English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The proof of Proposition 11 in [1] has a gap. The use of differential inequalities in line 7 of the statement in the beginning of page 333, is not correct. The aim of this note is to present a correct proof of this result. The question is to prove that if the equation (1) has a non fast heteroclinic solution for some c1 > 2 √ f ′(0) , then c1 > c∗, where c∗ := inf{c ∈ R : (1) has an heteroclinic solution}. So, we only have to prove there exists an heteroclinic solution for values below c1. By the claim in page 332 in [1] it is sufficient to find a solution of (19) for some c 0, u ∈]0, 1]. Let y1 be the solution of (19) with c = c1 corresponding to the non fast heteroclinic solution of (1). Then y1 satisfies y1(0) = y1(1) = 0. Consider 2 √ f ′(0) y1(u) for small values

Erratum to: Fast and heteroclinic solutions for a second order ODE related to Fisher-Kolmogorov’s equation