Cited by 62Differential Equations and Boundary ProblemsAdvanced Mathematical Physics ProblemsStability and Controllability of Differential Equations

On determinism and well-posedness in multiple time dimensions

Open access
Craig, Walter, Weinstein, Steven·2009·Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences

Abstract

We study the initial value problem for the wave equation and the ultrahyperbolic equation for data posed on initial hypersurfaces surface of arbitrary space–time signature. We show that, under a non-local constraint, the initial value problem posed on codimension-one hypersurfaces—the Cauchy problem—has global unique solutions in the Sobolev spaces H m . Thus, it is well-posed. However, we show that the initial value problem on higher codimension hypersurfaces is ill-posed due to failure of uniqueness, at least when specifying a finite number of derivatives of the data. This failure is in contrast to a uniqueness result for data given in an arbitrary neighbourhood of such initial hypersurfaces, which Courant deduces from Asgeirsson’s mean value theorem. We give a generalization of Courant’s theorem that extends to a broader class of equations. The proofs use Fourier synthesis and the Holmgren–John uniqueness theorem.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

The paper studies initial value problems for the wave and ultrahyperbolic equations with multiple time dimensions, showing that the mixed-signature Cauchy problem can be well-posed on Sobolev spaces under an explicit nonlocal constraint. In contrast, initial data on higher-codimension hypersurfaces generally fail uniqueness, even with smooth global solutions and finitely many prescribed derivatives.

Key findings

  • The Cauchy problem of mixed signature for the ultrahyperbolic equation is ill-posed in general for \(d_2 \ge 2\), but becomes well-posed on Sobolev spaces \(H^m\) when an explicit nonlocal constraint is imposed. Theorems 2.2–2.3 give unique solutions for data in \(X_S\) forward in \(y_1\), in \(X_U\) backward, and globally for \(X_C\); Corollary 2.4 extends this to higher energy spaces \(X^m\), with classical \(C^2\) solutions when \(m > ((d_1+(d_2-1))/2)+2\).
  • For higher-codimension hypersurfaces, solutions are highly nonunique even among smooth \(H^m\) solutions satisfying the constraint. In particular, data on \(M=\{y=0\}\) do not uniquely determine the solution at any other point \(y \in \mathbb{R}^{d_2}\setminus\{0\}\).
  • Theorem 4.1 shows that for any \(k\), there exist constraint-satisfying data \(u_0,u_1\) on \(N\) that vanish to order \(k\) on \(M\); hence specifying any finite number of normal derivatives on \(M\) does not restore uniqueness.
  • Theorem 5.1 generalizes a Courant uniqueness result: for \(\varepsilon>0\), a \(C^2\) solution whose Cauchy data vanish on an ellipsoid \(Z_\varepsilon \subseteq M\) must vanish on the envelope \(D\), so data in an arbitrarily small ellipsoidal neighborhood determine the solution. The proof uses the Holmgren–John theorem and remains true under perturbations of the equation.

Methods

  • Fourier synthesis of the evolution operator, using the dispersion relation and Lyapunov exponent, Plancherel identity, Sobolev spaces \(H^m\), and an indefinite energy functional; defines phase space \(X\) and subspaces \(X_S\), \(X_U\), \(X_C\).
  • Constructs extension operators from data on higher-codimension hypersurfaces \(M\) to constraint-satisfying Cauchy data on codimension-one hypersurfaces \(N\), with kernels \(\chi\) supported in \(|\eta'|<|\xi|\), and proves boundedness and energy estimates in Theorems 3.2–3.7.
  • Uses the Holmgren–John uniqueness theorem to prove the generalized Courant-type determinacy result, without relying on analyticity of the data or solution.

