Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Martingales, laminates and minimal Korn inequalities

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that the second Korn inequality needs exactly 2d−1 scalar measurements of the gradient, and that the first Korn inequality needs asymptotically 2d measurements, resolving a question posed in 2021.

desk verdict Sharp results on Chipot's Korn-measurement problem, with a clean algebraic reformulation and a genuinely useful martingale/laminate toolkit — but the proof of the flagship upper bound N'(d)≤2d−1 is written with the wrong ellipticity hypothesis and needs a revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2512.02784 v2 pith:LAGELVAE submitted 2025-12-02 math.AP

Gabriele Cassese This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35A2349J45
keywords Korninequalitiesrank-oneconvexityquasiconvexitylaminatesmartingalesHankelmatricesminimalmeasurementsL1non-inequality
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper settles a question about Korn's inequalities: how many scalar measurements of the gradient are enough to recover a Korn-type estimate on the whole gradient? The author shows that for the second Korn inequality the answer is exactly 2d−1 in dimension d, and for the first Korn inequality the answer grows as 2d asymptotically. The proof converts the problem into an algebraic statement about subspaces of matrices that avoid rank-one matrices, and then uses a systematic correspondence between laminates and martingales to build sharp examples. A concrete payout is a dimension-optimal Korn inequality: the full H1 norm of a vector field is controlled by its L2 norm plus the L2 norm of the projection of its gradient onto the (2d−1)-dimensional space of Hankel matrices. A sympathetic reader would care because this shows that the gradient norm is far more redundant than the standard symmetric-part control suggests, and it opens a martingale-based toolbox for sharp constants in calculus of variations.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are, on the algebraic side, the rank-one-avoiding subspaces of matrix space, and on the analytic side, a systematic correspondence between finite-order laminates and dyadic martingales. A laminate is a probability measure on matrix space obtained by repeated rank-one splitting, equivalently a dyadic martingale whose increments have rank one. The paper shows that the rank-one convex envelope of functions of the form Cp∥PX∥p−∥QX∥p is nonnegative exactly when X⊥ contains no rank-one matrices, and it uses the sharp subordination inequality for Hilbert-space martingales to compute the optimal constant p*−1. The Hankel matrices H(d) then provide the explicit dimension-mini

What would settle it

Compute N'(3) directly: the paper predicts 5. A single four-functional family of linear measurements for which the H1-control inequality holds on a cube would refute the lower bound N'(d)≥2d−1; likewise, a domain that is not John where the Hankel inequality still holds would test the reach of the representation theorem.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is an exact algebraic characterisation of when a Korn-type inequality holds: a subspace X of d×d matrices gives the L2 control ∥∇u∥ ≲ ∥PX(∇u)∥ exactly when its orthogonal complement contains no non-zero rank-one matrix. This reformulates the minimal numbers as N(d)=d2−nR(d,1) and N'(d)=d2−nC(d,1), the codimensions of the largest real/complex subspaces avoiding rank-one matrices. From this, the paper derives the exact value N'(d)=2d−1, the asymptotic N(d)∼2d (with N(d)≤2d−2 and equality infinitely often), and the inequality N(d)=d only for d∈{1,2,4,8}. The explicit extremal subspace is the space of Hankel matrices—matrices constant on each skew-diagonal—whose dimension i

