Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 46 references

Regularization and Chaotization of Maximal Attractors in the Sommerfeld-Kononenko Non-Ideal "Spherical Pendulum-Electric Motor" System with Time Delays

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Tiny time delays in a spherical-pendulum–electric-motor model can first regularize a chaotic maximal attractor into a periodic family and then re-chaotize it through a period-doubling cascade and generalized intermittency.

desk verdict Numerically interesting study of delay-induced regularization and re-chaotization of maximal attractors in a non-ideal pendulum–motor system, but the load-bearing DDE-to-ODE truncation is unvalidated and an internal contradiction in the bifurcation sequence remains unresolved. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.02572 v1 pith:LGFUGML3 submitted 2026-08-03 nlin.CD

O.O. Horchakov , A.Yu. Shvets This is my paper · ORCID
classification nlin.CD MSC 37G2537G3537L3037M20
keywords maximalattractorstimedelaysphericalpendulumelectricmotornon-idealsystemperiod-doublingcascadegeneralizedintermittencychaosregularization
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 argues that the presence of two small time delays in a non-ideal spherical-pendulum–electric-motor system can fundamentally change the kind of limit set the system settles into. Starting from a chaotic maximal attractor at zero delay, the authors show numerically that increasing the delay to about 7.30e-4 replaces the chaos with a periodic maximal attractor—an infinite family of non-isolated cycles sharing one period. Further increase drives the whole family through an infinite period-doubling cascade into a chaotic maximal attractor at about 7.41e-4, and then through a generalized-intermittency bifurcation into a second, larger chaotic maximal attractor. The reduction that makes the study tractable is a first-order expansion of the delayed variables, turning the delay differential equations into ordinary differential equations; all conclusions are reached on that reduced system.

What carries the argument

The central device is the first-order delayed-variable expansion that converts the infinite-dimensional delay system (3) into the finite-dimensional ODE system (5), with delta and rho demoted from argument shifts to algebraic parameters (and set to rho=2*delta). This reduction turns a delay-differential problem into an ordinary differential problem whose maximal attractors—families of non-isolated invariant sets—can be studied with standard numerical tools: phase portraits, cross-section maps, bifurcation diagrams, and characteristic-exponent spectra.

What would settle it

Integrate the original delay-differential system (3) directly—without truncation—for the same parameters, the same initial conditions, and delta=7.30e-4, rho=1.46e-3. If the largest characteristic exponent stays positive and the attractor remains chaotic, the regularization claim is false. A cheaper check is to add second-order delay terms to (5) and see whether the hard bifurcation at delta approx 7.30e-4 survives.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At fixed parameters E=-1.17, C=-0.5, D=-1, F=0.5, and with the formal relation rho=2*delta, system (5) has a chaotic maximal attractor for delta=0. Increasing delta to 7.30e-4 produces a hard bifurcation: the chaotic maximal attractor disappears and a periodic maximal attractor is born—a family of infinitely many closed trajectories, none isolated, none intersecting, all with the same period and the same spectrum of characteristic exponents, with the largest exponent zero. A further increase triggers an infinite cascade of period-doubling bifurcations that all members of the family undergo simultaneously, yielding a chaotic maximal attractor at delta approx 7.41e-4; at delta approx 7.411e-4

