical-flux-limited Keller–Segel system under radial symmetry: global existence is completely characterized by a sharp mass threshold, with a computable critical mass and (in the subcritical case) identification of the asymptotic profile X_λ; the critical case exhibits infinite-time collapse. The blow-up argument is a parameter-free moment method, the stationary uniqueness is explicit and verifiable, and the claimed threshold m_c is derived from stationary mass rather than fitted — these are real strengths. The main caveat is that the entire solution theory rests on a cited local well-posedness result, and the non-Lipschitz nature of the critical flux for N>2 makes the citation non-obvious. Because the threshold and the qualitative trichotomy are sharp and mathematically natural but depend on several lemmas that are only sketched as 'minor modifications', the central claim is defensible but not yet fully secure.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 2, Proposition 2.1] If the cited results do not cover the critical flux, the whole theorem chain lacks a foundation; if they do, a short verification would fix the issue.
  2. [Section 5.1, Proposition 5.1] The statement of Proposition 5.1 says that (5.1) implies a uniform bound on U_ξ, and the last paragraph claims 'the corresponding solution exists globally and remains bounded.' However, the proof of the bound on U_ξ appears to require Lemma 5.4 and the full hypothesis U0∈C0(Ω); please make the logical chain from (5.1) to the global existence explicit, and clarify whether (5.1) must hold for the specific time interval [0,T_max) or on a full neighborhood including T_max.
minor comments (8)
  1. [Introduction, equation (1.6)] The flux notation is inconsistent: (1.1) writes |∇v|^{α−2}∇v with α=N/(N−1), while (1.6) writes |∇Y|^{1/(N−1)−1}∇Y. Please unify the notation and state the identity |∇v|^{α−2}=|∇v|^{N/(N−1)−2} so the stationary problem matches the main system.
  2. [Theorem 1.1(3) and Theorem 6.1] The phrase 'aggregates complete mass at the center in infinite time' is used, but the proof of Theorem 6.1 only shows weak-* convergence of u(·,t_k) to m_c δ_0 along subsequences. Please make the formulation precise: does the proof actually show convergence as t→∞, or only along subsequences? If only along subsequences, the theorem statement should be softened or the subsequence issue removed.
  3. [Introduction, computation of ∫X_λ] The displayed integral computation after (1.8) contains an awkward dummy-variable step: ∫_0^∞ mc dr/(1+r^{1/(N−1)})^N = mc(N−1)∫_0^∞ ρ^{N−2}/(1+ρ)^N dρ. Please clean up the intermediate equalities; the final value mc is correct.
  4. [Proposition 4.1] In the proof of Proposition 4.1, the set S is introduced after deriving (4.5). The argument will read better if you state explicitly that local existence of positive solutions of (4.5) near ξ=0 follows by standard ODE theory; currently the derivation of 'f>0 on (0,∞)' and the definition of S skip the local well-posedness at the singular point f=0.
  5. [Lemma 5.3] The notation C is reused with different meanings: in (5.13) it is a sup bound, then in (5.14) it multiplies a different constant, and later the constants C(p) and K appear. Please rename the constants to avoid confusion and make all dependencies explicit.
  6. [Lemma 5.2] The comparison principle is stated for functions U and U (with an underline in the original), but the notation is not explicitly introduced in the text. Please introduce \(\underline U\) and \(\overline U\) explicitly.
  7. [Lemma 5.6] The identity (4.4) from Proposition 4.1 is used for ϕℓ, but the relation between the notation W0 and f in Proposition 4.1 and the definition of ϕℓ in Corollary 4.2 should be stated more clearly; currently the reader must guess that f=W^{1/(N−1)} and that W0 is the normalization in (1.7).
  8. [Proof of Theorem 3.1] The boundedness of ψ is given as ψ∈(0, Nm/(2ω_N)); please justify the upper bound explicitly, since ψ is an integral of U over a singular weight and the constant Nm/(2ω_N) is not derived. The bound is true by monotonicity of U and U(1,t)=m/ω_N, but it should be written down.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the mass threshold is computed from explicit steady states and proven by virial/comparison estimates, not fitted; the only self-citations are peripheral, and the Prop. 2.1 local-existence citation is a correctness gap, not a circular step.

