Recurrence relations and the Christoffel-Darboux formula for elliptic orthogonal polynomials

Harini Desiraju; Sampad Lahiry

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Recurrence relations and the Christoffel-Darboux formula for elliptic orthogonal polynomials

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Elliptic orthogonal polynomials satisfy a closed Christoffel-Darboux formula on the complex torus.

desk verdict Theorem 3.1 is real and the derivation is sound, but the confluent CD formula and the RHP expression carry correctable sign and normalization errors; the paper deserves a referee, not acceptance as-is. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.09582 v1 pith:RADHCGUY submitted 2025-06-11 math-ph math.CAmath.MP

Harini Desiraju , Sampad Lahiry This is my paper · ORCID

classification math-phmath.CAmath.MP MSC 33E0542C0530E2560G55

keywords ellipticorthogonalpolynomialsChristoffel-Darbouxformulafive-termrecurrenceseven-termWeierstrassfunctiondeterminantalpointprocessShohat-Favardtheorem

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

Orthogonal polynomials on the complex torus, called elliptic orthogonal polynomials, are meromorphic functions with a single pole at the origin; because multiplication by the Weierstrass function $\wp$ raises the pole order by two, they cannot satisfy the classical three-term recurrence. The paper shows that the correct structure is a pair of coupled recurrences: a five-term relation from multiplication by $\wp$ and a seven-term relation from multiplication by $\wp'$, with coefficients linked by the elliptic curve equation $\wp'^2=\wp^3-g_2\wp-g_3$. From these recurrences it derives the Christoffel-Darboux formula, expressing the kernel $\sum_{j=0}^{n-2}\pi_j(x)\pi_j(y)$ as a closed antisymmetric quotient by $\wp(x)-\wp(y)$. This makes the kernel available for analysis and yields a determinantal point process on the A-cycle of the torus. Under a symmetric weight, the recurrences reduce to three- and four-term forms, and the Christoffel-Darboux formula becomes the elliptic analogue of the classical one under the change of variable $z\mapsto\wp(z)$.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the pair of multiplication operators $M_\wp$ and $M_{\wp'}$ acting on the orthonormal polynomial sequence. Because $\wp$ has a double pole at $z=0$, the expansion of $\wp(z)\pi_n(z)$ in the orthonormal basis terminates after five terms; because $\wp'$ has a triple pole, the companion expansion terminates after seven terms. The elliptic curve identity $\wp'(z)^2=\wp(z)^3-g_2\wp(z)-g_3$ forces algebraic relations among the recurrence coefficients, and the two recurrences together are necessary to generate all polynomials, since $\pi_1=0$. The Christoffel-Darboux proof works by multiplying the five-term recurrence by $\pi_j(y)$, summing $j=0,\dots,n-2$, subtracting the same sum with $x$ and $y$ interchanged, and cancelling the symmetric terms; only three antisymmetric boundary terms survive.

