Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 49 references

Optimal error bounds on an exponential wave integrator Fourier spectral method for the logarithmic Schr\"odinger equation

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For the logarithmic Schrödinger equation, the exponential wave integrator Fourier spectral method is proved to converge with nearly optimal L² error under only H² regularity of the solution and an L∞ potential.

desk verdict Solid new error analysis for EWI-FS on LogSE with a real CFL restriction, but the abstract oversells the H2 well-posedness guarantee. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.16902 v3 pith:65URATFJ submitted 2024-12-22 math.NA cs.NA

Weizhu Bao , Ying Ma , Chushan Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.NAcs.NA MSC 65M1565M7035Q55
keywords logarithmicSchrödingerequationexponentialwaveintegratorFourierspectralmethoderrorestimatelowregularitypotentialH2solutionCFLconditionvortexdipoledynamics
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper proves that the exponential wave integrator Fourier spectral method solves the logarithmic Schrödinger equation with L² error of order $O(\tau|\ln\tau|^2 + h^2|\ln h|)$ under the mildest regularity currently available: an $H^2$ solution and a merely bounded $L^\infty$ potential. This is the first near-optimal convergence result for the LogSE at this regularity level, improving on earlier time-splitting analyses that reached only half-order in time and on finite-difference analyses that demanded $H^4$-regularity. The proof works directly with the singular logarithm, overcoming the non-Lipschitz nonlinearity through an energy-based stability estimate and an induction that keeps the numerical $H^2$ norm under control. A CFL-type condition $\tau|\ln\tau| \lesssim h^2/|\ln h|$ is proved necessary for stability and is confirmed by numerical experiments. If correct, the result makes accurate LogSE simulations feasible for low-regularity potentials, including disorder models.

What carries the argument

The central object is the exponential wave integrator Fourier spectral method: a first-order exponential integrator in time built from Duhamel's formula with the nonlinearity frozen at each time node, combined with Fourier spectral spatial discretization on a periodic domain. Its analysis rests on two devices: (i) an $H^2$-conditional $L^2$-stability estimate, proved with the energy method and the imaginary-part inequality for the logarithmic nonlinearity, which bounds the nonlinear contribution by a constant times the $L^2$ difference instead of by an unbounded Lipschitz constant; and (ii) a mathematical induction using inverse inequalities on the trigonometric space that controls the numerical $H^2$ norm by $|\ln h|$ while the CFL-type condition keeps the induction closed. A regularized logarithmic nonlinearity $g_\varepsilon$ and a difference estimate via $\varepsilon$ supply the local truncation error bounds.

What would settle it

Rerun the one-dimensional convergence test with initial datum $\psi_0(x)=x|x|^{0.51}e^{-x^2/2}$, $V\equiv 0$, and $\tau=h^2/8$ on $(-16,16)$ up to $T=1$; Theorem 1 predicts an $L^2$ error of order $h^2|\ln h|$, so if the measured rate in $h$ is worse than quadratic up to logarithms while $\tau|\ln\tau| \le h^2/|\ln h|$ holds, the central bound is wrong. Conversely, fixing $h$ and taking $\tau|\ln\tau| \gg h^2/|\ln h|$ should produce clear order reduction; if no such reduction appears, the claimed necessity of the CFL condition fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the EWI-FS scheme is stable and convergent under the minimal $H^2$ well-posedness assumption $\psi \in C([0,T];H^2_{\mathrm{per}}) \cap C^1([0,T];L^2)$, with nearly optimal $L^2$ error $O(\tau|\ln\tau|^2 + h^2|\ln h|)$ and $H^1$ error $O(\sqrt{\tau}|\ln\tau| + h|\ln h|)$. The log nonlinearity is not Lipschitz near zero; this is handled by a new $H^2$-conditional $L^2$-stability estimate proved with the energy method and the algebraic inequality $|\operatorname{Im}[(g(z_1)-g(z_2))(z_1-z_2)]| \le 2|z_1-z_2|^2$, which prevents the singularity from entering the stability constant exponentially. Mathematical induction with discrete Gronwall inequalities and inverse inequalities controls $\|\psi^n\|_{H^2} \lesssim |\ln h|$, and the CFL restriction compensates for logarithmic factors in the truncation error. With higher $H^m$ regularity the bound improves to $O(\tau|\ln\tau| + h^m|\ln h|)$ under a relaxed step restriction. Numerical experiments validate the convergence orders and show that violating the CFL condition causes order reduction.

