One thousand and one higher-order geometric flows of networks

Alessandra Pluda; Luca Benatti

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 17 references

One thousand and one higher-order geometric flows of networks

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves short-time existence and geometric uniqueness for higher-order curvature flows of networks — every m≥2 with admissible junction conditions — and a conditional long-time alternative.

desk verdict Solid short-time existence and a useful boundary-condition framework for higher-order network flows, but uniqueness up to reparametrization is not proved for general m and the displayed ξ-equation has a sign problem. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.13894 v1 pith:VF7MREWU submitted 2026-07-15 math.AP

Luca Benatti , Alessandra Pluda This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 53E4035K5235K5935A0135A02

keywords higher-ordergeometricflowsnetworksgradientlocalexistenceanduniquenesslong-timeWillmorefunctionalelasticflowmotionbycurvature

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 develops a general existence theory for a family of geometric flows on curves and networks: the L²-gradient flows of the energy ∫|∂_s^m γ|²/2 + ½ℓ(γ), for every integer m≥2. It proves that for any topology of the network and any admissible set of boundary conditions — built from topological conditions on junctions and higher-order geometric conditions on tangents and curvatures, each matched with a complementary higher-order Neumann condition — an admissible initial network has a short-time solution that is unique up to reparametrization and immediately becomes smooth. It further proves a long-time alternative: a maximal solution either exists forever or degenerates by some curve shrinking to zero length or by junction tangents aligning (the matrix A(ν) becoming singular). The unifying mechanism is the cancellation structure between each Dirichlet-type condition and its paired Neumann condition, which is what makes both the first variation and the kinetic-energy estimate tractable. This brings the previously special cases — length (m=1) and elastic/Willmore flows (m=2) — under one systematic framework for all orders.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are: (i) the energy E(γ)=∫_γ ½|∂_s^m γ|² dγ+½ℓ(γ) and its purely normal L²-gradient velocity V(γ); (ii) the admissible boundary-condition scheme pairing every imposed condition of order i with one of order 2m−1−i built from the orthogonal projection a⊥ of the coefficient matrix; (iii) the non-degeneracy matrix A(ν)=a†a+diag(ν)diag(ν)† with det A(ν)≠0 at junctions. Projection identities reduce the 2m−2 boundary parameters of the first variation to m−1 geometric ones, and the same orthogonality cancels boundary terms in d/dt∫V². Short-time existence: prescribe a tangential velocity so the linearization is parabolic and satisfies the Lopatinski–Shapiro compatibility con

What would settle it

For m=3 on a star network with a 3-junction, write out the auxiliary reparametrization system of Section 5.4 (displayed after (5.14)) and test whether the linearized operator satisfies the parabolic compatibility condition at the junction; if it fails, uniqueness up to reparametrization fails for m=3. Alternatively, numerically evolve the m=3 flow with preserved angles and search for a finite-time singularity while all curve lengths and det A(ν) stay bounded away from zero — such an event would disprove the long-time alternative.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For every m≥2, the L²-gradient flow of E(γ)=∫_γ ½|∂_s^m γ|² dγ+½ℓ(γ) is well-posed on networks whose boundary conditions belong to an admissible family: a topological condition with det A(ν)≠0 at junctions, higher-order Dirichlet conditions of orders 1…m−1, and paired Neumann conditions of complementary order via orthogonal projection. Every admissible initial network γ0∈W_p^{2m−2m/p} admits a short-time solution, unique up to reparametrization and smooth for t>0. A maximal solution either exists for all time or degenerates: some length →0 or det A(ν)→0. The proof fixes a tangential velocity to make the linearization parabolic, verifies the compatibility condition, and applies the contractio

Load-bearing premise

The central claim collapses if the auxiliary reparametrization system derived in Section 5.4 (after (5.14)) is not well-posed for some m≥3: the proof asserts solvability by analogy with the m=2 case, with details omitted, so uniqueness up to reparametrization rests on that unproved analogue (the long-time result, by contrast, is explicitly conditional on non-degeneracy).