What would settle it

Take a concrete positive weight, such as $w\equiv 1$ on the cycle $\gamma$, compute the first several orthonormal polynomials by numerical Gram-Schmidt, and test the five-term recurrence (2.1) and the Christoffel-Darboux identity (3.1) at several pairs $x,y$ and several $n$. Any nonzero residual in either identity would disprove the paper's central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 3.1: for orthonormal elliptic polynomials $\pi_n$ with a positive weight, the reproducing kernel $\mathcal{K}_n(x,y)=\sum_{j=0}^{n-2}\pi_j(x)\pi_j(y)$ equals $$\frac{1}{\wp(x)-\wp(y)}\left[a_{n-1}(\pi_n(x)\pi_{n-2}(y)-\pi_n(y)\pi_{n-2}(x))+a_{n-2}(\pi_{n-1}(x)\pi_{n-3}(y)-\pi_{n-1}(y)\pi_{n-3}(x))+b_{n-1}(\pi_{n-1}(x)\pi_{n-2}(y)-\pi_{n-1}(y)\pi_{n-2}(x))\right],$$ where $a_k,b_k$ are the recurrence coefficients from the five-term relation. The route is the pair of coupled recurrences: $\wp(z)\pi_n$ expands five terms wide and $\wp'(z)\pi_n$ seven terms wide, and the two expansions are tied by the elliptic curve identity. This structure also yields an elliptic Shohat-Favard theorem, a Riemann-Hilbert expression for the kernel, and, for symmetric weights, a reduction to ordinary three- and four-term recurrences whose Christoffel-Darboux kernel is the classical one pulled back through $z\mapsto\wp(z)$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise, stated without proof in Section 1, is that the orthonormal polynomials are real-valued on the support cycle and the weight is positive there, so that orthogonality is a genuine real inner product; if that fails, the Gram-Schmidt construction and the positive determinantal point process are not guaranteed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The Christoffel-Darboux kernel for the first $n-1$ elliptic orthogonal polynomials can be evaluated in closed form from the three boundary terms in (3.1), without summing the series.
The kernel defines a determinantal point process on the A-cycle $\gamma$, with positive determinants, trace equal to $n$, and the reproducing property.
The Riemann-Hilbert expression (3.11) gives a route to asymptotic analysis of the kernel by steepest-descent methods.
For symmetric weights, even and odd polynomials decouple into three- and four-term recurrences; zeros of even polynomials become eigenvalues of finite Jacobi matrices and interlace on $\gamma$, and Heine-type integral formulas hold.
In the symmetric case the CD kernel is, via $z\mapsto\wp(z)$, the elliptic analogue of the classical Christoffel-Darboux formula for ordinary orthogonal polynomials on the complex plane.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper's claims, the closed kernel formula is the natural starting point for edge scaling limits on the torus; the paper mentions steepest-descent analysis as future work, but the concrete kernel identity is what would make such a limit tractable.
A further inference is that, because the recurrence coefficients satisfy explicit algebraic identities forced by the elliptic curve relation, a reader could verify the entire construction numerically for a chosen weight by checking those identities and the five-term recurrence, not just the final CD formula.
The paper does not state it, but the symmetric-weight reduction suggests a broader transport principle: many one-dimensional results may lift to the torus by pulling back through $\wp$, provided the relevant polynomials have definite parity; if that principle holds, it would give a template for orthogonal polynomials on higher-genus curves.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The headline is that Theorem 3.1 is genuine progress: a Christoffel–Darboux formula for elliptic orthogonal polynomials with generic weights, derived cleanly from the five-term recurrence. I checked the algebra, including the n=3 boundary terms, and the non-confluent formula holds. The symmetric-weight reduction to the classical CD formula also checks out, and the zero interlacing via Jacobi matrices is a nice addition. The five- and seven-term recurrences are not deep, but the coupled statement and the elliptic Shohat–Favard result are useful. Self-citation of [6] is fair here; the CD formula is derived from the recurrences, not assumed.

The soft spots are real and mostly downstream of Theorem 3.1. Corollary 3.2 has a concrete sign error: for n=3 the confluent formula (3.9) evaluates to -π_0(x)^2, while the correct limit of (3.1) is +π_0(x)^2. The error comes from differentiating the denominator ℘(x)-℘(y). Corollary 3.3 inherits it. Proposition 3.4 also fails a direct check: substituting the RHP solution (1.6) gives an extra minus sign and a normalization off by a factor, and equation (3.17) is not antisymmetric while the term it represents is. These don't touch Theorem 3.1 itself, but they are errors in the paper's stated CD consequences, so the paper as submitted is not correct as written.

Two gaps are smaller but worth noting. Theorem 2.6 asserts positive definiteness of the moment functional without proof and dismisses the odd case as analogous; the odd case is exactly where π_1=0 is awkward, so that needs more than an analogy. Also, the reality of π_n on γ is asserted in Section 1 without proof; the inner product and DPP positivity rest on it.

