Multiple Blow-Up Phenomena for $Q$-Curvature in High Dimensions

Almir Silva Santos; Rayssa Caju

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 57 references

Multiple Blow-Up Phenomena for $Q$-Curvature in High Dimensions

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that, in dimensions n≥25, arbitrarily near any admissible metric one can find a metric whose conformal class contains infinitely many constant Q-curvature metrics with arbitrarily large energy and volume.

desk verdict A serious, mostly coherent extension of Marques to Q-curvature, but the positivity proof has an invalid negative-part test function and the final maximum-principle hypotheses are unchecked; it deserves a referee but needs repair. read the letter →

arxiv 2512.13811 v2 pith:Z7WSZSKO submitted 2025-12-15 math.DG

Rayssa Caju , Almir Silva Santos This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.DG MSC 35B0953C2135J3035J60

keywords Q-curvaturePaneitzoperatorconstantproblemcompactnessconjecturemultipleblow-upbubblegluingLyapunov-Schmidtreductiondimensionthresholdn=25

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 claims that on any closed Riemannian manifold of dimension at least 25 with positive Yamabe invariant and positive fourth-order invariant, compactness for the constant Q-curvature problem fails as badly as possible: arbitrarily close in the C^1 topology there is a metric whose conformal class contains infinitely many distinct smooth metrics sharing the same constant Q-curvature (that of the round sphere) and having arbitrarily large energy, together with a sequence of such metrics whose volumes diverge. This would transplant to the fourth-order Paneitz/Q-curvature setting the counterexamples long known for the scalar-curvature (Yamabe) problem. The proof builds approximate solutions by gluing many standard bubbles into a small ball, then uses a Lyapunov–Schmidt reduction and a reduced energy functional with a strict local minimum to produce genuine solutions. Sympathetic readers should read the result as strong evidence that the natural compactness conjecture for Q-curvature is false in high dimensions and that the threshold n=25 matches the scalar-curvature phenomenon.

What carries the argument

The engine is the multi-bubble ansatz W = Σ cut-off standard bubbles (explicit positive solutions w(ξ,λ)(x)=(2λ/(λ²+|x−ξ|²))^{(n−4)/2} of Δ²w=d(n)w^{(n+4)/(n−4)} on R^n), combined with a Lyapunov–Schmidt reduction: the equation is solved in the orthogonal complement of the finitely many scaling/translation modes (the φ_{ξ,ε,k}), leaving a finite-dimensional system whose critical points give full solutions. The reduction uses a coercivity estimate for the linearized operator on the complement, proved via a blow-up/contradiction argument on the sphere that uses spectral gap of the Laplacian beyond the first two eigenspaces. The dimension condition n≥25 enters through an auxiliary fourth-order

What would settle it

Take the paper's explicit perturbation h with parameters satisfying the hypotheses, and compute pointwise inside B_s(p) the scalar curvature R_g and Q-curvature Q_g of g=exp(h). If, for some parameters allowed by the paper, either R_g<0 or Q_g<0 on a set where the solution U is nonzero, then the strong maximum principle cannot be invoked as written, and positivity (hence genuine existence of a positive constant-Q metric) is not established by the given proof.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem A: for n≥25, for any ε>0, there is a smooth metric g with ||g−g0||<ε (C^1) such that the set of conformal metrics to g with Q-curvature equal to n(n²−4)/8 and energy at least ℓ is infinite for every ℓ, and moreover there is a sequence of such metrics with volume tending to infinity. The construction starts from a metric g_s that is Euclidean on a small ball and C^1-close to g0, then superimposes a trace-free symmetric tensor h so g=exp(h). Inside the ball one places ℓ scaled standard bubbles w(ξ_i,ε_i) (solutions of Δ²w = d(n) w^{(n+4)/(n−4)} on R^n), cut off and glued disjointly. A Lyapunov–Schmidt reduction solves the nonlinear equation up to the finite-dimensi

