Pathwise uniform convergence of numerical approximations for a two-dimensional stochastic Navier-Stokes equation with no-slip boundary conditions

Binjie Li; Qin Zhou; Xiaoping Xie

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 56 references

Pathwise uniform convergence of numerical approximations for a two-dimensional stochastic Navier-Stokes equation with no-slip boundary conditions

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · 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 a P3/P2 Taylor-Hood plus Euler discretization of the two-dimensional stochastic Navier-Stokes equations with no-slip boundary conditions converges pathwise uniformly in probability, at spatial order arbitrarily…

desk verdict First explicit convergence rates for fully discrete FE schemes for 2D stochastic Navier-Stokes with no-slip boundary and general multiplicative noise; the proof is credible, with the main caveat being reliance on standard but partly cited discrete Sobolev embeddings. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.04231 v2 pith:NOIP37SB submitted 2024-12-05 math.NA cs.NA

Binjie Li , Xiaoping Xie , Qin Zhou This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.NAcs.NA MSC 65M6065C3060H1560H3535Q30

keywords stochasticNavier-Stokesequationno-slipboundaryconditionsP3/P2Taylor-HoodfiniteelementEulerschemepathwiseuniformconvergenceinprobabilitymultiplicativenoise

topics Navier-Stokes Regularity

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 proves a quantitative error estimate for a fully discrete finite-element method for the two-dimensional stochastic Navier-Stokes equations with multiplicative noise and no-slip boundary conditions. Using P3/P2 Taylor-Hood elements in space and the Euler scheme in time, the numerical solution converges pathwise uniformly in probability to the global mild solution at a rate arbitrarily close to $h^{3/2}$ in space and $\tau^{1/2}$ in time, under the constraint $\tau \le h$. The result matters because earlier finite-element analyses for no-slip stochastic Navier-Stokes either gave no explicit rate or assumed the noise coefficients are divergence-free and vanish at the boundary, whereas the equation studied here keeps the full boundary coupling. The proof splits the error into a spatial semidiscretization part and a temporal discretization part, controlling rare large-deviation events through stopping times and logarithmic-in-probability regularity estimates.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the P3/P2 Taylor-Hood finite element pair and its discrete Stokes operator $A_h$, together with a decomposition of the total error into a spatial part $y - y_h$ and a temporal part $y_h(j\tau)-Y_j$. For the spatial part, stopping times and Gronwall-type estimates convert the mild solution's $\dot H^{\rho,2}$ regularity into a nearly-$h^\rho$ bound with an $\exp(cR^2)$ constant traded against the rare-event probability $1 - c/\ln(1+R)$. For the temporal part, the implicit Euler scheme is analyzed through four auxiliary sequences $\chi^{(1)},\dots,\chi^{(4)}$ that isolate the stiffness, the nonlinear increment, the nonlinear mismatch, and the stochastic increment, and their stability is controlled by discrete resolvent estimates and stochastic-convolution maximal inequalities. The h-independent discrete Sobolev embeddings of Remark 5.1---$\|u_h\|_{L^\infty} \le c \|u_h\|_{\dot H^{\rho,2}_h}$ and $\|\nabla u_h\|_{L^{2/(2-\rho)}} \le c\|u_h\|_{\dot H^{\rho,2}_h}$---are what keep the temporal error bound free of negative powers of $h$.

What would settle it

One concrete way to test the claim is to compute, on a sequence of quasi-uniform P3/P2 Taylor-Hood meshes, the supremum over discrete divergence-free $u_h$ of $\|u_h\|_{L^\infty}/\|u_h\|_{\dot H^{\rho,2}_h}$; if this ratio is unbounded as $h\to 0$, the h-independent embedding premise fails. An end-to-end numerical alternative is to manufacture a smooth no-slip solution of (1.1) with multiplicative noise coefficients that do not vanish on $\partial O$, run the fully discrete scheme with $\tau \le h$, and check whether $P\{\max_j \|y(j\tau)-Y_j\|_{L^2}^2 \ge \varepsilon(h^\alpha+\tau^\beta)\}$ with $\alpha=2.9$, $\beta=0.9$ tends to zero as $h,\tau \to 0$; a positive limiting probability would disprove the theorem.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 5.2: for initial data $y_0 \in L^4_{\mathcal F_0}(\Omega; \dot H^{3/2,2})$, any $\alpha \in (2,3)$, $\beta \in (0,1)$, and any $\varepsilon > 0$, the probability that $\max_{1\le j\le J} \|y(j\tau)-Y_j\|_{L^2}^2$ exceeds $\varepsilon (h^\alpha + \tau^\beta)$ tends to zero as $h \to 0$, $\tau \to 0$, with $\tau \le h$. In words, the full discretization converges pathwise uniformly in probability with spatial order arbitrarily close to $3/2$ and temporal order arbitrarily close to $1/2$. These rates are shown for the genuine no-slip problem, where the Helmholtz projection does not preserve the zero-trace condition and the standard cancellation identity used under periodic boundary conditions fails. The paper also establishes the underlying regularity of the global mild solution in $\dot H^{\rho,2}$, $\rho \in (1,3/2)$, with tail probability $1 - c/\ln(1+R)$.

Load-bearing premise

The rate proof requires that the discrete Sobolev embedding inequalities on the Taylor-Hood spaces hold with constants independent of mesh size h, including the logarithmic L-infinity bound used in Step 5; if these constants grow as h shrinks, the temporal error bound acquires negative powers of h and Theorem 5.2's joint limit would not follow from this argument.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For every $\alpha < 3$ and $\beta < 1$, the probability that the pathwise-uniform $L^2$ error exceeds $\varepsilon(h^\alpha+\tau^\beta)$ goes to zero as $h,\tau\to 0$ with $\tau \le h$, so the method is certified at nearly optimal rates for no-slip stochastic Navier-Stokes.
The semidiscrete estimate $\|y - y_h\|_{L^p(\{t_{R,\rho}=T\}; C([0,T];L^2))} \le c h^\rho \ln(1/h) \exp(cR^2)$ gives a quantitative trade-off between spatial accuracy and the size of the probability set on which it holds.
The temporal estimate (5.3) bounds the mean squared pathwise error between the semidiscrete and fully discrete solutions by $c\tau \exp(cR_h^2)(1+\ln(1/h)R_{h,\tau}^2)$, yielding nearly order-$1/2$ temporal convergence after optimizing the free parameters.
As noted in Remark 5.2, the auxiliary pressure $\phi$ inherits pathwise uniform convergence in probability, while the physical pressure $\psi$ does not because of its limited temporal regularity.

Reading between the lines

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

The rates saturate at the solution's regularity rather than at the polynomial degree: if the mild solution were known to live in $\dot H^{3/2+\delta,2}$ with high probability, the same argument would push the spatial rate above $3/2$ toward the cubic element's formal order.
The same regime-splitting machinery---trading an $\exp(cR^2)$ error constant against a $1/\ln(1+R)$ probability---should transfer to other stochastic PDEs whose solutions have only logarithmic tail regularity, including variants with transport noise or gradient-dependent coefficients.
One direct numerical check would be to manufacture a no-slip solution whose noise coefficients do not vanish on the boundary and measure the empirical rate of $\max_j \|y(j\tau)-Y_j\|_{L^2}$ under $\tau \le h$; agreement with exponents approaching $3/2$ and $1/2$ would confirm that the h-independent discrete embeddings hold with reasonable constants on practical meshes.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

You should know this paper is the first to give explicit near-optimal rates for a fully discrete finite element scheme for the 2D stochastic Navier-Stokes equations with no-slip boundary conditions, without requiring the diffusion coefficients to be divergence-free or vanish on the boundary. That is a genuine advance: prior rate proofs, notably Breit and Prohl, needed those structural assumptions. The spatial rate is nearly h^{3/2} and the temporal rate nearly tau^{1/2}, with convergence in probability pathwise uniformly in time.

What the paper does well: the main mathematical difficulty is the non-commuting Helmholtz projection under no-slip boundary conditions. The authors handle it through fractional Sobolev regularity estimates derived from maximal Lp-regularity, and they split the error into deterministic and stochastic convolution parts in a clean way. The stopping-time argument is standard but carefully carried out. They also state the regularity results honestly, including the slow logarithmic-type estimate in Theorem 4.3.

Soft spots, in proportion: several technical lemmas are delegated to references. In particular, Remark 5.1 sketches the h-uniform discrete embeddings and cites the discrete log-L∞ bound to Brenner-Scott without discussing the polygonal approximation of the smooth domain. The stress-test worry is that if these constants carried an h^{-kappa} factor, the temporal rate would degrade. But the derivation in Remark 5.1 is explicit enough that I do not think this is likely to break; it is worth a referee check, not a reason to reject. The abstract omits the tau ≤ h constraint and the H^{3/2} initial-data assumption, which are stated precisely in Theorem 5.2. There are no numerical experiments, but that is not a flaw for a purely theoretical convergence paper. The unconditional rate in Theorem 4.3 is very slow, but it is not load-bearing for the main theorem.

Overall, the central argument holds up. The paper deserves a serious referee; a referee should verify the cited embedding results and the log-L∞ inequality in this setting. I would cite it if I worked on SPDE numerics.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper studies the pathwise uniform convergence in probability of a fully discrete finite element method for the two-dimensional stochastic Navier-Stokes equations with multiplicative noise and no-slip boundary conditions. The spatial discretization uses P3/P2 Taylor-Hood elements and the temporal discretization is an implicit Euler scheme. The main result, Theorem 5.2, states that for initial data in L^4_F0(Ω; dot H^{3/2,2}), the maximal-in-time squared L2 error converges to zero in probability at rates arbitrarily close to h^{3/2} in space and τ^{1/2} in time, under the mesh constraint τ≤h. The proof combines new regularity estimates for the SNSE (Proposition 3.1), a spatial semidiscretization error bound (Theorems 4.1-4.3), and a temporal error estimate on a local probability set (Theorem 5.1). The error decomposition is coherent and the final rate follows by balancing the spatial and temporal errors with the probabilities of exceptional events.

Significance. If the advertised rates hold, this is a substantial improvement over the existing literature for no-slip SNSEs: previous finite element analyses either gave no explicit rates or only linear spatial and near-1/4 temporal rates. The main technical novelty is handling the lack of divergence-free diffusion coefficients by working directly with global mild solutions and using maximal Lp-regularity rather than relying on the structure ⟨(u·∇)u, A2u⟩=0. The paper also provides a fairly complete proof of the regularity estimates in Proposition 3.1. The central claims are falsifiable and parameter-free; there are no fitted parameters or circular reductions. The main caveat is that several h-uniform discrete estimates are cited or only sketched, and their proof is the principal point requiring attention before the rates can be considered fully established.

major comments (3)

[Section 5, Remark 5.1 and Step 5 of Theorem 5.1] The h-uniform discrete embeddings ||u_h||_{L∞} ≤ c ||u_h||_{dot H^{ρ,2}_h} and ||∇u_h||_{L^{2/(2-ρ)}} ≤ c ||u_h||_{dot H^{ρ,2}_h}, together with the log-L∞ bound ||u_h||_{L∞} ≤ c sqrt(ln(1/h)) ||∇u_h||_{L2}, are load-bearing: they enter directly into the bounds for I^(2), I^(3), and χ^(3) in Theorem 5.1. If any of these constants actually carried a factor h^{-κ}, then (5.12) and (5.15) would gain h^{-κ} and the last term in Theorem 5.2 would become h^{-κ} τ^{1-β-γ1}, which diverges under τ≤h unless κ is unusually small. The proof of Remark 5.1 is only a sketch: it invokes [31, Theorem 3.1] and [49, Theorem 3.1] without addressing the fact that O is a smooth domain while the finite element spaces are constructed on the polygonal union Oh; the cited results are standard for polygonal domains. The log bound is cited to [12, Lemma 4.9.2] without checking its hypotheses in the curved-boundary/polygonal-approximation setting. Please provide a complete proof or precise references that cover the smooth-boundary case, or state the additional geometric assumptions on the mesh that make these estimates h-uniform.
[Section 4, Lemmas 4.1 and 4.2] These lemmas contain nontrivial h-uniform estimates used throughout the spatial error analysis, but they are either proved by a one-line spectral argument or reported as "well-known". Lemma 4.1(i) and (iii) give h-uniform semigroup and stochastic-convolution bounds in discrete interpolation spaces, and Lemma 4.2(ii) asserts the h-uniform boundedness of the L2 projection Ph in L(dot H^{α,2}, dot H^{α,2}_h) for all α∈[0,2]. The latter is not an immediate consequence of standard estimates for the Stokes projection, especially for fractional α. Since these estimates are essential to Theorems 4.2 and 4.3, please provide a proof or a precise reference for each assertion, or state the extra hypotheses on the mesh and the Taylor-Hood pair needed to make them true.
[Section 4, paragraph before Theorem 4.1] The relationship between the smooth domain O and the discrete polygonal domain Oh is not specified. The text says "conforming and quasi-uniform triangulation of the domain O" but then defines Oh as the union of elements and extends functions by zero to O\Oh. For a smooth (or C^{3,1}) boundary, a conforming triangulation with straight elements cannot cover O exactly. The paper should state the boundary approximation used (e.g., that the vertices on ∂Oh lie on ∂O and that the symmetric difference of O and Oh has measure O(h^3) or similar) and explain why the cited results of [13], [31], and [49] remain valid in this setting. Without this, the h-uniform constants in Remark 5.1 and in Lemmas 4.2 and 4.4 are not fully justified.

minor comments (6)

[Section 2.3, definition of global mild solution] The indicator notation /BD[0,tR,ρ] appears without a subscript in the stochastic convolution term; the notation should be made consistent with the stopping time definition.
[Lemma 3.1] The final condition is written as "2/(1+β-α) ≥ q and β<1/q"; it would be clearer to state it as "q ≤ 2/(1+β-α) and β<1/q".
[Proof of Theorem 4.3] The formula for R contains nested logarithms and is difficult to parse; please display it more clearly and define all constants consistently.
[Remark 5.2] The representation of ψ(t,x) involves a generalized time derivative of a sum of stochastic integrals; the notation is ambiguous and should be clarified.
[Proof of Theorem 5.1, Step 1] The roles of the auxiliary sequences ξj,Rh and ηj,Rh in the decomposition Ej,Rh = ξj,Rh + ηj,Rh are not explained intuitively; a short explanatory sentence would improve readability.
[References] Reference [10] contains a typo in the arXiv number ("2305.109999" appears to have six nines); please correct it. Reference [38] is an arXiv preprint; if a published version exists, please cite it.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the convergence rates are derived from external maximal Lp-regularity results and standard finite-element estimates, with no fitted parameter or definitional reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks. Proposition 3.1 establishes regularity of the mild solution using maximal Lp-regularity results from van Neerven–Veraar–Weis [54] and Giga–Miyakawa [29], not from the later convergence claims. Theorem 4.2 derives the spatial error via a Ritz-type projection, the quasi-local interpolation operator of Girault–Scott [31], and standard Stokes estimates; Theorem 5.1 derives the temporal error via the discrete semigroup stability Lemmas 5.1–5.2 and the h-uniform discrete Sobolev embeddings quoted in Remark 5.1 from [31], [49], and [12]. Theorem 5.2 then combines the spatial and temporal bounds and optimizes the stopping-time parameters R, Rh, and Rh,τ; this is a standard argument and not a reduction of the conclusion to an assumption. There is no parameter fitted to the target rate, no quantity defined in terms of the quantity it predicts, and no renamed empirical pattern. The only self-citation visible in the paper is reference [38] by Li, Ma, and Sun, which appears in the introduction as motivational context and is not used in any proof. The most fragile premise, the h-independence of the discrete embeddings, is an external technical condition; if it failed the rates would fail, but that would be a correctness problem, not circularity. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard functional analytic results and explicit modeling assumptions; no parameters were fitted and no new entities were invented. The proofs rely on external maximal regularity and finite element interpolation theorems, which are standard but not re-derived.

assumptions (6)

standard math Stochastic maximal Lp regularity for the Stokes semigroup on fractional Sobolev spaces (van Neerven-Veraar-Weis, Theorems 3.5 and 2.5 in [54]).
Invoked in Proposition 3.1 and Lemma 4.1(iii) to bound stochastic convolutions; the whole regularity Proposition 3.1 depends on it.
domain assumption Hypothesis 2.1: the diffusion coefficients f_n are twice continuously differentiable with linear growth and bounded first and second derivatives uniformly in n.
This is the explicit noise regularity assumption that yields the Lipschitz and growth estimates for F in Lemma 2.1.
domain assumption The domain O is bounded, connected and C^{3,1}, with no-slip boundary; in the main theorem the initial data satisfy y0 ∈ L4_F0(Ω; dot H^{3/2,2}).
Smooth domain is needed for Stokes operator and Helmholtz projection regularity; the strong initial data set the spatial convergence order.
standard math P3/P2 Taylor-Hood finite element spaces on a quasi-uniform triangulation whose elements each contain at least one interior vertex satisfy the known stability, approximation and interpolation properties of Brezzi-Falk [13] and Girault-Scott [31].
Used in Lemma 4.2, Lemma 4.4 and Remark 5.1 for discrete Helmholtz projection and h-uniform embeddings.
standard math The discrete semigroup Sh and its stochastic convolution satisfy the h-uniform maximal regularity estimates stated in Lemma 4.1, with proofs referred to [39], [54] and [35].
These inequalities are the engine of the spatial semidiscretization error estimates in Section 4.
standard math The fully discrete implicit Euler scheme (5.1) is well posed and satisfies a uniform L4 bound, as established in [15, Lemma 3.1].
Used in Theorem 5.2 to control the probability that the numerical solution exceeds the threshold Rh,τ.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Pathwise uniform convergence of numerical approximations for a two-dimensional stochastic Navier-Stokes equation with no-slip boundary conditions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NOIP37SB

@misc{pith2026241204231,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Pathwise uniform convergence of numerical approximations for a two-dimensional stochastic Navier-Stokes equation with no-slip boundary conditions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NOIP37SB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.04231}
}

abstract

This paper investigates the pathwise uniform convergence in probability of fully discrete finite-element approximations for the two-dimensional stochastic Navier-Stokes equations with multiplicative noise, subject to no-slip boundary conditions. We demonstrate that the full discretization achieves nearly $ 3/2$-order convergence in space and nearly half-order convergence in time.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages

[13]

Brezzi and R

F. Brezzi and R. S. Falk. Stability of higher-order Hood-Taylor methods. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 28:581–590, 1991

work page 1991
[31]

Girault and L

V. Girault and L. R. Scott. A quasi-local interpolation operator presrving the discrete divergence. Calcolo, 40:1–19, 2003

work page 2003
[49]

Stenberg

R. Stenberg. Error analysis of some ﬁnite element methods for the Stokes problem. Math. Comput., 54:495–508, 1990

work page 1990
[1]

Ashyralyev and P

A. Ashyralyev and P. E. Sobolevskii. Well-posedness of parabolic diﬀerence equations . Birkh¨ auser Basel, 2012

work page 2012
[2]

P. Baldi. Stochastic calculus. Springer, Cham, 2017

work page 2017
[3]

Bensoussan and R

A. Bensoussan and R. Temam. Equations stochastique du type N avier-Stokes. J. Funct. Anal., 13:195–222, 1973

work page 1973
[4]

Bessaih, Z

H. Bessaih, Z. Brze´ zniak, and A. Millet. Splitting up method for th e 2D stochastic Navier- Stokes equations. Stoch PDE: Anal. Comp. , 2:433–470, 2014. 30

work page 2014
[5]

Bessaih and A

H. Bessaih and A. Millet. Strong L2 convergence of time numerical schemes for the stochastic two-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations. IMA J. Numer. Anal. , 39:2135–2167, 2019

work page 2019

Show all 56 references

[6]

Bessaih and A

H. Bessaih and A. Millet. Strong rates of convergence of space- time discretization schemes for the 2D Navier-Stokes equations with additive noise. Stoch. Dyn. , 22:2240005, 2022

2022
[7]

Boyer and P

F. Boyer and P. Fabrie. Mathematical tools for the study of the incompressible Navi er-Stokes equations and related models . Springer, New York, 2012

2012
[8]

Breckner

H. Breckner. Galerkin approximation and the strong solution of t he Navier-Stokes equation. J. Appl. Math. Stochastic Anal. , 13:239–259, 2000

2000
[9]

Breit and A

D. Breit and A. Dodgson. Convergence rates for the numerical approximation of the 2D stochastic Navier-Stokes equations. Numer. Math. , 147:553–578, 2021

2021
[10]

Breit, T

D. Breit, T. C. Moyo, A. Prohl, and J. Wichmann. Mean square te mporal error estimates for the 2D stochastic Navier-Stokes equations with transport no ise. arXiv:2305.109999, 2024

2024 arXiv
[11]

Breit and A

D. Breit and A. Prohl. Error analysis for 2D stochastic Navier-S tokes equations in bounded domains with Dirichlet data. Found. Comput. Math. , 2023

2023
[12]

S. C. Brenner and R. Scott. The mathematical theory of ﬁnite element methods . Springer- Verlag New York, 3 edition, 2008

2008
[14]

Brze´ zniak, M

Z. Brze´ zniak, M. Capi´ nski, and F. Flandoli. Stochastic partia l diﬀerential equations and turbulence. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. , 1:41–59, 1991

1991
[15]

Brze´ zniak, E

Z. Brze´ zniak, E. Carelli, and A. Prohl. Finite-element-based dis cretizations of the incom- pressible Navier–Stokes equations with multiplicative random forcing . IMA J. Numer. Anal., 33:771–824, 2013

2013
[16]

Brze´ zniak and G

Z. Brze´ zniak and G. Dhariwal. Stochastic tamed Navier-Stoke s equations on R3: the exis- tence and the uniqueness of solutions and the existence of an invar iant measure. J. Math. Fluid Mech., 22:23, 2020

2020
[17]

Capi´ nski and N

M. Capi´ nski and N. J. Cutland. Stochastic Navier-Stokes eq uations. Acta Appl. Math. , 25:59–85, 1991

1991
[18]

Carelli and A

E. Carelli and A. Prohl. Rates of convergence for discretizatio ns of the stochastic incom- pressible Navier-Stokes equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. , 50:2467–2496, 2012

2012
[19]

Chueshov and A

I. Chueshov and A. Millet. Stochastic 2D hydrodynamical type s ystems: well posedness and large deviations. Appl. Math. Optim. , 61:379–420, 2010

2010
[20]

J. Doghman. Numerical approximation of the stochastic Navier -Stokes equations through artiﬁcial compressibility. Calcolo, 61:23, 2024

2024
[21]

D¨ orsek

P. D¨ orsek. Semigroup splitting and cubature approximations f or the stochastic Navier- Stokes equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. , 50:729–746, 2012

2012
[22]

X. Feng, A. Prohl, and L. Vo. Optimally convergent mixed ﬁnite ele ment methods for the stochastic Stokes equations. IMA J. Numer. Anal. , 41:2280–2310, 2021

2021
[23]

Feng and H

X. Feng and H. Qiu. Analysis of fully discrete mixed ﬁnite element me thods for time- dependent stochastic Stokes equations with multiplicative noise. J. Sci. Comput. , 88:31, 2021. 31

2021
[24]

Flandoli and E

F. Flandoli and E. Luongo. Stochastic partial diﬀerential equations in ﬂuid mechanic s. Springer, Singapore, 2023

2023
[25]

G.P. Galdi. An introduction to the mathematical theory of the Navier-St okes equations . Springer, New York, 2011

2011
[26]

Geissert, M

M. Geissert, M. Hess, M. Hieber, C. Schwarz, and K. Stavrakid is. Maximal Lp −Lq- estimates for the Stokes equation: a short proof of Solonnikov’s t heorem. J. Math. Fluid Mech., 12:47–60, 2010

2010
[27]

Y. Giga. Analyticity of the semigroup generated by the Stokes o perator in Lr spaces. Math. Z., 178:297–329, 1981

1981
[28]

Y. Giga. Domains of fractional powers of the Stokes operator in Lr spaces. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 85:251–265, 1985

1985
[29]

Giga and T

Y. Giga and T. Miyakawa. Solutions in Lr of the Navier-Stokes initial value problem. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 89:267–281, 1985

1985
[30]

Girault and P.-A

V. Girault and P.-A. Raviart. Finite element methods for Navier-Stokes equations . Springer, Berlin, 1986

1986
[32]

Glatt-Holtz and M

N. Glatt-Holtz and M. Ziane. Strong pathwise solutions of the st ochastic Navier-Stokes system. Adv. Diﬀ. Equ. , 14:567–600, 2009

2009
[33]

Gy¨ ongy and A

I. Gy¨ ongy and A. Millet. Rate of convergence of implicit approxim ations for stochastic evolution equations. In: Stochastic Diﬀerential Equations: Theory and Applicat ions. In- terdisciplinary Mathematical Sciences, vol. 2, pp. 281–31 0. World Scientiﬁc Publishing, Hackensac...

2007
[34]

Hausenblas and T

E. Hausenblas and T. Randrianasolo. Time-discretization of sto chastic 2-D Navier-Stokes equations with a penalty-projection method. Numer. Math. , 143:339–378, 2019

2019
[35]

Hyt¨ onen, J

T. Hyt¨ onen, J. van Neerven, M. Veraar, and L. Weis. Analysis in Banach spaces, Volume II: Probabilistic methods and operator theory . Springer, Cham, 2017

2017
[36]

Kalton, P

N. Kalton, P. Kunstmann, and L. Weis. Perturbation and interp olation theorems for the H ∞-calculus with applications to diﬀerential operators. Math. Ann. , 336:747–801, 2006

2006
[37]

Kukavica and V

I. Kukavica and V. Vicol. On moments for strong solutions of the 2D stochastic Navier- Stokes equations in a bounded domain. Asympt. Anal. , 90:189–206, 2014

2014
[38]

B. Li, S. Ma, and W. Sun. Optimal analysis of ﬁnite element method s for the stochastic Stokes equations. arXiv:2206.13879, 2023

2023 arXiv
[39]

A. Lunardi. Interpolation theory. Edizioni della Normale, Pisa, 2018

2018
[40]

J. L. Menaldi and S. S. Sritharan. Stochastic 2-D Navier-Stok es equation. Appl. Math. Optim., 46:31, 2002

2002
[41]

Mikulevicius and B

R. Mikulevicius and B. L. Rozovskii. Stochastic Navier-Stokes eq uations for turbulent ﬂows. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 35:1250–1310, 2004

2004
[42]

Mikulevicius and B

R. Mikulevicius and B. L. Rozovskii. Global L2-solutions of stochastic Navier-Stokes equa- tions. Ann. Probab., 33:137–176, 2005

2005
[43]

Ondrej´ at, A

M. Ondrej´ at, A. Prohl, and N. Walkington. Numerical approxim ation of nonlinear SPDE’s. Stoch PDE: Anal. Comp. , 11:1553–1634, 2023. 32

2023
[44]

Pardoux and A

E. Pardoux and A. Rascanu. Stochastic diﬀerential equations, backward SDEs, partial dif- ferential equations. Springer, Cham, 2014

2014
[45]

Da Prato and J

G. Da Prato and J. Zabczyk. Stochastic equations in inﬁnite dimensions . Cambridge University Press, 2 edition, 2014

2014
[46]

Printems

J. Printems. On the discretization in time of parabolic stochastic partial diﬀerential equa- tions. M2AN Math. Model. Numer. Anal. , 35:1055–1078, 2001

2001
[47]

R¨ ockner and X

M. R¨ ockner and X. Zhang. Stochastic tamed 3D Navier-Stokes equations: existence, unique- ness and ergodicity. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields , 145:211–267, 2009

2009
[48]

S. S. Sritharan and P. Sundar. Large deviations for the two-d imensional Navier-Stokes equations with multiplicative noise. Stoch. Process. Appl. , 116:1636–1659, 2006

2006
[50]

L. Tartar. An Introduction to Sobolev Spaces and Interpolation Spaces . Springer, Berlin, 2007

2007
[51]

Thom´ ee

V. Thom´ ee. Galerkin Finite Element Methods for Parabolic Problems . Springer, Berlin, 2006

2006
[52]

van Neerven, M

J. van Neerven, M. Veraar, and L. Weis. Stochastic integratio n in UMD Banach spaces. Ann. Probab., 35:1438–1478, 2007

2007
[53]

van Neerven, M

J. van Neerven, M. Veraar, and L. Weis. Stochastic evolution e quations in UMD Banach spaces. J. Funct. Anal. , 255:940–993, 2008

2008
[54]

van Neerven, M

J. van Neerven, M. Veraar, and L. Weis. Maximal Lp-regularity for stochastic evolution equations. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 44:1372–1414, 2012

2012
[55]

van Neerven and M

J. van Neerven and M. Verrar. Maximal inequalities for stochas tic convolutions and pathwise uniform convergence of time discretization schemes. Stoch PDE: Anal. Comp. , 10:516–581, 2022

2022
[56]

A. Yagi. Abstract parabolic evolution equations and their applicat ions. Springer, Berlin, 2010. 33

2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [13]

Brezzi and R

F. Brezzi and R. S. Falk. Stability of higher-order Hood-Taylor methods. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 28:581–590, 1991

work page 1991

[2] [31]

Girault and L

V. Girault and L. R. Scott. A quasi-local interpolation operator presrving the discrete divergence. Calcolo, 40:1–19, 2003

work page 2003

[3] [49]

Stenberg

R. Stenberg. Error analysis of some ﬁnite element methods for the Stokes problem. Math. Comput., 54:495–508, 1990

work page 1990

[4] [1]

Ashyralyev and P

A. Ashyralyev and P. E. Sobolevskii. Well-posedness of parabolic diﬀerence equations . Birkh¨ auser Basel, 2012

work page 2012

[5] [2]

P. Baldi. Stochastic calculus. Springer, Cham, 2017

work page 2017

[6] [3]

Bensoussan and R

A. Bensoussan and R. Temam. Equations stochastique du type N avier-Stokes. J. Funct. Anal., 13:195–222, 1973

work page 1973

[7] [4]

Bessaih, Z

H. Bessaih, Z. Brze´ zniak, and A. Millet. Splitting up method for th e 2D stochastic Navier- Stokes equations. Stoch PDE: Anal. Comp. , 2:433–470, 2014. 30

work page 2014

[8] [5]

Bessaih and A

H. Bessaih and A. Millet. Strong L2 convergence of time numerical schemes for the stochastic two-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations. IMA J. Numer. Anal. , 39:2135–2167, 2019

work page 2019