Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 45 references

First-order continuum models for nonlinear dispersive waves in the granular crystal lattice

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two first-order continuum PDEs can stand in for the discrete granular crystal lattice and reproduce its solitary waves, periodic waves, and dispersive shock waves even without precompression.

desk verdict New first-order generalized KdV and BBM-type models for the granular chain are a real step beyond the KdV reduction; the zero-precompression claim is an extrapolation that should be softened, but the paper deserves serious refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.07571 v1 pith:WGXRFLJI submitted 2025-07-10 nlin.PS

Su Yang , Gino Biondini , Christopher Chong , Panayotis G.Kevrekidis This is my paper · ORCID
classification nlin.PS MSC 35Q5335L6737K40
keywords granularcrystalsdispersiveshockwavescontinuummodelsgeneralizedKdVequationBBMregularizationWhithammodulationtheorysonicvacuumnonlinearlattices
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper aims to show that two first-order-in-time continuum PDEs can stand in for the discrete granular crystal chain and reproduce its nonlinear wave behavior, including dispersive shock waves. The first is a generalized Korteweg–de Vries equation, and the second is its BBM-style regularization; both are derived from the positive branch of the chain's linearized dispersion relation. Using conservation laws, Whitham modulation theory, and the DSW fitting method, the authors obtain explicit predictions for the edges of dispersive shock waves and check them against direct simulations of the lattice. The agreement holds even in the no-precompression limit where the lattice is purely nonlinear and the classical KdV reduction has no linear dispersion to build on. A sympathetic reader would care because these PDEs are far more tractable analytically than the discrete lattice and could support rigorous existence and stability results.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the positive branch of the linearized dispersion relation, $\Omega = \sqrt{p}\,A^{(p-1)/2}K\sqrt{1-\epsilon^2K^2/12}$, expanded in its long-wave form (2.11), which converts the ill-posed second-order-in-time PDE into the first-order generalized KdV equation (2.12). Inverting the operator $1+\epsilon^2\partial_X^2/24$ regularizes the model into the BBM-type equation (2.14), whose dispersion relation stays bounded for large wavenumbers. This pair of models carries the argument because their solitary and periodic traveling waves, two conservation laws, and averaged Whitham modulation equations can be written explicitly enough to run the DSW fitting procedure and to predict how the leading and trailing edges of a dispersive shock move.