Load-bearing premise

The argument that the constructed solution is strictly positive, rather than merely nonnegative, requires the perturbed metric g to have nonnegative scalar curvature and semipositive Q-curvature pointwise; the paper verifies the conformal invariants but not these pointwise signs on the balls where the bubbles live.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the main theorem is correct, the compactness conjecture for constant Q-curvature is false for every closed manifold of dimension n≥25 with the two positive invariants—compactness fails not at a single exceptional metric but arbitrarily close to any admissible metric in the C^1 topology.
The solution set M_g for a single conformal class is infinite with unbounded energy and volume, so compactness fails even after normalizing volume or energy.
The dimension threshold n=25 coincides with the known threshold for the scalar-curvature (Yamabe) blow-up, strengthening the parallel between the fourth-order and second-order problems.
The construction yields solutions with Q-curvature set to the round-sphere constant n(n²−4)/8, showing the noncompactness is not an artifact of allowing the curvature constant to vary.
Because the perturbed metrics exist ε-close in C^1, any compactness theorem valid in high dimensions would have to require strictly stronger regularity or additional pointwise curvature hypotheses than C^1 closeness.

Reading between the lines

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

A likely extension the paper leaves implicit is that the same gluing should produce, for a single metric, prescribed numbers ℓ_1,...,ℓ_m of bubbles at different scales, yielding solutions whose energy grows like a sum of ℓ_t^{4/n}; the inductive argument already contains the seed of such a construction.
The positivity step via the strong maximum principle is the most fragile link: if one instead uses a weighted L^∞ norm as in earlier single-bubble work, positivity might be obtained without the pointwise R_g≥0 and Q_g≥0 hypotheses, possibly lowering the dimension threshold or simplifying the metric perturbation.
A testable consequence for neighboring problems: the same 'many bubbles in a small ball' mechanism should also destroy compactness for sixth-order and higher Q-curvature equations in dimensions where a similar polynomial with a negative local minimum exists; recent results show compactness holds below n=27 for the sixth-order analogue, matching the pattern.
For geometric flows, the existence of conformal classes with infinitely many constant-Q metrics of arbitrarily large volume suggests that any Q-curvature flow on such manifolds cannot converge to a unique limit from arbitrary initial data in high dimensions.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Bottom line: this is a serious preprint and the main theorem is probably true, but it is not fully proved as written. The advertised extension — multiple blow-up for constant Q-curvature in n≥25 — is genuinely new, and the Lyapunov–Schmidt machinery, energy expansion, and reduction to the Wei–Zhao functional are the right tools. The overall structure is not circular: the proof leans on external theorems ([18], [19], [56], [39]) rather than assuming the conclusion, and the citations look appropriate. If the positivity gap I describe below is fixed, this is a major within-field result.

The main technical work is substantial and, as far as I can tell from a careful read, coherent. Proposition 5.11 and the surrounding estimates have the right scaling, the dimension threshold n≥25 matches the known single-bubble threshold, and the decision to build on Wei–Zhao's polynomial and reduced functional is reasonable. The paper extends Marques's multi-bubble construction to a fourth-order setting, which is exactly the nontrivial step.

Now the soft spots. The reader's conditional verdict is fair, but the stress-test note identifies the sharper problem. In Theorem 3.11, after obtaining the weak solution U, the paper sets φ = min{0,U} and uses it as a test function. That is not legitimate for a fourth-order problem: for a general H² function, the negative part is not H², and the second derivatives acquire a measure on the nodal set. So the claimed contradiction after (3.50) does not prove U≥0. This is a concrete analytic gap, located before the maximum-principle step, and it is load-bearing because Proposition 6.1 needs a nonnegative solution. It is probably repairable — the weighted L∞ argument from Wei–Zhao, or a regularization of the test function, should work — but the text as written does not contain that argument.

The related but secondary issue is the final invocation of [19, Theorem A]. That maximum principle requires pointwise R_g≥0 and Q_g≥0 for the metric in the equation. Here Q_{g_s}≡0 on the ball and the perturbed metric only satisfies |Q_g−Q_{g_s}|≤cα, so the sign of Q_g is not controlled. The phrase “By [18] and the maximum principle” is too quick. Maybe one can conformally deform g to a representative with positive scalar and Q-curvature and then transfer positivity back via the conformal transformation law, but that route is not written.

Who is this for? People working in conformal geometry and geometric PDE, specifically the compactness/noncompactness literature for Q-curvature. The paper deserves a serious referee: the central construction is plausible and carefully developed, and the holes are specific and likely fixable rather than signs of a broken strategy. I would not cite it as a finished result until the positivity argument is repaired, but I would bring it to a reading group for exactly that discussion.

