Revisiting Bourgain's probabilistic construction of solutions to the 2-$d$ cubic NLS

Tadahiro Oh; Yuzhao Wang

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 4 cited by

Revisiting Bourgain's probabilistic construction of solutions to the 2-$d$ cubic NLS

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Random Gaussian data make the 2D cubic NLS almost surely locally well posed.

desk verdict A credible new proof of Bourgain's 1996 theorem via Deng–Nahmod–Yue random tensors; worth refereeing, but several load-bearing steps are sketched and the proof of Lemma 2.7 needs a fix or a citation. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.24271 v1 pith:GMCGYEBW submitted 2025-05-30 math.AP math.PR

Tadahiro Oh , Yuzhao Wang This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.APmath.PR MSC 35Q5560H15

keywords nonlinearSchrödingerequationGibbsmeasurerandominitialdataprobabilisticwell-posednesstensorestimateX^{sb}spacesWickrenormalization2Dtorus

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 note revisits Bourgain's 1996 probabilistic construction of local solutions to the defocusing cubic nonlinear Schrödinger equation on the two-dimensional torus and gives the same almost-sure well-posedness statement by a different route. The central claim is Proposition 1.4: for initial data drawn from the Gaussian free field, with probability at least $1-e^{-c_1/T^{c_2}}$ the cubic nonlinearity applied to the random linear evolution plus a small deterministic remainder is bounded in the $X^{s,-1/2+2\varepsilon}_T$ norm, uniformly over the deterministic remainder. From that bound the paper derives almost-sure local well-posedness of the renormalized (Wick-ordered) equation (1.15), the convergence of the truncated solutions, and, through Bourgain's invariant-measure argument, invariance of the Gibbs measure. The contribution is a reorganization of the proof: the delicate frequency counting in Bourgain's argument is replaced by the random tensor estimate of Deng, Nahmod, and Yue, applied term by term to the cubic nonlinearity.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the random tensor estimate (Lemma 2.6), applied to the base tensor $h_{N,(m)}$ of (2.29), which records the resonance relation $n=n_1-n_2+n_3$ and the level set $\phi(\bar n)=m$ of the phase. For a random tensor $H_{bc}=\sum_{n_A} h_{b c n_A}\prod_n H_{k_n}(g_n)$, Lemma 2.6 bounds $\|H_{bc}\|_{b\to c}$ in $L^p(\Omega)$ by $p^{k/2}N^\theta$ times the supremum, over a small set $J$ of representative $m$, of the best tensor norm of the compressed deterministic coefficient tensors. The companion compactness lemma (Lemma 2.7), proved via an LLL-reduced lattice basis (a standard reduced-basis construction for lattices) and an induction (Lemma A.1), supplies the small set $J$: on each domain $D_m=\{n:|n|\lesssim N,\ |m\cdot n|\lesssim N^{a_1}\}$ the function $f_m(n)=m\cdot n$ coincides with one of only $O(N^{a_2})$ linear functions. This compression is what lets the estimates in Sections 5–8 sum over all dyadic frequency blocks and produces the $e^{-c_1/T^{c_2}}$ probability bound through Chebyshev's inequality.

What would settle it

For $d=2$ and $a_1=2$, take $N=2^k$ with $k=10,20,30$ and enumerate $m\in[-N^2,N^2]^2$. Count the number of distinct pairs $(D_m, f_m)$ with $f_m(n)=m\cdot n$. If this count is not $O(N^{a_2})$ for the $a_2$ produced by Lemma 2.7, in particular if it grows faster than any fixed power of $N$, the lemma fails and the estimates (2.14) and (2.16) no longer follow.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the cubic nonlinearity $N(w+z)$ can be decomposed, up to the resonant term $R$ and the deterministic term $N(w,w,w)$, into one purely stochastic term and four random tensor terms $N(z,w,z)$, $N(w,z,z)$, $N(z,w,w)$, and $N(w,z,w)$, each of which is controlled by a single random tensor estimate. The random tensor estimate (Lemma 2.6) bounds the $L^p(\Omega)$ norm of the operator norm of a random matrix built from Hermite polynomials in independent Gaussians by $p^{k/2}N^\theta$ times the best tensor norm of the deterministic coefficient tensor, over all partitions of the index set. The proof's self-contained part is the compactness lemma (Lemma 2.7), which shows that the family of linear functions $m\cdot n$ on the domains $|m\cdot n|\lesssim N^{a_1}$, $|n|\lesssim N$, can be replaced by only $O(N^{a_2})$ representatives; this turns the supremum over all $m$ in the random tensor estimate into a finite supremum and makes the subsequent Chebyshev summation over dyadic frequency blocks possible.