Load-bearing premise

The entire numerical study is carried out on the reduced ODE (5) obtained by truncating the delayed variables to first order; if that truncation is inaccurate at delays around 7e-4, where the reported bifurcations are hypersensitive, the claimed regularization and chaotization of the true delay system may not occur.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Time-delay parameters, not just mechanical parameters, can regularize a chaotic maximal attractor into a periodic one through a single hard bifurcation.
  • The entire family of non-isolated cycles period-doubles at the same parameter value, so the cascade is a property of the whole maximal attractor rather than of individual cycles.
  • A generalized-intermittency bifurcation converts one chaotic maximal attractor into another, with a near-doubling of the largest characteristic exponent.
  • Bifurcation diagrams and exponent curves are qualitatively identical for every representative of the family, so the observed transitions are robust within the family.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the reduction to (5) drops second-order delay terms, the reported thresholds in the fourth decimal of delta are only as trustworthy as that truncation; a direct simulation of the original delay equations would test the claim.
  • The simultaneity of period-doubling across the whole family suggests an underlying symmetry or foliation that the paper does not spell out; identifying it could simplify the analysis to a single quotient system.
  • If such delay-controlled regularization holds generally, similar effects should appear in other non-ideal electromechanical systems; that is an extension beyond what the paper demonstrates.
  • A practical extension would be to scan other motor parameters (E, C, D, F) to see whether the same delay-induced regularization window exists throughout the parameter space.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies a five-dimensional delay differential equation (3) modeling a spherical pendulum driven by a non-ideal electric motor, with delays δ (motor → pendulum) and ρ (pendulum → motor). The authors replace the delayed variables by first-order Maclaurin expansions (4), obtaining the ODE system (5), and then analyze this ODE numerically for parameters E=−1.17, C=−0.5, D=−1, F=0.5 and with the ad hoc relation ρ=2δ. They report that as δ increases, the zero-delay chaotic maximal attractor (known from prior work) gives way at δ≈7.30·10⁻⁴ to a periodic maximal attractor consisting of a continuous family of non-isolated limit cycles; a Feigenbaum period-doubling cascade of this entire family then leads to a chaotic maximal attractor at δ≈7.41·10⁻⁴, followed at δ≈7.411·10⁻⁴ by a generalized-intermittency transition to a different chaotic maximal attractor. The abstract claims that these results establish that time delays can fundamentally change the type of limit sets and alter the scenarios of transition to chaos.

Significance. If the reported scenario were established for the actual delay system (3), it would be a noteworthy contribution: it would demonstrate that small delays act as genuine bifurcation parameters that regularize or chaotize non-classical maximal attractors, and it would extend the authors' earlier work on maximal attractors to a physically motivated non-ideal system with time delays. The paper is also explicit about its numerical methodology (Runge–Kutta integration, Hénon diagrams, Benettin LCE computation), and the central observations are reported as new simulation outputs rather than being forced by parameter fitting or by the construction of the model. These strengths are real. However, the weight of the conclusions falls entirely on the validity of the first-order Maclaurin truncation (4)–(5), and the paper provides no error bound, no second-order check, and no direct comparison with the delay system (3). Given that the reported bifurcations occur in the fourth decimal of δ, the unvalidated approximation is a decisive gap. There is also an internal numerical inconsistency in the stated bifurcation sequence. The paper is therefore not acceptable in its present form, but the concern