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Every specific higher-order network flow covered by the paper (e.g., the Willmore/elastic flow with natural or preserved-angle conditions, spelled out in Section 7) inherits the same short-time existence, geometric uniqueness, instant smoothing, and the same two-scenario long-time alternative.
For the preserved-angle Willmore flow, the junction-alignment scenario is excluded, so the only possible finite-time singularity is a curve shrinking to zero length.
The non-degeneracy condition for long-time existence is purely topological (lengths positive and det A(ν) bounded away from 0); no condition on higher derivatives at junctions is needed, for any m.
Starting data need only belong to W_p^{2m−2m/p}; the parabolic smoothing mechanism makes the solution smooth for all positive times, so the flow can be analysed with classical tools after an arbitrarily small time.

Reading between the lines

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

The Dirichlet–Neumann pairing is a template for constructing well-posed boundary conditions for any 2m-th order geometric flow: choose any independent set of geometric constraints of order <m and impose their orthogonal complements at the remaining orders; testing this template on sixth- and eighth-order flows beyond the paper's examples would show whether the mechanism is universal.
The uniqueness step is the main place where the paper currently leans on an analogous argument for m=2: if the auxiliary reparametrization system (Section 5.4) can be shown to satisfy the same compatibility condition for all m≥3, the results extend verbatim to networks with loops and multi-junctions; if not, uniqueness for m≥3 would need a different argument.
The long-time alternative suggests a possible sharpness test: construct a family of networks where det A(ν)→0 while all lengths stay positive and watch whether the flow develops a curvature singularity at the junction; if it does, condition (2) of Theorem 6.14 is geometrically necessary rather than merely technical.

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

This paper deserves a serious referee, but not as it stands. The short-time existence result for arbitrary order m in a general class of boundary conditions is a genuine advance, and the systematic Dirichlet–Neumann coupling is carefully developed. The first variation computations and the Lopatinski verification for the linearized problem look solid, and the conditional long-time result is honestly stated and plausible.

The load-bearing soft spot is uniqueness up to reparametrization. Theorem 1.1 advertises geometric uniqueness, but the proof in Section 5.4 derives a PDE for the reparametrization ξ and then says the details are omitted, referring to [GMP20] and [Men20] for the m=2 case only. The well-posedness of the ξ-system for general m is not established: no parabolicity check, no Lopatinski analysis, no compatibility verification, and no proof of the C1 diffeomorphism property. Proposition 5.23 and Theorem 1.1 both rest on this gap, so it is not a minor omission.

There is also a concrete sign issue. The displayed ξ-equation has principal part ∂tξ = (-1)^m ∂^{2m}_x ξ/|∂xγ|^{2m} + …, which for m=2 is a backward fourth-order parabolic equation. The sign in (5.1) is (-1)^{m+1}, but the line immediately after uses (-1)^m, so the derivation cannot be checked as printed. This may be a typo, but it makes the claim that the system has “the same structure as the main one” unsafe. The m=2 references do not cover m≥3, and the general admissible condition classes of Section 4.5 are not analyzed for this auxiliary problem.

Instantaneous smoothing (Theorem 5.24) is also delegated rather than proved, though this is a smaller gap than uniqueness.

My recommendation: send it to peer review, but require the authors to either write out the ξ-system analysis for general m or explicitly state uniqueness as an assumption, and to fix the sign inconsistency. The existence framework alone is worth publishing, but not the headline theorem as written.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a general framework for short-time existence, uniqueness up to reparametrization, and conditional long-time existence for L^2-gradient flows of E_m(γ)=1/2∫|∂_s^m γ|^2 ds + length on planar networks, for arbitrary m≥2 and a class of 'admissible' junction/endpoint conditions. The strategy is the usual one: choose a tangential velocity (DeTurck trick) to obtain a 2m-order parabolic system, linearize, invoke Solonnikov theory, then run a fixed-point argument; uniqueness is reduced to an auxiliary scalar parabolic problem for the reparametrization; long-time existence is obtained by energy/monotonicity estimates under a uniform non-degeneracy condition.

