Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 34 references

Enhanced Dissipation via time-modulated velocity fields

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Pith's one-line read A shear flow whose stirring strength grows with time dissipates a diffusing solute faster than any constant-strength shear can, and flows that switch on and off keep the autonomous decay rate.

desk verdict New time-dependent weights give genuine super-enhanced dissipation in Theorem 1, but the advertised on/off examples violate Theorem 2's derivative bound by an order of magnitude. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.16905 v2 pith:NXPD6XPA submitted 2025-01-28 math.AP math-phmath.MPphysics.flu-dyn

classification math.APmath-phmath.MPphysics.flu-dyn MSC 35Q3535B4076R50
keywords enhanceddissipationadvection-diffusionequationhypocoercivitymixingviscousfluidstime-dependentshearflowsnon-autonomousenergydecayestimates
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 asks how much faster a stirring flow mixes a dissolved substance when the stirring is unsteady — for example a laboratory vortex mixer that accelerates from rest, runs, and then decelerates. For shear flows whose velocity is a fixed profile $v(y)$ multiplied by a time-dependent modulation $\xi(t)$, it proves that the $L^2$ energy of the concentration decays at a rate that tracks $\xi$ quantitatively. If $\xi$ grows like $(1+\nu^{1/4}t)^4$, the decay is $e^{-c(\nu|k|)^{1/2}(t + \nu^{1/4}t^2/2)}$, strictly faster than the sharp rate $e^{-c(\nu|k|)^{1/2}t}$ for a steady shear — a regime the paper calls super-enhanced dissipation. If the flow is switched on and off instead, the dissipation rate stays comparable to the autonomous one, with the off-phase shape contributing little. The proofs adapt the hypocoercivity method by letting its weights and balancing parameters evolve in time to absorb the growth of $\xi$.

What carries the argument

The engine of both proofs is the hypocoercivity energy functional with time-dependent coefficients. For Theorem 1 the functional is $\Phi = \tfrac12\big[E_0 + \alpha_0 w_\nu^3 E_1 + 2\beta_0 w_\nu^2 E_3 + \gamma_0 k^2 w_\nu E_4\big]$, built from $E_0=\|\theta\|^2_{L^2}$, $E_1=\|\partial_y\theta\|^2_{L^2}$, $E_3=\mathrm{Re}\langle ik\,\partial_y v\,\theta,\partial_y\theta\rangle$, and $E_4=\|\partial_y v\,\theta\|^2_{L^2}$; the polynomial weights $w_\nu(t)=(1+\nu^s t)^{-1}$ obey $\frac{d}{dt}w_\nu^n = -n\nu s\, w_\nu^{n+1}$, and that prescribed decay is exactly what absorbs the growth of $\xi(t)$, producing the differential inequality $\frac{d}{dt}\Phi + \tfrac14(\beta\,\xi(t)\,\nu|k|)^{1/2}w_\nu(t)\,\Phi \le 0$, which Grönwall's inequality turns into Theorem 1 after a short-time bootstrap. For switch-on/off flows a second functional $\Psi$ keeps the same pieces but replaces fixed weights by explicitly time-dependent balancing parameters, chosen with $\beta(t)=C_\xi\xi(t)^2$; this removes any lower bound on $\xi$ — it may drop to zero — at the price of the slope condition $\xi'\le C_\xi(\nu|k|)^{1/2}$. Both closures use the same spectral-gap inequality for shears with finitely many simple critical points, $E_0\lesssim C_{sp}[\sigma^{1/2}E_1+\sigma^{-1/2}E_4]$, to convert gradient information into $L^2$ decay.

