Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 62 references

The $L^p$-continuity of wave operators for fractional order Schr\"odinger operators

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · 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 that the wave operators for the fractional Schrödinger operator (−Δ)^α+V, with α>1 and n>2α, extend to bounded operators on L^p(ℝ^n) for every 1≤p≤∞, provided the real-valued potential decays sufficiently and the operator h

desk verdict First L^p wave operator result for non-integer α is legitimate in design, but its central estimates are imported from an unpublished placeholder referenced preprint. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.18003 v2 pith:YIH4FDA7 submitted 2025-09-22 math.AP

M. Burak Erdogan , Michael Goldberg , William Green This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35P2547A4035R11
keywords waveoperatorsL^pboundednessfractionalSchrödingeroperatordispersiveestimatesStrichartzresolventBornseriesembeddedeigenvalues
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 proves that the wave operators for the fractional Schrödinger operator H=(−Δ)^α+V(x), with α>1 and n>2α, extend to bounded operators on L^p(ℝ^n) for every 1≤p≤∞, assuming the real-valued potential V decays sufficiently and the operator has no positive eigenvalues and a regular zero energy. The wave operators compare the free fractional evolution with the perturbed evolution, and their L^p boundedness is the standard route to turning dispersive and Strichartz estimates for the free operator into estimates for the perturbed operator via the intertwining identity. The argument is the first to cover non-integer α, where the resolvent splitting identities used for integer orders are unavailable; instead the paper develops direct bounds on the Fourier multipliers appearing in a Born series expansion of the stationary representation.

What carries the argument

The main engine is the stationary representation of the wave operator as W_+ = I − (1/2πi)∫_0^∞ R_V^+(λ)V[R_0^+(λ)−R_0^−(λ)] dλ, recast after the change of variables λ↦λ^{2α}. The perturbed resolvent R_V is expanded in a Born series via the second resolvent identity, and each summand is controlled on L^p by writing its integral kernel in terms of the functions h_k = F^{-1}(p_ω), where p_ω(ξ)=(|ξ−ω|^2−|ξ|^2)/(|ξ−ω|^{2α}−|ξ|^{2α}). Lemma 2.2 supplies uniform L^1 bounds and convergence for these multipliers, which replace the algebraic splitting identity that exists for integer α. For low energies, the tail of the series is dominated by absolutely bounded kernels using the resolvent representat

What would settle it

Take a real-valued potential V with |V(x)|≲⟨x⟩^{−β}, β>n_*, for which H=(−Δ)^α+V is known to have a positive embedded eigenvalue (examples of this kind exist for α>1). If the weighted resolvent bound ∥⟨x⟩^{−1/2−}R_V(λ^{2α})⟨y⟩^{−1/2−}∥_{L^2→L^2}≲λ^{1−2α} fails near such an eigenvalue, Proposition 3.4 and hence the high-energy step of the proof cannot hold, confirming the assumption is necessary; if the bound somehow persists, the theorem could be improved to drop or relax assumption (iv).

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that L^p-continuity of wave operators, a property long known for the classical Schrödinger operator and later extended to integer powers (−Δ)^m, holds for every real α>1 in the fractional setting. Fix α>1 and n>2α. If V is real-valued with pointwise decay |V(x)|≲⟨x⟩^{−β} for β>n_* (where n_*=n+4 for odd n, n+3 for even n), with the appropriate Sobolev condition when n=4α−1 or Fourier-L^r condition when n>4α−1, and if H has no positive eigenvalues and zero energy is regular, then the wave operators extend to bounded operators on L^p(ℝ^n) for all 1≤p≤∞. The proof splits into a low-energy analysis, where the Birman–Schwinger-type operator M_+(λ) is inverted and the Born-ser