major comments (4)
  1. [Eqs. (4)–(5) and all subsequent numerics] The central claim that time delays change the limit sets of the actual system inherits its validity from the first-order Maclaurin expansion (4). All phase portraits, bifurcation diagrams, and LCE curves are computed for the approximate ODE (5), not for the DDE (3). The manuscript asserts in the last paragraph that smallness 'fully justifies' the reduction, but gives no error bound, no estimate of the neglected O(δ²) terms, and no comparison with direct numerical integration of (3). This is not a formality: the reported dynamics change in the fourth decimal of δ (e.g., chaos onset between 7.30·10⁻⁴ and 7.41·10⁻⁴), so terms of order δ² and ρ² are not obviously negligible relative to the δ-dependent terms that drive the bifurcations. The authors should either (i) provide a rigorous bound on the truncation error over the relevant parameter range, (ii) repeat the key bifurcation computations
  2. [Section 'The Influence of Time Delays', paragraphs near Fig. 4] There is a direct internal inconsistency in the reported bifurcation sequence. The text states that at δ=7.30·10⁻⁴ the chaotic maximal attractor is replaced by a periodic maximal attractor (Fig. 4a), but two paragraphs later it states that 'At δ≈7.21·10⁻⁴, a period-doubling bifurcation takes place'. Since 7.21·10⁻⁴ < 7.30·10⁻⁴, a period-doubling of a family that is born at 7.30·10⁻⁴ is impossible. This is either a typographical error in one of the two values or a sign that the numerical resolution of the bifurcation sequence is not reliable. The authors must correct the values and ensure that the sequence of δ values is monotone and consistent across the text, Fig. 3, and Fig. 4.
  3. [Section 'The Influence of Time Delays', ρ=2δ and family-wide simultaneity] Two ad hoc but load-bearing assumptions are used without supporting analysis. First, the relation ρ=2δ is introduced as 'quite natural' but no physical or mathematical derivation is given; since ρ and δ enter the truncated equations differently, the scenario may depend sensitively on this ratio, and the paper does not test robustness to the choice ρ=δ or ρ=kδ. Second, the periodic maximal attractor is asserted to consist of infinitely many non-isolated cycles that all have the same period, the same LCE signature, and that all undergo period-doubling simultaneously. No symmetry or equivariance property of (5) is stated that would imply such family-wide synchronization, and no numerical evidence is shown across multiple representatives (the bifurcation diagram in Fig. 3a is computed for a single initial condition). The authors should either prove the stated structural property or demonstra
  4. [Last paragraph] The statement that 'the smallness of the time delays fully justifies the reduction of the delay system (4) to the system without time delays (5)' is an assertion, not a demonstration. Since the bifurcation values are extremely close (δ=7.30·10⁻⁴ vs. 7.41·10⁻⁴), the smallness of δ alone is insufficient; one needs a continuity argument or an explicit error estimate that controls the difference between solutions of (3) and (5) over the integration time used. The reference to the averaging method may explain the time scale, but it does not by itself justify the truncation. Please add a concrete estimate or a direct DDE validation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Last paragraph] The text says 'reduction of the delay system (4) to the system without time delays (5)', but the delay system is numbered (3); Eq. (4) is the expansion. Please correct the cross-reference.
  2. [References] Reference [13] (wildfire heat maps with Twitter/BERT) appears unrelated to non-ideal dynamical systems and seems to be an erroneous inclusion. Please verify that all references in the introduction are relevant.
  3. [References] References [24] and [32] appear to be the same work (same title, venue, and pages) listed twice. Also, in reference [15], 'A. Yu. Svets' should likely be 'A. Yu. Shvets'.
  4. [Fig. 2 and Fig. 3] The captions do not specify which colors correspond to which representatives; since the paper emphasizes that maximal attractors are families, the figure captions should explicitly state the color coding and the initial conditions used for each representative.
  5. [Throughout] The name 'Hénon' appears without the accent in the text ('H´enon' in the PDF source); please typeset properly. Also, 'Poincar´e' appears with a stray accent in several places.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central attractor-transition results are new numerical outputs of system (5), not forced by construction; the main caveats are the unvalidated delay truncation and an internal δ inconsistency.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is: DDE (3) is reduced by the first-order Maclaurin expansion (4) to ODE (5), and all phase portraits, Lyapunov spectra, bifurcation diagrams, and Poincaré sections are computed for (5). No parameter is fitted to a target set, and no prediction is defined in terms of the quantity it is supposed to predict. The statement that varying δ changes the limit sets is a numerical result, not an identity: system (5) contains δ explicitly, but the observed bifurcation sequence (hard transition, period-doubling cascade, generalized intermittency) is not written into the equations. The 'maximal attractor' and scenario terminology comes substantially from the authors' prior work (refs [15,24,28,39,42-45]), but those citations supply nomenclature and interpretation; they do not generate the specific δ values. The most serious concern is the validity of the truncation: the text asserts 'the smallness of the time delays fully justifies the reduction' but gives no error bound and no comparison with direct integration of (3); there is also an internal inconsistency (periodic maximal attractor first at δ=7.30e-4 vs period doubling at δ≈7.21e-4). These are correctness and reproducibility risks, not circularity, because none of the paper's claims is equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper contributes numerics and scenario classification, not a first-principles derivation. It inherits the model from prior work, adds an ad hoc delay-ratio choice and an unvalidated small-delay truncation, and asserts family-wide uniformity of the periodic maximal attractor without a structural argument. No new physical entities are postulated; the maximal-attractor concept is prior work (Milnor; refs [15,24,25,28]).