What would settle it

Solve (2.6) numerically on the one-dimensional torus with a shear profile having simple critical points, say $v(y)=\sin y$, with $k=1$, $\nu=10^{-6}$, and $\xi(t)=(1+\nu^{1/4}t)^4$; measure $-\log\|\theta(t)\|^2_{L^2}$ at $t=\nu^{-1/2}$. The paper predicts an exponent of order $|k|^{1/2}\nu^{-1/4}$, a factor $\nu^{-1/4}$ larger than the autonomous value $|k|^{1/2}$ at the same time; if the measured exponent stays $\mathcal O(1)$ in $\nu$, the super-enhanced claim fails. As a second check, run the switch-on/off profile $\xi_B$ and test whether the measured decay through $t=1/\nu$ trails the autonomous one by the predicted factor $1/4$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the enhanced-dissipation rate of a shear flow responds quantitatively to the time-modulation of its strength. Theorem 1 states that for a $C^2$ shear profile with only simple critical points and a nonnegative modulation $\xi(t)$ trapped between the lower and upper bounds (1.9), every Fourier mode obeys $$\|\hat\Theta(t)\|^2_{$L^{2}$_y} \le C_{ed}\left(1+\Big(\frac{|k|}{\nu}\Big)^{1/2}\right)\exp\!\Big(-\tfrac14(\$\beta$\nu|k|)^{1/2}\int_0^t \xi(\tau)^{1/2}w_\nu(\tau)\,d\tau - 2\nu $k^{2}$ t\Big)\|\hat\Theta_0\|^2_{$L^{2}$_y},$$ with $w_\nu(t)=(1+\nu^s t)^{-1}$ and $\beta\in[\nu/|k|,1]$. Because the exponent is a weighted integral of $\xi^{1/2}$, an accelerating flow genuinely out-damps a steady one: for the maximal growth $\xi(t)=(1+\nu^{1/4}t)^4$ the rate becomes $e^{-c(\nu|k|)^{1/2}(t+\nu^{1/4}t^2/2)}$, so at the classical enhanced-dissipation time $\nu^{-1/2}$ the surviving energy is of order $e^{-|k|^{1/2}\nu^{-1/4}}$ rather than $e^{-|k|^{1/2}}$. Theorem 2 covers modulations that may vanish, $\xi\le 1$ with $\xi'\le C_\xi(\nu|k|)^{1/2}$, giving decay with exponent $C'_\xi(\nu|k|)^{1/2}\int_0^t \xi(\tau)^3\,d\tau$; applied to switch-on/switch-off laboratory profiles this yields rates comparable to the autonomous case, with only lower-order corrections.