What would settle it

Run the discrete lattice and both continuum PDEs with exactly zero precompression and a fixed jump, then compare the measured trailing-edge wavenumber and edge speeds; if the PDE values do not approach the lattice values as the numerical smoothing and the artificial $r_+=10^{-5}$ background are removed, the claimed sonic-vacuum validity fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the strain dynamics of the granular chain, $\ddot r_n = (r_{n+1})^p - 2(r_n)^p + (r_{n-1})^p$, admit two unidirectional continuum limits that keep dispersive effects: the generalized KdV model (2.12) and the regularized BBM analogue (2.14). Both models come from taking the positive branch of the linearized dispersion relation, so they describe right-going waves, and both have enough conservation laws to close a Whitham modulation system by averaging. The DSW fitting procedure then yields explicit formulas for the trailing-edge wavenumber and the leading- and trailing-edge speeds, namely (5.10), (5.12), and (5.16). Numerical comparison shows that the PDE predictions agree with the discrete lattice for precompressed chains and continue to give a reasonable description of the DSW spatial profile at zero precompression, where the KdV model is not available.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a one-directional, right-going wave description remains valid when the chain has zero precompression, even though the derivation expands around a nonzero background and the linear wave speed vanishes in that limit; the paper relies on numerical agreement there rather than on a controlled asymptotic argument.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For granular chains with zero precompression, where the KdV reduction is unavailable, the two PDEs provide quantitative predictions for DSW edge speeds, amplitudes, and wavenumbers.
  • For finite but small precompression, the new models approximate the discrete chain noticeably better than KdV; as precompression grows, all models become comparable.
  • The explicit edge formulas from DSW fitting, such as $k_- = 4\,\mathrm{arcsec}[(r_-/r_+)^{(p-1)/4}]$ for the lattice, can be used to initialize or interpret numerical and experimental Riemann problems.
  • The regularized model has a bounded dispersion relation and runs stably at $r_+=0$, while the non-regularized model needs a small positive background and smoother initial data; this distinction matters for choosing a model in practice.
  • The Whitham modulation systems derived here open a route to studying hyperbolicity, genuine nonlinearity, and rarefaction-wave structure in the continuum descriptions of lattices.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension left implicit in the paper is to use these PDEs as design tools for laboratory granular-chain experiments at zero precompression, where the predicted edge speeds and wavenumbers could be measured directly.
  • The same two-step route—selecting the positive branch of the linearized dispersion relation and then regularizing—should transfer to other power-law lattices, including dimers, decorated chains, or two-dimensional packings, giving first-order continuum models for settings where no linear dispersion exists.
  • The artificial $r_+=10^{-5}$ required by the non-regularized model in the sonic-vacuum limit suggests a genuine singular limit; a matched-asymptotics analysis as $r_+\to 0$ could show whether the DSW edge quantities obey universal power laws shared by the lattice and the PDEs.
  • If the models hold up, equation (5.2) gives a concrete way to prepare lattice initial data so that a laboratory shock experiment follows the continuum prediction from the earliest times.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper derives two first-order continuum models for the granular crystal lattice (2.2): a generalized KdV-type model (2.12) and a regularized BBM-type model (2.14). It analyzes their solitary and periodic traveling waves, derives conservation laws and Whitham modulation systems, applies the DSW fitting method to obtain leading- and trailing-edge predictions, and compares those predictions with direct numerical simulations of the discrete lattice. The principal claims are that the new models outperform the classical KdV approximation for small precompression and remain accurate even in the zero-precompression (sonic vacuum) limit.

