Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 64 references

Stochastic bifurcation analysis via polynomial chaos: consistency and convergence of branch-approximating solutions

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-06-28 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read A polynomial chaos Galerkin projection recovers entire bifurcation diagrams of parameter-dependent ODEs from a single algebraic solve by isolating branch-approximating roots.

desk verdict PC Galerkin reformulation gives a single-solve route to bifurcation branches but the claimed natural split of roots into oscillatory versus approximating classes needs an explicit, provable identification rule. read the letter →

arxiv 2605.31288 v1 pith:OV22TDJB submitted 2026-05-29 math.NA cs.NAmath.DS

Giacomo Venier , Isabella Carla Gonnella , Federico Pichi , Gianluigi Rozza This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.NAcs.NAmath.DS
keywords polynomialchaosbifurcationanalysisGalerkinprojectionstochasticmethodsparameter-dependentsystemsconvergenceordinarydifferentialequations
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 casts a deterministic parameter-dependent dynamical system as a weak stochastic problem by treating the bifurcation parameter as a random variable. A generalized polynomial chaos expansion followed by Galerkin projection then produces one discrete algebraic system whose many roots split into highly oscillatory solutions and a class of branch-approximating solutions. The authors prove that the latter class is consistent with the true steady states and converges to them under suitable assumptions, while also guaranteeing uniqueness of the Galerkin solution in certain regimes. This single-run construction replaces the repeated pointwise continuation sweeps that conventional methods require across large parameter intervals.

What carries the argument

Galerkin projection of the stochastic weak form onto a polynomial chaos basis, which produces discrete algebraic roots that separate into oscillatory and branch-approximating classes.

What would settle it

A sequence of Galerkin solves at increasing polynomial chaos degree in which the identified branch-approximating roots fail to approach the known steady states of the underlying deterministic ODE.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Treating the bifurcation parameter as a random variable and applying a generalized polynomial chaos Galerkin projection to the resulting weak stochastic form yields a single algebraic system; in the non-uniqueness regime its roots naturally separate into highly oscillatory solutions and branch-approximating solutions, with the latter shown to converge to the true steady-state branches of the original deterministic system.

Load-bearing premise

The many roots of the Galerkin algebraic system naturally split into highly oscillatory solutions and a separate class of branch-approximating solutions that converge to the true branches.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The entire bifurcation diagram is reconstructed without iterative continuation across parameter values.
  • Convergence of the branch-approximating solutions to true steady states holds as the polynomial degree grows.
  • Uniqueness of the Galerkin solution is guaranteed under suitable assumptions on the system.
  • The framework applies directly to both scalar and vector-valued parameter-dependent ODEs.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same stochastic projection idea could be tested on parameter-dependent PDEs where classical continuation becomes prohibitively expensive.
  • Automated post-processing filters that separate oscillatory from branch-approximating roots would make the method immediately usable in black-box simulators.
  • If the parameter domain is high-dimensional the single-run advantage may grow, provided the polynomial chaos basis remains tractable.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes treating the bifurcation parameter as a random variable in a generalized polynomial chaos expansion, casting the deterministic parameter-dependent ODE system into a weak stochastic form, and applying Galerkin projection to recover the full bifurcation diagram in a single algebraic solve. It asserts that the resulting nonlinear algebraic system in the non-uniqueness regime produces roots that split into highly oscillatory and branch-approximating classes, develops a theoretical framework proving consistency and convergence of the branch-approximating solutions to the true steady states together with uniqueness of the Galerkin solution under suitable assumptions, and validates the approach numerically on scalar and vector ODE examples.

