2507.13997
Identification and Computation of Slow Manifolds Using the Isostable Coordinate System
Dan Wilson
correctmedium confidence
- Category
- Not specified
- Journal tier
- Specialist/Solid
- Processed
- Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM
- arXiv Links
- Abstract ↗PDF ↗
Audit review
The paper defines the slow manifold W^s = {x | ψ_k(x)=0 for k>β} via principal Koopman eigenfunctions and notes invariance under forward flow because ψ̇_k = λ_k ψ_k implies ψ̇_k = 0 for k>β on W^s . It derives the backward-time dynamics on W^s by stacking the gradients I_k = ∂ψ_k/∂x as rows of a matrix and inverting to obtain dx/dt̃ = [I_1^T; …; I_N^T]^{-1} [−λ_1 ψ_1, …, −λ_β ψ_β, 0, …, 0]^T (its Eq. (19)) , and observes that this velocity is orthogonal to the span of the “fast” gradients {I_{β+1}, …, I_N} . The paper also gives the gradient dynamics İ_k = −(J^T − λ_k Id) I_k along forward time (its Eq. (6)), which in backward time becomes dI_k/dt̃ = (J^T − λ_k Id) I_k (its Eq. (20)) , and it introduces dual vectors g_k via I_j^T g_k = δ_jk, obtaining the forward-time decomposition dx/dt = Σ_j λ_j ψ_j g_j (its Eq. (32)) . The candidate solution reproduces exactly these steps with the same dual-frame construction and matrix notation, including the invariance (a), the backward-time formula (b), the orthogonality (c), the backward-time gradient dynamics (d), and the forward-time decomposition (e). Both also assume invertibility of the stacked-gradient matrix on the domain of interest . Minor presentational differences exist (the model derives (d) via differentiating ∇ψ·F = λψ, while the paper uses a variational argument), but the proofs are substantively the same.
Referee report (LaTeX)
\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions \textbf{Journal Tier:} specialist/solid \textbf{Justification:} The paper’s analytical foundations align with standard Koopman/isostable results and are applied correctly to define and compute slow manifolds. The two numerical strategies are well-motivated and illustrated. However, certain technical assumptions (invertibility of the gradient stack, discrete Koopman spectrum, effective domain where approximations hold) are acknowledged but could be more explicitly framed, with practical diagnostics to guide users. Clarifications on complex eigenpairs and conditioning would improve accessibility.