full rationale

The central dichotomy is derived, not assumed. The threshold (1.8) is introduced as the explicitly computed mass of the Kohatsu–Senba steady state Xλ: the paper evaluates ∫_{R^N} Xλ dx = m_c from (1.7), and every subsequent use of m_c is algebraic. In the blow-up direction (Lemma 3.2), the moment identity gives ψ' = N^2 U_ξ(1,t) − N^2 m/ω_N + (N−1)(m/ω_N)^{N/(N−1)} ≥ N^2 m/ω_N ((m/m_c)^{1/(N−1)} − 1); no constant is fitted to force the threshold. In the subcritical direction (Prop. 5.1, Thm. 5.5), boundedness and convergence are obtained by comparison with explicit stationary supersolutions φ_ℓ from Cor. 4.2 and by a dissipation functional whose estimates are derived from the equation; no parameter is tuned to the data. In the critical case (Thm. 6.1), global existence follows from ε-regularity and a strong maximum principle argument, and infinite-time collapse from the monotonicity of Ψ_c; again no fitted input appears. Thus no 'prediction' is equivalent by construction to an input. The only self-citation that could be questioned is Lemma 5.4, attributed to the authors' own preprint [16] and used in Prop. 5.1 to select an initial upper bound φ_ℓ. It is a peripheral technical lemma about concave increasing majorants; the central mass dichotomy does not reduce to it. The same holds for the motivational reference [17] in Remark 3.1. Accordingly, the self-citations are not load-bearing for the main claim. One limitation should be separated from circularity: Proposition 2.1 outsources local existence/uniqueness/extensibility to [6, Prop. 2.1] and [13, Thm. 2.1] without checking their hypotheses for the non-Lipschitz sensitivity |z|^{α−2}z when α = N/(N−1) ∈ (1,2), N > 2. If those hypotheses are not met, the manuscript lacks a verified local well-posedness foundation. This is a correctness risk, not a circular step, and does not raise the circularity score. Score 2 reflects only the minor non-load-bearing self-citations.

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

No free parameters: the threshold m_c is computed from the explicit stationary solution X_λ, and the proofs introduce no fitted or hand-tuned constants. No new entities are postulated: the steady states are derived from the ODE in Section 4, recovering the solutions of [11]. The assumptions are the standard PDE regularity theorems and the cited technical lemmas listed above.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Local existence, uniqueness, mass conservation and extensibility criterion for bounded weak solutions of the singular flux-limited system (1.1) at the critical exponent.
    The proof is not carried out; it is deferred to fixed-point arguments in [6, Proposition 2.1] and [13, Theorem 2.1], and the singular nature of the flux at ∇v = 0 for N > 2 is not checked.
  • domain assumption Lemma 5.4, a concavity domination lemma used to select the stationary supersolution in the proof of Proposition 5.1.
    The lemma is quoted from the authors' own arXiv preprint [16] and no proof is included in this paper.
  • domain assumption Convergence of the uniformly bounded regularized systems (5.12) to the weak solution of (1.1) via Aubin-Lions compactness.
    This convergence is stated as standard in Lemma 5.3, citing [10,36].
  • standard math Standard parabolic regularity, Schauder estimates, strong maximum principle and classical comparison theorems for the reduced scalar equation (2.8).
    These tools are invoked throughout Sections 2, 5 and 6 without proof, which is standard practice in the PDE literature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Mass threshold for global existence in chemotaxis systems with critical flux limitation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OHO2SVKW

@misc{pith2026250719866,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Mass threshold for global existence in chemotaxis systems with critical flux limitation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OHO2SVKW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.19866}
}
abstract

This paper investigates the flux-limited chemotaxis system, proposed by Kohatsu and Senba~(2025), \begin{equation*} \begin{cases} u_t = \Delta u -\nabla\cdot(u|\nabla v|^{\alpha-2}\nabla v),\\ \:\:0=\Delta v + u, \end{cases} \end{equation*} posed in the unit ball of $\mathbb{R}^N$ for some $N\geq2$, subject to no-flux and homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions. Due to precedents, e.g., Tello (2022) and Winkler (2022), the exponent $\alpha = \frac{N}{N-1}$ is the threshold for finite-time blow-up under symmetry assumptions. We further find that under the framework of radially symmetric solutions, the system with critical flux limitation admits a globally bounded weak solution if and only if initial mass is strictly less than $\omega_N \big(\frac{N^2}{N-1}\big)^{N-1}$, where $\omega_N$ denotes the measure of the unit sphere $\mathbb{S}^{N-1}$. Asymptotic behaviors are also considered.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [16]

    arxiv:2405.06315, 2024

    , A note on the 8π problem of Jäger-Luckhaus system. arxiv:2405.06315, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    A HN AND M