Recommendation: send it to peer review, and make sure the referee focuses on Theorem 3.11 and Proposition 6.1.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper claims that on any closed Riemannian manifold of dimension n ≥ 25 with positive Yamabe invariant and positive fourth-order invariant Y_4, there are metrics arbitrarily C^1-close to the background metric whose conformal classes contain infinitely many smooth metrics with constant Q-curvature equal to that of the round sphere, with arbitrarily large energy, and with a sequence of such metrics having unbounded volume. The proof follows the Marques multiple-bubble strategy for the Yamabe problem: construct a metric that is conformally flat on a small ball, glue ℓ standard Paneitz bubbles, perform a Lyapunov–Schmidt reduction, expand the reduced energy using the Wei–Zhao fourth-order polynomial, and finally use the Gursky–Malchiodi maximum principle to obtain positivity of the solution.

Significance. If correct, the theorem would show that the compactness conjecture for the constant Q-curvature problem fails maximally in dimensions n ≥ 25, in precise analogy with the Yamabe case. This is a natural and substantial extension of [42] to a fourth-order setting. The paper contains a detailed reduction and many nontrivial energy estimates, and it correctly identifies the dimension threshold and the Wei–Zhao polynomial as the key mechanism. The framework is plausible and the external tools are appropriate. However, the proof of positivity — a load-bearing ingredient — has a concrete gap, and the final application of the Gursky–Malchiodi maximum principle is not justified as written.

major comments (2)

[Theorem 3.11, around (3.44)–(3.50)] The proof that U ≥ 0 is not valid. The text sets φ = min{0, U} and uses it both as a test function in the weak formulation and as an admissible function in the definition of Y_4 in (1.5). For a general smooth (or W^{2,2}) function U, the negative part min{0, U} is not in W^{2,2}(M,g): across a transverse nodal set the second derivatives acquire Dirac-type singularities. Thus the integral identity after (3.44) is not justified, and the contradiction using Y_4 > 0 does not follow. Moreover, even if a smooth admissible truncation were used, the step from the equation for U to the inequality (3.50) would require comparing ⟨P_g φ, φ⟩ with ⟨P_g U, U⟩; the text supplies no such comparison. Since the nonnegativity of U is essential for the application of the maximum principle in Proposition 6.1, this is a load-bearing gap. A repair is needed, for example via the weighted-L∞ argument of [56] or a
[Proposition 6.1, final step] The final step 'By [18] and the maximum principle [19, Theorem A]' does not verify the hypotheses of [19]. The strong maximum principle in [19] requires pointwise R_g ≥ 0 and Q_g ≥ 0, with Q_g > 0 somewhere. For the constructed metric g = exp(h) on B_s(p), the paper only establishes |Q_g − Q_{g_s}| ≤ cα, while Q_{g_s} ≡ 0 inside B_s(p); hence Q_g can change sign, and no pointwise lower bound is given for R_g. The result of [18] gives a conformal metric with positive scalar and Q-curvature, but that is not the metric g for which U solves the Paneitz equation, and no transformation argument is supplied to transfer positivity to U. Therefore the conclusion that U > 0 in Proposition 6.1 is not established by the text as written.

minor comments (5)

