Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 minor 1 cited by

Harnack inequality for degenerate fully nonlinear parabolic equations

T0 review · 0 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves intrinsic Harnack inequalities for nonnegative viscosity solutions and supersolutions of degenerate fully nonlinear parabolic equations in nondivergence form, with the cylinder's waiting time tied to the solution's…

desk verdict First intrinsic Harnack for the general nondivergence degenerate class; the proof is sound, with a minor illustrative example error and two incomplete references. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.10608 v1 pith:YXQN7DX6 submitted 2025-06-12 math.AP

Vedansh Arya , Vesa Julin This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35K5535K6535B65
keywords degeneratefullynonlinearparabolicequationsviscositysolutionsintrinsicHarnackinequalityweaknondivergenceformp-parabolicequationHöldercontinuityfinitespeedofpropagation
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 a form of Harnack's inequality for degenerate fully nonlinear parabolic equations in nondivergence form, the class that generalizes the $p$-parabolic equation $\partial_t u = \operatorname{div}(|Du|^{p-2}Du)$ with $p>2$ to operators depending on the Hessian, gradient, space, and time. Because the equation has no divergence structure, the comparison is intrinsic: it holds on cylinders whose time extent is set by the solution's value at the reference point through the waiting time $\theta = (c/u(x_0,t_0))^{p-2}$. The main theorems give a weak Harnack estimate for nonnegative viscosity supersolutions and a full Harnack inequality for nonnegative viscosity solutions, with universal constants depending only on $n$, $\lambda$, $\Lambda$, and $p$. Such an estimate is the standard regularity engine for this setting, and the paper draws that conclusion explicitly: every nonnegative viscosity solution is locally Hölder continuous.

What carries the argument

The proof first replaces (1.1) by two extremal inequalities involving Pucci extremal operators, the extremal choices compatible with uniform ellipticity, with the common degeneracy factor $|Du|^{p-2}$; all constants then depend only on $n$, $\lambda$, $\Lambda$, $p$. Two quantitative ingredients carry the argument. The first is a basic measure estimate (Lemma 3.2) obtained by sliding the test functions $\varphi_{(y,s)}(x,t)=-a^{1/(p-1)}\frac{p-1}{p}|x-y|^{p/(p-1)} + a(t-s)$, chosen so that $|D\varphi|^{p-2}P^-_{\lambda,\Lambda}(D^2\varphi)$ is constant; an area-formula computation in Lemma 3.1 shows the contact set has definite measure. The second is propagation of boundedness (Lemmas 4.2–4.4), built from an explicit barrier $\psi$ that mimics the fundamental solution and is a strict subsolution; iterating it shows that smallness of $u$ at one point forces smallness on increasingly dense spatial scales at every time level. A Vitali-type covering argument then converts these two estimates into the algebraic decay of the superlevel sets needed for the Harnack iteration.