Significance. If the claims hold, the paper provides a useful intermediate-level unidirectional description of a canonical nonlinear lattice, with parameter-free DSW edge predictions obtained from an established fitting method. The derivation from the discrete equations is transparent, the comparison against the KdV benchmark is appropriate, and the precompression results are convincing. The main weakness is that the zero-precompression claim, which is central to the abstract, rests on a singular limit and on numerical evidence that the authors themselves describe as showing deviations; this part of the claim needs to be either strengthened or carefully qualified.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.1, Eqs. (2.10)–(2.12)] The unidirectional reduction selects the positive branch of the linearized dispersion relation (2.10), whose prefactor sqrt(p) A^{(p-1)/2} vanishes at A = r_+ = 0. At r_+ = 0 the linearized dispersion relation (2.3) is identically zero, so there is no distinguished right-going wave direction and the KdV-type scaling used for the reduction becomes singular. Applying (2.12) and (2.14) at r_+ = 0 is therefore a formal extrapolation rather than a justified limit. This is load-bearing because the abstract's central claim concerns exactly this case; please either supply an explicit asymptotic or numerical justification for the limit, or restrict the claim to finite precompression plus a clearly labeled empirical extrapolation.
  2. [§6.2, Figs. 10–11] The numerical support for the zero-precompression claim is partial. The text states that the trailing-edge DSW features of both continuum models deviate from those of the granular lattice, that solitonic amplitudes deviate as r_- increases, and that agreement is good only for the small jump r_- = 0.05. In addition, the non-regularized model required r_+ = 10^{-5} and δ = 1 instead of the standard δ = 50. The abstract's unconditional statement of 'good agreement ... even in cases where no precompression is present' is therefore stronger than the evidence presented. Please add quantitative error metrics for the edge quantities and revise the summary claims to match the demonstrated regime.
  3. [§5.3, Eqs. (5.15)–(5.16)] The DSW fitting formulas for the discrete lattice are derived from the linearized dispersion relation around r_+ and contain factors such as (r_-/r_+)^{(p-1)/4}, which diverge as r_+ → 0; the paper acknowledges in §6.2 that the fitting formulas are invalid at r_+ = 0. Consequently, the zero-precompression comparisons rely entirely on direct numerical simulation of the continuum PDEs, without an independent theoretical prediction for the discrete chain. This limitation should be stated in the abstract and conclusions, or a separate zero-precompression prediction should be supplied.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (3.10)] The formula for the p = 3/2 solitary wave of the non-regularized model is garbled: the argument of the sine contains malformed square-root factors. Please correct the typesetting so that the expression can be verified against Eq. (3.5c).
  2. [References] References [18] and [33] cite the same paper (Chong, Geisler, Kevrekidis, Biondini, Wave Motion 130, 2024) and should be consolidated to avoid duplicate citation.
  3. [§4.3, Eq. (4.15)] The use of K_m for the complete elliptic integral of the first kind alongside K for the wavenumber is potentially confusing even though it is explained in the text; consider using a different symbol such as mathcal{K}(m).
  4. [§6.2, first paragraph] The sentence reporting numerical instability in the non-regularized model would benefit from stating whether the instability occurs before or after the DSW forms, and whether the choice δ = 1 and r_+ = 10^{-5} changes the measured edge features in a quantifiable way.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the continuum models are derived from the lattice equations by Taylor expansion and validated against independent lattice simulations.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The discrete granular chain (2.2) is Taylor-expanded at long wavelengths to obtain (2.6)-(2.8); taking the positive branch of the resulting dispersion relation (2.9)-(2.10) and expanding at long wave yields the linearized dispersion (2.11), with which the non-regularized model (2.12) and regularized model (2.14) are associated. No parameter is fitted to the DSW data: epsilon=0.1 is a fixed scale parameter, and the DSW edge predictions (5.8)-(5.12) are computed from the models' own dispersion relations via the standard DSW fitting method, then compared to direct numerical simulations of the discrete lattice in Figs. 8-11. The self-citations, e.g. refs. [18], [19], [22], and [33], are contextual and not load-bearing: the second-order model from [22] is rederived in Eqs. (2.6)-(2.8), and the KdV benchmark is independently classical. The zero-precompression claim is not circular either: Section 6.2 explicitly states that 'the DSW fitting formulas are also invalid since there is no dispersion around the zero state' and therefore relies only on direct numerical comparisons, with r_+=10^-5 and delta=1 for the non-regularized model. That is an acknowledged limitation and an extrapolation of the formal asymptotics, but it does not reduce any prediction to an input by construction. The central validation is external, against the discrete lattice itself, so no fitting-to-target or self-citation chain is present.

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

The central claim rests on the formal unidirectional reduction and the validity of modulation/DSW fitting for the non-integrable continuum models. No new physical entities are introduced. The free parameters are numerical choices, not fits to the DSW data.

free parameters (3)
  • epsilon (smallness parameter) = 0.1
    Chosen for numerical comparisons in Sections 5-6; controls the accuracy of the continuum approximation but is not fitted to data.
  • r+ floor in non-regularized zero-precompression runs = 1e-5
    Used in Section 6.2 to avoid negative-field instability in the non-regularized model; approximates the zero background.
  • initial-profile sharpness delta = 50 (and 1 for zero-precompression non-regularized runs)
    Tanh smoothing parameter in the box initial data (5.1); chosen for numerical stability, not fitted to data.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The discrete lattice dynamics is well approximated by the leading-order Taylor expansion (2.6)-(2.8) for long wavelengths.
    Invoked in Section 2.1 to derive the continuum models; no rigorous error bound is provided.
  • domain assumption The unidirectional reduction obtained by taking the positive branch of the dispersion relation (2.10) remains valid, including at zero precompression.
    Used to obtain (2.12) and (2.14); at r+ = 0 the linear dispersion vanishes, so the reduction is formally singular.
  • domain assumption The periodic traveling waves and the averaging of conservation laws yield a closed Whitham modulation system.
    Sections 4.2-4.3; closure is assumed without proof.
  • standard math The DSW fitting method of El (2005) is applicable to these non-integrable models and the discrete lattice.
    Section 5.3; an established asymptotic method, but its validity for the present systems is not proven.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of First-order continuum models for nonlinear dispersive waves in the granular crystal lattice." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WGXRFLJI

