\section*{Abstract}{\begin{spacing}{1.0} \small
We present Fabry-P\'erot interferometric observations of the narrow H$\alpha$\ component in the shock front of the historical supernova remnant Tycho (SN 1572).
Using \texttt{GH$\alpha$FaS}\ (Galaxy H$\alpha$\ Fabry-P\'erot Spectrometer) on the William Herschel Telescope, we observed a great portion of the shock front in the northeastern (NE)
region of the remnant. The angular resolution of $\sim$1$^{\prime\prime}$\ and spectral resolving power of R$\sim$21\,000 together with the large field-of-view (3.4$^{\prime}$$\times$3.4$^{\prime}$) of the
instrument allow us to measure the narrow H$\alpha$-line width in 73 bins across individual parts of the shock simultaneously and thereby study the indicators of several
shock precursors in a large variety of shock front conditions. Compared to previous studies, the detailed spatial resolution of the filament also allows us to mitigate possible artificial
broadening of the line from unresolved differential motion and projection. Covering one quarter of the remnant's shell, we confirm the broadening of
the narrow H$\alpha$\ line beyond its intrinsic width of $\sim$20\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ and report it to extend over most of the filament, not only the previously investigated dense 'knot\,g'.
Similarly, we confirm and find additional strong evidence for wide-spread intermediate-line ($\sim$150\,km\,s$^{-1}$) emission. Our Bayesian analysis approach allows us to quantify the evidence
for this intermediate component as well as a possible split in the narrow line. Suprathermal narrow
line widths point toward an additional heating mechanism in the form of a cosmic-ray precursor, while  the intermediate component, previously only qualitatively
reported as a small non-Gaussian contribution to the narrow component, reveals a broad-neutral precursor.
\end{spacing}}
\end{minipage}
\vspace{-0.2in}
\section{Introduction}

The main spectral characteristic of Balmer-dominated shocks (BDSs) is a two-component H$\alpha$\ line. Components are produced in radiative decays of excited
atoms \citep{ckr80}, whereas cold hydrogen atoms (the ones overrun by the shock) produce a narrow component ($\sim$10\,km\,s$^{-1}$) and broad-neutrals
generate a broad component ($\sim$1000\,km\,s$^{-1}$). Broad-neutrals are formed in a charge exchange (CE) process between a cold atom and a hot proton downstream of the shock.
BDSs are an important diagnostic tool for shock parameters \citep{heng10}:
narrow (broad) component width indicates the pre (post)-shock temperature; the shock velocity can be estimated from the broad line width and in combination with proper motions of optical filaments provides distance estimates;
the electron-to-proton temperature ratio can be constrained from the components' widths and their intensity ratios. The H$\alpha$-line profile is also influenced by possible shock precursors (emissions from the shock interacting with the pre-shock medium), for example
cosmic-rays (CRs) and broad-neutral precursors.
Heating in the CR precursor results in a narrow H$\alpha$\ component broadened beyond the normal 10--20\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ gas dispersion \citep{mor13}. Furthermore, CRs transfer also
momentum to the pre-shock neutrals introducing a Doppler shift between the pre- and post-shock gas \citep{lee07}.
CE in the broad-neutral precursor introduces an additional component to the H$\alpha$\ profile -- intermediate component -- with the width of $\sim$150km\,s$^{-1}$\ \citep{mor12}.

The H$\alpha$-line that is broader than the intrinsic 20\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ was previously measured in low-spatial resolution data of Tycho \citep{ghava00,lee07}, and interpreted as a strong indicator of CR production.
The same studies reported also on the detection of the intermediate component. However, both analyses focused on the H$\alpha$-bright,
but very complex 'knot\,g', where multiple or distorted shock fronts can contribute to the measured broadening of the narrow and intermediate H$\alpha$\ line.
Just as spatial resolution is crucial to eliminate or reduce the artificial broadening effect of differential projection, extended spatial coverage of the filament can help to ascertain spatially varying shock (and ambient ISM) conditions. For the first time, we provide both of these in our forthcoming analysis. We expand on previous studies also by providing full posterior distributions instead of relying merely on best-fit parameters (line fluxes, centroids and widths), and provide a quantitative assessment of the significance of the intermediate line as well as possible multiple narrow lines (projected shock fronts).

\section{Observations and Reduction}

The instrument setup of \texttt{GH$\alpha$FaS}\ is well suited for our study of spatially and spectrally resolving the narrow H$\alpha$\ line along the Tycho's NE rim.
\texttt{GH$\alpha$FaS}\ is very sensitive to gather enough signal-to-noise (S/N) of around 10 within 6.9\,h of observations, and its field-of-view (FoV) of 3.4$^{\prime}$$\times$3.4$^{\prime}$\ (1024$^2$ pixels at 0.2$^{\prime\prime}$\ pixel scale) is
large enough to cover roughly one quarter of the whole remnant. The instrument response function
is well approximated by a Gaussian with full width at half maximum (FWHM) of 19\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ \citep{blasco10}.
The spectral coverage of around 400\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ was centered around H$\alpha$\ line and split into 48 channels with a sampling velocity resolution of nearly 8\,km\,s$^{-1}$.

\begin{figure*}[!t]
\vspace{-0.3in}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth,angle=-90]{fig1_confpro_part1.pdf}
\centering
\caption{\footnotesize The left panel shows a composite image of the remnant ($\sim$8\,$^{\prime}$\ in diameter) of Tycho Brahe's 1572
	supernova, combining data from the Chandra X-ray Observatory (yellow, green, blue; NASA/CXC/SAO), Spitzer Space Telescope
	(red; NASA/JPL-Caltech), and the Calar Alto Observatory (white stars; Krause et al.). The magenta box indicates
	the pointing and the FoV of 3$^{\prime}$.4$\times$3$^{\prime}$.4 of the \texttt{GH$\alpha$FaS}\ Fabry-P\'erot interferometer.
	The green box marks the region which is zoomed-in in the right panel to show our reduced and integrated \texttt{GH$\alpha$FaS}\ H$\alpha$\ image.
	}
	\label{fig:fig1_part1}
\end{figure*}

We reduced the data (see Figure~\ref{fig:fig1_part1}) following the standard procedure for \texttt{GH$\alpha$FaS}\ data described in \citep{hernandez08}.
For each exposure we performed a phase- and wavelength-calibration and thereby built a data-subcube (x,y,$\lambda$) with 48 calibrated constant-wavelength slices.
For each frame (exposure, subcube), we then derived a (relative) astrometric solution, and aligned all frames onto a common coordinate system, before stacking.
In order to be able to take the flatfield effect and the effective exposure time into account, and to reconstruct the local background spectrum, we use the series of object-masked frames to build a flatfield- and a background-stack in the same way and in addition to the "raw" data stack (cube). We then use the flatfield (effective exposure time) cube and the background cube to compare the intrinsic emission model with the data cube (see next section).

