Heat kernel estimates for general symmetric pure jump Dirichlet forms

Jian Wang; Takashi Kumagai; Zhen-Qing Chen

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 25 references

Heat kernel estimates for general symmetric pure jump Dirichlet forms

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Stability theorem pins down heat kernels of jump processes

desk verdict A substantial, mostly solid extension of the CKW program to light-tailed jump kernels; the free functional input φc is a real caveat, but the paper deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.07655 v1 pith:YGEOGWM2 submitted 2019-08-21 math.PR

Zhen-Qing Chen , Takashi Kumagai , Jian Wang This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.PR MSC 60J3535K0860J7531C2560J2560J45

keywords symmetricnon-localDirichletformpurejumpprocessheatkernelestimatejumpingcut-offSobolevinequalityFaber-KrahnPoincaréparabolicHarnack

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to determine exactly when a symmetric pure-jump Markov process on a doubling metric measure space has a two-sided heat kernel estimate, including processes whose large jumps are so light that long-time behavior becomes diffusive. Its central result is a set of equivalences: the upper-and-lower heat kernel bound holds if and only if the jumping kernel is comparable to a prescribed rate φj, the Poincaré inequality holds with rate φ, and a cut-off Sobolev inequality (or equivalently a Faber-Krahn or generalized capacity inequality) holds. Because large jumps can be light, the formulation needs two scale functions: φj for the jump kernel and an intrinsic φc for the large-scale motion, and the claims are only asserted relative to a correct choice of φc. The paper also gives a stable characterization of the parabolic Harnack inequality by the same Poincaré and Sobolev conditions plus an averaging condition on the jump kernel.

What carries the argument

The central object is the two-scale heat kernel ansatz: p^(j)(t,x,y)=1/V(x,$φj^{{-1}}$(t)) ∧ t/(V(x,d(x,y))φj(d(x,y))) for the jump part, and p^(c)(t,x,y)=1/V(x,$φc^{{-1}}$(t)) exp(-d(x,y)/φ̄$c^{{-1}}$(t/d(x,y))) for the diffusive part, where φ̄c(r)≈φc(r)/r. The function φ is defined by switching between φj and φc according to the lower scaling indices β_* and β_* from (1.14), and the cut-off Sobolev inequality CSJ(φ) controls the energy of cut-off functions at scale r by the jump energy in an enlarged annulus plus φ(r) times the L² mass. The load-bearing mechanism is Proposition 3.5, which uses truncation at scale ρ and Meyer's decomposition to split the heat kernel into a truncation term and a tail term, then estimates the crossing point r*(t) where the exponential 'diffusive' term and the jump term are comparable; this yields the full upper bound UHK(φj,φc) from the diagonal bound, the jump-kernel upper bound, and the expected exit time bound.

What would settle it

Exhibit a metric measure space with volume doubling and a jump kernel with light tails for which two different admissible φc both satisfy (1.10)-(1.13) but lead to different heat kernel regimes (e.g., one diffusive, one not), or for which no admissible φc exists; this would show that the equivalence is not an intrinsic property of the jump process alone.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On a metric measure space satisfying volume doubling and reverse volume doubling, take a symmetric pure jump Dirichlet form with jump measure J and scale functions φj, φc satisfying (1.10)-(1.13), and write φ(r)=φj(r) on the scale where β_*≤1 and φc(r) where β_*>1 (and similarly for large r). The main theorem states that the following are equivalent: the heat kernel upper bound with near-diagonal lower bound HK-(φj,φc); the upper heat kernel bound plus near-diagonal lower bound and two-sided jump kernel bounds Jφj; the diagonal upper bound plus Dirichlet near-diagonal lower bound and Jφj; and any of the combinations PI(φ)+Jφj+Eφ, PI(φ)+Jφj+Gcap(φ), or PI(φ)+Jφj+CSJ(φ); with connectedness and the chain condition, all of these are also equivalent to the full two-sided heat kernel estimate HK(φj,φc). A second theorem characterizes the parabolic Harnack inequality PHI(φ) as exactly PI(φ)+Jφ,≤+CSJ(φ)+UJS, and consequently HK-(φj,φc) ⇔ PHI(φ)+Jφj. The heat kernel form itself is the minimum of a jump-kernel term p^(j)(t,x,y)=1/V(x,$φj^{{-1}}$(t)) ∧ t/(V(x,d)φj(d)) and, on diffusive scales, a term p^(c) with exponential decay driven by the derivative of φc.