Significance. If the proof were complete, this would be a substantial contribution: it unifies and extends the m=2 elastic-flow results of Garcke–Menzel–Pluda and Dall'Acqua–Lin–Pozzi to arbitrary order, and provides a systematic Dirichlet–Neumann boundary-condition calculus for higher-order geometric flows of networks. The first-variation computations and the algebraic boundary-condition framework are detailed and appear original. No parameters are fitted and the main statements are falsifiable. The paper also contains an explicit new long-time criterion. However, several load-bearing steps are presently assertions rather than proofs.

major comments (4)

[Section 5.4, proof of Theorem 5.21] The uniqueness proof is not carried out. After deriving the ξ-PDE the text states that 'following the steps of that argument' one obtains a W_p^{1,2m} solution and a C^1 diffeomorphism, and refers to [GMP20, Theorem 5.4] and [Men20, Theorem 4.60] for m=2. For general m and the admissible classes of Section 4.5 this is exactly the missing proof: no verification of parabolicity, Lopatinski condition, compatibility, or the diffeomorphism property is given. Theorem 1.1 and Proposition 5.23 both depend on this uniqueness statement.
[Section 5.4, displayed ξ-system after (5.14)] As printed the highest-order coefficient is (-1)^m ∂_x^{2m}ξ/|∂_xγ|^{2m}. With the DeTurck choice (5.1) and the chain rule (5.14), the coefficient should be (-1)^{m+1}; for m=2 the printed equation reads ∂_tξ = +a∂_x^4ξ + ..., which is backward parabolic. In addition the boundary conditions ∂_x^jξ(t,0/1)=p^j(γ,γ̃) depend on ξ nonlinearly through γ=γ̃(ξ); their linearization and Lopatinski condition are not analyzed for m≥3. The assertion that the system 'has the same structure' is therefore not checkable as written.
[Lemma 5.24 (smoothness)] The proof is omitted; the text says it is standard and refers to [Göß19, Chapter 6.6] and [GMP23, Section 4] for the fully nonlinear angle condition. These references treat m=2 or second-order motion by curvature, not arbitrary m≥2 with the general admissible conditions of Definition 4.22. Since Theorem 1.1 includes the statement 'smooth for all t>0', this is a load-bearing gap.
[Equation after (5.1)] The identity ∂_tγ_i = V_iν_i + T_iτ_i = (-1)^m |∂_xγ_i|^{-2m}∂_x^{2m}γ_i + p^{2m-1}(γ) has the opposite sign to what follows from the definition of T_i in (5.1); with (5.1) the coefficient is (-1)^{m+1}. The linearized system (5.6) is written with (-1)^m, so either (5.1) or the displayed evolution equation must be changed. This is a simple sign typo, but it affects the derivation of the special flow and should be corrected.

minor comments (5)