Load-bearing premise

The on/off theorem depends on the stirring strength rising slowly — no faster than a small constant times $(\nu|k|)^{1/2}$ per unit time — and the paper's own linear-ramp examples rise faster than that bound allows.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For the growing modulation $\xi(t)=(1+\nu^{1/4}t)^4$, the scalar's energy at the enhanced-dissipation time $t=\nu^{-1/2}$ is of order $e^{-|k|^{1/2}\nu^{-1/4}}$, an acceleration by a full power $\nu^{-1/4}$ compared with the autonomous shear's $e^{-|k|^{1/2}}$ at the same time.
  • For switch-on/switch-off profiles such as $\xi_B$ (ramp $\nu^{1/2}t$, plateau at 1, linear turn-off), decay through $t=1/\nu$ trails the autonomous rate only by a factor $1/4$ in the leading term $1/(4\nu^{1/2})$ plus lower-order corrections, and the shape of the turn-off contributes almost nothing because it acts after the enhanced-dissipation timescale.
  • A slow-then-fast profile (Example A, a linear ramp followed by $(1+\nu^{1/4}(t-\nu^{-1/2}))^4$) can be handled by gluing Theorem 2 and Theorem 1; the leading-order decay at $t=\nu^{-3/4}$ exceeds the autonomous value, but acceleration that begins after the autonomous timescale adds only lower-order gains.
  • The class of Theorem 1 also includes previously studied modulations such as $e^{-\nu t}$ on $[0,1/\nu]$ and bounded oscillations like $\tfrac14\cos t+\tfrac12$, for which the estimate (1.12) recovers the classical rate $e^{-c(|k|\nu)^{1/2}t}$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural reading of Theorem 1 is that the dissipation clock for accelerating shears is the accumulated integral $\int_0^t \xi(\tau)^{1/2}w_\nu(\tau)\,d\tau$ rather than $t$ itself; if the bound is sharp, scalar-decay curves measured under different ramp schedules should collapse onto one master curve when plotted against this time-rescaled variable.
  • The proof of Theorem 2 (Section 3.1) closes Step 3 only when the slope constant satisfies $C_\xi\le(1/80)^{2/3}\approx 0.053$, while the displayed examples use the linear ramp $\xi(t)=\nu^{1/2}t$, whose slope $\nu^{1/2}$ formally needs $C_\xi\ge 1$; a regime-switching functional or optimized constants would extend the on/off statement to exactly those advertised flows.
  • The same time-weighted hypocoercivity scheme transfers to shears with degenerate critical points and to higher dimensions, plausibly replacing the autonomous exponent $m/(m+2)$ by a $\xi$-adaptive rate with the same structure.
  • For practical mixing, the implicit upshot is that the acceleration schedule — not merely the peak stirrer speed — controls the dissipation timescale, a prediction testable in a programmable Couette or vortex mixer.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the advection-diffusion equation ∂tΘ + ξ(t)v(y)∂xΘ − νΔΘ = 0 on the two-dimensional torus, where v(y) is a shear profile with simple critical points and ξ(t) ≥ 0 is a time modulation. Two main theorems are proved by a hypocoercivity argument with time-dependent weights (Theorem 1, equation (1.10)) and with time-dependent balancing coefficients (Theorem 2, equation (1.17)). Theorem 1 gives super-enhanced dissipation, with decay rate proportional to (ν|k|)^{1/2}∫ξ(τ)^{1/2}wν(τ)dτ, for ξ admissible between a polynomial lower bound and an upper bound wν^{-ℓ}. Theorem 2 gives decay proportional to (ν|k|)^{1/2}∫ξ(τ)^3dτ under the conditions 0 ≤ ξ ≤ 1 and dξ/dt ≤ Cξ(ν|k|)^{1/2} with a small constant Cξ. Section 3.2 applies these results to two on/off profiles, one requiring a gluing of Theorems 2 and 1 and one fully in the class of Theorem 2, and computes decay rates for them, comparing with the autonomous case.