Who is this for? Anyone working on orthogonal polynomials on curves or elliptic integrable systems. The central CD formula is worth having, and the determinantal point process on the torus is a genuinely new direction, even though the authors defer the analysis. The paper deserves a serious referee, but only after the sign and normalization errors in Section 3 are corrected and the Shohat–Favard proof is filled in. I would send it back to the authors with a request for major revision, then look at it again.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper studies elliptic orthogonal polynomials (EOPs) on a torus, defined as monic meromorphic functions with a single pole at the origin, orthogonal with respect to a positive weight on the A-cycle γ. The main results are a five-term recurrence (Theorem 2.1), a seven-term recurrence (Theorem 2.2), an elliptic analogue of the Shohat–Favard theorem (Theorem 2.6), a Christoffel–Darboux formula (Theorem 3.1), a confluent version (Corollary 3.2), an expression for the CD kernel in terms of the Riemann–Hilbert problem (Proposition 3.4), and a determinantal point process construction (Proposition 3.6). For symmetric weights, the paper derives a three-term recurrence for even polynomials, a four-term recurrence coupling odd and even families, interlacing of zeros, Heine-type formulas, and a simplified CD formula. The appendices contain a proof of simplicity of zeros and lengthy relations among recurrence coefficients.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides a constructive Christoffel–Darboux theory for scalar orthogonal polynomials on a genus-one curve, with an elementary proof of the non-confluent formula and a plausible route to point-process universality. The central algebraic step in Theorem 3.1 is sound and independently verifiable, and the paper is explicit enough to allow direct checking. However, several advertised consequences contain concrete sign and normalization errors, and the positive-definiteness claim in Theorem 2.6 is asserted rather than proved; the current version is therefore not reliable as a reference for its corollaries.

major comments (4)

[§3, Corollary 3.2, Eq. (3.9)] The confluent Christoffel–Darboux formula (3.9) has the wrong sign in the two a-term contributions. For n=3, the left side of (3.1) is π_0(x)π_0(y), and the right side reduces to a_1(π_2(x)π_0(y)−π_2(y)π_0(x))/(℘(x)−℘(y)). Letting y→x, using d(℘(x)−℘(y))/dy = −℘'(x) and the n=0 recurrence ℘π_0 = a_1π_2+c_0π_0, the limit is +π_0(x)^2, whereas (3.9) produces −π_0(x)^2. Corollary 3.3 inherits this sign error. The correct statement should have minus signs on the a-terms in (3.9); as printed, the formula asserts a positive quantity equals its negative.
[§3, Proposition 3.4] The RHP expression for the CD kernel is incorrect. Substituting the explicit solution (1.6) into the bilinear form in (3.13) gives −(2πi/h_{n−2})(P_n(x)P_{n−2}(y)−P_n(y)P_{n−2}(x)), so the right-hand side of (3.13) has the wrong sign and, after conversion to orthonormal polynomials, is off by a factor √(h_n h_{n−2}). In the proof, the displayed formula for adj(Y_{n−1}(z)) uses h_{n−1} and P_n instead of the h_{n−2} and P_{n−2} that appear in (1.6). The b-term identity (3.17) also fails a direct normalization check. Consequently the assembled expression (3.11) does not faithfully represent the CD kernel and must be re-derived.
[§2.2, Theorem 2.6] The proof of Theorem 2.6 shows orthogonality of the recursively constructed polynomials with respect to a formal moment functional, but positive definiteness of L is asserted without proof in the final sentence ('Furthermore, assuming the recurrence coefficients a_n, p_n>0, the functional L is also positive definite'). This is not an immediate consequence of positivity of the coefficients; it requires a measure-existence or positivity argument for the moment functional. The odd-degree case is also dismissed as 'completely analogous' without displaying the construction. Since Theorem 2.6 is the elliptic Shohat–Favard theorem that justifies the recurrence-based construction of EOPs, this gap needs to be filled.
[§1, after Eq. (1.8)] The paper states without proof that 'since ℘ and ℘′ are real on γ, we obtain that the polynomials π_n are real on the support γ.' This reality is used to make (1.8) a real inner product and to support the positivity claim in Proposition 3.6, yet no argument is given. A proof by induction from the recurrence relations, with the exact assumptions on the weight w, should be supplied, or the statement should be formulated as a separate lemma with its hypotheses clearly stated.