@misc{pith2026250707571,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: First-order continuum models for nonlinear dispersive waves in the granular crystal lattice},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WGXRFLJI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.07571}
}
read the original abstract

We derive and analyze, analytically and numerically, two first-order continuum models to approximate the nonlinear dynamics of granular crystal lattices, focusing specifically on solitary waves, periodic waves, and dispersive shock waves. The dispersive shock waves predicted by the two continuum models are studied using modulation theory, DSW fitting techniques, and direct numerical simulations. The PDE-based predictions show good agreement with the DSWs generated by the discrete model simulation of the granular lattice itself, even in cases where no precompression is present and the lattice is purely nonlinear. Such an effective description could prove useful for future, more analytically amenable approximations of the original lattice system.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.07571 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Numerical simulations of the Riemann problem (2.2) with r + = 0.8 and r − = 1. (Please see section 6 for a discussion of the precise ICs used in the numerical simulations.) The spatial profile of the granular lattice DSW with p = 3/2 is shown at t = 1000. (b) Density plot of the DSW corresponding to the left panel. The two dashed black lines represent, respectively, the leading (upper) and the trailing (lower) e… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison of linearized dispersion relations. The solid blue, dashed black, and dotted dashed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of the KdV theoretical predicted DSW-edge features with the numerically measured [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison between the spatial profile of the KdV DSW with that of the granular chain at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the solitary waves for the case of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Potential curves. Panels (a) and (b) panels the potential curve (3.13) of the non-regularized model (2.12) and that (3.14) of the regularized model (2.14). Notice that the red horizontal lines correspond to the solitary-wave solutions of the models, while the three blu…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of the self-similar solution ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Panels (a)–(c) display the DSW-edge comparisons for the non-regularized model (2.12), while panels (d)–(f) depict the DSW-edge comparisons of the regularized model (2.14). In each panel, the solid red and blue lines refer to the DSW-fitting theoretical predictions on t…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison of the DSW spatial profiles between the continuum models and the granular lattice [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Comparison of the DSW-edge features between the non-regularized model ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The comparison of the DSWs in the zero precompression case. The panel [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The DSW spatial profile comparison between the two continuum models (( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Nesterenko

    V.F. Nesterenko. Dynamics of Heterogeneous Materials. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2001

    work page 2001

  2. [2]

    Chong and P

    C. Chong and P. G. Kevrekidis. Coherent Structures in Granular Crystals: From Experiment and Modelling to Computation and Mathematical Analysis. Springer, New York, 2018

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Starosvetsky , K.R

    Yu. Starosvetsky , K.R. Jayaprakash, M. Arif Hasan, and A.F. Vakakis.Dynamics and Acoustics of Ordered Granular Media. World Scientific, Singapore, 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Chong, Mason A

    C. Chong, Mason A. Porter, P. G. Kevrekidis, and C. Daraio. Nonlinear coherent structures in granular crystals. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter, 29:413003, 2017

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    S. Sen, J. Hong, J. Bang, E. Avalos, and R. Doney . Solitary waves in the granular chain. Phys. Rep., 462:21, 2008

    work page 2008

  6. [6]

    Christopher Chong and P. G. Kevrekidis. Dynamics of nonlinear lattices, 2024. 24

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    M. J. Ablowitz and M. Hoefer. Dispersive shock waves. Scholarpedia, 4(11):5562, 2009

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    El and M.A

    G.A. El and M.A. Hoefer. Dispersive shock waves and modulation theory .Physica D: Nonlinear Phenom- ena, 333:11, 2016

    work page 2016

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    G.B. Whitham. Linear and Nonlinear Waves. Wiley , New York, 1974

    1974

  2. [10]

    E. B. Herbold and V. F. Nesterenko. Solitary and shock waves in discrete strongly nonlinear double power-law materials. Appl. Phys. Lett., 90(26):261902, 2007

    2007

  3. [11]

