Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 42 references

Inverse scattering without phase: Carleman convexification and phase retrieval via the Wentzel--Kramers--Brillouin approximation

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Phaseless 3D scattering solved by WKB phase recovery, Carleman convexification

desk verdict A plausible three-stage pipeline for 3D phaseless inverse scattering, but the 'global convergence' is proven for an approximate system with zero-filled boundary data, not the original phaseless problem. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.21699 v1 pith:Y3EEFTUG submitted 2025-06-26 math.NA cs.NA

Thuy T. Le , Phuong M. Nguyen , Loc H. Nguyen This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.NAcs.NA MSC 35R3035J2565N2135P2578A46
keywords phaselessinversescatteringCarlemanconvexificationWKBapproximationphaseretrievalHelmholtzequationfrequencydimensionreductionglobalconvergencedielectricconstantreconstruction
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 claims a fully numerical route to reconstruct a 3D dielectric profile from intensity-only backscattered data of a single point source. The authors argue that by first recovering the lost phase through a WKB-informed optimization, then collapsing the frequency dimension with a Fourier expansion, and finally solving the resulting elliptic Cauchy system by Carleman-weighted least squares, one obtains a cost functional that is strictly convex and whose global minimizer approximates the true coefficient. Their stated result is that gradient descent on that functional converges globally, and their numerical tests on noisy synthetic data recover both the location and the contrast of buried scatterers. The reason to care is that phaseless inverse scattering is classically nonlinear and severely ill-posed, and a provably convergent, linearization-free method would make intensity-only imaging practical in settings where phase cannot be measured.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the Carleman convexification functional J_{λ,ε}(φ) = Σ_m [∫_Ω $e^{{2λ(z-r)^2}}$ |Σ_n s_{mn} Δφ_n + Σ_{n,l} a_{mnl} ∇φ_n·∇φ_l + Σ_n b_{mn}·∇φ_n|^2 dx + boundary penalty terms on Γ and ∂Ω\Γ + ε ||φ_m||^2_{H^s(Ω)}], built from the Fourier-truncated logarithmic transform of the wave field. Its job is to convert a non-convex, ill-posed inverse scattering problem into a strictly convex one: the Carleman weight $e^{{2λ(z-r)^2}}$, the boundary data terms, and the ε-regularization together make the second derivative of J_{λ,ε} uniformly positive on the ball B(0,M), so that the unique global minimizer can be found by plain gradient descent. The polynomial-exponential basis {Ψ_n} matters because its first element is not constant, so the principal term Δv_1 survives in the elliptic system, which Legendre or trigonometric bases would lose.

What would settle it

Run the algorithm on synthetic data in which the scattered wave on ∂Ω\Γ is deliberately made non-negligible (for example, by placing a strong scatterer close to the top face or by moving the source closer to the side), then compare the reconstructed c(x) against the known true profile; a large contrast error concentrated near the top and side regions would show that the zero-boundary approximation, rather than the Carleman convexification step, is the limiting factor.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central assertion is that phaseless inverse scattering from a single point source can be turned into a strictly convex optimization problem through a three-stage pipeline: (i) reconstruct the complex wave field on a bottom measurement layer by minimizing the functional J_k(v) = ||Δv + $k^{2}$ v||^2 + |||v|^2 - $f^{2}$||^2, initialized with the WKB travel-time guess $u^{{(0)}}$ = f $e^{{ik|x-x0|}}$; (ii) transform u into the logarithmic variable v = $k^{{-2}}$ log(u/u_inc), expand v in the polynomial-exponential basis {Ψ_n} of $L^{2}$(k̲,k̄), truncate at N, and thereby replace the original inverse problem by an elliptic system with Cauchy data on the bottom face and zero data on the remaining faces; and (iii) minimize the Carleman-weighted functional J_{λ,ε} whose weights $e^{{2λ(z-r)^2}}$ enforce strict convexity inside a bounded admissible ball. The Carleman convexification theorem then guarantees that J_{λ,ε} has a unique global minimizer, that gradient descent converges to it from any point in the ball, and that the minimizer approximates the true solution with error O(δ + √ε), where δ is the data noise level. Numerical examples with 10% noise show reconstruction of one and two inclusions with contrast errors around 1.6 to 17 percent, which the authors present as evidence of robustness under single-sided, magnitude-only measurements.

