MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407897714 · doi:10.1088/1361-6544/adb5e8

Constructive proofs of existence and stability of solitary waves in the Whitham and capillary–gravity Whitham equations

2025· article· en· W4407897714 on OpenAlexaff
Matthieu Cadiot

Bibliographic record

VenueNonlinearity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Physics Problems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical proofMathematicsConstructiveStability (learning theory)Mathematical analysisGravitational waveCapillary actionCalculus (dental)Classical mechanicsGeometryPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this manuscript, we present a method to prove constructively the existence and spectral stability of solitary waves in both the Whitham and the capillary–gravity Whitham equations. By employing Fourier series analysis and computer-aided techniques, we successfully approximate the Fourier multiplier operator in this equation, allowing the construction of an approximate inverse for the linearization around an approximate solution u 0 . Then, using a Newton–Kantorovich approach, we provide a sufficient condition under which the existence of a unique solitary wave u ~ in a ball centered at u 0 is obtained. The verification of such a condition is established combining analytic techniques and rigorous numerical computations. Moreover, we derive a methodology to control the spectrum of the linearization around u ~ , enabling the study of spectral stability of the solution. As an illustration, we provide a (constructive) computer-assisted proof (CAP) of existence of stable solitary waves in both the case with capillary effects ( T > 0) and without capillary effects ( T = 0). Moreover, we provide an existence proof for a branch of solitary waves in the case T = 0 via a rigorous continuation in the wave velocity. The methodology presented in this paper can be generalized and provides a new approach for addressing the existence and spectral stability of solitary waves in nonlocal nonlinear equations. All CAPs, including the requisite codes, are accessible on GitHub at Cadiot (2023 https://github.com/matthieucadiot/WhithamSoliton.jl ).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNonlinearitySame topicAdvanced Mathematical Physics ProblemsFrench-language works237,207