Load-bearing premise

The proof stands on Lemma 2.7, which asserts that on each domain $D_m=\{n:|n|\lesssim N,\ |m\cdot n|\lesssim N^{a_1}\}$ the functions $f_m(n)=m\cdot n$ take only $O(N^{a_2})$ distinct forms as $m$ varies; if that compression is false, the sup over $m$ in the random tensor estimates (2.14) and (2.16) cannot be made finite and the random tensor terms II and III collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Proposition 1.4 gives almost-sure local well-posedness of the renormalized NLS (1.15) for initial data distributed by the Gaussian free field.
For each good datum, the finite-dimensional truncated equation (1.14) has solutions that converge to the renormalized solution in $C([-T,T];H^{-\varepsilon}(\mathbb T^2))$.
Bourgain's invariant-measure argument then upgrades local to global well-posedness and shows that the Gibbs measure $\rho$ is invariant under the resulting flow.
Via the gauge change (1.13), the same statements imply the original invariance theorem (Theorem 1.2) for the truncated dynamics.

Reading between the lines

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

The same random-tensor strategy is likely to absorb the frequency-counting in other Bourgain-type probabilistic constructions on compact manifolds, although the paper does not claim this.
One concrete testable extension is to check Lemma 2.7 computationally for $d=2$: enumerating the domains $D_m$ for large $N$ should confirm that the number of distinct pairs $(D_m, m\cdot n)$ is polynomial in $N$; a counterexample would invalidate the random tensor step.
If the LLL-reduction step in Lemma A.1 could be replaced by a more direct lattice argument, the exponents $a_1,a_2$ in the compactness lemma would likely improve, sharpening the final time-weight $T^\theta$.

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

First, what you should know: this is a new proof of Bourgain's 1996 Gibbs-invariance theorem, not a new theorem. The contribution is methodological — it recasts Bourgain's probabilistic construction using the Deng–Nahmod–Yue random tensor estimates, and for much of the way it does so cleanly.

What is genuinely good: the decomposition of the nonlinearity into resonant, purely stochastic, and four random tensor terms is transparent. Section 3 (resonant) and Section 4 (purely stochastic) are essentially complete and careful. Section 5 (random tensor term I) is written in full, including the operator-norm lemma, and the counting lemma (Lemma 2.10) with its proofs is the real workhorse — that part looks solid. The linear-algebra lemma in Appendix A is proved in detail. The paper is honest about what it is.

Now the soft spots. Several load-bearing steps are asserted rather than shown: Case 1 of Proposition 6.1, Lemma 8.2, the multilinear version of (1.23), and the convergence of truncated solutions in Theorem 1.3(i) are all dismissed as "straightforward modification[s]." For a paper whose stated goal is a rigorous streamlined proof, that is a real incompleteness; a referee should ask for those arguments to be itemized.

The stress-test note flags the gluing step in Lemma 2.7: each slice D_{m,p} is bounded separately, and the text jumps from per-slice polynomial counts to a polynomial count for the glued family {F_m}. Read literally, that step is not justified — the product of per-slice counts would be super-polynomial. However, I do not think this sinks anything. Lemma 2.7 is standard (essentially [24, Claim 4.16]), and in the d=2 case needed here it can be proved by a much more elementary counting argument: the m's with |m| ≲ N^{a1} number only O(N^{2a1}), and the rest collapse to O(N^{O(1)}) classes. So the gap is in the proof as written, not in the lemma; the fix is either a direct citation or a short replacement argument. Similarly, the reductions in (6.11) and (7.14), replacing operator norms by Hilbert–Schmidt bounds via Lemma 2.7, are plausible but sketched.

Overall: the architecture is credible, the counting core is solid, and because the result is already known, the stakes are moderate. The paper succeeds in showing the DNY random tensor machinery can reproduce Bourgain's argument in a cleaner way. It is for researchers in probabilistic and dispersive PDEs, especially those using random tensor methods. It deserves a serious referee — conditional on the authors writing out the omitted steps, I would be happy to see it published. My recommendation: accept for peer review, with a report that forces detail on the flagged modifications.