[Throughout] Many cross-references use 'Theorem' where the target is a Lemma, Proposition, or Corollary: e.g., Remarks 4.6 and 4.9 refer to 'Theorem 4.5/4.6'; Section 6 repeatedly cites 'Theorem 6.9', 'Theorem 6.11', etc. for lemmas. Please correct.
[Theorem 5.8] Typo 'funtions' should be 'functions'. Also the proof cites '[Sol67, Theorem 5.4]' but the text earlier refers to '[Sol67, Theorem 4.9]'; the reference should be consistent and verified.
[Section 5.4, proof of Theorem 5.21] In the final sentence, the index set 'i∈{1,...,n}' should likely be 'i∈{1,...,d}', since the network has d curves.
[Definition 4.15] The displayed formula for the maximal order condition appears truncated; the expression for B_{(2m-1)j}(γ,ψ) is incomplete. Please display it fully.
[Lemma 5.15] The proof begins 'The first equality follows...' but the statement is an inequality; this is a wording slip.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular reduction: existence and long-time arguments are self-contained; Section 5.4's uniqueness proof is an omitted-proof gap, not a circularity.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not tautological. The first variation (Prop. 4.3) is computed from Em, and the admissible boundary conditions (Defs. 4.13, 4.16, 4.20) are algebraic classes whose purpose is to make the boundary terms vanish (Thm. 4.24); this is the variational definition of gradient flow rather than a prediction drawn from its inputs. Short-time existence is independent: the special flow is formed by an explicit De Turck tangential velocity, linearized to (5.6), verified to satisfy Solonnikov parabolicity, the Lopatinski-Shapiro condition (Lem. 5.7) and the initial compatibility conditions, and then solved by a contraction mapping (Thms. 5.8, 5.18, 5.19). No fitted parameter or data-dependent constant is later called a prediction. The long-time result (Thm. 6.14) is conditional and obtained from an energy estimate where boundary cancellations follow from the preservation of the same boundary conditions; there is no circular equivalence between hypothesis and conclusion. The only load-bearing gap is Section 5.4: geometric uniqueness for m≥3 is asserted by saying the auxiliary xi-system 'has the same structure as the main one' and 'following the steps of that argument,' with details omitted and only the m=2 cases [GMP20, Thm. 5.4] and [Men20, Thm. 4.60] cited; the displayed sign and boundary Lopatinski verification for m≥3 are not given. Similarly, smoothing of the fully nonlinear angle condition leans on [Goess19, GMP23]. These are omitted-proof and correctness risks, not circular reductions: no equation in the paper is equal to its own input by construction, and the cited results are prior technical tools rather than a renaming or a fitted quantity. Accordingly the circularity score is 0.

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

The paper introduces no fitted constants and no new physical or mathematical entities in the graviton sense. Its assumptions are standard analytic estimates plus the paper's own admissible-boundary-condition framework, which is a defined mathematical structure rather than an empirically loaded postulate. The main external reliance is on Solonnikov's theory and on prior smoothing/reparametrization results, some from the same group.

assumptions (6)

standard math Solonnikov's L_p theory for parabolic systems with coupled boundary conditions
Used as the black-box existence theorem for the linearized system (Section 5.2, Theorem 5.8).
standard math Sobolev embedding and interpolation results from Denk–Saal–Seiler, Triebel, Simon
Used to characterize initial-data spaces and uniform-in-time embeddings (Section 3).
standard math Gagliardo–Nirenberg interpolation inequalities
Used for polynomial estimates in the long-time energy argument (Lemmas 6.10, 6.11).
standard math Angenent's parameter trick and quasilinear parabolic smoothing theory
Invoked for Lemma 5.24 and for the reparametrization uniqueness step, with details referred to [Ang90], [Lun95], [PS16], [Göß19], [GMP23].
domain assumption Admissibility of boundary conditions: det A(ν) ≠ 0, well-ordering, normalization, homogeneity
Defines the class C(B) of networks for which the theorems are stated (Definitions 4.13, 4.16, 4.22).
domain assumption Uniform non-degeneracy for long-time existence
The long-time dichotomy requires lengths bounded away from zero and det A(ν_t) bounded away from zero uniformly (Definition 6.7, Theorem 6.14).

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of One thousand and one higher-order geometric flows of networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VF7MREWU

@misc{pith2026260713894,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: One thousand and one higher-order geometric flows of networks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VF7MREWU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.13894}
}

abstract

We show short-time existence and uniqueness up to reparametrization for a large class of higher-order geometric flows of curves and networks obtained as $L^2$-gradient flow of higher-order functionals involving derivatives of the curvature. Additionally, we prove a long-time existence result via energy methods.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

[1]

Short time existence for the curve diffusion flow with a contact angle

[AB19] H. Abels and J. Butz. “Short time existence for the curve diffusion flow with a contact angle”. In:J. Differential Equations268.1 (2019), pp. 318–352.issn: 0022- 0396.doi:10.1016/j.jde.2019.08.018.url:https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jde.2019.08.018. [AB20] H. Abels and J. Butz. “A blow–up criterion for the curve diffusion flow with a contact angle”. In:...