Significance. If the results hold as stated, the paper makes a useful contribution by extending enhanced dissipation estimates to non-autonomous shear flows with growing or switchable amplitudes, and by making the dependence of the decay rate on ξ(t) explicit. The time-dependent weights in Section 2 and the time-dependent coefficients in Section 3 are natural and the proofs are detailed, with the core hypocoercivity algebra mostly coherent. The paper also contains a mixing estimate for the inviscid problem (Appendix A) that is consistent with existing results. However, the on/off examples advertised in the introduction and computed in Section 3.2 are not, as shown below, covered by the hypotheses of Theorem 2 as proven; this is a load-bearing gap between the theorem and its central illustrative applications.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.1 (Lemma 3.1.1) and §3.2 (Examples A and B)] The derivative hypothesis (1.16)/(3.5) is not satisfied by the illustrative switch-on profiles, so Theorem 2 as proven does not cover them. In Step 3 of Lemma 3.1.1 the closure requires (16 Cξ^{3/2}ξ(t)^4)^{-1} ≥ 5; since ξ ≤ 1 this forces Cξ ≤ (1/80)^{2/3} ≈ 0.053. Together with the absorption condition (3.17), the admissible derivative bound is ξ'(t) ≤ (1/100)Cξ^{-1/2}(ν|k|)^{1/2} ≤ 0.043(ν|k|)^{1/2}. The turn-on profile ξ1(t) = ν^{1/2}t on [0,ν^{-1/2}] in both Example A and Example B has derivative ν^{1/2}; for |k| = 1 this exceeds the admissible bound by a factor of about 23. Consequently the decay estimates (3.23), (3.24), and the Example B computation E0(1/ν) ≤ Ke^{-C(1/(4ν^{1/2}) − 3/2)} are not rigorous consequences of Theorem 2 as stated. The gap is a statement-to-example mismatch in a central advertised result rather than an internal contradiction of the hypocoercivity machinery; it needs to be resolved by either revising the theorem's hypotheses (e.g., by allowing Cξ to depend on the profile in a way that covers the linear ramp), proving a separate estimate for the ramp phase, or carefully restating the examples so that the hypotheses are met.
  2. [§3.2, Example A, equation (3.24)] The decay computation for the second interval does not follow from Theorem 1 as written. Theorem 1, equation (1.10), gives an exponent proportional to ∫ ξ(τ)^{1/2}wν(τ)dτ. For ξ2(t) = (1+ν^{1/4}(t−ν^{-1/2}))^4 and wν(t) = 1/(1+ν^{1/4}t), the integrand is (1+ν^{1/4}(t−ν^{-1/2}))^2/(1+ν^{1/4}t), not (1+ν^{1/4}(t−ν^{-1/2})) as stated between (3.23) and (3.24). The correct integral gives a different numerical coefficient for the leading ν^{-3/4} term, so the displayed rate in (3.24) and the subsequent comparison with the autonomous case are quantitatively inaccurate. The qualitative conclusion that the glued decay is super-enhanced appears to survive, but the displayed computation should be corrected or the integrand derivation explained.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3, proof of Theorem 2] In the sentence beginning 'Then, for times t ∈ (t0,T], we apply Proposition 2.1 to find', Proposition 2.1 should be Proposition 3.1; the estimate used is (3.10), which is the Ψ-functional estimate from Section 3.1.
  2. [§3.2, Example B] The formula for ξ3(t) is typeset ambiguously as 'νt−1 ν 1 4 −1'; it should read ξ3(t) = (νt − 1)/(ν^{1/4} − 1) to match the computed integral and the boundary values ξ3(ν^{-3/4}) = 1 and ξ3(ν^{-1}) = 0.
  3. [§3.1, Step 2] In the paragraph following equation (3.19), the constants Cβ and C'_β appear to be meant as Cξ and C'_ξ; for readability, the proof should use one consistent notation for the small derivative constant and the rate constant.
  4. [Throughout] The prefactor 1 + (|k|/ν)^{1/2} in (1.10), (1.17), and elsewhere is described as a 'logarithmic correction', but it is algebraic in (|k|/ν)^{1/2}; this wording should be changed to avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derived decay rates are explicit functionals of the modulation ξ(t) and viscosity ν, with no fitted parameters or load-bearing self-citation chain.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained in the sense required for circularity analysis. Theorem 1 proves an L2 decay estimate whose exponential rate is an explicit integral of ξ(τ)^{1/2} w_ν(τ), and Theorem 2 proves a rate proportional to ∫ξ(τ)^3 dτ. In both cases the modulation ξ(t) is an input of the problem, not a quantity chosen to match the output decay; the proof constants (α0, β0, γ0, Cξ, C′ξ) are selected to close hypocoercivity estimates, not fitted to the final exponential rate. The comparison with the autonomous case ξ=1 follows by direct evaluation of the derived inequality. The spectral-gap lemma used in the proof is cited from external prior work ([2], [13]), and the self-citations that appear ([21], [24]) are not load-bearing for the main theorems. The skeptical concern about Theorem 2's derivative bound (1.16) versus the illustrative examples ξA and ξB is a real correctness or scope issue — the examples' turn-on ramp ν^{1/2}t may violate the quantitative smallness of Cξ required in the proof — but it is not circularity: the examples are applications of the stated estimates, not inputs used to define those estimates. No equation is shown to be identical to its own input, no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

