Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MICHAEL JUNK
Abstract. In this article, we study systems of conservation laws with two de-
pendent and two independent variables which have the property that the fluxes
are entropies. Several characterizations of such flux functions are presented. It
turns out, that the corresponding systems automatically possess a large class
of additional entropies, they are closely related to a kinetic equation, and, in
the case of strict hyperbolicity, they can be decoupled into two independent
Burgers’ equations. The isentropic Euler equations with zero or cubic pressure
laws are the most prominent examples of such systems, but other examples
are also presented.
are satisfied by solutions of (1.1), i.e. if the flux functions Fi are entropies, then U
is a second order approximation. Thus, the connection between (1.1) and (1.2) is
closer if the fluxes of (1.1) are themselves entropies and if the second moments of
the Maxwellian are the corresponding entropy fluxes.
The basic idea is now to classify those systems which are particularly connected
to a kinetic formulation and in this article, we concentrate on the case m = 2.
We present characterizations of entropic fluxes in terms of
• a partial differential equation for the coefficients of A = F 0 ,
• integrability properties of functions h(A) like An , exp(A), |A|, etc.
EJDE–2003/26 ON 2×2 SYSTEMS OF CONSERVATION LAWS 3
R
that the components of Q are entropies. Moreover, we prove in Section 4 that,
if (1.7) admits at least one strictly convex entropy, then every convex entropy η of
(1.7) gives rise to additional entropies η 0 Q with Q ∈ P(F 0 ). Since the availability
R
Choosing the F 0 -monomials (F 0 )n ∈ P(F 0 ) and noting that, since F10 = (0, 1), the
first row of (F 0 )n is equal to the second row of (F 0 )n−1 , we obtain entropies
Z
ηn
= (F 0 )n , n ≥ 0. (1.12)
ηn+1
For example, we find with u = m/ρ
η0 (ρ, m) = ρ, η1 (ρ, m) = m,
1
η2 (ρ, m) = ρu2 + ρ3 , η3 (ρ, m) = ρu3 + ρ3 u,
3
1 10 3 3
η4 (ρ, m) = ρu4 + 2ρ2 u2 + ρ5 , η5 (ρ, m) = ρu5 + ρ u + ρ5 u.
5 3
In general, we have
(u + ρ)n+1 − (u − ρ)n+1
ηn (ρ, m) = . (1.13)
2(n + 1)
0 0
R ) of0 P(F ), we can also choose,
Since analytic functions h give rise to elements h(F
for example, h(s) = exp(s). The components of h(F ) are
eu eu
η̂1 (ρ, m) = √ sinh(ρ), η̂2 (ρ, m) = √ ((u − 1) sinh(ρ) + ρ cosh(ρ)).
3α 3α
According to Lemma 5.1 in the appendix, we can even use continuous functions h
to generate elements of P(F 0 ). In general, we set
h(λ1 ) 0
h(F 0 ) = R R−1
0 h(λ2 )
where λi are the eigenvalues of F 0 and R contains the right eigenvalues in its
columns. Choosing, for example, h(s) = |s|, the first component of |F 0 | is the
R
entropy
1
(u + ρ)2 sign(u + ρ) − (u − ρ)2 sign(u − ρ)
η(ρ, m) = (1.14)
4
We remark that the entropies for the Euler equation listed above are so called weak
entropies which can also be generated with suitable functions g(ξ) in the form (see
[14]) Z
η(ρ, m) = g(ξ)χ(ρ, ξ − u) dξ, (1.15)
R
6 MICHAEL JUNK EJDE–2003/26
where ξ 7→ 2χ(ρ, ξ) is the indicator function on the interval [−ρ, ρ]. In [14] it has
been shown that entropies of type (1.15) are convex if and only if g is convex.
Hence, ηn above are convex for all even n ∈ N since they belong to gn (ξ) = ξ n .
Moreover η̂1 is convex because it corresponds to g(ξ) = exp(ξ) and η̂2 is associated
with the non-convex function g(ξ) = (ξ − 1) exp(ξ). Finally, the entropy (1.14) is
also convex since it belongs to to g(ξ) = |ξ|.
with flux H 2 /2). In Corollary 2.8, we will see that any non-diagonizable hyperbolic
system with entropic flux has this property.