arXiv 2019
[2]

Evolution of closed curves by length– constrained curve diffusion

MATRIX Book Ser. Springer, Cham, 2019, pp. 213–221. [MWW19b] J. McCoy, G. Wheeler, and Y. Wu. “Evolution of closed curves by length– constrained curve diffusion”. In:Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.147.8 (2019), pp. 3493– 3506.issn: 0002-9939.doi:10.1090/proc/14473.url:https://doi.org/10. 1090/proc/14473. [MW26] J. McCoy and G. Wheeler.On the generalised ideal flow...

arXiv 2019
[5]

Curve straightening and a minimax argument for closed elastic curves

S´ emin. Congr. Soc. Math. France, Paris, 1996, pp. 403–436. [LS85] J. Langer and D. A. Singer. “Curve straightening and a minimax argument for closed elastic curves”. English. In:Topology24 (1985), pp. 75–88.issn: 0040-9383. doi:10.1016/0040-9383(85)90046-1. [Lan25] L. Langer. “Dynamics of elastic wires: preserving area without nonlocality”. Eng- lish. I...

work page doi:10.1016/0040-9383(85)90046-1 1996
[10]

Evolving inextensible and elastic curves with clamped ends under the second–order evolution equation inR 2

REFERENCES 45 [LL18] C.-C. Lin and Y.-K. Lue. “Evolving inextensible and elastic curves with clamped ends under the second–order evolution equation inR 2”. In:Geom. Flows3.1 (2018), pp. 14–18.doi:10.1515/geofl-2018-0002.url:https://doi.org/10. 1515/geofl-2018-0002. [LLS15] C.-C. Lin, Y.-K. Lue, and H. R. Schwetlick. “The second–orderL 2–flow of inex- tens...

work page doi:10.1515/geofl-2018-0002.url:https://doi.org/10 2018
[12]

The dynamics of elastic closed curves under uniform high pressure

[Oka08] S. Okabe. “The dynamics of elastic closed curves under uniform high pressure”. English. In:Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ.33.4 (2008), pp. 493–521.issn: 0944- 2669.doi:10.1007/s00526-008-0179-0. [Pol96] A. Polden. “Curves and Surfaces of Least Total Curvature and Fourth-Order Flows”. PhD thesis. Universit¨ at T¨ ubingen,

work page doi:10.1007/s00526-008-0179-0 2008
[17]

L 2 flow of curve straightening in the plane

North-Holland Mathematical Library. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam- New York, 1978, p. 528.isbn: 0-7204-0710-9. [Wen93] Y. Wen. “L 2 flow of curve straightening in the plane”. In:Duke Math. J.70.3 (1993), pp. 683–698.issn: 0012-7094. [Wen95] Y. Wen. “Curve straightening flow deforms closed plane curves with nonzero ro- tation number to circles”. ...

arXiv 1978
[18]

A sixth order curvature flow of plane curves with boundary conditions

issn: 0944-2669.doi:10.1007/s00526-020-01916-0. [MWW19a] J. McCoy, G. Wheeler, and Y. Wu. “A sixth order curvature flow of plane curves with boundary conditions”. In:2017 MATRIX annals. Vol

work page doi:10.1007/s00526-020-01916-0 2017
[41]

Sobolev, Besov and Nikolskii fractional spaces: imbeddings and com- parisons for vector valued spaces on an interval

issn: 1424-3199.doi:10.1007/s00028-024-00988-1. [Sim90] J. Simon. “Sobolev, Besov and Nikolskii fractional spaces: imbeddings and com- parisons for vector valued spaces on an interval”. In:Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) 157 (1990), pp. 117–148.issn: 0003-4622.doi:10.1007/BF01765315.url:https: //doi.org/10.1007/BF01765315. [Sol67] V. A. Solonnikov.Boundary value...

work page doi:10.1007/s00028-024-00988-1 1990

Show all 17 references

[105]

Existence and convergence of the length-preserving elas- tic flow of clamped curves

Monographs in Mathematics. Birkh¨ auser/Springer, [Cham], 2016, pp. xix+609.isbn: 978-3-319-27697-7.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-27698-4. url:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27698-4. [RS24] F. Rupp and A. Spener. “Existence and convergence of the length-preserving elas- tic flow of...