Load-bearing premise

The proof assumes the exact solution has $H^2$ spatial regularity with an $L^2$ time derivative, and because the cited well-posedness results do not explicitly cover the LogSE with a general $L^\infty$ potential, that regularity is the load-bearing premise.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • First-order temporal and second-order spatial $L^2$ convergence is achieved with $H^2$ solutions and $L^\infty$ potentials, removing the $H^4$ requirement imposed by earlier finite-difference analyses of the LogSE.
  • The CFL-type restriction $\tau|\ln\tau| \lesssim h^2/|\ln h|$ is a genuine feature of the logarithmic singularity: violating it causes measurable order reduction, so practical simulations must couple the time step to the mesh size.
  • The $H^1$ error bound $O(\sqrt{\tau}|\ln\tau| + h|\ln h|)$ provides a quantified derivative error under the same minimal regularity assumption.
  • For solutions with $H^m$ regularity for $m>2$, the error improves to $O(\tau|\ln\tau| + h^m|\ln h|)$ under the slightly relaxed condition $\tau|\ln\tau| \lesssim h^2$, so smoother data recover higher-order spatial accuracy.
  • The method extends to Neumann and Dirichlet boundary conditions and supports physically motivated simulations such as Gausson collisions under disorder potentials and vortex dipole dynamics in two dimensions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the CFL-type restriction is intrinsic to the logarithmic singularity rather than to the low-regularity potential, unregularized first-order schemes such as Lie–Trotter splitting should exhibit a similar $\tau \lesssim h^2$ threshold; the stability technique developed here gives a template for proving such restrictions.
  • The numerical observation that odd data with $\psi'_0(0)\neq 0$ produce roughly $H^{3.5-}$ solutions suggests that $H^2$ regularity is close to the sharp threshold for the LogSE, so removing the logarithmic factors in the error estimate may require new well-posedness theory rather than sharper analysis.
  • Disorder models with genuinely white-noise potentials fall outside the $L^\infty$ assumption, so extending this convergence theory to rougher potentials would require an $L^2$-based control of the projected nonlinearity that the present proof does not supply.
  • The necessity of the CFL condition even for single-Gausson dynamics implies that high-accuracy LogSE simulations must balance mesh size and time step globally, not only near zeros of the solution.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes a first-order exponential wave integrator with Fourier spectral spatial discretization (EWI-FS) for the periodic logarithmic Schrödinger equation with an L∞ potential. The main result, Theorem 1, proves an L2 error bound of order O(τ|ln τ|² + h²|ln h|) under an H2 regularity assumption on the exact solution, an L∞ potential, and a CFL-type step-size restriction τ|ln τ| ≲ h²/|ln h|; an H1 error bound of order O(√τ|ln τ| + h|ln h|) is also stated. The proof combines a local truncation error estimate, an H2-conditional L2-stability estimate obtained by the energy method, and a mathematical induction using inverse inequalities. Numerical experiments confirm the convergence orders and the necessity of the step-size restriction, and the method is applied to soliton collisions in 1D and vortex dipole dynamics in 2D.