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that H has no positive eigenvalues and that zero energy is regular; the decay and smoothness conditions on V alone do not rule out embedded positive eigenvalues when α is not an integer, so this is a genuine spectral hypothesis required by both the low-energy inversion of M_+(λ) and the high-energy resolvent bound.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Under the theorem's hypotheses, the dispersive bound ∥e^{−itH}P_ac(H)∥_{L^p→L^{p'}}≲|t|^{−n/α(1/2−1/p)} holds for every 1≤p≤2, including the global L^1→L^∞ decay |t|^{−n/(2α)}.
  • Strichartz estimates for the perturbed fractional flow follow: ∥e^{−itH}P_ac(H)f∥_{L^q_t L^r_x}≲∥f∥_{L^2} for admissible pairs satisfying 2/q=n/α(1/2−1/r), 2≤r<∞.
  • The weighted dispersive family ∥e^{−itH}H^{(γ−n)/(2α)}P_ac(H)∥_{L^1→L^∞}≲|t|^{−γ/(2α)} holds for 0<γ≤nα.
  • These estimates extend the authors' earlier dispersive results for fractional operators to all dimensions n>2α, in particular beyond the previously treated range n≤4α−1.
  • The small-potential version (Theorem 1.1) shows the same L^p conclusions under explicit smallness conditions on V, so the result is robust for both small and large potentials.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the high-energy limiting absorption bound (Proposition 3.4) could be proved under weaker spectral assumptions, the theorem would extend to potentials with positive eigenvalues whose resonances are suitably controlled; the paper's reliance on the no-positive-eigenvalues assumption suggests this is the main obstacle to a fully unconditional statement.
  • The critical dimension n=4α−1 uses an H^{0+} condition that the paper suspects may be an artifact; a natural test is whether a slightly weaker Sobolev regularity (e.g., H^0 instead of H^{0+}) still yields L^p boundedness, which would simplify the theorem.
  • One expects, by analogy with the integer-order case, that zero-energy resonances or eigenvalues would shrink the range of p (typically to 1<p<n/(2α) or smaller with orthogonality conditions); the paper explicitly plans to address threshold obstructions in future work.
  • The Fourier-L^r condition for n>4α−1 is reminiscent of smoothness assumptions; it would be worthwhile to test numerically for the smallest σ that actually suffices, since the paper's σ is expressed with a δ margin and may be improvable.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the L^p-continuity of wave operators for fractional Schrödinger operators H=(-Δ)^α+V(x) with α>1 non-integer and n>2α. The main results are Theorem 1.1 (small potentials) and Theorem 1.2 (large decaying potentials with a spectral assumption), both asserting that the wave operators extend to bounded operators on L^p for all 1≤p≤∞. The proof uses the stationary representation of the wave operator, a Born-series expansion, and a low/high-energy decomposition. The low-energy analysis relies on the free resolvent kernel representation (Proposition 3.3) and bounds on the operators Γ_ℓ(λ) (Lemma 3.2); the high-energy analysis relies on a limiting absorption bound (Proposition 3.4) and a pointwise kernel domination (Proposition 5.1). Corollaries give dispersive and Strichartz estimates for the perturbed semigroup.