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper revisits Bourgain's 1996 probabilistic construction of solutions to the defocusing cubic NLS on the two-dimensional torus, aiming to streamline the proof using the random tensor estimate of Deng, Nahmod, and Yue (2022). The central result is Proposition 1.4: for small s > 0 and ε > 0, there exist c1, c2 > 0 such that for all sufficiently small T, outside a set of initial data of probability < exp(-c1/T^{c2}), the nonlinearity N(w+z) is bounded in X^{s,-1/2+2ε}_T uniformly for w in the unit ball of X^{s,1/2+ε}_T. From this estimate, the paper claims almost sure local well-posedness of the renormalized NLS (1.15), convergence of the truncated solutions, and, via Bourgain's invariant-measure argument, invariance of the Gibbs measure (Theorem 1.3). The proof splits the nonlinearity into resonant, deterministic, purely stochastic, and four random tensor terms, each treated in a separate section.

Significance. If the proof is completed as written, this would be a valuable modernization of a landmark result, replacing Bourgain's original intricate estimates with the random tensor framework and offering a template for analogous problems. The paper includes detailed and careful counting arguments (Lemmas 2.10 and 2.12), a precise treatment of the deterministic trilinear estimate, and a correct use of an external theorem (the Deng-Nahmod-Yue random tensor bound) rather than a circular argument. The paper is explicit about the exceptional-probability bounds and the role of each term in Proposition 1.4. However, the manuscript as it stands leaves several load-bearing components to 'straightforward modifications' (the convergence of truncated solutions, the multilinear version of the key estimate, Cases in Propositions 6.1 and 8.1, and Lemma 8.2), and the proof of the compactness lemma (Lemma 2.7) contains a gluing step that is not adequately justified. These gaps prevent the central claim from being fully established in the present form.

major comments (4)

The passage from the per-slice bound to the global bound is not justified. The proof shows that for each p with |p| ≲ N^{a1} the restricted objects F_{m,p} have O(N^{a1'}) possibilities, and then asserts that the glued family {F_m} has O(N^{a2}) elements. This is a gluing step: the number of compatible assignments of the slice data could in principle be as large as the product of the per-slice counts, and the argument gives no reason that the lattice L, the direction of m, and the values m·n_0 are compatible across p in a way that collapses the product to a single polynomial. Since Lemma 2.7 is used in (2.25), (2.28), and (6.11) to replace the supremum over m ∈ Z^d by a supremum over a polynomial-size set J, a super-polynomial number of equivalence classes would invalidate the random tensor estimates (2.14) and (2.16), and with them the bounds for random tensor terms II and III in Sections 6 and 7. The lemma should either be proved by a complete argument or the paper should rely directly on a cited proof, such as [24, Claim 4.16].
The convergence of the truncated solutions v_N to the solution v of (1.15), in C([-T,T];H^{-ε}) on a common local existence interval, is an explicit assertion of Theorem 1.3(i), but the text says it 'follows from a straightforward modification of such an argument' and omits details. This is a load-bearing claim: Theorem 1.3(i) is not merely local well-posedness of the limit equation but also includes the convergence statement needed to pass from the truncated dynamics to the limiting dynamics. A proof of this convergence, including the choice of the common interval T(u_0) and the uniformity over the probability set Σ_T, should be supplied.
The paper states that a multilinear version of (1.23) is needed and that it follows from a straightforward modification, but no statement or proof of this multilinear estimate is given. Such an estimate is necessary for the fixed-point argument for (1.22), since the Duhamel iteration requires difference estimates, not just the bound on N(w+z) at a single w. Without a precise multilinear version, the almost sure local well-posedness in Theorem 1.3(i) is not fully established.
Two components of the proof are deferred without proof: Case 1 of Proposition 6.1 ('a straightforward modification of the argument in Case 1 of the proof of Proposition 5.1 yields (6.5)') and Lemma 8.2 ('follows from a minor modification of the proof of Lemma 7.2'). Both are used in the estimates for random tensor terms II and IV, respectively, which are part of Proposition 1.4. Since Proposition 1.4 is the central estimate, these cases should either be proved in detail or the manuscript should be restructured so that the omitted arguments are explicitly relegated to an appendix with a clear statement of the required estimates.