Significance. If the claimed convergence and separation results hold with explicit, uniform criteria, the method would provide a computationally attractive global alternative to classical continuation techniques, particularly for systems where repeated pointwise solves across parameter ranges are prohibitive. The single-solver reconstruction and the numerical demonstrations on both scalar and vector systems are concrete strengths.

major comments (2)
  1. [Theoretical framework (consistency and convergence statements)] The central claim that Galerkin roots 'naturally split into two classes' (highly oscillatory vs. branch-approximating) and that only the latter converge requires an explicit, computable separation rule (e.g., a bound on PC-coefficient decay rates, a residual threshold, or a spectral property of the algebraic system) that is proved to isolate the approximating class uniformly in the parameter domain and to survive as the chaos degree tends to infinity. The abstract invokes this splitting without indicating the formal criterion; if the separation is only observed numerically rather than derived, the convergence theorem for the branch-approximating class rests on an unproved premise.
  2. [Uniqueness theorem] The uniqueness guarantee for the Galerkin solution is stated to hold 'under suitable assumptions,' yet the manuscript must specify whether these assumptions remain valid when the underlying deterministic problem possesses multiple coexisting stable branches or when the PC basis is truncated at finite degree; without this, the reconstruction guarantee for the entire diagram is not secured for the general case claimed.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the probability measure on the bifurcation parameter and the precise definition of the weak stochastic form should be introduced earlier to aid readers outside the PC community.
  2. Figure captions for the numerical bifurcation diagrams should explicitly state the PC degree, the number of roots retained after splitting, and the identification rule used to classify branch-approximating solutions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading, the positive assessment of the method's potential, and the constructive comments. We address the two major comments point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Theoretical framework (consistency and convergence statements)] The central claim that Galerkin roots 'naturally split into two classes' (highly oscillatory vs. branch-approximating) and that only the latter converge requires an explicit, computable separation rule (e.g., a bound on PC-coefficient decay rates, a residual threshold, or a spectral property of the algebraic system) that is proved to isolate the approximating class uniformly in the parameter domain and to survive as the chaos degree tends to infinity. The abstract invokes this splitting without indicating the formal criterion; if the separation is only observed numerically rather than derived, the convergence theorem for the branch-approximating class rests on an unproved premise.

    Authors: The manuscript derives the splitting analytically within the consistency analysis: branch-approximating roots are characterized by PC-coefficient sequences whose higher-mode norms decay at a rate controlled by the smoothness of the underlying deterministic branch (via the projection error bounds), while oscillatory roots exhibit no such decay and produce large residuals in the weak form. This separation is uniform over the parameter domain and persists under degree elevation. To make the criterion fully explicit and computable as requested, we will revise the abstract and add a corollary stating the precise decay threshold (e.g., an L²-norm bound on coefficients beyond a given multi-index) together with a practical residual check that isolates the class. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Uniqueness theorem] The uniqueness guarantee for the Galerkin solution is stated to hold 'under suitable assumptions,' yet the manuscript must specify whether these assumptions remain valid when the underlying deterministic problem possesses multiple coexisting stable branches or when the PC basis is truncated at finite degree; without this, the reconstruction guarantee for the entire diagram is not secured for the general case claimed.

    Authors: The uniqueness statement applies to the branch-approximating root of the Galerkin system and rests on local Lipschitz continuity of the nonlinearity and orthogonality of the PC basis; these assumptions are independent of the number of coexisting deterministic branches because the algebraic system is permitted (and shown) to possess multiple distinct roots, each approximating a different branch. Finite truncation is already accounted for by the convergence theorem, which quantifies the truncation error uniformly. We will add a clarifying remark after the uniqueness theorem that explicitly verifies the assumptions hold under multiple branches and finite degree, supported by the vector ODE examples already containing coexisting branches. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: theoretical claims derive from stochastic reformulation and Galerkin analysis without reduction to inputs.

full rationale

The abstract and description present a framework deriving consistency, convergence, and uniqueness of branch-approximating Galerkin solutions from the weak stochastic form and projection, under stated assumptions. No quoted equations or steps reduce predictions to fitted parameters by construction, invoke self-citations as load-bearing uniqueness theorems, or rename known results. The 'natural split' into oscillatory and branch-approximating roots is asserted as a property of the system rather than a fitted or self-defined input. This is the common case of a self-contained theoretical derivation against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review limits visibility into explicit free parameters or axioms; the approach implicitly requires a chosen probability measure on the parameter and a truncation level for the PC expansion, plus the domain assumption that the deterministic system admits a useful stochastic weak form.

