Liouville theorems for non-local operators
By Enrico Priola, Jerzy Zabczyk. 2004
57 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Computational Theory and Mathematics, Finance, Mathematical Physics
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e8bacff1c3b0f714d82db2527f8f93b60c811a31
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Computational Theory and Mathematics
- Franco Flandoli
- Michael Röckner
- Enrico Priola
- Massimiliano Gubinelli
- Xicheng Zhang
- Jerzy Zabczyk
- Carlo Marinelli
- Feng-Yu Wang
In Finance
- Michael Röckner
- Franco Flandoli
- Massimiliano Gubinelli
- Enrico Priola
- Xicheng Zhang
- Jerzy Zabczyk
- Feng-Yu Wang
- Carlo Marinelli
In Mathematical Physics
- Enrico Priola
- Massimiliano Gubinelli
- Jerzy Zabczyk
- Franco Flandoli
- Michael Röckner
- Luca Lorenzi
- Carlo Marinelli
- M. Bertoldi
Citations in the corpus
- Regular dependence on initial data for stochastic evolution equations with multiplicative Poisson noise (2008, background): “1), and to deduce from it the strong Feller property, adapting an argument of [27] to the infinite dimensional case.”
- Estimates of the derivatives for parabolic operators with unbounded coefficients (2005, background): “Counterexamples are also given in [18] in the one-dimensional case.”
- Structural properties of semilinear SPDEs driven by cylindrical stable processes (2008, background): “ the Bismut-Elworthy-Li formula is not available in the non-Gaussian case. A related formula, but requiring a non trivial Gaussian component in the L´evy noise, was established in finite dimensions in [20]. 2 Preliminaries H will denote a real separable Hilbert with inner product h·,·i and norm | · |”
- Flow of diffeomorphisms for SDEs with unbounded H (2009, background): “C (Rd). However, to be precise, in [4], it is assumed that (x) is an invertible d d matrix and so the expression of J1 in [4, Section 1.5] contains 1(Xx s ) instead of our (Xx s )a 1(Xx s ). We briey explain why (12) holds following the proof of [ 25, Theorem 5.1 ].”