Significance. If the proof is completed, the result is a significant advance: it would give the first nearly optimal a priori error estimate for the LogSE under H2 regularity, with a general L∞ potential, improving on existing FDTD and time-splitting analyses. The identification of a CFL-type restriction caused by the logarithmic singularity rather than by the potential is an interesting and plausible new phenomenon. The numerical section is substantial and supports the theoretical rates. The proof has two genuinely load-bearing gaps that are, in my view, repairable within the scope of the manuscript: the well-posedness citation does not cover the claimed L∞-potential setting, and the induction step uses an unjustified constant dependence from the stability proposition.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 2.2, assumption (2.15)] The assumption (2.15) is introduced as 'known H2 well-posedness' of the LogSE (1.1), and the abstract and conclusion state that the H2-solution assumption is 'theoretically guaranteed'. However, the text immediately following (2.15) concedes that the cited results of Carles–Gallagher 2018, Bao et al. 2019b, and Hayashi–Ozawa 2024 are for the LogSE with V ≡ 0, while Kato 1987 is for the NLSE with L∞ potential. No cited theorem covers the LogSE with a general V ∈ L∞. Since the advertised advantage over the existing literature is precisely applicability to L∞ potentials, this gap is load-bearing. The authors should either prove H2 well-posedness for (1.1) with V ∈ L∞, supply a reference that does cover this case, or explicitly reformulate Theorem 1 as conditional on (2.15) and remove the 'theoretically guaranteed' wording from the abstract and conclusion.
  2. [Section 3.3–3.4, Proposition 3 and Eq. (3.33)] Proposition 3 states a stability bound of the form e^{Cs τ}‖v0 − w0‖L2 + C(M0)τ²|ln τ|(1 + M1) + C(M2)τ²|ln τ|, where M2 = ‖w0‖H2. In the induction in Theorem 1, Proposition 3 is applied with w0 = ψn, so M2 = ‖ψn‖H2, which the induction controls only by C1|ln h|. In passing to (3.33), the term C(M2)τ²|ln τ| is replaced by C(M0)τ²|ln τ|‖ψn‖H2. This replacement does not follow from the statement of Proposition 3: the notation C(α) denotes a generic constant depending on α, and no inequality such as C(M2) ≤ C(M0)M2 is established. Since ‖ψn‖H2 grows logarithmically as h → 0, an unspecified dependence on M2 could invalidate the induction. The proof needs to make the dependence on M2 explicit, for instance by using the L2 bound on ψn together with inverse inequalities and the CFL condition to control the R2 term in Proposition 3, or by stating Proposition 3 with a polynomial dependence on M2.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.4, Eqs. (3.34)–(3.35) and Theorem 1] The induction proves the L2 bound with a factor τ|ln τ||ln h|, while Theorem 1 is stated with τ|ln τ|². The conversion is not shown and should be stated: the CFL condition implies τ ≤ h²/|ln h| ≤ h² for h < e⁻¹, hence |ln h| ≤ |ln τ|/2, so τ|ln τ||ln h| ≤ (1/2)τ|ln τ|².
  2. [Remark 2] Remark 2 asserts improved error bounds and a relaxed step-size restriction under ψ ∈ C([0,T];H^m_per), m > 2, but no proof is given. If this statement is intended as a theorem, a proof or at least a detailed proof sketch should be included; otherwise it should be labelled as a conjecture or a claim to be established elsewhere.
  3. [Section 3.3, proof of Proposition 3] In Eq. (3.25), the chain ∥v(t)∥L∞ ≲ ∥v(t)∥_{H^{7/4}} ≤ ∥v0∥_{H^{7/4}} + C t^{1/8} C(∥v0∥L∞) ≤ C(M0) should state explicitly that the last inequality uses the Sobolev embedding H^{7/4} ↪ L∞ and the assumption ∥v0∥_{H^{7/4}} ≤ M0. The current notation is understandable but slightly compressed.