Load-bearing premise

The scattered wave is assumed to be negligible on the top and side faces of the computational cube, so the boundary data there are set to zero; if the scattered field on those unmeasured faces is not small, the reconstruction carries a systematic error that the paper's error estimate does not cover.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, intensity-only backscattering data from a single point source suffice to recover both the geometry and the dielectric contrast of buried objects, without any linearization step.
  • The O(δ + √ε) error estimate means the reconstruction error can be driven toward the data noise level by sending the regularization parameter ε to zero, making the method a stable regularization rather than a heuristic fit.
  • Because gradient descent converges globally on the Carleman-weighted functional, the method needs no close initial guess: the travel-time WKB guess merely informs the phase retrieval step, and the convexification step still succeeds from a simplified starting point generated by dropping the nonlinear term.
  • The framework transfers directly to other coefficient inverse problems that can be rewritten as elliptic systems with Cauchy data, as the authors explicitly intend for Helmholtz-type problems in higher regularity settings.
  • A practical consequence is that high-frequency imaging systems, where phase is hard or impossible to measure, can rely on magnitude-only sensors placed on a single side of the target domain.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The neglected boundary approximation, in which the scattered wave is set to zero on the unmeasured top and side faces of Ω, is the most likely source of systematic error in practice; a testable extension would be to replace v_m = 0 on ∂Ω\Γ by a Robin-type or extrapolated boundary condition and measure the change in reconstruction error as the source distance d grows.
  • The method's reliance on multi-frequency data over a finite band [π, 2π] with N = 7 Fourier modes suggests an implicit low-frequency regularization; one could test whether the same pipeline works with a narrower band or with fewer frequencies, which would reveal how much of the contrast recovery comes from the phase retrieval versus the convexification step.
  • The WKB phase retrieval step and the Fourier truncation are both justified at high frequency, yet the synthetic tests use modest frequencies (k around π to 2π); a natural stress test is to run the same algorithm at lower wave numbers to see where the eikonal phase assumption breaks down in terms of contrast error.
  • The authors position this as a stepping stone toward the full Maxwell system; a direct extension would apply the same logarithmic and Carleman machinery to vector-valued fields, although the boundary zero-filling approximation would be harder to justify there because of polarization coupling.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a three-stage numerical method for a three-dimensional phaseless inverse scattering problem governed by the Helmholtz equation with multi-frequency, single-point-source data. Stage one retrieves the phase by minimizing a weighted least-squares functional J_k (Eq. 2.10) initialized from a WKB travel-time ansatz. Stage two applies a logarithmic transform and a truncated Fourier expansion in the frequency variable to convert the phased inverse problem into a system of elliptic PDEs with Cauchy boundary data on the bottom face and zero boundary data on the remaining faces (Eqs. 3.16 and 4.2). Stage three minimizes a Carleman-weighted convexified functional J_{\lambda,\epsilon} (Eq. 4.4) via gradient descent; Theorem 4.1 states strict convexity and geometric convergence to the unique minimizer, and Eq. (4.10) bounds that minimizer against the solution of the approximate boundary value problem (4.8). Numerical tests on three synthetic scatterers with 10% noise show reconstructions of location and contrast. The central theoretical claim of global convergence is established only for the approximate model (4.8), not for the original phaseless problem (Problem 2.1), because the zero boundary data on unmeasured faces and the uncontrolled phase-retrieval step introduce model errors that are not quantified in the convergence estimate.

