Wave scattering around a submerged vertical permeable breakwater

Jeongin Kim; Yong Sung Park

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 31 references

Wave scattering around a submerged vertical permeable breakwater

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

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

Pith's one-line read Scattering by a fully submerged permeable vertical plate is solved analytically to first order in permeability.

desk verdict Clever first-order porous-plate solution with a strong energy check, but the printed sign in (4.17)-(4.18) appears wrong and must be reconciled with the code before the results are trustworthy. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06089 v1 pith:HKVMEHNY submitted 2026-08-06 physics.flu-dyn

Jeongin Kim , Yong Sung Park This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.flu-dyn MSC 76B1530E2545E05 PACS 47.35.Bb47.56.+r

keywords wavescatteringpermeablebreakwaterverticalplateperturbationmethodRiemann-Hilbertproblemreflectionandtransmissioncoefficientsenergyidentity

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 establishes that scattering of linear ocean waves by a thin, fully submerged, vertical permeable plate can be solved analytically to first order in a small permeability parameter. The velocity potential is written as the known impermeable-plate field plus a first-order correction obtained from a nonhomogeneous Riemann-Hilbert problem, so the reflected and transmitted wave amplitudes follow from closed-form formulas. The paper also derives an exact energy identity for the truncated solution and a closed-form bound on the permeability parameter; the bound tells exactly when the first-order expansion is energy-consistent and when it breaks down. A sympathetic reader would care because it converts a problem previously treated mostly by numerical methods into one with explicit, checkable predictions, including the range of validity of those predictions.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the reduced potential $W(z) = dw/dz + ikw$, defined in the lower half-plane and continued by reflection across the real axis, which converts the free-surface condition into a real-axis condition and the plate condition into a Riemann-Hilbert problem, a boundary-value problem for an analytic function whose real part is prescribed on a cut. The leading-order problem is homogeneous and yields $W_0$ with inverse-square-root singularities at the four edges, reproducing the impermeable-plate solution; the first-order problem is nonhomogeneous, with datum $f(y)$ built from the leading-order potential jump across the plate, and its solution is (4.15). The identity that carries the argument is the first-order energy balance $\Re\{\Lambda \Delta_{123}\} / |\Delta_{123}|^2 = \mathcal{D}_0/2$, which connects the first-order far-field coefficient $\Lambda$ to a weighted norm of the leading-order solution on the plate and yields the closed-form $\varepsilon_{\max}$.

What would settle it

A direct numerical solution of the full potential problem with the nonlinear porous boundary condition (2.15) at a small permeability, say $\varepsilon = 0.01$, should reproduce (4.53)-(4.54) within numerical tolerance; if $R^2 + T^2$ exceeds 1 for any $kb$ below the claimed $\varepsilon_{\max}$, or if $\Re\{\Lambda \Delta_{123}\} / |\Delta_{123}|^2$ differs from $\mathcal{D}_0/2$ beyond quadrature error, the central identity is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper argues that the spatial velocity potential is $\phi = \phi_0 + \varepsilon \phi_1$, where $\phi_0$ is the impermeable-plate solution and $\phi_1$ is determined by the nonhomogeneous Riemann-Hilbert problem (4.15). The corresponding reflection and transmission coefficients are $R = |\Delta_{11} - \varepsilon \Lambda| / |\Delta_{123}|$ and $T = |j(\Delta_{12} - \Delta_{13}) - \varepsilon \Lambda| / |\Delta_{123}|$, and these satisfy $R^2 + T^2 = 1 - \varepsilon \mathcal{D}_0 + 2 \varepsilon^2 |\Lambda|^2 / |\Delta_{123}|^2$. At first order in $\varepsilon$ this reproduces the exact energy identity for the porous plate, and the requirement $R^2 + T^2 \le 1$ yields the closed-form validity boundary $\varepsilon \le \varepsilon_{\max} = \Re\{\Lambda \Delta_{123}\} / |\Lambda|^2$. Within that window the dissipated energy flux is $\varepsilon \mathcal{D}_0$; outside it the apparent growth of the coefficients is an artifact of the omitted second-order field.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the circulation around the plate is exactly zero and that the potential has square-root singularities at all four plate edges, the index-2 Riemann-Hilbert class; if either fails, the constants $C_0$, $D_0$, $C_1$, $D_1$ and therefore every predicted coefficient change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