free parameters (2)
  • Motor/pendulum parameter set (E, C, D, F) = E=−1.17, C=−0.5, D=−1, F=0.5
    Single operating point inherited from the authors' prior simulations [15,32]; all conclusions about delay-induced regularization/chaotization are demonstrated only at this point.
  • Delay ratio ρ/δ = ρ = 2δ
    Ad hoc scaling relation justified as 'quite natural'; the prose simultaneously claims the delays are equal, so the choice is ambiguous/unjustified.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption System (1) is an adequate averaged slow-time model of the spherical pendulum–electric motor (derived in [6,22]).
    All results inherit this modeling layer; delays are introduced into the averaged system, not the original mechanics.
  • ad hoc to paper First-order Maclaurin expansion (4) of the delayed variables faithfully represents DDE (3) for δ,ρ up to ≈7.4×10⁻⁴.
    No error bound, second-order check, or direct DDE validation; the paper asserts smallness 'fully justifies' the reduction.
  • ad hoc to paper The maximal attractor consists of a continuous family of non-isolated limit cycles of identical period and identical LCE signature, all bifurcating at the same parameter value.
    Inferred from representative-sampling numerics; needs a structural degeneracy/symmetry in system (5) that is not identified.
  • standard math Standard numerical methods (RK4, Hénon map sampling, Benettin LCE algorithm) with the (unspecified) step sizes and horizons used reproduce the true flow and LCE spectra.
    No convergence checks, tolerances, or integration parameters are reported.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Regularization and Chaotization of Maximal Attractors in the Sommerfeld-Kononenko Non-Ideal "Spherical Pendulum-Electric Motor" System with Time Delays." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LGFUGML3

@misc{pith2026260802572,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Regularization and Chaotization of Maximal Attractors in the Sommerfeld-Kononenko Non-Ideal "Spherical Pendulum-Electric Motor" System with Time Delays},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LGFUGML3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.02572}
}
read the original abstract

The influence of the time-delay parameters on the bifurcations of "non-classical" maximal attractors in the Sommerfeld-Kononenko non-ideal dynamical system "spherical pendulum-electric motor" is investigated. Regular and chaotic maximal attractors of this system, as well as their bifurcations, are described. It is established that the presence of time delays can fundamentally change the type of limit sets of the considered dynamical system and significantly alter the scenarios of transitions to deterministic chaos.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

  1. [13]

    Warminski

    J. Warminski. «Nonlinear Dynamics of Self and Parametrically Excited Systems with Non-ideal Energy Source».Nonlinear Vibrations Excited by Li- mited Power Sources.116. Mechanisms and Machine Science. Cham: Springer, 2022, 53—72. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96603-4_5. 14

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-96603-4_5 2022

  2. [1]

    Sommerfeld

    A. Sommerfeld. «Beitr¨ age zum dynamischen Ausbau der Festigkeitslehre». Physikalische Zeitschrift3 (1902), 266—271

    1902

  3. [2]

    Sommerfeld

    A. Sommerfeld. «Beitr¨ age zum dynamischen Ausgleich von Maschinen: II. Die Wirkung eines f¨ ur unendliche Schwingungen berechneten, aber unvollkommenen Motors auf die Fundamentschwingungen».Zeitschrift des Vereines deutscher Ingenieure48,18 (1904), 631—636

    1904

  4. [3]

    Rocard.Th´ eorie des oscillations

    Y. Rocard.Th´ eorie des oscillations. Paris: Librairie Scientifique A. Hermann et Cie, 1943. 13

    1943

  5. [4]