    J. A HN AND M. W INKLER , A critical exponent for blow-up in a two-dimensional chemotaxis-consumption system, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 62 (2023), pp. Paper No. 180, 25

    work page 2023

  3. [2]

    B ELLOMO , A

    N. B ELLOMO , A. B ELLOUQUID , J. N IETO , AND J. S OLER , Multiscale biological tissue models and flux-limited chemotaxis for multicellular growing systems, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 20 (2010), pp. 1179–1207

    work page 2010

  4. [3]

    B ELLOMO AND M

    N. B ELLOMO AND M. W INKLER , A degenerate chemotaxis system with flux limitation: maximally extended solutions and absence of gradient blow-up, Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 42 (2017), pp. 436–473

    work page 2017

  5. [4]

    , Finite-time blow-up in a degenerate chemotaxis system with flux limitation, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. Ser. B, 4 (2017), pp. 31–67

    work page 2017

  6. [5]

    BILER , G

    P. BILER , G. K ARCH , P. L AURENÇOT , AND T. NADZIEJA , The 8π-problem for radially symmetric solutions of a chemotaxis model in a disc, Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal., 27 (2006), pp. 133–147

    work page 2006

  7. [6]

    F UHRMANN , J

    J. F UHRMANN , J. L ANKEIT , AND M. W INKLER , A double critical mass phenomenon in a no-flux-Dirichlet Keller-Segel system, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 162 (2022), pp. 124–151

    work page 2022

  8. [7]

    JÄGER AND S

    W. JÄGER AND S. L UCKHAUS , On explosions of solutions to a system of partial differential equations modelling chemotaxis, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 329 (1992), pp. 819–824

    work page 1992

Show all 36 references
  1. [8]

    N. I. K AVALLARIS AND P. SOUPLET , Grow-up rate and refined asymptotics for a two-dimensional Patlak-Keller- Segel model in a disk, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 40 (2009), pp. 1852–1881

    2009

  2. [9]

    E. F. K ELLER AND L. A. S EGEL , Initiation of slime mold aggregation viewed as an instability, J. Theoret. Biol., 26 (1970), pp. 399–415

    1970

  3. [10]

    K OHATSU , Finite-time blow-up of weak solutions to a chemotaxis system with gradient dependent chemotactic sensitivity, J

    S. K OHATSU , Finite-time blow-up of weak solutions to a chemotaxis system with gradient dependent chemotactic sensitivity, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 531 (2024), pp. Paper No. 127820, 26. MASS THRESHOLD IN CRITICAL FLUX-LIMITED CHEMOTAXIS MODELS 23

    2024

  4. [11]

    K OHATSU AND T

    S. K OHATSU AND T. SENBA , Self-similar solutions to a flux-limited Keller–Segel system, Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl., 84 (2025), p. Paper No. 104308

    2025

  5. [12]

    K OHATSU AND T

    S. K OHATSU AND T. YOKOTA, Stability of constant equilibria in a Keller-Segel system with gradient dependent chemotactic sensitivity, Matematiche (Catania), 78 (2023), pp. 213–237

    2023

  6. [13]

    LI AND W

    Y. LI AND W. WANG, Finite-time blow-up and boundedness in a 2D Keller-Segel system with rotation, Nonlinear- ity, 36 (2023), pp. 287–318

    2023

  7. [14]

    G. M. L IEBERMAN , Hölder continuity of the gradient of solutions of uniformly parabolic equations with conormal boundary conditions, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4), 148 (1987), pp. 77–99

    1987

  8. [15]

    M AO AND Y

    X. M AO AND Y. LI, Instability of homogeneous steady states in chemotaxis systems with flux limitation, Nonlinear Anal., 243 (2024), pp. Paper No. 113527, 18

    2024

  9. [17]

    X. M AO, M. L IU, AND Y. LI, Critical mass for finite-time chemotactic collapse in the critical dimension via comparison. Preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.14278, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  10. [18]

    M ARRAS , S

    M. M ARRAS , S. V ERNIER -PIRO, AND T. YOKOTA, Blow-up phenomena for a chemotaxis system with flux limitation, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 515 (2022), pp. Paper No. 126376, 13

    2022

  11. [19]