minor comments (4)

[§2.2, Eq. (2.12)] Equation (2.12) contains a typographical error: the term 'b_{n−2}π_{n−}(z)' should presumably read 'b_{n−2}π_{n−3}(z)'.
[§4, Proposition 4.3] The reference to 'Theorem 2.10' in Proposition 4.3 should be to Theorem 2.2.
[§3, Eq. (3.16)] Equation (3.16) has an unbalanced parenthesis in the denominator: it reads '℘(x)−℘(y))' instead of '℘(x)−℘(y)'.
[§3 and §4.3] The notation K_n is used with two different meanings: in (3.18) it is the weighted CD kernel involving bK_{n+1}, while in (4.26) it is the even CD kernel involving the first n even polynomials. These should be denoted by different symbols to avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the Christoffel–Darboux formula is derived directly from the independently derived five-term recurrence and its coefficients, not assumed or fitted.

full rationale

The central claim, Theorem 3.1, is a direct rearrangement of the five-term recurrence (3.2), which itself follows from expanding ℘(z)π_n(z) in the orthonormal basis and applying orthogonality (2.4). No quantity is fitted to a subset of data and then renamed a prediction; the recurrence coefficients a_n, b_n, c_n are defined by the orthogonality integrals and appear in the CD identity as given objects, not as outputs of the derivation. The proof is algebraically self-contained: it sums the recurrence, symmetrizes, subtracts the x↔y expression, and the symmetric terms cancel exactly, leaving the displayed CD formula. The same holds for the even-weight CD formula in Proposition 4.7, which follows from the specialized three-term recurrence. The paper does invoke the prior framework of [6] for the definition of elliptic orthogonal polynomials, the Riemann–Hilbert problem (1.4)–(1.6), and the symmetric-weight structure, and [6] is co-authored by one of the present authors. This is a real dependency, but it is not circular: those cited results are independent inputs whose assumptions do not include the CD formula, and the CD formula itself is not used to prove them. Proposition 3.4 uses the RHP solution form and [6, Lemma 2.3], but presents it as a direct computation, not as a reduction of the target result to itself. Two non-circular concerns are noted: the statement in Section 1 that π_n are real on γ because ℘ and ℘′ are real on γ is made without proof, and a careful check suggests sign/normalization errors in Corollary 3.2/3.3 and Proposition 3.4. These are correctness issues, not circularity: they do not show that Theorem 3.1 is assumed as an input.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation uses standard elliptic function theory and the prior framework of [6]; no free parameters are introduced. The main external inputs are the existence of EOPs and the RHP solution; the paper's own contributions are the recurrences and CD formula built on these.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Existence and uniqueness of EOPs and the RHP solution (RHP 1), as established in [6].
The paper builds on [6] for the definition of EOPs, the formulation and solvability of the Riemann-Hilbert problem, and the identity detY_n=℘+c_n; these are not reproven here.
domain assumption The weight w is positive on γ and the orthonormal polynomials π_n are real on γ, making (1.8) a real inner product.
Positivity of the weight is assumed in Definition 1.1; reality of π_n on γ is stated in Section 1 without proof and used for the DPP positivity.
standard math The five-term recurrence expansion (2.3) has the stated finite band structure.
Follows from pole orders: ℘π_n has a pole of order n+2 and can be expanded in the basis up to degree n+2; the coefficients vanish for k<n-2 by orthogonality.
standard math Abel's theorem on divisors of meromorphic functions on the torus.
Used in Appendix A to prove simplicity and location of zeros.
standard math Standard spectral theorems, interlacing for symmetric tridiagonal matrices, and Prokhorov's theorem.
Used in Section 4.1 and Proposition 4.5.
standard math The elliptic curve equation ℘'^2 = ℘^3 - g2℘ - g3.
Used in Appendix B to relate recurrence coefficients.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Recurrence relations and the Christoffel-Darboux formula for elliptic orthogonal polynomials." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RADHCGUY