Significance. If all technical inputs are valid, the result is a significant extension of the integer-order wave-operator L^p theory of [16,17] to non-integer α, and it would provide the first such L^p statements for non-local fractional Schrödinger operators. The announced dispersive and Strichartz corollaries are natural and potentially useful. The paper is clearly written and the overall strategy is a coherent adaptation of prior work. However, the present manuscript is not self-contained: several load-bearing estimates are either stated without proof and attributed to the authors' own preprint [15], which appears only as a placeholder reference, or are only sketched with pointers to [16,17]. The central claims are therefore conditional on unpublished or non-verifiable ingredients, and the lack of detailed proofs for those estimates is the main obstacle to acceptance.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3, Propositions 3.3 and 3.4] Propositions 3.3 and 3.4 are the key resolvent estimates used throughout the low- and high-energy arguments. Proposition 3.3 supplies the kernel representation (18) and the derivative bounds (19)–(20); Proposition 3.4 supplies the high-energy limiting absorption bound ∥⟨x⟩^{-1/2-}R_V(λ^{2α})⟨y⟩^{-1/2-}∥_{L^2→L^2}≲λ^{1-2α}. Both are stated without proof and attributed to the authors' preprint [15], whose entry in the bibliography reads "dispersive estimates for fractional Schrodinger or something, preprint". These estimates are load-bearing: the pointwise domination (31) in Proposition 5.1 and the admissibility arguments in Proposition 3.1 both depend on them. The manuscript cannot be verified until either complete proofs are included or [15] appears as a checkable reference with theorem numbers and proofs.
  2. [Section 4, Lemma 3.2] Lemma 3.2 is the main low-energy ingredient, but its proof is only a sketch. In particular, the claimed L^2-boundedness of the kernel (28) for β>n_*, the derivative bounds on [M_+(λ)]^{-1} in (29), and the large-ℓ decay estimate for A(λ,z_1,z_2) in (30) are asserted with references to [16,17] and a few sentences. These assertions are essential: Lemma 3.2 is what allows the low-energy tail to satisfy the hypotheses of Proposition 3.1, and without it the low-energy part of Theorem 1.2 is unsupported. The sketch may be a reasonable summary, but in a journal submission the full proof should appear, especially because the fractional case lacks the splitting identity (4) used in the integer-order arguments.
  3. [Section 5, Proposition 5.1] Proposition 5.1, which provides the pointwise bound (31) for the high-energy tail, is stated with the comment that the proof is "a straightforward modification of the proof of Propositions 5.3 and 6.5 in [16]". This is not adequate for the present setting. The integer-order argument uses the splitting identity (4), which the authors explicitly note is unavailable for fractional α; Proposition 3.4 is the only imported high-energy input. Since (31) is what combines with Lemma 5.2 to yield admissibility of the high-energy tail, a detailed proof of Proposition 5.1 is necessary. At minimum, the authors should spell out how the fractional resolvent bounds substitute for each step of the integer-order proof.
  4. [Theorem 1.2, condition (iv)] The theorem assumes away positive eigenvalues and threshold obstructions. This is an explicit hypothesis, so it is not an internal inconsistency. However, the introduction also states "We leave the lack of embedded eigenvalues as an overarching assumption," which means the theorem is conditional on a spectral property that is not derived from the decay assumptions. Given the examples of Cuenin [10], this limitation should be stated as prominently in the abstract or theorem as it is in the body; the current formulation is acceptable mathematically but may overstate the class of potentials covered if readers overlook assumption (iv).
minor comments (4)
  1. [References] Reference [15] is listed as "dispersive estimates for fractional Schrodinger or something, preprint". This is clearly a placeholder and must be replaced with a complete citation or the content must be included in the paper.
  2. [Throughout] There are typographical inconsistencies in the text, e.g. "Schr¨odinger" vs. "Schrödinger", "W A VE OPERATORS" in headers, and some corrupted accents. The paper would benefit from a careful proofreading pass.
  3. [Proposition 3.1] The statement ends with "provided that β > n" without defining β in the proposition. Presumably β refers to the decay of V in the hypotheses of Lemma 3.2, but this should be made explicit.
  4. [Section 2, Lemma 2.4] The statement of Lemma 2.4 says "Morever" for "Moreover", and the notation γ<0 with the case γ+j=-n may need a brief clarification of the logarithmic case; this is minor but worth correcting.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Load-bearing resolvent bounds imported from same-author unpublished preprint; theorem still has independent content.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 3, Proposition 3.4; used in Section 5 (Proposition 5.1)]
    "To prove these results we need the following representations of the free resolvent given in [15], which were inspired by Lemmas 3.2 and 6.2 in [16]. ... Proposition 3.4. Fix α > 1/2 and n > 2α. Assume that H has no embedded eigenvalues. Then when λ ≳ 1, we have ∥⟨x⟩^{-1/2-} R_V(λ^{2α}) ⟨y⟩^{-1/2-}∥_{L2→L2} ≲ λ^{1-2α}, provided that |V(x)|≲⟨x⟩^{-β} for some β > 1."