free parameters (2)
  • Polynomial chaos degree
    Truncation level of the expansion that controls accuracy and size of the algebraic system; must be selected by the user.
  • Probability measure on the bifurcation parameter
    Distribution chosen when treating the deterministic parameter as random; affects the basis and the resulting Galerkin matrix.
assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption The deterministic parameter-dependent system admits a weak stochastic formulation suitable for Galerkin projection onto a polynomial chaos basis.
    Invoked to convert the original model into the stochastic form that enables the single global solve.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stochastic bifurcation analysis via polynomial chaos: consistency and convergence of branch-approximating solutions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OV22TDJB

@misc{pith2026260531288,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stochastic bifurcation analysis via polynomial chaos: consistency and convergence of branch-approximating solutions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OV22TDJB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.31288}
}
read the original abstract

Parameter-dependent dynamical systems that exhibit bifurcations pose significant computational challenges, as traditional continuation methods require repeated, costly simulations across large ranges of parameter values to capture sudden qualitative changes in the solution. In this work, we propose a systematic approach to reconstruct the branches of the entire bifurcation diagram in a single numerical solver leveraging generalized Polynomial Chaos (PC) expansion. By treating the parameter as a random variable, we cast the deterministic parameter-dependent model in a weak stochastic form, and then use a Galerkin projection to recover bifurcation branches globally across the parameter domain without iterative pointwise continuation. We show that the resulting Galerkin system, in the non-uniqueness regime, produces many discrete algebraic roots that naturally split into two classes: highly oscillatory solutions and branch-approximating ones. We develop a rigorous theoretical framework that establishes consistency, proves convergence of the branch-approximating solutions to the true steady states, and guarantees uniqueness of the Galerkin solution under suitable assumptions. Finally, we confirm these theoretical results with numerical experiments on several parameter-dependent ordinary differential equations (ODEs), demonstrating the accuracy and computational efficiency of our single-run framework in capturing complex bifurcation diagrams for both scalar and vector-valued systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.31288 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Oscillating and branch-approximating solutions for the pitchfork bifur￾cation, left and right respectively, for NP C = 10, ¯µ = 1.0, and σ = 1.0. 3. Theoretical Results In this section, we establish rigorous convergence results and error estimates for the branch ap￾proximating solutions to problem (PB2). Let us suppose that there exist r distinct solution branches u¯ (1) , . . . , u¯ (r) ∈ C(I; R n) of (PB1) within … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Pitchfork normal form bifurcation diagram. a stopping criterion until reaching the maximum number of initializations, closely resembling the procedure adopted for the convergence of the deflation method [20]. The first two examples, the pitchfork and S-shaped normal forms, serve as fundamental scalar benchmarks to test the spectral convergence rates and the uniqueness guarantees. The subsequent two examples extend o… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. PCE-Galerkin approximations (left) and convergence analysis (right) in the smooth regime, I = [0.2, 1]. 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 µ 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 u u¯N = 0 N = 1 N = 5 N = 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 N 10−4 10−3 10−2 10−1 100 ku¯ − uNkL2 ku¯ − uNkL∞ kf(uLS,N)kL2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: PCE-Galerkin approximations (left) and convergence analysis (right) in the boundary singularity region, I = [0, 1]. infinite derivative at µ = 0 makes uniform approximation challenging, causing the L∞ error to be higher than the L 2 error due to the difficulty of match…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: PCE-Galerkin approximations (left) and convergence analysis (right) in the interior singularity regime, I = [−1, 3]. as well as the other two branches ¯u0 and ¯u−. However, as illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: S-shaped dynamical system bifurcation diagram. 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 µ 1.20 1.25 1.30 1.35 1.40 1.45 u u¯N = 0 N = 1 N = 5 N = 20 0 5 10 15 20 N 10−16 10−13 10−10 10−7 10−4 10−1 ku¯ − uNkL2 ku¯ − uNkL∞ kf(uLS,N)kL2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: PCE-Galerkin approximations (left) and convergence analysis (right) in a region of uniqueness, I = [0.5, 1.5]. As shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: PCE-Galerkin approximations in I = [−6, 15], with two pitchfork bifurcations. restricts the transcription rate to µ ≥ 0, we extend our analysis to I = [−6, 15] to demonstrate our method’s capacity to handle multiple bifurcations. To compute the equilibrium manifold, we…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: PCE-Galerkin approximation in I = [−2, 2], with a uniqueness regime. since this matrix is symmetric, this directly proves negative definiteness of the matrix, bypassing the need to analyze its symmetric part or introduce weighted P-norms. Using the relation µ(z) = ¯x0(…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: PCE-Galerkin approximation for N = 20 in the (ρ, x, y) space, por￾traying the uniqueness regime (left) and the three-solution regime (right). undergoes a pitchfork bifurcation. Since the condition ˙x = 0 confines the equilibria to the plane x = y, two equilibrium bran…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Random initializations for N = 10 and I = [−1, 1]. Since all hypotheses of the uniqueness Theorem 3.6 are satisfied under the P-weighted metric, there exists a sufficiently large N¯ such that, if N ≥ N¯, the PCE-Galerkin problem associated with the stochastic Lorenz s…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: PCE-Galerkin degree continuation across domains of increasing width. 4.5.2. Degree Continuation. We now investigate the behavior of the branch-approximating solutions when applying the degree continuation detailed in Algorithm 1, consistent with the approach used in t…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    R. A. Adams and J. J. F. Fournier.Sobolev Spaces, volume 140 ofPure and Applied Mathematics. Academic Press, New York, 2 edition, 2003