    V. O. Kononenko.Vibrating System with a Limited Power-Supply. London: Iliffe, 1969

    1969

  6. [5]

    spherical pendulum–electric motor

    + 2) ×(y 2 1 +y 2 4)−(y 3 + 1 8 (y2 1 +y 2 2 +y 2 4 +y 2 5)−2)(y 2 2 +y 2 5) i +Ey 3 +F, dy4 dτ =Cy 4 − y3 −δD(y 1y2 +y 4y5)−δEy 3 −δF+ 1 8 (y2 1 +y 2 2 +y 2 4 +y 2 5) y5 + 3 4 (y1y5 −y 2y4)y1 + 2y5, dy5 dτ =Cy 5 + y3 −δD(y 1y2 +y 4y5)−δEy 3 −δF+ 1 8 (y2 1 +y 2 2 +y 2 4 +y 2 5) y4 + 3 4 (y1y5 −y 2y4)y2 + 2y4. (5) In system (5), the quantitiesδandρno longe...

  7. [6]

    Krasnopolskaya, A.Yu

    T.S. Krasnopolskaya, A.Yu. Shvets. «Chaos in Dynamics of Machines with a Limited Power-Supply».Proceedings of the 8th World Congress on the Theory of Machines and Mechanisms. За ред. M. Okrolnick, L. Pust.1. Prague: Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, 1991, 181—184

    1991

  8. [7]

    T. S. Krasnopolskaya, A. Yu. Shvets. «Chaotic oscillations of a spherical pendulum as an example of interaction with an energy source».Internati- onal applied mechanics28,10 (1992), 52—61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00846923

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00846923 1992

Show all 46 references
  1. [8]

    T. S. Krasnopolskaya, A. Yu. Shvets. «Parametric resonance in the system liquid in tanks + electric motor».Int. Appl. Mech29,9 (1993), 722—730

    1993

  2. [9]

    Shvets, A.M

    A.Yu. Shvets, A.M. Makaseyev. «Chaotic Oscillations of Nonideal Plane Pendulum Systems».Chaotic Modeling and Simulation (CMSIM) Journal, 1 (2012), 195—204

    2012

  3. [10]

    Balthazar, A

    J. Balthazar, A. Tusset, R., R. Brasil et al. «An overview on the appearance of the Sommerfeld effect and saturation phenomenon in non-ideal vibrating systems (NIS) in macro and MEMS scales».Nonlinear Dyn.93 (2018), 319— 40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-018-4126-0

    2018 doi

  4. [11]

    Cveticanin, M

    L. Cveticanin, M. Zukovic, Jos´ e Manoel Balthazar. «Non-ideal Energy Harvester with Piezoelectric Coupling».Dynamics of Mechanical Systems with Non-Ideal Excitation. Mathematical Engineering. Cham: Springer, 2018, 121— 144. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54169-3_6

    2018 doi

  5. [12]

    Mikhlin, A

    Yu. Mikhlin, A. Onizhuk, J. Awrejcewicz. «Resonance Behavior of the System withaLimitedPowerSupplyHavingtheMisesGirderasAbsorber».Nonlinear Dynamics99,1 (2020), 519—536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-019-05125-z

    2020 doi

  6. [14]

    Pinto, H

    J. Pinto, H. Oliveira, A.Cardoso, C.Silva. «Generating Wildfire Heat Maps wi- th Twitter and BERT».In: Quaresma, P., Camacho, D., Yin, H., Gon¸ calves, T., Julian, V., Tall´ on-Ballesteros, A.J. (eds) Intelligent Data Engineering and Automated Learning – IDEAL 2023. IDEAL 2023...

