alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

Type-II Singularities of Immersed Locally Convex Curves Evolving under Generalized Anisotropic Gage Area-Preserving Flows with Slow Curvature Speeds

AI contributions
Not recorded for this paper
View details

Abstract

In this paper, we study the singularity behavior of immersed locally convex closed plane curves evolving under generalized anisotropic Gage area-preserving flows with slow curvature speeds of the form κσακ_σ^α, where 0<α≤10<α\le 1. Here κσκ_σ denotes the anisotropic curvature associated with a prescribed anisotropy function σσ. We prove that every finite-time blow-up is of Type-II provided that the Euclidean length of the evolving curve remains uniformly bounded away from zero. This result holds without any symmetry assumptions on either the initial curve or the anisotropy. When the initial signed area is nonzero, this length lower bound is automatically satisfied, and thus any finite-time singularity is necessarily of Type-II. By means of Hamilton's rescaling method combined with a differential Harnack estimate, we show that along a suitable blow-up subsequence, the rescaled curves at the selected times converge locally to the profile of a translating solution of the corresponding anisotropic curvature flow V=κσαV=κ_σ^α. We also establish sufficient conditions for finite-time singularity formation in terms of the initial signed area and anisotropic length. Moreover, we construct locally convex initial curves arbitrarily close to the Wulff curve for which a finite-time Type-II singularity occurs.

Introduction

Background and notation

A plane curvature flow is a one-parameter family of smooth closed curves

X(⋅,t):Sm:=R/(2mπZ)⟶R2,t∈[0,T),X(\cdot,t):S_m:=\mathbb{R}/(2m\pi\mathbb{Z})\longrightarrow\mathbb{R}^2,\qquad t\in[0,T),

which evolves in the direction of its inner unit normal NN with speed VV:

∂X∂t(u,t)=V(u,t,κ,θ)N.(1)\frac{\partial X}{\partial t}(u,t)=V(u,t,\kappa,\theta)N. \tag*{(1)}

Here T=XsT=X_s is the unit tangent, ss is arc length, VV may depend on the signed curvature κ\kappa, position parameter uu, tangential angle θ\theta and time parameter tt, and the orientation is chosen so that

N=Rπ/2T,Ts=κN,N=R_{\pi/2}T,\qquad T_s=\kappa N,

where Rπ/2R_{\pi/2} denotes the counterclockwise rotation matrix in R2\mathbb{R}^2 through an angle π/2\pi/2. The rotation index of a smooth closed curve XX is

m=12π∫Xκ ds.m=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_X\kappa\,ds.

Suppose XX has strictly positive curvature everywhere. We say that XX is convex if m=1m=1, and locally convex if m≥2m\ge2. A locally convex curve with m≥2m\ge2 is in general immersed and may have self-intersections. Its Euclidean length and signed area are

L=∫Xds,A=−12∫X⟨X,N⟩ds.(2)L=\int_X ds,\qquad A=-\frac{1}{2}\int_X\langle X,N\rangle ds. \tag*{(2)}

For an immersed curve, AA is the algebraic area and may be positive, zero, or negative. Since κ>0\kappa>0, the tangential angle θ\theta is a global parameter on SmS_m and κ ds=dθ\kappa\,ds=d\theta. We now recall some terminology related to the blow-up phenomenon for the power-type curvature flow. For α>0\alpha>0, a power-type curvature flow generally takes the form of

∂X∂t=(Ψ(θ)κα−λ(t))N,t∈[0,T),(3)\frac{\partial X}{\partial t}=\left(\Psi(\theta)\kappa^\alpha-\lambda(t)\right)N,\qquad t\in[0,T), \tag*{(3)}

where Ψ(θ)>0\Psi(\theta)>0 is an anisotropic function and λ(t)\lambda(t) is a nonlocal term related to some geometric quantities such as length and area. We call the flow anisotropic if Ψ\Psi is not a constant and isotropic otherwise. We say the flow (3) develops a singularity at time TT (0<T≤∞0<T\le\infty) if the curvature κ(⋅,t)\kappa(\cdot,t) of the evolving curves XtX_t satisfies

lim sup⁡t↑Tκmax⁡(t)=∞,\limsup_{t\uparrow T}\kappa_{\max}(t)=\infty,

where κmax⁡(t):=max⁡u∈Smκ(u,t)\kappa_{\max}(t):=\max_{u\in S_m}\kappa(u,t). For α>0\alpha>0 and T<∞T<\infty, the singularity is called Type-I if

lim sup⁡t↑T(T−t)κmax⁡α+1(t)<∞,(4)\limsup_{t\uparrow T}(T-t)\kappa_{\max}^{\alpha+1}(t)<\infty, \tag*{(4)}

and Type-II if

lim sup⁡t↑T(T−t)κmax⁡α+1(t)=∞.(5)\limsup_{t\uparrow T}(T-t)\kappa_{\max}^{\alpha+1}(t)=\infty. \tag*{(5)}

The classical curve shortening flow (CSF) is given by

V=κ.(6)V=\kappa. \tag*{(6)}

Gage–Hamilton [14] proved that every convex embedded closed curve evolving by CSF shrinks to a point in finite time, with a Type-I singularity. Then Grayson [17] extended the round-point theorem to the case of arbitrary embedded closed curves. For immersed curves the singularity theory is much richer. Angenent [6] studied singularity formation for the CSF and showed that, in the locally convex setting, both Type-I and Type-II singularities can occur. Type-I blow-up is related to homothetically shrinking solutions, the Abresch–Langer curves, whereas Type-II rescaling leads to a translating solution, the Grim Reaper (see [1, 6]).

A natural nonlinear extension is the power-type curvature flow

V=1ακα,α≠0,(7)V = \frac{1}{\alpha}\kappa^{\alpha}, \qquad\alpha\ne0, \tag*{(7)}

or, in the anisotropic setting,

V=1αΨ(θ)κα,α≠0,Ψ(θ)>0.(8)V = \frac{1}{\alpha}\Psi(\theta)\kappa^{\alpha}, \qquad\alpha\ne0, \qquad\Psi(\theta) > 0. \tag*{(8)}

For the anisotropic flow (8) with embedded convex initial curves, Andrews [3] developed a general theory describing how the exponent α\alpha affects the evolution. In particular, only a Type-I singularity occurs when α>1/3\alpha> 1/3. Andrews [4] further studied the instability of the flow (8) for 0<α<1/30 < \alpha< 1/3 and showed that the isoperimetric ratio may become unbounded, leading to a Type-II singularity. Such behavior may also occur at the critical exponent α=1/3\alpha= 1/3 for suitable anisotropies, whereas the isotropic critical case has only a Type-I singularity. See also Poon–Tsai [32] for the relation between the isoperimetric ratio and the blow-up type. In the isotropic setting Ψ≡1\Psi\equiv1, Andrews [5] classified the closed homothetically shrinking solutions of (7). Other related curvature flows with forcing terms were studied by Chou–Zhu [9], who considered the anisotropic flow β(θ)V=g(θ)κ+F\beta(\theta)V = g(\theta)\kappa+ F, where β,g>0\beta, g > 0 are smooth 2π2\pi-periodic functions and FF is a constant. In the shrinking case, for embedded convex initial curves, they proved finite-time extinction with Type-I blow-up. Moreover, the rescaled curves converge smoothly along a subsequence to a homothetically shrinking solution of the unforced flow β(θ)V=g(θ)κ\beta(\theta)V = g(\theta)\kappa. For immersed locally convex curves moving by (7), Poon–Tsai [31] treated the fast regime α>1\alpha> 1 and proved that finite-time blow-up is of Type-I. Lin–Poon–Tsai [22] studied the slow regime 0<α≤10 < \alpha\le1 and analyzed both Type-I and Type-II singularities. Moreover, Type-I blow-up is associated with homothetic solutions, while under a special symmetry assumption, a Type-II blow-up develops a translator profile. For the anisotropic flow (8), Poon–Tsai [32] investigated the corresponding degenerate parabolic equation. Under the Type-I assumption, they established subsequential convergence to self-similar profiles, and under the Type-II assumption, they showed that, in the case where the equation defines an embedded convex flow, the blow-up profile near a maximum point is a translating solution of (8). For the anisotropic flow (8) with α>1\alpha> 1, Wang–Wang [39] proved that for immersed locally convex closed initial curves, any finite-time singularity is of Type-I. They also established subsequential convergence of the rescaled curvature and further obtained full-time convergence under suitable symmetry assumptions on both the anisotropy and the initial curve.

We next turn to nonlocal curvature flows. Gage [13] introduced the area-preserving curvature flow

V=κ−2πL(t)(9)V = \kappa- \frac{2\pi}{L(t)} \tag*{(9)}

for embedded convex curves and established global existence together with smooth convergence to a circle. A power-type generalization

V=κα−1L(t)∫Xtκα ds,α>0,(10)V = \kappa^{\alpha} - \frac{1}{L(t)}\int_{X_t}\kappa^{\alpha}\,ds, \qquad\alpha> 0, \tag*{(10)}

was studied for embedded convex curves by Tsai–Wang [37]. Other important isotropic nonlocal flows include the length-preserving flow due to Ma–Zhu [26] and the gradient flow of the isoperimetric ratio proposed by Jiang–Pan [20]. For embedded convex initial curves, these flows typically possess global solutions and converge smoothly to a circle.

For immersed curves, finite-time singularities can occur under suitable initial conditions. For the immersed area-preserving curvature flow

V=κ−2mπL(t),(11)V = \kappa- \frac{2m\pi}{L(t)}, \tag*{(11)}

Escher–Ito [12] proved finite-time singularity formation when A(0)<0A(0)<0, or when m≥2m \ge2 and L2(0)<4mπA(0)L^2(0)<4m\pi A(0). Nagasawa–Nakamura [28] studied several nonlocal curvature flows for plane curves with general rotation number, including the area-preserving flow (11). They obtained convergence results for global solutions, together with finite-time blow-up criteria, upper estimates for the blow-up time, and lower estimates for the blow-up rate. For the power-type area-preserving flow (10), Šešum–Tsai–Wang [33] studied immersed locally convex curves and proved finite-time singularity formation under the explicit conditions

A(0)<0orL2(0)<4mπA(0).(12)A(0)<0 \qquad\text{or} \qquad L^2(0)<4m\pi A(0). \tag*{(12)}

They also obtained convergence to an mm-fold circle for suitable global solutions. Lippoth [23] obtained further blow-up results for general immersed closed curves under (11), including a sufficient condition for finite-time curvature blow-up when the initial signed area is positive and the rotation index is one. He also proved curvature blow-up for initial curves with zero signed area. Furthermore, people are also interested in the type and the profile of singularities. In the isotropic case, Mäder-Baumdicker [27] studied Gage’s area-preserving curvature flow with Neumann free boundary conditions and, under suitable assumptions, proved that any finite-time singularity must be of Type-II. Moreover, for convex initial curves, she employed Hamilton’s rescaling technique to show that the asymptotic profile is a Grim Reaper or a half Grim Reaper. Dittberner [11] investigated isotropic curvature flows with global forcing terms, including Gage’s area-preserving curvature flow, for embedded curves satisfying suitable geometric conditions. She proved global existence for a class of embedded curves by first ruling out Type-I singularities and then excluding Type-II singularities using a distance comparison principle. More recently, Anada–Ishiwata–Ushijima [2] considered the isotropic power-type area-preserving flow (10) for 0<α≤10<\alpha\le1 with a special class of highly symmetric Abresch–Langer type immersed initial curves, and proved Type-II blow-up.