At leading order the solution reproduces the known impermeable submerged-plate coefficients, with $R_0^2 + T_0^2 = 1$ exactly.
For a fixed geometry, both the reflection and transmission coefficients decrease as the permeability parameter $\varepsilon$ increases, and the missing energy flux equals $\varepsilon \mathcal{D}_0$ inside the validity window.
The truncated expansion is energy-consistent if and only if $\varepsilon \le \varepsilon_{\max}(kb; a/b)$; for larger $\varepsilon$ the computed coefficients should not be interpreted physically.
Because $\varepsilon_{\max}$ grows rapidly in the long-wave limit while the physical $\varepsilon$ grows only slowly, the perturbation solution remains reliable for long waves and loses validity at the short-wave end.
For any chosen wavelength, plate length, and permeability satisfying the bound, the velocity potential and the wave attenuation coefficients are available in closed form.

Reading between the lines

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

A practical design rule follows that the paper does not spell out: for a given plate geometry and wave period, $\varepsilon_{\max}$ fixes the largest pore-to-thickness ratio for which the first-order reflection and transmission predictions are quantitatively trustworthy.
The two assumptions most likely to fail in real flows are zero circulation around the plate and the four square-root edge singularities; a viscous or nonlinear simulation at small $\varepsilon$ could quantify how much the first-order constants shift.
The energy-identity method itself does not depend on the Riemann-Hilbert reduction, so the same $R^2+T^2$ bound could be derived for other porous-barrier geometries where the first-order far-field coefficient is known.
A true surface-piercing plate requires a separate upper-edge treatment, as the paper notes; extending the present construction to that case would require a modified boundary condition at the upper edge rather than taking the $a/b \to 0$ limit of the submerged solution.

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

The genuinely new content here is the first-order correction for a finite submerged permeable plate, the exact energy identity (5.1)/(5.4), and the closed-form validity boundary (5.6). The leading-order solution correctly reduces to Evans's impermeable-plate result, and the perturbation framework is coherent. Credit is due for the exact energy identity, which is a real consistency check, and for shipping code and data on Zenodo. If the first-order solution holds up, this is a useful design-check and benchmarking tool for coastal engineering.

That said, there is a serious problem in the printed equations. Starting from (4.16) and taking the contour from -ia to iy along the plate, the integration direction gives w1(iy) = e^{ky}[B1 + ∫_y^{-a} e^{-ku} Im W1 du - i∫_y^{-a} e^{-ku} Re W1 du]. With Re W1 = f on L, the imaginary part should be -e^{ky}∫ e^{-ku}f du, not the positive expression in (4.18). The stress-test note is correct on this point. Since (4.18) feeds directly into the matching equation (4.19) and hence into I, f, and Λ, every first-order quantity is potentially affected. The paper claims the energy identity (5.4) is satisfied numerically to 1e-4, so the most likely explanation is a typographical sign error in the manuscript while the code uses the correct sign. But that needs to be verified explicitly, and the printed equations must be fixed. If the sign error is actually in the code, then (5.4) would fail and the whole first-order result collapses.

Other soft spots are addressable. The boundary condition (2.15) is linear in φ, so calling it "nonlinear" (abstract, §2b, §6) is inaccurate and should be corrected. The Riemann-Hilbert solution (4.15) is cited rather than derived, with no explicit index or existence check for the nonhomogeneous problem; the zero-circulation assumption (3.26) is plausible but deserves more justification. And while the energy identity is a necessary check, it is not a complete substitute for an independent numerical solution of the full porous-plate problem; adding one would substantially strengthen the paper.