minor comments (3)

The author name appears as 'W ANG' in the title; this spacing should be corrected to 'Wang'.
The word 'supermum' appears twice and should be 'supremum'.
The assertion that after fixing n, n1, n3 there are O((N_1 ∧ N_3)^ε) choices for n_1 and n_3 is not immediate from the preceding equation; adding a one-sentence explanation would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: Proposition 1.4 rests on an external random tensor estimate and an internally proved compactness lemma, with no fitted parameters or self-referential reductions.

full rationale

The central claim, Proposition 1.4, is derived from deterministic trilinear estimates and the random tensor estimate Lemma 2.6. Lemma 2.6(i) is cited to the external work of Deng, Nahmod, and Yue [24] and to Oh, Wang, and Zine [55]; parts (ii) and (iii) are proved in the present paper using Lemma 2.7, a lattice compactness lemma whose proof is given in the text and does not assume the target estimate. No parameter is fitted to data, and no quantity is renamed as a prediction. The only potentially fragile step is the counting/gluing argument inside Lemma 2.7, where the polynomial bound on the family {F_m} is asserted after bounding each slice F_{m,p}; even if this were a gap, it would be a correctness issue rather than a circular one, because the assertion is not equivalent to the conclusion of Lemma 2.6 by construction. Self-citations in the paper are background references or technical tools and are not load-bearing for the main derivation. Therefore the paper exhibits no significant circularity.

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

No free parameters. Axioms are all standard tools from harmonic analysis, stochastic analysis, or prior literature. No invented entities.

assumptions (6)

standard math Random tensor estimate (Lemma 2.6) from Deng-Nahmod-Yue (2022)
Used extensively in Sections 5-8 to bound random trilinear operators. It is an external theorem from the cited literature.
standard math Wiener chaos estimate (Lemma 2.4)
Used to control L^p norms of polynomial Gaussian chaoses in Sections 4-8.
standard math Bourgain's trilinear estimate (1.17) and its variant (2.7)
Deterministic estimate used to handle the pure w,w,w term and in deterministic cases of random tensor terms.
standard math Nonhomogeneous linear estimate (1.23) and its multilinear extension
Basis for converting the nonlinearity estimate into a solution estimate; the multilinear version is invoked but not proven.
standard math Gibbs measure construction and Wick renormalization (Section 1.2)
Background construction of the Phi^4_2 measure, the truncated measures, and the renormalized NLS.
standard math Lattice point counting and divisor bounds (Lemma 2.10)
Counting estimates on the resonance set used ubiquitously in tensor norm estimates.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Revisiting Bourgain's probabilistic construction of solutions to the 2-$d$ cubic NLS." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GMCGYEBW

@misc{pith2026250524271,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Revisiting Bourgain's probabilistic construction of solutions to the 2-$d$ cubic NLS},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GMCGYEBW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.24271}
}

read the original abstract

In a seminal paper (1996), Bourgain proved invariance of the Gibbs measure for the defocusing cubic nonlinear Schr\"odinger equation on the two-dimensional torus by constructing local-in-time solutions in a probabilistic manner. In this note, we revisit and streamline his argument, using the random tensor estimate developed by Deng, Nahmod, and Yue (2022).

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

Fourier restriction norm method adapted to controlled paths: stochastic wave equations
math.AP 2026-07 accept novelty 8.0 of 10

Pathwise local well-posedness of stochastic nonlinear wave equations with multiplicative noise is established in optimal regularity ranges by unifying Fourier restriction norm methods with rough path integration.
Nonlinear PDEs with modulated dispersion III: multiplicative noises
math.AP 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

Irregular modulation of dispersion yields pathwise regularization-by-noise for multiplicative Young noise on stochastic KdV, giving local well-posedness in every Hs.
Sharp unconditional well-posedness of the 2-$d$ periodic cubic hyperbolic nonlinear Schr\"odinger equation
math.AP 2025-09 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

The 2D periodic cubic hyperbolic NLS is semilinearly well-posed in FL^{s,p} for s>1-1/p, unconditionally unique under (1.14), and ill-posed for s<1-1/p, with the same normal-form machinery giving sharp FL^{s,p} unique...
A remark on pathwise well-posedness of the 1-$d$ stochastic heat equation
math.AP 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Pathwise global well-posedness of the 1-d SHE holds for σ > −2β+1 (Young) and σ > −1/2 (rough/white-in-time), via random-tensor estimates on convolution drivers.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

[1]

B´ enyi, T

´A. B´ enyi, T. Oh,Modulation spaces, Wiener amalgam spaces, and Brownian motions , Adv. Math. 228 (2011), no. 5, 2943–2981

work page 2011
[2]

B´ enyi, T

´A. B´ enyi, T. Oh, O. Pocovnicu,On the probabilistic Cauchy theory of the cubic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation on Rd, d ≥ 3, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. Ser. B 2 (2015), 1–50

work page 2015
[3]

B´ enyi, T

´A. B´ enyi, T. Oh, O. Pocovnicu, On the probabilistic Cauchy theory for nonlinear dispersive PDEs , Landscapes of Time-Frequency Analysis. 1–32, Appl. Numer. Harmon. Anal., Birkh¨ auser/Springer, Cham, 2019

work page 2019
[4]

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

J. Bourgain, Fourier transform restriction phenomena for certain lattice subsets and applications to nonlinear evolution equations. I. Schr¨ odinger equations, Geom. Funct. Anal. 3 (1993), 107–156

work page 1993
[5]

Bourgain, Periodic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation and invariant measures, Comm

J. Bourgain, Periodic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation and invariant measures, Comm. Math. Phys. 166 (1994), no. 1, 1–26

work page 1994
[6]

Bourgain, Invariant measures for the 2D-defocusing nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Comm

J. Bourgain, Invariant measures for the 2D-defocusing nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Comm. Math. Phys. 176 (1996), no.2, 421–445

work page 1996
[7]

Bremner, Lattice basis reduction

M. Bremner, Lattice basis reduction. An introduction to the LLL algorithm and its applications . Pure and Applied Mathematics (Boca Raton), 300. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2012. xviii+316 pp

work page 2012
[8]

Bringmann, Almost sure local well-posedness for a derivative nonlinear wave equation , Int

B. Bringmann, Almost sure local well-posedness for a derivative nonlinear wave equation , Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2021, no. 11, 8657–8697

work page 2021

Show all 63 references

[9]

Bringmann, Invariant Gibbs measures for the three-dimensional wave equation with a Hartree nonlin- earity II: dynamics , J

B. Bringmann, Invariant Gibbs measures for the three-dimensional wave equation with a Hartree nonlin- earity II: dynamics , J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 26 (2024), no. 6, 1933–2089

2024
[10]

Bringmann, Y

B. Bringmann, Y. Deng, A. Nahmod, H. Yue, Invariant Gibbs measures for the three dimensional cubic nonlinear wave equation, Invent. Math. 236 (2024), no. 3, 1133–1411

2024
[11]

Brydges, G

D. Brydges, G. Slade, Statistical mechanics of the 2-dimensional focusing nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Comm. Math. Phys. 182 (1996), no. 2, 485–504

1996
[12]

N. Burq, N. Tzvetkov, Random data Cauchy theory for supercritical wave equations. I. Local theory , Invent. Math. 173 (2008), no. 3, 449–475

2008
[13]

N. Burq, N. Tzvetkov, Random data Cauchy theory for supercritical wave equations. II. A global existence result, Invent. Math. 173 (2008), no. 3, 477–496

2008
[14]

N. Burq, N. Tzvetkov, Probabilistic well-posedness for the cubic wave equation, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 16 (2014), no. 1, 1–30

2014
[15]

Chapouto, M

A. Chapouto, M. Gubinelli, G. Li, J. Li, T. Oh,Nonlinear PDEs with modulated dispersion III: multiplicative noises, preprint
[16]

Chapouto, J

A. Chapouto, J. Li, T. Oh, Fourier restriction norm method adapted to controlled paths: stochastic wave equations, preprint
[17]

Chapouto, T

A. Chapouto, T. Oh, G. Zheng, Pathwise well-posedness of the stochastic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equations with multiplicative noises , in preparation
[18]

Christ, Power series solution of a nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Mathematical aspects of nonlinear dispersive equations, 131–155, Ann

M. Christ, Power series solution of a nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Mathematical aspects of nonlinear dispersive equations, 131–155, Ann. of Math. Stud., 163, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ, 2007

2007
[19]

Colliander, T

J. Colliander, T. Oh, Almost sure well-posedness of the cubic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation below L2(T), Duke Math. J. 161 (2012), no. 3, 367–414

2012
[20]

Da Prato, A

G. Da Prato, A. Debussche, Strong solutions to the stochastic quantization equations . Ann. Probab. 31 (2003), no. 4, 1900–1916

2003
[21]

Da Prato, L

G. Da Prato, L. Tubaro, Wick powers in stochastic PDEs: an introduction , Quantum and stochastic mathematical physics, 1–15, Springer Proc. Math. Stat., 377, Springer, Cham, [2023], ©2023

2023
[22]

Y. Deng, Z. Hani, On the derivation of the wave kinetic equation for NLS , Forum Math. Pi 9 (2021), Paper No. e6, 37 pp

2021
[23]

Y. Deng, A. Nahmod, H. Yue, Invariant Gibbs measures and global strong solutions for nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equations in dimension two, Ann. of Math. 200 (2024), no. 2, 399–486. REVISITING BOURGAIN’S ARGUMENT 39

2024
[24]

Y. Deng, A. Nahmod, H. Yue, Random tensors, propagation of randomness, and nonlinear dispersive equations, Invent. Math. 228 (2022), no. 2, 539–686

2022
[25]

Y. Deng, A. Nahmod, H. Yue, Invariant Gibbs measure and global strong solutions for the Hartree NLS equation in dimension three , J. Math. Phys. 62 (2021), no. 3, Paper No. 031514, 39 pp

2021
[26]

C. Fan, Y. Ou, G. Staffilani, H. Wang, 2D-defocusing nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation with random data on irrational tori , Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput. 9 (2021), no. 1, 142–206

2021
[27]

Forlano, T

J. Forlano, T. Oh, Y. Wang, Stochastic cubic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation with almost space-time white noise, J. Aust. Math. Soc. 109 (2020), no. 1, 44–67

2020
[28]

Ginibre, Y

J. Ginibre, Y. Tsutsumi, G. Velo, On the Cauchy problem for the Zakharov system, J. Funct. Anal. 151 (1997), no. 2, 384–436

1997
[29]

Greco, T

D. Greco, T. Oh, L. Tao, L. Tolomeo Critical threshold for weakly interacting log-correlated focusing Gibbs measures, arXiv:2412.09790 [math.PR]

arXiv
[30]

Gr¨ unrock, S

A. Gr¨ unrock, S. Herr,Low regularity local well-posedness of the derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation with periodic initial data , SIAM J. Math. Anal. 39 (2008), no. 6, 1890–1920

2008
[31]

Gubinelli, H

M. Gubinelli, H. Koch, T. Oh, Renormalization of the two-dimensional stochastic nonlinear wave equations . Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 370 (2018), no. 10, 7335–7359

2018
[32]

Gubinelli, H

M. Gubinelli, H. Koch, T. Oh, Paracontrolled approach to the three-dimensional stochastic nonlinear wave equation with quadratic nonlinearity . J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 26 (2024), no. 3, 817–874

2024
[33]

Z. Guo, T. Oh, Non-existence of solutions for the periodic cubic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation below L2, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2018, no. 6, 1656–1729

2018
[34]

S. Herr, B. Kwak, Strichartz estimates and global well-posedness of the cubic NLS on T2 Forum Math. Pi 12 (2024), Paper No. e14, 21 pp

2024
[35]

Kenig, G

C. Kenig, G. Ponce, L. Vega, The Cauchy problem for the Korteweg-de Vries equation in Sobolev spaces of negative indices, Duke Math. J. 71 (1993), no. 1, 1–21

1993
[36]

Kishimoto, Remark on the periodic mass critical nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Proc

N. Kishimoto, Remark on the periodic mass critical nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 142 (2014), no. 8, 2649–2660

2014
[37]

Lebowitz, H

J. Lebowitz, H. Rose, E. Speer, Statistical Mechanics of the Nonlinear Schr¨ odinger Equation,J. Stat. Phys. 50 (1988), no.3, 657–687

1988
[38]

Lenstra, H.W

A.K. Lenstra, H.W. Lenstra Jr., L. Lov´ asz,Factoring polynomials with rational coefficients , Math. Ann. 261 (1982), no. 4, 515–534