A natural problem is what happens if we consider nonlocal curvature flows in the anisotropic setting. Let σ∈C∞(R)\sigma\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}) be a positive 2mπ2m\pi-periodic function satisfying

σ(θ)>0,φ(θ):=σ(θ)+σ′′(θ)>0,θ∈Sm.(13)\sigma(\theta)>0,\qquad\varphi(\theta):=\sigma(\theta)+\sigma''(\theta)>0,\qquad\theta\in\mathbb{S}_m. \tag*{(13)}

Motivated by Green–Osher [18] and Ševčovič–Yazaki [34], we define the anisotropic curvature and anisotropic length by

κσ=φ(θ)κ,Lσ=∫Xσ(θ) ds.(14)\kappa_\sigma=\varphi(\theta)\kappa,\qquad L_\sigma=\int_X \sigma(\theta)\,ds. \tag*{(14)}

The associated Wulff curve is parametrized by

∂Wσ=−σ(θ)N(θ)+σ′(θ)T(θ),θ∈Sm.(15)\partial W_\sigma=-\sigma(\theta)N(\theta)+\sigma'(\theta)T(\theta),\qquad\theta\in\mathbb{S}_m. \tag*{(15)}

This parametrization defines a closed, convex curve when m=1m=1, and a closed locally convex curve when m≥2m\ge2, which may have self-intersections or be multiply covered. Its Euclidean curvature is φ−1\varphi^{-1} and its anisotropic curvature is identically one. We denote its signed area by ∣Wσ∣|W_\sigma|. Direct calculation gives

∣Wσ∣=12∫Smσ(θ)φ(θ) dθ=12Lσ(∂Wσ)>0.(16)|W_\sigma|=\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_m}\sigma(\theta)\varphi(\theta)\,d\theta=\frac{1}{2}L_\sigma(\partial W_\sigma)>0. \tag*{(16)}

The flow V=κσV=\kappa_\sigma is the gradient flow of the anisotropic interfacial energy ∫Xσ ds\int_X\sigma\,ds; see Taylor–Cahn [36]. If we consider the gradient flow of the surface energy with the area-preserving constraint, then the following anisotropic version of Gage’s area-preserving curvature flow is obtained:

∂X∂t=(κσ−1L(t)∫Xκσ ds)N.(17)\frac{\partial X}{\partial t}=\left(\kappa_\sigma-\frac{1}{L(t)}\int_X\kappa_\sigma\,ds\right)N. \tag*{(17)}

Wang–Wang [38] proved that for embedded smooth convex closed initial curves, the flow {(xref)}(1.17) exists globally and converges smoothly, up to translation, to the boundary of the homothetic Wulff shape A(0)/∣Wσ∣Wσ\sqrt{A(0)/|W_\sigma|}W_\sigma. Liu–Tsai–Wang [24] considered a power-type extension

∂X∂t=(κσα−1L(t)∫Xκσα ds)N,α>0,(18)\frac{\partial X}{\partial t}=\left(\kappa_\sigma^\alpha-\frac{1}{L(t)}\int_X\kappa_\sigma^\alpha\,ds\right)N,\qquad\alpha>0, \tag*{(18)}

and established analogous global existence and smooth convergence results for embedded convex closed initial curves. There are several other related anisotropic nonlocal or constrained curve flows. We refer, for example, to Beneš–Yazaki–Kimura [7], Pan–Yang [30], Gao–Zhang [15], Li–Wang [21], Liu–Yang–Zhang [25], Zhao–Yang–Mao–Fang [41], Sun [35], and Ye–Wang [40]. See also the survey of Giga–Požár [16].

The present paper focuses on generalized anisotropic Gage area-preserving flows with slow curvature speeds, corresponding to the regime 0<α≤10<\alpha\le1 in {(xref)}(1.18):

∂X∂t=(κσα−λ(t))N,λ(t)=1L(t)∫Xtκσα ds,0<α≤1.(19)\frac{\partial X}{\partial t}=(\kappa_\sigma^\alpha-\lambda(t))N,\qquad\lambda(t)=\frac{1}{L(t)}\int_{X_t}\kappa_\sigma^\alpha\,ds,\qquad0<\alpha\le1. \tag*{(19)}

Since

∫Xtκσ ds=∫Smφ(θ) dθ=:Kσ,(20)\int_{X_t}\kappa_\sigma\,ds=\int_{S_m}\varphi(\theta)\,d\theta=:K_\sigma, \tag*{(20)}

Jensen’s inequality gives

0<λ(t)≤(KσL(t))α.(21)0<\lambda(t)\le\left(\frac{K_\sigma}{L(t)}\right)^\alpha. \tag*{(21)}

The flow preserves the signed area and decreases the anisotropic length. We first show that every finite-time singularity with inf⁡t<TL(t)>0\inf_{t<T}L(t)>0 is of Type-II, and we determine its local blow-up profile by applying Hamilton’s rescaling method. We then provide sufficient conditions on immersed locally convex initial curves that guarantee finite-time singularity formation. In contrast to Anada–Ishiwata–Ushijima [2], we impose no symmetry condition, and the anisotropy may be general under {(xref)}(1.13).

Main results

Our first two theorems concern the type and local profile of a finite-time singularity under a positive length lower bound.

Theorem 1.1 (Type-II blow-up). Let 0<α≤10 < \alpha\le1, and let X(⋅,t)X(\cdot,t), 0≤t<T<∞0 \le t < T < \infty, be a smooth immersed locally convex solution of (1.19). Assume

lim sup⁡t↑Tκmax⁡(t)=∞,inf⁡0≤t<TL(t)>0.\limsup_{t \uparrow T} \kappa_{\max}(t)=\infty,\qquad\inf_{0 \le t < T} L(t)>0.

Then the singularity at TT is Type-II, namely

lim sup⁡t↑T(T−t)α+1ακmax⁡α+1(t)=∞.(22)\limsup_{t \uparrow T}(T-t)^{\frac{\alpha+1}{\alpha}}\kappa_{\max}^{\alpha+1}(t)=\infty. \tag*{(22)}

The length lower bound in Theorem 1.1 cannot be omitted in general, already in the isotropic case α=1\alpha=1. In a recent preprint, Cernomazov [8 Main Result A, Remarks 1.7 and 2.1] constructed noncircular locally convex shrinkers of the isotropic flow (1.11). These have zero signed area and shrink by a factor proportional to T−t\sqrt{T-t}, so L(t)→0L(t)\to0 and the singularity is of Type-I.

Since the signed area is preserved and an immersed closed plane curve satisfies L2≥4π∣A∣L^2 \ge4\pi|A|, the lower bound for L(t)L(t) is automatic whenever A(0)≠0A(0)\ne0.

Our next theorem identifies the curvature profile near a Type-II blow-up point.

Theorem 1.2 (Blow-up profile). Let 0<α≤10 < \alpha\le1, and let X(⋅,t)X(\cdot,t), 0≤t<T<∞0 \le t < T < \infty, be a smooth immersed locally convex solution of (1.19) with a Type-II singularity at TT, and assume

inf⁡0≤t<TL(t)>0.(23)\inf_{0 \le t < T} L(t)>0. \tag*{(23)}

Then there exist times tj↑Tt_j \uparrow T and angles θj∈Sm\theta_j \in S_m at which κσ(⋅,tj)\kappa_\sigma(\cdot,t_j) attains its maximum such that, after passing to a subsequence,

θj⟶θ∗∈Sm\theta_j \longrightarrow\theta_* \in S_m

and

κσ(θj+ξ,tj)κσ(θj,tj)⟶(cos⁡ξ)1/α(24)\frac{\kappa_\sigma(\theta_j+\xi,t_j)}{\kappa_\sigma(\theta_j,t_j)} \longrightarrow(\cos\xi)^{1/\alpha} \tag*{(24)}

uniformly for ξ∈[−π/2,π/2]\xi\in[-\pi/2,\pi/2]. Equivalently,

κ(θ∗+ξ,tj)κ(θ∗,tj)⟶φ(θ∗)φ(θ∗+ξ)(cos⁡ξ)1/α(25)\frac{\kappa(\theta_*+\xi,t_j)}{\kappa(\theta_*,t_j)} \longrightarrow \frac{\varphi(\theta_*)}{\varphi(\theta_*+\xi)}(\cos\xi)^{1/\alpha} \tag*{(25)}

uniformly on [−π/2,π/2][-\pi/2,\pi/2].

The limiting curvature profile in Theorem 1.2 is realized, after the following rescaling, by a translating solution of the corresponding anisotropic flow V=καV=\kappa^\alpha. Put qj=κσα(θj,tj)q_j=\kappa_\sigma^\alpha(\theta_j,t_j), Qj=qj1/αQ_j=q_j^{1/\alpha} and p=1+1/αp=1+1/\alpha, and let τ=qjp(t−tj)\tau=q_j^p(t-t_j) denote the rescaled time. Define

X~j(ξ,τ)=Qj[X(θj+ξ,tj+τqjp)−X(θj,tj)].\widetilde{X}_j(\xi,\tau)=Q_j\left[X\left(\theta_j+\xi,t_j+\frac{\tau}{q_j^p}\right)-X(\theta_j,t_j)\right].

Spatial dilation by QjQ_j divides curvature by QjQ_j and preserves the tangent direction. Thus (1.24) is precisely the convergence of the anisotropic curvature of X~j(⋅,0)\widetilde{X}_j(\cdot,0) to (cos⁡ξ)1/α(\cos\xi)^{1/\alpha}. Moreover,

∂ξX~j(ξ,0)=φ(θj+ξ)(κσα(θj+ξ,tj)/qj)1/αT(θj+ξ).\partial_\xi\widetilde{X}_j(\xi,0) = \frac{\varphi(\theta_j+\xi)} {\left(\kappa_\sigma^\alpha(\theta_j+\xi,t_j)/q_j\right)^{1/\alpha}} T(\theta_j+\xi).

