Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 31 references

New invariant surface measures for the cubic Schr\"odinger equation

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For the defocusing cubic NLS on the 1- and 2-dimensional torus, the paper constructs, for every r>0, a probability measure on the mass level set {E=r} and a unique flow, defined almost surely, that preserves it.

desk verdict Genuinely new 2D mass-constrained invariant measures for NLS, but the paper's central W^∞ regularity claim rests on an admitted, unsupplied independence argument; deserve peer review with a request to close that gap. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.02162 v2 pith:GUPYO2TU submitted 2025-02-04 math.AP

Jean-Baptiste Casteras , Ana Bela Cruzeiro , Annie Millet This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35Q5528C20
keywords invariantmeasuresurfacecubicnonlinearSchrödingerequationmasslevelsetrenormalizationtorusWienerspacequasi-sureanalysis
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

For the defocusing cubic Schrödinger equation on the torus $\mathbb{T}^d$ with $d=1,2$, the paper constructs, for every $r>0$, a probability measure $\sigma_r$ supported on the level set $V_r=\{\varphi: E(\varphi)=r\}$ of the renormalized mass, together with a unique flow $u_t$, defined $\sigma_r$-almost everywhere for all real times, that solves the cubic NLS equation (after renormalization in dimension 2) and leaves $\sigma_r$ invariant. The interest is that the measure is concentrated on a thin mass shell rather than spread over the whole support of the Gibbs measure, and the paper states this is the first such result in dimension 2, where both the nonlinearity and the mass must be renormalized. The one-dimensional case is treated as a simpler companion that needs no renormalization. If the construction is correct, rough initial data drawn from $\sigma_r$ still evolve uniquely for all times and the mass shell is a genuinely invariant structure.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is the disintegration of a weighted Gaussian measure on a Wiener space into surface measures on level sets of a smooth functional. The two objects that carry the argument are the renormalized mass $E(\varphi)=\sum_k(|\varphi_k|^2-Z_k)$, with $Z_k=c_1|k|^{-2}$ in dimension 2, and the renormalized cubic nonlinearity $:B:$, defined as the limit of $:B:^N_k=B_k-4\sum_{1\le|m|\le N}|m|^{-2}\varphi_k$. The paper proves that $E$, the inverse of the norm of its gradient, and all stochastic derivatives of $:B:$ belong to the intersection of all Sobolev classes $W^\infty$ with respect to the Gaussian measure; this makes the surface-measure construction applicable and lets the vector field $A-:B:$ be redefined on the level sets with zero divergence, so that the surface measures are invariant under the truncated flows.