What would settle it

A single admissible quadruple $(n,\lambda,\Lambda,p)$ for which Lemma 3.1's universal bound $|Du|^{p-2}\sqrt{B}D^2u\sqrt{B}\le aC I_n$ and $\partial_t u\ge -aC$ fails on a positive-measure set of contact points of a supersolution satisfying (3.3) would destroy the contact-set area estimate and, with it, the weak Harnack inequality; alternatively, a direct check of Lemma 4.1 seeking an admissible $(p,\lambda,\Lambda)$ with no $q_0,\alpha_0$ satisfying the barrier inequalities would break the propagation step.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, every nonnegative viscosity solution of (1.1) is controlled by its value at a reference point in both the past and the future, provided the comparison is made in intrinsic cylinders. Theorem 1.2 asserts that if $(x_0,t_0)$ is a point with $u(x_0,t_0)>0$ and the intrinsic backward cylinder with $\theta_1=(c_1/u(x_0,t_0))^{p-2}$ lies in the domain, then $\sup_{Q^-} u \le C u(x_0,t_0)$; with a second, possibly larger waiting time $\theta_2=(c_2/u(x_0,t_0))^{p-2}$ one gets $\inf_{Q^+} u \ge C^{-1} u(x_0,t_0)$. Theorem 1.1 complements this with a weak Harnack estimate for nonnegative supersolutions: an $L^\varepsilon$ average over an intrinsic past cylinder is bounded by a constant times $u(x_0,t_0)$. The paper shows the two waiting times can genuinely differ, and it derives local Hölder continuity (Corollary 1.3) as a corollary, the first such result for this general class.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the exact power coupling: the same $p>2$ that measures gradient degeneracy in the ellipticity bounds must determine the intrinsic scaling $\theta=(c/u)^{p-2}$ and $t\sim \rho^p$; if the two were decoupled, the contact-set measure estimate or the barrier step would fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every nonnegative viscosity solution of (1.1) is locally Hölder continuous with a universal exponent (Corollary 1.3), giving regularity for the whole nondivergence degenerate class.
  • Nonnegative viscosity supersolutions satisfy the weak Harnack estimate of Theorem 1.1: an $L^\varepsilon$ average over an intrinsic past cylinder is controlled by the value at the reference point.
  • Nonnegative solutions satisfy both backward and forward Harnack control in intrinsic cylinders, with the forward waiting time $\theta_2$ possibly strictly larger than $\theta_1$; the paper shows the gap is genuine in general.
  • Because the intrinsic cylinders are scaled through $u(x_0,t_0)$, the Harnack inequality quantifies how information spreads on a time scale set by the solution's own size, consistent with finite speed of propagation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same two-estimate framework should yield quantitative finite-speed-of-propagation bounds for (1.1) beyond the Harnack inequality itself; the paper notes the phenomenon through the fundamental solution but does not pursue sharp expansion rates.
  • The strict inequality $\theta_1<\theta_2$ suggests the optimal waiting-time gap is governed by the ratio of the solution's supremum to its value at the reference point, a relation testable against explicit one-dimensional barriers.
  • The measure-estimate part already covers $1<p<2$, while propagation of boundedness is proved only for $p>2$; extending that lemma to the singular range would likely yield an elliptic-type Harnack inequality in the singular case.
  • Tracking constants through the proof could produce an explicit Hölder exponent depending on $n,\lambda,\Lambda,p$, which would show how the degeneracy degrades regularity compared with the homogeneous case $p=2$.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proves an intrinsic weak Harnack inequality for nonnegative viscosity supersolutions and an intrinsic Harnack inequality for nonnegative viscosity solutions of degenerate fully nonlinear parabolic equations in nondivergence form, with ellipticity controlled by |ξ|^{p-2} for p>2. The theorems are stated in intrinsic cylinders whose waiting time θ scales as (c/u_0)^{p-2}. The proof combines two new building blocks: a basic measure estimate obtained by sliding adapted paraboloids (Section 3), and a propagation-of-boundedness estimate built from an explicit barrier (Section 4); these are then used in a covering argument to obtain the weak Harnack estimate (Section 5) and iterated to obtain the full Harnack inequality (Section 6). Corollary 1.3 derives local Hölder continuity of solutions.

Significance. If correct, the paper resolves an open problem for this general nondivergence degenerate class, extending the divergence-form results of DiBenedetto, Gianazza and Vespri and of Kuusi to the nondivergence setting, and extending the Krylov-Safonov theory from the homogeneous case p=2 to p>2. The proof is self-contained: the Harnack estimates are not used as input, and the delicate computations in Lemma 3.1 (the determinant of the contact map, the nonnegativity of I+a^{-1}|Du|^{p-2}√B D^2u√B, and the universal upper bound) and Lemma 4.1 (the barrier computation) are internally consistent. The propagation-of-boundedness Lemma 4.3 is the most original component and is likely to be useful beyond this paper.

minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.1, Lemma 5.1] The inclusion Q^-_{ρ/32}((L0m0)^{-(p-2)}) ⊂ Q^-_{ρ/32} used just before (5.5) requires L0m0 ≥ 1, and this is not stated explicitly. The constants in Lemma 4.2 can be chosen so that this holds, for example by taking b sufficiently small in the definition of L0; the paper should record this choice.
  2. [Section 2.1] The assertion that u_k is a viscosity solution of (2.8) across the interface t=t_k needs a short justification: the function is only piecewise C^2 and ∂_t u_k jumps at t_k for x≠0, so the pointwise computation given does not by itself cover test functions touching at t=t_k.
  3. [Section 3, around (3.9)] The one-sided Taylor bound containing the term -a(t-t_hat) is not a direct consequence of semiconcavity alone; it uses the contact inequality ∂_t u ≤ a from (3.6). A sentence explaining this dependence would help the reader follow the proof of the Lipschitz continuity of Φ.
  4. [Appendix, Proposition 5.2] There is a typo in the introductory sentence: 'convinience' should be 'convenience'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Harnack and weak Harnack inequalities are derived from the structural ellipticity assumptions by self-contained lemmas.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Theorem 1.1 is obtained from Lemma 3.2 (basic measure estimate), Lemma 4.2 (local boundedness barrier), Lemma 5.1 (measure estimate in intrinsic paraboloid sets), and the Vitali-type covering Proposition 5.2 via layer-cake iteration. Theorem 1.2 is obtained from Corollary 5.3, Lemma 4.4, and Lemma 6.1; the forward-time part is a continuity argument using the backward estimate. Each lemma is proved directly: Lemma 3.1 uses the contact-set and area-formula method; Lemma 4.1 is an explicit pointwise computation for the barrier psi; Lemmas 4.2-4.4 iterate the scaling in Remark 2.2. The desired Harnack estimate never appears as an input or hidden assumption. The only self-citations [4,5] appear in a sentence of related work on gradient-drift equations and are not used in any proof; no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work. The Section 2.1 example applies the already-stated Theorem 1.2 to a model solution and is illustrative rather than load-bearing for the proof. Thus there is no circular step.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No data are fitted. The only numbers chosen by hand are universal proof constants (a, q0, alpha0, b, m0, L0) whose precise values are immaterial to the theorem statements; they are constructed, not postulated. The axioms are standard tools of viscosity and geometric measure theory plus the theorem's structural hypotheses. No new particles, forces, dimensions, or empirical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • a (amplitude of sliding test functions phi_(y,s)) = 16^p
    Chosen in Lemma 3.2 to make the sliding-paraboloid contact argument work (phi(0,0) >= 1+1/p while phi <= 0 outside a small ball). A proof constant, not a data fit; the theorem statements do not depend on its value.
  • q0, alpha0 (barrier shape parameters)
    Lemma 4.1 requires q0 large enough in the sense q0 >= Lambda(n-1)/lambda and q0^{p-2} > (1/lambda)(3/2)^{p-2}, and alpha0 small enough so that -c a + C a^{p-1} < 0 for a = alpha^{1/(p-2)}. Values are existential and universal; they are used to build m0 and L0 in Lemma 4.2.
  • b, m0, L0 (Lemma 4.2 constants)
    b is chosen with (3/2)b^alpha < 1/32; m0 = 4^{-beta-1} alpha^{1/(p-2)} g(17/18) < 1 and L0 = m0^{-1} alpha^{1/(p-2)} b^{-beta} 2^{q0} > 1. They set the scale for the propagation-of-boundedness iteration used in Theorems 1.1 and 1.2.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption F satisfies the stated ellipticity/degeneracy bounds with 0 < lambda <= Lambda and p > 2, and F(0, xi, x, t) = 0
    This is the hypothesis of the theorems (Section 1); the whole scaling structure is built on it.
  • standard math Viscosity solutions and supersolutions are defined as in Definition 2.1, with u continuous
    Standard viscosity solution framework; the paper uses touching test functions, inf-convolution, and a.e. differentiability of semiconcave functions.
  • standard math Reduction from (1.1) to the extremal Pucci inequalities (2.4)-(2.5)
    Standard consequence of uniform ellipticity following Caffarelli [11]; the paper explicitly replaces the full equation by the two extremal inequalities.
  • standard math Inf-convolution preserves supersolutions of (2.4) and yields semiconcavity, hence a.e. twice differentiability and the pointwise inequality (3.3)
    Used at the start of Lemma 3.1; standard in viscosity theory, implicitly citing [12].
  • standard math Area formula for Lipschitz maps and the AM-GM determinant step in Lemma 3.1
    Basis of the contact-set measure estimate; the determinant computation and the rank-deficiency of M2 are verified in the text.
  • standard math Vitali-type covering Proposition 5.2, Zorn's lemma, Lindelof property
    Used in the superlevel-set decay argument in Theorem 1.1; fully proven in the Appendix.
  • standard math Scaling invariance of the extremal inequalities (Remark 2.2)
    Direct computation from homogeneity; used repeatedly in Lemmas 4.3, 5.1, and 6.1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Harnack inequality for degenerate fully nonlinear parabolic equations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YXQN7DX6

