MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404674634 · doi:10.1007/s00205-024-02070-z

Boundary Behavior of Limit-Interfaces for the Allen–Cahn Equation on Riemannian Manifolds with Neumann Boundary Condition

2024· article· en· W4404674634 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Man‐chun Li, Davide Parise, Lorenzo Sarnataro

Bibliographic record

VenueArchive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Modeling in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersYoung Scientists FundResearch Grants Council, University Grants CommitteeNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChinese University of Hong KongStryker
KeywordsNeumann boundary conditionMathematical analysisLimit (mathematics)MathematicsBoundary value problemBoundary (topology)Allen–Cahn equation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study the boundary behavior of any limit-interface arising from a sequence of general critical points of the Allen–Cahn energy functionals on a smooth bounded domain. Given any such sequence with uniform energy bounds, we prove that the limit-interface is a free boundary varifold which is integer rectifiable up to the boundary. This extends earlier work of Hutchinson and Tonegawa on the interior regularity of the limit-interface. A key novelty in our result is that no convexity assumption of the boundary is required and it is valid even when the limit-interface clusters near the boundary. Moreover, our arguments are local and thus work in the Riemannian setting. This work provides the first step towards the regularity theory for the Allen–Cahn min-max theory for free boundary minimal hypersurfaces, which was developed in the Almgren–Pitts setting by the first-named author and Zhou.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchive for Rational Mechanics and AnalysisSame topicAdvanced Mathematical Modeling in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207