\section{Analysis and Results}

Utilizing the large FoV, limiting bin sizes to $>1''$ that corresponds to the seeing conditions, and requiring S/N$\simeq$10 per bin, we were able to extract
spectra from 73 spatial Voronoi bins \citep{cappellari03}. Thus, we are in a position to measure the narrow H$\alpha$-line widths across individual parts of the
shocks simultaneously, and thereby study the indicators of precursors in a large variety of shock front conditions (see Figure~\ref{fig:fig1_part2}).
Although we see only $\sim1\%$ variations between background regions of 25$^2$ pixels, for very large bins with their large integrated signal and signal-to-noise,
even these small unaccounted-for residuals can become comparable to the noise. Therefore, we exclude bins with an area larger than 400 pixels from the analysis.

We use Bayesian inference to perform parameter estimation -- traditionally termed "fitting" -- as well as comparison and selection. This choice of method is motivated by our desire to maintain small bins with often low S/N, but to simultaneously obtain reliable and complete information about generally significantly non-Gaussian relative probabilities of the parameters ("errors"). This stands in stark contrast to the commonly applied method of deriving some (supposedly) best-fit set of parameters and a rough, generally vastly underestimated, "error bar" via minimizing the chi-square (maximum-likelihood) and calculating its local derivatives. We numerically calculate the posterior parameter probability distributions ("posteriors" for short) via a Markov-Chain Monte-Carlo (MCMC) method, and summarize the posteriors for each bin and model by their global maximum-posterior ("best-fit"), median, and the central 95\%-confidence interval limits.

For our purpose, just as important as ascertaining the line parameters is the model comparison (and subsequent selection). We want to determine if, as visual inspection of the spectra and theoretical considerations (precursors, differential shock projection) suggest, a so-called intermediate line (IL) is needed in addition to the narrow line (NL) to properly describe the data, or if the NL is split, i.e. if two centroid-shifted NLs are present. Before comparing any model and its specific parameters with the data, we account for the local flatfield spectrum (effective relative exposure time) and add to it the local background spectrum.
Each line (H$\alpha$\ component) is represented by a Gaussian (flux, centroid, width), except for the broad line (BL), which, due to its large width compared to the \texttt{GH$\alpha$FaS}\ spectral range, is represented by a constant that also includes the continuum. We consider the following intrinsic models: NL, 2NL, NLNL, NLIL, 2NLIL, NLNLIL, where 2NL and NLNL denote two NLs with common and independent width, respectively.

\begin{figure*}[!t]
\vspace{-0.2in}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth,height=0.7\textwidth,angle=-90]{fig1_part2.pdf}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\centering
\caption{\footnotesize Spatial maps of Tycho's NE filament: contours of 73 Voronoi bins for S/N=10 binning criteria, spatial variation of the intrinsic narrow-line width ($W_{NL}$)
	in the NL model, IL flux fraction in the NLIL model, and logarithmic evidence ratio of the NLIL relative to the NL model.
	The white circles are the masked stars.}
	\label{fig:fig1_part2}
\end{figure*}

The prior parameter distributions are flat or nearly so (Beta or Dirichlet distributions with low $\alpha(=\beta) \geq 1$ parameter) -- that is, we do not (strongly) prefer any parameter values within the model definition limits. Those limits are [10, 100]\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ for the NL width (intrinsic FWHM), and for the IL, [100, 350]\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ as predicted for shock velocities [1500, 3500]\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ \citep{mor12,mor13}.
Figure~\ref{fig:fig2} shows 1D-marginalized posteriors over model NLIL parameters for one of the bins. The vertical red lines show the parameters at the maximum of the posterior
(``best-fit'' model, the prediction of which is the solid red line in the top-right blue-framed panel). We find the NL width being close to 40\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ and IL with the width of $\approx$\,250\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ comprising 55\%
of the total flux. Moreover, NL widths in a single-line model (NL model) are larger than 20\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ (the second panel in Figure~\ref{fig:fig1_part2}), that is they are broadened beyond the expectation when no CR precursor is present. This result is not entirely new \citep{ghava00,lee07}, but we now and here show it to not be an artifact of spatially averaging over regions with potentially differential motion along the line-of-sight.

In addition, we see that a significant fraction of the bins also show prominent IL (third panel in Figure~\ref{fig:fig1_part2}) in the NLIL model.
Here, as a preliminary and "pedestrian" indicator, this statement is underpinned by IL-NL flux fractions; the stronger the best-fit IL line the more "significant" it is. However, a more statistically well-defined statement on the need for an IL is based on the models' Bayesian Evidence and their ratios ("Bayes factors"). We use the leave-one-out cross validation (LOO-CV) method to calculate the evidence \citep{bjc12}. It is a derivative version of the standard direct numeric integration (marginalization) of the posterior, with the advantage that the prior enters the result only to second order.
Figure~\ref{fig:fig2} shows the example where the NLIL model is favoured, for which we get that the logarithmic evidence ratio of the NLIL relative to the NL model is about 1\,dex. This means that an IL in addition to a single NL explains our data 10 times better than a simple NL model, irrespective of any particular parameter values -- notably, also not only considering the respective best-fit parameters. The logarithmic evidence ratio of the NLIL relative to the NL model
for other Voronoi bins is shown in the Figure~\ref{fig:fig1_part2}.

\begin{figure*}[!t]
\vspace{-0.25in}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth,height=0.9\textwidth, angle=-90]{fig2_confpro_v5.pdf}
\vspace{-0.25in}
\caption{\footnotesize The top-right blue panel shows the spectrum of one of the bins (solid-black line), the background model (dashed-black line) and components of the intrinsic ``best-fit'' model (dashed-red lines).
                The ``best-fit'' model is overplotted with the solid red line.
                The remaining 8 panels are 1D-marginalized posteriors over model parameters (solid-black lines): total intrinsic flux, flux fractions in the continuum and lines, NL centroid, IL offset
                from the NL centroid, and line widths. Dashed-black lines are prior distributions and vertical red lines are the estimated parameters of the ``best-fit'' model, i.e. the parameters at the
                maximum of the posterior distribution.}
	\label{fig:fig2}
\end{figure*}