@misc{pith2026250610608,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Harnack inequality for degenerate fully nonlinear parabolic equations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YXQN7DX6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.10608}
}
abstract

We consider degenerate fully nonlinear parabolic equations, which generalize the p-parabolic equation with $p>2$ to nondivergence form operators. We prove an intrinsic Harnack inequality for nonnegative solutions and a weak Harnack inequality for nonnegative supersolutions. These results can be seen as the nondivergence form counterparts of the results by DiBenedetto, Gianazza and Vespri (Acta Math. 2008) and Kuusi (Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa 2008).

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Harnack inequality for anisotropic fully nonlinear equations with nonstandard growth

    math.AP 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    Viscosity solutions of anisotropic fully nonlinear equations with nonstandard growth satisfy an intrinsic Harnack inequality under a gap condition on the exponents (p_i).

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [19]

    (English summary) Ann

    Forward, backward and elliptic Harnack inequalities for nonnegative solutions to certain singular para- bolic partial differential equations. (English summary) Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5) 9 (2010), no. 2, 385-422

    work page 2010

  2. [33]

    Boundary H¨ older gradient estimates for parabolicp-Laplace type equations, arXiv:2506.01018

    work page Pith review arXiv

  3. [1]

    Andrade, D

    P. Andrade, D. Pellegrino, E. Pimentel & E. V. O. Teixeira;C 1-regularity for degenerate diffusion equations, Adv. Math.409(2022), Paper No. 108667, 34 pp

    work page 2022

  4. [2]

    D. J. Ara´ ujo, G. C. Ricarte & E. V. O. Teixeira; Geometric gradient estimates for solutions to degenerate elliptic equations, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations53(2015), no. 3-4, 605–625. 34PARABOLIC HARNACK ETC

    work page 2015

  5. [3]

    S. N. Armstrong & C. K. Smart; Regularity and stochastic homogenization of fully nonlinear equations without uniform ellipticity, Ann. Probab.42(2014), no. 6, 2558–2594

    work page 2014

  6. [4]

    Arya; An intrinsic Harnack inequality for some non-homogeneous parabolic equations in non-divergence form, Calc

    V. Arya; An intrinsic Harnack inequality for some non-homogeneous parabolic equations in non-divergence form, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations61(2022), no. 1, Paper No. 30, 31 pp

    work page 2022

  7. [5]

    Arya & V

    V. Arya & V. Julin; H¨ older continuity and Harnack estimate for non-homogeneous parabolic equations, Math. Ann.391(2025), no. 2, 2319–2335

    work page 2025

  8. [6]

    Attouchi; Local regularity for quasi-linear parabolic equations in non-divergence form, Nonlinear Anal.199 (2020), 112051, 28 pp

