Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 54 references

Local boundary conditions in nonlocal hyperelasticity via heterogeneous horizons

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper builds a Sobolev-space theory for nonlocal gradients whose interaction range vanishes at the boundary, giving classical boundary traces and minimizers in nonlocal hyperelasticity.

desk verdict A substantial and convincing functional-analytic toolbox for nonlocal gradients with boundary-vanishing heterogeneous horizons; the trace theory is the gem, the mildly varying smallness condition is the soft spot the abstract glosses over. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.03468 v1 pith:R2QBUH3U submitted 2025-09-03 math.AP math.FA

Carolin Kreisbeck , Hidde Schönberger This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.APmath.FA MSC 35R1146E3549J4547G3074A7074G65
keywords nonlocalgradientsfractionalSobolevspacespseudo-differentialoperatorstracePoincaréinequalityvariationalproblemsheterogeneoushorizons
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

Nonlocal hyperelasticity models replace the classical deformation gradient by a nonlocal gradient averaged over a finite interaction range, or horizon. This paper studies what happens when the horizon varies in space and shrinks to zero at the domain's boundary, so that the nonlocal operator becomes local near the boundary. It establishes that the resulting heterogeneous nonlocal Sobolev spaces behave like classical Sobolev spaces at the boundary: functions in them have well-defined boundary traces matching the classical trace, and Poincaré inequalities hold. This makes it possible to prove existence of minimizers for nonlocal hyperelastic energies with quasiconvex or polyconvex stored-energy densities under local Dirichlet, Neumann, and mixed boundary conditions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the identification of the heterogeneous nonlocal gradient as a restricted pseudo-differential operator whose symbol is $q_{\rho(\cdot)}(x,\xi)=\widehat{Q}_{\rho_1}(\delta(x)\xi)$, sitting in the symbol class $S^0_{1,\mu}$. This symbol is the Fourier multiplier of the homogeneous nonlocal gradient, rescaled by the space-dependent horizon. From it the paper builds a parametrix (an almost-inverse), commutators measuring the mismatch between $D_{\rho(\cdot)}$ and $\nabla Q^\Omega_{\rho(\cdot)}$, and a bidirectional translation between the nonlocal space $H_{\rho(\cdot),p}(\Omega)$ and the classical Sobolev space $W^{1,p}(\Omega)$ up to lower-order operators. This translation is what carries classical facts about traces, density, compactness, and quasiconvex lower semicontinuity over to the nonlocal setting.