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

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its free parameters are proof constants and class-defining exponents, not fitted data. The central decay estimates are explicit functions of the modulation ξ, so the circularity burden is low.

free parameters (5)
  • β (Theorem 1) = chosen in [ν/|k|, 1], not specified
    Appears in the decay exponent as β^{1/2} and in the lower bound L(t). The theorem holds for any admissible β, but the best rate for a given ξ requires choosing and optimizing β.
  • s (weight exponent) = any in [0, ∞), e.g. s=1/4 in examples
    Controls the polynomial decay of the weights wν(t)=(1+ν^s t)^{-1}; the class of admissible ξ depends on s through the upper bound U(t)=wν^{-ℓ}.
  • ℓ (upper bound exponent) = any in [2,4], e.g. ℓ=4 in examples
    Defines the growth ceiling U(t)=wν^{-ℓ} that the proof needs to control ξ(t)wν^4 terms. Different ℓ change the admissible growth rates.
  • Cξ (Theorem 2 derivative constant) = required small, not explicit
    Bounds dξ/dt in (1.16). The proof later requires Cξ ≤ (1/80)^{2/3} ≈ 0.053, and the decay constant C'_ξ depends on it.
  • C'_ξ (Theorem 2 rate constant) = not explicit, depends on Cξ, c∞, C_sp
    Appears in the exponential decay rate in (1.17). Its value is not computed explicitly, only asserted to be independent of ν and k.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Spectral gap inequality (Lemma 2.1.1, from Bedrossian-Coti Zelati)
    Used to eliminate E0 in the functional estimates (Step 2 of Lemmas 2.1.2 and 3.1.1). Requires v to have only simple critical points.
  • domain assumption v ∈ C^2(T) with finitely many simple critical points
    Stated in Theorems 1 and 2; needed for the spectral gap lemma and for the stationary phase mixing estimate in Appendix A.
  • domain assumption Well-posedness for ξ ∈ L^2([0,T]) and v ∈ H^1
    Cited from [5,16]; the analysis restricts to finite T so that ξ stays in L^2 and the Cauchy problem is well posed.
  • domain assumption ξ(t) ≥ 0
    Imposed in (1.6) and throughout; positivity makes the accumulated shear Ξ(t) monotone and is used in the mixing estimate of Appendix A.
  • standard math Energy balance identities (Lemma B.1)
    Derived in the appendix from (2.6); they are the starting point for the differential inequalities for Φ and Ψ.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Enhanced Dissipation via time-modulated velocity fields." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NXPD6XPA

@misc{pith2026250116905,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Enhanced Dissipation via time-modulated velocity fields},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NXPD6XPA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.16905}
}
abstract

Motivated by mixing processes in analytical laboratories, this work investigates enhanced dissipation in non-autonomous flows. We study the evolution of concentrations governed by the advection-diffusion equation, where the velocity field is modelled as the product of a shear flow and a time-dependent modulation function $\xi(t)$. The main objective of this paper is to derive quantitative estimates for the energy decay rates, which are shown to depend sensitively on the properties of $\xi$. We identify a class of time-dependent functions that are bounded by increasing functions, for which we demonstrate super-enhanced dissipation, characterized by energy decay rates faster than those observed in autonomous cases. Additionally, we explore the case of velocity fields that may be switched on and off over time. Here, the dissipation rates are comparable to those of autonomous flows. To illustrate our results, we analyse two prototypical flows of this class: one exhibiting a gradual turn-on and turn-off phase, and another that undergoes a significant acceleration following a slow initial activation phase. Both results are achieved through the application of the hypocoercivity framework, adapted to an augmented functional with time-dependent weights. These weights are designed to dynamically counteract the potential growth of $\xi$, ensuring robust decay estimates.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.16905 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustrative sketch of the upper and lower bounds for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Plot of the exponential decay in Example B, compared to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Beck and C