[Proposition 2.1] Item (b) is labeled as convergence of Y_4, but the proof actually estimates Y_4^+; the notation in items (b) and (c) is inconsistent and should be corrected.
[Section 3] In Theorem 3.11, after obtaining (3.45), the text says 'In particular, U is smooth.' This is true by elliptic regularity once the coefficients and the right-hand side are sufficiently regular, but the bootstrap is not spelled out; a short justification would help.
[Section 2.2] In the definition of D(α,r), the condition |ξ_i − ξ_j| > 2(r_i + r_j) appears, but later in Section 5 the stronger separation (5.3) is introduced. It would be useful to comment on why the earlier condition suffices for the intermediate lemmas.
[Section 5.3] The reduced functional F is introduced as depending on (ξ,λ) ∈ R^n × (0,∞), but in (5.18) and in Proposition 6.1 it is evaluated at (ξ_t/λ_t, ε_t/λ_t). The notation is understandable but should be made uniform to avoid confusion.
[Throughout] There are numerous typographical issues (e.g., 'MUL TIPLE' in the title header, 'V ary' in Section 1, inconsistent spacing in equations). A careful proofreading pass is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the key reduced-energy and maximum-principle inputs are external, and the only overlapping-author citation is technical and non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The proof chain is: construct a C^1-close conformally flat perturbation g_s (Prop 2.1); glue ℓ standard bubbles into W; solve the projected equation by a Lyapunov–Schmidt contraction (Thm 3.10), with the error controlled by α (Prop 2.2); prove critical points of the reduced energy F_g give weak solutions (Thm 3.11); approximate F_g by ℓ copies of the Wei–Zhao reduced functional F (Prop 5.11, using the Γ and z from [56]); invoke [56, Prop 11.6] for a strict local minimum of F at (0,1); then obtain a critical point in P(λ,y), positive by the maximum principle [19, Theorem A]. The target result—infinitely many high-energy constant-Q metrics with unbounded volume—is never assumed. The parameters λ, μ, ρ are free and are chosen only to make the error terms tend to zero; no parameter is fitted to the conclusion. The only citation involving the present authors is [2], used in Proposition 2.2 as 'as in [2, Section 5] and [56, Section 4]' for pointwise Paneitz estimates. Those estimates are simultaneously supplied by the external paper [56], and [2] does not assume or contain Theorem A. The separate analytic concern about using min{0,U} as an H^2 test function in Theorem 3.11 is a correctness gap in the positivity argument, not a circular reduction, so it does not raise the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The proof introduces no new physical or geometric entities; the bubbles and perturbation tensors are standard tools. The main external assumptions are the Wei-Zhao reduced-energy result and the Gursky-Malchiodi maximum principle. The free parameters are construction parameters, not empirically fitted quantities, but their specific choices drive the asymptotic analysis.

free parameters (3)

bubble scaling parameters λ_N, μ_N, ρ_N = λ_N=2^{-N}, μ_N=2^{-N/3}, ρ_N=(4N²)^{-1}
Chosen by hand to satisfy the inequalities (5.2), (5.3), and the decay condition μ^{-2}ρ^{4-n}λ^{n-24}→0. These are construction parameters, not empirical fits, but the proof depends on their specific scaling.
coefficients of the fourth-order polynomial f = f(x)=τ−1200x+2411x²−135x³+x⁴
Borrowed from Wei-Zhao [56] to make the reduced energy have a strict local minimum for n≥25. The paper does not rederive these coefficients; it treats them as an input from prior work.
tensor W defining the perturbation h = arbitrary Weyl-symmetric tensor with at least one nonzero component
The nonzero component guarantees the leading-order energy term does not vanish. Any such tensor works; it is a structural choice rather than a fitted constant.

assumptions (4)

standard math Lin's classification of all positive H² solutions to Δ²w = d(n) w^{(n+4)/(n-4)} in R^n.
Used in Section 2.2 to characterize the standard bubbles w_{(ξ,λ)}.
domain assumption Wei-Zhao's reduced energy F has a strict local minimum at (0,1) with F(0,1)<0 for n≥25.
Invoked in Section 6, Proposition 6.1, through [56, Proposition 11.6]. This external result is the source of the dimension threshold n≥25.
ad hoc to paper The constructed metric g satisfies the hypotheses of the Gursky-Malchiodi strong maximum principle [19, Theorem A].
Used at the end of Proposition 6.1 to conclude U>0 from U≥0. The paper does not verify R_g≥0 and Q_g≥0 for the perturbed metric, so this is a load-bearing unproven premise.
domain assumption The background metric can be conformally deformed so that both scalar curvature and Q-curvature are positive, via [18].
Used at the start of Section 2 to justify the standing assumption R_{g0}>0 and Q_{g0}>0.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multiple Blow-Up Phenomena for $Q$-Curvature in High Dimensions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Z7WSZSKO