    The high-energy tail of Theorem 1.2 rests on the limiting absorption bound in Proposition 3.4, which is stated without proof and attributed to the authors' own preprint [15]. The reference list labels [15] 'dispersive estimates for fractional Schrodinger or something, preprint'—an unpublished placeholder rather than an external, verifiable result. Section 5 then says the tail estimate follows by 'the limiting absorption principle in Proposition 3.4', so the proof of the theorem is contingent on an unverified same-author claim. This is load-bearing self-citation: the paper derives the Lp conclusion only modulo a result that is not proved here.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section 4, proof of Lemma 3.2 (around equations (28)-(30))]
    "This follows, with some modifications, from the discussion preceeding Lemma 3.5 in [16], also see Section 4 of [17]. We briefly sketch the argument here. ... By the assumption that zero energy is regular, T0 is invertible with absolutely bounded inverse, see [15]."

    Lemma 3.2 is the low-energy input needed to apply Proposition 3.1. Its proof is not actually given: the boundedness of the operators R_j in (28) is asserted to 'follow' from [17], the invertibility of T0 is cited to [15], and the decay of A(λ,z1,z2) is said to follow from pointwise bounds with '[16,15] for more details.' Since [16] and [17] are prior work by the same authors and [15] is an unpublished placeholder, the low-energy tail is again carried by same-author citations rather than a self-contained derivation in this manuscript.

full rationale

Pure mathematics paper; no empirical predictions, fitted parameters, or renamed data. The explicit hypothesis 'H has no positive eigenvalues and zero energy is regular' (condition (iv) of Theorem 1.2) is a stated assumption, not a derived consequence, so it is not circular. The core concern is structural: Theorem 1.2's proof is not self-contained because Proposition 3.4, the keystone of the high-energy tail, is quoted from an unpublished same-author preprint [15], and Lemma 3.2's low-energy bounds are imported from [16,17] with only sketches. This is genuine load-bearing self-citation, but it is not 'X defined in terms of Y': the Born-series estimates in Section 2 and the overall theorem statement are new content. Hence 4 rather than 6/8. If [15] fails to supply Proposition 3.4, the proof of Theorem 1.2 is incomplete; the paper itself flags the placeholder status of [15] in the reference list.

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

All inputs are mathematical hypotheses and imported analytic lemmas. No empirical parameters or invented entities appear. The main imported content is the authors' own prior resolvent calculus ([15], [16], [17]); because that calculus does not contain the target Lp theorem, its use is not circular, but it does mean the paper is not fully self-contained.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption H has no positive embedded eigenvalues (Theorem 1.2(iv); overarching assumption in Section 1)
    For non-integer α, potential decay does not generally exclude embedded eigenvalues (Cuenin's examples [10]); the paper assumes rather than proves this.
  • domain assumption Zero energy is regular, with no threshold resonances or eigenvalues (Theorem 1.2(iv))
    Used to invert M_+(λ)=U+vR_0^+(λ^{2α})v near λ=0 in Section 3; failure changes the low-energy analysis.
  • standard math Free resolvent kernel estimates of Proposition 3.3, bounds (19) and (20)
    Stated from reference [15], the authors' own preprint; underpins all kernel bounds in Sections 3, 4, and 5.
  • standard math Weighted resolvent bound of Proposition 3.4
    Imported from [15]; requires no embedded eigenvalues and pointwise potential decay, and drives the high-energy tail argument.
  • domain assumption Invertibility of U+vR_0^+(0)v at regular zero energy, with absolutely bounded inverse
    Cited to [15]; used for the Neumann series for M_+(λ)^{-1} in Section 4.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The $L^p$-continuity of wave operators for fractional order Schr\"odinger operators." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YIH4FDA7

@misc{pith2026250918003,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The $L^p$-continuity of wave operators for fractional order Schr\"odinger operators},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YIH4FDA7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.18003}
}
abstract