My take: the core idea is worth serious review, and the energy identity is a valuable contribution even if the first-order coefficients need revision. A good referee can work through the sign issue and the index question. I would send this to peer review rather than desk reject, but the authors must reconcile the sign discrepancy and ideally add an independent numerical comparison before acceptance.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents an analytical perturbation solution for linear monochromatic wave scattering by a thin submerged vertical permeable plate in deep water. The velocity potential is expanded as phi = phi_0 + epsilon phi_1, where epsilon is a porosity parameter. The leading-order problem is the impermeable-plate problem solved by reduction to a homogeneous Riemann-Hilbert problem, reproducing Evans's coefficients. The first-order correction is obtained from a nonhomogeneous Riemann-Hilbert problem, and first-order reflection and transmission coefficients are derived. The paper also derives an exact energy identity and, from its O(epsilon) balance, a closed-form validity bound epsilon_max(kb) for the truncated expansion. Numerical results for R, T, and epsilon_max are presented for a range of kb and a/b values, with scripts archived on Zenodo.

Significance. If the derivation is correct, the paper provides a closed-form small-permeability correction to a classical wave-scattering problem, together with a useful quantitative validity criterion for the perturbation expansion. The leading-order coefficients match Evans's impermeable-plate results, and the exact energy identity (5.1) and its first-order consequence (5.4) are strong internal checks that are not obtained by fitting parameters. The archived Python scripts and the reported verification of (5.4) to relative error below 10^-4 are additional positive features. However, the manuscript currently contains a sign inconsistency in the first-order matching equation, an unverified Riemann-Hilbert normalization/index, and no independent numerical benchmark against the full porous-plate boundary value problem; these issues affect the central claim and must be resolved before publication.

major comments (4)

[§4(a), Eqs. (4.17)–(4.18)] A direct evaluation of (4.16) on L (with z = iy and zeta = iu, u decreasing from -a to y) gives w1(iy) = e^{ky}(B1 - i ∫_y^{-a} e^{-ku} f(u) du + ∫_y^{-a} e^{-ku} I_i{W1(iu)} du), so that Im_i w1(iy) = e^{ky}(-∫_y^{-a} e^{-ku} f(u) du + ∫_y^{-a} e^{-ku} I_i{W1(iu)} du). This differs from the printed (4.17)–(4.18) in the sign of the f-term, and the I_i{W1} term is also dropped in (4.18). Since (4.18) is equated with (4.12) in (4.19) to determine I, the printed f in (4.22), and hence C1, D1, gamma1, Lambda, and the first-order coefficients in (4.53)–(4.54), all rest on an internally inconsistent expression. The reported numerical verification of (5.4) cannot by itself arbitrate this issue unless the code uses a corrected expression; please re-derive (4.19)–(4.22) and confirm that the sign convention in the archived scripts matches the published equations.
[§4(a), Eq. (4.15)] The nonhomogeneous Riemann-Hilbert solution is cited from reference [20] without a construction, page reference, or index check. The coefficient pair (C1, D1) and the 2/pi normalization of the integral term are load-bearing for every first-order far-field coefficient: if the index differs from the assumed kappa = 2, or if the branch choice is different, Lambda and the energy balance (5.4) would shift. Please provide a derivation of (4.15), or a precise theorem statement with page and hypotheses, and verify that the index is the same as in the homogeneous solution (3.8) and that (4.15) satisfies (4.13) on both L and L'.
[§3(a), Eq. (3.26) and §4(a), Eq. (4.35)] The zero-circulation condition is introduced by assumption and fixes the constants C0, D0 and C1, D1. For a porous plate with through-flow, the circulation around the plate is not obviously zero, and a nonzero value would shift the constants at both orders. Please justify this condition from the edge behavior (2.10), a Kutta-type argument, or an explicit symmetry statement, and quantify how the results would change if the circulation were nonzero.
[§5(b), Eq. (5.4), and Fig. 7] The energy identity is a necessary self-consistency check, but it does not validate the first-order coefficients against the original boundary value problem. No independent numerical solution of the full porous-plate problem is presented, and no comparison is made with existing porous-barrier solutions (e.g., refs. [14] or [15]) in a geometry or parameter regime where they overlap. Given that the central claim is the correctness of the first-order solution, please add such a benchmark (for example, a boundary-element or eigenfunction matching solution) for the reflection and transmission coefficients over the range of parameters shown.