@misc{pith2026251213811,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multiple Blow-Up Phenomena for $Q$-Curvature in High Dimensions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Z7WSZSKO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.13811}
}

abstract

Let $(M,g_0)$ be a closed Riemannian manifold of dimension $n \geq 25$ with positive Yamabe invariant $Y(M,g_0)>0$ and positive fourth-order invariant $Y_4(M,g_0)>0$. We show that, arbitrarily $C^1$-close to $g_0$, there exists a Riemannian metric such that, within its conformal class, one can find infinitely many smooth metrics with the same constant $Q$-curvature and arbitrarily large energy. Moreover, within this conformal class, there exists a sequence of smooth metrics with constant $Q$-curvature equal to $n(n^2-4)/8$ and unbounded volume. This extends to the $Q$-curvature setting the result previously obtained for the scalar curvature in Marques (2015) (see also Gond and Li (2025)). The proof is based on constructing small perturbations of multiple standard bubbles that are glued together.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

[18]

M. J. Gursky, F. Hang, and Y.-J. Lin. Riemannian manifolds with positive Yamabe invariant and Paneitz operator.Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, 2016(5):1348–1367, 2016

2016
[19]

M. J. Gursky and A. Malchiodi. A strong maximum principle for the Paneitz operator and a non-local flow for theQ-curvature.J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 17(9):2137–2173, 2015

2015
[56]

Wei and C

J. Wei and C. Zhao. Non-compactness of the prescribed Q-curvature problem in large dimensions.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 46(1-2):123–164, 2013

2013
[39]

C.-S. Lin. A classification of solutions of a conformally invariant fourth order equation inR n.Comment. Math. Helv., 73(2):206–231, 1998

1998
[42]

C. L. Marques.Multiple Blow-up Solutions for the Yamabe problem in compact Riemannian manifolds of dimensionn≥25. Phd thesis, IMPA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2015

2015
[1]

Ambrosetti and A

A. Ambrosetti and A. Malchiodi. A multiplicity result for the Yamabe problem onS n.J. Funct. Anal., 168(2):529–561, 1999

1999
[2]

J. H. Andrade, R. Caju, J. M. do ´O, J. Ratzkin, and A. Silva Santos. ConstantQ-curvature metrics with Delaunay ends: the nondegenerate case.Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5), 25(2):965–1031, 2024

2024
[3]

T. Aubin. ´ equations diff´ erentielles non lin´ eaires et probl` eme de Yamabe concernant la courbure scalaire.J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 55(3):269–296, 1976

1976

Show all 57 references

[4]

Berti and A

M. Berti and A. Malchiodi. Non-compactness and multiplicity results for the Yamabe problem onS n.J. Funct. Anal., 180(1):210–241, 2001

2001
[5]

R. G. Bettiol, P. Piccione, and Y. Sire. Nonuniqueness of conformal metrics with constantQ-curvature.Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, (9):6967–6992, 2021

2021
[6]

T. P. Branson. Differential operators canonically associated to a conformal structure.Math. Scand., 57(2):293– 345, 1985

1985
[7]

S. Brendle. Blow-up phenomena for the Yamabe equation.J. Amer. Math. Soc., 21(4):951–979, 2008

2008
[8]

Brendle and F

S. Brendle and F. C. Marques. Blow-up phenomena for the Yamabe equation. II.J. Differential Geom., 81(2):225–250, 2009

2009
[9]

S.-Y. A. Chang, M. Eastwood, B. Ørsted, and P. C. Yang. What isQ-curvature?Acta Appl. Math., 102(2- 3):119–125, 2008

2008
[10]

S.-Y. A. Chang and P. C. Yang. Extremal metrics of zeta function determinants on 4-manifolds.Ann. of Math. (2), 142(1):171–212, 1995

1995
[11]

S.-Y. A. Chang and P. C. Yang. On a fourth order curvature invariant. InSpectral problems in geometry and arithmetic (Iowa City, IA, 1997), volume 237 ofContemp. Math., pages 9–28. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1999

1997
[12]

Djadli and A

Z. Djadli and A. Malchiodi. Existence of conformal metrics with constantQ-curvature.Ann. of Math. (2), 168(3):813–858, 2008

2008
[13]

Djadli, A

Z. Djadli, A. Malchiodi, and M. O. Ahmedou. Prescribing a fourth order conformal invariant on the standard sphere. II. Blow up analysis and applications.Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5), 1(2):387–434, 2002

2002
[14]

O. Druet. Compactness for Yamabe metrics in low dimensions.Int. Math. Res. Not., (23):1143–1191, 2004

2004
[15]