We consider fractional Schr\"odinger operators $H=(-\Delta)^\alpha+V(x)$ in $n$ dimensions with real-valued potential $V$ when $n>2\alpha$, $\alpha>1$. We show that the wave operators extend to bounded operators on $L^p(\mathbb R^n)$ for all $1\leq p\leq\infty$ under conditions on the potential that depend on $n$ and $\alpha$ analogously to the case when $\alpha\in \mathbb N$. As a consequence, we deduce a family of dispersive and Strichartz estimates for the perturbed fractional Schr\"odinger operator.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

  1. [15]

    M. B. Erdo˘ gan, M. Goldberg, and W. R. Green,dispersive estimates for fractional Schrodinger or something, preprint

  2. [16]

    M. B. Erdo˘ gan, and W. R. Green,TheL p-continuity of wave operators for higher order Schr¨ odinger operators, Adv. Math. 404 (2022), Paper No. 108450

    2022

  3. [10]

    Cuenin,Embedded eigenvalues of generalized Schr¨ odinger operators, J

    J.-C. Cuenin,Embedded eigenvalues of generalized Schr¨ odinger operators, J. Spectr. Theory10(2020), no. 2, 415–437

    2020

  4. [1]

    Agmon,Spectral properties of Schr¨ odinger operators and scattering theory.Ann

    S. Agmon,Spectral properties of Schr¨ odinger operators and scattering theory.Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (4) 2 (1975), no. 2, 151–218

    1975

  5. [2]

    Beceanu,Structure of wave operators for a scaling-critical class of potentials

    M. Beceanu,Structure of wave operators for a scaling-critical class of potentials. Amer. J. Math. 136 (2014), no. 2, 255–308

    2014

  6. [3]

    Beceanu, and W

    M. Beceanu, and W. Schlag,Structure formulas for wave operators.Amer. J. Math. 142 (2020), no. 3, 751–807

    2020

  7. [4]

    Beceanu, and W

    M. Beceanu, and W. Schlag,Structure formulas for wave operators under a small scaling invariant condition.J. Spectr. Theory 9 (2019), no. 3, 967–990

    2019

  8. [5]

    Bellazzini, V

    J. Bellazzini, V. S. Georgiev and N. Visciglia,Long time dynamics for semi-relativistic NLS and half wave in arbitrary dimension, Math. Ann.371(2018), no. 1-2, 707–740 26 ERDO ˘GAN, GOLDBERG, GREEN

    2018

Show all 62 references
  1. [6]

    Cheng, A

    H. Cheng, A. Soffer, Z. Wu, X. Yao,TheL p-boundedness of wave operators for higher order Schr¨ o¨dinger operator with zero singularities in low odd dimensions, preprint, 2025, 57pp. arXiv:2505.07009

    2025 arXiv

  2. [7]

    Y. Cho, H. Hajaiej, H. Hwang, and T. Ozawa.On the Cauchy problem of fractional Schr¨ odinger equation with Hartree type nonlinearity, Funkcial. Ekvac.56(2013), no. 2, 193–224

    2013

  3. [8]

    Cho and S

    Y. Cho and S. H. Lee,Strichartz estimates in spherical coordinates, Indiana Univ. Math. J.62(2013), no. 3, 991–1020

    2013

  4. [9]

    Y. Cho, T. Ozawa and S. Xia,Remarks on some dispersive estimates, Commun. Pure Appl. Anal.10(2011), no. 4, 1121–1128

    2011

  5. [11]

    D’Ancona, and L

    P. D’Ancona, and L. Fanelli,Lp-boundedness of the wave operator for the one dimensional Schr¨ odinger operator, Commun. Math. Phys. 268 (2006), 415–438

    2006

  6. [12]

    V. D. Dinh,A study on blowup solutions to the focusingL 2-supercritical nonlinear fractional Schr¨ odinger equation, J. Math. Phys.59(2018), no. 7, 071506, 25 pp

    2018

  7. [13]