On compact subintervals of (−π/2,π/2)(-\pi/2,\pi/2) the denominator converges to a positive function. Since X~j(0,0)=0\widetilde{X}_j(0,0)=0, integration gives Cloc1C^1_{\mathrm{loc}} convergence to

X∞(ξ,0)=∫0ξφ(θ∗+r)(cos⁡r)1/αT(θ∗+r) dr,∣ξ∣<π2.(26)X_\infty(\xi,0)=\int_0^\xi\frac{\varphi(\theta_*+r)}{(\cos r)^{1/\alpha}}T(\theta_*+r)\,dr,\qquad|\xi|<\frac{\pi}{2}. \tag*{(26)}

The positive factor in ∂ξX∞\partial_\xi X_\infty shows that its unit tangent and normal are T∞=T(θ∗+ξ)T_\infty=T(\theta_*+\xi) and N∞=N(θ∗+ξ)N_\infty=N(\theta_*+\xi). Using ds∞/dξ=φ(θ∗+ξ)/(cos⁡ξ)1/αds_\infty/d\xi=\varphi(\theta_*+\xi)/(\cos\xi)^{1/\alpha} and ∂ξT∞=N∞\partial_\xi T_\infty=N_\infty, we obtain

κ∞(ξ)=(cos⁡ξ)1/αφ(θ∗+ξ),κσ,∞(ξ)=(cos⁡ξ)1/α.\kappa_\infty(\xi)=\frac{(\cos\xi)^{1/\alpha}}{\varphi(\theta_*+\xi)},\qquad\kappa_{\sigma,\infty}(\xi)=(\cos\xi)^{1/\alpha}.

Set e=N(θ∗)e=N(\theta_*). Since e⋅N∞=cos⁡ξe\cdot N_\infty=\cos\xi, the family

X∞(ξ,τ)=X∞(ξ,0)+τe(27)X_\infty(\xi,\tau)=X_\infty(\xi,0)+\tau e \tag*{(27)}

satisfies the normal-velocity law

∂τX∞⋅N∞=κσ,∞α.(28)\partial_\tau X_\infty\cdot N_\infty=\kappa_{\sigma,\infty}^{\alpha}. \tag*{(28)}

Indeed, its full velocity in the fixed-angle parametrization is κσ,∞αN∞−(κσ,∞α)ξT∞=cos⁡ξN∞+sin⁡ξT∞=e\kappa_{\sigma,\infty}^{\alpha}N_\infty-(\kappa_{\sigma,\infty}^{\alpha})_\xi T_\infty=\cos\xi N_\infty+\sin\xi T_\infty=e. Thus it is a translating solution of the anisotropic curvature flow V=κσαV=\kappa_\sigma^\alpha, up to tangential reparametrization. Since 0<α≤10<\alpha\leq1, its arc length diverges at both endpoints of the angle interval. When α=1\alpha=1 and σ≡1\sigma\equiv1, a rigid motion gives X∞(ξ,τ)=(ξ,−log⁡cos⁡ξ)+τ(0,1)X_\infty(\xi,\tau)=(\xi,-\log\cos\xi)+\tau(0,1), the classical Grim Reaper.

We now give sufficient conditions on the initial curve that guarantee finite-time singularity formation.

Theorem 1.3 (Finite-time singularity). Let 0<α≤10<\alpha\leq1, and let X0X_0 be a smooth immersed locally convex closed initial curve with rotation index m≥2m\geq2. Suppose that either

A(0)<0or0<Lσ2(0)<4∣Wσ∣A(0).(29)A(0)<0\qquad\text{or}\qquad0<L_\sigma^2(0)<4|W_\sigma|A(0). \tag*{(29)}

Then the solution of (1.19) develops a singularity at a finite maximal time T<∞T<\infty.

Remark 1.4 (Initial curves near the Wulff curve). For every σ\sigma satisfying (1.13) and every m≥2m\geq2, the second condition in (1.29) is satisfied by locally convex closed initial curves arbitrarily close to ∂Wσ\partial W_\sigma in C∞(Sm)C^\infty(\mathbb{S}_m). The strict inequality persists under sufficiently small smooth perturbations, so these examples need not be symmetric. The construction is given in Subsection 5.2.

Both conditions in (1.29) imply A(0)≠0A(0)\ne0. Therefore Theorems 1.3 and 1.1 immediately give the following result.

Corollary 1.5. If X0X_0 satisfies either condition in (1.29), then the solution of (1.19) develops a finite-time Type-II singularity.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 gives the evolution equations, the monotonicity of geometric quantities, the gradient estimate and a concentration estimate near points of maximal curvature. Section 3 proves Theorem 1.1 by showing that the Type-I assumption would force the Euclidean length to vanish. Section 4 applies Hamilton’s rescaling method and proves the compactness, nonlocal-error, and Harnack estimates needed to identify the blow-up profile in Theorem 1.2. Finally, Section 5 establishes uniform curvature bounds for global solutions whose anisotropic length has a positive limit, identifies the limiting Wulff curve, and proves the finite-time singularity criteria in Theorem 1.3. It also gives the construction described in Remark 1.4.

Preliminaries

Evolution equations

For a locally convex solution of (19), one can use the tangential angle to parameterize it. Put v(θ,t):=κσα(θ,t)v(\theta,t):=\kappa_{\sigma}^{\alpha}(\theta,t) and p=1+1/α≥2p=1+1/\alpha\ge2. A tangential velocity changes only the parametrization, not the geometric image of the curve; see Chou–Zhu [10] and Gage [13]. If VV and GG are the normal and tangential velocities, then ∂tθ=∂sV+κG\partial_t\theta=\partial_sV+\kappa G. Choosing G=−vθG=-v_\theta with V=v−λ(t)V=v-\lambda(t) therefore keeps θ\theta independent of time and gives

∂X∂t=(v−λ)N−vθT.(30)\frac{\partial X}{\partial t}=(v-\lambda)N-v_\theta T. \tag*{(30)}

At fixed angle the curvature satisfies κt=κ2(Vθθ+V)\kappa_t=\kappa^2(V_{\theta\theta}+V). Since φ\varphi is independent of time and v=(φκ)αv=(\varphi\kappa)^\alpha, this gives

vt=αφ(θ)vp(vθθ+v−λ(t))on Sm×(0,T),(31)v_t=\frac{\alpha}{\varphi(\theta)}v^p\left(v_{\theta\theta}+v-\lambda(t)\right)\quad\text{on }S_m\times(0,T), \tag*{(31)}

where

λ(t)=J(t)L(t),J(t):=∫Smφv1−1/α dθ,Kσ:=∫Smφ(θ) dθ.(32)\lambda(t)=\frac{J(t)}{L(t)},\qquad J(t):=\int_{S_m}\varphi v^{1-1/\alpha}\,d\theta,\qquad K_\sigma:=\int_{S_m}\varphi(\theta)\,d\theta. \tag*{(32)}

We also have

ds=φv1/α dθ,L(t)=∫Smφv1/α dθ,Lσ(t)=∫Smσφv1/α dθ.(33)ds=\frac{\varphi}{v^{1/\alpha}}\,d\theta,\qquad L(t)=\int_{S_m}\frac{\varphi}{v^{1/\alpha}}\,d\theta,\qquad L_\sigma(t)=\int_{S_m}\frac{\sigma\varphi}{v^{1/\alpha}}\,d\theta. \tag*{(33)}

In particular, the Euclidean length satisfies

L′(t)=−∫Sm(v−λ) dθ=−∫Smv dθ+2mπλ.(34)L'(t)=-\int_{S_m}(v-\lambda)\,d\theta=-\int_{S_m}v\,d\theta+2m\pi\lambda. \tag*{(34)}

This follows either by differentiating (33) and using periodicity, or from the first variation of length. Notice that λ\lambda is the arc-length average of vv, so 0<λ≤vmax⁡0<\lambda\le v_{\max}.

Short-time existence and preservation of local convexity follow by the standard quasilinear parabolic argument used for anisotropic nonlocal curvature flows; see [10, 24]. In particular, the solution can be continued beyond any finite time TT, provided its curvature remains uniformly bounded on [0,T)[0,T). Indeed, if v≤Mv\le M, then λ≤M\lambda\le M and the spatial minimum satisfies

ddtvmin⁡≥−αMφmin⁡vmin⁡p\frac{d}{dt}v_{\min}\ge-\frac{\alpha M}{\varphi_{\min}}v_{\min}^{p}

in the lower Dini derivative sense. Thus vv stays uniformly positive on every bounded time interval, and the equation remains uniformly parabolic when the curvature is bounded.

Preserved area and non-increasing anisotropic length

Lemma 2.1. Along (19), the signed area is preserved and the anisotropic length is non-increasing, i.e.,

dAdt=0,dLσdt=−∫Xt(κσ−λ1/α)(κσα−λ) ds≤0.(35)\frac{dA}{dt}=0,\qquad\frac{dL_\sigma}{dt}=-\int_{X_t}(\kappa_\sigma-\lambda^{1/\alpha})(\kappa_\sigma^\alpha-\lambda)\,ds\le0. \tag*{(35)}

Proof. The standard variation formulas give

dAdt=−∫Xt(κσα−λ) ds=0\frac{dA}{dt}=-\int_{X_t}\left(\kappa_\sigma^\alpha-\lambda\right)\,ds=0

by the definition of λ\lambda. Also

dLσdt=−∫Xtκσ(κσα−λ) ds=−∫Smφv dθ+λKσ.\frac{dL_\sigma}{dt}=-\int_{X_t}\kappa_\sigma\left(\kappa_\sigma^\alpha-\lambda\right)\,ds=-\int_{S_m}\varphi v\,d\theta+\lambda K_\sigma.

Since ∫Xt(κσα−λ) ds=0\int_{X_t}\left(\kappa_\sigma^\alpha-\lambda\right)\,ds=0,

∫Xtκσ(κσα−λ) ds=∫Xt(κσ−λ1/α)(κσα−λ) ds.\int_{X_t}\kappa_\sigma\left(\kappa_\sigma^\alpha-\lambda\right)\,ds=\int_{X_t}\left(\kappa_\sigma-\lambda^{1/\alpha}\right)\left(\kappa_\sigma^\alpha-\lambda\right)\,ds.

The integrand is nonnegative because s↦sαs\mapsto s^\alpha is increasing on (0,∞)(0,\infty), which proves (2.6).

A gradient estimate

The following gradient estimate will be used in both the global argument and the blow-up analysis.

Lemma 2.2 (Gradient estimate). Let v>0v>0 solve (31). Set

Ψ=v2+vθ2.\Psi=v^2+v_\theta^2.

Then for every t<Tt<T,

max⁡Sm×[0,t]Ψ≤max⁡{Cφmax⁡Sm×[0,t]v2,max⁡Sm(v2+vθ2)(θ,0)}.(36)\max_{S_m\times[0,t]}\Psi\leq\max\left\{C_\varphi\max_{S_m\times[0,t]}v^2,\max_{S_m}(v^2+v_\theta^2)(\theta,0)\right\}. \tag*{(36)}

where

Cφ=1+∥φθ∥∞24φmin⁡2.C_\varphi=1+\frac{\|\varphi_\theta\|_\infty^2}{4\varphi_{\min}^2}.

Proof. Fix t>0t>0 and suppose the maximum of Ψ\Psi on Sm×[0,t]S_m\times[0,t] is attained at (θ∗,t∗)(\theta_*,t_*) with t∗>0t_*>0. At this point

Ψθ=2vθ(v+vθθ)=0,Ψθθ≤0.\Psi_\theta=2v_\theta(v+v_{\theta\theta})=0,\qquad\Psi_{\theta\theta}\leq0.