Load-bearing premise

The exact value N'(d)=2d−1 depends on a pointwise representation theorem for operators whose symbol avoids complex rank-one matrices; if that representation fails (e.g., on domains that are not John domains), the dimension-optimal Hankel inequality for the second Korn inequality would collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Second Korn inequality: exactly 2d−1 scalar linear measurements of ∇u suffice (and are necessary) to control the H1 norm on Lipschitz domains, for every d.
  • First Korn inequality: the minimal number N(d) satisfies N(d)∼2d, with N(d)≤2d−2 and equality for d=2n+1 infinitely often; N(d)=d only for d∈{1,2,4,8}.
  • The Hankel projection gives a concrete dimension-optimal Korn inequality: ∥u∥H1 ≲ ∥u∥L2 + ∥PH(∇u)∥L2.
  • The classical L1 non-inequality is quantified: any first-order homogeneous operator with a rank-2 matrix in its kernel fails L1 control, and the optimal constant in the Lp version grows at least like p*−1.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The algebraic characterisation suggests the hard part of N(d) for each d is a purely topological question about immersion dimensions of real projective spaces; a closed form for N(d) would follow from an unresolved equality between the algebraic minimum and the immersion dimension, which the paper leaves open.
  • The sharp constant conjecture in the paper—that the Lp Hankel-Korn constant factorises as the L2 constant times p*−1—would, if true, connect the problem to a long-standing conjecture about the quasiconvexity of certain rank-one convex envelopes; the martingale method already proves the rank-one-convex side.
  • The same martingale–laminate correspondence could be pushed to higher-order operators and to rectangular gradients, as the paper begins, potentially yielding dimension bounds for general linear operators beyond first order.
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

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies Chipot's minimal number of scalar measurements needed for Korn-type control of the gradient. It reformulates the problem in terms of subspaces of matrices avoiding rank-one matrices, proves the algebraic characterisations N(d)=g_R(d) and N'(d)=g_C(d), and derives the sharp values N'(d)=2d−1 and N(d)=2d(1−o(1)), together with a dimension-optimal Korn inequality based on the Hankel subspace H(d). The paper also develops a martingale–laminate technique to obtain sharp constants, treats the rectangular case, extensions to L^p, and a quantitative proof of Ornstein's non-inequality.