minor comments (4)

[Throughout] The typeset equations are heavily garbled in places (e.g., (2.1), (3.1), (3.33), (4.34) show stray 'Rj n o', 'I i{z}', and similar artifacts); please provide a cleanly typeset version.
[Figure captions, Figs. 4–8] The captions state that the plotted quantities were 'verified via the energy identity (5.4)', but f, F, Lambda, and epsilon_max are ingredients of (5.4); the identity checks a combination of these quantities, not the intermediate curves themselves. Please rephrase the captions or show the actual identity residuals.
[§4(a), Eqs. (4.23) and (4.26)] The symbol F is used both for the elliptic integral in (4.23) and for the Hilbert-transform function in (4.26); this is confusing and should be resolved by renaming one of them.
[§4(a), Eq. (4.15) and §4(c), Eq. (4.55)] Equation (4.15) contains a principal-value integral but is written as an ordinary equality; this should be stated explicitly, as is done later for (4.55).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the expansion coefficients and the energy identity are derived from the stated boundary-value problem and independently checked; no fitted input is relabelled as a prediction.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain from Section 2 through Section 5. The leading-order constants C0 and D0 are fixed by the radiation condition (3.25) and the zero-circulation condition (3.28); the first-order constants B1, C1, and D1 are fixed by the first-order radiation condition (4.37) and the zero-circulation condition (4.36). None of these conditions is the target reflection/transmission coefficient or the energy identity. The energy identity (5.1) is obtained by applying Green's identity to the governing equations and boundary conditions; its first-order reduction (5.3)-(5.4) is a nontrivial consistency relation that is numerically checked, not used to solve for the coefficients. The leading-order match with Evans [8] is an external cross-validation. The only self-reference, the Zenodo code/data archive [31], is not load-bearing. Concerns about the zero-circulation assumption or the sign in (4.17)-(4.18) are physical/mathematical correctness issues, not circularity; no step reduces by construction to its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted: the constants C0, D0, C1, D1, and I are determined by boundary conditions, and the perturbation parameter epsilon is a physical input. The central result rests on standard potential-flow, linear-wave, and porous-media assumptions, plus a zero-circulation condition and the Riemann-Hilbert solution formulas. No new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption Fluid is incompressible, inviscid, irrotational, and of infinite depth (potential flow).
Used from section 2(a), equations (2.2)-(2.4).
domain assumption Wave amplitude is small: linearized free surface with kA much less than 1, and the plate stays submerged with A < a.
Stated in section 2(a) as the Stokes leading-order condition and the submergence condition.
domain assumption Taylor's porous boundary condition: the normal velocity through the plate is proportional to the pressure jump, with constant permeability B.
Equation (2.11) in section 2(b); if this linear porous relation is inaccurate, all permeability corrections change.
domain assumption Zero circulation around the plate.
Equation (3.26) in section 3(a) is used to determine C0 and D0; no physical justification is given beyond the assumption.
standard math Riemann-Hilbert solution formulas from Muskhelishvili with index kappa = 2 and integrable inverse-square-root edge behavior.
Equations (3.8) and (4.15); the paper does not re-derive existence, uniqueness, or the index choice.
domain assumption Perturbation expansion in epsilon is asymptotic and truncation at first order is valid for epsilon at most epsilon_max.
epsilon_max is derived from energy consistency rather than from convergence; the adequacy of energy consistency as a validity criterion is assumed.
standard math Analytic continuation by Schwarz reflection across the free surface.
Used in section 3(a) after equation (3.3).