Significance. If the claimed global convergence held for the full phaseless problem, this would be a substantial contribution to a hard and practically relevant inverse problem. The manuscript is honest about two key approximations: Remark 3.3 concedes that the zero data complementation on unmeasured faces is "not rigorous but rather an approximation," and Remark 3.4 describes the truncation and data supplementation as deliberate regularization. The Carleman convexification machinery is largely adapted from the authors' prior work (e.g., refs. 13-15, 32, 33), with Theorem 4.1 stated without a full proof. The genuinely new ingredients are the integration of WKB-based phase retrieval with the convexification pipeline and the numerical demonstration. The significance is therefore moderate: the paper offers a plausible and well-motivated heuristic pipeline, but its advertised global-convergence theorem currently applies to an approximating model whose distance from the original phaseless problem is unquantified.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 6; Theorem 4.1; Eq. (4.10)] The concluding claim that gradient descent "globally converge[s] to the true solution" overstates what is proven. Theorem 4.1 and estimate (4.10) connect the minimizer of J_{\lambda,\epsilon} to v*, the exact solution of the approximate system (4.8), which enforces v_m = 0 on \partial\Omega\setminus\Gamma via (3.15). Remark 3.3 explicitly labels this supplementation an approximation. Since the boundary term on \partial\Omega\setminus\Gamma in (4.4) carries a weight \lambda^4, minimizing the functional cannot correct for a nonzero physical scattered field on those faces. The error estimate (4.10) contains no term for this model error, so it does not support convergence to a solution of Problem 2.1. Please either quantify the model error (for example, by bounding the difference between v* and the true v in terms of the true boundary values on \partial\Omega\setminus\Gamma) or restrict the convergence claim to the approximate model (4.8).
  2. [Section 2; Eq. (2.10); Section 5.1] The phase-retrieval step is non-convex and is solved by fminunc with no proof or error bound. The functional J_k contains a quadratic term in the Laplacian and a quartic term in |v|; the paper states only that among local minimizers the one closest to the WKB initial guess u^(0) is selected. No theorem guarantees that this minimizer approximates the true wave field, nor is any quantitative error bound provided for the reconstructed phase. Because the Cauchy data g_m, h_m in (3.13)-(3.14) are computed from this phase-retrieval output, a failure of phase retrieval would invalidate the entire pipeline. At minimum, the manuscript should include a numerical study reporting quantitative phase-recovery errors against the ground truth, and ideally an error estimate for J_k under the stated WKB assumptions.
  3. [Section 4; Eq. (4.9)] The noise model in (4.9) does not match the actual algorithmic pipeline. The bound compares g_m, h_m to noiseless data g*_m, h*_m of the approximate problem (4.8), but the numerical g_m and h_m are derived from the phase-retrieval minimization, whose error is uncontrolled and not representable as measurement noise of size \delta in H^1(\Gamma) \times L^2(\Omega). The second norm in (4.9) is written as L^2(\Omega) while h_m is defined on \Gamma, which appears to be a typo. Please clarify the noise model and state explicitly whether the phase-retrieval error is included in \delta; if it is not, the estimate (4.10) cannot be used as an end-to-end accuracy certificate.
  4. [Section 5.3] The numerical validation is too narrow to support the claimed robustness. There are only three test cases, all with inclusions at depth z = -0.65 and all with slab-like geometry; the key parameters N = 7, \lambda = 1.1, and \epsilon = 10^{-5.75} are tuned on Test 1 with no sensitivity study. No quantitative error metric is reported for the phase-retrieval step (e.g., relative L^2 errors in Re u and Im u), and no comparison with a baseline method is given. In particular, the load-bearing assumption of zero data on \partial\Omega\setminus\Gamma is not tested; please compute the true scattered-field magnitude on \partial\Omega\setminus\Gamma for the synthetic examples and show that it is small relative to the measurements on \Gamma_L, or otherwise quantify the impact of this approximation.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The word "servere" should be "severe."
  2. [Lemma 4.1, Eq. (4.5)] The integrand is written as "Z_\Omega e^{2\lambda(z-r)^2} |\Delta\phi|^2, dx"; the stray comma before "dx" should be removed.
  3. [Algorithm 1, Step 3] The line "Choose Carleman parameters x0, \beta, and \lambda" introduces \beta without any prior or later definition, and x0 is already the source location fixed in Section 2. Please clarify the intended parameters.
  4. [Algorithm 1, Step 6] The reconstruction formula for c^{comp} contains "dxd\theta" in the integrand, but the integration variable is the wave number k; the expression should be consistent with \frac{1}{k - \underline{k}} \int_{\underline{k}}^{\overline{k}} \Re e[\ldots] \, dx\, dk.
  5. [Section 4, after Eq. (4.6)] The proof of Theorem 4.1 invokes a set H in the convexity inequality (4.6), but H is never defined in the manuscript. Presumably H = B(0,M); please define it explicitly.
  6. [Section 5.3.2] In Test 2 the relative errors of the two inclusions are 1.61% and 16.78%, respectively; the large asymmetry between two similarly shaped inclusions of contrast 5 and 4.5 is not discussed. A brief comment on this variability would improve the presentation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the pipeline's derivations are self-contained, and its acknowledged approximations and self-citations do not reduce any prediction to its inputs.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain: the phase-retrieval step (2.9)-(2.10) uses the measured intensity f only as data and as an initialization; the recovered u is the minimizer of a Helmholtz-residual-plus-intensity functional, so the Cauchy data (3.13)-(3.14) are not forced to equal the input by construction. The logarithmic change of variables and the Fourier-transformed elliptic system (3.1)-(3.12), (3.16) are algebraic consequences of the Helmholtz equation, and the final recovery of c from v is the same algebraic identity (3.4)/(Step 6 of Algorithm 1). The one genuinely unmeasured input is v_m=0 on ∂Ω\Γ, which is explicitly acknowledged as "not rigorous but rather an approximation" (Remark 3.3) and as a deliberate regularization (Remark 3.4); this is a model-error/overclaim issue, not a circular reduction, because (4.10) bounds only data noise and ϵ relative to the zero-boundary solution v* of (4.8) and contains no term for the complementation error. Theorem 4.1 rests on cited published theorems ([32, Theorem 4.1], [33, Theorem 2], [15, Theorem 5.1], and [3]); these are parameter-free mathematical statements with distinct assumptions, so the self-citations are not load-bearing circularity by the standard for independent support. Hyperparameters N, λ, ϵ are tuned on Test 1 and then reused, but the reported errors are measured against independently simulated ground-truth c, so this is ordinary parameter selection rather than a fitted quantity relabeled as a prediction. No equation in the paper is equivalent to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on several domain assumptions: the WKB phase ansatz is used heuristically, the unmeasured boundary data are replaced by zeros, and the smoothness and lower-bound assumptions on u are stated without verification. The main free parameters (N, lambda, epsilon) are tuned by trial-and-error on Test 1.