Gazzola, H.-C

F. Gazzola, H.-C. Grunau, and G. Sweers.Polyharmonic boundary value problems, volume 1991 ofLecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2010. Positivity preserving and nonlinear higher order elliptic equations in bounded domains

1991
[16]

L. Gong, S. Kim, and J. Wei. Compactness and non-compactness theorems of the fourth- and sixth-order constantQ-curvature problems.arXiv 2502.14237, 2025

2025
[17]

Gong and Y

L. Gong and Y. Li. Conformal metrics of constant scalar curvature with unbounded volumes.Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3), 131(1):Paper No. e70069, 55, 2025

2025
[20]

Hang and P

F. Hang and P. C. Yang. The Sobolev inequality for Paneitz operator on three manifolds.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 21(1):57–83, 2004

2004
[21]

Hang and P

F. Hang and P. C. Yang. Lectures on the fourth-orderQcurvature equation. InGeometric analysis around scalar curvatures, volume 31 ofLect. Notes Ser. Inst. Math. Sci. Natl. Univ. Singap., pages 1–33. World Sci. Publ., Hackensack, NJ, 2016

2016
[22]

Hang and P

F. Hang and P. C. Yang.Qcurvature on a class of 3-manifolds.Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 69(4):734–744, 2016

2016
[23]

Hang and P

F. Hang and P. C. Yang.Q-curvature on a class of manifolds with dimension at least 5.Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 69(8):1452–1491, 2016

2016
[24]

Hang and P

F. Hang and P. C. Yang. Paneitz operator for metrics nearS 3.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 56(4):Paper No. 106, 26, 2017

2017
[25]

Hebey and F

E. Hebey and F. Robert. Compactness and global estimates for the geometric Paneitz equation in high dimensions.Electron. Res. Announc. Amer. Math. Soc., 10:135–141, 2004. 42 R. CAJU AND A. SIL V A SANTOS

2004
[26]

Humbert and S

E. Humbert and S. Raulot. Positive mass theorem for the Paneitz-Branson operator.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 36(4):525–531, 2009

2009
[27]

M. A. Khuri, F. C. Marques, and R. M. Schoen. A compactness theorem for the Yamabe problem.J. Differential Geom., 81(1):143–196, 2009

2009
[28]

Kobayashi

O. Kobayashi. Scalar curvature of a metric with unit volume.Math. Ann., 279(2):253–265, 1987

1987
[29]

J. M. Lee and T. H. Parker. The Yamabe problem.Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.), 17(1):37–91, 1987

1987
[30]

G. Li. A compactness theorem on Branson’sQ-curvature equation.Pacific J. Math., 302(1):119–179, 2019

2019
[31]

J. Li, Y. Li, and P. Liu. TheQ-curvature on a 4-dimensional Riemannian manifold (M, g) with R M QdVg = 8π2. Adv. Math., 231(3-4):2194–2223, 2012

2012
[32]

M. Li. A note on prescribed Q-curvature.Pacific J. Math., 319(1):181–188, 2022

2022
[33]

M. Li. Conformal metrics with finite total Q-curvature revisited.arXiv 2405.09872, 2024

2024 arXiv
[34]

Li and B

M. Li and B. Ma. Existence of complete conformal metrics onR n with prescribed q-curvature.arXiv 2503.23689, 2025

2025 arXiv
[35]

Li and J

M. Li and J. Wei. A remark on the Case-Gursky-V´ etois identity and its applications.Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 153(8):3417–3430, 2025

2025
[36]

Li and J

Y. Li and J. Xiong. Compactness of conformal metrics with constantQ-curvature. I.Adv. Math., 345:116–160, 2019

2019
[37]

Y. Y. Li and L. Zhang. Compactness of solutions to the Yamabe problem. II.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 24(2):185–237, 2005

2005
[38]

Y. Y. Li and L. Zhang. Compactness of solutions to the Yamabe problem. III.J. Funct. Anal., 245(2):438–474, 2007

2007
[40]

Malchiodi

A. Malchiodi. Compactness of solutions to some geometric fourth-order equations.J. Reine Angew. Math., 594:137–174, 2006

2006
[41]

Malchiodi

A. Malchiodi. On conformal metrics with constantQ-curvature.Anal. Theory Appl., 35(2):117–143, 2019

2019
[43]