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    Petrocino, Jos´ e Manoel Balthazar, ˆAngelo M

    Eduardo A. Petrocino, Jos´ e Manoel Balthazar, ˆAngelo M. Tusset et al. «Dynamic Analysis of an Electromagnetic Vibration Absorber in a Non-Ideal System».Meccanica58,2 (2023), 287—302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11012-022-01621-6

    2023 doi

  8. [16]

    S. V. Donetskyi, A. Yu. Svets. «Generalization of the concept of attractor for pendulum systems with limited excitation».Journal of Mathematical Sciences 273,2 (2023), 220—229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10958-023-06550-7

    2023 doi

  9. [17]

    Ya. O. Lebedenko, Yu. V. Mikhlin. «Stationary Regimes and Transient in Two Systems with Limited Power Supply».Journal of Applied Nonlinear Dynamics 14,1 (2025), 189—210. https://doi.org/10.5890/JAND.2025.03.013

    2025 doi

  10. [18]

    Tank with Liquid–Electric Motor

    I. Seit-Dzhelil, A. Shvets. «Influence of Delay on the Regular and Chaotic Dynamics of a “Tank with Liquid–Electric Motor” System».Ukrainian Mathematical Journal78 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11253-026-02585-6

    2026 doi

  11. [19]

    Tank with Liquid–Electric Motor

    I. Seit-Dzhelil, A. Shvets. «Delay Factors and Genesis of the Limit Sets of a Nonideal “Tank with Liquid–Electric Motor” System».Ukrainian Mathemati- cal Journal78 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11253-026-02609-1

    2026 doi

  12. [20]

    J. W. Miles. «Stability of forced oscillations of a spherical pendulum».Quart. Appl. Math20,1 (1962), 21—32. https://doi.org//10.1121/1.1909816

    1962 doi

  13. [21]

    J. W. Miles. «Resonant motion of a spherical pendulum».Phys. D11,3 (1984), 309—323. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(84)90013-7

    1984 doi

  14. [22]

    J. W. Miles. «Nonlinear Faraday resonance».J. Fluid Mech.146,2 (1984), 285—302. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112084001865. 15

    1984 doi

  15. [23]

    A. Yu. Shvets. «Deterministic chaos of a spherical pendulum under limited excitation».Ukr. Math. J.59 (2007), 602—614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11253-007-0039-7

    2007 doi

  16. [24]

    T. S. Krasnopolskaya, N. P. Podchasov. «Resonance and Chaos in Nonaxi- symmetric Dynamic Processes in Hydroelastic Systems».International Appli- ed Mechanics29,12 (1994), 1024—1029

    1994

  17. [26]

    Shvets, S

    A. Shvets, S. Donetskyi. «Maximal Attractors in Nonideal Hydrodynamic Systems».14th Chaotic Modeling and Simulation International Conference. CHAOS 2021. За ред. C.H. Skiadas, Y. Dimotikalis. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Cham: Springer, 2022, 433—443. https://doi.org/10...

    2021 doi

  18. [27]

    «On the Concept of Attractor: Correction and Remarks»

    John Milnor. «On the Concept of Attractor: Correction and Remarks». Communications in Mathematical Physics102,3 (1985), 517—519. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01209298

    1985 doi

  19. [28]

    V. S. Anishchenko, T. E. Vadivasova, G. I. Strelkova.Deterministic Nonli- near Systems: A Short Course. Springer Series in Synergetics. Cham: Springer, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06871-8

    2014 doi

  20. [29]

    A. Y. Shvets. «Nonisolated Limit Sets for Some Hydrodynamic Systems with Limited Excitation».Journal of Mathematical Sciences274 (2023), 912—922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10958-023-06650-4

    2023 doi

  21. [30]

    Yu. A. Mitropolsky, A. Yu. Shvets. «On the Influence of Delay on the Stability of a Pendulum with a Vibrating Suspension Point».Analytical Methods for the Investigation of Nonlinear Oscillations. Kyiv: Institute of Mathematics, Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR, 1980, 115—120

    1980

  22. [31]

    S. P. Kuznetsov.Dynamic Chaos. Moscow: Fizmatlit, 2006, 292

    2006

  23. [32]