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Wave scattering around a submerged vertical permeable breakwater." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HKVMEHNY

@misc{pith2026260806089,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Wave scattering around a submerged vertical permeable breakwater},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HKVMEHNY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06089}
}

abstract

An analytical solution for a wave velocity field scattered by a submerged permeable vertical plate-type breakwater under the linear monochromatic wave is obtained and the applications of the solution are presented. The water has an infinite depth, and the flow is assumed to be incompressible, inviscid, and irrotational, which leads to the two-dimensional potential wave theory. The permeable breakwater vertically occupies a finite interval beneath the water surface and the water flows through the breakwater. The resulting nonlinear boundary condition is resolved by the perturbation method with a small parameter representing the permeability. The solution was expanded up to the first order so that the leading-order term can represent the wave scattered by the impermeable breakwater and the first-order term can give the correction to the solution considering the wave scattered by the permeable breakwater. Each order of the wave velocity potential is determined by a reduction method and this leads to the homogeneous Riemann-Hilbert problem for the leading-order problem and the nonhomogeneous Riemann-Hilbert problem for the first-order problem. \rev{The effects} of wavelength, breakwater length, and breakwater permeability conditions on the reflection and transmission coefficients are discussed in detail as an illustrative example of the application of the solution. \rev{An exact energy identity is also derived; it verifies the first-order solution and yields a closed-form boundary $\varepsilon_{\max}(kb)$ of the validity range of the expansion.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.06089 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** A vertical plate occupies a finite interval along the y axis and a regular wave train of small amplitude propagates along the x-axis. (Diagram drawn with Anthropic Claude (Fable 5) under the authors’ direction.) In order to solve the problem in closed form using potential wave theory, it is assumed that the fluid has infinite depth and is incompressible, inviscid, and irrotational. Also, we assume that the wave ampl… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Integration path for w0(z) as z → ±∞. (Diagram drawn with Anthropic Claude (Fable 5) under the authors’ direction.) For z → +∞, let us modify the integral term in (3.9) as, Z z −ia e ikζW0(ζ) dζ = Z 0 ++i∞ −ia e ikζW0(ζ) dζ + Z z i∞+0+ e ikζ (W0(ζ) − D0) dζ − iD0 k e ikz . (3.10) When the second integral in (3.10) is taken following a large arc, which is noted as Γ+ in figure 2, this term vanishes to zero by Jordan’… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Leading-order (a) reflection coefficient R0 and (b) transmission coefficient T0 versus kb for a/b = 0.001, 0.01, 0.05, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5. (Script written with Anthropic Claude (Fable 5) under the authors’ direction; plotted values checked against figure 2 of [8].) impermeable plate and the permeable plate, respectively. In this section, the first-order correction for the case of a single permeable plate is sought. In a… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (5 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: f(y) versus y for (top) kb = 0.5, (center) kb = 1.5, (bottom) kb = 2.5; (a) a/b = 0.001, (b) a/b = 0.05, (c) a/b = 0.25. (—, Rj{f(y)}; - - -, Ij{f(y)}.) (Script written with Anthropic Claude (Fable 5) under the authors’ direction; results verified via the energy identi…

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: F(u) versus u for (top) kb = 0.5, (center) kb = 1.5, (bottom) kb = 2.5; (a) a/b = 0.001, (b) a/b = 0.05, (c) a/b = 0.25. (—, Rj{F(u)}; - - -, Ij{F(u)}.) (Script written with Anthropic Claude (Fable 5) under the authors’ direction; results verified via the energy identi…