In Figure~\ref{fig:fig3} we summarize our results for all Voronoi bins and all
the models regardless of the favoured ones. We plot histograms of the best-fit intrinsic NL widths in the NL model, NL widths and their centroid separation in 2NL(IL) and NLNL(IL) models,
IL flux fractions, widths and their offsets from the NL centroids. For each of the estimated parameter we
also calculate central 95\%-confidence interval. The vertical blue-dashed lines show the mean of the 2.5\% (left line) and 97.5\% (right line) quantile distributions.
We often find NL widths being much larger than 20\,km\,s$^{-1}$: $\approx$\,60\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ is the mean of the NL width in single-NL models; even in the 2NL(IL) and NLNL(IL) models, it is generally $\approx$40\,km\,s$^{-1}$.
The intrinsic IL widths are $\approx$\,180\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ on average with 30\% flux contribution to the total intrinsic flux.

\begin{figure*}[!t]
\vspace{-0.35in}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth,height=0.5\textwidth]{bins_histograms.pdf}
\vspace{-0.4in}
\caption{\footnotesize Summarized results for all Voronoi bins. Top panels: ``best-fit'' intrinsic NL widths in NL model, NL widths in 2NL(IL) and NLNL(IL) models, NL centroid separation in all double-NL models.
                Bottom panels: IL flux fractions, IL widths, IL offsets from the NL centroid in all IL models. Vertical dashed-blue lines show the mean of the 2.5\% (left line) and 97.5\% (right line) quantile distributions.}
	\label{fig:fig3}
\end{figure*}

\section{Summary}

We presented the narrow H$\alpha$\ spectroscopic observations of Tycho's NE Balmer filaments. This study provides spectroscopic data that is for the first time spatially resolved (spectro-imagery),
with large coverage that comprises and resolves the entire NE filament.
Our analysis includes Bayesian model comparison that enables a quantitative, probabilistic and well-defined model comparison.
We find that the broadening of the NL beyond 20\,km\,s$^{-1}$\ that was noted in previous studies was not an artifact of the spatial integration, and that it extends across the whole filament, not only the previously covered 'knot\,g'.
Likewise, we confirm the suspected presence of an IL, and show it to be widespread.
The first result points toward the evidence of heating in the CR precursor, while the second result reveals the presence of the broad-neutral precursor.

\section*{Acknowledgments}
We would like to thank Coryn Bailer-Jones (MPIA) for useful discussion on Bayesian statistics and Giovanni Morlino (INFN Gran Sasso Science Institute) for discussion on
theoretical predictions for the shock emission in Tycho's SNR.

\setlength{\bibsep}{0.0pt}
\footnotesize
\bibliographystyle{aj}


\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}

We are concerned with the $L^p$, $1\leq p<+\infty$, regularity of solutions to the system
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ghs}
\begin{cases}
u_{xt} + uu_{xx} - \lambda u_x^2 - \kappa \rho^2 = I(t), & x\in[0,1],\quad t > 0, \\
\rho_t + u\rho_x = 2\lambda \rho u_x, & x\in[0,1],\quad t > 0, \\
u(x,0) = u_0(x), \quad \rho(x,0) = \rho_0(x), & x \in [0,1],
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ and $\kappa$ are nonzero real parameters, the nonlocal term $I(t)$ is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:nonlocal}
I(t) = -\kappa \int_0^1 \rho^2 \, \mathrm{d} x - (1 + \lambda) \int_0^1 u_x^2 \, \mathrm{d} x,
\end{equation}
and solutions are subject to periodic boundary conditions
\begin{equation} \label{eq:pbc}
u(0,t) = u(1,t), \qquad u_x(0,t) = u_x(1,t), \qquad \rho(0,t) = \rho(1,t).
\end{equation}

System~\eqref{eq:ghs} was first introduced by Wunsch~\cite{Wun10} as the \emph{generalized Hunter-Saxton system} due to its connection, via $(\lambda,\kappa)=(-1/2,\pm1/2)$, to the Hunter-Saxton (HS) system. Both models have been studied extensively in the literature (see, e.g.,~\cite{WW12, Lenells2, Liu2, Moon13}, and references therein). The HS system is a particular case of the Gurevich-Zybin system describing the formation of large scale structure in the universe (c.f.~\cite{Pavlov1}). It also arises as the ``short-wave'' limit of the Camassa-Holm (CH) system~\cite{Aconstantin0, Escher0}
\begin{equation} \label{gCH}
\begin{cases}
m_t+2u_xm+um_x+k\rho\rho_x=0, &\quad k=\pm1, \\
\rho_t+(u\rho)_x=0, \\
m\equiv u-u_{xx},
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
which is in turn derived from the Green-Naghdi equations~\cite{Johnson1}, widely used in coastal oceanography to approximate the free-surface Euler equations. It is worth noting that for $\rho\equiv0$, the CH system~\eqref{gCH} reduces to the well-known CH equation, a nonlinear dispersive wave equation that arises in the study of propagation of unidirectional irrotational waves over a flat bed, as well as water waves moving over an underlying shear flow. The CH equation is completely integrable, has an infinite number of conserved quantities, and its solitary wave solutions are solitons~\cite{Camassa1}; it also admits ``peakons'' and ``breaking wave'' solutions. We direct the reader to~\cite{Camassa1, Dullin1, Aconstantin2, Aconstantin0, Escher0, Lenells2}, and references therein, for additional background and results on the CH equation and system.

Lastly, when $\rho\equiv0$ or $\rho=\sqrt{-1}\,u_x$, system~\eqref{eq:ghs} becomes the generalized inviscid Proudman-Johnson (giPJ) equation~\cite{Proudman1, Okamoto1, Wunsch1, SS13, SS15}, comprising:
\begin{itemize}
\item for $\lambda=-1$, the Burgers' equation of gas dynamics;
\item for $\lambda=\frac{1}{n-1}$, stagnation point-form solutions~\cite{Childress, Saxton1, Sarria3} of the $n-$dimensional incompressible Euler equations;
\item for $\lambda=-\frac{1}{2}$, the HS equation, describing the orientation of waves in massive director field nematic liquid crystals~\cite{Hunter1}.
\end{itemize}

From a more heuristic point of view,~\eqref{eq:ghs} may serve as a tool to better understand one-dimensional fluid convection and stretching. More specifically, differentiating~\eqref{eq:ghs}i) in space and setting $\omega=-u_{xx}$ yields
\begin{equation} \label{eq:diff}
\begin{cases}
\;\;\omega_{t}+\underbrace{u\omega_{x}}_{\textup{convection}}+\;(1-2\lambda)\underbrace{\omega u_{x}}_{\textup{stretching}}+2\kappa\underbrace{\rho\rho_x}_{\textup{coupling}}=0,
\\
\;\;\rho_t+\underbrace{u\rho_x}_{\textup{convection}}=2\lambda u_x\rho.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The nonlinear terms in~\eqref{eq:diff}i) represent the competition in fluid convection between nonlinear steepening and amplification due to $(1-2\lambda)$-dimensional stretching and $2\kappa$-dimensional coupling~\cite{Holm1, Wun10}, with the parameters $\lambda$ and $\kappa$ measuring the ratio of stretching to convection and the impact of the coupling between $u$ and $\rho$, respectively.