    Molinari and C

    A. Molinari and C. Daraio. Stationary shocks in periodic highly nonlinear granular chains. Phys. Rev. E, 80:056602, 2009

    2009

  4. [12]

    Fleischer

    Shu Jia, Wenjie Wan, and Jason W. Fleischer. Dispersive shock waves in nonlinear arrays. Phys. Rev. Lett., 99:223901, Nov 2007

    2007

  5. [13]

    H. Kim, E. Kim, C. Chong, P. G. Kevrekidis, and J. Yang. Demonstration of dispersive rarefaction shocks in hollow elliptical cylinder chains. Phys. Rev. Lett., 120:194101, 2018

    2018

  6. [14]

    Observation of ultraslow shock waves in a tunable magnetic lattice

    Jian Li, S Chockalingam, and Tal Cohen. Observation of ultraslow shock waves in a tunable magnetic lattice. Phys. Rev. Lett., 127:014302, Jun 2021

    2021

  7. [15]

    A. M. Filip and S. Venakides. Existence and modulation of traveling waves in particles chains. Comm. Pure and Appl. Math., 52(6):693, 1999

    1999

  8. [16]

    Dreyer, M

    W. Dreyer, M. Herrmann, and A. Mielke. Micro-macro transition in the atomic chain via Whitham’s modulation equation. Nonlinearity, 19(2):471, 2005

    2005

  9. [17]

    A. M. Bloch and Y. Kodama. Dispersive regularization of the whitham equation for the toda lattice. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 52(4):909–928, 1992

    1992

  10. [18]

    Kevrekidis, and Gino Biondini

    Christopher Chong, Ari Geisler, Panayotis G. Kevrekidis, and Gino Biondini. Integrable approximations of dispersive shock waves of the granular chain. Wave Motion, 130:103352, 2024

    2024

  11. [19]

    Biondini, C

    G. Biondini, C. Chong, and P. G. Kevrekidis. On the Whitham modulation equations for the Toda lattice and the quantitative description of its dispersive shocks. Physica D, 469:134315, 2024

    2024

  12. [20]

    G. A. El. Resolution of a shock in hyperbolic systems modified by weak dispersion. Chaos: An Interdis- ciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 15(3), September 2005

    2005

  13. [21]

    Dispersive hydrodynamics of a discrete conservation law

    Patrick Sprenger, Christopher Chong, Emmanuel Okyere, Michael Herrmann, Panayotis Kevrekidis, and Mark Hoefer. Dispersive hydrodynamics of a discrete conservation law. arXiv:2404.1675, 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Kevrekidis

    Su Yang, Gino Biondini, Christopher Chong, and Panayotis G. Kevrekidis. A regularized continuum model for traveling waves and dispersive shocks of the granular chain, 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    Fermi, J

    E. Fermi, J. Pasta, and S. Ulam. Studies of Nonlinear Problems. I. Tech. Rep., (Los Alamos National Laboratory , Los Alamos, NM, USA):LA–1940, 1955

    1940

  16. [24]

    G. P. Berman and F. M. Izrailev. The fermi-pasta-ulam problem: Fifty years of progress. Chaos, 15(1), 2005

    2005

  17. [25]

    Gallavotti

    G. Gallavotti. The Fermi–Pasta–Ulam Problem: A Status Report. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany , 2008

    2008

  18. [26]

    Porter, Norman J

    Mason A. Porter, Norman J. Zabusky , Bambi Hu, and David K. Campbell. Fermi, pasta, ulam and the birth of experimental mathematics: A numerical experiment that enrico fermi, john pasta, and stanislaw ulam reported 54 years ago continues to inspire discovery . American Scientis...