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Λ versus kb for (a) a/b = 0.001, (b) a/b = 0.05, (c) a/b = 0.25. (—, Rj{Λ}; - - -, Ij{Λ}.) (Script written with Anthropic Claude (Fable 5) under the authors’ direction; results verified via the energy identity (5.4).) the impermeable plate, and within the validity wind…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: (top) Reflection coefficient R and (bottom) transmission coefficient T versus kb for (a) a/b = 0.001; (b) a/b = 0.05; (c) a/b = 0.25, for ε = 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1. Grey segments indicate ε > εmax(kb), where the truncated expansion violates energy conservation; vertical line…

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Validity boundary εmax(kb) = Rj{Λ∆123}/|Λ| 2 of the truncated perturbation expansion for a/b = 0.001, 0.05, 0.25. (Script written with Anthropic Claude (Fable 5) under the authors’ direction; results verified via the energy identity (5.4).) transmission coefficients, t…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

[20]

1977Singular Integral Equations

Muskhelishvili NI. 1977Singular Integral Equations. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. (10.1007/978-94-009-9994-7)

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-9994-7
[14]

2014 A hypersingular integral equation approach to the porous plate problem.Applied Ocean Research46, 70–78

Gayen R, Mondal A. 2014 A hypersingular integral equation approach to the porous plate problem.Applied Ocean Research46, 70–78. (10.1016/j.apor.2014.01.006)

work page doi:10.1016/j.apor.2014.01.006 2014
[15]

2016 Scattering of water waves by vertical porous barriers: An analytical approach.Wave Motion67, 89–101

Manam SR, Sivanesan M. 2016 Scattering of water waves by vertical porous barriers: An analytical approach.Wave Motion67, 89–101. (10.1016/j.wavemoti.2016.07.008)

work page doi:10.1016/j.wavemoti.2016.07.008 2016
[1]

2002 Field and numerical comparisons of the RIBS floating breakwater.Journal of Hydraulic Research40, 289–301

Briggs M, Ye W, Demirbilek Z, Zhang J. 2002 Field and numerical comparisons of the RIBS floating breakwater.Journal of Hydraulic Research40, 289–301. (10.1080/00221680209499944)

work page doi:10.1080/00221680209499944 2002
[2]

1998 Interaction between porous media and wave motion.Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics30, 53–84

Chwang AT, Chan AT. 1998 Interaction between porous media and wave motion.Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics30, 53–84

work page 1998
[3]

1945 On the reflexion of surface waves by a submerged plane barrier.Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society41, 231–238

Dean WR. 1945 On the reflexion of surface waves by a submerged plane barrier.Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society41, 231–238. (10.1017/S030500410002260X)

work page doi:10.1017/s030500410002260x 1945
[4]

1948 On the waves due to the rolling of a ship.The Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics1, 246–252

Ursell F. 1948 On the waves due to the rolling of a ship.The Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics1, 246–252. (10.1093/qjmam/1.1.246)

work page doi:10.1093/qjmam/1.1.246 1948
[5]

1940 XLI

Havelock TH. 1940 XLI. Waves produced by the rolling of a ship.The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science29, 407–414. (10.1080/14786444008521281)

work page doi:10.1080/14786444008521281 1940

Show all 31 references

[6]

1963 The effect of vertical barriers on progressing waves.Journal of Mathematics and Physics42, 287–300

Lewin M. 1963 The effect of vertical barriers on progressing waves.Journal of Mathematics and Physics42, 287–300. (10.1002/sapm1963421287)

1963 doi
[7]

1966 Radiation and scattering of transient gravity waves by vertical plates.Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics19, 417–440

Mei CC. 1966 Radiation and scattering of transient gravity waves by vertical plates.Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics19, 417–440. (10.1093/qjmam/19.4.417)

1966 doi
[8]

1970 Diffraction of water waves by a submerged vertical plate.Journal of Fluid Mechanics40, 433–451

Evans DV . 1970 Diffraction of water waves by a submerged vertical plate.Journal of Fluid Mechanics40, 433–451. (10.1017/S0022112070000253)

1970 doi
[9]