\subsection{Previous results.} \label{subsec:prev}
Local well-posedness of~\eqref{eq:ghs} in particular Sobolev spaces has been established in~\cite{WW12}; see also~\cite{Wun10}. As for global well-posedness, Sarria~\cite{Sar15} investigated the $L^\infty([0,1])$ regularity of solutions arising from a large class of smooth initial data by deriving general representation formulae for solutions of~\eqref{eq:ghs}--\eqref{eq:pbc} along characteristics for $\lambda\neq0$. For convenience of the reader, we recall the representation formulae and the main results of~\cite{Sar15} below; for additional regularity results, the reader may refer to~\cite{Wun09, Wun10, WW12, ML12, Moon13}.

\smallskip

For as long as a solution exists, define characteristics $\gamma$ via the initial value problem
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:charIVP}
\gamma_t(x,t) = u(\gamma(x,t),t), \qquad \gamma(x,0) = x.
\end{equation*}
Then for $\lambda\neq0$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ux}
u_x(\gamma(x,t),t) = \frac{\bar{\mathcal{P}}_0(t)^{-2\lambda}}{\lambda \eta(t)} \left\{ \frac{\mathcal J(x,t)}{\mathcal{Q}(x,t)} - \frac{1}{\bar{\mathcal{P}}_0(t)} \int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J(x,t)}{\mathcal{Q}(x,t)^{1+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x \right\}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{eq:rho}
\rho(\gamma(x,t),t) = \frac{\rho_0(x)}{\mathcal{Q}(x,t)} \left( \int_0^1 \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{\mathcal{Q}(x,t)^{\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \right)^{-2\lambda},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{eq:P0}
\bar{\mathcal{P}}_0(t) = \int_0^1 \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{\mathcal{Q}(x,t)^{\frac{1}{2\lambda}}},\qquad
\mathcal J(x,t) = 1 - \lambda \eta(t) u_0'(x)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Q}
\mathcal{Q}(x,t) = c(x)\eta(t)^2 - 2\lambda u_0'(x) \eta(t) + 1,\qquad c(x) = \lambda \left(\lambda u_0'(x)^2 - \kappa \rho_0(x)^2 \right).
\end{equation}
The strictly increasing function $\eta:[0,+\infty)\to[0,+\infty)$ satisfies the IVP
\begin{equation} \label{eq:etaivp}
\eta'(t) = \bar{\mathcal{P}}_0(t)^{-2\lambda}, \qquad \eta(0) = 0,
\end{equation}
and the ``Jacobian'', $\gamma_x$, is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gammax}
\gamma_x(x,t) =\bar{\mathcal{P}}_0(t)^{-1}\mathcal{Q}(x,t)^{-\frac{1}{2\lambda}}.
\end{equation}
Lastly, the time variable $t$ obeys
\begin{equation} \label{eq:t}
 t(\eta) = \int_0^\eta \left( \int_0^1 \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{(c(x)\mu^2 - 2\lambda u_0'(x)\mu + 1)^{\frac{1}{2\lambda}}}\right)^{2\lambda} \, \mathrm{d} \mu.
\end{equation}

\bigskip

\noindent Next we summarize the main results of~\cite{Sar15}; additional details on the qualitative behavior of solutions may be found therein.

\begin{thm}[global-in-time solutions] \label{thm:global}
Suppose $u_0(x)$ and $\rho_0(x)$ are smooth and satisfy~\eqref{eq:pbc}. Then the solution $(u,\rho)$ of~\eqref{eq:ghs}--\eqref{eq:pbc} stays smooth for all time if any of the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\lambda\kappa<0$ and $\rho_0$ never vanishes;
\item $\lambda\kappa<0$ and $\rho_0$ vanishes at finitely many points $x_i\in[0,1]$, $1\leq i\leq n$, with $\lambda u_0'(x_i)\leq0$;
\item $(\lambda,\kappa)\in(0,1]\times\mathbb{R}^-$ and $\rho_0$ vanishes at finitely many points $x_i\in[0,1]$, $1\leq i\leq n$, with $\lambda u_0'(x_i)>0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}

\begin{thm}[finite-time blowup for $\lambda\kappa<0$] \label{thm:blowupak<0}
Suppose $\rho_0(x_i)=0$ at finitely many points $x_i\in[0,1]$, $1\leq i\leq n$, and $\lambda u_0'(x_i)>0$. Without loss of generality, let $\max_{\{x_i\}}u_0'(x)=u_0'(x_1)$. Then there exist smooth initial data $(u_0(x), \rho_0(x))$ satisfying~\eqref{eq:pbc} such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item for $(\lambda,\kappa)\in(-2,0)\times\mathbb{R}^+$, $u_x$ undergoes ``one-sided, discrete'' blowup. In particular, there exists a finite $t_*>0$ such that $u_x(\gamma(x_1,t),t)\to-\infty$ as $t\nearrow t_*$, but remains finite otherwise;
\item for $(\lambda,\kappa)\in(-\infty,-2]\times\mathbb{R}^+$, $u_x$ undergoes ``two-sided, everywhere'' blowup. In particular, there exists a finite $t_*>0$ such that $u_x(\gamma(x_1,t),t)\to-\infty$ as $t\nearrow t_*$, while $u_x(\gamma(x,t),t)\to+\infty$ otherwise;
\item for $(\lambda,\kappa)\in(1,+\infty)\times\mathbb{R}^-$, $u_x$ undergoes two-sided, everywhere blowup.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}

\begin{thm}[finite-time blowup for $\lambda\kappa>0$] \label{thm:blowupak>0}
There exist smooth initial data $(u_0(x), \rho_0(x))$ satisfying~\eqref{eq:pbc} and a finite time $t_*>0$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item for $(\lambda,\kappa)\in(-1,0)\times\mathbb{R}^-$, $u_x$ undergoes one-sided discrete blowup as $t\nearrow t_*$, whereas, for $(\lambda,\kappa)\in(-\infty,-1]\times\mathbb{R}^-$, $u_x$ develops a two-sided, everywhere singularity;
\item for $(\lambda,\kappa)\in\mathbb{R}^-\times\mathbb{R}^-$, $\rho$ undergoes one-sided, discrete blowup as $t\nearrow t_*$;
\item for $(\lambda,\kappa)\in\mathbb{R}^+\times\mathbb{R}^+$,  $u_x$ undergoes two-sided, everywhere blowup, while $\rho$ develops a one-sided, discrete singularity.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}

\smallskip
\subsection{Summary of results} \label{subsec:summary}
Theorems~\ref{thm:global}--\ref{thm:blowupak>0} describe the $L^{\infty}([0,1])$ regularity of $u_x$ and $\rho$ for a large class of smooth, periodic initial conditions. The main purpose of this paper is to extend these results to $L^p([0,1])$ spaces for $p \in [1,\infty)$. We do this via a direct approach which involves using the representation formulae introduced in Section~\ref{subsec:prev} to compute the $L^p$ norm of the solution and then applying some standard $L^p$ space inequalities to the resulting expressions.