What would settle it

Numerically discretize $Q^\Omega_{\rho(\cdot)}$ on a fixed Lipschitz domain and check whether a nonconstant function with $D_{\rho(\cdot)}u=0$ appears for some horizon below the stated threshold; finding one would disprove Theorem 4.17, and with it the Poincaré inequalities and existence results that depend on it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At the center of the paper is the heterogeneous nonlocal Sobolev space $H_{\rho(\cdot),p}(\Omega)$, defined by requiring both $u$ and its nonlocal gradient $D_{\rho(\cdot)}u$ to be $p$-integrable, where the kernel is rescaled by a smooth horizon $\delta(x)$ that vanishes near $\partial\Omega$. The authors show this space sits between the classical Sobolev space $W^{1,p}(\Omega)$ and the Bessel potential space $H^{\lambda,p}(\Omega)$, and that smooth functions are dense. The key structural discovery is a translation mechanism: a bounded operator $Q^\Omega_{\rho(\cdot)}$ maps $H_{\rho(\cdot),p}(\Omega)$ into $W^{1,p}(\Omega)$, with $D_{\rho(\cdot)}$ equal to $\nabla Q^\Omega_{\rho(\cdot)}$ up to lower-order operators, and a parametrix $P_{\rho(\cdot),\Omega}$ acts in the reverse direction. From this they derive a unique bounded trace operator $T_{\rho(\cdot)}:H_{\rho(\cdot),p}(\Omega)\to W^{1-1/p,p}(\partial\Omega)$ extending the classical trace, show that the kernel of $D_{\rho(\cdot)}$ consists only of constants when the horizon is mildly varying, and prove Poincaré inequalities for functions with zero mean, vanishing trace on a boundary portion, or vanishing on a positive-measure set. These tools yield existence of minimizers for functionals $\int_\Omega f(x,D_{\rho(\cdot)}u)\,dx$ with quasiconvex or polyconvex integrands under Dirichlet, Neumann, and mixed local boundary data.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the horizon function's maximum value lies below a threshold whose size is never computed; all the main theorems—constant zero-gradient kernel, Poincaré inequalities, and existence of minimizers—depend on this smallness condition.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Boundary data for nonlocal models can be imposed as classical Sobolev traces, so local and nonlocal regions can be coupled seamlessly at interfaces.
  • The Poincaré inequalities give coercivity for energy minimization, so existence of minimizers follows by the direct method for quasiconvex and polyconvex stored-energy densities.
  • Because the spaces are sandwiched between $W^{1,p}(\Omega)$ and $H^{\lambda,p}(\Omega)$, solutions are never more regular than classical Sobolev functions away from the boundary, but they can be less regular.
  • Minimizers solve nonlocal Euler–Lagrange systems with classical boundary conditions, including a nonlocal Laplace equation with mixed Dirichlet–Neumann data as a special scalar case.
  • The zero-gradient kernel being exactly the constants mirrors local elasticity, so rigid-body motions are the only zero-energy deformations under mild variation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The hidden threshold $\bar\delta_0$ is an invitation to quantify it: for concrete kernels and domains one could estimate the largest horizon for which the Poincaré and existence theorems hold, turning the mild-variation condition into a checkable design criterion.
  • The pseudo-differential translation mechanism suggests the same toolbox could treat interfaces inside a domain, not only boundaries, by letting the horizon vanish across a hypersurface.
  • One testable consequence is that if the horizon is allowed to exceed the threshold, the kernel of the nonlocal gradient may cease to be trivial, so the Poincaré inequality and existence results should fail; numerical experiments with discretized $Q^\Omega_{\rho(\cdot)}$ could locate this transition.
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 / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces heterogeneous nonlocal gradients with a spatially varying horizon that vanishes at the boundary of a bounded Lipschitz domain. It defines associated Sobolev spaces, embeds these spaces between W^{1,p} and Bessel potential spaces, establishes a translation mechanism relating the heterogeneous nonlocal gradient to the classical gradient up to lower-order terms, proves a trace theorem, density results, extension operators, regularity properties, and a characterization of the kernel of the nonlocal gradient. Under an additional 'mildly varying' smallness hypothesis on the horizon, it derives Poincaré inequalities and, for quasiconvex or polyconvex integrands, proves existence of minimizers for nonlocal hyperelasticity-type functionals under local Dirichlet, Neumann, and mixed boundary conditions, together with Euler-Lagrange equations for the associated boundary value problems.