What would settle it

Take $d=2$, a frequency $k\ne 0$, a truncation $N$, and $p=2$. Expand $E[|B_k-C_N\varphi_k|^6]$ directly using the exact Gaussian moments $E[|\varphi_j|^{2m}]=2^m m! |j|^{-2m}$, keeping all cross-contractions between the two factors $|B_k-C_N\varphi_k|^4$ and $|B_k|^2-C_N^2|\varphi_k|^2$, which share $\varphi_k$. If the ratio to $E[|B_k-C_N\varphi_k|^4]$ is unbounded as $N\to\infty$, Proposition 3.1 fails; if it is bounded, the recursive step can likely be made rigorous.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.1, sharpened as Theorem 5.1: for every $r>0$ there is a Borel probability measure $\sigma_r$ on $L^2$ with support in $V_r=\{E=r\}$, and there is a flow $u\in C(\mathbb{R}\times V_r)$ such that $u_t$ solves equation (1) when $d=1$ and the renormalized equation (4) when $d=2$, for $\sigma_r$-almost every initial condition, and $(u_t)_*\sigma_r=\sigma_r$ for every $t\in\mathbb{R}$. The flow is obtained as a limit of finite-dimensional truncations: the truncated vector fields are divergence-free with respect to the surface measure on each level set, tightness gives a weak limit of their laws on path space, a standard representation theorem for weak limits gives an almost-sure representation, and the invariance passes to the limit. Uniqueness follows from the continuity-equation framework for Sobolev vector fields on Wiener spaces.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on being able to repair a gap in Section 3: the proof of the key norm bounds for the renormalized nonlinearity uses an independence of two random variables that the text itself calls erroneous, and no rigorous replacement is supplied.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Initial data drawn from $\sigma_r$ are almost surely in $H^\beta$ for every $\beta<0$, so the flow is defined on rough data concentrated on a mass shell rather than on smooth data.
  • The invariance $(u_t)_*\sigma_r=\sigma_r$ holds for all real times, so the mass shell $\{E=r\}$ is preserved exactly in measure, not just approximately.
  • In dimension 1 the same construction yields the result without renormalization, giving a simpler family of mass-conditioned invariant measures for the cubic NLS.
  • The paper notes the argument extends to dispersion $(-\Delta)^s$ for $s>0$ and odd-power nonlinearities, with the renormalization constant adjusted from $a=2$ to $a=2s$.
  • By the paper's account this is the first two-dimensional construction of invariant measures conditioned on a mass level; earlier mass- and momentum-conditioned Gibbs measures were one-dimensional.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper does not discuss momentum level sets, but the same surface-measure machinery would plausibly apply to $\{P=b\}$ in dimension 2 once the momentum functional and the inverse of its gradient are shown to have the same $W^\infty$ regularity.
  • A numerical check of finite-dimensional truncations on $V_r$ could test the invariance before the analysis is fixed: if the empirical law of $E(v^n_t(\varphi))$ drifts away from $r$ as $n$ grows, the claimed limiting invariance would be called into question.
  • If the missing recursive estimate cannot be repaired by direct Gaussian moment expansions, the theorem might still be true by another route, such as bounding the mixed moments with Wick-contraction combinatorics; the paper's own admitted independence error points to that combinatorics as the natural repair.
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

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper constructs probability measures σ_r supported on level sets V_r of a renormalized mass E for the defocusing cubic NLS on the torus in dimensions d=1,2, and claims existence and uniqueness of a flow u_t solving the (renormalized) NLS, with σ_r invariant under the flow. The construction uses the Airault-Malliavin coarea formula for surface measures on a Gaussian (abstract Wiener) space, Sobolev estimates for the Wick-ordered nonlinearity :B:, and the Ambrosio-Figalli theory of flows for Sobolev vector fields. The main theorem is stated as Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 5.1.

Significance. If the main theorem is correct, this would be the first construction of invariant measures supported on mass level sets for the 2D cubic NLS, going beyond Bourgain's Gibbs-measure constructions and the 1D mass-conditioned results of Oh-Quastel and Brereton. The paper's approach is original: it combines Malliavin calculus, the Airault-Malliavin coarea formula, and Ambrosio-Figalli flows. A notable strength is that the renormalization constants Z_k and the subtraction term C_N are derived from Gaussian variances, not fitted to force the conclusion, and the L^2 estimates for the Wick-ordered nonlinearity are largely credible. However, several load-bearing steps in the proof are not rigorously supplied, and at least one displayed equation appears inconsistent with the NLS dynamics.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 3, Propositions 3.1 and 3.2] The recursive L^p estimates use an admitted erroneous independence assumption. After Eq. (8), the displayed chain replaces the random factor |B_k - C_N φ_k|^2 by the deterministic value I_{N,1}+I_{N,2}, but |B_k|^2 - C_N^2|φ_k|^2 is not equal to I_{N,1}+I_{N,2}; these are expectations, not identities. The text states that independence is used erroneously and that the argument can be made rigorous, yet no replacement is supplied. Proposition 3.2 repeats the same device for the gradient, and Propositions 3.3-3.4 inherit the pattern. Since the W^∞ regularity of :B: is the basis for the redefinition :B:^* and for the flow argument in Theorem 5.1, this gap is load-bearing. A repair via Gaussian hypercontractivity for polynomial :B:_{N,k} seems plausible but is not in the manuscript.
  2. [Section 5, Eq. (11) and Theorem 5.1(i)] The integral equation displayed in Eq. (11) and in Theorem 5.1(i) does not appear to be the Duhamel formula for the cubic NLS. With A=Δ as defined in Section 2.3, the equation i∂_t u = -Δu + |u|^2 u is equivalent to ∂_t φ_k = -i|k|^2 φ_k - i B_k(φ), whose integral form is u_t = e^{itA}u_0 - i∫_0^t e^{i(t-s)A} B(u_s) ds. The manuscript instead writes u_t = e^{itA}u_0 + ∫_0^t e^{-i(t-s)A} :B:^*(u_s) ds; differentiating this expression does not yield the NLS evolution. This is a central statement of the theorem, and the subsequent estimates are built on this formula. Please correct the sign/conjugation and re-derive the relevant bounds.
  3. [Sections 2.3, 4, and Theorem 5.1] The Gaussian measure μ_2 and the renormalized mass E are defined through sums over k≠0, so the phase space is effectively the zero-mean subspace of L^2. However, the cubic NLS (1) does not preserve the zero-mean subspace: the zero Fourier mode evolves according to dφ_0/dt = -i B_0(φ), which is generally nonzero even when φ_0(0)=0. The flow constructed in Theorem 5.1 uses only the modes k≠0 and therefore appears to solve a projected, zero-mean system rather than the full equation (1) or (4). The paper must either include the zero mode in the construction (for instance via a massive Gaussian weight) or explicitly prove invariance for the projected system and state the theorem accordingly. Without this, the claim that σ_r is invariant for the NLS flow is not established.
  4. [Section 4, Proposition 4.1] The proof of E∈W^8 is incomplete. The displayed expansion of ∫|E|^p dμ_a is not the correct multinomial expansion of (∑_k X_k)^p: it keeps only the diagonal term and the term with all indices distinct, omitting terms such as X_k^2 X_l with repeated indices. Consequently the displayed equalities are not identities. The conclusion may still be true (for instance by Rosenthal's inequality or hypercontractivity for the independent centered variables X_k=|φ_k|^2-Z_k), but the proof as written does not establish it. Since E∈W^8 is required by Theorem 2.1 for the surface measure construction, a rigorous L^p bound for E is needed.
  5. [Section 5, uniqueness step] The uniqueness of the flow is delegated to [2, Theorem 4.7] after only a brief indication. To apply the Ambrosio-Figalli theorem, one must verify that the limit vector field :B:^* has Sobolev regularity with respect to the surface measure σ_r (not only with respect to μ_2) and that its divergence with respect to σ_r is zero. The paper states these properties but does not prove them; the divergence-free condition is shown only for the truncated fields :B:^n, and the passage to the limit is not justified. Please spell out the verification or provide a reference with the precise conditions met here.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and title] The abstract contains a LaTeX artifact "Schr\"odinger"; the final PDF should be checked for this and similar encoding issues.
  2. [Section 2.1] The product measure Π_{k∈Z^d} dμ_k^a is not a probability measure for k=0 because |k|^a=0 makes the density zero; the paper should explicitly state whether the zero mode is excluded from the Gaussian measure and how the level sets V_r are defined in that case.
  3. [Section 1, Eq. (5)] The definition E(φ)=∫|φ|^2 dx - 1_{d=2}∑_{k≠0} 2/|k|^2 mixes an integral over all frequencies with a renormalization over nonzero frequencies; the zero-mode contribution should be made explicit.
  4. [Section 5, tightness proof] In the estimates for the second tightness condition, the passage from convergence of :B:^n in L^p_μ to convergence in L^p_σr is not demonstrated; a short proof using the coarea formula and Proposition 3.1 would clarify the step.
  5. [References] Reference [10] has a typo in the journal name ("J. Funct. AnaL"); it should read "J. Funct. Anal.".

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the admitted gap in the Section 3 L^p estimate is a correctness issue, not a fitted-input/prediction reduction.

full rationale

No circularity found. The derivation is self-contained in the relevant sense: the renormalized mass E in (5) and the subtraction constant C_N in Section 3 are fixed by the Gaussian moment formulas (6) (Z_k = c_1 |k|^{-a}, C_N = 2 sum over 0<|m|<=N |m|^{-a}), not by the target measure sigma_r or by the claimed invariance. The surface measure sigma_r is produced by the Airault-Malliavin coarea formula (Theorem 2.1), which is an external geometric disintegration theorem, and is not defined so as to force the flow invariance. Invariance is then proved from conservation of mass and the divergence-free property of A - :B:, following Ambrosio-Figalli. The external inputs (Bourgain's Wick-ordered Gibbs measure, Airault-Malliavin, Ambrosio-Figalli) are genuinely independent of the present theorem, and no load-bearing self-citation or imported uniqueness theorem appears. The one flagged weakness is a proof gap, not circularity: in the proof of Proposition 3.1, the text states 'we use erroneously the independence of |Bkp(phi)-C_N phi_k|^{2p} and |Bk|^2-C_N^2|phi_k|^2, but the argument can be made rigorous', and no rigorous replacement is supplied in the paper. That unsupported W^infinity regularity is load-bearing for Theorem 5.1, but it is an unproven estimate rather than a quantity defined in terms of the conclusion or a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The central claim therefore does not reduce by construction to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on external theorems from Airault-Malliavin, Bourgain, and Ambrosio-Figalli, on the choice of Gaussian parameters a=2 and beta<0, and on the standard Wick renormalization. No empirical free parameters are fitted.

free parameters (2)
  • Gaussian exponent a = 2
    The Gaussian measure exponent is set to a=2 so that the Cameron-Martin space is H^1; the paper notes other values are possible but does not justify a=2 as forced by the construction.
  • Regularity exponent beta = <0
    The regularity exponent of the ambient Wiener space H^beta is arbitrary negative; the construction purports to work for any beta<0 but the measure may depend on the choice.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Airault-Malliavin surface measure theorem provides the coarea disintegration on abstract Wiener spaces.
    This is the main external ingredient; the paper uses it without proof to define sigma_r.
  • domain assumption Bourgain's Wick-ordered Gibbs measure mu is invariant for the renormalized flow and absolutely continuous with respect to mu_2 with density in all L^p.
    Taken from [5]; the paper states 'all these statements were shown in [5]'.
  • domain assumption Ambrosio-Figalli theory: existence and uniqueness of a flow associated to a Sobolev vector field in Wiener space, plus the continuity equation.
    Used at the end of Theorem 5.1 to upgrade the weak solution to a flow and prove uniqueness; hypotheses are not verified in the text.
  • ad hoc to paper Renormalization prescription: subtract the divergent constant 4 sum_{|m|<=N} 1/|m|^2 from the cubic term and sum Z_k from the mass.
    This renormalization is standard in [5] and is needed to make the vector field integrable in d=2; it defines the objects rather than being derived.
invented entities (2)
  • Renormalized mass E(phi) = sum_k (|phi_k|^2 - Z_k)
    purpose: Defines the level sets V_r on which the invariant surface measures are supported; without it the mass is infinite almost surely in d=2.
    This is a renormalized observable inherited from the Gaussian construction, not a new physical entity; it has no independent falsifiable handle outside the paper.
  • Wick-ordered nonlinearity :B:
    purpose: Replaces the cubic term in d=2 after subtracting a divergent frequency sum, making the vector field integrable with respect to the Gaussian measure.
    The Wick ordering is a construction from [5] needed for the analysis; it is not an independently observable entity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of New invariant surface measures for the cubic Schr\"odinger equation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GUPYO2TU

@misc{pith2026250202162,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: New invariant surface measures for the cubic Schr\"odinger equation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GUPYO2TU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.02162}
}
abstract

We construct new invariant measures supported on mass level sets for the cubic defocusing nonlinear Schr\"odinger equation in dimensions $1$ and $2$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Intégration géométrique sur l’espace de Wiener

    Hélène Airault and Paul Malliavin. Intégration géométrique sur l’espace de Wiener. Bull. Sci. Math. (2), 112(1):3–52, 1988

    work page 1988

  2. [2]

    On flows associated to Sobolev vector fields in Wiener spaces: An approach à la DiPerna-Lions.J

    Luigi Ambrosio and Alessio Figalli. . On flows associated to Sobolev vector fields in Wiener spaces: An approach à la DiPerna-Lions.J. Funct. Anal., 256:179–214, 2009

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    Fourier transform restriction phenomena for certain lattice subsets and applications to nonlinear evolution equations

    Jean Bourgain. Fourier transform restriction phenomena for certain lattice subsets and applications to nonlinear evolution equations. I. Schrödinger equations.Geom. Funct. Anal., 3(2):107–156, 1993

    work page 1993

  4. [4]

    Periodic nonlinear Schrödinger equation and invariant measures

    Jean Bourgain. Periodic nonlinear Schrödinger equation and invariant measures. Comm. Math. Phys., 166(1):1–26, 1994

    work page 1994

  5. [5]

    Invariant measures for the2d-defocusing nonlinear Schrödinger equa- tion

    Jean Bourgain. Invariant measures for the2d-defocusing nonlinear Schrödinger equa- tion. Comm. Math. Phys., 176(2):421–445, 1996

    work page 1996

  6. [6]

    Brereton

    Justin T. Brereton. Invariant measure construction at a fixed mass.Nonlinearity, 32(2):496–558, 2019

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Invariant measures and global well-posedness for a fractional Schrödinger equation with Moser-Trudinger type non- linearity.Stoch

    Jean-Baptiste Casteras and Léonard Monsaingeon. Invariant measures and global well-posedness for a fractional Schrödinger equation with Moser-Trudinger type non- linearity.Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput., 12(1):416–465, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    A continuum of invariant measures for the periodic KdV and mKdV equations

    Andreia Chapouto and Justin Forlano. Invariant measures for the periodic kdv and mkdv equations using complete integrability.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.14565, 2023

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

Show all 31 references
  1. [9]

    The two-dimensional Euler equation: a statistical study.Comm

    Fernanda Cipriano. The two-dimensional Euler equation: a statistical study.Comm. Math. Phys., 201(1):139–154, 1999

    1999

  2. [10]

    Ana Bela Cruzeiro Équations différentielles ordinaires: Non explosion et mesures quasi-invarantes.J. Funct. AnaL54:103-205, 1983

    1983

  3. [11]

    Nahmod, and Haitian Yue

    Yu Deng, Andrea R. Nahmod, and Haitian Yue. Invariant Gibbs measures and global strong solutions for nonlinear Schrödinger equations in dimension two.Ann. of Math. (2), 200(2):399–486, 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    Faddeev and Leon A

    Ludwig D. Faddeev and Leon A. Takhtajan.Hamiltonian methods in the theory of solitons. Springer Series in Soviet Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987. Trans- lated from the Russian by A. G. Reyman [A. G. Re˘iman]

    1987

  5. [13]

    Measurable functions on Hilbert space

    Leonard Gross. Measurable functions on Hilbert space. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 105:372–390, 1962

    1962

  6. [14]

    Sharp well-posedness for the cubic NLS and mKdV inH spRq

    Benjamin Harrop-Griffiths, Rowan Killip, and Monica Vi¸san. Sharp well-posedness for the cubic NLS and mKdV inH spRq. Forum Math. Pi, 12:Paper No. e6, 86, 2024

    2024

  7. [15]

    Strichartz estimates and global well-posedness of the cubic nls onT2

    Sebastian Herr and Beomjong Kwak. Strichartz estimates and global well-posedness of the cubic nls onT2. Forum of Mathematics, Pi, volume 12, page e14. Cambridge University Press, 2024

    2024

  8. [16]

    Scale invariant Strichartz estimates on tori and applications

    Rowan Killip and Monica Vi¸san. Scale invariant Strichartz estimates on tori and applications. Math. Res. Lett., 23(2):445–472, 2016

    2016

  9. [17]

    Conserved energies for the cubic nonlinear Schrödinger equation in one dimension.Duke Math

    Herbert Koch and Daniel Tataru. Conserved energies for the cubic nonlinear Schrödinger equation in one dimension.Duke Math. J., 167(17):3207–3313, 2018

    2018

  10. [18]

    Randomly forced CGL equation: stationary measures and the inviscid limit.J

    Sergei Kuksin and Armen Shirikyan. Randomly forced CGL equation: stationary measures and the inviscid limit.J. Phys. A, 37(12):3805–3822, 2004

    2004

  11. [19]

    Mathematics of two-dimensional turbulence, volume 194 ofCambridge Tracts in Mathematics

    Sergei Kuksin and Armen Shirikyan. Mathematics of two-dimensional turbulence, volume 194 ofCambridge Tracts in Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 2012

    2012

  12. [20]

    Critical local well-posedness of the nonlinear schrödinger equation on the torus.Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré C, 2024

    Beomjong Kwak and Soonsik Kwon. Critical local well-posedness of the nonlinear schrödinger equation on the torus.Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré C, 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    Lebowitz, Harvey A

    Joel L. Lebowitz, Harvey A. Rose, and Eugene R. Speer. Statistical mechanics of the nonlinear Schrödinger equation.J. Statist. Phys., 50(3-4):657–687, 1988

    1988

  14. [22]

    Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997

    Paul Malliavin.Stochastic analysis, volume 313 ofGrundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997. INV ARIANT MEASURE NLS 25

    1997

  15. [23]

    On invariant Gibbs measures conditioned on mass and momentum.J

    Tadahiro Oh and Jeremy Quastel. On invariant Gibbs measures conditioned on mass and momentum.J. Math. Soc. Japan, 65(1):13–35, 2013

    2013

  16. [24]

    Optimal integrability thresh- old for Gibbs measures associated with focusing NLS on the torus.Invent

    Tadahiro Oh, Philippe Sosoe, and Leonardo Tolomeo. Optimal integrability thresh- old for Gibbs measures associated with focusing NLS on the torus.Invent. Math., 227(3):1323–1429, 2022

    2022

  17. [25]

    Ann., 378(1-2):389– 423, 2020

    FabricePlanchon, NikolayTzvetkov, andNicolaVisciglia.TransportofGaussianmea- sures by the flow of the nonlinear Schrödinger equation.Math. Ann., 378(1-2):389– 423, 2020

    2020

  18. [26]

    Periodic Schrödinger equations in Hamiltonian form

    Gigliola Staffilani. Periodic Schrödinger equations in Hamiltonian form. InHCDTE lecture notes. Part II. Nonlinear hyperbolic PDEs, dispersive and transport equations, volume 7 ofAIMS Ser. Appl. Math., page 66. Am. Inst. Math. Sci. (AIMS), Spring- field, MO, 2013

    2013

  19. [27]

    Quasi-invariance of gaussian measures for the 3d energy critical nonlinear Schrödinger equation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.12758, 2023

    Chenmin Sun and Nikolay Tzvetkov. Quasi-invariance of gaussian measures for the 3d energy critical nonlinear Schrödinger equation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.12758, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Almost sure global well-posedness for the energy supercritical Schrödinger equations.J

    Mouhamadou Sy. Almost sure global well-posedness for the energy supercritical Schrödinger equations.J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 154:108–145, 2021

    2021

  21. [29]

    Global well-posedness and long-time behavior of the fractional NLS.Stoch

    Mouhamadou Sy and Xueying Yu. Global well-posedness and long-time behavior of the fractional NLS.Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput., 10(4):1261–1317, 2022

    2022

  22. [30]

    Gaussian measures associated to the higher order conservation laws of the Benjamin-Ono equation.Ann

    Nikolay Tzvetkov and Nicola Visciglia. Gaussian measures associated to the higher order conservation laws of the Benjamin-Ono equation.Ann. Sci. Éc. Norm. Supér. (4), 46(2):249–299, 2013

    2013

  23. [31]

    Zakharov and Aleksei B

    Vladimir E. Zakharov and Aleksei B. Shabat. Exact theory of two-dimensional self- focusing and one-dimensional self-modulation of waves in nonlinear media. Soviet Physics JETP34 (1972), no. 1, 62-69. CEMSUL, F aculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Edificio C6, Piso 1...

    1972

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.