In summary, we prove the following:

\begin{thm}[$L^p$ regularity for $\lambda\kappa < 0$] \label{thm:ak<0}
Let $t_*>0$ denote the finite, $L^\infty$ blowup time in Theorem \ref{thm:blowupak<0} for $\lambda\kappa < 0$. There  exists smooth initial data $(u_0,\rho_0)$ satisfying~\eqref{eq:pbc} such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item for $p \in (1,\infty)$ and $\lambda \in (-\infty,-2/p] \cup (1,\infty)$, $\lim_{t\nearrow t_*} \norm{u_x}_p = +\infty$.
\item for $p \in [1,\infty)$ and $\lambda \in (-2/(2p-1),0)$, $\lim_{t\nearrow t_*} \norm{u_x}_p < \infty$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}

\begin{thm}[$L^p$ regularity for $\lambda\kappa > 0$] \label{thm:ak>0}
Let $t_*>0$ denote the finite, $L^\infty$ blowup time in Theorem \ref{thm:blowupak>0} for $\lambda\kappa > 0$. There exists smooth initial data $(u_0,\rho_0)$ satisfying~\eqref{eq:pbc} such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item for $p \in (1,\infty)$ and $\lambda \in (-\infty,-1/p] \cup (0,\infty)$, $\lim_{t\nearrow t_*} \norm{u_x}_p = +\infty$.
\item for $p \in [1,\infty)$ and $\lambda \in (-1/(2p-1),0)$, $\lim_{t\nearrow t_*} \norm{u_x}_p < \infty$.
\item for $p \in [1,\infty)$ and $\lambda \in (-\infty,-1/(2p-1)] \cup (0,\infty)$, $\lim_{t\nearrow t_*} \norm{\rho}_p = +\infty$.
\item for $p \in [1,\infty)$ and $\lambda \in (-1/(2p-1),0)$, $\lim_{t\nearrow t_*} \norm{\rho}_p <\infty$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}

Our results establish a connection between the $L^p([0,1])$ regularity of solutions and qualitative properties of $L^{\infty}([0,1])$ blowup: two-sided everywhere blowup of $u_x$ corresponds to its $L^1([0,1])$ norm escaping to infinity at the $L^{\infty}([0,1])$ blowup time, whereas, one-sided discrete blowup of $u_x$ corresponds to its containment, up to the $L^{\infty}([0,1])$ blowup time, in some $L^p([0,1])$ spaces for $p$ finite.

We also remark that our results are not exclusive to periodic solutions; they also hold, with the obvious modifications, under Dirichlet boundary conditions
\[ u(0,t)=u(1,t)=\rho(0,t)=\rho(1,t)=0. \]

To further investigate the role that the boundary conditions may play in the long-time behavior of solutions to~\eqref{eq:ghs}, we end the paper by considering the associated system
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ghs2}
\begin{cases}
u_{xxt}+uu_{xxx}+(1-2\lambda)u_xu_{xx}-2\kappa\rho\rho_x=0, & x\in[0,1],\quad t > 0, \\
\rho_t + u\rho_x = 2\lambda \rho u_x, & x\in[0,1],\quad t > 0, \\
u(x,0) = u_0(x), \quad \rho(x,0) = \rho_0(x), & x \in [0,1],
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
obtained by differentiating~\eqref{eq:ghs}i) with respect to $x$. Replacing~\eqref{eq:pbc} with the homogeneous, three-point boundary condition~\eqref{eq:ghs_3p}, we establish the following result for a local-in-time solution of~\eqref{eq:ghs2}.

\begin{thm} \label{thm:threept}
Suppose there exists $T>0$ such that $(u,\rho)$ solves~\eqref{eq:ghs2} with the homogeneous three-point boundary condition~\eqref{eq:ghs_3p} for all $0<t\leq T$. If $(\lambda,\kappa) \in (-1,+\infty) \times[0,+\infty)$, or $(\lambda,\kappa) \in (-\infty,-1) \times(-\infty,0]$, there exist smooth initial data $(u_0,\rho_0)$ such that $T<+\infty$. In particular, $|u(0,t)|\to+\infty$ as $t\nearrow T$.
\end{thm}

\smallskip
\subsection{Outline.} \label{subsec:outline}
The paper is organized as follows. In Section~\ref{sec:prelim}, we introduce the class of smooth initial data, derive bounds for the $L^p$ norm of $u_x$, and isolate two lemmas useful in approximating the asymptotic behavior of some of the integrals appearing in the norm expressions. These integral estimates are then used in Section~\ref{sec:Lpregularity} to prove Theorems~\ref{thm:ak<0} and \ref{thm:ak>0}. Lastly, Theorem~\ref{thm:threept} is established in Section~\ref{sec:threept}. For the convenience of the reader, we include an outline of the derivation~\cite{Sar15} of the representation formulae and some of the integral estimates used to prove the main theorems in Appendices~\ref{app:soln} and~\ref{app:int}, respectively.