Significance. If fully correct, these results settle the growth rate of Chipot's minimal dimensions and, in particular, give the exact closed form for the second Korn inequality. The Hankel projection inequality is a genuinely stronger and dimension-optimal replacement for the classical Korn inequality. The martingale–laminate connection with Burkholder's sharp constants is a promising tool for coercivity questions. The paper is also honest about the algebraic characterisation being previously known (Remark 3) and the external C-ellipticity theorem is clearly identified. However, two load-bearing arguments are not correctly written as they stand: the upper bound for N'(d) uses the wrong rank-one hypothesis, and the sharpness proof of Theorem 2.2 omits the scaling needed to reach the claimed constant. These are repairable, but the revision must close them before the central claims are fully established.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 4, Proof of N'(d)≤g_C(d)] The proof as written invokes [48] with the wrong hypothesis. It states: 'Let X be a subspace of M_d(C) such that X avoids all rank one matrices' and then claims that T_X(u)=P_X(∇u) satisfies condition (C). C-ellipticity of this operator requires that X_C^⊥ contains no nonzero complex rank-one matrix, equivalently P_X(a⊗ξ)≠0 for all nonzero a,ξ; this is exactly the condition stated in Remark 14. 'X avoids rank-one' is not equivalent and does not imply C-ellipticity. In fact H(d) itself contains rank-one matrices (e.g. the all-ones matrix), while H(d)^⊥ avoids rank-one by the polynomial-convolution argument. Thus the upper bound N'(d)≤2d−1 is not proved as written. The repair is straightforward: apply the argument to X=H(d) (or its complexification), verify H(d)_C^⊥∩R_1(C)=∅, and correct the wording. Because this step is load-bearing for the main exact value, it must be fixed explicitly in
  2. [Section 2, Theorem 2.2] The proof of the sharpness direction is only a sketch and does not, as written, yield the claimed threshold c(p*−1). The martingale M_n=A f_n + B g_n with A∈X, B∈X^⊥ has rank-one increments only if rank(A±B)=1, whereas the theorem assumes rank(A±cB)=1. To use the stated hypothesis one must scale the A-component, e.g. M_n=(1/c)A f_n + B g_n, and then track the induced ratio ∥Q_X(M_n)∥/∥P_X(M_n)∥. Without this scaling the argument gives only the threshold p*−1. Since Theorem 2.2 underlies the sharp-constant claims and the quantitative Ornstein result, this gap needs to be closed in the revision.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section 5, Theorem 5.2] The notation m◦d is used without definition. The paper defines d◦d in Section 3.1; the Hopf–Stiefel function should be defined or a reference given.
  2. [Table 2] The asterisked entries in Table 2 are intervals of best known bounds, but the caption does not say so. Please state explicitly that entries marked * are not exact values.
  3. [Theorem 3.2 proof] In the cohomology computation, write the tensor product over Z_2 and use H^*(RP^{d-1};Z_2) to avoid ambiguity about coefficients.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claims are derived from independent algebraic/analytic inputs; the only self-citation is non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained rather than circular. Theorem 1.2 -- the algebraic characterisation N(d)=d^2-n_R(d,1) and N'(d)=d^2-n_C(d,1) -- is proved in Section 3 from rank-one convexity and Theorem 2.1, not assumed. The sharp value N'(d)=2d-1 is then obtained by combining this characterisation with the independent algebraic fact g_C(d)=2d-1 (Proposition 3.2, labelled folklore and proved in the text) and with the external C-ellipticity theorem of Kalamajska [48]. The lower bound in Section 4 uses a complex-rank-one intersection argument plus compactness of H^1 into L^2; the upper bound invokes [48, Theorem 4] to get a pointwise representation. No fitted parameter is relabelled as a prediction, and no input is defined in terms of the target inequality. The only self-citation, [20], appears in Remark 2 ('Theorem 2.2 was originally developed in a rougher form in [20]'), Remark 12, and a remark on L^p constants; it is not used as a proof of any central claim, so it is not load-bearing. One non-circular correctness concern should be flagged: in the proof of N'(d)<=g_C(d) the text writes 'Let X be a subspace of M_d(C) such that X avoids all rank one matrices' and then applies [48], whereas Remark 14 correctly states that C-ellipticity of T_X is equivalent to X^{perp C} containing no rank-one matrices. This is an internal inconsistency in the stated hypothesis, not a circular reduction; the Hankel subspace introduced by the paper supplies the needed condition, so the argument is repairable without assuming the conclusion. Overall the paper's central claims do not reduce by construction to their inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard theorems from martingale theory (Burkholder), calculus of variations (quasiconvexity and laminates), PDE (C-ellipticity), algebraic topology (RP^n immersion), and algebra (nonsingular bilinear maps, division algebras). No free parameters are fitted and no new entities are introduced. The self-citation [20] is noted but not load-bearing.

assumptions (8)
  • standard math Burkholder's sharp inequality for differentially subordinated martingales (Theorem 2.3), including sharpness on dyadic trees.
    Used to prove Theorem 2.1 (existence of C) and Theorem 2.2 (sharpness). Quoted from [18] with exposition [58].
  • standard math For quadratic forms, quasiconvexity is equivalent to rank-one convexity and to nonnegativity on rank-one matrices.
    Bridges the Korn inequality to the algebraic condition X^⊥ ∩ R_1 = ∅ in the proof of Theorem 1.2, Section 3. Cited to [25, Theorem 5.25(i)].
  • standard math The rank-one convex/quasiconvex envelope formulas (equations (4) and (5)) via laminates and Young measures.
    Foundation of the laminate-martingale method; cited to [25, 49, 59, 61].
  • domain assumption Kałamajska's pointwise representation theorem for differential operators satisfying condition (C) (C-ellipticity) [48, Theorem 4].
    Used in Section 4 to prove N'(d) ≤ g_C(d); assumes star-shaped/Lipschitz domains and the operator symbol having no complex rank-one kernel.
  • standard math Immersion bounds for real projective spaces: Imm(RP^d) = 2d − O(log d), Imm(RP^{2^n}) = 2^{n+1}−1 (Section 3.2, from [6, 54]).
    Yields the asymptotic N(d)~2d and the exact lower bounds for d=2^n+1.
  • standard math Algebraic facts on nonsingular bilinear maps: g_R(d) values for selected d (from [1,29]) and g_K(d)=2d−1 over algebraically closed fields (Prop. 3.2).
    Identifies N(d), N'(d) with g_R(d), g_C(d); table values for d up to 33 are imported.
  • standard math Division algebra classification: the only finite-dimensional real division algebras are R, C, H, O (Bott-Milnor, cited [14]).
    Used to prove equality N(d)=d iff d∈{1,2,4,8}.
  • standard math Cohomology of RP^n over Z_2 (Künneth, H^*(RP^n;Z_2)=Z_2[x]/(x^{n+1})) used for the Hopf-Stiefel lower bound.
    Proves N(d) ≥ 2⌈log₂(d)⌉ in Theorem 3.2.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Martingales, laminates and minimal Korn inequalities." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LAGELVAE

@misc{pith2026251202784,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Martingales, laminates and minimal Korn inequalities},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LAGELVAE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.02784}
}
abstract

Korn's inequalities show that the $L^2$-norm of $\nabla u$ can be controlled by the $L^2$-norm of $\mathrm{Sym}(\nabla u)$, which only has $d(d+1)/2$ components. In [J. Math. Pures Appl. 148 (2021), pp. 199-220] Chipot posed the question of \textit{how many scalar measurements are needed to have a Korn-type control on $\nabla u$} when $u$ is in $H_0^1(\Omega)$ and $H^1(\Omega)$, introducing the minimal numbers $N(d,\Omega)$ and $N'(d,\Omega)$ respectively. He proved general bounds and calculated several low-dimensional values of $N,N'$. We reframe Chipot's problem in the language of rank-one convexity and quasiconvexity and obtain a purely algebraic characterisation of when such inequalities hold, which yields the sharp bounds \begin{align*} N(d,\Omega)&=2d(1-o(1))\\ N'(d,\Omega)&=2d-1. \end{align*} As a consequence, we recover and streamline several of Chipot's results, we obtain a dimension-optimal Korn inequality and several sharp estimates for the best constant for various Korn-type inequalities. Generalisations to the rectangular case and to general $L^p$ estimates are also considered.\par The central new ingredient of our approach is a systematic connection between laminates and martingales which produces explicit families of laminates realising these bounds. This method is of independent interest in the calculus of variations: for instance, we use it to obtain a new quick and quantitative proof of Ornstein's non-inequality, valid for all first order homogeneous operators in $\mathbb{R}^{2\times 2}$ and for a large class of operators in general dimensions (including Korn's $\frac{\nabla u+\nabla u^t}2$ and $\frac{\nabla u+\nabla u^t}2-\mathrm{div}(u)\frac{\mathrm{Id}}d$).

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. Korn's inequality from the viewpoint of calculus of variations

    math.AP 2026-03 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    Korn's constant satisfies p^*-1 ≤ C(p,d) ≤ √3(p^*-1) in all dimensions, with exact p^*-1 for radial fields in dimension 2.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [20]

    A martingale study of Korn’s inequality

    Cassese, G., 2025. A martingale study of Korn’s inequality. In preparation

    2025

  2. [48]

    Pointwise multiplicative inequalities and Nirenberg type estimates in weighted Sobolev spaces

    Kałamajska, A., 1994. Pointwise multiplicative inequalities and Nirenberg type estimates in weighted Sobolev spaces. Studia Math. 108, 275–290

    1994

  3. [1]

    On nonsingular bilinear maps II

    Adem, J., 1971. On nonsingular bilinear maps II. Bol. Soc. Mat. Mex. 16, 64–70

    1971

  4. [2]

    The local Burkholder functional, quasiconvexity and Geometric Function Theory

    Astala, K., Faraco, D., Guerra, A., Koski, A., Kristensen, J., 2023. The local Burkholder functional, quasiconvexity and Geometric Function Theory. Preprint, arXiv:2309.03495

    arXiv 2023

  5. [3]

    Lower semi- continuity, Stoilow factorization and principal maps

    Astala, K., Faraco, D., Guerra, A., Koski, A., Kristensen, J., 2024. Lower semi- continuity, Stoilow factorization and principal maps. Communications on Pure and Applied Analysis 23, 1608–1645

    2024

  6. [4]

    Burkholder integrals, Mor- rey’s problem and quasiconformal mappings

    Astala, K., Iwaniec, T., Prause, I., Saksman, E., 2012. Burkholder integrals, Mor- rey’s problem and quasiconformal mappings. J. Am. Math. Soc. 25, 507–531

    2012

  7. [5]

    A hunt for sharpLp-estimates and rank-one convex variational integrals

    Astala, K., Iwaniec, T., Prause, I., Saksman, E., 2015. A hunt for sharpLp-estimates and rank-one convex variational integrals. Filomat 29, 245–261

    2015

  8. [6]

    Nonimmersions of real projective spaces implied by BP

    Astey, L., Davis, D.M., 1980. Nonimmersions of real projective spaces implied by BP. Bol. Soc. Mat. Mex. 25, 15–22

    1980

Show all 67 references
  1. [7]

    Bi-convexity and bi-martingales

    Aumann, R.J., Hart, S., 1986. Bi-convexity and bi-martingales. Israel J. Math. 54, 159–180

    1986

  2. [8]

    The foundational inequalities of D

    Bañuelos, R., 2010. The foundational inequalities of D. L. Burkholder and some of their ramifications. Ill. J. Math. 54, 789–868

    2010

  3. [9]

    Some conjectures about integral means of∂fand ¯∂f.arXiv:math/9709215

    Baernstein, A., Montgomery-Smith, S.J., 1997. Some conjectures about integral means of∂fand ¯∂f.arXiv:math/9709215

    1997 arXiv

  4. [10]

    Partial regularity of mappings between Euclidean spaces

    Boman, J., 1967. Partial regularity of mappings between Euclidean spaces. Acta Math. 119

    1967

  5. [11]

    Technical Report

    Boman, J., 1982.L p-estimates for very strongly elliptic systems. Technical Report. University of Stockholm, Department of Mathematics

    1982

  6. [12]

    Laminates meet Burkholder functions

    Boros, N., Székelyhidi, L., Volberg, A., 2013. Laminates meet Burkholder functions. J. Math. Pures Appl. 100, 687–700. 31

    2013

  7. [13]

    Sharp lower bound estimates for vector-valued and matrix-valued multipliers inLp.arXiv:1110.5405

    Boros, N., Volberg, A., 2011. Sharp lower bound estimates for vector-valued and matrix-valued multipliers inLp.arXiv:1110.5405

    2011 arXiv

  8. [14]

    On the parallelizability of the spheres

    Bott, R., Milnor, J., 1958. On the parallelizability of the spheres. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 64, 87–89

    1958

  9. [15]

    Two sharp inequalities for the norm of a factor of a polynomial

    Boyd, D.W., 1992. Two sharp inequalities for the norm of a factor of a polynomial. Mathematika 39, 341–349

    1992

  10. [16]

    On the trace operator for functions of boundedA-variation

    Breit, D., Diening, L., Gmeineder, F., 2020. On the trace operator for functions of boundedA-variation. Anal. PDE 13, 559–594

    2020

  11. [17]

    Boman equals John, in: 16th Rolf Nevanlinna Colloquium, pp

    Buckley, S., Koskela, P., Lu, G., 1996. Boman equals John, in: 16th Rolf Nevanlinna Colloquium, pp. 91–99

    1996

  12. [18]

    Boundary Value Problems and Sharp Inequalities for Mar- tingale Transforms

    Burkholder, D.L., 1984. Boundary Value Problems and Sharp Inequalities for Mar- tingale Transforms. Ann. Probab. 12, 647 – 702

    1984

  13. [19]

    Minimizing and maximizing the Euclidean norm of the product of two polynomials

    Bünger, F., 2010. Minimizing and maximizing the Euclidean norm of the product of two polynomials. Adv. Comput. Math. 35, 193–215

    2010

  14. [21]

    On coercive variational integrals

    Chen, C.Y., Kristensen, J., 2017. On coercive variational integrals. Nonlinear Anal. 153, 213–229

    2017

  15. [22]

    OnInequalitiesofKorn’stype

    Chipot, M., 2021. OnInequalitiesofKorn’stype. J.Math.PuresAppl.148, 199–220

    2021

  16. [23]

    A new approach to counterexamples to L1 estimates: Korn’s inequality, geometric rigidity, and regularity for gradients of separately convex functions

    Conti, S., Faraco, D., Maggi, F., 2005. A new approach to counterexamples to L1 estimates: Korn’s inequality, geometric rigidity, and regularity for gradients of separately convex functions. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 175, 287–300

    2005

  17. [24]

    Introduction to the Calculus of Variations

    Dacorogna, B., 2004. Introduction to the Calculus of Variations. 2 ed., Imperial College Press

    2004

  18. [25]

    Direct methods in the Calculus of Variations

    Dacorogna, B., 2008. Direct methods in the Calculus of Variations. volume 78 of Applied Mathematical Sciences. Springer

    2008

  19. [26]

    An elementary proof of a theorem of Johnson and Lindenstrauss

    Dasgupta, S., Gupta, A., 2003. An elementary proof of a theorem of Johnson and Lindenstrauss. Random Struct. Algorithms 22, 60–65

    2003

  20. [27]

    Table of Immersions and Embeddings of Real Projective Spaces

    Davis, D.M., 2016. Table of Immersions and Embeddings of Real Projective Spaces. URL:https://www.lehigh.edu/~dmd1/immtable. Online list of immersion, nonim- mersion, embedding, and nonembedding results forRPn. Accessed 2025-09-17

    2016

  21. [28]

    Korn and Poincaré–Korn inequalities: a differ- ent perspective

    Di Fratta, G., Solombrino, F., 2023. Korn and Poincaré–Korn inequalities: a differ- ent perspective. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 153, 2991–3002

    2023

  22. [29]

    Nonsingular Bilinear Maps Revisited

    Domínguez, C., Lam, K.Y., 2021. Nonsingular Bilinear Maps Revisited. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. A: Math. 151, 377–390. 32

    2021

  23. [30]

    Multivariate statistics

    Eaton, M.L., 1983. Multivariate statistics. Wiley Series in Probability and Mathe- matical Statistics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York

    1983

  24. [31]

    Old and new formulas for the Hopf-Stiefel and related functions

    Eliahou, S., Kervaire, M., 2005. Old and new formulas for the Hopf-Stiefel and related functions. Expo. Math. 23, 127–145

    2005

  25. [32]

    Milton’s conjecture on the regularity of solutions to isotropic equations

    Faraco, D., 2003. Milton’s conjecture on the regularity of solutions to isotropic equations. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré C Anal. Non Linéaire 20, 889–909

    2003

  26. [33]

    Remarks on Ornstein’s Non-Inequality inR2×2

    Faraco, D., Guerra, A., 2022. Remarks on Ornstein’s Non-Inequality inR2×2. Q. J. Math. 73, 17–21

    2022

  27. [34]

    Tartar’s conjecture and localization of the quasi- convex hull inR2×2

    Faraco, D., Székelyhidi, L., 2008. Tartar’s conjecture and localization of the quasi- convex hull inR2×2. Acta Math. 200, 279–305

    2008

  28. [35]

    On singular integral and martingale transforms

    Geiss, S., Montgomery-Smith, S., Saksman, E., 2010. On singular integral and martingale transforms. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 362, 553–575

    2010

  29. [36]

    On Milman’s inequality and random subspaces which escape through a mesh inRn, in: Lindenstrauss, J., Milman, V.D

    Gordon, Y., 1988. On Milman’s inequality and random subspaces which escape through a mesh inRn, in: Lindenstrauss, J., Milman, V.D. (Eds.), Geometric As- pects of Functional Analysis, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg. pp. 84–106

    1988

  30. [37]

    From microstructure-independent formulas for composite ma- terials to rank-one convex, non-quasiconvex functions

    Grabovsky, Y., 2017. From microstructure-independent formulas for composite ma- terials to rank-one convex, non-quasiconvex functions. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 227, 607–636

    2017

  31. [38]

    Extremal rank-one convex integrands and a conjecture of Šverák

    Guerra, A., 2019. Extremal rank-one convex integrands and a conjecture of Šverák. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 58, 1–19

    2019

  32. [39]

    Automaticquasiconvexityofhomogeneousisotropic rank-one convex integrands

    Guerra, A., Kristensen, J., 2022. Automaticquasiconvexityofhomogeneousisotropic rank-one convex integrands. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 245, 479–500

    2022

  33. [40]

    Two-by-two upper triangular matrices and morrey’s conjecture

    Harris, T.L., Kirchheim, B., Lin, C.C., 2018. Two-by-two upper triangular matrices and morrey’s conjecture. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 57, 1–12

    2018

  34. [41]

    Algebraic Geometry

    Hartshorne, R., 1977. Algebraic Geometry. volume 52 ofGraduate Texts in Mathe- matics. Springer, New York, NY. XVI+496 pp

    1977

  35. [42]

    Algebraic Topology

    Hatcher, A., 2002. Algebraic Topology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    2002

  36. [43]

    Inequality for Burkholder’s martingale transform

    Ivanisvili, P., 2015. Inequality for Burkholder’s martingale transform. Anal. PDE 8, 765–789

    2015

  37. [44]

    OnLp-integrability in PDE’s and quasiregular mappings for large exponents

    Iwaniec, T., 1982. OnLp-integrability in PDE’s and quasiregular mappings for large exponents. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 7, 301–322

    1982

  38. [45]

    Nonlinear Cauchy-Riemann operators inRn

    Iwaniec, T., 2002. Nonlinear Cauchy-Riemann operators inRn. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 354. 33

    2002

  39. [46]

    Korn’s inequality and John domains

    Jiang, R., Kauranen, A., 2017. Korn’s inequality and John domains. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 56, 18

    2017

  40. [47]

    On Bernstein type quantitative estimates for Ornstein non-inequalities

    Kazaniecki, K., Wojciechowski, M., 2023. On Bernstein type quantitative estimates for Ornstein non-inequalities. Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana 40, 901–912

    2023

  41. [49]

    Characterizations of Young measures generated by gradients

    Kinderlehrer, D., Pedregal, P., 1991. Characterizations of Young measures generated by gradients. Arch. Rational Mech. and Anal. 115, 329–365

    1991

  42. [50]

    On rank-one convex functions that are homo- geneous of degree one

    Kirchheim, B., Kristensen, J., 2016. On rank-one convex functions that are homo- geneous of degree one. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 221, 527–558

    2016

  43. [51]

    Empirical processes and random projections

    Klartag, B., Mendelson, S., 2005. Empirical processes and random projections. J. Funct. Anal. 225, 229–245

    2005

  44. [52]

    Construction of Some Nonsingular Bilinear Maps

    Lam, K.Y., 1968. Construction of Some Nonsingular Bilinear Maps. Bol. Soc. Mat. Mex. 13, 88–94

    1968

  45. [53]

    On the optimal constants in Korn’s and geometric rigidity estimates, in bounded and unbounded domains, under Neumann boundary conditions

    Lewicka, M., Müller, S., 2016. On the optimal constants in Korn’s and geometric rigidity estimates, in bounded and unbounded domains, under Neumann boundary conditions. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 65, 377–397

    2016

  46. [54]

    Characteristic Classes

    Milnor, J.W., Stasheff, J.D., 1974. Characteristic Classes. Number 76 in Annals of Mathematics Studies, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. 338 pp

    1974

  47. [55]

    Rank-one Convexity Implies Quasiconvexity on Diagonal Matrices

    Müller, S., 1999. Rank-one Convexity Implies Quasiconvexity on Diagonal Matrices. Int. Math. Res. Not 1999, 1087–1095

    1999

  48. [56]

    Variational models for microstructure and phase transitions, in: Hildebrandt, S., Struwe, M

    Müller, S., 1999. Variational models for microstructure and phase transitions, in: Hildebrandt, S., Struwe, M. (Eds.), Calculus of Variations and Geometric Evolution Problems. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. volume 1713 ofLecture Notes in Mathemat- ics, pp. 85–210

    1999

  49. [57]

    A non-inequality for differential operators in theL1 norm

    Ornstein, D., 1962. A non-inequality for differential operators in theL1 norm. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 11, 40–49

    1962

  50. [58]

    Sharp Martingale and Semimartingale inequalities

    Osękowski, A., 2012. Sharp Martingale and Semimartingale inequalities. volume 72 ofIMPAN Monogr. Mat. (N. S.). Springer, Basel

    2012

  51. [59]

    Laminates and microstructure

    Pedregal, P., 1993. Laminates and microstructure. European J. Appl. Math. 4, 121–149

    1993

  52. [60]

    Contemporary Geometry and Related Topics

    Petrović, Z., 2006. Nonsingular Bilinear Maps, Spaces of Matrices, Immersions and Embeddings, in: Bokan, N., Djorić, M., Fomenko, A.T., Rakić, Z., Wegner, B., Wess, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference "Contemporary Geometry and Related Topics", Faculty of Mathematics, Uni...

    2006

  53. [61]

    Calculus of Variations

    Rindler, F., 2018. Calculus of Variations. Universitext, Springer, Basel

    2018

  54. [62]

    The Ratio Between the Toeplitz and the Un- structured Condition Number, in: Bini, D.A., Mehrmann, V., Olshevsky, V., Tyr- tyshnikov, E.E., van Barel, M

    Rump, S.M., Sekigawa, H., 2010. The Ratio Between the Toeplitz and the Un- structured Condition Number, in: Bini, D.A., Mehrmann, V., Olshevsky, V., Tyr- tyshnikov, E.E., van Barel, M. (Eds.), Numerical Methods for Structured Matrices and Applications. Birkhäuser Basel. volume...

    2010

  55. [63]

    Compositions of Quadratic Forms

    Shapiro, D.B., 2000. Compositions of Quadratic Forms. Number 33 in De Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin

    2000

  56. [64]

    Inequalities for formally positive integro-differential forms

    Smith, K.T., 1961. Inequalities for formally positive integro-differential forms. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 67, 368–370

    1961

  57. [65]

    Rank-one convexity does not imply quasiconvexity

    Šverák, V., 1992. Rank-one convexity does not imply quasiconvexity. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. A: Math. 120, 185–189

    1992

  58. [66]

    Injective Ellipticity, Cancelling Operators, and Endpoint Gagliardo–Nirenberg–SobolevInequalitiesforVectorFields, in: Cianchi, A., Maz’ya, V., Weth, T

    Van Schaftingen, J., 2024. Injective Ellipticity, Cancelling Operators, and Endpoint Gagliardo–Nirenberg–SobolevInequalitiesforVectorFields, in: Cianchi, A., Maz’ya, V., Weth, T. (Eds.), Geometric and Analytic Aspects of Functional Variational Prin- ciples. Springer. volume 23...

    2024

  59. [67]

    High-Dimensional Probability

    Vershynin, R., 2018. High-Dimensional Probability. Number 47 in Cambridge Series in Statistical and Probabilistic Mathematics, Cambridge University Press. 35

    2018

Pith tools

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