1995 Complementary approximations to wave scattering by vertical barriers.Journal of Fluid Mechanics294, 155–180

Porter R, Evans DV . 1995 Complementary approximations to wave scattering by vertical barriers.Journal of Fluid Mechanics294, 155–180. (10.1017/S0022112095002849)

1995 doi
[10]

1979 Reflexion of water waves by a permeable barrier.Journal of Fluid Mechanics 95, 141–157

Macaskill C. 1979 Reflexion of water waves by a permeable barrier.Journal of Fluid Mechanics 95, 141–157. (10.1017/S0022112079001385)

1979 doi
[11]

1983 A porous-wavemaker theory.Journal of Fluid Mechanics132, 395–406

Chwang AT. 1983 A porous-wavemaker theory.Journal of Fluid Mechanics132, 395–406. (10.1017/S0022112083001676)

1983 doi
[12]

2000 Scattering and radiation of water waves by permeable barriers

Lee MM, Chwang AT. 2000 Scattering and radiation of water waves by permeable barriers. Physics of Fluids12, 54–65. (10.1063/1.870284)

2000 doi
[13]

2013 Wave reflection and transmission by porous breakwaters: A new analytical solution.Coastal Engineering78, 46–52

Liu Y, Li HJ. 2013 Wave reflection and transmission by porous breakwaters: A new analytical solution.Coastal Engineering78, 46–52. (10.1016/j.coastaleng.2013.04.003)

2013 doi
[16]

2017 Scattering of oblique waves by permeable vertical flexible membrane wave barriers.Applied Ocean Research62, 156–168

Koley S, Sahoo T. 2017 Scattering of oblique waves by permeable vertical flexible membrane wave barriers.Applied Ocean Research62, 156–168. (10.1016/j.apor.2016.12.005) 23Preprint Proc R Soc A 0000000

2017 doi
[17]

2019 Effect of Porosity on Oblique Wave Diffraction by Two Unequal Vertical Porous Barriers.Journal of Marine Science and Application18, 417–432

Sasmal A, Paul S, De S. 2019 Effect of Porosity on Oblique Wave Diffraction by Two Unequal Vertical Porous Barriers.Journal of Marine Science and Application18, 417–432. (10.1007/s11804- 019-00107-4)

2019 doi
[18]

1956 Fluid flow in regions bounded by porous surfaces.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London

Taylor GI. 1956 Fluid flow in regions bounded by porous surfaces.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences234, 456–475. (10.1098/rspa.1956.0050)

1956
[19]

1972Dynamics of fluids in porous media

Bear J. 1972Dynamics of fluids in porous media. American Elsevier, New York, pp. 579–663
[21]

1954Handbook of Elliptic Integrals for Engineers and Physicists

Byrd PF, Friedman MD. 1954Handbook of Elliptic Integrals for Engineers and Physicists. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. (10.1007/978-3-642-52803-3)

doi
[22]

2016 Computing Cauchy principal value integrals using a standard adaptive quadrature.Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics294, 323–341

Keller P , Wróbel I. 2016 Computing Cauchy principal value integrals using a standard adaptive quadrature.Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics294, 323–341. (10.1016/j.cam.2015.08.021)

2016 doi
[23]

1987 On the solution of integral equations with strongly singular kernels

Kaya AC, Erdogan F. 1987 On the solution of integral equations with strongly singular kernels. Quarterly of Applied Mathematics45, 105–122. (10.1090/qam/885173)

1987 doi
[24]

2004 Uniform approximations to finite Hilbert transform and its derivative

Hasegawa T. 2004 Uniform approximations to finite Hilbert transform and its derivative. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics163, 127–138. (10.1016/j.cam.2003.08.059)

2004 doi
[25]

1980 A note on quadrature formulae for cauchy principal value integrals.IMA Journal of Applied Mathematics26, 447–451

Kumar S. 1980 A note on quadrature formulae for cauchy principal value integrals.IMA Journal of Applied Mathematics26, 447–451. (10.1093/imamat/26.4.447)

1980 doi
[26]