\section{Preliminaries} \label{sec:prelim}

\subsection{The initial data} \label{subsec:blowup}

From the solution formulae~\eqref{eq:ux} and~\eqref{eq:rho}, we see that solutions potentially become infinite at the smallest positive $\eta$-value, say $\eta_*$, for which $\mathcal Q(x,t)$ vanishes for some $x \in [0,1]$. To this end, define sets
\begin{equation} \label{eq:omega}
\Omega = \{x \in [0,1] \mid c(x) = 0 \}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{eq:sigma}
\Sigma = \{x \in [0,1] \mid c(x) \neq 0 \}.
\end{equation}
Then $\mathcal Q$ admits three possible representations for each $x \in [0,1]$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item if $x \in \Omega$, then $\mathcal Q$ is linear in $\eta$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Q1}
\mathcal Q(x,t) = 1 - 2\lambda u_0'(x)\eta(t),
\end{equation}
\item if $x \in \Sigma$ and $\rho_0(x) = 0$, then $\mathcal Q$ is quadratic in $\eta$ and has a double root:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Q2}
\mathcal Q(x,t) = (1 - \lambda\eta(t) u_0'(x))^2 = \mathcal J(x,t)^2,
\end{equation}
\item if $x \in \Sigma$ and $\rho_0(x) \neq 0$, then $\mathcal Q$ is quadratic in $\eta$ and has two single roots:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Q3}
\mathcal Q(x,t) = (1 - \lambda \eta(t) g_+(x))(1 - \lambda \eta(t) g_-(x)),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gpm}
g_{\pm} = u_0'(x) \pm \sqrt\frac\kappa\lambda \abs{\rho_0(x)}.
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
Note that if $x \in \Sigma$, then the discriminant of $\mathcal Q$ with respect to $\eta$ is
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:disc}
\mathcal D(x) = 4\lambda\kappa \rho_0(x)^2.
\end{equation*}
To determine the locations where $\mathcal Q(x,t)$ vanishes earliest, we consider the cases $\lambda\kappa < 0$ and $\lambda\kappa > 0$ separately. \\

\noindent {\bf Case} $\lambda\kappa < 0$. \\
Suppose $\rho_0$ vanishes at finitely many points $\{x_1,\dots,x_n\} \subset [0,1]$, and that $\lambda u_0'(x_i) \neq 0$ for all $i = 1,\dots,n$ and $\lambda u_0'(x_i) > 0$ for some $i$. Note that $\Sigma = [0,1]$. Indeed, $c(x_i) =(\lambda u_0'(x_i))^2 \neq 0$ for all $i = 1,\dots,n$, and if $\rho_0(x) \neq 0$, then $c(x) = 0$ would imply
\begin{equation*}
0 \leq u_0'(x)^2 = \frac{\kappa}{\lambda} \rho_0(x)^2 < 0.
\end{equation*}
Hence $\mathcal Q$ is quadratic for each fixed $x \in [0,1]$. If $\rho_0(x) \neq 0$, then $\mathcal D(x) < 0$ and $\mathcal Q(x,0) = 1$ imply $0 < \mathcal{Q}(x,t) < \infty$ for all $\eta > 0$. From
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:Qak<0}
\mathcal Q(x_i,t) = (1 - \lambda \eta(t)u_0'(x_i))^2,
\end{equation*}
we see that if we set
\begin{equation} \label{eq:minmaxmM}
m_0 = \min_{x \in \{x_i\}} u_0'(x) < 0, \qquad\quad M_0 = \max_{x \in \{x_i\}} u_0'(x) > 0,
\end{equation}
then $\mathcal Q(x,t)$ vanishes first as
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:etastarmM}
\eta \nearrow \eta_* =
\begin{dcases}
\frac{1}{\lambda m_0} & \mbox{ if } \lambda < 0, \\
\frac{1}{\lambda M_0} & \mbox{ if } \lambda > 0.
\end{dcases}
\end{equation*}
Lastly, we assume that at the locations where $m_0$ (resp.\ $M_0$) is achieved, $u_0''(x) = 0$ and $u_0'''(x) > 0$ (resp.\ $u_0'''(x) < 0$). Then the $L^{\infty}([0,1])$ blowup time
\begin{equation*}
t_* \equiv \lim_{\eta \uparrow \eta_*} t(\eta),
\end{equation*}
for $t(\eta)$ as in~\eqref{eq:t}, is finite for $\lambda \in (-\infty,0) \cup (1, \infty)$; see Theorem \ref{thm:blowupak<0}. \\

\noindent{\bf Case} $\lambda\kappa > 0$. \\
If $\lambda\kappa > 0$, then $\Omega$ is not necessarily empty, so all three representations~\eqref{eq:Q1}--\eqref{eq:Q3} of $\mathcal Q$ are possible. We remark that the case where $\eta_*$ is a double root of $\mathcal Q$ has been studied extensively in connection with the generalized inviscid Proudman-Johnson equation~\cite{SS13, SS15}. We direct the reader to these works for results in this direction, as well as for the special case where $Q$ is identically linear, i.e., $c(x)\equiv0$. Thus, for $\lambda\kappa>0$, we only treat the simple case where $\eta_*$ is a single root arising from~\eqref{eq:Q3}.\footnote[1]{If $\eta_*$ occurs as a root of~\eqref{eq:Q1}, a nearly identical arguments may be used.}

For $\lambda < 0$, and respectively $\lambda > 0$, set
\begin{equation} \label{eq:minmaxnN}
n = \min_{\substack{x \in \Omega \\ \rho_0(x) \neq 0}} g_-(x) < 0, \qquad\quad N =  \max_{\substack{x \in \Omega \\ \rho_0(x) \neq 0}} g_+(x) > 0,
\end{equation}
and assume that at the finitely many locations where $n$ (resp.\ $N$) is achieved, the smooth initial data is such that $g_-$ (resp.\ $g_+$) has vanishing first order derivative and non-vanishing second order derivative. Then $\mathcal Q(x,t)$ vanishes earliest as
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:etastarnN}
\eta \nearrow \eta_* =
\begin{dcases}
\frac{1}{\lambda n} & \mbox{ if } \lambda < 0, \\
\frac{1}{\lambda N} & \mbox{ if } \lambda > 0,
\end{dcases}
\end{equation*}
and solutions to~\eqref{eq:ghs}--\eqref{eq:pbc} leave $L^{\infty}([0,1])$ in finite time (see Theorem \ref{thm:blowupak>0}).

\subsection{$L^p$ estimates} \label{subsec:Lpnorm}

In this section, we begin our study of the $L^p$, $p\in[1,+\infty)$, regularity of solutions to~\eqref{eq:ghs}--\eqref{eq:pbc} under the setup described in Section~\ref{subsec:blowup}. Using the representation formulae along characteristics, we explicitly compute the $p$-norms of $u_x$ and $\rho$. We then provide rudimentary upper and lower bounds for the $p$-norm of $u_x$, which, as we will see later, are sufficient to classify the $L^p$ regularity of solutions for much of the $\lambda$-$\kappa$ parameter space. We conclude with two general lemmas that will allow us to estimate, near the $L^{\infty}$ blowup time, the behavior of particular integral terms appearing in the bounds.