  4. [Throughout] Minor typographical issues: the keyword 'voterx dipole' should presumably be 'vortex dipole'; 'Cauchy-Schwartz' in Section 3.3 should be 'Cauchy-Schwarz'; and expressions such as 'H2.5-regularity' would benefit from a hyphen or explicit definition.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the EWI-FS error bound is derived directly from Duhamel's formula, energy stability, and induction; the flagged H2 well-posedness gap for L∞ potentials is a correctness issue, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The central claim, an O(τ|lnτ|^2 + h^2|lnh|) error bound, is proven directly rather than assumed or fitted. Section 3.2 derives the local truncation error from Duhamel's formula and projection estimates; Section 3.3 proves an H2-conditional L2-stability estimate by an energy method using the Cazenave-Haraux monotonicity inequality (3.4); Section 3.4 uses discrete Gronwall and inverse inequalities to close the induction. No parameter is fitted to the exact solution, no target error quantity is inserted into the algorithm by construction, and no 'prediction' is merely a renamed input. The cited lemmas, including the ϕ1 estimate from Bao and Wang 2024a and the semigroup difference bound from Bao et al. 2022, are published technical tools with stated assumptions that do not include the theorem being proved, so the self-citations are independent support rather than circularity. The manuscript does contain an explicit assumption-support gap: under assumption (2.15) it says 'H2 well-posedness' is known, then immediately concedes that 'the H2 well-posedness is proved for the LogSE without potential, i.e., (1.1) with V(x)=0 ... and for the NLSE with L∞-potential and power-type nonlinearity,' not for the LogSE with a general L∞ potential. This is a real limitation affecting the advertised applicability of Theorem 1, but it is an incomplete-support or correctness issue, not a circular derivation: the theorem does not reduce to the cited well-posedness result, and the numerical error bound does not depend on the unproved L∞-potential well-posedness claim for its internal validity. The CFL-type time step restriction is imposed as a hypothesis of Theorem 1 and is independently demonstrated numerically; it is not recovered from the conclusion by construction. Accordingly, the appropriate circularity finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The proof rests on standard functional analysis tools and on one technical lemma imported from the authors' own preceding NLSE paper. No free parameters or invented entities appear; the CFL condition is a stated hypothesis, not a fitted quantity.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Existence of an H2 solution ψ ∈ C([0,T];H²_per) ∩ C¹([0,T];L²) for the LogSE (1.1) with V ∈ L∞.
    This is assumption (2.15), the central regularity premise. The paper asserts it is theoretically guaranteed, but the cited references prove it for V≡0 (LogSE) or for NLSE with L∞ potential, not explicitly for LogSE with potential.
  • standard math Sobolev embedding H^{7/4}(Ω) ⊂ L∞(Ω) for d=1,2,3.
    Used in (3.25) to bound the numerical flow in L∞ via the H^{7/4} norm.
  • domain assumption Lemma 3.9 from Bao and Wang (2024a): ||φ1(it∆)φ||_{Hα} ≲ t^{-α/2}||φ||_{L2} for 0 ≤ α ≤ 2.
    Imported tool from the authors' prior work; essential to estimate ||v(t)||_{L∞} in Proposition 3.
  • domain assumption Cazenave-Haraux algebraic property |Im[(g(z1)-g(z2))(z1-z2)]| ≤ 2|z1-z2|² for g(z)=z ln|z|².
    Used in (3.20) to close the energy estimate without Lipschitz continuity.
  • standard math Inverse inequality ||φ||_{Hα} ≤ Cinv h^{-α}||φ||_{L2} on XN.
    Used in the induction step, (3.31), to control H^{7/4} and H2 norms of the numerical solution.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Optimal error bounds on an exponential wave integrator Fourier spectral method for the logarithmic Schr\"odinger equation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/65URATFJ