F. C. Marques. A priori estimates for the Yamabe problem in the non-locally conformally flat case.J. Differential Geom., 71(2):315–346, 2005

2005
[44]

F. C. Marques. Blow-up examples for the Yamabe problem.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 36(3):377– 397, 2009

2009
[45]

Mazumdar and B

S. Mazumdar and B. Premoselli. Compactness of conformal metrics with constant Q-curvature of higher order. arXiv 2510.00888, 2025

2025
[46]

L. I. Nicolaescu.Lectures on the geometry of manifolds. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Hackensack, NJ, third edition, [2021]©2021

2021
[47]

S. M. Paneitz. A quartic conformally covariant differential operator for arbitrary pseudo-Riemannian manifolds (summary).SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl., 4:Paper 036, 3, 2008

2008
[48]

D. Pollack. Nonuniqueness and high energy solutions for a conformally invariant scalar equation.Comm. Anal. Geom., 1(3-4):347–414, 1993

1993
[49]

Qing and D

J. Qing and D. Raske. Compactness for conformal metrics with constantQ-curvature on locally conformally flat manifolds.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 26(3):343–356, 2006

2006
[50]

O. Rey. The role of the Green’s function in a nonlinear elliptic equation involving the critical Sobolev exponent. J. Funct. Anal., 89(1):1–52, 1990

1990
[51]

R. Schoen. Conformal deformation of a Riemannian metric to constant scalar curvature.J. Differential Geom., 20(2):479–495, 1984

1984
[52]

R. M. Schoen. On the number of constant scalar curvature metrics in a conformal class. InDifferential geometry, volume 52 ofPitman Monogr. Surveys Pure Appl. Math., pages 311–320. Longman Sci. Tech., Harlow, 1991

1991
[53]

R. M. Schoen. A report on some recent progress on nonlinear problems in geometry. InSurveys in differential geometry (Cambridge, MA, 1990), pages 201–241. Lehigh Univ., Bethlehem, PA, 1991

1990
[54]

N. S. Trudinger. Remarks concerning the conformal deformation of Riemannian structures on compact manifolds.Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (3), 22:265–274, 1968

1968
[55]

Wei and C

J. Wei and C. Zhao. Non-compactness of the prescribed Q-curvature problem in large dimensions.arXiv 0903.3446, 2009

2009 arXiv
[57]

H. Yamabe. On a deformation of Riemannian structures on compact manifolds.Osaka Math. J., 12:21–37, 1960. MULTIPLE BLOW-UP PHENOMENA FORQ-CUR V ATURE IN HIGH DIMENSIONS 43 (R. Caju)Departamento de Ingenier´ıa Matem´atica and Centro de Modelamiento Matem´atico (CNRS IRL 2807), ...

1960

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [18]

M. J. Gursky, F. Hang, and Y.-J. Lin. Riemannian manifolds with positive Yamabe invariant and Paneitz operator.Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, 2016(5):1348–1367, 2016

2016

[2] [19]

M. J. Gursky and A. Malchiodi. A strong maximum principle for the Paneitz operator and a non-local flow for theQ-curvature.J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 17(9):2137–2173, 2015

2015

[3] [56]

Wei and C

J. Wei and C. Zhao. Non-compactness of the prescribed Q-curvature problem in large dimensions.Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 46(1-2):123–164, 2013

2013

[4] [39]

C.-S. Lin. A classification of solutions of a conformally invariant fourth order equation inR n.Comment. Math. Helv., 73(2):206–231, 1998

1998

[5] [42]

C. L. Marques.Multiple Blow-up Solutions for the Yamabe problem in compact Riemannian manifolds of dimensionn≥25. Phd thesis, IMPA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2015

2015

[6] [1]

Ambrosetti and A

A. Ambrosetti and A. Malchiodi. A multiplicity result for the Yamabe problem onS n.J. Funct. Anal., 168(2):529–561, 1999

1999

[7] [2]

J. H. Andrade, R. Caju, J. M. do ´O, J. Ratzkin, and A. Silva Santos. ConstantQ-curvature metrics with Delaunay ends: the nondegenerate case.Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5), 25(2):965–1031, 2024

2024

[8] [3]

T. Aubin. ´ equations diff´ erentielles non lin´ eaires et probl` eme de Yamabe concernant la courbure scalaire.J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 55(3):269–296, 1976

1976