For as long as solutions exist, the Jacobian $\gamma_x$~\eqref{eq:gammax} is an increasing diffeomorphism of the unit circle $\mathbb S$ to itself~\cite{Wun10}. Hence
\begin{equation} \label{eq:uxnorm}
\begin{split}
\norm{u_x(\, \cdot \,, t)}_p
&= \left( \int_0^1 \left|u_x(\gamma(x,t),t)\right|^p \gamma_x \, \mathrm{d} x \right)^{\frac1p} \\
&= \frac{\bar{\mathcal{P}}_0^{-2\lambda - \frac1p}}{\abs{\lambda}\eta}  \left( \int_0^1  \left| \frac{\mathcal{J}}{\mathcal{Q}^{1+\frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} - \frac{1}{\bar{\mathcal{P}}_0} \cdot \frac{1}{\mathcal{Q}^{\frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} \int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal{J}}{\mathcal{Q}^{1+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} \alpha  \right|^p \, \mathrm{d} x \right)^{\frac1p}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{eq:rhonorm}
\begin{split}
\norm{\rho(\, \cdot \,, t)}_p^p
&= \int_0^1 \left|\rho(\gamma(x,t),t)\right|^p \gamma_x \, \mathrm{d} x \\
&= \bar{\mathcal P}_0^{-2\lambda p-1} \int_0^1 \abs{\rho_0(x)}^p \frac{1}{\mathcal Q^{p + \frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By the convexity of the $p$-norm and Jensen's inequality,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:uxlower}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p
\geq \frac{\bar{\mathcal{P}}_0^{-2\lambda - \frac1p}}{\abs{\lambda}\eta}  \left| \int_0^1   \frac{\mathcal{J}}{\mathcal{Q}^{1 + \frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} \, \mathrm{d} x - \frac{1}{\bar{\mathcal{P}}_0}  \int_0^1 \frac{\mathrm{d} x}{\mathcal{Q}^{\frac{1}{2\lambda p}}}  \int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal{J}}{\mathcal{Q}^{1+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x \right|,
\end{equation}
and by Minkowski's inequality,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:uxupper}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p
\leq \frac{\bar{\mathcal{P}}_0^{-2\lambda - \frac1p}}{\abs{\lambda}\eta} \left[ \left( \int_0^1   \frac{\mathcal{J}^p}{\mathcal{Q}^{p+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x \right)^{\frac{1}{p}} + \frac{1}{\bar{\mathcal{P}}_0^{1-\frac1p}} \int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal{J}}{\mathcal{Q}^{1+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x  \right].
\end{equation}
Although the right-hand side of~\eqref{eq:uxlower} vanishes for $p = 1$, it does allow us to investigate the $L^p$ regularity of $u_x$ for $p \in (1,\infty)$. To prove Theorems \ref{thm:ak<0} and \ref{thm:ak>0}, we must first estimate the blowup rates of the integrals appearing in~\eqref{eq:rhonorm}--\eqref{eq:uxupper}. To this end, we use the following two lemmas, whose proofs are deferred to Appendix~\ref{app:int}.

\begin{lemma} \label{lem:estlamneg}
Suppose $h(x)\in C^2([0,1])$ attains a local minimum $m < 0$ at finitely many points $\underline{x} \in (0,1)$ with $h''(\underline{x}) > 0$. Set $\tau_* = \frac{1}{\lambda m}$ for $\lambda < 0$ and let $0<\tau<\tau_*$. Then for $\delta > 0$ and $\tau_* - \tau > 0$ both small,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:lamneg}
 \int_{\underline{x}-\delta}^{\underline{x}+\delta} \frac{\mathrm dx}{(1 - \lambda \tau h(x))^b} \sim
  \begin{cases}
  C_2(1 - \lambda \tau m)^{\frac12 - b} & \mbox{if } b > 1/2, \\
  -C_3\log(1 - \lambda \tau m) & \mbox{if } b = 1/2, \\
  C & \mbox{if } b < 1/2,
  \end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $C_2$ and $C_3$ are positive constants given by
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:lamnegconst}
C_1 = \frac{h''(\underline{x})}{2}, \qquad C_2 = \frac{\Gamma\left(b - \frac12\right)}{\Gamma\left(b\right)} \sqrt\frac{\abs{m}\pi}{C_1}, \qquad C_3 = \frac{\abs{m}}{\sqrt{C_1}},
\end{equation*}
$C$ is a positive constant that depends only on $\lambda$ and $b$, and $\Gamma(\cdot)$ is the standard gamma function.
\end{lemma}

\begin{lemma} \label{lem:estlampos}
Suppose $h(x) \in C^2([0,1])$ attains a local maximum $M > 0$ at finitely many points $\bar{x} \in (0,1)$ with $h''(\bar{x}) < 0$. Set $\tau_* = \frac{1}{\lambda M}$ for $\lambda > 0$ and let $0<\tau<\tau_*$. Then for $\delta > 0$ and $\tau_* - \tau > 0$ both small,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:lampos}
\int_{\bar{x}-\delta}^{\bar{x}+\delta} \frac{\mathrm{d} x}{(1 - \lambda \tau h(x))^b} \sim
  \begin{cases}
  C_5(1 - \lambda \tau M)^{\frac12 - b} & \mbox{if } b > 1/2, \\
  -C_6\log(1 - \lambda \tau M) & \mbox{if } b = 1/2, \\
  C & \mbox{if } b < 1/2,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $C_5$ and $C_6$ are positive constants given by
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:lamposconst}
C_5 = \frac{h''(\bar{x})}{2}, \qquad C_5 = \frac{\Gamma\left(b - \frac12\right)}{\Gamma\left(b\right)} \sqrt\frac{M\pi}{\abs{C_4}}, \qquad C_6 = \frac{M}{\sqrt{C_4}},
\end{equation*}
and $C$ is a positive constant that depends only on $\lambda$ and $b$.
\end{lemma}

For the convenience of the reader, we illustrate two applications of the lemmas and estimate the blowup rate of
\begin{equation*}
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J}{\mathcal Q^{1 + \frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
\end{equation*}
for $\lambda\kappa < 0$ and $\lambda > 1$, and then for $\lambda\kappa>0$ with $\lambda > 0$.