    M. B. Erdo˘ gan, M. J. Goldberg and W. R. Green,Counterexamples toL p boundedness of wave operators for classical and higher order Schr¨ odinger operators, J. Funct. Anal.285(2023), no. 5, Paper No. 110008, 18 pp

    2023

  8. [14]

    M. B. Erdo˘ gan, M. J. Goldberg and W. R. Green,Dispersive estimates for higher order Schr¨ odinger operators with scaling-critical potentials, Math. Ann.392(2025), no. 2, 2225–2252

    2025

  9. [17]

    M. B. Erdo˘ gan and W. R. Green, A note on endpointLp-continuity of wave operators for classical and higher order Schr¨ odinger operators, J. Differential Equations355(2023), 144–161

    2023

  10. [18]

    M. B. Erdo˘ gan, W. R. Green and K. LaMaster,L p-continuity of wave operators for higher order Schr¨ odinger operators with threshold eigenvalues in high dimensions, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst.45(2025), no. 9, 3258–3274

    2025

  11. [19]

    M. B. Erdo˘ gan, W. R. Green and K. LaMaster,L p boundedness of wave operators for higher order Schr¨ odinger operators with threshold eigenvalues, preprint 2025, 29pp. arXiv:2506.16378

    2025 arXiv

  12. [20]

    M. B. Erdo˘ gan, W. R. Green, and E. Toprak,On the Fourth order Schr¨ odinger equation in three dimensions: dispersive estimates and zero energy resonances. J. Differ. Eq., 267, (2019), no. 3, 1899–1954

    2019

  13. [21]

    Feng and H

    B. Feng and H. Zhang,Stability of standing waves for the fractional Schr¨ odinger-Hartree equation, J. Math. Anal. Appl.460(2018), no. 1, 352–364

    2018

  14. [22]

    H. Feng, A. Soffer, Z. Wu, and X. Yao,Decay estimates for higher order elliptic operators, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 373 (2020), no. 4, 2805—2859

    2020

  15. [23]

    Fujiwara, V

    K. Fujiwara, V. S. Georgiev and T. Ozawa,On global well-posedness for nonlinear semirelativistic equations in some scaling subcritical and critical cases, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9)136(2020), 239–256

    2020

  16. [24]

    Galtbayar and K

    A. Galtbayar and K. Yajima,TheL p-boundedness of wave operators for fourth order Schr¨ odinger operators on R4, J. Spectr. Theory14(2024), no. 1, 271–354

    2024

  17. [25]

    Ghanmi, S

    R. Ghanmi, S. M. Boulaaras and T. Saanouni,Local well-posedness of the fractional inhomogeneous NLS in Sobolev spaces, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. S17(2024), no. 10, 3035–3045 W A VE OPERATORS FOR FRACTIONAL ORDER SCHR¨ODINGER OPERATORS 27

    2024

  18. [26]

    Goldberg and W

    M. Goldberg and W. Green,TheL p boundedness of wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators with threshold singularities. Adv. Math. 303 (2016), 360–389

    2016

  19. [27]

    Goldberg, and W

    M. Goldberg, and W. Green,On theL p boundedness of the Wave Operators for fourth order Schr¨ odinger operators,. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 374 (2021), 4075–4092

    2021

  20. [28]

    Ginibre and G

    J. Ginibre and G. Velo,Generalized Strichartz inequalities for the wave equation, J. Funct. Anal.133(1995), no. 1, 50–68

    1995

  21. [29]

    Goldberg, and M

    M. Goldberg, and M. Visan.A Counterexample to Dispersive Estimates. Comm. Math. Phys. 266 (2006), no. 1, 211-238

    2006

  22. [30]

    Z. H. Guo and Y. Wang,Improved Strichartz estimates for a class of dispersive equations in the radial case and their applications to nonlinear Schr¨ odinger and wave equations, J. Anal. Math.124(2014), 1–38

    2014

  23. [31]

    Green, and E

    W. Green, and E. Toprak,On the Fourth order Schr¨ odinger equation in four dimensions: dispersive estimates and zero energy resonances,J. Differential Equations, 267, (2019), no. 3, 1899–1954