2016 doi
[154]

The heat equation shrinks embedded plane curves to round points

[Gra87] M. A. Grayson. “The heat equation shrinks embedded plane curves to round points”. In:J. Differential Geom.26 (1987), pp. 285–314. [KM24] T. Kemmochi and T. Miura. “Migrating elastic flows”. English. In:J. Math. Pures Appl. (9)185 (2024), pp. 47–62.issn: 0021-7824.doi:1...

1987 doi
[1952]

Evolution of open elastic curves inR n subject to fixed length and natural boundary conditions

[DLP14] A. Dall’Acqua, C.-C. Lin, and P. Pozzi. “Evolution of open elastic curves inR n subject to fixed length and natural boundary conditions”. In:Analysis (Berlin) 34.2 (2014), pp. 209–222.issn: 0174-4747.doi:10.1515/anly-2014-1249.url: https://doi.org/10.1515/anly-2014-124...

2014
[1967]

Short time existence for the elastic flow of clamped curves

[Spe17] A. Spener. “Short time existence for the elastic flow of clamped curves”. In:Math. Nachr.290.13 (2017), pp. 2052–2077.issn: 0025-584X.doi:10.1002/mana.2016 00304.url:https://doi.org/10.1002/mana.201600304. [Tri78] H. Triebel.Interpolation theory, function spaces, diffe...

2017 doi
[1995]

Nonlinear parabolic equations and systems

[Lun04] A. Lunardi. “Nonlinear parabolic equations and systems”. In:Evolutionary equa- tions. Vol. I. Handb. Differ. Equ. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 2004, pp. 385–436. [Man+24] C. Mantegazza, M. Novaga, A. Pluda, and F. Schulze. “Evolution of networks with multiple junctions”. ...

2004
[1996]

Convergence of elastic flows of curves into manifolds

[Poz22] M. Pozzetta. “Convergence of elastic flows of curves into manifolds”. English. In:Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl., Ser. A, Theory Methods214 (2022). Id/No 112581, p. 53.issn: 0362-546X.doi:10.1016/j.na.2021.112581. [PS16] J. Pr¨ uss and G. Simonett.Moving interfa...

2022
[2019]

Existence and uniqueness of the motion by curvature of regular networks

[GMP23] M. G¨ oßwein, J. Menzel, and A. Pluda. “Existence and uniqueness of the motion by curvature of regular networks”. In:Interfaces Free Bound.25.1 (2023), pp. 109–

2023
[2020]

Migrating elastic flows II

[Miu25] T. Miura. “Migrating elastic flows II”. English. In:Int. Math. Res. Not.2025.11 (2025). Id/No rnaf148, p. 08.issn: 1073-7928.doi:10.1093/imrn/rnaf148. [MMR25] T. Miura, M. M¨ uller, and F. Rupp. “Optimal thresholds for preserving embed- dedness of elastic flows”. Engli...

2025 arXiv
[5926]

The Lojasiewicz-Simon inequality for the elastic flow

[MP21] C. Mantegazza and M. Pozzetta. “The Lojasiewicz-Simon inequality for the elastic flow”. English. In:Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ.60.1 (2021). Id/No 56, p

2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Short time existence for the curve diffusion flow with a contact angle

[AB19] H. Abels and J. Butz. “Short time existence for the curve diffusion flow with a contact angle”. In:J. Differential Equations268.1 (2019), pp. 318–352.issn: 0022- 0396.doi:10.1016/j.jde.2019.08.018.url:https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jde.2019.08.018. [AB20] H. Abels and J. Butz. “A blow–up criterion for the curve diffusion flow with a contact angle”. In:...