If vθ(θ∗,t∗)=0v_\theta(\theta_*,t_*)=0, then Ψ=v2\Psi=v^2 and there is nothing to prove. Otherwise

vθθ+v=0v_{\theta\theta}+v=0

at (θ∗,t∗)(\theta_*,t_*). Differentiating (31) and evaluating at this point gives

0≤Ψt=−2αλvp+1φ−2αpλvp−1vθ2φ+2αλφθvpvθφ2+αvpφΨθθ≤−2αλvp−1φ(2vθ2−φθφvθv),\begin{aligned} 0\leq\Psi_t=-\frac{2\alpha\lambda v^{p+1}}{\varphi}-\frac{2\alpha p\lambda v^{p-1}v_\theta^2}{\varphi}+\frac{2\alpha\lambda\varphi_\theta v^pv_\theta}{\varphi^2}+\frac{\alpha v^p}{\varphi}\Psi_{\theta\theta} \\ &\leq-\frac{2\alpha\lambda v^{p-1}}{\varphi}\left(2v_\theta^2-\frac{\varphi_\theta}{\varphi}v_\theta v\right), \end{aligned}

where p≥2p\geq2 has been used and the non-positive terms have been discarded in the last line. Hence

∣vθ∣≤∣φθ∣2φv≤∥φθ∥∞2φmin⁡v.|v_\theta|\leq\frac{|\varphi_\theta|}{2\varphi}v\leq\frac{\|\varphi_\theta\|_\infty}{2\varphi_{\min}}v.

Thus Ψ≤Cφv2\Psi\leq C_\varphi v^2 at every interior spacetime maximum with vθ≠0v_\theta\ne0, and (36) follows.

Lemma 2.3 (Concentration estimate). Suppose

v(θ∗,t∗)=max⁡Sm×[0,t∗]v.v(\theta_*,t_*)=\max_{\mathbb{S}_m\times[0,t_*]}v.

For every 0<ε<1/20<\varepsilon<1/2, there exist δ>0\delta>0 and C0>0C_0>0, independent of t∗t_*, such that

(1−ε)v(θ∗,t∗)≤v(θ,t∗)+C0ε(37)(1-\varepsilon)v(\theta_*,t_*)\leq v(\theta,t_*)+C_0\varepsilon \tag*{(37)}

whenever ∣θ−θ∗∣<δ|\theta-\theta_*|<\delta.

Proof. By Lemma 2.2,

∣vθ(θ,t∗)∣≤CI+Cφv2(θ∗,t∗),|v_\theta(\theta,t_*)|\leq\sqrt{C_I+C_\varphi v^2(\theta_*,t_*)},

where CI:=max⁡Sm(v2+vθ2)(θ,0)C_I:=\max_{\mathbb{S}_m}(v^2+v_\theta^2)(\theta,0) depends only on the initial data. Integrating from θ\theta to θ∗\theta_* and choosing δ=ε/Cφ\delta=\varepsilon/\sqrt{C_\varphi} gives (2.8).

Type-II singularities

This section proves Theorem 1.1. Assume for contradiction that the singularity is of Type-I. Set

r(t)=(T−t)1/(α+1),U(θ,t)=r(t)αv(θ,t).(38)r(t)=(T-t)^{1/(\alpha+1)},\qquad U(\theta,t)=r(t)^\alpha v(\theta,t). \tag*{(38)}

The Type-I assumption and Lemma 2.2 imply

∥U(⋅,t)∥L∞(Sm)+∥Uθ(⋅,t)∥L∞(Sm)≤C.(39)\|U(\cdot,t)\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{S}_m)}+\|U_\theta(\cdot,t)\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{S}_m)}\leq C. \tag*{(39)}

At a spatial maximum of vv, equation (31) gives, in the upper Dini derivative sense,

ddtvmax⁡(t)≤αφmin⁡vmax⁡p+1(t).\frac{d}{dt}v_{\max}(t)\leq\frac{\alpha}{\varphi_{\min}}v_{\max}^{p+1}(t).

Since TT is a curvature blow-up time, integration toward TT gives

vmax⁡(t)≥c(T−t)−1/p=c(T−t)−α/(α+1)(40)v_{\max}(t)\geq c(T-t)^{-1/p}=c(T-t)^{-\alpha/(\alpha+1)} \tag*{(40)}

for tt sufficiently close to TT. Therefore

max⁡SmU(θ,t)≥c0>0.(41)\max_{\mathbb{S}_m}U(\theta,t)\geq c_0>0. \tag*{(41)}

The assumption inf⁡t<TL(t)>0\inf_{t<T}L(t)>0 and (21) give a uniform bound for λ\lambda. From (2.1) and (3.2),

∣∂tX(θ,t)∣≤C(T−t)−α/(α+1).|\partial_tX(\theta,t)|\leq C(T-t)^{-\alpha/(\alpha+1)}.

Hence there exists a continuous limiting map XT:Sm→R2X_T:\mathbb{S}_m\to\mathbb{R}^2 satisfying

sup⁡θ∈Sm∣X(θ,t)−XT(θ)∣≤C(T−t)1/(α+1)=Cr(t).(42)\sup_{\theta\in\mathbb{S}_m}|X(\theta,t)-X_T(\theta)|\leq C(T-t)^{1/(\alpha+1)}=Cr(t). \tag*{(42)}

Lemma 3.1. There exist c>0c>0 and t0<Tt_0<T such that

U(θ,t)≥cU(\theta,t)\geq c

for all θ∈Sm\theta\in\mathbb{S}_m and t∈[t0,T)t\in[t_0,T).

Proof. Suppose not. Then there are tj↑Tt_j \uparrow T such that

min⁡SmU(⋅,tj)⟶0.\min_{\mathbb{S}_m} U(\cdot,t_j) \longrightarrow0.

By (3.2), after passing to a subsequence,

U(⋅,tj)⟶U∞U(\cdot,t_j) \longrightarrow U_\infty

uniformly on Sm\mathbb{S}_m, where U∞≥0U_\infty\ge0 is Lipschitz. By (3.4), it is not identically zero, while it has at least one zero. Let I=(a,b)I=(a,b) be a connected component of {U∞>0}\{U_\infty>0\}.

Put rj=(T−tj)1/(α+1)r_j=(T-t_j)^{1/(\alpha+1)}. Since

Xθ(θ,tj)=rjφ(θ)U(θ,tj)−1/αT(θ),X_\theta(\theta,t_j)=r_j\varphi(\theta)U(\theta,t_j)^{-1/\alpha}T(\theta),

the length of X(⋅,tj)X(\cdot,t_j) restricted to any compact subinterval of II tends to zero. Hence XTX_T is constant on II. Write XT≡x∗X_T\equiv x_* there. Define

Yj(θ)=X(θ,tj)−x∗rj.Y_j(\theta)=\frac{X(\theta,t_j)-x_*}{r_j}.

By (3.5), ∣Yj∣≤C|Y_j|\le C on II, and

(Yj)θ=φU(θ,tj)−1/αT.(Y_j)_\theta=\varphi U(\theta,t_j)^{-1/\alpha}T.

Since Tθ=NT_\theta=N,

ddθ(Yj⋅T)=φU(θ,tj)−1/α+Yj⋅N.(43)\frac{d}{d\theta}(Y_j\cdot T)=\varphi U(\theta,t_j)^{-1/\alpha}+Y_j\cdot N. \tag*{(43)}

Integrating (3.6) over [a′,b′]⋐I[a',b']\Subset I and using ∣Yj∣≤C|Y_j|\le C, we have

∫a′b′φU(θ,tj)−1/α dθ≤2C+C(b′−a′)≤C(2+2mπ).\int_{a'}^{b'}\varphi U(\theta,t_j)^{-1/\alpha}\,d\theta\le2C+C(b'-a')\le C(2+2m\pi).

Passing to the limit gives

∫a′b′φ(θ)U∞(θ)1/α dθ≤C,\int_{a'}^{b'}\frac{\varphi(\theta)}{U_\infty(\theta)^{1/\alpha}}\,d\theta\le C,

where CC is independent of a′a' and b′b'. Letting a′↓aa'\downarrow a and b′↑bb'\uparrow b, we obtain

∫Iφ(θ)U∞(θ)1/α dθ<∞.(44)\int_I\frac{\varphi(\theta)}{U_\infty(\theta)^{1/\alpha}}\,d\theta<\infty. \tag*{(44)}

But U∞U_\infty is Lipschitz and vanishes at an endpoint of II, so near that endpoint

U∞(θ)≤C∣θ−a∣.U_\infty(\theta)\le C|\theta-a|.

Since 1/α≥11/\alpha\ge1, the integral in (3.7) must diverge, a contradiction. □

Proof of Theorem 1.1. By Lemma 3.1,

κ(θ,t)=v1/αφ=U1/αr(t)φ≥c(T−t)1/(α+1).\kappa(\theta,t)=\frac{v^{1/\alpha}}{\varphi}=\frac{U^{1/\alpha}}{r(t)\varphi}\ge\frac{c}{(T-t)^{1/(\alpha+1)}}.

Thus

L(t)=∫Smdθκ(θ,t)≤C(T−t)1/(α+1)⟶0,L(t)=\int_{\mathbb{S}_m}\frac{d\theta}{\kappa(\theta,t)} \le C(T-t)^{1/(\alpha+1)}\longrightarrow0,

contradicting inf⁡t<TL(t)>0\inf_{t<T}L(t)>0. Hence Type-I is impossible and the singularity is of Type-II. □

Hamilton rescaling and the local profile

We now assume that a Type-II singularity occurs at T<∞T<\infty and that (1.23) holds.

Hamilton’s rescaling method

Following Hamilton’s rescaling method [19], choose sj↑Ts_j \uparrow T such that

(T−sj)vmax⁡p(sj)⟶∞(T-s_j)v_{\max}^{p}(s_j) \longrightarrow\infty

and set

Tj=T+sj2.T_j=\frac{T+s_j}{2}.

Choose (θj,tj)∈Sm×[0,Tj](\theta_j,t_j)\in S_m\times[0,T_j] so that

Hj:=(Tj−tj)vp(θj,tj)=max⁡θ∈Sm, 0≤t≤Tj(Tj−t)vp(θ,t).(45)H_j:=(T_j-t_j)v^p(\theta_j,t_j)=\max_{\theta\in S_m,\,0\leq t\leq T_j}(T_j-t)v^p(\theta,t). \tag*{(45)}

Then

Hj≥12(T−sj)vmax⁡p(sj)⟶∞.H_j\geq\frac{1}{2}(T-s_j)v_{\max}^{p}(s_j)\longrightarrow\infty.