free parameters (3)
  • cutoff number N = 7
    Truncation order of the Fourier expansion in k; chosen by trial-and-error on Test 1 (Section 5).
  • Carleman weight parameter lambda = 1.1
    Weight exponent in the Carleman cost functional; tuned by trial-and-error on Test 1 (Section 5).
  • regularization parameter epsilon = 10^(-5.75)
    H^s penalty weight; tuned by trial-and-error on Test 1 (Section 5).
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption WKB ansatz u approximately A e^{ik tau} with tau = |x - x0| on the measurement layer Gamma_L
    Used to set the initial phase guess u^(0) = f e^{ik|x-x0|}; the paper explicitly says the rigorous validity conditions are not verifiable and the ansatz is adopted heuristically (Section 2).
  • domain assumption Scattered wave vanishes on the unmeasured top and side boundary faces
    Gives the missing boundary data v_m = 0 on those faces (eq 3.15); acknowledged as an approximation in Remark 3.3.
  • domain assumption |u| is uniformly bounded below by a positive constant u0 on Omega
    Needed so that log(u/u_inc) in (3.1) is well defined; stated in Section 4 without justification for the scattered field case.
  • domain assumption c is smooth enough that the H^s norm of u is uniformly bounded in k
    Needed for the H^s setting of the convexification theorem (Section 4).
  • standard math Carleman estimate Lemma 4.1
    Quoted from [22] with claimed minor modifications; proof omitted ('we omit the proof of Lemma 4.1 here').