Significance. If the main theorems hold, this is a substantial contribution to the nonlocal calculus of variations and to local-to-nonlocal coupling: it provides a systematic Sobolev-space toolbox for heterogeneous nonlocal gradients, including a natural trace theory that matches classical local boundary values. The use of pseudo-differential techniques to handle the space-dependent horizon is elegant and goes substantially beyond the constant-horizon theory. The trace theorem, density results, extension operator, finite-dimensionality of the kernel, and the quasiconvexity characterization are valuable and appear technically sound. The practical reach of the existence and Poincaré results, however, is currently gated by an unquantified smallness condition that is not verified for any concrete admissible horizon.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.5, Eq. (4.13); Theorem 4.17; Corollary 4.19; Corollary 5.3] The 'mildly varying' hypothesis is the gatekeeper for the kernel identification with constants, for all three Poincaré inequalities, and for the existence theorems, but it is only an existential smallness statement. The threshold δ̄0 in (4.13) comes from Proposition 2.4, which asserts only that some ε0 exists; no formula, lower bound, or verification procedure is given. Consequently, for a concrete admissible horizon such as Example 2.6, the paper does not enable the reader to decide whether Theorem 4.17(ii), Corollary 4.19, or Corollary 5.3 apply. Remark 4.18 itself concedes that the non-mildly-varying case is open and cites only numerical simulations. Since the abstract advertises existence of minimizers under local Dirichlet, Neumann, and mixed boundary conditions without this caveat, the advertised statement is conditional on an invisible constant. Please add a quantitative or otherwise checkable sufficient condition, or exhibit a nontrivial family of admissible horizons that is provably mildly varying, and qualify the abstract and introduction accordingly.
  2. [§4, Proposition 4.2, Eq. (4.2)] The proof of the embedding H_{ρ(·),p}(Ω) → H^{λ,p}(Ω) contains a bootstrap step that is not justified as written. The first estimate bounds ||u||_{H^{λ−μ,p}(Ω)} by applying P_{ρ(·),Ω} to Q^Ω_{ρ(·)}u and therefore requires Q^Ω_{ρ(·)}u ∈ H^{1−μ,p}(Ω), but at that stage only Q^Ω_{ρ(·)}u ∈ L^p(Ω) is known from (3.15). Using the norm equivalence (2.10) to infer membership in H^{1−μ,p}(Ω) before that membership is established is circular as printed. The argument can be repaired by first showing that ∇(Q^Ω_{ρ(·)}u) = D_{ρ(·)}u + C^Ω_{ρ(·)}u lies in H^{−μ,p}(Ω), which together with Q^Ω_{ρ(·)}u ∈ L^p(Ω) ⊂ H^{−μ,p}(Ω) yields Q^Ω_{ρ(·)}u ∈ H^{1−μ,p}(Ω) via (2.10); please rewrite this step explicitly. Since the embedding is used in Lemma 4.3 and hence throughout Section 4, this proof must be clearly valid.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§4.4, Example 4.15(b)] The asserted identification H_{ρ(·),p}(Ω)|_U = H^{s,p}(U) does not follow from Corollary 4.14. That corollary gives only H^{s,p}_0(U)|_U + W^{1,p}(Ω)|_U ⊂ H_{ρ(·),p}(Ω)|_U ⊂ H^{s,p}(U), and H^{s,p}_0(U)|_U is in general a proper subspace of H^{s,p}(U). Please either prove the equality or state only the inclusions.
  2. [§4.1, Theorem 4.5] The proof of uniqueness of the trace operator refers to Theorem 4.7(i), which appears only later in the text; the forward reference is acceptable, but the logical order would be cleaner if the density theorem were stated and proved before the trace theorem.
  3. [§5.3] The derivation of the natural boundary condition uses the formal statement that D_{ρ(·)} = ∇ on ∂Ω. Since the existence results in Corollary 5.3 do not rely on this derivation, the point is not load-bearing, but the formal passage should be flagged as heuristic or justified more carefully.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the heterogeneous Sobolev-space and existence theorems are proved from stated assumptions and independent pseudo-differential theory; the 'mildly varying' condition is an explicit hypothesis, not a fitted or self-referential prediction.

full rationale

The central results—trace theorem, density, embeddings, Poincaré inequalities, and minimizer existence—are new theorems established by explicit proofs rather than by renaming or refitting inputs. The trace operator is constructed as T_{ρ(·)} = T_{W^{1,p}} Q^Ω_{ρ(·)} (Eq. (4.6)), which is a proof, not an assumption of the conclusion. The Poincaré estimates in Corollary 4.19 combine Lemma 4.16 with the kernel characterization in Theorem 4.17; the latter's 'mildly varying' hypothesis (4.13) is an explicit smallness condition that guarantees injectivity of Q_{ρ(·)} via Proposition 2.4. This is a transparent sufficient condition: the theorem is conditional on exactly the hypothesis it names. Remark 4.18 openly concedes that the proof does not cover non-mildly-varying horizons and that only numerical simulations support the conjectured larger validity; this is an applicability limitation, not a circular reduction. The foundation from [10] for homogeneous nonlocal gradients is independent published work with stated assumptions that do not include the target heterogeneous results; although [10] shares an author, it is not a self-citation chain used to forbid alternatives. Standard pseudo-differential references [30,33,37] supply the external machinery. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no displayed equation reduces by construction to a previously fitted constant or to the desired conclusion.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The paper's central theorems rest on the kernel hypotheses, the fast-decaying horizon condition, and the standard pseudo-differential operator toolbox. The only genuinely ad hoc input is the 'mildly varying' smallness condition, which is needed for the Poincare inequalities and the existence results. No physical or numerical fitting is used; the horizon is a modeling input, not a fitted parameter.

