Back to search
2410.19824

The impact of a wind switch on the stability of traveling fronts in a reaction-diffusion model of fire propagation

Olivia Chandrasekhar, C.K.R.T. Jones, Blake Barker, Rodman Linn

wrongmedium confidenceCounterexample detected
Category
math.DS
Journal tier
Specialist/Solid
Processed
Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM

Audit review

The paper’s Proposition 1 states the admissible-speed interval with reversed inequalities (it claims ĉ+α < c < ĉ+β when α>β), which contradicts the phase-plane straddling condition and the constant-w limit; the correct interval is ĉ+β < c < ĉ+α for α>β (and the reverse when α<β). This sign reversal is repeated later when describing the stable range, although figures and endpoints match the corrected interpretation. Apart from this, the paper’s qualitative conclusions—type 1 stable (α>β), type 2 unstable (α<β); a spectrally preferred interior speed with broken translational invariance; and the switch ahead of the fireline—agree with the candidate solution. The model correctly fixes the speed inequalities and gives a coherent Liouville/point-interaction argument for the stability split. Note: the model’s Rayleigh-quotient algebra includes a small inconsistency, but its conclusions are still correct and can be repaired by a standard perturbation argument from the constant-w endpoints.

Referee report (LaTeX)

\textbf{Recommendation:} major revisions

\textbf{Journal Tier:} specialist/solid

\textbf{Justification:}

The paper develops a clear geometric and numerical framework for traveling fronts with a spatial wind switch, yielding physically meaningful conclusions. However, the speed-interval inequalities are written with reversed order in Proposition 1 and again in the stability-range narrative, which is a substantive error that must be corrected. The remainder of the conclusions (stability split, interior spectral selection, switch ahead of fireline) are well supported by computations and standard theory, but a few short analytic clarifications would strengthen rigor.