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Inverse scattering without phase: Carleman convexification and phase retrieval via the Wentzel--Kramers--Brillouin approximation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Y3EEFTUG

@misc{pith2026250621699,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Inverse scattering without phase: Carleman convexification and phase retrieval via the Wentzel--Kramers--Brillouin approximation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Y3EEFTUG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.21699}
}
read the original abstract

This paper addresses the challenging and interesting inverse problem of reconstructing the spatially varying dielectric constant of a medium from phaseless backscattering measurements generated by single-point illumination. The underlying mathematical model is governed by the three-dimensional Helmholtz equation, and the available data consist solely of the magnitude of the scattered wave field. To address the nonlinearity and severe ill-posedness of this phaseless inverse scattering problem, we introduce a robust, globally convergent numerical framework combining several key regularization strategies. Our method first employs a phase retrieval step based on the Wentzel--Kramers--Brillouin (WKB) ansatz, where the lost phase information is reconstructed by solving a nonlinear optimization problem. Subsequently, we implement a Fourier-based dimension reduction technique, transforming the original problem into a more stable system of elliptic equations with Cauchy boundary conditions. To solve this resulting system reliably, we apply the Carleman convexification approach, constructing a strictly convex weighted cost functional whose global minimizer provides an accurate approximation of the true solution. Numerical simulations using synthetic data with high noise levels demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed method, confirming its capability to accurately recover both the geometric location and contrast of hidden scatterers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.21699 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Illustration of the inverse scattering scenario, showing incident waves interacting with an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Reconstruction of the wave function u(x, k) on Γ with k = k, showing both real and imaginary parts from magnitude-only data. The data in (a) corresponds to Test 1 with a noise level of 10%. while the imaginary part accurately recovers the expected dip pattern. Although the input data in Figure 2a appears heavily degraded, the reconstructed real and imaginary parts (Figures 2c and 2e) exhibit a clear improvement in q… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Test 1. Visualization of the true and reconstructed dielectric constant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Test 2. The true and reconstructed dielectric constant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Test 3. The true and reconstructed dielectric constant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Aktosun and P

    T. Aktosun and P. Sacks. Inverse problem on the line without phase information. Inverse Problems, 14:211–224, 1998. 21

    work page 1998

  2. [2]

    Ammari, Y

    H. Ammari, Y. Chow, and J. Zou. Phased and phaseless domain reconstruction in inverse scattering problem via scattering coefficients. SIAM J. Appl. Math. , 76:1000–1030, 2016

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    A. B. Bakushinskii, M. V. Klibanov, and N. A. Koshev. Carleman weight functions for a globally convergent numerical method for ill-posed Cauchy problems for some quasilinear PDEs. Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl. , 34:201–224, 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Bao and L

    G. Bao and L. Zhang. Shape reconstruction of the multi-scale rough surface from multi-frequency phaseless data. Inverse Problems, 32:085002, 2016

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Imaging with power controlled source pairs

    Patrick Bardsley and Fernando Guevara Vasquez. Imaging with power controlled source pairs. SIAM J. Imaging Sci. , 9:185–211, 2016

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Kirchhoff migration without phases

    Patrick Bardsley and Fernando Guevara Vasquez. Kirchhoff migration without phases. Inverse Problems, 32(10):105006, 2016

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    Chadan and P

    K. Chadan and P. C. Sabatier. Inverse Problems in Quantum Scattering Theory . Springer, 2nd edition, 1989

    work page 1989

  8. [8]