To see this, we pick φ ∈ Tc and introduce η = hM , φi and θ = hvM , φi. Then, for
a non-negative test function ψ ∈ C0∞ ((0, ∞) × R), we have
0 ≥ h∂t η(U ) + ∂x θ(U ), ψi(t,x) = hhJ , φiv , ψi(t,x) = − m, φ0 v , ψ (t,x)
1.6. General remarks. In the following sections, we will carefully state and prove
the results described above. Section 2 deals with the characterization of entropic
fluxes, in Section 3 we discuss existence of such fluxes, and in Section 4, additional
entropies for systems with entropic fluxes are derived.
We conclude with the remark that for systems with m ≥ 3 equations, a similar
characterization of entropic fluxes seems to be difficult. The reason is that the
number of conditions on F ∈ C 2 (S, Rm ) to be entropic amounts to m2 (m − 1)
conditions on A = F 0 . In the case m = 1 there is no condition (all fluxes are
entropic), and for m = 2 there are 4 conditions (the equations in (1.8)) which is
just enough to fix A and thus F . For m ≥ 3, however, the number of conditions
exceeds the number of components of A = F 0 which indicates that entropic fluxes
are rare if m ≥ 3 (for examples see [5]).
Finally, an application of the Paley–Wiener theorem implies that for each U ∈ S the
inverse Fourier transform E(U ) = F −1 Ê(U ) is a matrix of compactly supported
distributions where the size of the support depends on kA(U )k (for details see
[11, 12]). If K ⊂ S is any compact set, the norm kA(U )k and thus the support
of E(U ) is uniformly bounded for U ∈ K. Hence, by choosing a test function
ψK ∈ C0∞ (R) which is equal to one on a suitably large interval, we obtain for every
φ ∈ C ∞ (R) and all U ∈ K
D E
hE(U ), φi = hE(U ), φψK i = Ê(U ), F −1 (φψK ) .
Using Lemma 5.2 in the appendix, we conclude that hE, φi ∈ P(A) for every φ ∈
C ∞ (R) and since F is entropic, the
R exactness of hE, φi follows. One can then
check (see [12]) that the primitive hE, φi gives rise to a pair of continuous linear
functionals on C ∞ (R) which we denote by M̃ . We now check that, possibly up
to some U independent distribution, the required Maxwellian M is given by M̃ .
To obtain the entropy property of M̃ , we apply standard properties of the Fourier
transform (see e.g. [10]) to FE = Ê
hE, 1i = Ê(U , 0) = I, vE = F −1 F(vE) = F −1 (i∂ξ Ê) = F −1 ÊA = EA
14 MICHAEL JUNK EJDE–2003/26
With the notation of Theorem 2.4, we find that det  = −(µ2 + 4λ)/4 which is
non-positive if we are looking for hyperbolic systems (1.7). Hence, Â is not definite
and there must be characteristic vectors 0 6= x ∈ R2 (i.e. D(x) = 0). Picking a non-
characteristic direction ν and checking the roots of the polynomial λ → D(λν +xi),
we find that they are real for every xi ∈ R2 because the roots involve the square
root of d(ν, xi)2 − 4d(ν, ν)d(xi, xi) = (ν1 ξ2 − ν2 ξ1 )2 (µ2 + 4λ) ≥ 0.
Hence, if we select an analytic surface Γ in R2 and prescribe analytic values for
A = (aij ) along Γ in such a way that µ2 + 4λ ≥ γ > 0 and that the normal to Γ
is not characteristic, the theorem of Cauchy-Kovalevskaya ensures that there exists
an open set S ⊂ R2 and an analytic function A on S which solves (3.1) with the
prescribed boundary values. Moreover, with a suitable choice of S, the relation
µ2 + 4λ > 0 will be satisfied throughout S and in connection with Theorem 2.4, we
conclude that many hyperbolic 2 × 2 systems with entropic fluxes exist.
EJDE–2003/26 ON 2×2 SYSTEMS OF CONSERVATION LAWS 15
3.2. Constant and symmetric solutions. Clearly, the most trivial solutions of
(3.1) are those with constant aij . Hence, all linear functions F (U ) = AU are
entropic. One can also check the exactness condition directly in that case
F 0 (U )2 = A2 = (A2 U )0 .
Another simple case where the exactness can be checked directly arises if the 2 × 2
system (1.7) consists of two independent scalar equations, i.e.