Load-bearing premise

The user must supply a scale function φc satisfying (1.10) and (1.13), and the paper states that there is no universal formula for φc; a bad choice of φc can make every equivalent statement fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

To prove a two-sided heat kernel estimate it is enough to verify a Poincaré inequality, two-sided jump-kernel bounds, and a cut-off Sobolev inequality at the same rate φ; conversely, any process with such an estimate satisfies all of these.
The parabolic Harnack inequality holds for a pure jump process exactly when Poincaré, upper jump-kernel bounds, the cut-off Sobolev inequality, and the UJS averaging condition hold, so PHI can be checked without knowing the heat kernel.
Heat kernel estimates and PHI transfer between any two jump processes whose jumping kernels are comparable, so a single model process can serve as a base for a whole class.
Processes with light large jumps (large-scale lower index >1) can have diffusive long-time behaviour, and their heat kernels then contain a 'super-Gaussian' exponential term governed by φc rather than by the jump kernel.
The results recover earlier stability theorems for pure jump processes (where φ=φj) and for symmetric diffusions with jumps as special cases, with the time intervals (0,1] and (1,∞) interchanged.

Reading between the lines

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

Because the paper offers no construction of φc, the practical content of the equivalence is 'for each admissible φc'; a natural next step would be to prove that φc is uniquely determined by φj and the metric measure space, for instance as the smallest rate for which the diagonal heat kernel satisfies UHKD(φ).
The UJS condition in the PHI characterization is an averaging condition rather than a pointwise one; this suggests that PHI may hold even when the jump kernel is not pointwise two-sided, and one could test whether a one-sided average bound suffices in the light-tail regime.
The switching construction of φ in (1.14) depends on the indicators of β_*≤1 and β_*≤1, but the paper's own examples show the real transition is at α2=β, so the formulation might be made coordinate-free by replacing the indicator functions with a threshold defined by the heat kernel itself.

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

Chen, Kumagai and Wang have written a real sequel to their CKW stability program. The genuinely new territory is pure jump Dirichlet forms with light tails, where the local scaling indices β* and β* are allowed to be ≤1, so the small-jump and large-jump scales can differ. That case is not covered by CKW1/2/4 or by BKKL2, and the paper's main equivalences (Theorems 1.11, 1.12, 1.15) are plausible and carefully delimited. The load-bearing new step is Proposition 3.5, and they give it a detailed proof. The paper also deserves credit for being upfront about its limitations, including the warning that a bad choice of φc makes the statements false.

The soft spot is the one flagged in the stress test: the main theorems are conditional on a scale function φc supplied by the user. Condition (1.13) is only a one-sided comparability on one interval, not a determination. The authors state they have no universal formula, so for a given (M,d,μ,J) the characterization is not intrinsic. This is a genuine limitation, and it is load-bearing, but it is not an internal flaw—the proofs show equivalence inside the class of admissible φc. A referee will want the role of φc clarified, ideally with a discussion of when it is unique or how to test candidate choices.

A lesser soft spot is the number of deferred proofs. Several supporting results (Propositions 2.2 and 3.2, Lemmas 3.3, 3.4, 3.6, Proposition 4.3) are stated as having the same proof as earlier work. That is acceptable for a paper in a series, but a referee should check the transfers, especially where the two-scale form changes the argument. The heavy self-citation is legitimate—CKW1/2/4 are independent published results—but it makes the paper hard to read in isolation.