    Colton and R

    D. Colton and R. Kress. Inverse acoustic and electromagnetic scattering theory. Applied Mathemat- ical Sciences. Springer, New York, 3rd edition, 2013

    work page 2013

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    C. L. Critchfield. The WKB method in three dimensions. American Journal of Physics , 32:597, 1964

    1964

  2. [10]

    Hecht and Joseph E

    Charles E. Hecht and Joseph E. Mayer. Extension of the WKB equation. Physical Review, 106:1156, 1957

    1957

  3. [11]

    Ivanyshyn and R

    O. Ivanyshyn and R. Kress. Inverse scattering for surface impedance from phase-less far field data. J. Computational Physics , 230:3443–3452, 2011

    2011

  4. [12]

    Ivanyshyn, R

    O. Ivanyshyn, R. Kress, and P. Serranho. Huygens’ principle and iterative methods in inverse obstacle scattering. Advances in Computational Mathematics , 33:413–429, 2010

    2010

  5. [13]

    V. A. Khoa, G. W. Bidney, M. V. Klibanov, L. H. Nguyen, L. Nguyen, A. Sullivan, and V. N. Astratov. Convexification and experimental data for a 3D inverse scattering problem with the moving point source. Inverse Problems, 36:085007, 2020

    2020

  6. [14]

    V. A. Khoa, G. W. Bidney, M. V. Klibanov, L. H. Nguyen, L. Nguyen, A. Sullivan, and V. N. Astra- tov. An inverse problem of a simultaneous reconstruction of the dielectric constant and conductivity from experimental backscattering data. Inverse Problems in Science and Engineer...

    2021

  7. [15]

    V. A. Khoa, M. V. Klibanov, and L. H. Nguyen. Convexification for a 3D inverse scattering problem with the moving point source. SIAM J. Imaging Sci. , 13(2):871–904, 2020

    2020

  8. [16]

    M. V. Klibanov. On the first solution of a long standing problem: Uniqueness of the phaseless quantum inverse scattering problem in 3-d. Applied Mathematics Letters , 37:82–85, 2014

    2014

  9. [17]

    M. V. Klibanov. Phaseless inverse scattering problems in three dimensions. SIAM J. Appl. Math. , 74:392–410, 2014. 22

    2014

  10. [18]

    M. V. Klibanov. Convexification of restricted Dirichlet to Neumann map. J. Inverse and Ill-Posed Problems, 25(5):669–685, 2017

    2017

  11. [19]

    M. V. Klibanov. A phaseless inverse scattering problem for the 3-D Helmholtz equation. Inverse Problems and Imaging , 11:263–276, 2017

    2017

  12. [20]

    M. V. Klibanov and O. V. Ioussoupova. Uniform strict convexity of a cost functional for three- dimensional inverse scattering problem. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 26:147–179, 1995

    1995

  13. [21]

    M. V. Klibanov, N. A. Koshev, D-L Nguyen, L. H. Nguyen, A. Brettin, and V. N. Astratov. A numerical method to solve a phaseless coefficient inverse problem from a single measurement of experimental data. SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences , 11:2339–2367, 2018

    2018

  14. [22]

    M. V. Klibanov, Z. Li, and W. Zhang. Convexification for the inversion of a time dependent wave front in a heterogeneous medium. SIAM J. Appl. Math. , 79:1722–1747, 2019

    2019

  15. [23]

    M. V. Klibanov, D-L Nguyen, and L. H. Nguyen. A coefficient inverse problem with a single measurement of phaseless scattering data. SIAM Journal of Applied Mathematics , 79:1–27, 2019

    2019

  16. [24]

    M. V. Klibanov, D-L Nguyen, L. H. Nguyen, and H. Liu. A globally convergent numerical method for a 3D coefficient inverse problem with a single measurement of multi-frequency data. Inverse Problems and Imaging , 12:493–523, 2018

    2018

  17. [25]