    A. Attouchi; Local regularity for quasi-linear parabolic equations in non-divergence form, Nonlinear Anal.199 (2020), 112051, 28 pp

    work page 2020

Show all 40 references
  1. [7]

    Attouchi & E

    A. Attouchi & E. Ruosteenoja; Gradient regularity for a singular parabolic equation in non-divergence form, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst.40(2020), no. 10, 5955–5972

    2020

  2. [8]

    Avelin; Boundary behavior of solutions to the parabolic p-Laplace equation II

    B. Avelin; Boundary behavior of solutions to the parabolic p-Laplace equation II. J. Funct. Anal.279(2020), no. 1, 108515

    2020

  3. [9]

    Banerjee & R

    A. Banerjee & R. B. Verma;C 1,α regularity for degenerate fully nonlinear elliptic equations with Neumann boundary conditions, Potential Anal.57(2022), no. 3, 327–365

    2022

  4. [10]

    Birindelli & F

    I. Birindelli & F. Demengel;C 1,β regularity for Dirichlet problems associated to fully nonlinear degenerate elliptic equations, ESAIM Control Optim. Calc. Var.20(2014), no. 4, 1009–1024

    2014

  5. [11]

    Caffarelli; Interior a priori estimates for solutions of fully nonlinear equations

    L. Caffarelli; Interior a priori estimates for solutions of fully nonlinear equations. Ann. of Math. (2) 130, (1989) no. 1, 189-213

    1989

  6. [12]

    Caffarelli & X

    L. Caffarelli & X. Cabre; Fully nonlinear elliptic equations. American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publi- cations, 43. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI (1995)

    1995

  7. [13]

    Daskalopoulos & R

    P. Daskalopoulos & R. S. Hamilton; Regularity of the free boundary for the porous medium equation, J. Amer. Math. Soc.11(1998), no. 4, 899–965

    1998

  8. [14]

    Daskalopoulos & R

    P. Daskalopoulos & R. S. Hamilton;C ∞-regularity of the interface of the evolutionp-Laplacian equation, Math. Res. Lett.5(1998), no. 5, 685–701

    1998

  9. [15]

    Delarue; Krylov and Safonov estimates for degenerate quasilinear elliptic PDEs, J

    F. Delarue; Krylov and Safonov estimates for degenerate quasilinear elliptic PDEs, J. Differential Equations248 (2010), no. 4, 924–951

    2010

  10. [16]

    DiBenedetto; Intrinsic Harnack type inequalities for solutions of certain degenerate parabolic equations, Arch

    E. DiBenedetto; Intrinsic Harnack type inequalities for solutions of certain degenerate parabolic equations, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal.100(1988), no. 2, 129–147

    1988

  11. [17]

    DiBenedetto; Degenerate parabolic equations

    E. DiBenedetto; Degenerate parabolic equations. Universitext. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993

    1993

  12. [18]

    DiBenedetto, U

    E. DiBenedetto, U. Gianazza & V. Vespri; Harnack estimates for quasi-linear degenerate parabolic differential equations. Acta Math. 200 (2008), no. 2, 181-209

    2008

  13. [20]

    Springer Monographs in Mathe- matics

    Harnack’s inequality for degenerate and singular parabolic equations. Springer Monographs in Mathe- matics. Springer, New York, 2012. xiv+278 pp. ISBN: 978-1-4614-1583-1

    2012

  14. [21]

    Imbert, T

    C. Imbert, T. Jin & L. E. Silvestre; H¨ older gradient estimates for a class of singular or degenerate parabolic equations, Adv. Nonlinear Anal.8(2019), no. 1, 845–867. PARABOLIC HARNACK ETC.35

    2019

  15. [22]

    Imbert & L

    C. Imbert & L. E. Silvestre;C 1,α regularity of solutions of some degenerate fully non-linear elliptic equations, Adv. Math.233(2013), 196–206

    2013

  16. [23]

    Imbert & L

    C. Imbert & L. E. Silvestre; Estimates on elliptic equations that hold only where the gradient is large. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 18 (2016), no. 6, 1321-1338