F1 (U1 )
F (U1 , U2 ) = . (3.2)
F2 (U2 )
02
(F1 ) 0
Then (F 0 )2 = 0 2
0 (F2 )
is exact according to the fundamental theorem of cal-
culus. Hence, decoupled fluxes are entropic. It is interesting to note that these
simple fluxes are related to situations in which the system (2.10) reduces to a linear
problem. To see this, we first note that decoupled fluxes are special cases of fluxes
F with a potential Φ (i.e. Fi = ∂Ui Φ). In order to check when such fluxes are
entropic, we insert the symmetric matrix A = F 0 = Φ00 into the system (3.1). Due
to symmetry, the first two equations are satisfied and the remaining equations can
be written in the form
L1 Φ(L2 Φ)0 = L2 Φ(L1 Φ)0 (3.3)
where L1 = ∂U1 ∂U2 , L2 = ∂U2 2 − ∂U2 1 and the dash denotes the U -gradient. Note
that
L1 Φ(L2 Φ + αL1 Φ)0 = L2 Φ(L1 Φ)0 + αL1 Φ(L1 Φ)0 = (L2 Φ + αL1 Φ)(L1 Φ)0 .
Hence, if L1 Φ is non-zero at some point Ū , we can choose α such that also (L2 Φ +
αL1 Φ)(Ū ) 6= 0. In some suitable neighborhood around Ū , we then have
0
(ln(L2 Φ + αL1 Φ) − ln L1 Φ) = 0
which implies
1
L1 Φ − L2 Φ = 0
α + ec
for some constant c ∈ R such that α + ec 6= 0. Conversely, if L1 Φ − γL2 Φ = 0 for
some γ ∈ R, then equation (3.3) is obviously satisfied. We thus have shown that,
at least locally in U , potential fluxes are entropic if and only if the potential Φ
satisfies an equation of the form
∂2Φ
2
∂2Φ
∂ Φ
+γ − = 0. (3.4)
∂U1 ∂U2 ∂U12 ∂U22
In the case γ = 0, we recover the decoupled fluxes (3.2). For γ 6= 0, we can write
1/γ = λ − 1/λ with a unique λ > 0 and in a rotated coordinate system V = RU
with
1 1 λ
R= √
1 + λ2 −λ 1
the flux also decouples because ∂V1 ∂V2 Φ̂ = 0 where Φ̂(V ) = Φ(RT V ). More pre-
cisely, the flux F̃ related to Φ̂ has the form (3.2) and F (U ) = RT F̂ (RU ) is the
flux in the original variables. Consequently, the assumption that an entropic flux F
has a symmetric Jacobian (i.e. F = Φ0 ) implies that the corresponding hyperbolic
system decouples after a suitable linear transformation of the unknowns U .
16 MICHAEL JUNK EJDE–2003/26
with flux G(V ) = (V2 , Θ(R−1 (V )))T . Since G transforms into F via (3.5), Propo-
sition 2.6 implies that the flux G of (3.6) is also entropic. To summarize this result,
we introduce the notion of fluxes in standard form.
Definition 3.1. We say that a system (1.7) has standard form if the flux function
is entropic and has the structure
U2
F (U ) = . (3.7)
F2 (U )
In connection with Definition 2.5, we can restate the above result.
Proposition 3.2. Let F ∈ C 2 (S, R2 ) be entropic and assume (3.5) defines a dif-
feomorphism. Then, the flux F transforms into a flux in standard form.
Let us now consider fluxes of the form (3.7) which implies a11 = 0, a12 = 1,
a21 = λ, and a22 = µ in (2.10). These additional assumptions reduce (2.10) to the
problem
∂ µ 0 −1 ∂ µ
+ = 0. (3.8)
∂U1 λ −λ µ ∂U2 λ
Going over to Riemann invariants H1 , H2 as variables
r r
µ µ2 µ µ2
H1 = − + λ, H2 = + +λ
2 4 2 4
respectively µ = H1 + H2 , λ = −H1 H2 , we find the diagonal system
∂ H1 H2 0 ∂ H1
+ = 0. (3.9)
∂U1 H2 0 H1 ∂U2 H2
Any solution of this 2 × 2 system on some open, simply connected set S ⊂ R2 which
observes H2 ≥ H1 gives rise to an entropic flux F as primitive of A = λ0 µ1 . Note
that at points Ū ∈ S with H2 (Ū ) > H1 (Ū ), the discriminant µ2 /4 + λ is strictly
positive so that (1.7) is strictly hyperbolic at Ū .