    2019

  24. [32]

    Guo and S

    Q. Guo and S. Zhu,Sharp threshold of blow-up and scattering for the fractional Hartree equation, J. Differential Equations264(2018), no. 4, 2802–2832

    2018

  25. [33]

    X. Y. Guo and M. Y. Xu,Some physical applications of fractional Schr¨ odinger equation, J. Math. Phys.47(2006), no. 8, 082104, 9 pp

    2006

  26. [34]

    Z. H. Guo, Y. Sire, Y. Wang, and L. Zhao.On the energy-critical fractional Schr¨ odinger equation in the radial case, Dyn. Partial Differ. Equ.15(2018), no. 4, 265–282

    2018

  27. [35]

    Hong and Y

    Y. Hong and Y. Sire,On fractional Schr¨ odinger equations in Sobolev spaces, Commun. Pure Appl. Anal.14(2015), no. 6, 2265–2282

    2015

  28. [36]

    H¨ ormander,The existence of wave operators in scattering theory.Math

    L. H¨ ormander,The existence of wave operators in scattering theory.Math. Z. 146 (1976), no. 1, 69–91

    1976

  29. [37]

    Ishida, J

    A. Ishida, J. L˝ orinczi and I. Sasaki,Absence of embedded eigenvalues for non-local Schr¨ odinger operators, J. Evol. Equ.22(2022), no. 4, Paper No. 82, 30 pp

    2022

  30. [38]

    Ishida and K

    A. Ishida and K. Wada,Threshold between short and long-range potentials for non-local Schr¨ odinger operators, Math. Phys. Anal. Geom.23(2020), no. 3, Paper No. 32, 11 pp

    2020

  31. [39]

    Jensen,Spectral properties of Schr¨ odinger operators and time-decay of the wave functions results inL 2(Rm), m≥5

    A. Jensen,Spectral properties of Schr¨ odinger operators and time-decay of the wave functions results inL 2(Rm), m≥5. Duke Math. J. 47 (1980), no. 1, 57–80

    1980

  32. [40]

    Jensen, and K

    A. Jensen, and K. Yajima,A remark onL p-boundedness of wave operators for two-dimensional Schr¨ odinger operators.Comm. Math. Phys. 225 (2002), no. 3, 633–637

    2002

  33. [41]

    Jensen, and K

    A. Jensen, and K. Yajima,OnL p boundedness of wave operators for 4-dimensional Schr¨ odinger operators with threshold singularities.Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 96 (2008), no. 1, 136–162

    2008

  34. [42]

    Kuroda,Scattering theory for differential operators

    S. Kuroda,Scattering theory for differential operators. I.J. Math. Soc. Japan 25 (1973), 75–104

    1973

  35. [43]

    Kuroda,Scattering theory for differential operators

    S. Kuroda,Scattering theory for differential operators. II. Self-adjoint elliptic operators.J. Math. Soc. Japan 25 (1973), 222–234

    1973

  36. [44]

    Laskin,Fractional quantum mechanics and L´ evy path integrals, Phys

    N. Laskin,Fractional quantum mechanics and L´ evy path integrals, Phys. Lett. A268(2000), no. 4-6, 298–305

    2000

  37. [45]

    Laskin,Fractional Schr¨ odinger equation, Phys

    N. Laskin,Fractional Schr¨ odinger equation, Phys. Rev. E (3)66(2002), no. 5, 056108, 7 pp

    2002

  38. [46]

    Longhi, S.Fractional Schr¨ odinger equation in optics.Opt. Lett. 40, 1117–1120 (2015)

    2015

  39. [47]

    Mizutani,Wave operators on Sobolev spaces.Proc

    H. Mizutani,Wave operators on Sobolev spaces.Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 148 (2020), no. 4, 1645–1652

    2020

  40. [48]