arXiv 2019

[2] [2]

Evolution of closed curves by length– constrained curve diffusion

MATRIX Book Ser. Springer, Cham, 2019, pp. 213–221. [MWW19b] J. McCoy, G. Wheeler, and Y. Wu. “Evolution of closed curves by length– constrained curve diffusion”. In:Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.147.8 (2019), pp. 3493– 3506.issn: 0002-9939.doi:10.1090/proc/14473.url:https://doi.org/10. 1090/proc/14473. [MW26] J. McCoy and G. Wheeler.On the generalised ideal flow...

arXiv 2019

[3] [5]

Curve straightening and a minimax argument for closed elastic curves

S´ emin. Congr. Soc. Math. France, Paris, 1996, pp. 403–436. [LS85] J. Langer and D. A. Singer. “Curve straightening and a minimax argument for closed elastic curves”. English. In:Topology24 (1985), pp. 75–88.issn: 0040-9383. doi:10.1016/0040-9383(85)90046-1. [Lan25] L. Langer. “Dynamics of elastic wires: preserving area without nonlocality”. Eng- lish. I...

work page doi:10.1016/0040-9383(85)90046-1 1996

[4] [10]

Evolving inextensible and elastic curves with clamped ends under the second–order evolution equation inR 2

REFERENCES 45 [LL18] C.-C. Lin and Y.-K. Lue. “Evolving inextensible and elastic curves with clamped ends under the second–order evolution equation inR 2”. In:Geom. Flows3.1 (2018), pp. 14–18.doi:10.1515/geofl-2018-0002.url:https://doi.org/10. 1515/geofl-2018-0002. [LLS15] C.-C. Lin, Y.-K. Lue, and H. R. Schwetlick. “The second–orderL 2–flow of inex- tens...

work page doi:10.1515/geofl-2018-0002.url:https://doi.org/10 2018

[5] [12]

The dynamics of elastic closed curves under uniform high pressure

[Oka08] S. Okabe. “The dynamics of elastic closed curves under uniform high pressure”. English. In:Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ.33.4 (2008), pp. 493–521.issn: 0944- 2669.doi:10.1007/s00526-008-0179-0. [Pol96] A. Polden. “Curves and Surfaces of Least Total Curvature and Fourth-Order Flows”. PhD thesis. Universit¨ at T¨ ubingen,

work page doi:10.1007/s00526-008-0179-0 2008

[6] [17]

L 2 flow of curve straightening in the plane

North-Holland Mathematical Library. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam- New York, 1978, p. 528.isbn: 0-7204-0710-9. [Wen93] Y. Wen. “L 2 flow of curve straightening in the plane”. In:Duke Math. J.70.3 (1993), pp. 683–698.issn: 0012-7094. [Wen95] Y. Wen. “Curve straightening flow deforms closed plane curves with nonzero ro- tation number to circles”. ...

arXiv 1978

[7] [18]

A sixth order curvature flow of plane curves with boundary conditions

issn: 0944-2669.doi:10.1007/s00526-020-01916-0. [MWW19a] J. McCoy, G. Wheeler, and Y. Wu. “A sixth order curvature flow of plane curves with boundary conditions”. In:2017 MATRIX annals. Vol

work page doi:10.1007/s00526-020-01916-0 2017

[8] [41]

Sobolev, Besov and Nikolskii fractional spaces: imbeddings and com- parisons for vector valued spaces on an interval

issn: 1424-3199.doi:10.1007/s00028-024-00988-1. [Sim90] J. Simon. “Sobolev, Besov and Nikolskii fractional spaces: imbeddings and com- parisons for vector valued spaces on an interval”. In:Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) 157 (1990), pp. 117–148.issn: 0003-4622.doi:10.1007/BF01765315.url:https: //doi.org/10.1007/BF01765315. [Sol67] V. A. Solonnikov.Boundary value...

work page doi:10.1007/s00028-024-00988-1 1990