@misc{pith2026241216902,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Optimal error bounds on an exponential wave integrator Fourier spectral method for the logarithmic Schr\"odinger equation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/65URATFJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.16902}
}
abstract

We prove a nearly optimal error bound on the exponential wave integrator Fourier spectral (EWI-FS) method for the logarithmic Schr\"odinger equation (LogSE) under the assumption of $H^2$-solution, which is theoretically guaranteed. Subject to a CFL-type time step size restriction $\tau |\ln \tau| \lesssim h^2/|\ln h|$ for obtaining the stability of the numerical scheme affected by the singularity of the logarithmic nonlinearity, an $L^2$-norm error bound of order $O(\tau |\ln \tau|^2 + h^2 |\ln h|)$ is established, where $\tau$ is the time step size and $h$ is the mesh size. Compared to the error estimates of the LogSE in the literature, our error bound either greatly improves the convergence rate under the same regularity assumptions or significantly weakens the regularity requirement to obtain the same convergence rate. Moreover, our result can be directly applied to the LogSE with low regularity $L^\infty$-potential, which is not allowed in the existing error estimates. Two main ingredients are adopted in the proof: (i) an $H^2$-conditional $L^2$-stability estimate, which is established using the energy method to avoid singularity of the logarithmic nonlinearity, and (ii) mathematical induction with inverse inequalities to control the $H^2$-norm of the numerical solution. Numerical results are reported to confirm our error estimates and demonstrate the necessity of the time step size restriction imposed. We also apply the EWI-FS method to investigate soliton collisions in one dimension and vortex dipole dynamics in two dimensions.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Abidi, O

    M. Abidi, O. Goubet, and V. Martin. (2022) Crank- N icolson scheme for a logarithmic S chr\"odinger equation. North-West. Eur. J. Math., 8, 167--187

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Alama Bronsard, Y

    Y. Alama Bronsard, Y. Bruned, G. Maierhofer, and K. Schratz. (2023) Symmetric resonance based integrators and forest formulae, arXiv:2305.16737

    arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    Alama Bronsard, Y

    Y. Alama Bronsard, Y. Bruned, and K. Schratz. (2022) Low regularity integrators via decorated trees, arXiv:2202.01171

    arXiv 2022

  4. [4]

    Antoine, W

    X. Antoine, W. Bao, and C. Besse. (2013) Computational methods for the dynamics of the nonlinear S chr\" o dinger/ G ross- P itaevskii equations. Comput. Phys. Commun., 184, 2621--2633

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    A. V. Avdeenkov and K. G. Zloshchastiev. (2011) Quantum B ose liquids with logarithmic nonlinearity: self-sustainability and emergence of spatial extent. J. Phys. B At. Mol. Opt. Phys., 44, 195303

    work page 2011

  6. [6]

    Bao and Y

    W. Bao and Y. Cai. (2013) Optimal error estimates of finite difference methods for the G ross- P itaevskii equation with angular momentum rotation. Math. Comp., 82, 99--128

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    W. Bao, R. Carles, C. Su, and Q. Tang. (2019) Regularized numerical methods for the logarithmic S chr\" o dinger equation. Numer. Math., 143, 461--487

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    W. Bao, R. Carles, C. Su, and Q. Tang. (2019) Error estimates of a regularized finite difference method for the logarithmic S chr\" o dinger equation. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 57, 657--680

    work page 2019

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    W. Bao, R. Carles, C. Su, and Q. Tang. (2022) Error estimates of local energy regularization for the logarithmic S chr\" o dinger equation. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 32, 101--136

    2022

  2. [10]

    W. Bao, B. Lin, Y. Ma, and C. Wang. (2024) An extended F ourier pseudospectral method for the G ross- P itaevskii equation with low regularity potential. East Asian J. Appl. Math., 14, 530--550

    2024

  3. [11]

    W. Bao, Y. Ma, and C. Wang. (2024) Optimal error bounds on time-splitting methods for the nonlinear S chr\" o dinger equation with low regularity potential and nonlinearity. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 34, 803--844

    2024

  4. [12]

    Bao and Q

    W. Bao and Q. Tang. (2014) Numerical study of quantized vortex interactions in the nonlinear S chr\"odinger equation on bounded domains. Multiscale Model. Simul., 12, 411--439

    2014

  5. [13]

    Bao and C

    W. Bao and C. Wang. (2024) Optimal error bounds on the exponential wave integrator for the nonlinear S chr\" o dinger equation with low regularity potential and nonlinearity. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 62, 93--118

    2024

  6. [14]