    Mizutani, Z

    H. Mizutani, Z. Wan, and X. Yao,L p-boundedness of wave operators for fourth-order Schr¨ odinger operators on the line,Adv. Math.451(2024), Paper No. 109806, 68 pp. 28 ERDO ˘GAN, GOLDBERG, GREEN

    2024

  41. [49]

    Mizutani, Z

    H. Mizutani, Z. Wan and X. Yao,Counterexamples and weak(1,1)estimates of wave operators for fourth-order Schr¨ odinger operators in dimension three, J. Spectr. Theory14(2024), no. 4, 1409–1450

    2024

  42. [50]

    Mizutani, Z

    H. Mizutani, Z. Wan and X. Yao,L p-boundedness of wave operators for fourth order Schr¨ odinger operators with zero resonances onR 3, J. Funct. Anal.289(2025), no. 8, Paper No. 111013, 68 pp

    2025

  43. [51]

    Peng and Q

    C. Peng and Q. H. Shi,Stability of standing wave for the fractional nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, J. Math. Phys. 59(2018), no. 1, 011508, 11 pp

    2018

  44. [52]

    Schechter,Scattering theory for pseudodifferential operators,Quart

    M. Schechter,Scattering theory for pseudodifferential operators,Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser. (2) 27 (1976), no. 105, 111–121

    1976

  45. [53]

    Schechter,Scattering theory for elliptic operators of arbitrary order.Comment

    M. Schechter,Scattering theory for elliptic operators of arbitrary order.Comment. Math. Helv. 49 (1974), 84–113

    1974

  46. [54]

    Wei and Z

    L. Wei and Z. W. Duan,Scattering for the fractional magnetic Schr¨ odinger operators, Acta Math. Sci. Ser. B (Engl. Ed.)44(2024), no. 6, 2391–2410

    2024

  47. [55]

    Yajima,TheW k,p-continuity of wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators.J

    K. Yajima,TheW k,p-continuity of wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators.J. Math. Soc. Japan 47 (1995), no. 3, 551–581

    1995

  48. [56]

    Yajima,TheW k,p-continuity of wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators

    K. Yajima,TheW k,p-continuity of wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators. II. Positive potentials in even dimensionsm≥4.Spectral and scattering theory (Sanda, 1992), 287–300, Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., 161, Dekker, New York, 1994

    1992

  49. [57]

    Yajima,TheW k,p-continuity of wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators

    K. Yajima,TheW k,p-continuity of wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators. III. Even-dimensional casesm≥4. J. Math. Sci. Univ. Tokyo 2 (1995), no. 2, 311–346

    1995

  50. [58]

    Yajima,TheL p Boundedness of wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators with threshold singularities I

    K. Yajima,TheL p Boundedness of wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators with threshold singularities I. The odd dimensional case. J. Math. Sci. Univ. Tokyo 13 (2006), 43–94

    2006

  51. [59]

    Yajima,Wave Operators for Schr¨ odinger Operators with Threshold Singularities, Revisited

    K. Yajima,Wave Operators for Schr¨ odinger Operators with Threshold Singularities, Revisited. Preprint, arXiv:1508.05738

    arXiv

  52. [60]

    Yajima,Remark on theL p-boundedness of wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators with threshold singularities, Documenta Mathematica 21 (2016), 391–443

    K. Yajima,Remark on theL p-boundedness of wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators with threshold singularities, Documenta Mathematica 21 (2016), 391–443

    2016

  53. [61]

    Yajima,On wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators with threshold singularities in three dimensions.Tokyo J

    K. Yajima,On wave operators for Schr¨ odinger operators with threshold singularities in three dimensions.Tokyo J. Math. 41 (2018), no. 2, 385–406

    2018

  54. [62]

    Zhang, T

    R. Zhang, T. Huang and Q. Zheng,The scattering of fractional Schr¨ odinger operators with short range potentials, J. Funct. Anal.281(2021), no. 2, Paper No. 109033, 44 pp. Department of Mathematics, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, U.S.A. Email address:berdogan@illino...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.