Back to search
2212.12006

ON THE NUMBER OF ISOLATED INVARIANT TORI FOR 3D POLYNOMIAL VECTOR FIELDS

Douglas D. Novaes, Pedro C.C.R. Pereira

correcthigh confidence
Category
Not specified
Journal tier
Strong Field
Processed
Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM

Audit review

The paper’s Theorem A states N(m) ≥ Hh([m/2] − 1) for all m ≥ 2, proved by constructing, from any planar degree-k system with H hyperbolic limit cycles in K, a one-parameter family of 3D polynomial systems (ẋ, ẏ, ż) = (−y, x + ε y P(x^2 + y^2, z), 2ε y^2 Q(x^2 + y^2, z)) having at least H normally hyperbolic invariant tori; when deg P, deg Q ≤ k, this 3D system has degree 2k+2, yielding N(2k+2) ≥ Hh(k) and, by monotonicity, the odd-m case as well . The averaging step and guiding system equivalence are carried out explicitly via cylindrical coordinates, time rescaling, and the transformation ρ = r^2, reducing to the original planar system’s limit cycles; Theorem 1 then yields the invariant tori near those cycles . The candidate solution reproduces this mechanism verbatim: fix n = [m/2] − 1, lift planar degree ≤ n systems to 3D systems of degree ≤ 2(n+1) ≤ m, and take suprema over planar systems. Minor overstatements aside (e.g., saying “one-to-one correspondence” rather than “at least H”), the logic, degree control, and use of averaging are aligned with the paper’s proof.

Referee report (LaTeX)

\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions

\textbf{Journal Tier:} strong field

\textbf{Justification:}

The work presents a clear and constructive lower bound for N(m) by lifting planar hyperbolic cycles to invariant tori via averaging. The argument is methodical, with explicit degree control and an accessible proof structure. Minor clarifications—especially regarding repelling cycles and phrasing about correspondence—would enhance precision and readability.