Since vv is bounded on compact time intervals in [0,T)[0,T), we have tj→Tt_j\to T. After taking a subsequence, assume tj↑Tt_j\uparrow T and put

qj=v(θj,tj)⟶∞,Qj=qj1/α.(46)q_j=v(\theta_j,t_j)\longrightarrow\infty,\qquad Q_j=q_j^{1/\alpha}. \tag*{(46)}

Here QjQ_j is the spatial dilation factor. Define

τ=qjp(t−tj),vj(θ,τ)=v(θ,tj+τ/qjp)qj.(47)\tau=q_j^p(t-t_j),\qquad v_j(\theta,\tau)=\frac{v(\theta,t_j+\tau/q_j^p)}{q_j}. \tag*{(47)}

Then

(vj)τ=αvjpφ(θ)((vj)θθ+vj−ηj(τ)),ηj(τ)=λ(tj+τ/qjp)qj.(48)(v_j)_\tau=\frac{\alpha v_j^p}{\varphi(\theta)}\left((v_j)_{\theta\theta}+v_j-\eta_j(\tau)\right),\qquad\eta_j(\tau)=\frac{\lambda(t_j+\tau/q_j^p)}{q_j}. \tag*{(48)}

On the rescaled interval [−qjptj,Hj)[-q_j^pt_j,H_j), whose endpoints tend to −∞-\infty and +∞+\infty, respectively, the maximality in (4.1) gives

vjp(θ,τ)≤HjHj−τ(49)v_j^p(\theta,\tau)\leq\frac{H_j}{H_j-\tau} \tag*{(49)}

whenever the rescaled flow is defined and τ<Hj\tau<H_j. In particular,

vj(θj,0)=1,0<vj(θ,0)≤1.v_j(\theta_j,0)=1,\qquad0<v_j(\theta,0)\leq1.

Space-time compactness

Lemma 4.1. For every R>0R>0 there exists CRC_R independent of jj such that

sup⁡Sm×[−R,R](vj+∣(vj)θ∣)≤CR(50)\sup_{S_m\times[-R,R]}\left(v_j+|(v_j)_\theta|\right)\leq C_R \tag*{(50)}

for all sufficiently large jj.

Proof. Set

CI:=max⁡Sm(v2+vθ2)(θ,0).C_I := \max_{S_m}(v^2+v_\theta^2)(\theta,0).

which depends only on the initial curve. Since (vj)θ=vθ/qj(v_j)_\theta=v_\theta/q_j, Lemma 2.2 gives

(vj)θ2+vj2≤max⁡{Cφsup⁡0≤s≤tvmax⁡2(s)qj2,CIqj2}.(v_j)_\theta^2+v_j^2\leq\max\left\{C_\varphi\frac{\sup_{0\leq s\leq t}v_{\max}^2(s)}{q_j^2},\frac{C_I}{q_j^2}\right\}.

where t=tj+τ/qjpt=t_j+\tau/q_j^p. The maximality in (45) gives, for 0≤s≤t<Tj0\leq s\leq t<T_j,

vmax⁡p(s)qjp≤Tj−tjTj−s≤Tj−tjTj−t=HjHj−τ.\frac{v_{\max}^p(s)}{q_j^p}\leq\frac{T_j-t_j}{T_j-s}\leq\frac{T_j-t_j}{T_j-t}=\frac{H_j}{H_j-\tau}.

Taking the power 2/p2/p and using Hj,qj→∞H_j,q_j\to\infty proves (50). □

Lemma 4.2 (Time equicontinuity). For every R>0R>0 there exists CRC_R independent of jj such that

∣vj(θ,τ2)−vj(θ,τ1)∣≤CR∣τ2−τ1∣1/2(51)|v_j(\theta,\tau_2)-v_j(\theta,\tau_1)|\leq C_R|\tau_2-\tau_1|^{1/2} \tag*{(51)}

for ∣τi∣≤R|\tau_i|\leq R and all sufficiently large jj.

Proof. By (21) and (23), ηj≤qj−1(Kσ/ℓ0)α\eta_j\leq q_j^{-1}(K_\sigma/\ell_0)^\alpha, where ℓ0=inf⁡t<TL(t)>0\ell_0=\inf_{t<T}L(t)>0. Write (48) as

(vj)τ=∂θFj+Gj,(v_j)_\tau=\partial_\theta F_j+G_j,

where

Fj=αvjpφ(vj)θ,Gj=−(αvjpφ)θ(vj)θ+αvjpφ(vj−ηj).F_j=\frac{\alpha v_j^p}{\varphi}(v_j)_\theta,\qquad G_j=-\left(\frac{\alpha v_j^p}{\varphi}\right)_\theta(v_j)_\theta+\frac{\alpha v_j^p}{\varphi}(v_j-\eta_j).

Lemma 4.1 gives ∣Fj∣+∣Gj∣≤CR|F_j|+|G_j|\leq C_R. Fix an arbitrary θ0∈Sm\theta_0\in S_m. For 0<h≤10<h\leq1, let Ih=(θ0−h,θ0+h)I_h=(\theta_0-h,\theta_0+h) and define Aj,h(τ)=(2h)−1∫Ihvj(θ,τ) dθA_{j,h}(\tau)=(2h)^{-1}\int_{I_h}v_j(\theta,\tau)\,d\theta, using periodic extension if necessary. The spatial Lipschitz bound and integration of the equation give, respectively,

∣vj(θ0,τ)−Aj,h(τ)∣≤CRh,∣Aj,h(τ2)−Aj,h(τ1)∣≤CR(Δh+Δ),|v_j(\theta_0,\tau)-A_{j,h}(\tau)|\leq C_Rh,\qquad|A_{j,h}(\tau_2)-A_{j,h}(\tau_1)|\leq C_R\left(\frac{\Delta}{h}+\Delta\right),

where Δ=∣τ2−τ1∣\Delta=|\tau_2-\tau_1|. Therefore

∣vj(θ0,τ2)−vj(θ0,τ1)∣≤∣vj(θ0,τ2)−Aj,h(τ2)∣+∣Aj,h(τ2)−Aj,h(τ1)∣+∣Aj,h(τ1)−vj(θ0,τ1)∣≤CR(h+Δh+Δ).\begin{aligned} |v_j(\theta_0,\tau_2)-v_j(\theta_0,\tau_1)| &\leq|v_j(\theta_0,\tau_2)-A_{j,h}(\tau_2)|\\ &\quad+|A_{j,h}(\tau_2)-A_{j,h}(\tau_1)|\\ &\quad+|A_{j,h}(\tau_1)-v_j(\theta_0,\tau_1)|\\ &\leq C_R\left(h+\frac{\Delta}{h}+\Delta\right). \end{aligned}

For 0<Δ≤10<\Delta\leq1, take h=Δh=\sqrt{\Delta}. For Δ≥1\Delta\geq1, use ∣vj(θ0,τ2)−vj(θ0,τ1)∣≤2∥vj∥∞≤CRΔ|v_j(\theta_0,\tau_2)-v_j(\theta_0,\tau_1)|\leq2\|v_j\|_\infty\leq C_R\sqrt{\Delta}. This proves (51). □

Disappearance of the nonlocal term

Define the rescaled Euclidean length and the rescaled numerator of the nonlocal term by

Lj(τ)=QjL(tj+τ/qjp)=∫Smφvj−1/α dθ,Jj(τ)=∫Smφvj1−1/α dθ.(52)\begin{aligned} \mathcal{L}_j(\tau) &= Q_jL(t_j+\tau/q_j^p)=\int_{\mathbb{S}_m}\varphi v_j^{-1/\alpha}\,d\theta,\\ J_j(\tau) &= \int_{\mathbb{S}_m}\varphi v_j^{1-1/\alpha}\,d\theta. \tag*{(52)} \end{aligned}

Then

ηj(τ)=Jj(τ)Lj(τ).(53)\eta_j(\tau)=\frac{J_j(\tau)}{\mathcal{L}_j(\tau)}. \tag*{(53)}

Lemma 4.3. On every compact rescaled time interval,

ηj⟶0,ηj′⟶0(54)\eta_j\longrightarrow0,\qquad\eta_j'\longrightarrow0 \tag*{(54)}

uniformly as j→∞j\to\infty.

Proof. Since Lj≥Qjinf⁡t<TL(t)→∞\mathcal{L}_j\ge Q_j\inf_{t<T}L(t)\to\infty, Jensen’s inequality gives

0<ηj≤(KσLj)α⟶00<\eta_j\le\left(\frac{K_\sigma}{\mathcal{L}_j}\right)^\alpha\longrightarrow0

uniformly on compact rescaled time intervals. Differentiating (52), using (48) and periodic integration by parts, we obtain

Lj′=−∫Smvj dθ+2mπηj,(55)\mathcal{L}_j'=-\int_{\mathbb{S}_m}v_j\,d\theta+2m\pi\eta_j, \tag*{(55)}
Jj′=(α−1)∫Sm(−(vj)θ2+vj2−ηjvj) dθ.(56)J_j'=(\alpha-1)\int_{\mathbb{S}_m}\left(-(v_j)_\theta^2+v_j^2-\eta_jv_j\right)\,d\theta. \tag*{(56)}

Indeed, the powers of vjv_j cancel in the first differentiation, while in the second they leave the factor vjv_j:

Jj′=(α−1)∫Smvj((vj)θθ+vj−ηj) dθ.J_j'=(\alpha-1)\int_{\mathbb{S}_m}v_j\left((v_j)_{\theta\theta}+v_j-\eta_j\right)\,d\theta.

The right-hand sides of (55) and (56) are uniformly bounded on each compact rescaled time interval by Lemma 4.1. The quotient rule therefore gives

∣ηj′∣≤∣Jj′∣Lj+ηj∣Lj′∣Lj⟶0\lvert\eta_j'\rvert\le\frac{\lvert J_j'\rvert}{\mathcal{L}_j}+\eta_j\frac{\lvert\mathcal{L}_j'\rvert}{\mathcal{L}_j}\longrightarrow0

uniformly there as well.

A Harnack estimate

Since vj>0v_j>0, define

zj=(vj)τvj.(57)z_j=\frac{(v_j)_\tau}{v_j}. \tag*{(57)}

A direct calculation using (48) gives

(zj)τ=αvjpφ(zj)θθ+2αvjp−1(vj)θφ(zj)θ+pzj2+αvjp−1φ(ηjzj−ηj′).(58)(z_j)_\tau=\frac{\alpha v_j^p}{\varphi}(z_j)_{\theta\theta}+\frac{2\alpha v_j^{p-1}(v_j)_\theta}{\varphi}(z_j)_\theta+pz_j^2+\frac{\alpha v_j^{p-1}}{\varphi}(\eta_jz_j-\eta_j'). \tag*{(58)}

Lemma 4.4 (Harnack estimate). Fix R>0R>0. There exists a sequence εj(R)→0\varepsilon_j(R)\to0 such that, for all sufficiently large jj,

zj(θ,τ)≥−1τ+R−εj(R),−R<τ≤R.(59)z_j(\theta,\tau)\ge-\frac{1}{\tau+R}-\sqrt{\varepsilon_j(R)},\qquad-R<\tau\le R. \tag*{(59)}

Consequently, if −R<τ1<τ2≤R-R<\tau_1<\tau_2\le R, then

vj(θ,τ2)≥R+τ1R+τ2exp⁡[−cj(R)(τ2−τ1)]vj(θ,τ1),(60)v_j(\theta,\tau_2)\ge\frac{R+\tau_1}{R+\tau_2}\exp\left[-c_j(R)(\tau_2-\tau_1)\right]v_j(\theta,\tau_1), \tag*{(60)}

where cj(R)→0c_j(R)\to0.