This is a paper for specialists in Dirichlet forms and heat kernel estimates. It will become a standard toolbox reference if the φc caveat is handled honestly, and it deserves a serious referee. I would recommend acceptance after revision, not desk rejection.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies symmetric pure-jump Dirichlet forms on metric measure spaces whose jumping kernel may have different scaling at small and large jumps, including light-tailed kernels with possible diffusive large-scale behavior. Two scale functions φj and φc are fixed, satisfying regularity conditions (1.10) and the comparability condition (1.13), and φ is built from them via (1.14). The main results, Theorems 1.11, 1.12 and 1.15, assert stability/equivalence: two-sided heat kernel estimates HK−(φj,φc) and HK(φj,φc), upper estimates UHK(φj,φc), diagonal upper bounds, Faber–Krahn inequalities, cut-off Sobolev inequalities, Poincaré inequalities, generalized capacity inequalities, jumping-kernel bounds, and parabolic Harnack inequalities are mutually equivalent under VD, RVD and (1.10)–(1.13). The proofs are largely reductions to the authors' earlier works CKW1, CKW2 and CKW4, with a detailed proof of Proposition 3.5 as the main new analytic step. A motivating example of a subordinate diffusion with light tails is worked out in the appendix.

Significance. If the stated equivalences hold, the paper substantially extends the stability program for non-local Dirichlet forms: it covers jumping kernels whose lower scaling index can be larger than 1 on the large-scale part, it accommodates cases where the heat-kernel scaling differs from the jumping-kernel scaling, and it provides stable characterizations of parabolic Harnack inequalities with the UJS condition. The motivating example is instructive and the detailed proof of Proposition 3.5 is a genuine technical contribution. The paper also explicitly delineates the relation to, and differences from, the parallel work of Bae–Kang–Kim–Lee (BKKL1, BKKL2). However, the central equivalences are conditional on a freely chosen scale function φc, and several load-bearing proofs are omitted with references to unpublished or hard-to-verify companion papers; these points limit the present form of the manuscript.

major comments (3)

[§1.3, Theorems 1.11 and 1.12, and the paragraph after Theorem 1.12] The scale function φc is a free functional input that is not intrinsically determined by the Dirichlet form data (M,d,μ,J). Condition (1.13) only imposes the one-sided bound φc≤c0φj on the relevant intervals, and the authors explicitly state that they have no universal formula for φc and that a bad selection of φc can make every statement in Theorems 1.11 and 1.12 false. Consequently, the equivalences are not closed under the data of the Dirichlet form: for a concrete process, one must guess an admissible φc before the characterization can be applied. This is not an internal contradiction, but it weakens the claim of a 'stable characterization' of heat kernel estimates. The manuscript should either provide a constructive or algorithmic determination of φc in the cases covered, or reformulate the theorems as equivalences quantified over admissible pairs (φj,φc) and discuss the non-uniqueness and its consequences explicitly.
[§2.1, §3.2, §4.2] Several load-bearing results are not proved in the text but are deferred to earlier papers, some of which are unpublished or lack verifiable identifiers. Specifically, Proposition 2.2 (UHK + conservativeness implies Jφj,≤, and HK− implies Jφj), Proposition 3.2 (FK + Eφ + Jφ,≤ implies UHKD), Lemma 3.3 (heat kernel upper bound for the truncated form), Lemma 3.4 (tail estimate implies off-diagonal upper bound), Lemma 3.6 (subexponential off-diagonal decay), and Proposition 4.3 (HK− implies HK under connectedness and chain condition) are essential inputs to Theorems 1.11 and 1.12. The reference [CKW4] is listed as 'available at arXiv' without an arXiv number, so the reader cannot verify the quoted arguments. Since Proposition 3.5, the paper's main new proof, relies on Lemmas 3.4 and 3.6, the omitted proofs are not merely cosmetic. The authors should either include full proofs or provide exact statements with complete references to published or identifiable sources.
[§5.1, Theorem 1.15] The first assertion of Theorem 1.15, namely PHI(φ) ⇔ PI(φ) + Jφ,≤ + CSJ(φ) + UJS, is one of the three main results of the paper, yet its proof is dismissed in a single sentence: 'the first assertion of Theorem 1.15 can be established by the same arguments in [CKW2, Subsection 4.3]'. Given that the setting here is more general than CKW2 (light tails, φc not necessarily equal to φj, and the new UJS condition), the proof should be at least outlined, and the precise modifications needed for the present case should be stated. As written, the main characterization of parabolic Harnack inequalities is not independently verifiable from this manuscript.