1982
[39]

L¨ uhrmann, D

J. L¨ uhrmann, D. Mendelson,Random data Cauchy theory for nonlinear wave equations of power-type on Rd,. Comm. Partial Differential Equations 39 (2014), no. 12, 2262–2283

2014
[40]

Statistical mechanics of nonlinear wave equations. IV. Cubic Schr¨ odinger

H.P. McKean, Statistical mechanics of nonlinear wave equations. IV. Cubic Schr¨ odinger. Comm. Math. Phys. 168 (1995), no. 3, 479–491. Erratum: “Statistical mechanics of nonlinear wave equations. IV. Cubic Schr¨ odinger”.Comm. Math. Phys. 173 (1995), no. 3, 675

1995
[41]

Nelson, A quartic interaction in two dimensions , 1966 Mathematical Theory of Elementary Particles (Proc

E. Nelson, A quartic interaction in two dimensions , 1966 Mathematical Theory of Elementary Particles (Proc. Conf., Dedham, Mass., 1965), pp. 69–73, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass

1966
[42]

Oh, Note on a lower bound of the Weyl sum in Bourgain ’s paper (GAF A ’93) http://www.maths.ed.ac.uk/∼toh

T. Oh, Note on a lower bound of the Weyl sum in Bourgain ’s paper (GAF A ’93) http://www.maths.ed.ac.uk/∼toh
[43]

Oh, A remark on norm inflation with general initial data for the cubic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equations in negative Sobolev spaces , Funkcial

T. Oh, A remark on norm inflation with general initial data for the cubic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equations in negative Sobolev spaces , Funkcial. Ekvac. 60 (2017), 259–277

2017
[44]

T. Oh, M. Okamoto, L. Tolomeo, Focusing Φ4 3-model with a Hartree-type nonlinearity. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 304 (2024), no. 1529

2024
[45]

T. Oh, M. Okamoto, L. Tolomeo, Stochastic quantization of the Φ3 3-model. Mem. Eur. Math. Soc., 16 EMS Press, Berlin, 2025, viii+145 pp

2025
[46]

T. Oh, T. Robert, N. Tzvetkov, Stochastic nonlinear wave dynamics on compact surfaces, Ann. H. Lebesgue 6 (2023), 161–223

2023
[47]

T. Oh, K. Seong, L. Tolomeo, A remark on Gibbs measures with log-correlated Gaussian fields , Forum Math. Sigma 12 (2024), e50, 40 pp

2024
[48]

T. Oh, P. Sosoe, L. Tolomeo, Optimal integrability threshold for Gibbs measures associated with focusing NLS on the torus , Invent. math. 227 (2022), 1323–1429

2022
[49]

T. Oh, C. Sulem, On the one-dimensional cubic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation below L2, Kyoto J. Math. 52 (2012), no.1, 99–115

2012
[50]

T. Oh, L. Thomann, A pedestrian approach to the invariant Gibbs measure for the 2-d defocusing nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equations, Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput. 6 (2018), 397–445. 40 T. OH AND Y. W ANG

2018
[51]

T. Oh, L. Thomann, Invariant Gibbs measures for the 2- d defocusing nonlinear wave equations , Ann. Fac. Sci. Toulouse Math. 29 (2020), no. 1, 1–26

2020
[52]

T. Oh, N. Tzvetkov, Quasi-invariant Gaussian measures for the two-dimensional defocusing cubic nonlinear wave equation, J. Eur. Math. Soc. 22 (2020), no. 6, 1785–1826

2020
[53]

T. Oh, Y. Wang, Global well-posedness of the one-dimensional cubic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation in almost critical spaces, J. Differential Equations 269 (2020), no. 1, 612–640

2020
[54]

T. Oh, Y. Wang, Normal form approach to the one-dimensional periodic cubic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation in almost critical Fourier-Lebesgue spaces , J. Anal. Math. 143 (2021), no. 2, 723–762

2021
[55]

T. Oh, Y. Wang, Y. Zine, Three-dimensional stochastic cubic nonlinear wave equation with almost space-time white noise, Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput. 10 (2022), 898–963

2022
[56]

Pocovnicu, Almost sure global well-posedness for the energy-critical defocusing nonlinear wave equation on Rd, d = 4 and 5, J

O. Pocovnicu, Almost sure global well-posedness for the energy-critical defocusing nonlinear wave equation on Rd, d = 4 and 5, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 19 (2017), no. 8, 2521–2575

2017
[57]

Ryan, Introduction to tensor products of Banach spaces, Springer Monographs in Mathematics

R. Ryan, Introduction to tensor products of Banach spaces, Springer Monographs in Mathematics. Springer- Verlag London, Ltd., London, 2002. xiv+225 pp

2002
[58]

Simon, The P (φ)2 Euclidean (quantum) field theory, Princeton Series in Physics

B. Simon, The P (φ)2 Euclidean (quantum) field theory, Princeton Series in Physics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1974. xx+392 pp

1974
[59]

Takaoka, N

H. Takaoka, N. Tzvetkov, On 2D nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equations with data on R × T, J. Funct. Anal. 182 (2001), 427–442

2001
[60]

Tao, Nonlinear dispersive equations

T. Tao, Nonlinear dispersive equations. Local and global analysis, CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics, 106. Published for the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC; by the American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2006. xvi+373 pp

2006
[61]

Tzvetkov, Construction of a Gibbs measure associated to the periodic Benjamin-Ono equation , Probab

N. Tzvetkov, Construction of a Gibbs measure associated to the periodic Benjamin-Ono equation , Probab. Theory Related Fields 146 (2010), no. 3-4, 481–514

2010
[62]

Tzvetkov, Random data wave equations , Singular random dynamics, 221–313, Lecture Notes in Math., 2253, Fond

N. Tzvetkov, Random data wave equations , Singular random dynamics, 221–313, Lecture Notes in Math., 2253, Fond. CIME/CIME Found. Subser., Springer, Cham, [2019], ©2019

2019
[63]

Zine, On the inviscid limit of the singular stochastic complex Ginzburg-Landau equation at statistical equilibrium, arXiv:2212.00604 [math.AP]

Y. Zine, On the inviscid limit of the singular stochastic complex Ginzburg-Landau equation at statistical equilibrium, arXiv:2212.00604 [math.AP]. Tadahiro Oh, School of Mathematics, The University of Edinburgh, and The Maxwell Institute for the Mathematical Sciences, James Cl...

arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

B´ enyi, T

´A. B´ enyi, T. Oh,Modulation spaces, Wiener amalgam spaces, and Brownian motions , Adv. Math. 228 (2011), no. 5, 2943–2981

work page 2011

[2] [2]

B´ enyi, T

´A. B´ enyi, T. Oh, O. Pocovnicu,On the probabilistic Cauchy theory of the cubic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation on Rd, d ≥ 3, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. Ser. B 2 (2015), 1–50

work page 2015

[3] [3]

B´ enyi, T

´A. B´ enyi, T. Oh, O. Pocovnicu, On the probabilistic Cauchy theory for nonlinear dispersive PDEs , Landscapes of Time-Frequency Analysis. 1–32, Appl. Numer. Harmon. Anal., Birkh¨ auser/Springer, Cham, 2019

work page 2019

[4] [4]

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

J. Bourgain, Fourier transform restriction phenomena for certain lattice subsets and applications to nonlinear evolution equations. I. Schr¨ odinger equations, Geom. Funct. Anal. 3 (1993), 107–156

work page 1993

[5] [5]

Bourgain, Periodic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation and invariant measures, Comm

J. Bourgain, Periodic nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation and invariant measures, Comm. Math. Phys. 166 (1994), no. 1, 1–26

work page 1994

[6] [6]

Bourgain, Invariant measures for the 2D-defocusing nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Comm

J. Bourgain, Invariant measures for the 2D-defocusing nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Comm. Math. Phys. 176 (1996), no.2, 421–445

work page 1996

[7] [7]

Bremner, Lattice basis reduction

M. Bremner, Lattice basis reduction. An introduction to the LLL algorithm and its applications . Pure and Applied Mathematics (Boca Raton), 300. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2012. xviii+316 pp

work page 2012

[8] [8]

Bringmann, Almost sure local well-posedness for a derivative nonlinear wave equation , Int

B. Bringmann, Almost sure local well-posedness for a derivative nonlinear wave equation , Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2021, no. 11, 8657–8697

work page 2021