Since general solutions of the nonlinear system (3.9) are still not easily accessible,
we restrict ourselves to several special cases. First, we discuss the simple wave
solutions. We recall that along simple wave solutions, one of the Riemann invariants
EJDE–2003/26 ON 2×2 SYSTEMS OF CONSERVATION LAWS 17
Note that for H̄1 = 0, the system essentially decouples because U1 is calculated by
simple time integration from U2 which solves a scalar conservation law. For H̄1 6= 0,
we can apply the linear transformation V = T U = (U2 − H̄1 U1 , U2 )T , and find that
the corresponding 2 × 2 system also decouples in the above sense: the transformed
flux is F̂ (V ) = T F (T −1 V ) = (G(V1 ), G(V1 ) + H̄1 V2 )T .
Next, we study the particular case of solutions which satisfy H2 = H1 = H. In
this case, the system (3.9) reduces to Burgers’ equation for H
∂H ∂H
+H = 0. (3.10)
∂U1 ∂U2
Note that the similarity solution H(U1 , U2 ) = U2 /U1 of (3.10) gives rise to the flux
of the pressure-less Euler equation: setting U1 = ρ, U2 = m, we find with µ = 2H
and λ = −H 2 the flux F (ρ, m) = (m, m2 /ρ)T as primitive of
!
0 1
A= 2 .
−mρ2 2mρ
Using the implicit representation H(U ) = Φ(U2 −U1 H(U )) of the solution to (3.10)
with “initial” value H(0, U2 ) = Φ(U2 ), we can obtain other solutions as well (note
that no shocks develop in (3.10) if Φ is increasing and U1 ≥ 0). Starting with
Φ(s) = s, we find again the pressure-less Euler system, if we set U1 + 1 = ρ > 0
and U2 = m. For Φ(s) = s3 /|s|, we obtain with U1 = ρ ≥ 0 and U2 = m
s !
|m| 1 |m| 1
H(ρ, m) = sign(m) + 2− + 4
ρ 2ρ ρ2 4ρ
3
Note that (1 + 4ρ|m|) 2 ≈ 1 + 6ρ|m| + 6ρ2 m2 − 4ρ3 |m|3 for small m so that F is
really twice differentiable.
Finally, we look for particular solutions of (3.9) in the form H1,2 (U ) = H(U ) ±
h(U1 ) and find H(U ) = U2 /(U1 + c) and h(U1 ) = κ(U1 + c)2 with certain constants
c, κ ∈ R. Setting U1 + c = ρ > 0 and m = U2 , we find the flux of the isentropic
Euler equation with cubic pressure law
!
m
F (ρ, m) = m2 1 3 .
ρ + 3 κρ
18 MICHAEL JUNK EJDE–2003/26
To check that F is entropic, we have to show that (F 0 )2 is exact and since F10 F 0 =
F20 , it suffices to investigate exactness of ω = F20 F 0 , i.e.
3
m 0 m2 0
ω(ρ, m) = −2 m ρ3 + 2 ρ p (ρ) 3 ρ 2 + p (ρ) .
Using the fact that the (ρ, m) domain is simply connected, the exactness of ω
reduces to the condition ∂ρ ω2 = ∂m ω1 which is obviously satisfied if and only if
2 0
p (ρ) = p00 (ρ).
ρ
This condition singles out the cubic pressure laws but includes also the case of
constant pressure
p(ρ) = C + Dρ3 , C, D ≥ 0
(for a detailed study of these systems and their relation to kinetic equations, we
refer to [2, 5, 6])
ToR construct additional entropic fluxes, we can use Theorem 1.3 which states
that Q is entropic for every Q ∈ P(F 0 ) if F 0 is entropic. Choosing, for example,
Q = (F 0 )2 or Q = (F 0 )3 , we obtain entropic flux functions
m2 m3
! !
3 2
ρ + αρ 3αρ m + 2
F 2 (ρ, m) = 3 , F 3 (ρ, m) = 9 2 5 m4 ρ .
3αρ2 m + m ρ2 5 α ρ + ρ3 + 6αρm
2
p
Setting u = m/ρ and c = 3αρ2 , another example is given by
eu c cosh(c) − u sinh(c)
sinh(c)
Q = exp(F 0 ) = .
c (c2 − u2 ) sinh(c) c cosh(c) + u sinh(c)
which yields the flux
eu
sinh(c)
F exp (ρ, m) = √ .