free parameters (1)
  • Mild variation threshold = not computed (exists by Proposition 2.4)
    Introduced as a smallness condition on the horizon: all Poincare inequalities and the identification of the kernel with constants require the maximal horizon to be below this threshold. No quantitative bound is given, and the threshold depends on the kernel and on the exponent in an inexplicit way.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Kernel rho1 satisfies (H0)-(H4)
    Assumptions on the radial kernel (support, lower bound, fractional comparison with orders lambda and kappa) are used in Proposition 2.3 to control the symbol and in Lemma 3.3 to ensure the symbol class.
  • domain assumption Horizon delta is smooth, positive inside, vanishes at boundary, bounded by distance to complement, and has fast decay condition
    The fast decay condition is essential for the Hormander symbol estimates in Lemma 3.3 and for the construction of admissible horizons in Lemma 2.5.
  • standard math Standard pseudo-differential operator theory (Hormander classes, parametrices, composition estimates)
    The paper relies on textbook results for symbols, adjoints, composition, parametrices, and Lp mapping properties; Proposition 2.4 is adapted from a cited source.
  • standard math Rychkov universal extension operator exists for bounded Lipschitz domains
    Used to extend Bessel potential spaces and in the construction of the extension operator in Section 3.2.
  • standard math Bessel potential spaces have compact embeddings for higher order into lower order
    Used in the compactness arguments in Lemma 4.16 and Theorem 5.1; cited to a known theorem.
  • ad hoc to paper Mildly varying horizon condition
    Introduced to make the operator Q injective via Proposition 2.4. It is a smallness condition on the horizon, not derived from physical principles, and it drives the Poincare and existence results.
invented entities (2)
  • Heterogeneous nonlocal gradient
    purpose: Generalizes the constant-horizon nonlocal gradient to space-dependent horizons that vanish at the boundary; defined in Section 3.1.
    A new mathematical operator. Its usefulness is established internally by the theorems of this paper; there is no external falsifiable prediction (such as a measurable physical quantity) that would confirm or refute it independently.
  • Heterogeneous nonlocal Sobolev spaces
    purpose: Provide the admissible function spaces for variational problems with heterogeneous nonlocal gradients; see Definition 4.1.
    New function spaces introduced by the authors. Their properties (embeddings, traces, density) are the content of the paper, so they do not have independent evidence outside the theory.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Local boundary conditions in nonlocal hyperelasticity via heterogeneous horizons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/R2QBUH3U

@misc{pith2026250903468,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Local boundary conditions in nonlocal hyperelasticity via heterogeneous horizons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/R2QBUH3U}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.03468}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper, we consider a class of variational problems with integral functionals involving nonlocal gradients. These models have been recently proposed as refinements of classical hyperelasticity, aiming for an effective framework to capture also discontinuous and singular material effects. Specific to our set-up is a space-dependent interaction range that vanishes at the boundary of the reference domain. This ensures that the nonlocal operator depends only on values within the domain and localizes to the classical gradient at the boundary, which allows for a seamless integration of nonlocal modeling with local boundary values. The main contribution of this work is a comprehensive theory for the newly introduced associated Sobolev spaces, including the rigorous treatment of a trace operator and Poincar\'e inequalities. A central aspect of our technical approach lies in exploiting connections with pseudo-differential operator theory. As an application, we establish the existence of minimizers for functionals with quasiconvex or polyconvex integrands depending on heterogeneous nonlocal gradients, subject to local Dirichlet, Neumann or mixed-type boundary conditions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.03468 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of the reference configuration Ω with the space-dependent horizon δ(x) for selected points x and the local boundary ∂Ω. 1.2. Background on nonlocal gradients with constant horizon. As indicated above, our results in the setting with spatially varying horizons build on the theory of homogeneous nonlocal gradients as a foundation. Let us briefly review some developments concerning these operators, namely,… view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Abels and C