Proof. Let mj(τ)=min⁡Smzj(⋅,τ)m_j(\tau)=\min_{\mathbb{S}_m}z_j(\cdot,\tau). At a spatial minimum of zjz_j, equation (58) and Lemmas 4.1 and 4.3 give, in the lower Dini derivative sense,

mj′≥pmj2−CR∥ηj∥∞∣mj∣−CR∥ηj′∥∞≥p2mj2−εj(R)≥mj2−εj(R),m_j'\ge pm_j^2-C_R\lVert\eta_j\rVert_\infty\lvert m_j\rvert-C_R\lVert\eta_j'\rVert_\infty\ge\frac{p}{2}m_j^2-\varepsilon_j(R)\ge m_j^2-\varepsilon_j(R),

where p≥2p\ge2 has been used, εj(R)=CR(∥ηj∥∞2+∥ηj′∥∞)→0\varepsilon_j(R)=C_R(\lVert\eta_j\rVert_\infty^2+\lVert\eta_j'\rVert_\infty)\to0, and the norms are taken on [−R,R][-R,R]. The function

yj(τ)=−1τ+R−εj(R)y_j(\tau)=-\frac{1}{\tau+R}-\sqrt{\varepsilon_j(R)}

satisfies yj′≤yj2−εj(R)y_j'\le y_j^2-\varepsilon_j(R) and tends to −∞-\infty as τ↓−R\tau\downarrow-R. Comparison gives mj≥yjm_j\ge y_j, proving (4.15). Integrating ∂τlog⁡vj=zj\partial_\tau\log v_j=z_j and exponentiating gives (4.16), with cj(R)=εj(R)c_j(R)=\sqrt{\varepsilon_j(R)}.

Identification of the profile

Proof of Theorem 1.2. After passing to a subsequence,

θj⟶θ∗∈Sm.(61)\theta_j\longrightarrow\theta_*\in\mathbb{S}_m. \tag*{(61)}

Set uj(ξ,τ)=vj(θj+ξ,τ)u_j(\xi,\tau)=v_j(\theta_j+\xi,\tau) and bj(ξ)=αφ(θj+ξ)−1b_j(\xi)=\alpha\varphi(\theta_j+\xi)^{-1}. Then bj→b∞:=αφ(θ∗+ξ)−1b_j\to b_\infty:=\alpha\varphi(\theta_*+\xi)^{-1} smoothly. Lemmas 4.1 and 4.2, followed by Arzelà–Ascoli and a diagonal argument, give

uj⟶u∞locally uniformly on Sm×R.(62)u_j\longrightarrow u_\infty\qquad\text{locally uniformly on }\mathbb{S}_m\times\mathbb{R}. \tag*{(62)}

By (49),

0≤u∞≤1,u∞(0,0)=1.(63)0\le u_\infty\le1,\qquad u_\infty(0,0)=1. \tag*{(63)}

Fix τ1<τ2\tau_1<\tau_2 and R>max⁡{∣τ1∣,∣τ2∣}+1R>\max\{|\tau_1|,|\tau_2|\}+1. Passing to the limit in (60), with RR fixed, yields

u∞(ξ,τ2)≥R+τ1R+τ2u∞(ξ,τ1).u_\infty(\xi,\tau_2)\ge\frac{R+\tau_1}{R+\tau_2}u_\infty(\xi,\tau_1).

Letting R→∞R\to\infty gives

u∞(ξ,τ2)≥u∞(ξ,τ1),τ2>τ1.(64)u_\infty(\xi,\tau_2)\ge u_\infty(\xi,\tau_1),\qquad\tau_2>\tau_1. \tag*{(64)}

In particular, (4.19) implies

u∞(0,τ)=1,τ≥0.(65)u_\infty(0,\tau)=1,\qquad\tau\ge0. \tag*{(65)}

Let II be the connected component of {u∞(⋅,0)>0}\{u_\infty(\cdot,0)>0\} containing 00. By (4.20) and local uniform convergence, uju_j has a uniform positive lower bound on each K⋐I×[δ,R]K \Subset I \times[\delta,R], where K⋐IK \Subset I and 0<δ<R0<\delta<R. Standard interior parabolic estimates and Lemma 4.3 yield

uj⟶u∞in Cloc2,1(I×(0,∞)).(66)u_j \longrightarrow u_\infty\quad\text{in } C_{\mathrm{loc}}^{2,1}(I \times(0,\infty)). \tag*{(66)}

The limit satisfies

(u∞)τ=b∞(ξ)u∞p((u∞)ξξ+u∞),b∞(ξ)=αφ(θ∗+ξ),(67)(u_\infty)_\tau=b_\infty(\xi)u_\infty^p\bigl((u_\infty)_{\xi\xi}+u_\infty\bigr), \qquad b_\infty(\xi)=\frac{\alpha}{\varphi(\theta_*+\xi)}, \tag*{(67)}

and is smooth there by interior regularity. By (4.20), we have w:=(u∞)τ≥0w:=(u_\infty)_\tau\geq0. Differentiating (4.23) gives

wτ=b∞u∞pwξξ+cw,c=pb∞u∞p−1(u∞)ξξ+(p+1)b∞u∞p.(68)w_\tau=b_\infty u_\infty^p w_{\xi\xi}+cw,\qquad c=pb_\infty u_\infty^{p-1}(u_\infty)_{\xi\xi}+(p+1)b_\infty u_\infty^p. \tag*{(68)}

This equation is uniformly parabolic on compact subsets of I×(0,∞)I\times(0,\infty), with locally bounded coefficients. Since w≥0w\geq0 and w(0,τ)=0w(0,\tau)=0 for every τ>0\tau>0, the strong maximum principle gives w≡0w\equiv0 on I×(0,∞)I\times(0,\infty).

It follows that u∞u_\infty is independent of τ\tau and (u∞)ξξ+u∞=0(u_\infty)_{\xi\xi}+u_\infty=0 on II. Since u∞(0)=1u_\infty(0)=1 and (u∞)ξ(0)=0(u_\infty)_\xi(0)=0, we obtain u∞(ξ,τ)=cos⁡ξu_\infty(\xi,\tau)=\cos\xi. By continuity the identity also holds at τ=0\tau=0, and maximality of the positive component gives I=(−π/2,π/2)I=(-\pi/2,\pi/2). Hence (4.18) gives

v(θj+ξ,tj)v(θj,tj)⟶cos⁡ξuniformly for ∣ξ∣≤π/2.(69)\frac{v(\theta_j+\xi,t_j)}{v(\theta_j,t_j)}\longrightarrow\cos\xi\quad\text{uniformly for } |\xi|\leq\pi/2. \tag*{(69)}

Finally, the gradient estimate gives

sup⁡∣ξ∣≤π/2∣v(θ∗+ξ,tj)−v(θj+ξ,tj)qj∣≤C∣θj−θ∗∣⟶0.\sup_{|\xi|\leq\pi/2}\left|\frac{v(\theta_*+\xi,t_j)-v(\theta_j+\xi,t_j)}{q_j}\right|\leq C|\theta_j-\theta_*|\longrightarrow0.

Taking ξ=0\xi=0 shows that v(θ∗,tj)/qj→1v(\theta_*,t_j)/q_j\to1. Therefore

v(θ∗+ξ,tj)v(θ∗,tj)⟶cos⁡ξ\frac{v(\theta_*+\xi,t_j)}{v(\theta_*,t_j)}\longrightarrow\cos\xi

uniformly on the same interval. Taking the power 1/α1/\alpha and using v=(φκ)αv=(\varphi\kappa)^\alpha proves (1.24) and (1.25), and completes the proof. □

Remark 4.5. Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 give the Type-II conclusion without the symmetry assumption in the isotropic work of Anada–Ishiwata–Ushijima [2], and also allow anisotropy, under the stated length lower bound. For the anisotropic flow of Poon–Tsai [32 Theorem 4.7 and Corollary 4.9], the nonlocal error is absent. Their geometric Type-II result is stated for embedded convex curves, whereas the same profile argument here applies to immersed locally convex curves without symmetry. These conclusions concern selected blow-up subsequences and do not assert uniqueness of the blow-up direction.

Global compactness and finite-time singularity

Global compactness and proof of Theorem 1.3

We now turn to the sufficient conditions for finite-time singularity formation. The following convergence result will be used to prove Theorem 1.3.

Proposition 5.1 (Global compactness and convergence). Assume that a smooth locally convex solution of (1.19) exists for all t≥0t \ge0 and that

Lσ(∞):=lim⁡t→∞Lσ(t)>0.(70)L_\sigma(\infty) := \lim_{t \to\infty} L_\sigma(t) > 0. \tag*{(70)}

Then v=κσαv = \kappa_\sigma^\alpha has positive time-independent upper and lower bounds, and all its spatial derivatives are uniformly bounded. Moreover,

∫Xt(κσ−λ1/α)(κσα−λ) ds⟶0as t→∞,(71)\int_{X_t}(\kappa_\sigma-\lambda^{1/\alpha})(\kappa_\sigma^\alpha-\lambda)\,ds \longrightarrow0 \qquad\text{as } t \to\infty, \tag*{(71)}

and, for every integer k≥0k \ge0,

λ(t)⟶C∗α,v(⋅,t)⟶C∗αin Ck(Sm),C∗:=2∣Wσ∣Lσ(∞)>0.\lambda(t) \longrightarrow C_*^\alpha,\qquad v(\cdot,t) \longrightarrow C_*^\alpha\quad\text{in } C^k(S_m),\qquad C_* := \frac{2|W_\sigma|}{L_\sigma(\infty)} > 0.

After translating each curve so that X(0,t)=0X(0,t)=0, the curves converge smoothly to a translation of C∗−1∂WσC_*^{-1}\partial W_\sigma. In particular,

A(0)=∣Wσ∣C∗2>0,C∗=∣Wσ∣A(0).(72)A(0)=\frac{|W_\sigma|}{C_*^2}>0,\qquad C_*=\sqrt{\frac{|W_\sigma|}{A(0)}}. \tag*{(72)}

Proof. By (5.1) and positivity of σ\sigma,

0<Lσ(∞)σmax⁡≤L(t)≤Lσ(0)σmin⁡<∞.(73)0<\frac{L_\sigma(\infty)}{\sigma_{\max}}\le L(t)\le\frac{L_\sigma(0)}{\sigma_{\min}}<\infty. \tag*{(73)}

Thus (1.21) gives a positive time-independent upper bound for λ\lambda. Write λ≤Λ\lambda\le\Lambda and set

D(t):=−Lσ′(t)=∫Xt(v1/α−λ1/α)(v−λ) ds.\mathcal{D}(t):=-L_\sigma'(t)=\int_{X_t}(v^{1/\alpha}-\lambda^{1/\alpha})(v-\lambda)\,ds.