    C. H. Skiadas, Char. Skiadas editors.Handbook of Applications of Chaos Theory. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman та Hall/CRC, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1201/b20232. 16

    2016 doi

  24. [33]

    Spherical Pendulum—Electric Motor

    A. Shvets, S. Donetskyi. «New Types of Limit Sets in the Dynamic System "Spherical Pendulum—Electric Motor"».Advanced Structured Materials.157. Springer, Cham, 2021, 443—455. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75890-5_25

    2021 doi

  25. [34]

    N. A. Magnitskii, S. V. Sidorov.New Methods for Chaotic Dynamics.58. World Scientific Series on Nonlinear Science, Series A: Monographs and Treati- ses. Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific, 2006, xvii + 363.isbn: 978-981-256-817- 5. https://doi.org/10.1142/6117

    2006 doi

  26. [35]

    Hairer, S

    E. Hairer, S. P. Nørsett, G. Wanner.Solving Ordinary Differential Equations I. Springer, 1987. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78862-1

    1987 doi

  27. [36]

    M. H´ enon. «A two-dimensional mapping with a strange attractor».Communi- cations in Mathematical Physics50 (1976), 69—77. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01608556

    1976 doi

  28. [37]

    Benettin, L

    G. Benettin, L. Galgani. «Kolmogorov entropy and numerical experiments». Physical Review A14,6 (1976), 2338—2342. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.14.2338

    1976 doi

  29. [38]

    Benettin, L

    G. Benettin, L. Galgani. «Lyapunov Characteristic Exponents for Smooth Dynamical Systems and for Hamiltonian Systems, a Method for Computing All of Them, Part 2».Meccanica15,1 (1980), 21—30. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02128236

    1980 doi

  30. [39]

    Manneville, Y

    P. Manneville, Y. Pomeau. «Different ways to turbulence in dissipative dynamical systems».Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena1,2 (1980), 219—226. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(80)90013-5

    1980 doi

  31. [40]

    Donetskyi, A.Yu

    S.V. Donetskyi, A.Yu. Shvets. «Bifurcations of Maximal Attractors in Noni- deal Pendulum Systems».Dopovidi of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 3 (2022), 13—19. https://doi.org/10.15407/dopovidi2022.03.013

    2022 doi

  32. [41]

    M. J. Feigenbaum. «Quantitative universality for a class of nonlinear transformations».Journal of Statistical Physics19,1 (1978), 25—52. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01020332

    1978 doi

  33. [42]

    M. J. Feigenbaum. «The universal metric properties of nonlinear transformati- ons».Journal of Statistical Physics21,6 (1979), 669—706. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01107909. 17

    1979 doi

  34. [43]

    A. Shvets. «Overview of Scenarios of Transition to Chaos in Nonideal Dynamic Systems».Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Springer, Cham, 2021, 853— 864. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70795-8_59

    2021 doi

  35. [44]

    Classical

    Aleksandr Shvets. «Generalised Intermittency in Non-ideal and “Classical” Dynamical Systems».Analytical and Approximate Methods for Complex Dynamical Systems. За ред. A. Timokha. Understanding Complex Systems. Cham: Springer, 2025, 75—87. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-77378-5_5

    2025 doi

  36. [45]

    Horchakov, A

    O. Horchakov, A. Shvets. «Implementation of a generalized intermittency scenario in the Rossler Dynamical System».System Research and Information Technologies1 (2026), 103—111. https://doi.org/10.20535/SRIT.2308-8893.2026.1.07

    2026

  37. [46]

    Horchakov, A.Yu

    O.O. Horchakov, A.Yu. Shvets. «Generalized Scenarios of Transition to Chaos in Ideal Dynamic Systems».System Research and Information Technologies, 3 (2024), 64—73. https://doi.org/10.20535/SRIT.2308-8893.2024.3.04

    2024

  38. [47]

    Yu.A.Mitropolsky.Metod usredneniya v nelineinoi mekhanike.Kyiv:Naukova Dumka, 1971, 440. 18

    1971

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.