    H. Abels and C. Pfeuffer. Characterization of non-smooth pseudodifferential operators. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. , 24(2):371–415, 2018

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Acerbi and N

    E. Acerbi and N. Fusco. Semicontinuity problems in the calculus of variations. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. , 86(2):125–145, 1984

    1984

  3. [3]

    S. Almi, M. Caponi, M. Friedrich, and F. Solombrino. A fractional approach to strain-gradient plasticity: beyond core-radius of discrete dislocations. Math. Ann., 391(3):4063–4115, 2025

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    Arroyo-Rabasa

    A. Arroyo-Rabasa. Functional and variational aspects of nonlocal operators associated with linear PDEs. Non- linear Anal., 251:Paper No. 113683, 26, 2025

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    J. M. Ball. Convexity conditions and existence theorems in nonlinear elasticity. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. , 63(4):337–403, 1976/77

    work page 1976

  6. [6]

    J. C. Bellido, J. Cueto, M. D. Foss, and P. Radu. Nonlocal Green theorems and Helmholtz decompositions for truncated fractional gradients. Appl. Math. Optim. , 90(1):Paper No. 16, 49, 2024

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    J. C. Bellido, J. Cueto, and C. Mora-Corral. Fractional Piola identity and polyconvexity in fractional spaces. Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e C Anal. Non Lin´ eaire, 37(4):955–981, 2020

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    J. C. Bellido, J. Cueto, and C. Mora-Corral. Γ-convergence of polyconvex functionals involving s-fractional gradients to their local counterparts. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations , 60(1):Paper No. 7, 29, 2021

    work page 2021

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    J. C. Bellido, J. Cueto, and C. Mora-Corral. Non-local gradients in bounded domains motivated by continuum mechanics: fundamental theorem of calculus and embeddings. Adv. Nonlinear Anal., 12(1):Paper No. 20220316, 48, 2023

    2023

  2. [10]

    J. C. Bellido, C. Mora-Corral, and H. Sch¨ onberger. Nonlocal gradients: Fundamental theorem of calculus, Poincar´ e inequalities, and embeddings.J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) , 112(2):Paper No. e70277, 2025

    2025

  3. [11]

    Bru` e, M

    E. Bru` e, M. Calzi, G. E. Comi, and G. Stefani. A distributional approach to fractional Sobolev spaces and fractional variation: asymptotics II. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris , 360:589–626, 2022

    2022

  4. [12]

    P. M. Campos and J. F. Rodrigues. Unilateral problems for quasilinear operators with fractional Riesz gradients. Preprint, arXiv:2311.18428, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Caponi, A

    M. Caponi, A. Carbotti, and A. Maione. H-compactness for nonlocal linear operators in fractional divergence form. Preprint, arXiv:2408.10984, 2025

    2025

  6. [14]

    G. E. Comi and G. Stefani. A distributional approach to fractional Sobolev spaces and fractional variation: existence of blow-up. J. Funct. Anal., 277(10):3373–3435, 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    J. B. Conway. A course in functional analysis , volume 96 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics . Springer-Verlag, New York, second edition, 1990

    1990

  8. [16]

    Cueto, C

    J. Cueto, C. Kreisbeck, and H. Sch¨ onberger. A variational theory for integral functionals involving finite-horizon fractional gradients. Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal. , 26(5):2001–2056, 2023

    2001

  9. [17]

    Cueto, C

    J. Cueto, C. Kreisbeck, and H. Sch¨ onberger. Γ-convergence involving nonlocal gradients with varying horizon: Recovery of local and fractional models. Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl. , 85:Paper No. 104371, 20, 2025