    M. V. Klibanov, L. H. Nguyen, and K. Pan. Nanostructures imaging via numerical solution of a 3-d inverse scattering problem without the phase information. Appl. Numer. Math. , 110:190–203, 2016

    2016

  18. [26]

    M. V. Klibanov and V. G. Romanov. Explicit formula for the solution of the phaseless inverse scattering problem of imaging of nano structures. J. Inverse and Ill-Posed Problems , 23:187–193, 2015

    2015

  19. [27]

    M. V. Klibanov and V. G. Romanov. Explicit solution of 3-d inverse scattering problem for the Schr¨ odinger equation: the plane wave case.Eurasian J. of Mathematical and Computer Applications, 3:48–63, 2015

    2015

  20. [28]

    M. V. Klibanov and V. G. Romanov. Reconstruction procedures for two inverse scattering problems without the phase information. SIAM J. Applied Mathematics , 76:178–196, 2016

    2016

  21. [29]

    M. V. Klibanov and V. G. Romanov. Two reconsrtuction procedures for a 3-d phaseless inverse scattering problem for the generalized Helmholtz equation. Inverse Problems, 32:015005, 2016

    2016

  22. [30]

    M. V. Klibanov and V. G. Romanov. Uniqueness of a 3-D coefficient inverse scattering problem without the phase information. Inverse Problems, 33:095007, 2017

    2017

  23. [31]

    M. V. Klibanov and P. Sacks. Phaseless inverse scattering and the phase problem in optics. J. Math. Physics, 33:3813–3821, 1992

    1992

  24. [32]

    P. N. H. Le, T. T. Le, and L. H. Nguyen. The Carleman convexification method for Hamilton-Jacobi equations. Computers and Mathematics with Applications , 159:173–185, 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    T. T. Le and L. H. Nguyen. The gradient descent method for the convexification to solve bound- ary value problems of quasi-linear PDEs and a coefficient inverse problem. Journal of Scientific Computing, 91(3):74, 2022. 23

    2022

  26. [34]

    Lechleiter and D.-L

    A. Lechleiter and D.-L. Nguyen. A trigonometric Galerkin method for volume integral equations arising in TM grating scattering. Adv. Comput. Math. , 40:1–25, 2014

    2014

  27. [35]

    J. Li, H. Liu, and Q. Wang. Enhanced multilevel linear sampling methods for inverse scattering problems. J. Comput. Phys. , 257:554–571, 2014

    2014

  28. [36]

    S. C. Miller and Robert H. Good. A WKB-type approximation to the Schr¨ odinger equation.Physical Review, 91:174, 1953

    1953

  29. [37]

    D. L. Nguyen. A volume integral equation method for periodic scattering problems for anisotropic Maxwell’s equations. Appl. Numer. Math. , 98:59–78, 2015

    2015

  30. [38]

    L. H. Nguyen, Q. Li, and M. V. Klibanov. A convergent numerical method for a multi-frequency inverse source problem in inhomogenous media. Inverse Problems and Imaging , 13:1067–1094, 2019

    2019

  31. [39]

    P. M. Nguyen, T. T. Le, L. H. Nguyen, and M. V. Klibanov. Numerical differentiation by the polynomial-exponential basis. Journal of Applied and Industrial Mathematics , 17:928–942, 2023

    2023

  32. [40]

    P. M. Nguyen, L. H. Nguyen, and H. T. Vu. A robust approach with numerical demonstrations for the inverse scattering problem using a Carleman contraction map. preprint arXiv:2404.04145, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    B. R. Vainberg. On the short wave asymptotic behaviour of solutions of stationary problems and the asymptotic behaviour as t → ∞of solutions of non-stationary problems. Russian Math. Surveys, 30(2):1–58, 1975

    1975

  34. [42]

    X. Xu, B. Zhang, and H. Zhang. Uniqueness in inverse scattering problems with phaseless far-field data at a fixed frequency. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics , 78:1737–1753, 2018. 24

    2018

Pith tools

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