minor comments (6)

[§1.2, first sentence] The phrase 'measure metric space' should be 'metric measure space'.
[Equation (1.13)] The first condition in (1.13) should presumably read φc(r)≤c0φj(r) on [0,1] if β∗>1 (with the small-scale index), while the text currently repeats β∗>1 in both conditions; please check and correct the notation.
[§3.3, proof of Proposition 3.5, step (ii)] In the definition of c∗ = (1 + (2c1c5/c2))^{1/(β1,φc−1)}, the constants c1, c5 and c2 are not clearly identified before use; please define them or refer to the displayed inequalities where they first appear.
[Proposition 4.1] There is a typo: 'Propisition' should be 'Proposition'.
[Remark 1.18(i)] 'in the sprit of' should be 'in the spirit of'.
[Reference [CKW4]] The reference [CKW4] is cited as 'available at arXiv' but no arXiv identifier is given; this makes the extensive reliance on it impossible to check.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the main theorems are conditional equivalences with φc as an explicit input, and the self-citations are to independent prior proofs.

full rationale

Walking the claimed derivation chain, I find no step where a 'prediction' reduces to its input by construction. Theorems 1.11, 1.12 and 1.15 are conditional equivalences: for any φj, φc satisfying the standing scaling/comparison hypotheses (1.10) and (1.13), they show mutual implication among heat-kernel upper/lower bounds, jumping-kernel bounds Jφj, Poincaré / Faber–Krahn / cut-off Sobolev / generalized-capacity inequalities, and parabolic Harnack inequalities. None of these conditions is defined in terms of another in a way that makes the implication tautological. The paper explicitly says “we do not have a universal formula for φc” and warns “it is possible that none of the statements hold with a bad selection of φc” (Section 1.2 and immediately after Theorem 1.12); this is an input assumption and a limitation of scope, not a circular reduction, because φc is not fitted from the target estimates. The proofs lean heavily on the authors' earlier papers [CKW1, CKW2, CKW4] (e.g., Propositions 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2; Lemmas 3.3, 3.4, 3.6; and the proofs of Theorems 1.11 and 1.15), but these are cited as proven external results with their own arguments rather than as assertions of uniqueness or as ansätze; they are transportable tools, and hard rule 4 does not treat such citations as circularity. The novelty boundary relative to [BKKL1, BKKL2] is also explicitly delimited in Remark 1.18. Hence no self-definitional, fitted-input, uniqueness-import, ansatz-smuggling, or renaming circularity is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The main extra input beyond a metric measure space with VD and RVD is the pair (φj, φc). φj is dictated by the jumping kernel, but φc is an additional scale function that the user must supply, and the paper gives no existence or universal construction for it. This is the primary unpaid input of the paper.

free parameters (1)

Scale function φc for the large-scale (diffusive) part
An input function satisfying (1.10) and (1.13). The paper states that there is no universal formula for φc from φj and (M,d,μ), and a bad choice invalidates the conclusions.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption Volume doubling (VD), eq. (1.8): V(x,R)/V(x,r) ≤ Cμ (R/r)^{d2}
Assumed throughout the paper.
domain assumption Reverse volume doubling (RVD), eq. (1.9)
Used for implications UHKD(φ) implies FK(φ) and PI(φ) implies FK(φ) in Proposition 2.1, and thus in the main theorems.
domain assumption Bi-Lipschitz scaling of φj and φc, eq. (1.10)
Requires both scale functions to have polynomial growth bounds with indices β1 ≤ β2.
domain assumption Comparability φc ≤ c0 φj on the relevant interval, eq. (1.13)
Ensures the function φ(r) defined in (1.14) inherits the stated growth bounds.
domain assumption Connectedness and chain condition for the full two-sided HK(φj,φc)
Needed only to upgrade HK- to HK in Theorems 1.11 and 1.15.
domain assumption Pure jump regular Dirichlet form with symmetric Radon measure J
The entire paper works within this class; the generator is negative definite and the associated process is a Hunt process.
domain assumption The measure is infinite, μ(M)=∞, and all balls are relatively compact
Assumed in Section 1.2 to simplify the heat kernel normalization and the treatment of exits from balls.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Heat kernel estimates for general symmetric pure jump Dirichlet forms." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YGEOGWM2