    Bao and C

    W. Bao and C. Wang. (2024) An explicit and symmetric exponential wave integrator for the nonlinear S chr\" o dinger equation with low regularity potential and nonlinearity. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 62, 1901--1928

    2024

  7. [15]

    Bao and C

    W. Bao and C. Wang. (2024) Error estimates of the time-splitting methods for the nonlinear S chr\" o dinger equation with semi-smooth nonlinearity. Math. Comp., 93, 1599--1631

    2024

  8. [16]

    Besse, B

    C. Besse, B. Bid\' e garay, and S. Descombes. (2002) Order estimates in time of splitting methods for the nonlinear S chr\" o dinger equation. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 40, 26--40

    2002

  9. [17]

    Bialynicki-Birula and J

    I. Bialynicki-Birula and J. Mycielski. (1976) Nonlinear wave mechanics. Ann. Phys., 100, 62--93

    1976

  10. [18]

    Bialynicki-Birula and J

    I. Bialynicki-Birula and J. Mycielski. (1979) Gaussons: S olitons of the logarithmic S chr\" o dinger equation. Phys. Scr., 20, 539

    1979

  11. [19]

    Bruned and K

    Y. Bruned and K. Schratz. (2022) Resonance-based schemes for dispersive equations via decorated trees. Forum Math. Pi, 10, e2, 76

    2022

  12. [20]

    Buljan, A

    H. Buljan, A. S S iber, M. Solja c c i c \' c , T. Schwartz, M. Segev, and D. N. Christodoulides. (2003) Incoherent white light solitons in logarithmically saturable noninstantaneous nonlinear media. Phys. Rev. E, 68, 036607

    2003

  13. [21]

    R. Carles. (2022) Logarithmic S chr\"odinger equation and isothermal fluids. EMS Surv. Math. Sci., 9, 99--134

    2022

  14. [22]

    Carles and G

    R. Carles and G. Ferriere. (2024) Logarithmic G ross- P itaevskii equation. Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 49, 88--120

    2024

  15. [23]

    Carles and I

    R. Carles and I. Gallagher. (2018) Universal dynamics for the defocusing logarithmic S chr\" o dinger equation. Duke Math. J., 167, 1761--1801

    2018

  16. [24]

    Carles and C

    R. Carles and C. Su. (2024) Scattering and uniform in time error estimates for splitting method in NLS . Found. Comput. Math., 24, 683--722

    2024

  17. [25]

    Carles, M

    R. Carles, M. Hayashi, and T. Ozawa. (2024) Low regularity solutions to the logarithmic S chr\"odinger equation. Pure Appl. Anal., 6, 859--871

    2024

  18. [26]

    Cazenave

    T. Cazenave. (2003) Semilinear Schr\" o dinger Equations , Courant Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 10. New York, 2003

    2003

  19. [27]

    Cazenave and A

    T. Cazenave and A. Haraux. (1980) \'Equations d'\'evolution avec non lin\'earit\'e logarithmique. Ann. Fac. Sci. Toulouse Math. (5), 2, 21--51

    1980

  20. [28]

    Celledoni, D

    E. Celledoni, D. Cohen, and B. Owren. (2008) Symmetric exponential integrators with an application to the cubic S chr\" o dinger equation. Found. Comput. Math., 8, 303--317

    2008

  21. [29]

    Chauleur and A

    Q. Chauleur and A. Mouzard. (2025) The logarithmic Schr\"odinger equation with spatial white noise on the full space. J. Evol. Equ., DOI:10.1007/s00028-024-01031-z

    2025 doi

  22. [30]

    Debussche, R

    A. Debussche, R. Liu, N. Tzvetkov, and N. Visciglia. (2024) Global well-posedness of the 2 D nonlinear S chr\"odinger equation with multiplicative spatial white noise on the full space. Probab. Theory Related Fields, 189, 1161--1218

    2024

  23. [31]

    Eilinghoff, R

    J. Eilinghoff, R. Schnaubelt, and K. Schratz. (2016) Fractional error estimates of splitting schemes for the nonlinear S chr\" o dinger equation. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 442, 740--760