Limitations

  • The paper states that case (iii), specifying infinitely many derivatives on the initial hypersurface \(M\), is not answered.
  • The extension operators and resulting global solutions are highly nonunique; this nonuniqueness is central to the higher-codimension failure of determinism.
  • For \(d_1=p_1\), it is not possible to extend arbitrary data to satisfy the constraint; one must require \(\pi_2 w_\gamma=0\) for the relevant multi-indices. The results also depend on imposing the nonlocal constraint; without it the Cauchy problem is ill-posed.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspa.2009.0097

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 9 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingreasoning
    § 2. The Cauchy problem · p. 4

    If the evolution mapping y1 → (u, ∂y1 u) is in C^1(R_y1 : H^1 × H^0), then the energy is conserved along a solution u(·, y1, ·).

    “Theorem 2.1. Suppose that the evolution mapping y 1 → ( u ( x,y 1 ,y ′ ) ∂ y 1 u ( x,y 1 ,y ′ ) ) is in C 1 ( R y 1 : H 1 × H 0 ) . Then the energy is conserved along a solution u ( · , y 1 , · ) :”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § 3. The initial value problem in higher codimension · p. 8

    Solutions can be singular for standard classes of data.

    “Indeed, we show that solutions can be singular for standard classes of data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning
    § ( c ) The extension problem for mixed spacelike and timelike data · p. 14

    For initial data on a lower-dimensional hypersurface M of mixed signature, it is not always possible to extend arbitrary data w=(w0,wα) on M to N so that the well-posedness constraint is satisfied, due to analogous lower-dimensional constraints on M.

    “This is not always possible for arbitrary data w = ( w 0 , w α ) posed on M , due to analogous lower dimensional constraints on M .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § 4. Failure of uniqueness in higher codimension · p. 19

    Initial data consisting of the values of the solution u(x,y) and its first normal derivatives on M, through the extension procedure, give rise to constraint-satisfying Cauchy data on a codimension-one hypersurface N.

    “In section 3 we showed that initial data consisting of the values of the solution u ( x, y ) and its first normal derivatives on M , through a procedure of extension, give rise to constraint-satisfying Cauchy data on a codimension-one hypersurface N .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning
    § ( c ) The extension problem for mixed spacelike and timelike data · p. 15

    In case d1=p1, it is not possible to extend arbitrary data to a function u=E(w) satisfying the constraint supp(û(ξ,η'))⊆R1.

    “In case d 1 = p 1 , it is not possible to extend arbitrary data to a function u = E ( w ) which satisfies the constraint supp(ˆ u ( ξ, η ′ )) ⊆ R 1 .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 25
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 6
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § ( c ) The extension problem for mixed spacelike and timelike data · p. 15

    If d1=p1 and initially supp(ŵ(ξ,η'))⊆R1 (i.e., w=π2w), then such an extension is possible, and the stated estimates hold for u=E(w).

    “However, if initially supp( ˆ w ( ξ, η ′ )) ⊆ ˜ R 1 (i.e., w = π 2 w ), then such an extension is possible, and we have, for u = E ( w ) ,”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 3. The initial value problem in higher codimension · p. 8

    The initial value problem fails to be well-posed in several ways: resulting solutions may be singular, or they may be selected to satisfy the constraint and be regular for all y1 ∈ R, however they will not be unique.

    “Thus the initial value problem fails to be well-posed in several ways: resulting solutions may be singular, or they may be selected to satisfy the constraint and be regular for all y 1 ∈ R , however they will not be unique.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § ( a ) Codimension 2 to codimension 1 in R 3 · p. 9

    The extension operator E is a bounded operator on the stated space of functions; in addition, when w ∈ H^{-3/2}(M), then y2 E(w) ∈ L^2(N) and a further estimate holds.

    “Theorem 3.2. The extension operator E is a bounded operator on the following space of functions:”
    • Also stated in: § ( a ) Codimension 2 to codimension 1 in R 3 · p. 9 · plain
      “In addition, when w ∈ ˙ H -3 / 2 ( M ) then y 2 E ( w ) ∈ L 2 ( N ) and furthermore”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § ( c ) The extension problem for mixed spacelike and timelike data · p. 18

    Given data (w0, w(α'',0), w(0,β''), wβ1) on M with |α''|=|β''|=1 satisfying the stated conditions, the extension (u0,u1) given by expression (3.2) has finite energy and lies in the center subspace X_C; if d1=p1, one must additionally ask that π2 wγ=0 for all multi-indices γ in question.

    “Theorem 3.7. Given data ( w 0 , w ( α ′′ , 0) , w (0 ,β ′′ ) , w β 1 ) on M with | α ′′ | = | β ′′ | = 1 , suppose that”
    • Also stated in: § ( c ) The extension problem for mixed spacelike and timelike data · p. 18 · plain
      “Then the extension ( u 0 , u 1 ) given by expression (3.2) has finite energy and lies in the center subspace X C . If d 1 = p 1 , then we have to ask that π 2 w γ = 0 in the above statement, for all multi-indices γ in question.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given
    § 1. Introduction · p. 2

    None of these results rely upon properties of analyticity of the data or the solution.

    “We remark that none of these results rely upon properties of analyticity of the data or the solution.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 2. The Cauchy problem · p. 8

    The problem is well-posed in the sense that data in X_S continuously propagates to all y1 ∈ R+, data in X_U continuously propagates to all times y1 ∈ R-, and data in X_C, an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space, are defined globally in time.

    “Thus the problem is wellposed in the following sense: data in X S continuously propagates to all y 1 ∈ R + , data in X U continuously propagates to all times y 1 ∈ R -, and data in X C , which constitute an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space, are defined globally in time.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § 2. The Cauchy problem · p. 7

    The higher energy space X^m decomposes into three subspaces X^{m,S}, X^{m,U}, and X^{m,C} = X^{m,S} ∩ X^{m,U} with estimates for y1 ≥ 0 and y1 ≤ 0, and a global solution exists with higher Sobolev regularity; when m > ((d1 + (d2 - 1))/2) + 2, such solutions are classical C^2 by the Sobolev embedding theorem.

    “Corollary 2.4. The higher energy space X m decomposes into three subspaces, X m,S , X m,U and X m,C = X m,S ∩ X m,U such that for u, v ∈ X m,S and y 1 ≥ 0”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 1. Introduction · p. 2

    Under the above constraints one can preserve stability in the higher codimension setting, but uniqueness is lost, and thus determinism.

    “We show that under the above constraints one can preserve stability in this setting, but uniqueness is lost, and thus determinism.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 2. The Cauchy problem · p. 4

    The energy associated with equation (2.1) is indefinite and not bounded below, hence it does not in general define an energy norm with which to control the Sobolev norms of solutions of the evolution equations.

    “The energy is indefinite and in particular not bounded below, hence it does not in general define an energy norm with which to control the Sobolev norms of solutions of the evolution equations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § ( a ) Codimension 2 to codimension 1 in R 3 · p. 10

    Suppose w0 ∈ H^{1/2}(M), w01 ∈ H^{-1/2}, and w10 ∈ H^{-1/2}. Then the energy norm of the extension u0 = E(w0)(x1,y2) + y2 E(w01)(x1,y2), u1(x1,y2) = E(w10)(x1,y2) is finite; additionally, the higher energy norms defining the X^m topology for (u0,u1) are bounded by this extension process.

    “Theorem 3.3. Suppose that w 0 ∈ ˙ H 1 / 2 ( M ) , w 01 ∈ ˙ H -1 / 2 and w 10 ∈ ˙ H -1 / 2 . Then the energy norm of the extension u 0 = E ( w 0 )( x 1 , y 2 ) + y 2 E ( w 01 )( x 1 , y 2 ) , u 1 ( x 1 , y 2 ) = E ( w 10 )( x 1 , y 2 ) is finite:”
    • Also stated in: § ( a ) Codimension 2 to codimension 1 in R 3 · p. 10 · plain
      “Additionally, the higher energy norms with which one defines the X m topology for ( u 0 , u 1 ) are also bounded by this extension process, namely”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § ( c ) The extension problem for mixed spacelike and timelike data · p. 15

    In the case d1=p1, R1={0} and K_n = H^{r-r2}(d2-p2-1).

    “We note that in the case where d 1 = p 1 , ˜ R 1 = { 0 } and K n = H r -r 2 ( d 2 -p 2 -1) .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § On determinism and well-posedness in multiple time dimensions · p. 1

    Under a nonlocal constraint, the initial value problem posed on codimension-one hypersurfaces (the Cauchy problem) has global unique solutions in the Sobolev spaces H^m, and is therefore well-posed.

    “We show that under a nonlocal constraint, the initial value problem posed on codimension-one hypersurfaces - the Cauchy problem - has global unique solutions in the Sobolev spaces H m . Thus it is well-posed.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 2. The Cauchy problem · p. 6

    For u ∈ X_C, Φ_C^{y1} = Φ_S^{y1} for y1 ≥ 0 and Φ_C^{y1} = Φ_U^{y1} for y1 ≤ 0, and equality holds in both (2.6) and (2.7).

    “For u ∈ X C , Φ C y 1 = Φ S y 1 for y 1 ≥ 0 and Φ C y 1 = Φ U y 1 for y 1 ≤ 0 , and equality holds in both (2.6) and (2.7).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § ( a ) Codimension 2 to codimension 1 in R 3 · p. 10

    The pair of functions (u0(x1,y2), u1(x1,y2)) gives Cauchy data for the codimension one problem discussed in Section 2, and because of the properties of the extension, it satisfies the constraint conditions of X_C for solutions globally defined in y1.

    “The pair of functions ( u 0 ( x 1 , y 2 ) , u 1 ( x 1 , y 2 )) gives Cauchy data for the codimension one problem that is discussed in Section 2. Because of the properties of the extension, it satisfies the constraint conditions of X C for solutions which are globally defined in y 1 .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § 2. The Cauchy problem · p. 6

    For (u0,u1) ∈ X_S, the Cauchy problem of mixed signature for equation (2.1) has a unique solution in X for all y1 ∈ R+. For (u0,u1) ∈ X_U the problem has a unique solution for all y1 ∈ R-, and whenever (u0,u1) ∈ X_C the solution exists globally in y1 ∈ R. In each case, the map y1 → u(x,y1,y') is C^1.

    “Theorem 2.2. For ( u 0 u 1 ) ∈ X S , the Cauchy problem of mixed signature for equation (2.1) has a unique solution in X for all y 1 ∈ R + . For ( u 0 u 1 ) ∈ X U the problem has a unique solution for all y 1 ∈ R -, and whenever ( u 0 u 1 ) ∈ X C the solution exists globally in y 1 ∈ R . In each of these cases, the map y 1 → u ( x, y 1 , y ′ ) is C 1 .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 23

    It is easily verified that [the matrix] is positive definite. Recalling λ≤0, it follows that Sλ(w) are all noncharacteristic, and hence the Holmgren-John theorem applies, completing the argument.

    “It is easily verified that this is positive definite. Recalling that λ ≤ 0 in the definition of the analytic families of hyperboloids, it follows that S λ ( w ) are all noncharacteristic, and hence the Holmgren-John theorem applies, thus completing the argument.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 21

    All these regions have been shown to be domains of determinacy; their union contains the set D={(x,y): |x|+|y|<1}; therefore if a solution vanishes in Wε it must also vanish in D.

    “All of these regions have been shown to be domains of determinacy. Their union contains the set D = { ( x, y ) : | x | + | y | &lt; 1 } . Therefore if a solution vanishes in W ε it must also vanish in D .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 21

    For the case of vertex v=(0,w) with w=e1, the family of hyperboloids constitutes a noncharacteristic analytic family which sweeps the region between Zε and Rε(e1); thus the Holmgren-John uniqueness theorem applies, and this region is a region of determinacy for the ultrahyperbolic equation (1.2).

    “Recalling that λ &lt; 0 (except in the limiting case S λ → R ε ) observe that this family of hyperboloids constitutes a noncharacteristic analytic family which sweeps the region between Z ε and R ε ( e 1 ). Thus the Holmgren-John uniqueness theorem applies, and this region is a region of determinacy for the ultrahyperbolic equation (1.2).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation
    § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 20

    Theorem 5.1: Let ε>0 and define ellipsoid Zε⊆M. A C2 solution to (1.2) whose Cauchy data vanishes on Zε must necessarily vanish on the set [formula] and in particular its Cauchy data along with all derivatives must vanish on the subset of the Cauchy hypersurface given by {(x,y')∈M: |x|+|y'|<1}.

    “Theorem 5.1. Let ε &gt; 0 and define the ellipsoid Z ε ⊆ M by”
    • Also stated in: § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 20 · plain
      “A C 2 solution to (1.2) whose Cauchy data vanishes on Z ε must necessarily vanish on the set”
    • Also stated in: § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 20 · plain
      “and in particular its Cauchy data along with all derivatives must vanish on the subset of the Cauchy hypersurface given by { ( x, y ′ ) ∈ M : | x | + | y ′ | &lt; 1 } .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 21

    The closure of the envelope of such ellipsoidal cones includes the region D; in fact it is slightly larger.

    “The closure of the envelope of such ellipsoidal cones includes the region D ; in fact it is slightly larger.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § ( c ) The extension problem for mixed spacelike and timelike data · p. 15

    The constraint induces a restriction on the data w( ̃ξ, ̃η) in the vicinity of the lightcone {| ̃ξ|=| ̃η|}⊆M̂.

    “It is to be expected that the constraint induces a restriction on the data w ( ˜ ξ, ˜ η ) in the vicinity of the 'lightcone' {∣ ∣ ˜ ξ ∣ ∣ = | ˜ η | } ⊆ ˆ M .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 20

    Courant (1962) gives a uniqueness result for the ultrahyperbolic equation with data posed on a hypersurface of mixed signature, stating that among C2 solutions, initial values of u(x,0,y') and ∂y1 u(x,0,y') prescribed in a certain set in the Cauchy hypersurface M determine a priori the values of the data on a larger set, and the solution is determined uniquely in a space-time region.

    “Courant (1962) gives a uniqueness result for the ultrahyperbolic equation with data posed on a hypersurface of mixed signature, which in our notation states that, among C 2 solutions, initial values of u ( x, 0 , y ′ ) and ∂ y 1 u ( x, 0 , y ′ ) prescribed in the set in the Cauchy hypersurface M given by”
    • Also stated in: § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 20 · plain
      “will determine a priori the values of the data on the larger set”
    • Also stated in: § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 20 · plain
      “Furthermore the solution is determined uniquely in the space-time region”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Courant (1962)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § ( c ) The extension problem for mixed spacelike and timelike data · p. 17

    The singularities introduced at the boundaries of the lightcone {| ̃η|=| ̃ξ|}⊆M̂ by the kernel χ2 impose more severe constraints on the functions w permitted in the domain of E; this is the origin of the unusual requirements on functions w from which data can reasonably be drawn.

    “The singularities introduced at the boundaries of the lightcone { | ˜ η | = ∣ ∣ ∣ ˜ ξ ∣ ∣ ∣ } ⊆ ˆ M by the kernel χ 2 impose more severe constraints on the functions w that are permitted in the domain of the operator E ; this is the origin of the somewhat unusual requirements on functions w (˜ x, ˜ y ) from which we can reasonably draw our data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction · p. 3

    This result is analogous to a result in Courant (1962) that is derived from Asgeirsson's mean value theorem.

    “This is analogous to a result in Courant (1962) that is derived from Asgeirsson's mean value theorem.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Courant (1962)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § 4. Failure of uniqueness in higher codimension · p. 19

    Courant's classic result (1962) in the case of purely timelike M states that data given in any ε-tubular neighborhood of M within N determine solutions uniquely in the C2 category.

    “Given Courant's classic result (1962) in the case of purely timelike M , that data given in any ε -tubular neighborhood of M within N determine solutions uniquely in the C 2 category”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Courant (1962)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction · p. 2

    Woodhouse (1992) studied the case of two space and two time dimensions with initial data on a spacelike hypersurface of codimension 2, using the Penrose twistor transform in the real case, and recovered the uniqueness result of Courant and its implicit constraints on well-posed initial data for the Cauchy problem.

    “In related and prior work, Woodhouse (1992) studied the case of two space and two time dimensions with initial data on a spacelike hypersurface (thus of codimension 2), using the Penrose twistor transform in the real case. He also recovered the uniqueness result of Courant and its implicit constraints on well-posed inital data for the Cauchy problem.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Woodhouse (1992) source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given
    § 3. The initial value problem in higher codimension · p. 8

    In the presence of multiple time dimensions, spacelike hypersurfaces are necessarily of higher codimension.

    “In the presence of multiple time dimensions, spacelike hypersurfaces are necessarily of higher codimension.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 20

    Our proof of the version of Courant's theorem for ellipsoidal domains is based on the Holmgren-John theorem (John 1982), and therefore remains true under perturbations to the equation.

    “Our proof of this result is based on the Holmgren-John theorem (John 1982), and therefore remains true under perturbations to the equation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites John 1982

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 20

    Data on an arbitrarily small cylindrical subset of M, plus the stipulation of C2 regularity, determine the data and indeed the solution on much larger sets of M and of space-time, respectively.

    “The key implication from our point of view is that data on an arbitrarily small cylindrical subset of M , plus the stipulation of C 2 regularity, determine the data and indeed the solution on much larger sets of M and of space-time, respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 20

    Courant's proof of this uniqueness result uses the Asgeirsson mean value theorem in a fundamental way.

    “Courant's proof of this fact uses the Asgeirsson mean value theorem in a fundamental way.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Courant (1962)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 5. A variant of a uniqueness theorem of Courant · p. 20

    The result is a robust generalization of the Courant result, which, being based on Asgeirsson's theorem, is true only for precisely the ultrahyperbolic equation.

    “Thus it is a robust generalization of the Courant result, which being based on Asgeirsson's theorem is true only for precisely the ultrahyperbolic equation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
31 of 31

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • The wave-equation case is identified by the number of space dimensions

    Minor

    The paper defines the ordinary wave equation as having one time dimension and d 1 space dimensions. Its later parenthesis instead identifies that case by d 1 = 1, which does not specify that there is only one time dimension.

  • Higher-codimension initial data are said to be given on N

    Minor

    Section 3(c) describes the data as given on N, but its setup says the data are posed on M and are to be extended to N. The displayed evaluation at the complementary coordinates (0, 0) also describes data on M, not arbitrary data on N.

  • Theorem 3.6 reverses the stated projection labels

    Minor

    The paper defines π 1 as projection onto data supported in ̃ R 1 and π 2 onto data supported in ̃ R 2. Theorem 3.6 then equates support in ̃ R 1 with w = π 2 w, reversing those definitions in its condition for an extension.

3 of 3

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Hull C. M., 1999, Proc. of ‘Mathematical Sciences Beyond the Second Millennium’
  2. 10.1007/978-1-4684-9333-7 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Craig, W., & Weinstein, S.
Affiliations
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
Corresponding author
Craig, Walter
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
Published
2009-07-15
Volume
465
Issue
2110
Pages
3023-3046
ISSN
  • 1364-5021 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2946
OpenAlex
W2131560474
Cited by
62
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
2.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Applied Mathematics › Differential Equations and Boundary Problems
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Mathematical Physics › Advanced Mathematical Physics Problems
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Stability and Controllability of Differential Equations
Keywords
well-posedness, ill-posed problems, wave equation, ultrahyperbolic equation, initial value problems, Cauchy problem, non-local constraints, uniqueness of solutions, Sobolev spaces, determinism

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-31.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-31.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review