Lemma 2.1 gives D≥0\mathcal{D}\ge0 and ∫0∞D(t) dt=Lσ(0)−Lσ(∞)<∞\int_0^\infty\mathcal{D}(t)\,dt=L_\sigma(0)-L_\sigma(\infty)<\infty. For any fixed d0>0d_0>0, there are tj∈[(j−1)d0,jd0]t_j\in[(j-1)d_0,jd_0] with D(tj)→0\mathcal{D}(t_j)\to0. By the first variation of anisotropic length,

D(t)=∫Smφv dθ−λKσ.(74)\mathcal{D}(t)=\int_{S_m}\varphi v\,d\theta-\lambda K_\sigma. \tag*{(74)}

Consequently, for F(t):=∫Smv dθF(t):=\int_{S_m}v\,d\theta,

F(tj)≤B:=1+ΛKσφmin⁡F(t_j)\le B:=\frac{1+\Lambda K_\sigma}{\varphi_{\min}}

for all sufficiently large jj, where BB is independent of d0d_0.

To extend the bound to all times, put a=αφ−1a=\alpha\varphi^{-1}. By (2.2), periodic integration by parts and λ≥0\lambda\ge0 give

F′(t)≤−p∫Smavp−1vθ2 dθ+∫Sm(a+1p+1aθθ)vp+1 dθ.F'(t)\le-p\int_{S_m}av^{p-1}v_\theta^2\,d\theta+\int_{S_m}\left(a+\frac{1}{p+1}a_{\theta\theta}\right)v^{p+1}\,d\theta.

Since vs=(v1/α/φ)vθv_s=(v^{1/\alpha}/\varphi)v_\theta, dθ=(v1/α/φ) dsd\theta=(v^{1/\alpha}/\varphi)\,ds and p−1=1/αp-1=1/\alpha, we obtain

F′(t)≤−αp∫Xtvs2 ds+C∫Xtv2p ds.(75)F'(t)\le-\alpha p\int_{X_t}v_s^2\,ds+C\int_{X_t}v^{2p}\,ds. \tag*{(75)}

The one-dimensional Gagliardo–Nirenberg inequality gives

∥v∥L2p≤C(∥vs∥L21/(p+2)∥v∥Lp(p+1)/(p+2)+∥v∥Lp).\|v\|_{L^{2p}} \le C\left(\|v_s\|_{L^2}^{1/(p+2)}\|v\|_{L^p}^{(p+1)/(p+2)}+\|v\|_{L^p}\right).

where all norms are taken along XtX_t and the constant is uniform by (73). Taking the power 2p2p and applying Young’s inequality yields

∫Xtv2p ds≤ϵ∫Xtvs2 ds+Cϵ(∥v∥Lpp(p+1)+∥v∥Lp2p).\int_{X_t}v^{2p}\,ds\le\epsilon\int_{X_t}v_s^2\,ds+C_\epsilon\left(\|v\|_{L^p}^{p(p+1)}+\|v\|_{L^p}^{2p}\right).

where Cϵ>0C_\epsilon>0 is a time-independent constant. Using ∥v∥Lpp=∫Smφv dθ≤φmax⁡F\|v\|_{L^p}^p=\int_{S_m}\varphi v\,d\theta\le\varphi_{\max}F and taking ϵ\epsilon sufficiently small to absorb the derivative term in (75), we obtain

F′(t)≤C(Fp+1(t)+F2(t)).(76)F'(t)\le C\left(F^{p+1}(t)+F^2(t)\right). \tag*{(76)}

Thus there is a number δ0>0\delta_0>0, independent of jj, such that a fixed bound for F(tj)F(t_j) implies a fixed bound for FF on [tj,tj+δ0][t_j,t_j+\delta_0]. Choosing d0=δ0/2d_0=\delta_0/2 makes these intervals overlap, and hence

sup⁡t≥0F(t)<∞.(77)\sup_{t\ge0}F(t)<\infty. \tag*{(77)}

If vv were not uniformly bounded, choose (θj,sj)(\theta_j,s_j) such that

v(θj,sj)=max⁡Sm×[0,sj]v⟶∞.v(\theta_j,s_j)=\max_{S_m\times[0,s_j]}v\longrightarrow\infty.

Lemma 2.3 gives a fixed-length angle interval on which v(⋅,sj)v(\cdot,s_j) is comparable with this maximum. Thus F(sj)→∞F(s_j)\to\infty, contradicting (77). Hence

v(θ,t)≤C,t∈[0,∞),(78)v(\theta,t)\le C,\qquad t\in[0,\infty), \tag*{(78)}

and Lemma 2.2 also gives ∣vθ∣≤C|v_\theta|\le C. If ej:=v(θj,tj)→0e_j:=v(\theta_j,t_j)\to0, this Lipschitz bound would imply

Lσ(tj)≥c∫0δdr(ej+Cr)1/α⟶∞,L_\sigma(t_j)\ge c\int_0^\delta\frac{dr}{(e_j+Cr)^{1/\alpha}}\longrightarrow\infty,

since 1/α≥11/\alpha\ge1. Here c,δ>0c,\delta>0 are independent of jj. This contradicts Lσ(tj)≤Lσ(0)L_\sigma(t_j)\le L_\sigma(0). Therefore

0<c≤v(θ,t)≤C.(79)0<c\le v(\theta,t)\le C. \tag*{(79)}

The same bounds hold for λ\lambda, since it is the arc-length average of vv. The equation is now uniformly parabolic. Differentiating JJ in (32) and integrating by parts, as in (56), gives

J′=(α−1)∫Sm(−vθ2+v2−λv) dθ.J'=(\alpha-1)\int_{S_m}\left(-v_\theta^2+v^2-\lambda v\right)\,d\theta.

This formula, (34) and (73) bound λ′=J′/L−λL′/L\lambda'=J'/L-\lambda L'/L. Standard interior estimates then give time-independent bounds for vtv_t and all spatial derivatives of vv. Differentiating (74) therefore gives ∣D′(t)∣≤C|\mathcal{D}'(t)|\le C. Since D\mathcal{D} is nonnegative and integrable, this bound implies D(t)→0\mathcal{D}(t)\to0. Moreover,

D(t)=∫Smφv1/α(v1/α−λ1/α)(v−λ) dθ≥c∥v(⋅,t)−λ(t)∥L2(Sm)2.\mathcal{D}(t)=\int_{S_m}\frac{\varphi}{v^{1/\alpha}}\left(v^{1/\alpha}-\lambda^{1/\alpha}\right)(v-\lambda)\,d\theta\ge c\|v(\cdot,t)-\lambda(t)\|_{L^2(S_m)}^2.

The last inequality follows from (5.10) and the mean value theorem applied to s↦s1/αs \mapsto s^{1/\alpha} on the common positive range of vv and λ\lambda. The uniform spatial derivative estimates and compactness therefore give

∥v(⋅,t)−λ(t)∥Ck(Sm)⟶0for every integer k≥0.(80)\lVert v(\cdot,t)-\lambda(t)\rVert_{C^k(\mathbb{S}_m)} \longrightarrow0 \qquad\text{for every integer } k \ge0. \tag*{(80)}

To identify the limit, use

λ(t)1/αLσ(t)−2∣Wσ∣=∫Smσφv1/α(λ1/α−v1/α) dθ.\lambda(t)^{1/\alpha}L_\sigma(t)-2|W_\sigma|=\int_{\mathbb{S}_m}\frac{\sigma\varphi}{v^{1/\alpha}}\left(\lambda^{1/\alpha}-v^{1/\alpha}\right)\,d\theta.

Thus

∣λ1/αLσ−2∣Wσ∣∣≤Lσ∥v1/α−λ1/α∥∞⟶0,\left|\lambda^{1/\alpha}L_\sigma-2|W_\sigma|\right|\le L_\sigma\left\|v^{1/\alpha}-\lambda^{1/\alpha}\right\|_\infty\longrightarrow0,

and

λ(t)1/α⟶C∗:=2∣Wσ∣Lσ(∞),v(⋅,t)⟶C∗αin every Ck(Sm).\lambda(t)^{1/\alpha}\longrightarrow C_*:=\frac{2|W_\sigma|}{L_\sigma(\infty)},\qquad v(\cdot,t)\longrightarrow C_*^\alpha\quad\text{in every }C^k(\mathbb{S}_m).

Finally, the translated curves satisfy

X(θ,t)−X(0,t)=∫0θφ(r)v(r,t)1/αT(r) dr⟶1C∗∫0θφ(r)T(r) drX(\theta,t)-X(0,t)=\int_0^\theta\frac{\varphi(r)}{v(r,t)^{1/\alpha}}T(r)\,dr\longrightarrow\frac{1}{C_*}\int_0^\theta\varphi(r)T(r)\,dr

smoothly. Since ∂θ(−σN+σ′T)=φT\partial_\theta(-\sigma N+\sigma'T)=\varphi T, the limit is a translation of C∗−1∂WσC_*^{-1}\partial W_\sigma. Continuity and translation invariance of signed area, together with area preservation, give A(0)=∣Wσ∣/C∗2>0A(0)=|W_\sigma|/C_*^2>0, proving (5.3).

Proof of Theorem 1.3. Suppose first that A(0)<0A(0)<0 and the solution were global. A generalized isoperimetric inequality for immersed closed plane curves (see Osserman [29]) gives

L2(t)≥4π∣A(t)∣=4π∣A(0)∣.L^2(t)\ge4\pi|A(t)|=4\pi|A(0)|.

Therefore

Lσ(t)≥σmin⁡L(t)≥2σmin⁡π∣A(0)∣,L_\sigma(t)\ge\sigma_{\min}L(t)\ge2\sigma_{\min}\sqrt{\pi|A(0)|},

so (5.1) holds. Proposition 5.1 would then imply that the preserved signed area is positive, a contradiction.

Now assume

0<Lσ2(0)<4∣Wσ∣A(0).0<L_\sigma^2(0)<4|W_\sigma|A(0).

Again A(0)>0A(0)>0 and the generalized isoperimetric inequality gives (5.1). If the flow were global, Proposition 5.1 would give

κσ(⋅,t)⟶C∗=∣Wσ∣A(0).\kappa_\sigma(\cdot,t)\longrightarrow C_*=\sqrt{\frac{|W_\sigma|}{A(0)}}.

Consequently,

Lσ(∞)=1C∗Lσ(∂Wσ)=2∣Wσ∣C∗=2∣Wσ∣A(0).L_\sigma(\infty)=\frac{1}{C_*}L_\sigma(\partial W_\sigma)=\frac{2|W_\sigma|}{C_*}=2\sqrt{|W_\sigma|A(0)}.

Since LσL_\sigma is non-increasing,

Lσ2(0)≥Lσ2(∞)=4∣Wσ∣A(0),L_\sigma^2(0)\ge L_\sigma^2(\infty)=4|W_\sigma|A(0),

contradicting the assumption. Hence in either case the maximal existence time is finite. By the continuation criterion, the curvature blows up there.

Initial curves near the Wulff curve

We give the construction asserted in Remark 1.4.