@misc{pith2026250609582,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Recurrence relations and the Christoffel-Darboux formula for elliptic orthogonal polynomials},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RADHCGUY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.09582}
}

read the original abstract

In recent years, there has been significant progress in the theory of orthogonal polynomials on algebraic curves, particularly on genus 1 surfaces. In this paper, we focus on elliptic orthogonal polynomials and establish several of their fundamental properties. In particular, we derive general five-term and seven-term recurrence relations, which lead to a Christoffel-Darboux formula and the construction of an associated point process on the A-cycle of the torus. Notably, the recurrence coefficients in these relations are intricately linked through the underlying elliptic curve equation. Under additional symmetry assumptions on the weight function, the structure simplifies considerably, recovering known results for orthogonal polynomials on the complex plane.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Elliptic orthogonal polynomials and OPRL
math.CA 2025-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The paper constructs elliptic orthogonal a-polynomials, proves zero interlacing on the torus, and derives a lifting correspondence from OPRL that implies new interlacing for rational modifications.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

16 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[6]

On a class of elliptic orthogonal polynomials and their integrability.Constructive Approximation, pages 1–44, 2024

Harini Desiraju, Tomas Lasic Latimer, and Pieter Roffelsen. On a class of elliptic orthogonal polynomials and their integrability.Constructive Approximation, pages 1–44, 2024

work page 2024
[1]

Nonlinear steepest descent approach to orthogonality on elliptic curves

Marco Bertola. Nonlinear steepest descent approach to orthogonality on elliptic curves. Journal of Approximation Theory, 276:105717, 2022

work page 2022
[2]

Abelianization of matrix orthogonal polynomials.International Math- ematics Research Notices, 2023(10):8544–8595, 2023

Marco Bertola. Abelianization of matrix orthogonal polynomials.International Math- ematics Research Notices, 2023(10):8544–8595, 2023

work page 2023
[3]

Critical measures on higher genus riemann surfaces.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 404:51–95, 2022

Marco Bertola, Alan Groot, and Arno BJ Kuijlaars. Critical measures on higher genus riemann surfaces.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 404:51–95, 2022

work page 2022
[4]

Matrix orthogonality in the plane versus scalar orthogonality in a riemann surface.Transactions of Mathematics and Its Applications, 5(2):Article, 2021

Christophe Charlier. Matrix orthogonality in the plane versus scalar orthogonality in a riemann surface.Transactions of Mathematics and Its Applications, 5(2):Article, 2021

work page 2021
[5]

Isomonodromic tau func- tions on a torus as fredholm determinants, and charged partitions.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 398(3):1029–1084, 2023

Fabrizio Del Monte, Harini Desiraju, and Pavlo Gavrylenko. Isomonodromic tau func- tions on a torus as fredholm determinants, and charged partitions.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 398(3):1029–1084, 2023

work page 2023
[7]

Nonlinear steepest descent on a torus: a case study of the landau–lifshitz equation.Nonlinearity, 38(4):045023, 2025

Harini Desiraju, Alexander Its, and Andrei Prokhorov. Nonlinear steepest descent on a torus: a case study of the landau–lifshitz equation.Nonlinearity, 38(4):045023, 2025

work page 2025
[8]

Orthogonal polynomials on planar cubic curves.Foundations of Computational Mathematics, 23(1):1–31, 2023

Marco Fasondini, Sheehan Olver, and Yuan Xu. Orthogonal polynomials on planar cubic curves.Foundations of Computational Mathematics, 23(1):1–31, 2023

work page 2023

Show all 16 references

[9]

The isomonodromy approach to matric models in 2d quantum gravity.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 147(2): 395–430, 1992

Athanassios S Fokas, AR Its, and A V Kitaev. The isomonodromy approach to matric models in 2d quantum gravity.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 147(2): 395–430, 1992. 22

1992
[10]

Forrester.Log-Gases and Random Matrices, volume 34 ofLondon Mathe- matical Society Monographs

Peter J. Forrester.Log-Gases and Random Matrices, volume 34 ofLondon Mathe- matical Society Monographs. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2010. ISBN 978-0-691-12829-0. doi: 10.1515/9781400835416

