Back to search
2209.07408

Biquadratic Nontwist Map: a model for shearless bifurcations

G. C. Grime, M. Roberto, R. L. Viana, Y. Elskens, I. L. Caldas

correctmedium confidence
Category
Not specified
Journal tier
Specialist/Solid
Processed
Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM

Audit review

The paper’s appendix defines the same integrable Hamiltonian H(x,y) = −ay + a(1+ε) y^3/3 − aε y^5/5 + (b/2π) cos(2πx) and prescribes the equal-H criterion at the relevant hyperbolic fixed points to locate separatrix reconnection. Using the fixed points z±1=(0,±1), z±2=(0,±1/√ε), z±3=(1/2,±1), z±4=(1/2,±1/√ε) and the convention that x ranges over ℝ, the paper derives b*1 = (4πa/3)(1−ε/5) and b*2 = [2πa(1−5ε+5ε^{3/2}−ε^{5/2})]/(15ε^{3/2}). The candidate solution evaluates H at exactly these points, imposes the same equalities, and recovers the identical formulas. The supplementary hyperbolicity check in the model (via the Hessian) is consistent with the paper’s stability discussion for 0<ε<1. Thus, both are correct, with essentially the same method, and the results match the paper’s equations (24)–(25) and (27)–(28) and the Hamiltonian (26) definition. Citations: H definition and method (), fixed points (), convention on x (), b*1 (; ), b*2 (; ), stability for 0<ε<1 (; ).

Referee report (LaTeX)

\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions

\textbf{Journal Tier:} specialist/solid

\textbf{Justification:}

The derivations of the reconnection thresholds b*1 and b*2 are correct within the stated integrable Hamiltonian approximation. The presentation is clear and consistent with established methods in nontwist dynamics. Minor clarifications about parameter conventions (sign of b), explicit mention of the domain 0<ε<1 for hyperbolicity, and the equivalence of the two equal-H constraints in the simultaneous reconnection would further improve clarity.