    2025

  10. [18]

    Dacorogna

    B. Dacorogna. Direct methods in the calculus of variations , volume 78 of Applied Mathematical Sciences . Springer, New York, second edition, 2008

    2008

  11. [19]

    D’Elia, M

    M. D’Elia, M. Gulian, H. Olson, and G. E. Karniadakis. Towards a unified theory of fractional and nonlocal vector calculus. Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal. , 24(5):1301–1355, 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    D’Elia, X

    M. D’Elia, X. Li, P. Seleson, X. Tian, and Y. Yu. A review of local-to-nonlocal coupling methods in nonlocal diffusion and nonlocal mechanics. J. Peridyn. Nonlocal Model. , 4(1):1–50, 2022

    2022

  13. [21]

    Q. Du, M. Gunzburger, R. B. Lehoucq, and K. Zhou. A nonlocal vector calculus, nonlocal volume-constrained problems, and nonlocal balance laws. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. , 23(3):493–540, 2013

    2013

  14. [22]

    Q. Du, T. Mengesha, and X. Tian. Fractional Hardy-type and trace theorems for nonlocal function spaces with heterogeneous localization. Anal. Appl. (Singap.) , 20(3):579–614, 2022

    2022

  15. [23]

    Q. Du, X. Tian, C. Wright, and Y. Yu. Nonlocal trace spaces and extension results for nonlocal calculus. J. Funct. Anal., 282(12):Paper No. 109453, 63, 2022

    2022

  16. [24]

    Fefferman

    C. Fefferman. Lp bounds for pseudo-differential operators. Israel J. Math. , 14:413–417, 1973

    1973

  17. [25]

    Fonseca and G

    I. Fonseca and G. Leoni. Modern methods in the calculus of variations: Lp spaces. Springer Monographs in Mathematics. Springer, New York, 2007

    2007

  18. [26]

    H. F. Gon¸ calves, D. D. Haroske, and L. Skrzypczak. Compact embeddings in Besov-type and Triebel-Lizorkin- type spaces on bounded domains. Rev. Mat. Complut. , 34(3):761–795, 2021

    2021

  19. [27]

    Grafakos

    L. Grafakos. Modern Fourier analysis, volume 250 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, New York, third edition, 2014

    2014

  20. [28]

    Z. Han, T. Mengesha, and X. Tian. Compactness results for a Dirichlet energy of nonlocal gradient with applications. Numer. Methods Partial Differential Equations , 40(6):Paper No. e23149, 46, 2024. LOCAL BOUNDARY CONDITIONS IN NONLOCAL HYPERELASTICITY 35

    2024

  21. [29]

    Han and X

    Z. Han and X. Tian. Nonlocal half-ball vector operators on bounded domains: Poincar´ e inequality and its applications. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. , 33(12):2507–2556, 2023

    2023

  22. [30]

    H¨ ormander.The analysis of linear partial differential operators

    L. H¨ ormander.The analysis of linear partial differential operators. III. Classics in Mathematics. Springer, Berlin,

  23. [31]

    Kreisbeck and H

    C. Kreisbeck and H. Sch¨ onberger. Quasiconvexity in the fractional calculus of variations: Characterization of lower semicontinuity and relaxation. Nonlinear Anal., 215:Paper No. 112625, 2022

    2022

  24. [32]

    Kreisbeck and H

    C. Kreisbeck and H. Sch¨ onberger. Non-constant functions with zero nonlocal gradient and their role in nonlocal Neumann-type problems. Nonlinear Anal., 249:Paper No. 113642, 28, 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    Kumano-go

    H. Kumano-go. Pseudodifferential operators. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.-London, 1981. Translated from the Japanese by the author, R´ emi Vaillancourt and Michihiro Nagase

    1981

  26. [34]

    Mengesha and D

    T. Mengesha and D. Spector. Localization of nonlocal gradients in various topologies. Calc. Var. Partial Dif- ferential Equations, 52(1-2):253–279, 2015

    2015

  27. [35]

