View source for Talk:Perturbation theory (dynamical systems)

== Reviewer: Review of perturbation theory article (revised) ==

I respect the authors' careful and technically sophisticated presentation in the article they have written. I also respect the authors' freedom to write about whatever focus areas they prefer. However I will not give my approval to have this article represent the area of "Perturbation Theory". It is far too narrowly focused to represent this field. Rather than having other articles with different qualified titles "Classical Perturbation Theory, Perturbation theory of eigenvalues", it should be the current text that should be shifted to a different entry, for example "KAM theory and perturbation theory". Sections 1-1.3 might be appropriate for an article on general perturbation theory (and I appreciate some revisions that the authors have made here in response to the previous review), most of the rest is directed in far too specialized a way for an "encyclopedia entry". For comparison, see the WIKIPEDIA article on perturbation theory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perturbation_theory
which is far more comprehensive in its treatment of different areas, applications and history of the field.

The Wikipedia article has set a standard by which this article (and Scholarpedia) will be judged. The authors and the editors should consider this fact and evaluate how best to proceed in such a way to make best use of the authors' sophisticated technical contribution.