    2003

  2. [2]

    E. L. Allgower and K. Georg.Numerical Continuation Methods: An Introduction, volume 13 ofSpringer Series in Computational Mathematics. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 1990

    1990

  3. [3]

    Appell and P

    J. Appell and P. P. Zabrejko.Nonlinear Superposition Operators, volume 95. Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 1990

    1990

  4. [4]

    V. I. Arnold.Ordinary Differential Equations. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 3 edition, 1992

    1992

  5. [5]

    Bergh and J

    J. Bergh and J. L¨ ofstr¨ om.Interpolation Spaces: An Introduction, volume 223 ofGrundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 1976

    1976

  6. [6]

    Bollenbach.Genetic toggle switch

    T. Bollenbach.Genetic toggle switch. Advanced Practical Course M Biophysics, University of Cologne, 2023

    2023

  7. [7]

    Boull´ e, V

    N. Boull´ e, V. Dallas, and P. E. Farrell. Bifurcation analysis of two-dimensional Rayleigh–B\’enard convection using deflation.Physical Review E, 105(5):055106, 2022

    2022

  8. [8]

    J. P. Boyd.Chebyshev and Fourier Spectral Methods. Dover Publications, 2001

    2001

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    S. C. Brenner and L. R. Scott.The Mathematical Theory of Finite Element Methods, volume 15 ofTexts in Applied Mathematics. Springer, New York, 3 edition, 2008

    2008

  2. [10]

    Brezis and P

    H. Brezis and P. Mironescu. Gagliardo–nirenberg inequalities and non-inequalities: The full story.Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincar´ e C, 35(5):1355–1376, 2018

    2018

  3. [11]

    S. L. Brunton, J. L. Proctor, and J. N. Kutz. Discovering governing equations from data by sparse identification of nonlinear dynamical systems.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(15):3932–3937, 2016

    2016

  4. [12]

    R. H. Cameron and W. T. Martin. The orthogonal development of non-linear functionals in series of fourier- hermite functionals.Annals of Mathematics, 48:385–413, 1947

    1947

  5. [13]

    Canuto, M

    C. Canuto, M. Hussaini, A. Quarteroni, and T. A. Zang.Spectral Methods: Fundamentals in Single Domains. Springer, 2006

    2006

  6. [14]

    Cartan.Differential Calculus

    H. Cartan.Differential Calculus. Hermann / Houghton Mifflin, Paris / Boston, 1971

    1971

  7. [15]

    Conti, G

    P. Conti, G. Gobat, S. Fresca, A. Manzoni, and A. Frangi. Reduced order modeling of parametrized systems through autoencoders and SINDy approach: Continuation of periodic solutions.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 411:116072, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    B. J. Debusschere, H. N. Najm, P. P. P´ ebay, O. M. Knio, R. G. Ghanem, and O. P. L. Maˆ ıtre. Numerical challenges in the use of polynomial chaos representations for stochastic processes.SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 26(2):698–719, 2005. STOCHASTIC BIFURCATION ANALYSI...

    2005

  9. [17]

    N. Deng, B. R. Noack, M. Morzy´ nski, and L. R. Pastur. Low-order model for successive bifurcations of the fluidic pinball.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 884:A37, 2020

    2020

  10. [18]

    R. A. DeVore and G. G. Lorentz.Constructive Approximation, volume 303 ofGrundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1993

    1993

  11. [19]

    Dini.Fondamenti per la teorica delle funzioni di variabili reali

    U. Dini.Fondamenti per la teorica delle funzioni di variabili reali. T. Nistri, Pisa, 1878

  12. [20]

    P. E. Farrell, ´A. Birkisson, and S. W. Funke. Deflation Techniques for Finding Distinct Solutions of Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations.SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 37(4):A2026–A2045, 2015

    2015

  13. [21]

    Fulton.Intersection Theory

    W. Fulton.Intersection Theory. Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. Springer-Verlag, 2nd edition, 1998

    1998

  14. [22]

    T. S. Gardner, C. R. Cantor, and J. J. Collins. Construction of a genetic toggle switch in escherichia coli.Nature, 403(6767):339–342, 2000

    2000

  15. [23]

    R. G. Ghanem and P. D. Spanos.Stochastic Finite Elements: A Spectral Approach. Springer, New York, NY, 1991

    1991

  16. [24]

    I. C. Gonnella, M. Khamlich, F. Pichi, and G. Rozza. A stochastic perturbation approach to nonlinear bifurcating problems. Preprint, arXiv:2402.16803v4, 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Gottlieb and C.-W

    D. Gottlieb and C.-W. Shu. On the gibbs phenomenon and its resolution.SIAM Review, 39(4):644–668, 1997

    1997

  18. [26]

    Herrero, Y

    H. Herrero, Y. Maday, and F. Pla. RB (Reduced basis) for RB (Rayleigh–B´ enard).Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 261–262:132–141, 2013

    2013

  19. [27]

    J. S. Hesthaven, S. Gottlieb, and D. Gottlieb.Spectral Methods for Time-Dependent Problems. Cambridge Uni- versity Press, Cambridge, 2007

    2007

  20. [28]

    L. V. Kantorovich and G. P. Akilov.Functional Analysis in Normed Spaces. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1964. Translated from Russian (1959)

    1964

  21. [29]

    Kuehn, C

    C. Kuehn, C. Piazzola, and E. Ullmann. Uncertainty quantification analysis of bifurcations of the Allen–Cahn equation with random coefficients.Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 470:134390, 2024

    2024

  22. [30]

    Kumar, F

    N. Kumar, F. Pichi, and G. Rozza. Bifurcation curve detection with deflation for multiparametric PDEs. Preprint, arXiv:2602.12940, 2026

    2026

  23. [31]

    Y. A. Kuznetsov.Elements of Applied Bifurcation Theory, volume 112 ofApplied Mathematical Sciences. Springer, Cham / Switzerland, 4 edition, 2023

    2023

  24. [32]

    O. P. Le Maˆ ıtre. A newton method for the resolution of steady stochastic navier-stokes equations.Computers & Fluids, 38(8):1566–1579, 2009

    2009

  25. [33]

    Li and Y

    S. Li and Y. Yang. Data-driven modeling of bifurcation systems by learning the bifurcation parameter general- ization.Nonlinear Dynamics, 113(2):1163–1174, 2025

    2025

  26. [34]

    E. N. Lorenz. Deterministic nonperiodic flow.Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 20(2):130–141, 1963

    1963

  27. [35]

    G. V. Milovanovi´ c, D. S. Mitrinovi´ c, and T. M. Rassias.Topics in Polynomials: Extremal Problems, Inequalities, Zeros. World Scientific, Singapore, 1994

    1994

  28. [36]

    M. A. Olshanskii and L. G. Rebholz. Approximating a branch of solutions to the Navier–Stokes equations by reduced-order modeling.Journal of Computational Physics, 524:113728, 2025

    2025

  29. [37]

    J. M. Ortega. The newton–kantorovich theorem.The American Mathematical Monthly, 75(6):658–660, 1968. Short note stating the Newton–Kantorovich theorem

    1968

  30. [38]

    Patil and H

    P. Patil and H. Babaee. Reduced-order modeling with time-dependent bases for pdes with stochastic boundary conditions.SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification, 11(2):727–756, 2023

    2023

  31. [39]

    A. D. Pia, D. G. Patsatzis, G. Rozza, L. Russo, and C. Siettos. Surrogate normal-forms for the numerical bifurcation and stability analysis of navier-stokes flows via machine learning. Preprint, arXiv:2506.21275, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Pichi, F

    F. Pichi, F. Ballarin, G. Rozza, and J. S. Hesthaven. An artificial neural network approach to bifurcating phe- nomena in computational fluid dynamics.Computers & Fluids, 254:105813, 2023

    2023

  33. [41]

    Pichi, B

    F. Pichi, B. Moya, and J. S. Hesthaven. A graph convolutional autoencoder approach to model order reduction for parametrized PDEs.Journal of Computational Physics, 501:112762, 2024

    2024

  34. [42]

    Pichi and M

    F. Pichi and M. Strazzullo. Deflation-based certified greedy algorithm and adaptivity for bifurcating nonlinear PDEs.Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 149:108941, 2025

    2025

  35. [43]

    Pichi, M

    F. Pichi, M. Strazzullo, F. Ballarin, and G. Rozza. Driving bifurcating parametrized nonlinear PDEs by optimal control strategies: Application to Navier–Stokes equations with model order reduction.ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis, 56(4):1361–1400, 2022

    2022

  36. [44]

    Pintore, F

    M. Pintore, F. Pichi, M. W. Hess, G. Rozza, and C. Canuto. Efficient computation of bifurcation diagrams with a deflated approach to reduced basis spectral element method.Advances in Computational Mathematics, 47(1):1–39, 2021

    2021

  37. [45]

    Quarteroni, A

    A. Quarteroni, A. Manzoni, and F. Negri.Reduced Basis Methods for Partial Differential Equations: An Intro- duction. La Matematica per Il 3+2, 92. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 1st ed. 2016. edition, 2016

    2016

  38. [46]

    Quarteroni and G

    A. Quarteroni and G. Rozza.Reduced order methods for modeling and computational reduction. Springer, 2014

    2014

  39. [47]

    Rudin.Principles of Mathematical Analysis

    W. Rudin.Principles of Mathematical Analysis. McGraw-Hill, New York, 3rd edition, 1976

    1976

  40. [48]

    Rudin.Functional Analysis

    W. Rudin.Functional Analysis. McGraw-Hill, 2 edition, 1991

    1991

  41. [49]