3α (u − 1) sinh(c) + c cosh(c)
Using Q = sinh(F 0 ), we obtain
1 sinh(u) sinh(c)
F sinh (ρ, m) = √ .
3α sinh(c)(sinh(u)u − cosh(u)) + cosh(u) cosh(c)c
EJDE–2003/26 ON 2×2 SYSTEMS OF CONSERVATION LAWS 19
4. Additional entropies
An immediate consequence of the characterizing Theorem 1.3 is the existence of
many entropies for systems with entropic fluxes.
2 2 0
Corollary 4.1. R Assume F ∈ C (S, R ) is entropic. Then, for every Q ∈ P(F ),
the functions ( Q)i , i = 1, 2 are entropies of (1.7).
Proof: If F is entropic, thenR all Q ∈ P(F 0 ) are exact. Since P(F 0 ) is an algebra,
also QF 0 is exact and hence ( Q)i is an entropy for (1.7) with entropy-flux Qi F 0 .
R
♦
The result of Corollary 4.1 can be extended if the system (1.7) admits at least
one strictly convex entropy.
Theorem 4.2. Assume (1.7) admits at least one strictly convex entropy ηs ∈
C 2 (S, R) and has an entropic flux F . Then 2
R for all convex entropies η ∈ C (S, R)
of (1.7) and all Q ∈ P(F 0 ), the function η 0 Q is again an entropy.
Proof: We introduce A = F 0 and the flux θs = ηs0 A of the strictly convex
R
entropy ηs . In order to use an argument similar to the one in [9], we define the
transformation w = W (U ) : = ∇U ηs (U ) which is locally invertible because ηs is
strictly convex. Setting
r(w) : = w · F (U ) − θs (U ), U = W −1 (w)
we conclude that ∇w r = F . Consequently, ∇w F = A∇w W −1 is, as the Hessian
of r, symmetric. Since also ∇w W −1 is symmetric as the inverse of the symmetric
matrix ∇U W (which is the Hessian of ηs ), we conclude
∇w F = A∇w W −1 = (A∇w W −1 )T = ∇w W −1 AT .
Applied to the product An , we get by induction
An ∇w W −1 = (∇w W −1 )T [An ]T = (An ∇w W −1 )T . (4.1)
The exactness of An allows us to define F n = An and we find with (4.1)
R
∇w F n = An ∇w W −1 = (∇w F n )T .
Since S is simply connected, we conclude from the symmetry of ∇w F n that there
exists a function Rn such that ∇w Rn = F n . Finally, by setting
Ψ(U ) : = w · F n (U ) − Rn (w), w = W (U )
we get with the definition of Rn , F n and W that Ψ0 = ηs0 An . If Γ is any closed
and piecewise smooth curve in S, we thus find
Z
ηs0 An = 0.
Γ
If η is any convex entropy for (1.7), we can make it strictly convex by adding ηs .
With the same arguments as above, we conclude that for any closed curve Γ
Z Z Z Z
0 = (η + ηs )0 An = η 0 An + ηs0 An = η 0 An
Γ Γ Γ Γ
because η 0 An A = η 0 An+1 is exact. Using Lemma 5.3 in the appendix, the result
follows. ♦
20 MICHAEL JUNK EJDE–2003/26
5. Appendix
We collect some basic properties of the set P(A) which is the locally-uniform
closure of all A-polynomials over C.
Lemma 5.1. Let A : S 7→ R2×2 be continuous. Then P(A) is a sub-algebra of
C 0 (S, C2×2 ) which is closed under locally-uniform limits. Moreover, P(A) contains
h(A) for all analytic functions h : C → C. If A is diagonalizable, i.e.
A(U ) = R(U )diag(λi (U ))R−1 (U )
with continuous functions R, R−1 , λi and if h : C 7→ C is continuous, then the
function h(A) defined by
h(A(U )) = R(U )diag(h(λi (U )))R−1 (U ), U ∈S
is also an element of P(A).
Proof: The set P(A) is an algebra because the locally-uniform limit commutes
with all relevant operations. Since A-polynomials are continuous on S, the same
holds for locally-uniform limits which shows that P(A) ⊂ C 0 (S, C2×2 ). Obviously
P(A) is closed because it is defined as locally-uniform closure.
If h is an analytic function, we define
n ∞
X h(j) (0) n X |h(n) (0)| n
hn (s) = s , n ∈ N, ĥ(s) = s .
j=0
j! n=0
n!