    NAGAI , Blow-up of radially symmetric solutions to a chemotaxis system , Adv

    T. NAGAI , Blow-up of radially symmetric solutions to a chemotaxis system , Adv. Math. Sci. Appl., 5 (1995), pp. 581–601

    1995

  12. [20]

    NAGAI , T

    T. NAGAI , T. S ENBA , AND T. SUZUKI , Chemotactic collapse in a parabolic system of mathematical biology, Hiroshima Math. J., 30 (2000), pp. 463–497

    2000

  13. [21]

    N EGREANU AND J

    M. N EGREANU AND J. I. T ELLO , On a parabolic-elliptic system with gradient dependent chemotactic coefficient, J. Differential Equations, 265 (2018), pp. 733–751

    2018

  14. [22]

    P ERTHAME , N

    B. P ERTHAME , N. VAUCHELET , AND Z. WANG, The flux limited Keller-Segel system; properties and derivation from kinetic equations, Rev. Mat. Iberoam., 36 (2020), pp. 357–386

    2020

  15. [23]

    M. M. P ORZIO AND V. VESPRI , Hölder estimates for local solutions of some doubly nonlinear degenerate parabolic equations, J. Differential Equations, 103 (1993), pp. 146–178

    1993

  16. [24]

    SUZUKI , Exclusion of boundary blowup for 2D chemotaxis system provided with Dirichlet boundary condition for the Poisson part, J

    T. SUZUKI , Exclusion of boundary blowup for 2D chemotaxis system provided with Dirichlet boundary condition for the Poisson part, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 100 (2013), pp. 347–367

    2013

  17. [25]

    TAO AND M

    Y. TAO AND M. W INKLER , Boundedness in a quasilinear parabolic-parabolic Keller-Segel system with subcritical sensitivity, J. Differential Equations, 252 (2012), pp. 692–715

    2012

  18. [26]

    , Critical mass for infinite-time aggregation in a chemotaxis model with indirect signal production, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 19 (2017), pp. 3641–3678

    2017

  19. [27]

    Differential Equations, 423 (2025), pp

    , A switch in dimension dependence of critical blow-up exponents in a Keller-Segel system involving indirect signal production, J. Differential Equations, 423 (2025), pp. 197–239

    2025

  20. [28]

    J. I. T ELLO , Blow up of solutions for a Parabolic-Elliptic chemotaxis system with gradient dependent chemotactic coefficient, Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 47 (2022), pp. 307–345

    2022

  21. [29]

    WANG AND Y

    H. WANG AND Y. LI, On a parabolic-parabolic system with gradient dependent chemotactic coefficient and consumption, J. Math. Phys., 60 (2019), pp. 011502, 20

    2019

  22. [30]

    WANG AND M

    Y. WANG AND M. W INKLER , Finite-time blow-up in a repulsive chemotaxis-consumption system, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A, 153 (2023), pp. 1150–1166

    2023

  23. [31]

    W INKLER , A critical blow-up exponent in a chemotaxis system with nonlinear signal production, Nonlinearity, 31 (2018), pp

    M. W INKLER , A critical blow-up exponent in a chemotaxis system with nonlinear signal production, Nonlinearity, 31 (2018), pp. 2031–2056

    2018

  24. [32]

    Ann., 373 (2019), pp

    , How unstable is spatial homogeneity in Keller-Segel systems? A new critical mass phenomenon in two- and higher-dimensional parabolic-elliptic cases, Math. Ann., 373 (2019), pp. 1237–1282

    2019

  25. [33]

    , A critical blow-up exponent for flux limitation in a Keller-Segel system, Indiana Univ. Math. J., 71 (2022), pp. 1437–1465

    2022

  26. [34]

    Nachr., 295 (2022), pp

    , A unifying approach toward boundedness in Keller-Segel type cross-diffusion systems via conditionalL∞ estimates for taxis gradients, Math. Nachr., 295 (2022), pp. 1840–1862

    2022

  27. [35]

    W INKLER , Effects of degeneracies in taxis-driven evolution, Math

    M. W INKLER , Effects of degeneracies in taxis-driven evolution, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 35 (2025), pp. 283–343

    2025

  28. [36]

    YAN AND Y

    J. YAN AND Y. LI, Existence and boundedness of solutions for a Keller-Segel system with gradient dependent chemotactic sensitivity, Electron. J. Differential Equations, (2020), pp. Paper No. 122, 14. 24 X. MAO, H. W ANG, AND J. Y AN (X. Mao) SCHOOL OF MATHEMATICS , H OHAI UNIV...

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.