    Seydel.Practical Bifurcation and Stability Analysis, volume 5 ofInterdisciplinary Applied Mathematics

    R. Seydel.Practical Bifurcation and Stability Analysis, volume 5 ofInterdisciplinary Applied Mathematics. Springer, New York, NY, 3 edition, 2010. 30 STOCHASTIC BIFURCATION ANALYSIS VIA POLYNOMIAL CHAOS

    2010

  42. [50]

    M. L. Shahab and H. Susanto. Neural networks for bifurcation and linear stability analysis of steady states in partial differential equations.Applied Mathematics and Computation, 483:128985, 2024

    2024

  43. [51]

    J. Shen, T. Tang, and L.-L. Wang.Spectral Methods: Algorithms, Analysis and Applications, volume 41 of Springer Series in Computational Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2011

    2011

  44. [52]

    A. J. Sommese and C. W. Wampler.The Numerical Solution of Systems of Polynomials Arising in Engineering and Science. World Scientific, Singapore, 2005

    2005

  45. [53]

    Sparrow.The Lorenz Equations: Bifurcations, Chaos, and Strange Attractors

    C. Sparrow.The Lorenz Equations: Bifurcations, Chaos, and Strange Attractors. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1982

    1982

  46. [54]

    Tartar.An Introduction to Sobolev Spaces and Interpolation Spaces, volume 3 ofLecture Notes of the Unione Matematica Italiana

    L. Tartar.An Introduction to Sobolev Spaces and Interpolation Spaces, volume 3 ofLecture Notes of the Unione Matematica Italiana. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 2007

    2007

  47. [55]

    Tomada, M

    L. Tomada, M. Khamlich, F. Pichi, and G. Rozza. Sparse Identification for bifurcating phenomena in Computa- tional Fluid Dynamics.Computers & Fluids, 302:106841, 2025

    2025

  48. [56]

    L. N. Trefethen.Approximation Theory and Approximation Practice. SIAM, Philadelphia, 1 edition, 2013

    2013

  49. [57]

    Uecker.Numerical Continuation and Bifurcation in Nonlinear PDEs

    H. Uecker.Numerical Continuation and Bifurcation in Nonlinear PDEs. Other Titles in Applied Mathematics. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2021

    2021

  50. [58]

    Venturi, X

    D. Venturi, X. Wan, and G. E. Karniadakis. Stochastic bifurcation analysis of Rayleigh–B´ enard convection. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 650:391–413, 2010

    2010

  51. [59]

    Wan and G

    X. Wan and G. E. Karniadakis. Multi-element generalized polynomial chaos for arbitrary probability measures. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 28(3):901–928, 2006

    2006

  52. [60]

    H. Wang. How much faster does the best polynomial approximation converge than legendre projection?Con- structive Approximation, 54(3):481–504, 2021

    2021

  53. [61]

    Wiggins.Introduction to Applied Nonlinear Dynamical Systems and Chaos

    S. Wiggins.Introduction to Applied Nonlinear Dynamical Systems and Chaos. Springer, New York, New York, 2nd edition, 2003

    2003

  54. [62]

    Xiu.Numerical methods for stochastic computations: A spectral method approach

    D. Xiu.Numerical methods for stochastic computations: A spectral method approach. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2010

    2010

  55. [63]

    Xiu and G

    D. Xiu and G. E. Karniadakis. The wiener-askey polynomial chaos for stochastic differential equations.SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 24(2):619–644, 2002

    2002

  56. [64]

    Xiu and G

    D. Xiu and G. E. Karniadakis. Modeling uncertainty in flow simulations via generalized polynomial chaos.Journal of Computational Physics, 187(1):137–167, 2003. AppendixA. B´ ezout’s Theorem.In Section 2, ifn= 1 and the functionfis polynomial inu, the Galerkin projection is for...

    2003

Pith tools

Reviewed June 28, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.