Back to search
2408.13428

Non-Markovian Reduced Models to Unravel Transitions in Non-equilibrium Systems

Mickaël D. Chekroun, Honghu Liu, James C. McWilliams

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

Audit review

The paper’s Theorem IV.2 explicitly states the conditional-expectation identity E_{ρ_{θ_t ω}}[G|Π_c](X) = A_c X + Π_c G_2(X,X) + 2 Π_c G_2(X, Φ^*(θ_t ω,X)) + ⟨G_2(Y,Y)⟩_{ρ^X_{θ_t ω}} and its corollary that, under assumption (H) and when ⟨G_2(Y,Y)⟩_{ρ^X_{θ_t ω}} = 0, the non-Markovian optimal reduced model is dX = E_{ρ_{θ_t ω}}[G|Π_c](X) dt; it does not claim pathwise exactness of the resolved dynamics, only optimal closure via conditional expectation . The candidate’s derivation of the identity (part 1) matches the paper and correctly uses the A-invariant spectral splitting implicit in the setup, consistent with the paper’s eigenmode decomposition and assumption (H) that noise acts only on unresolved modes . However, in part (2) the candidate asserts an “exact closed reduced model,” conflating conditional-expectation closure with the actual pathwise drift of X; exactness would require stronger measurability (e.g., Y determined by X), which the paper does not assume. Thus the paper is correct; the model over-claims exactness.

Referee report (LaTeX)

\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions

\textbf{Journal Tier:} strong field

\textbf{Justification:}

The paper presents a principled, rigorous, and practically implementable pathway to non-Markovian reduced models for SPDEs using optimal parameterizing manifolds and conditional expectations. The core theorem connecting conditional expectation and the reduced drift is correct and well-motivated. Minor revisions would help by elaborating proof details, clarifying language around 'optimal' versus 'exact' closure, and discussing when certain simplifying terms vanish.