@misc{pith2026190807655,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Heat kernel estimates for general symmetric pure jump Dirichlet forms},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YGEOGWM2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.07655}
}

abstract

In this paper, we consider the following symmetric non-local Dirichlet forms of pure jump type on metric measure space $(M,d,\mu)$: $$\mathcal{E}(f,g)=\int_{M\times M} (f(x)-f(y))(g(x)-g(y))\,J(dx,dy),$$ where $J(dx,dy)$ is a symmetric Radon measure on $M\times M\setminus {\rm diag}$ that may have different scalings for small jumps and large jumps. Under general volume doubling condition on $(M,d,\mu)$ and some mild quantitative assumptions on $J(dx, dy)$ that are allowed to have light tails of polynomial decay at infinity, we establish stability results for two-sided heat kernel estimates as well as heat kernel upper bound estimates in terms of jumping kernel bounds, the cut-off Sobolev inequalities, and the Faber-Krahn inequalities (resp.\ the Poincar\'e inequalities). We also give stable characterizations of the corresponding parabolic Harnack inequalities.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.07655 by the authors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

[1]

Andres and M.T

S. Andres and M.T. Barlow. Energy inequalities for cutoff-functions and some applications. J. Reine Angew. Math. 699 (2015), 183--215

work page 2015
[2]

Barlow and R.F

M.T. Barlow and R.F. Bass. Stability of parabolic Harnack inequalities. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 356 (2003), 1501--1533

work page 2003
[3]

Barlow, R.F

M.T. Barlow, R.F. Bass, Z.-Q. Chen and M. Kassmann. Non-local Dirichlet forms and symmetric jump processes. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 361 (2009), 1963--1999

work page 2009
[4]

Barlow, R.F

M.T. Barlow, R.F. Bass and T. Kumagai. Stability of parabolic Harnack inequalities on metric measure spaces. J. Math. Soc. Japan 58 (2006), 485--519

work page 2006
[5]

Barlow, R

M.T. Barlow, R. F. Bass and T. Kumagai. Parabolic Harnack inequality and heat kernel estimates for random walks with long range jumps. Math. Z. 261 (2009), 297--320

work page 2009
[6]

Barlow, A

M.T. Barlow, A. Grigor'yan and T. Kumagai. On the equivalence of parabolic Harnack inequalities and heat kernel estimates. J. Math. Soc. Japan 64 (2012), 1091--1146

work page 2012
[7]

J. Bae, J. Kang, P. Kim and J. Lee. Heat kernel estimates for symmetric jump processes with mixed polynomial growths. To appear in Ann. Probab. , available at arXiv:1804.06918

work page Pith review arXiv
[8]

J. Bae, J. Kang, P. Kim and J. Lee. Heat kernel estimates and their stabilities for symmetric jump processes with general mixed polynomial growths on metric measure spaces, arXiv:1904.10189

arXiv 1904

Show all 25 references

[9]

Bingham, C.M

N.H. Bingham, C.M. Goldie and J.L. Teugels. Regular Variation, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications 27 , Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1987

1987
[10]

B\" o ttcher, R.L

B. B\" o ttcher, R.L. Schilling and J. Wang. Constructions of coupling processes for L\'evy processes and their applications. Stoch. Proc. Appl. 121 (2011), 1201--1216

2011
[11]

Z.-Q. Chen, P. Kim and T. Kumagai. Weighted Poincar\'e inequality and heat kernel estimates for finite range jump processes. Math. Ann. 342 (2008), 833--883

2008
[12]

Z.-Q. Chen, P. Kim and T. Kumagai. On heat kernel estimates and parabolic Harnack inequality for jump processes on metric measure spaces. Acta Math. Sin. (Engl. Ser.) 25 (2009), 1067--1086

2009
[13]

Z.-Q. Chen, P. Kim and T. Kumagai. Global heat kernel estimates for symmetric jump processes. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 363 (2011), 5021--5055

2011
[14]