Setting Qn (A) = hn (A) we find on any compact set K ⊂ S with a bound |A(U )| ≤
C for U ∈ K that |Qn (A(U ))| ≤ ĥ(C). Since Qn (A) forms a Cauchy sequence (in
the locally-uniform topology), we get convergence with limit defined as h(A).
Let us now turn to the case of continuous functions h and diagonalizable ma-
trices A. If K ⊂ S is compact, continuity implies existence of C > 0 such that
|R(U )|, |R−1 (U )|, |diag(λi (U ))| ≤ C for all U ∈ K. For given n ∈ N, we can use
the theorem of Stone-Weierstraß to find a polynomial Pn such that
1
sup{|Pn (s) − h(s)| : |s| ≤ C} <
n
Since Pn (A) = Rdiag(Pn (λi ))R−1 , we thus have |Pn (A(U )) − h(A(U ))| ≤ C 2 /n
for all U ∈ K which completes the proof. ♦
A simple consequence of the closedness of P(A) is the following result.
Lemma 5.2. Let A ∈ C 0 (S, R2×2 ) and Q : S → C2×2 . If, for every compact
subset K ⊂ S, there exists QK ∈ P(A) such that Q(U ) = QK (U ) for all U ∈ K
then Q ∈ P(A).
Proof: We choose the sequence
Kn = {U ∈ S : kU k ≤ n, dist(U , ∂S) ≥ 1/n}, n ∈ N.
Then QKn converges locally uniformly to Q and since P(A) is closed, the result
follows. ♦
The final result shows that exactness of all powers of An (and thus of all A-
polynomials) leads to exactness of each Q ∈ P(A). The proof basically shows that
exactness commutes with locally-uniform limits.
Lemma 5.3. Let η ∈ C 1 (S, R) and A ∈ C 0 (S, R2×2 ). Equivalent are
i) η 0 An is exact for all n ∈ N0 ,
EJDE–2003/26 ON 2×2 SYSTEMS OF CONSERVATION LAWS 21
References
[1] Denise Aregba-Driollet and Roberto Natalini. Discrete kinetic schemes for multidimensional
systems of conservation laws. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 37:1973–2004, 2000.
[2] F. Bouchut. On zero pressure gas dynamics. In Perthame, B. (ed.), Advances in kinetic
theory and computing: selected papers. Singapore: World Scientific. Ser. Adv. Math. Appl.
Sci. 22, 171-190, 1994.
[3] F. Bouchut. Construction of BGK models with a family of kinetic entropies for a given system
of conservation laws. J. Stat. Phys., 95:113–170, 1999.
[4] P.L. Bhatnagar, E.P. Gross and M. Krook. A model for collision processes in gases. Phys.
Rev., 94:511, 1954.
[5] Y. Brenier and L. Corrias. A kinetic formulation for multi–branch entropy solutions of scalar
conservation laws. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincare, Anal. Non Lineaire, 15:169–190, 1998.
[6] Y. Brenier and E. Grenier. Sticky particles and scalar conservation laws. SIAM J. Numer.
Anal., 35:2317–2328, 1997.
[7] S. M. Deshpande and J. C. Mandal. Kinetic flux–vector splitting for Euler equations. Comput.
Fluids, 23:447–478, 1994.
[8] Yu. V. Egorov and M. A. Shubin. Partial Differential Equations I. Springer-Verlag, 1992.
[9] A. Harten. On the symmetric form of systems of conservation laws with entropy. J. Comp.
Phys., 49:151–164, 1983.
[10] L. Hörmander. The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators I. Springer, 1983.
[11] M. Junk. A new perspective on kinetic schemes. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 38:1603–1625, 2000.
[12] M. Junk. Moment problems in kinetic theory. Habilitationsschrift, Universität Kaiserslautern,
2002.
[13] P. L. Lions, B. Perthame, and E. Tadmor. A kinetic formulation of multidimensional scalar
conservation laws and related equations. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 7:169–191, 1994.
[14] P. L. Lions, B. Perthame, and E. Tadmor. Kinetic formulation of the isentropic gas dynamics
and p-system. Commun. Math. Phys., 163:415–431, 1994.
[15] B. Perthame and E. Tadmor. A kinetic equation with kinetic entropy functions for scalar
conservation laws. Comm. Math. Phys., 136:501–517, 1991.