    2016

  17. [24]

    Introduction to fully nonlinear parabolic equations. 2012. hal-00798300

    2012

  18. [25]

    N. V. Krylov & M. V. Safonov; An estimate for the probability of a diffusion process hitting a set of positive measure, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR245(1979), no. 1, 18–20

    1979

  19. [26]

    N. V. Krylov & M. V. Safonov; A property of the solutions of parabolic equations with measurable coefficients. (Russian) Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 44 (1980), no. 1, 161-175

    1980

  20. [27]

    Kurkinen, M

    T. Kurkinen, M. Parviainen & J. Siltakoski; Elliptic Harnack’s inequality for a singular nonlinear parabolic equation in non-divergence form, Bull. Lond. Math. Soc.55(2023), no. 1, 470–489

    2023

  21. [28]

    Kurkinen & J

    T. Kurkinen & J. Siltakoski; Intrinsic Harnack’s inequality for a general nonlinear parabolic equation in non- divergence form, Potential Anal.62(2025), no. 2, 393–437

    2025

  22. [29]

    Kuusi; Harnack estimates for supersolutions to a nonlinear degenerate parabolic equation, PhD thesis, Report A532, Helsinki University of Technology, Institute of Mathematics, 2007

    T. Kuusi; Harnack estimates for supersolutions to a nonlinear degenerate parabolic equation, PhD thesis, Report A532, Helsinki University of Technology, Institute of Mathematics, 2007

    2007

  23. [30]

    Kuusi; Harnack estimates for weak supersolutions to nonlinear degenerate parabolic equations

    T. Kuusi; Harnack estimates for weak supersolutions to nonlinear degenerate parabolic equations. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5) 7 (2008), no. 4, 673-716

    2008

  24. [31]

    K. A. Lee, S. C. Lee & H. Yun;C 1,α-regularity for solutions of degenerate/singular fully nonlinear parabolic equations, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9)181(2024), 152–189

    2024

  25. [32]

    S. C. Lee, Y. Lian, H. Yun & K. Zhang; Time derivative estimates for parabolicp-Laplace equations and appli- cations to optimal regularity. arXiv:2503.04384

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    Mooney; Harnack inequality for degenerate and singular elliptic equations with unbounded drift, J

    C. Mooney; Harnack inequality for degenerate and singular elliptic equations with unbounded drift, J. Differential Equations258(2015), no. 5, 1577–1591

    2015

  27. [35]

    Parviainen & J

    M. Parviainen & J. L. V´ azquez; Equivalence between radial solutions of different parabolic gradient-diffusion equations and applications, Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5)21(2020), 303–359

    2020

  28. [36]

    M. V. Safonov; Unimprovability of estimates of H¨ older constants for solutions of linear elliptic equations with measurable coefficients. Math. USSR-Sb.60(1988), no. 1, 269–281; translated from Mat. Sb. (N.S.)132(174) (1987), no. 2, 275–288

    1988

  29. [37]

    Savin; Small perturbation solutions for elliptic equations

    O. Savin; Small perturbation solutions for elliptic equations. Comm. Partial Differential Equations 32, (2007), 557-578

    2007

  30. [38]

    N. S. Trudinger; Local estimates for subsolutions and supersolutions of general second order elliptic quasilinear equations, Invent. Math.61(1980), no. 1, 67–79

    1980

  31. [39]

    Wang; On the regularity theory of fully nonlinear parabolic equations

    L. Wang; On the regularity theory of fully nonlinear parabolic equations. I, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 45 (1) (1992) 27-76

    1992

  32. [40]

    Wang; Small perturbation solutions for parabolic equations, Indiana Univ

    Y. Wang; Small perturbation solutions for parabolic equations, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 62 (2) (2013) 671-697. 36PARABOLIC HARNACK ETC. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Jyv¨askyl¨a, Finland Email address, Vedansh Arya:vedansh.v.arya@jyu.fi Department of Ma...

    2013

Pith tools

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