Chen and T

Z.-Q. Chen and T. Kumagai. Heat kernel estimates for stable-like processes on d -sets. Stochastic Process Appl. 108 (2003), 27--62

2003
[15]

Z.-Q. Chen, T. Kumagai and J. Wang. Stability of heat kernel estimates for symmetric non-local Dirichlet forms. To appear in Memoirs Amer. Math. Soc. , available at arXiv:1604.04035

arXiv
[16]

Z.-Q. Chen, T. Kumagai and J. Wang. Stability of parabolic Harnack inequalities for symmetric non-local Dirichlet forms. To appear in J. European Math. Soc. , available at arXiv:1609.07594

arXiv
[17]

Z.-Q. Chen, T. Kumagai and J. Wang. Elliptic Harnack inequalities for symmetric non-local Dirichlet forms. J. Math. Pures Appl. 125 (2019), 1--42

2019
[18]

Z.-Q. Chen, T. Kumagai and J. Wang. Heat kernel and parabolic Harnack inequalities for symmetric Dirichlet forms. available at arXiv
[19]

Fukushima, Y

M. Fukushima, Y. Oshima and M. Takeda. Dirichlet Forms and Symmetric Markov Processes . de Gruyter, Berlin, 2nd rev. and ext. ed., 2011

2011
[20]

Gordina, M

M. Gordina, M. R\" o ckner and F.-Y. Wang. Dimension-independent Harnack inequalities for subordinated semigroups. Potential Anal. 34 (2011), 293--307

2011
[21]

Grigor'yan and J

A. Grigor'yan and J. Hu. Upper bounds of heat kernels on doubling spaces. Mosco Math. J. 14 (2014), 505--563

2014
[22]

Grigor'yan, E

A. Grigor'yan, E. Hu and J. Hu. Two-sided estimates of heat kernels of jump type Dirichlet forms. Advances in Math. 330 (2018), 433--515

2018
[23]

Grigor'yan and A

A. Grigor'yan and A. Telcs. Two-sided estimates of heat kernels on metric measure spaces. Ann. Probab. 40 (2012), 1212--1284

2012
[24]

Knopova and R.L

V. Knopova and R.L. Schilling. A note on the existence of transition probability densities for L\'evy processes. Forum Math. 25 (2013), 125--149

2013
[25]

A. Mimica. Heat kernel estimates for subordinate Brownian motions. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 113 (2016), 627--648

2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Andres and M.T

S. Andres and M.T. Barlow. Energy inequalities for cutoff-functions and some applications. J. Reine Angew. Math. 699 (2015), 183--215

work page 2015

[2] [2]

Barlow and R.F

M.T. Barlow and R.F. Bass. Stability of parabolic Harnack inequalities. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 356 (2003), 1501--1533

work page 2003

[3] [3]

Barlow, R.F

M.T. Barlow, R.F. Bass, Z.-Q. Chen and M. Kassmann. Non-local Dirichlet forms and symmetric jump processes. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 361 (2009), 1963--1999

work page 2009

[4] [4]

Barlow, R.F

M.T. Barlow, R.F. Bass and T. Kumagai. Stability of parabolic Harnack inequalities on metric measure spaces. J. Math. Soc. Japan 58 (2006), 485--519

work page 2006

[5] [5]

Barlow, R

M.T. Barlow, R. F. Bass and T. Kumagai. Parabolic Harnack inequality and heat kernel estimates for random walks with long range jumps. Math. Z. 261 (2009), 297--320

work page 2009

[6] [6]

Barlow, A

M.T. Barlow, A. Grigor'yan and T. Kumagai. On the equivalence of parabolic Harnack inequalities and heat kernel estimates. J. Math. Soc. Japan 64 (2012), 1091--1146

work page 2012

[7] [7]

J. Bae, J. Kang, P. Kim and J. Lee. Heat kernel estimates for symmetric jump processes with mixed polynomial growths. To appear in Ann. Probab. , available at arXiv:1804.06918

work page Pith review arXiv

[8] [8]

J. Bae, J. Kang, P. Kim and J. Lee. Heat kernel estimates and their stabilities for symmetric jump processes with general mixed polynomial growths on metric measure spaces, arXiv:1904.10189

arXiv 1904