    M. Beck and C. E. Wayne, Metastability and rapid convergence to quasi-stationary bar states for the two-dimensional Navier–Stokes equations, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh Section A: Mathematics , 143 (2013), 905–927

  2. [2]

    Bedrossian and M

    J. Bedrossian and M. Coti Zelati, Enhanced Dissipation, hypoellipticity, and anomalous small noise inviscid limits in shear flows, Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis , 224 (2017), 1121-1179

  3. [3]

    Bedrossian, A

    J. Bedrossian, A. Blumenthal and S. Punshon-Smith, Almost-sure enhanced dissipa- tion and uniform-in-diffusivity exponential mixing for advection-diffusion by stochastic Navier-Stokes, Probability Theory and Related Fields , 179 (2021), 777-834

  4. [4]

    Blumenthal and S

    A. Blumenthal and S. Punshon-Smith, On the norm equivalence of Lyapunov exponents for regularizing linear evolution equations, Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 247 (2023), 97

  5. [5]

    Bonicatto, G

    P. Bonicatto, G. Ciampa and G. Crippa, Weak and parabolic solutions of advec- tion–diffusion equations with rough velocity field, Journal of Evolution Equations ,1. 24 (2024)

  6. [6]

    Bru` e, M

    E. Bru` e, M. Coti Zelati and E. Marconi, Enhanced dissipation for two-dimensional Hamiltonian flows, Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis , 248 (2024), 84

  7. [7]

    Coble and S

    D. Coble and S. He, A note on enhanced dissipation of time-dependent shear flows, Communications in Mathematical Sciences , 22 (2024), 1685-1700

  8. [8]

    Constantin, A

    P. Constantin, A. Kiselev, L. Ryzhik and A. Zlatoˇ s, Diffusion and mixing in fluid flow, Annals of Mathematics , 168 (2008), 643-674

Show all 34 references
  1. [9]

    Cooperman, G

    W. Cooperman, G. Iyer and S. Son, A Harris theorem for enhanced dissipation, and an example of Pierrehumbert, preprint, 2025, arxiv:2403.19858

  2. [10]

    Coti Zelati, G

    M. Coti Zelati, G. Crippa, G. Iyer and A. L. Mazzucato, Mixing in incompressible flows: transport, dissipation, and their interplay, preprint, 2023, arxiv:2308.00358

  3. [11]

    Coti Zelati, M

    M. Coti Zelati, M. G. Delgadino and T. M. Elgindi, On the relation between en- hanced dissipation timescales and mixing rates, Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, 73 (2020), 1205-1244. 31

  4. [12]

    Coti Zelati and T

    M. Coti Zelati and T. D. Drivas, A stochastic approach to enhanced diffusion, Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa. Classe di Scienze. Serie V , 22 (2021), 811-834

  5. [13]

    Coti Zelati and T

    M. Coti Zelati and T. Gallay, Enhanced dissipation and Taylor dispersion in higher- dimensional parallel shear flows, Journal of the London Mathematical Society , 108 (2023), 1358-1392

  6. [14]

    T. M. Elgindi, K. Liss and J. C. Mattingly, Optimal enhanced dissipation and mixing for a time-periodic, Lipschitz velocity field on T⊭, preprint, 2023, arxiv:2304.05374

  7. [15]

    T. M. Elgindi and A. Zlatoˇ s, Universal mixers in all dimensions, Advances in Mathe- matics, 356 (2019), 106807

  8. [16]

    L. C. Evans, Partial Differential Equations, 2nd edition, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2010

  9. [17]

    D. P. G. Foures, C. P. Caulfield and P. J. Schmid, Optimal mixing in two-dimensional plane Poiseuille flow at finite P´ eclet number, Journal of Fluid Mechanics , 748 (2014), 241-277

  10. [18]