For a locally convex immersion parametrized by its tangential angle, its support function relative to the origin is h=−⟨X,N⟩h=-\langle X,N\rangle. Then hθ=⟨X,T⟩h_\theta=\langle X,T\rangle, so

X=−hN+hθT,Xθ=(h+hθθ)T.X=-hN+h_\theta T,\qquad X_\theta=(h+h_{\theta\theta})T.

Conversely, any smooth 2mπ2m\pi-periodic function hh with h+hθθ>0h+h_{\theta\theta}>0 determines in this way a closed locally convex immersion of rotation index mm. Here the support function is understood along the immersion, not as the support function of a convex body.

Put B=∣Wσ∣B=|W_\sigma| and define

c0:=∫Smφ(θ)cos⁡(θ/m) dθ∫Smφ(θ) dθ,f(θ):=cos⁡(θ/m)−c0.c_0:=\frac{\int_{S_m}\varphi(\theta)\cos(\theta/m)\,\mathrm{d}\theta}{\int_{S_m}\varphi(\theta)\,\mathrm{d}\theta},\qquad f(\theta):=\cos(\theta/m)-c_0.

Then ∫Smφf dθ=0\int_{S_m}\varphi f\,\mathrm{d}\theta=0. For sufficiently small ∣ε∣|\varepsilon|, the function hε=σ+εfh_\varepsilon=\sigma+\varepsilon f satisfies hε+hε,θθ>0h_\varepsilon+h_{\varepsilon,\theta\theta}>0, and hence defines a locally convex closed curve Xε=−hεN+(hε)θTX_\varepsilon=-h_\varepsilon N+(h_\varepsilon)_\theta T. Periodic integration by parts gives

Lσ(Xε)=∫Smσ(hε+hε,θθ) dθ=2B,L_\sigma(X_\varepsilon)=\int_{S_m}\sigma(h_\varepsilon+h_{\varepsilon,\theta\theta})\,\mathrm{d}\theta=2B,
A(Xε)=12∫Smhε(hε+hε,θθ) dθ=B+ε22∫Sm(f2−fθ2) dθ.A(X_\varepsilon)=\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_m}h_\varepsilon(h_\varepsilon+h_{\varepsilon,\theta\theta})\,\mathrm{d}\theta=B+\frac{\varepsilon^2}{2}\int_{S_m}(f^2-f_\theta^2)\,\mathrm{d}\theta.

Since

∫Sm(f2−fθ2) dθ=mπ(1−1m2)+2mπc02>0,\int_{S_m}(f^2-f_\theta^2)\,\mathrm{d}\theta=m\pi\left(1-\frac{1}{m^2}\right)+2m\pi c_0^2>0,

we obtain

0<Lσ2(Xε)=4B2<4BA(Xε)0<L_\sigma^2(X_\varepsilon)=4B^2<4BA(X_\varepsilon)

for all sufficiently small nonzero ε\varepsilon. Thus, for every 0<α≤10<\alpha\leq1, Corollary 1.5 gives a finite-time Type-II singularity for each such initial curve. Moreover, Xε→−σN+σθTX_\varepsilon\to-\sigma N+\sigma_\theta T in C∞(Sm)C^\infty(S_m) as ε→0\varepsilon\to0. The strict inequality persists under sufficiently small smooth perturbations of each XεX_\varepsilon, so the examples need not be confined to a symmetric class.

Acknowledgements

This work is partially supported by the NSF of China 12471193, 12271092, 11871148, 11101078, the 2023 Qinglan Project of Jiangsu Province, and the Jiangsu Provincial Scientific Research Center of Applied Mathematics under Grant No. BK20233002.

Data availability statement

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors state no conflict of interest.

References

References

  1. [1]U. Abresch and J. Langer, The normalized curve shortening flow and homothetic solutions, J. Differential Geom., 23 (1986), 175–196.DOI
  2. [2]K. Anada, T. Ishiwata and T. Ushijima, Type II singularities in area-preserving curvature flows of convex symmetric immersed closed plane curves, J. Differential Equations, 437 (2025), Paper No. 113348.DOI
  3. [3]B. Andrews, Evolving convex curves, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 7 (1998), 315–371.DOI
  4. [4]B. Andrews, Non-convergence and instability in the asymptotic behaviour of curves evolving by curvature, Comm. Anal. Geom., 10 (2002), 409–449.DOI
  5. [5]B. Andrews, Classification of limiting shapes for isotropic curve flows, J. Amer. Math. Soc., 16 (2003), 443–459.DOI
  6. [6]S. Angenent, On the formation of singularities in the curve shortening flow, J. Differential Geom., 33 (1991), 601–633.DOI
  7. [7]M. Beneš, S. Yazaki and M. Kimura, Computational studies of non-local anisotropic Allen–Cahn equation, Math. Bohem., 136 (2011), 429–437.DOI
  8. [8]N. Cernomazov, Shrinkers of the area-preserving curve-shortening flow: Existence and saddle-point property, arXiv:2508.00352v2, 2026.arxiv.org/abs/2508.00352
  9. [9]K.S. Chou and X.P. Zhu, Anisotropic flows for convex plane curves, Duke Math. J., 97 (1999), 579–619.DOI
  10. [10]K.S. Chou and X.P. Zhu, The Curve Shortening Problem, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2001.DOI
  11. [11]F. Dittberner, Curve flows with a global forcing term, J. Geom. Anal., 31 (2021), 8414–8459.DOI
  12. [12]J. Escher and K. Ito, Some dynamic properties of volume preserving curvature driven flows, Math. Ann., 333 (2005), 213–230.DOI
  13. [13]M.E. Gage, On an area-preserving evolution equation for plane curves, Contemp. Math., 51 (1986), 51–62.DOI
  14. [14]M.E. Gage and R.S. Hamilton, The heat equation shrinking convex plane curves, J. Differential Geom., 23 (1986), 69–96.DOI
  15. [15]L.Y. Gao and Y.T. Zhang, On Yau’s problem of evolving one curve to another: convex case, J. Differential Equations, 266 (2019), 179–201.DOI
  16. [16]Y. Giga and N. Požár, Motion by crystalline-like mean curvature: a survey, Bull. Math. Sci., 12 (2022), Paper No. 2230004.arxiv.org/abs/2112.05294
  17. [17]M.A. Grayson, The heat equation shrinks embedded plane curves to round points, J. Differential Geom., 26 (1987), 285–314.DOI
  18. [18]M. Green and S. Osher, Steiner polynomials, Wulff flows, and some new isoperimetric inequalities for convex plane curves, Asian J. Math., 3 (1999), 659–676.DOI
  19. [19]R.S. Hamilton, The formation of singularities in the Ricci flow, in Surveys in Differential Geometry, Vol. II, Int. Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995, 7–136.
  20. [20]L.S. Jiang and S.L. Pan, On a non-local curve evolution problem in the plane, Comm. Anal. Geom., 16 (2008), 1–26.DOI
  21. [21]Y.R. Li and X.L. Wang, The evolution of gradient flow minimizing the anisoperimetric ratio of convex plane curves, J. Differential Equations, 375 (2023), 348–373.
  22. [22]Y.C. Lin, C.C. Poon and D.H. Tsai, Contracting convex immersed closed plane curves with slow speed of curvature, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 364 (2012), 5735–5763.arxiv.org/abs/1009.4777
  23. [23]F. Lippoth, On finite time blow-up of the volume preserving mean curvature flow in 2D, J. Geom. Anal., 35 (2025), Paper No. 168.DOI
  24. [24]L. Liu, D.H. Tsai and X.L. Wang, On length-preserving and area-preserving anisotropic curvature flow of convex closed plane curves, J. Evol. Equ., 25 (2025), Paper No. 2.DOI
  25. [25]L. Liu, Y.L. Yang and Y.L. Zhang, Preserving Minkowski length from one convex curve to another, Math. Res. Lett., 31 (2024), 1827–1836.DOI
  26. [26]L. Ma and A.Q. Zhu, On a length preserving curve flow, Monatsh. Math., 165 (2012), 57–78.arxiv.org/abs/0811.2083
  27. [27]E. Mäder-Baumdicker, Singularities of the area preserving curve shortening flow with a free boundary condition, Math. Ann., 371 (2018), 1429–1448.
  28. [28]T. Nagasawa and K. Nakamura, Asymptotic analysis for non-local curvature flows for plane curves with a general rotation number, Math. Eng., 3 (2021), 1–26.arxiv.org/abs/2003.06120
  29. [29]R. Osserman, The isoperimetric inequality, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 84 (1978), 1182–1238.DOI
  30. [30]S.L. Pan and Y.L. Yang, An anisotropic area-preserving flow for convex plane curves, J. Differential Equations, 266 (2019), 3764–3786.DOI
  31. [31]C.C. Poon and D.H. Tsai, Contracting convex immersed closed plane curves with fast speed of curvature, Comm. Anal. Geom., 18 (2010), 23–75.DOI
  32. [32]C.C. Poon and D.H. Tsai, On a nonlinear parabolic equation arising from anisotropic plane curve evolution, J. Differential Equations, 258 (2015), 2375–2407.DOI
  33. [33]N. Šešum, D.H. Tsai and X.L. Wang, Evolution of locally convex closed curves in the area-preserving and length-preserving curvature flows, Comm. Anal. Geom., 28 (2020), 1863–1894.DOI
  34. [34]D. Ševčovič and S. Yazaki, On a gradient flow of plane curves minimizing the anisoperimetric ratio, IAENG Int. J. Appl. Math., 43 (2013), 160–171.arxiv.org/abs/1203.2238
  35. [35]Z.Z. Sun, Deforming convex curves with constant anisotropic length, J. Geom. Anal., 35 (2025), Paper No. 296.arxiv.org/abs/2311.01763
  36. [36]J.E. Taylor and J.W. Cahn, Linking anisotropic sharp and diffuse surface motion laws via gradient flows, J. Statist. Phys., 77 (1994), 183–197.DOI
  37. [37]D.H. Tsai and X.L. Wang, On length-preserving and area-preserving nonlocal flow of convex closed plane curves, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 54 (2015), 3603–3622.DOI
  38. [38]X.L. Wang and Y.P. Wang, The area-preserving anisotropic motion of a phase interface arising from Allen–Cahn equation, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., 45 (2025), 2949–2968.DOI
  39. [39]Y.P. Wang and X.L. Wang, The evolution of immersed locally convex plane curves driven by anisotropic curvature flow, Adv. Nonlinear Anal., 12 (2023), 117–131.DOI
  40. [40]Z.Y. Ye and X.L. Wang, Evolution of convex closed curves under the generalized gradient flow of anisoperimetric ratio, Nonlinear Anal., 263 (2026), Paper No. 113980.DOI
  41. [41]T.Y. Zhao, Y.L. Yang, Y.Y. Mao and J.B. Fang, Anisotropic area-preserving nonlocal flow for closed convex plane curves, Adv. Geom., 24 (2024), 79–98.DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_cp33dfem
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 0

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

Not recorded for this paper · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents