EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 31 (2025) ESAIM: COCV, 31 (2025) 65 References
Open Access
Issue
ESAIM: COCV
Volume 31, 2025
Article Number 65
Number of page(s) 20
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/cocv/2025043
Published online 30 July 2025
  1. P.M. Jordan, An analytic study of the Kuznetsov’s equation: diffusive solitons, shock formation, and solution bifurcation. Phys. Lett. A 326 (2004) 77–84. [Google Scholar]
  2. P.M. Jordan, Nonlinear acoustic phenomena in viscous thermally relaxing fluids: shock bifurcation and the emergence of diffusive solitons. J. Acoust. Soc. Amer. 124 (2000) 2491–2491. [Google Scholar]
  3. F.K. Moore and W.E. Gibson, Propagation of weak disturbances in a gas subject to relaxation effects. J. Aero/Space Sci. 27 (1960) 117–127. [Google Scholar]
  4. P.A. Thompson, Compressible-Fluid Dynamics. McGraw-Hill, New York (1972). [Google Scholar]
  5. B.O. Enflo and C.M. Hedberg, Theory of Nonlinear Acoustics in Fluids, Fluid Mechanics and Its Applications. Springer Netherlands (2006). [Google Scholar]
  6. O.V. Rudenko and S.I. Soluyan, Theoretical Foundations of Nonlinear Acoustics, Translated from the Russian by Robert T. Beyer. Studies in Soviet Science. Consultants Bureau, New York–London (1977). [Google Scholar]
  7. B. Kaltenbacher, Mathematics of nonlinear acoustics. Evol. Equ. Control Theory 4 (2015) 447–491. [Google Scholar]
  8. F. Bucci and M. Eller, The Cauchy–Dirichlet problem for the Moore–Gibson–Thompson equation. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 359 (2021) 881–903. [Google Scholar]
  9. F. Bucci and L. Pandolfi, On the regularity of solutions to the Moore–Gibson–Thompson equation: a perspective via wave equations with memory. J. Evol. Equ. 20 (2020) 837–867. [Google Scholar]
  10. B. Kaltenbacher, I. Lasiecka and M.K. Pospieszalska, Well-posedness and exponential decay of the energy in the nonlinear Jordan–Moore–Gibson–Thompson equation arising in high intensity ultrasound. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 22 (2012) 1250035. [Google Scholar]
  11. C. Lizama and S. Zamorano, Controllability results for the Moore–Gibson–Thompson equation arising in nonlinear acoustics. J. Differ. Equ. 266 (2019) 7813–7843. [Google Scholar]
  12. R. Marchand, T. McDevitt and R. Triggiani, An abstract semigroup approach to the third-order Moore–Gibson–Thompson partial differential equation arising in high-intensity ultrasound: structural decomposition, spectral analysis, exponential stability. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 35 (2012) 1896–1929. [Google Scholar]
  13. M. Pellicer and J. Sola-Morales, Optimal scalar products in the Moore–Gibson–Thompson equation. Evol. Equ. Control Theory 8 (2019) 203–220. [Google Scholar]
  14. O.V. Abramov, High-intensity Ultrasonics: Theory and Industrial Applications, Vol. 10. CRC Press (1999). [Google Scholar]
  15. Y. Kian, Unique determination of a time-dependent potential for wave equations from partial data. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré C Analyse Nonlinéaire 34 (2017) 973–990. [Google Scholar]
  16. Y. Kian and L. Oksanen, Recovery of time-dependent coefficient on Riemannian manifold for hyperbolic equations. Int. Math. Res. Not. 16 (2019) 5087–5126. [Google Scholar]
  17. G. Bao, P. Li and Y. Zhao, Stability for the inverse source problems in elastic and electromagnetic waves. J. Math. Pures Appl. 134 (2020) 122–178. [Google Scholar]
  18. G. Bao and H. Zhang, Sensitivity analysis of an inverse problem for the wave equation with caustics. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 27 (2014) 953–981. [Google Scholar]
  19. L. Baudouin and J.-P. Puel, Uniqueness and stability in an inverse problem for the Schrödinger equation. Inverse Probl. 18 (2002) 1537–1554. [Google Scholar]
  20. A.L. Bukhgeim and M.V. Klibanov, Global uniqueness of class of multidimensional inverse problems. Soviet Math. Dokl. 24 (1981) 244–247. [Google Scholar]
  21. M. Yamamoto, Carleman estimates for parabolic equations and applications. Inverse Probl. 25 (2009) 123013. [Google Scholar]
  22. G. Yuan and M. Yamamoto, Lipschitz stability in the determination of the principal part of a parabolic equation. ESAIM Control Optim. Calc. Var. 15 (2009) 525–554. [Google Scholar]
  23. M. Bellassoued, M. Choulli and M. Yamamoto, Stability estimate for an inverse wave equation and a multidimensional Borg-Levinson theorem. J. Differ. Equ. 247 (2009) 465–494. [Google Scholar]
  24. V. Isakov and Z. Sun, Stability estimates for hyperbolic inverse problems with local boundary data. Inverse Probl. 8 (1992) 193–206. [Google Scholar]
  25. M. Bellassoued and D. Dos Santos Ferreira, Stability for the anisotropic wave equation from the Dirichlet-to- Neumann map. Inverse Probl. Imaging 5 (2011) 745–773. [Google Scholar]
  26. P. Stefanov and G. Uhlmann, Stability estimates for the hyperbolic Dirichlet-to-Neumann map in anisotropic media. J. Funct. Anal. 154 (1998) 330–358. [Google Scholar]
  27. M. Bellassoued and O. Ben. Fraj, Stability estimates for time-dependent coefficients appearing in the magnetic Schrödinger equation from arbitrary boundary measurements. Inverse Probl. Imaging 14 (2020) 841–865. [Google Scholar]
  28. I.B. Aïcha, Stability estimate for a hyperbolic inverse problem with time-dependent Coefficient. Inverse Probl. 31 (2015) 125010. [Google Scholar]
  29. A. Waters, Stable determination of X-ray transforms of time-dependent potentials from partial boundary data. Commun. Part. Differ. Equ. 39 (2014) 2169–2197. [Google Scholar]
  30. S.T. Liu and R. Triggiani, An inverse problem for a third order PDE arising in high-intensity ultrasound: global uniqueness and stability by one boundary measurement. J. Inverse Ill-Posed Probl. 21 (2013) 825–869. [Google Scholar]
  31. R. Arancibia, R. Lecaros, A. Mercado and S. Zamorano, An inverse problem for Moore–Gibson–Thompson equation arising in high intensity ultrasound. J. Inverse Ill-Posed Probl. 30 (2022) 659–675. [Google Scholar]
  32. J. Sylvester and G. Uhlmann, A global uniqueness theorem for an inverse boundary value problem. Ann. Math. 125 (1987) 153–169. [Google Scholar]
  33. M. Bellassoued and I.B. Aïcha, Stable determination outside a cloaking region of two time-dependent coefficients in an hyperbolic equation from Dirichlet to Neumann map. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 449 (2017) 46–76. [Google Scholar]
  34. A. Feizmohammadi and Y. Kian, Recovery of nonsmooth coefficients appearing in anisotropic wave equations. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 51 (2019) 4953–4976. [Google Scholar]
  35. R.-Y. Lai, G. Uhlmann and H. Zhou, Recovery of coefficients in semilinear transport equations. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 248 (2004) 62. [Google Scholar]
  36. B. Kaltenbacher and V. Nikolić, The Jordan–Moore–Gibson–Thompson equation: well-posedness with quadratic gradient nonlinearity and singular limit for vanishing relaxation time. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 29 (2019) 2523–2556. [Google Scholar]
  37. B. Kaltenbacher and V. Nikolić, Vanishing relaxation time limit of the Jordan–Moore–Gibson–Thompson wave equation with Neumann and absorbing boundary conditions. Pure Appl. Funct. Anal. 5 (2020) 1–26. [Google Scholar]
  38. R. Dautray and J.-L. Lions, Mathematical Analysis and Numerical Methods for Science and Technology, Vol. 6. Springer (2000). [Google Scholar]
  39. G. Hu and Y. Kian, Determination of singular time-dependent coefficients for wave equations from full and partial data. Inverse Probl. Imaging 12 (2018) 745–772. [Google Scholar]
  40. S. Vessella, A continuous dependence result in the analytic continuation problem. Forum Math. 11 (1999) 695–703. [Google Scholar]
  41. M.I. Belishev, An approach to multidimensional inverse problems for the wave equation. Dokl. Akad. Nauk 297 (1987) 524–527. [Google Scholar]
  42. A. Feizmohammadi, J. Ilmavirta, Y. Kian and L. Oksanen, Recovery of time dependent coefficients from boundary data for hyperbolic equations. J. Spectr. Theory 11 (2021) 1107–1143. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.