    2009

  19. [27]

    Friesecke and R

    G. Friesecke and R. L. Pego. Solitary waves on Fermi–Pasta–Ulam lattices: II. Qualitative properites, renormalization and continuum limit. Nonlinearity, 12:1601, 1999. 25

    1999

  20. [28]

    Friesecke and R

    G. Friesecke and R. L. Pego. Solitary waves on Fermi–Pasta–Ulam lattices: I. Linear implies nonlinear stability .Nonlinearity, 15:1343, 2002

    2002

  21. [29]

    Friesecke and R

    G. Friesecke and R. L. Pego. Solitary waves on Fermi–Pasta–Ulam lattices: III. Howland-type Floquet theory .Nonlinearity, 17:207, 2004

    2004

  22. [30]

    Friesecke and R

    G. Friesecke and R. L. Pego. Solitary waves on Fermi–Pasta–Ulam lattices: IV. Proof of stability at low energy .Nonlinearity, 17:229, 2004

    2004

  23. [31]

    James and D

    G. James and D. Pelinovsky . Gaussian solitary waves and compactons in Fermi–Pasta–Ulam lattices with Hertzian potentials. P. Roy. Soc. A-Math-Phy., 470(2165), 2014

    2014

  24. [32]

    T. B. Benjamin, J. L. Bona, and J. J. Mahony . Model equations for long waves in nonlinear dispersive systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 272(1220):47–78, 1972

    1972

  25. [33]

    Kevrekidis, and Gino Biondini

    Christopher Chong, Ari Geisler, Panayotis G. Kevrekidis, and Gino Biondini. Integrable approximations of dispersive shock waves of the granular chain. Wave Motion, 130:103352, October 2024

    2024

  26. [34]

    A. V. Gurevich and L. P. Pitaevskii. Nonstationary structure of a collisionless shock wave. Zhurnal Eksperimentalnoi i Teoreticheskoi Fiziki, 65:590–604, 1973

    1973

  27. [35]

    G.A. El, V.V. Geogjaev, A.V. Gurevich, and A.L. Krylov. Decay of an initial discontinuity in the defocusing NLS hydrodynamics. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 87(1-4):186–192, 1995

    1995

  28. [36]

    Trefethen

    Aly-Khan Kassam and Lloyd N. Trefethen. Fourth-order time-stepping for stiff pdes. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 26(4):1214–1233, 2005

    2005

  29. [37]

    Compactons and chaos in strongly nonlinear lattices

    Karsten Ahnert and Arkady Pikovsky . Compactons and chaos in strongly nonlinear lattices. Physical Review E, 79(2), February 2009

    2009

  30. [38]

    Hochstrasser, F.G

    D. Hochstrasser, F.G. Mertens, and H. Büttner. An iterative method for the calculation of narrow solitary excitations on atomic chains. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 35(1):259–266, 1989

    1989

  31. [39]

    G. A. El. Resolution of a shock in hyperbolic systems modified by weak dispersion. Chaos: An Interdis- ciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 15(3):037103, 10 2005

    2005

  32. [40]

    M.A. Hoefer. Shock waves in dispersive Eulerian fluids. J. Nonlinear Sci., 24:525–577, 2014

    2014

  33. [41]

    Chong, Y

    C. Chong, Y. Wang, D. Marechal, E. G. Charalampidis, Miguel Molerón, Alejandro J. Martínez, Mason A. Porter, P. G. Kevrekidis, and Chiara Daraio. Nonlinear localized modes in two-dimensional hexagonally- packed magnetic lattices. New Journal of Physics, 23:043008, 2021

    2021

  34. [42]

    Leonard, F

    A. Leonard, F. Fraternali, and C. Daraio. Directional wave propagation in a highly nonlinear square packing of spheres. Exp. Mech., 53:327, 2013

    2013

  35. [43]

    Leonard, C

    A. Leonard, C. Daraio, A. Awasthi, and P. Geubelle. Effects of weak disorder on stress wave anisotropy in centered square nonlinear granular crystals. Phys. Rev. E, 86:031305, 2012

    2012

  36. [44]

    Leonard, C

    A. Leonard, C. Chong, P. G. Kevrekidis, and C. Daraio. Traveling waves in 2D hexagonal granular crystal lattices. Granular Matter, 16(4):531, 2014

    2014

  37. [45]

    Ablowitz

    Mark J. Ablowitz. Nonlinear Dispersive Waves: Asymptotic Analysis and Solitons. Cambridge University Press, 2011. 26

    2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.