The conjectured formula for the cubic supremum at large cutoff

Let M3(λ,c0)M_3(\lambda,c_0) be the cubic supremum, and let c1(λ)c_1(\lambda) be a threshold such that M3(λ,c0)=M3(λ,c1)M_3(\lambda,c_0)=M_3(\lambda,c_1) for all c0c1(λ)c_0\geq c_1(\lambda). For λ[1,2]\lambda\in[1,2], let ν10.4501\nu_1\approx0.4501, ν21.764×103\nu_2\approx1.764\times10^{-3}, and ν31.842\nu_3\approx1.842. Large-cutoff cubic-supremum conjecture. For all c0c1(λ)c_0\geq c_1(\lambda) and λ[1,2]\lambda\in[1,2],

M3(λ,c0)=M3(λ,c1)=ν1λ,M_3(\lambda,c_0)=M_3(\lambda,c_1)=\frac{\nu_1}{\lambda},

where c1(λ)=ν3λ+ν2c_1(\lambda)=\nu_3\lambda+\nu_2. This conjecture records the numerical agreement observed for the threshold and the limiting supremum; the paper presents these values as numerical evidence rather than a proof.

Sources & referencesView supporting material

Primary source

Jonathan J. Bevan and Jonathan H. B. Deane, “A calibration method for estimating critical cavitation loads from below in 3D nonlinear elasticity”, arXiv:1707.08532 (2017).

Progress summary

Never refreshed

Nothing recorded yet. Refresh searches the literature and the public web for attempts on this problem, and writes the first summary here.

Solutions 0

No solutions have been posted yet.