    Gallagher, T

    I. Gallagher, T. Gallay and F. Nier, Spectral asymptotics for large skew-symmetric perturbations of the harmonic oscillator, International Mathematics Research Notices , 2009 (2009), 2147-2199

  11. [19]

    Gess and I

    B. Gess and I. Yaroslavtsev, Stabilization by transport noise and enhanced dissipation in the Kraichnan model, Journal of Evolution Equations , 25 (2025), 42

  12. [20]

    Hairer, S

    M. Hairer, S. Punshon-Smith, T. Rosati and J. Yi, Lower bounds on the top Lyapunov exponent for linear PDEs driven by the 2D stochastic Navier-Stokes equations, preprint, 2024, arxiv:2411.10419

  13. [21]

    A. L. Mazzucato, Y. Feng and C. Nobili, Enhanced dissipation by advection and applications to PDEs, preprint, 2025, arxiv:2501.17695

  14. [22]

    C. J. Miles and C. R. Doering, Diffusion-limited mixing by incompressible flows, Non- linearity, 31 (2018), 2346

  15. [23]

    Navarro-Fern´ andez and C

    V. Navarro-Fern´ andez and C. Seis, Exponential mixing by random cellular flows, preprint, 2025, arxiv:2502.17273

  16. [24]

    Nobili and S

    C. Nobili and S. Pottel, Lower bounds on mixing norms for the advection diffusion equation in R, Nonlinear Differential Equations and Applications NoDEA , 29 (2022), 12

  17. [25]

    R. T. Pierrehumbert, Tracer microstructure in the large-eddy dominated regime, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 4 (1994), 1091-1110

  18. [26]

    Seis, Bounds on the rate of enhanced dissipation, Communications in Mathematical Physics, 399 (2023), 2071-2081

    C. Seis, Bounds on the rate of enhanced dissipation, Communications in Mathematical Physics, 399 (2023), 2071-2081. 32

  19. [27]

    E. M. Stein, Harmonic Analysis: Real-Variable Methods, Orthogonality, and Oscillatory Integrals, Princeton University Press, 1993

  20. [28]

    Thiffeault, The strange eigenmode in Lagrangian coordinates, Chaos: An Inter- disciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science , 14 (2004), 531-538

    J.-L. Thiffeault, The strange eigenmode in Lagrangian coordinates, Chaos: An Inter- disciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science , 14 (2004), 531-538

  21. [29]

    Thiffeault, Using multiscale norms to quantify mixing and transport, Nonlinearity, 25 (2012), R1

    J.-L. Thiffeault, Using multiscale norms to quantify mixing and transport, Nonlinearity, 25 (2012), R1

  22. [30]

    Vanneste, Intermittency of passive-scalar decay: Strange eigenmodes in random shear flows, Physics of Fluids , 18 (2006), 8

    J. Vanneste, Intermittency of passive-scalar decay: Strange eigenmodes in random shear flows, Physics of Fluids , 18 (2006), 8

  23. [31]

    Villani, Hypocoercivity, Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society, 950, Amer- ican Mathematical Society, 2009

    C. Villani, Hypocoercivity, Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society, 950, Amer- ican Mathematical Society, 2009

  24. [32]

    Wei, Diffusion and mixing in fluid flow via the resolvent estimate, Science China Mathematics, 64 (2021), 507-518

    D. Wei, Diffusion and mixing in fluid flow via the resolvent estimate, Science China Mathematics, 64 (2021), 507-518

  25. [33]

    Wei and Z

    D. Wei and Z. Zhang, Enhanced dissipation for the Kolmogorov flow via the hypocoer- civity method, Science China Mathematics , 62 (2019), 1219-1232

  26. [34]

    W. R. Young, P. B. Rhines and C. J. R. Garrett, Shear-Flow dispersion, internal waves and horizontal mixing in the ocean, Journal of Physical Oceanography, 12 (1982), 515-527. 33

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.