2010 doi
[11]

Matrix-valued orthogonal polynomials related to hexagon tilings.Journal of Approximation Theory, 270:105619, 2021

Alan Groot and Arno BJ Kuijlaars. Matrix-valued orthogonal polynomials related to hexagon tilings.Journal of Approximation Theory, 270:105619, 2021

2021
[12]

Cambridge University Press, 2022

Jean Bernard Lasserre, Edouard Pauwels, and Mihai Putinar.The Christoffel–Darboux Kernel for Data Analysis, volume 38. Cambridge University Press, 2022

2022
[13]

American Mathematical Soci- ety,, 1995

Rick Miranda.Algebraic curves and riemann surfaces. American Mathematical Soci- ety,, 1995

1995
[14]

G´ eza freud, orthogonal polynomials and christoffel functions

Paul Nevai. G´ eza freud, orthogonal polynomials and christoffel functions. a case study. Journal of approximation theory, 48(1):3–167, 1986

1986
[15]

The christoffel-darboux kernel.arXiv:0806.1528, 2008

Barry Simon. The christoffel-darboux kernel.arXiv:0806.1528, 2008

2008 arXiv
[16]

Springer International Publishing, 2020

Walter Van Assche.Orthogonal and Multiple Orthogonal Polynomials, Random Matri- ces, and Painlev´ e Equations, page 629–683. Springer International Publishing, 2020. 23

2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [6]

On a class of elliptic orthogonal polynomials and their integrability.Constructive Approximation, pages 1–44, 2024

Harini Desiraju, Tomas Lasic Latimer, and Pieter Roffelsen. On a class of elliptic orthogonal polynomials and their integrability.Constructive Approximation, pages 1–44, 2024

work page 2024

[2] [1]

Nonlinear steepest descent approach to orthogonality on elliptic curves

Marco Bertola. Nonlinear steepest descent approach to orthogonality on elliptic curves. Journal of Approximation Theory, 276:105717, 2022

work page 2022

[3] [2]

Abelianization of matrix orthogonal polynomials.International Math- ematics Research Notices, 2023(10):8544–8595, 2023

Marco Bertola. Abelianization of matrix orthogonal polynomials.International Math- ematics Research Notices, 2023(10):8544–8595, 2023

work page 2023

[4] [3]

Critical measures on higher genus riemann surfaces.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 404:51–95, 2022

Marco Bertola, Alan Groot, and Arno BJ Kuijlaars. Critical measures on higher genus riemann surfaces.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 404:51–95, 2022

work page 2022

[5] [4]

Matrix orthogonality in the plane versus scalar orthogonality in a riemann surface.Transactions of Mathematics and Its Applications, 5(2):Article, 2021

Christophe Charlier. Matrix orthogonality in the plane versus scalar orthogonality in a riemann surface.Transactions of Mathematics and Its Applications, 5(2):Article, 2021

work page 2021

[6] [5]

Isomonodromic tau func- tions on a torus as fredholm determinants, and charged partitions.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 398(3):1029–1084, 2023

Fabrizio Del Monte, Harini Desiraju, and Pavlo Gavrylenko. Isomonodromic tau func- tions on a torus as fredholm determinants, and charged partitions.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 398(3):1029–1084, 2023

work page 2023

[7] [7]

Nonlinear steepest descent on a torus: a case study of the landau–lifshitz equation.Nonlinearity, 38(4):045023, 2025

Harini Desiraju, Alexander Its, and Andrei Prokhorov. Nonlinear steepest descent on a torus: a case study of the landau–lifshitz equation.Nonlinearity, 38(4):045023, 2025

work page 2025

[8] [8]

Orthogonal polynomials on planar cubic curves.Foundations of Computational Mathematics, 23(1):1–31, 2023

Marco Fasondini, Sheehan Olver, and Yuan Xu. Orthogonal polynomials on planar cubic curves.Foundations of Computational Mathematics, 23(1):1–31, 2023

work page 2023