    2016

  24. [32]

    Gubinelli, B

    M. Gubinelli, B. Ugurcan, and I. Zachhuber. Semilinear evolution equations for the A nderson H amiltonian in two and three dimensions. Stoch. Partial Differ. Equ. Anal. Comput., 8, 82--149

  25. [33]

    M. Hayashi. (2018) A note on the nonlinear S chr\"odinger equation in a general domain. Nonlinear Anal., 173, 99--122

    2018

  26. [34]

    Hayashi and T

    M. Hayashi and T. Ozawa. (2024) The C auchy problem for the logarithmic S chr\"odinger equation revisited. Ann. Henri Poincar\'e, DOI:10.1007/s00023-024-01460-z

    2024 doi

  27. [35]

    Henning and D

    P. Henning and D. Peterseim. (2017) Crank- N icolson G alerkin approximations to nonlinear S chr\" o dinger equations with rough potentials. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 27, 2147--2184

    2017

  28. [36]

    Hochbruck and A

    M. Hochbruck and A. Ostermann. (2010) Exponential integrators. Acta Numer., 19, 209--286

    2010

  29. [37]

    L. Ji, A. Ostermann, F. Rousset, and K. Schratz. (2024) Low regularity full error estimates for the cubic nonlinear S chr\"odinger equation. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 62, 2071--2086

    2024

  30. [38]

    T. Kato. (1987) On nonlinear S chr\" o dinger equations. Ann. Inst. H. Poincar\' e Phys. Th\' e or. , 46, 113--129

    1987

  31. [39]

    B. Lin, Y. Ma, and C. Wang. (2024) A L awson-time-splitting extended F ourier pseudospectral method for the G ross- P itaevskii equation with time-dependent low regularity potential. J. Comput. Phys., 512, 113133

    2024

  32. [40]

    o dinger- P oisson and cubic nonlinear S chr\

    C. Lubich. On splitting methods for S chr\" o dinger- P oisson and cubic nonlinear S chr\" o dinger equations. Math. Comp., 77, 2141--2153

  33. [41]

    Ostermann and K

    A. Ostermann and K. Schratz. (2018) Low regularity exponential-type integrators for semilinear S chr\" o dinger equations. Found. Comput. Math., 18, 731--755

    2018

  34. [42]

    Ostermann, F

    A. Ostermann, F. Rousset, and K. Schratz. (2021) Error estimates at low regularity of splitting schemes for NLS . Math. Comp., 91, 169--182

    2021

  35. [43]

    Paraschis and G

    P. Paraschis and G. E. Zouraris. (2023) On the convergence of the C rank- N icolson method for the logarithmic S chr\"odinger equation. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. B, 28, 245--261

    2023

  36. [44]

    J. M. Sanz-Serna. (1984) Methods for the numerical solution of the nonlinear S chroedinger equation. Math. Comp., 43, 21--27

    1984

  37. [45]

    J. Shen, T. Tang, and L.-L. Wang. (2011) Spectral Methods: Algorithms, Analysis and Applications, Springer Series in Computational Mathematics, vol. 41. Springer, Heidelberg

    2011

  38. [46]

    Sulem and P.-L

    C. Sulem and P.-L. Sulem. (1999) The Nonlinear Schrödinger Equation: Self-focusing and Wave Collapse. Springer

    1999

  39. [47]

    L.-L. Wang, J. Yan, and X. Zhang. (2024) Error analysis of a first-order IMEX scheme for the logarithmic S chr\" o dinger equation. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 62, 119--137

    2024

  40. [48]

    Wang and C

    Z.-Q. Wang and C. Zhang. (2019) Convergence from power-law to logarithm-law in nonlinear scalar field equations. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 231, 45--61

    2019

  41. [49]

    Zhang and L.-L

    X. Zhang and L.-L. Wang. (2024) Low regularity estimates of the Lie-Trotter time-splitting Fourier spectral method for the logarithmic Schrödinger equation, arXiv:2401.02288

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

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