    A. Miyachi. Estimates for pseudodifferential operators with exotic symbols. J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. IA Math., 34(1):81–110, 1987

    1987

  28. [36]

    C. B. Morrey, Jr. Quasi-convexity and the lower semicontinuity of multiple integrals. Pacific J. Math. , 2:25–53, 1952

    1952

  29. [37]

    V. S. Rabinovich and S. Roch. Exact and numerical inversion of pseudo-differential operators and applications to signal processing. In Modern trends in pseudo-differential operators, volume 172 of Oper. Theory Adv. Appl., pages 259–277. Birkh¨ auser, Basel, 2007

    2007

  30. [38]

    F. Rindler. Calculus of variations . Universitext. Springer, Cham, 2018

    2018

  31. [39]

    V. S. Rychkov. On restrictions and extensions of the Besov and Triebel-Lizorkin spaces with respect to Lipschitz domains. J. London Math. Soc. (2) , 60(1):237–257, 1999

    1999

  32. [40]

    J. M. Scott and Q. Du. Nonlocal problems with local boundary conditions I: Function spaces and variational principles. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 56(3):4185–4222, 2024

    2024

  33. [41]

    J. M. Scott and Q. Du. Nonlocal problems with local boundary conditions II: Green’s identities and regularity of solutions. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 57(1):404–451, 2025

    2025

  34. [42]

    Shi and L

    Z. Shi and L. Yao. New estimates of Rychkov’s universal extension operator for Lipschitz domains and some applications. Math. Nachr., 297(4):1407–1443, 2024

    2024

  35. [43]

    Shieh and D

    T.-T. Shieh and D. E. Spector. On a new class of fractional partial differential equations. Adv. Calc. Var. , 8(4):321–336, 2015

    2015

  36. [44]

    Shieh and D

    T.-T. Shieh and D. E. Spector. On a new class of fractional partial differential equations II. Adv. Calc. Var. , 2017

    2017

  37. [45]

    ˇSilhav´ y

    M. ˇSilhav´ y. Fractional vector analysis based on invariance requirements (critique of coordinate approaches). Contin. Mech. Thermodyn., 32(1):207–228, 2020

    2020

  38. [46]

    S. A. Silling. Reformulation of elasticity theory for discontinuities and long-range forces. J. Mech. Phys. Solids , 48(1):175–209, 2000

    2000

  39. [47]

    S. A. Silling, M. Epton, O. Weckner, J. Xu, and E. Askari. Peridynamic states and constitutive modeling. J. Elasticity, 88(2):151–184, 2007

    2007

  40. [48]

    S. A. Silling, D. J. Littlewood, and P. Seleson. Variable horizon in a peridynamic medium. J. Mech. Mater. Struct., 10(5):591–612, 2015

    2015

  41. [49]

    E. M. Stein. Singular integrals and differentiability properties of functions , volume No. 30 of Princeton Mathe- matical Series. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1970

    1970

  42. [50]

    Y. Tao, X. Tian, and Q. Du. Nonlocal models with heterogeneous localization and their application to seamless local-nonlocal coupling. Multiscale Model. Simul., 17(3):1052–1075, 2019

    2019

  43. [51]

    M. E. Taylor. Partial differential equations III. Nonlinear equations , volume 117 of Applied Mathematical Sci- ences. Springer, New York, second edition, 2011

    2011

  44. [52]

    Tian and Q

    X. Tian and Q. Du. Trace theorems for some nonlocal function spaces with heterogeneous localization. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 49(2):1621–1644, 2017

    2017

  45. [53]

    H. Triebel. Theory of function spaces, volume 78 of Monographs in Mathematics. Birkh¨ auser Verlag, Basel, 1983. Mathematisch-Geographische Fakult¨at, Katholische Universit¨at Eichst¨att-Ingolstadt, Ostenstra- ße 28, 85072 Eichst ¨att, Germany Email address: carolin.kreisbeck@...

    1983

  46. [2007]

    Pseudo-differential operators, Reprint of the 1994 edition

    1994

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.