1984Methods of numerical integration

Davis PJ. 1984Methods of numerical integration. Computer science and applied mathematics. Orlando: Academic, 2nd edition
[27]

1991 An Automatic Quadrature for Cauchy Principal Value Integrals

Hasegawa T, Torii T. 1991 An Automatic Quadrature for Cauchy Principal Value Integrals. Mathematics of Computation56, 741. (10.2307/2008405)

1991 doi
[28]

1999 A method for the practical evaluation of the Hilbert transform on the real line.Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics112, 45–53

Diethelm K. 1999 A method for the practical evaluation of the Hilbert transform on the real line.Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics112, 45–53. (10.1016/S0377- 0427(99)00212-5)

1999 doi
[29]

1960 A method for numerical integration on an automatic computer.Numerische Mathematik2, 197–205

Clenshaw CW, Curtis AR. 1960 A method for numerical integration on an automatic computer.Numerische Mathematik2, 197–205. (10.1007/BF01386223)

1960 doi
[30]

1994 Hilbert and Hadamard transforms by generalized Chebyshev expansion.Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics51, 71–83

Hasegawa T, Torii T. 1994 Hilbert and Hadamard transforms by generalized Chebyshev expansion.Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics51, 71–83. (10.1016/0377- 0427(92)00003-R)

1994 doi
[31]

Wave scattering around a submerged vertical permeable breakwater

Kim J, Park YS. 2026 Data and code for “Wave scattering around a submerged vertical permeable breakwater”. Version 1.0 [Dataset and Software]. Zenodo. (10.5281/zenodo.21818444)

2026 doi

Pith tools

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

[1] [20]

1977Singular Integral Equations

Muskhelishvili NI. 1977Singular Integral Equations. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. (10.1007/978-94-009-9994-7)

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-9994-7

[2] [14]

2014 A hypersingular integral equation approach to the porous plate problem.Applied Ocean Research46, 70–78

Gayen R, Mondal A. 2014 A hypersingular integral equation approach to the porous plate problem.Applied Ocean Research46, 70–78. (10.1016/j.apor.2014.01.006)

work page doi:10.1016/j.apor.2014.01.006 2014

[3] [15]

2016 Scattering of water waves by vertical porous barriers: An analytical approach.Wave Motion67, 89–101

Manam SR, Sivanesan M. 2016 Scattering of water waves by vertical porous barriers: An analytical approach.Wave Motion67, 89–101. (10.1016/j.wavemoti.2016.07.008)

work page doi:10.1016/j.wavemoti.2016.07.008 2016

[4] [1]

2002 Field and numerical comparisons of the RIBS floating breakwater.Journal of Hydraulic Research40, 289–301

Briggs M, Ye W, Demirbilek Z, Zhang J. 2002 Field and numerical comparisons of the RIBS floating breakwater.Journal of Hydraulic Research40, 289–301. (10.1080/00221680209499944)

work page doi:10.1080/00221680209499944 2002

[5] [2]

1998 Interaction between porous media and wave motion.Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics30, 53–84

Chwang AT, Chan AT. 1998 Interaction between porous media and wave motion.Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics30, 53–84

work page 1998

[6] [3]

1945 On the reflexion of surface waves by a submerged plane barrier.Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society41, 231–238

Dean WR. 1945 On the reflexion of surface waves by a submerged plane barrier.Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society41, 231–238. (10.1017/S030500410002260X)

work page doi:10.1017/s030500410002260x 1945

[7] [4]

1948 On the waves due to the rolling of a ship.The Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics1, 246–252

Ursell F. 1948 On the waves due to the rolling of a ship.The Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics1, 246–252. (10.1093/qjmam/1.1.246)

work page doi:10.1093/qjmam/1.1.246 1948

[8] [5]

1940 XLI

Havelock TH. 1940 XLI. Waves produced by the rolling of a ship.The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science29, 407–414. (10.1080/14786444008521281)

work page doi:10.1080/14786444008521281 1940