Recall that for $\lambda\kappa < 0$ and $\lambda > 1$, the earliest root $\eta_*$ of the quadratic~\eqref{eq:Q2} occurs at locations where $M_0$ (as defined in~\eqref{eq:minmaxmM}ii)) is achieved; for simplicity, assume $M_0$ occurs at a single point $\bar{x}$. For $\eta_* = \frac{1}{\lambda M_0}$ and $\eta_* - \eta > 0$ small,~\eqref{eq:lampos}i) yields
\begin{equation*}
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J}{\mathcal Q^{1+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
\sim
\int_{\bar{x} - \delta}^{\bar{x} + \delta} \frac{1}{(1 - \lambda\eta(t)u_0'(x))^{1+\frac{1}{\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
\sim
C_2(1 - \lambda \eta M_0)^{-\frac12 - \frac1\lambda}.
\end{equation*}
For $\lambda\kappa > 0$ and $\lambda > 0$, the earliest root $\eta_*$ occurs as a single root of~\eqref{eq:Q3} at locations where $N$ (as defined in ~\eqref{eq:minmaxnN}ii)) is achieved. Again assume for simplicity that $N$ is achieved at a single point $\bar{x}$. Then
\begin{equation*}
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J}{\mathcal Q^{1+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
\sim
\int_{\bar{x} - \delta}^{\bar{x} + \delta} \frac{C}{(1-\lambda\eta g_+(x))^{1+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
\sim
C_5(1 - \lambda \eta N)^{-\frac12 - \frac{1}{2\lambda}}
\end{equation*}
for $\eta_* = \frac{1}{\lambda N}$ and $\eta_* - \eta>0$ small.

\section{Proofs of the theorems} \label{sec:Lpregularity}

We are now ready to prove the Theorems. Throughout the proofs, $C$ will denote a generic positive constant that may change in value from line to line.

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \textup{\ref{thm:ak<0}}]
Let $M_0 > 0 > m_0$ be as in~\eqref{eq:minmaxmM}, and set
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:etastarmM2}
\eta_* =
\begin{dcases}
\frac{1}{\lambda m_0} & \mbox{ if } \lambda < 0, \\
\frac{1}{\lambda M_0} & \mbox{ if } \lambda > 0.
\end{dcases}
\end{equation*}

\medskip

\noindent For $\lambda < 0$ and $1 \leq p < \infty$, Lemma~\ref{lem:estlamneg} yields

\begin{align*}
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J}{\mathcal Q^{1 + \frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
\begin{cases}
C_2 (1 - \lambda \eta m_0)^{-\frac12 - \frac{1}{\lambda p}},\quad & \lambda \in (-\infty,-2/p), \\
-C_3 \log(1 - \lambda \eta m_0),  & \lambda = -2/p, \\
C,  & \lambda \in (-2/p, 0),
\end{cases}
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J}{\mathcal Q^{1 + \frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
\begin{cases}
C_2 (1 - \lambda \eta m_0)^{-\frac12 - \frac{1}{\lambda}},\quad & \lambda \in (-\infty,-2), \\
-C_3 \log(1 - \lambda \eta m_0),  & \lambda = -2, \\
C,  & \lambda \in (-2, 0),
\end{cases}
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{1}{\mathcal Q^{\frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim C, \qquad \lambda \in (-\infty,0),
\\
\bar{\mathcal P}_0
&\sim C, \qquad \lambda \in (-\infty,0),
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J^p}{\mathcal Q^{p+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
\begin{cases}
C_2 (1 - \lambda \eta m_0)^{\frac12 - \frac1\lambda - p},\quad & \lambda \in (-\infty, -2/(2p-1)), \\
-C_3 \log(1 - \lambda \eta m_0), & \lambda = -2/(2p-1), \\
C, & \lambda \in (-2/(2p-1),0)
\end{cases}
\end{align*}

\medskip
\noindent for $\eta - \eta_* > 0$ small. Similarly for $\lambda > 1$ and $1 \leq p < 2$,

\begin{align*}
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J}{\mathcal Q^{1 + \frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
C_5 (1 - \lambda \eta M_0)^{-\frac12 - \frac{1}{\lambda p}}, \qquad \lambda \in (1,\infty),
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J}{\mathcal Q^{1 + \frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
C_5 (1 - \lambda \eta M_0)^{-\frac12 - \frac{1}{\lambda}}, \qquad \lambda \in (1,\infty),
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{1}{\mathcal Q^{\frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
\begin{cases}
C_5 (1 - \lambda \eta M_0)^{\frac12 - \frac{1}{\lambda p}},\quad & \lambda \in (1,2/p), \\
-C_6 \log(1 - \lambda \eta M_0),  & \lambda = 2/p, \\
C,  & \lambda \in (2/p, \infty).
\end{cases}
\\
\bar{\mathcal P}_0
&\sim
\begin{cases}
C_5 (1 - \lambda \eta M_0)^{\frac12 - \frac{1}{\lambda}},\quad & \lambda \in (1,2), \\
-C_6 \log(1 - \lambda \eta M_0), & \lambda = 2, \\
C,  & \lambda \in (1, \infty).
\end{cases} \label{eq:P0ak<0a>0}
\end{align*}

\bigskip

\noindent Applying these estimates to~\eqref{eq:uxlower} and~\eqref{eq:uxupper}, we obtain, as $\eta \nearrow \eta_*$, the following: \\
For $\lambda < -2$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \geq
C \abs{\frac{1}{(1 - \lambda \eta m_0)^{\frac12 + \frac{1}{\lambda p}}} - \frac{C}{(1 - \lambda \eta m_0)^{\frac12 + \frac{1}{\lambda}}}} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
For $\lambda = -2$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \geq
C \abs{\frac{1}{(1 - \lambda \eta m_0)^{\frac12 + \frac{1}{\lambda p}}} + C \log (1 - \lambda \eta m_0)} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
For $-2 < \lambda < -2/p$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \geq
C \abs{\frac{1}{(1 - \lambda \eta m_0)^{\frac12 + \frac{1}{\lambda p}}} - C} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
For $\lambda = -2/p$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \geq C \abs{\log(1-\lambda\eta m_0) + C} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
For $-2/(2p-1) < \lambda < 0$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \to C < +\infty.
\end{equation*}
For $1 < \lambda < 2$, choose $p' \leq p$ such that $1 < p' < 5/3$ and $\frac{3 p'-1}{2 p'}<\lambda <\frac{2}{p'}$. Then $\lambda + \frac{1}{2p'} - \frac{3}{2}>0$, so that
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_{p} \geq \norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_{p'} \geq \frac{C}{(1-\lambda\eta M_0)^{\lambda + \frac{1}{2 p'}-\frac{3}{2}}} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
For $\lambda = 2$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p
&\geq \frac{C}{\abs{\log(1-2\eta M_0)}^{4+\frac1p}} \abs{\frac{1}{(1-2\eta M_0)^{\frac12 + \frac{1}{2 p}} }+ \frac{C}{(1-2\eta M_0)\log(1-2\eta M_0)}} \\
&= \frac{C}{(1-2\eta M_0)\abs{\log(1-2\eta M_0)}^{5+\frac1p}} \abs{(1-2\eta M_0)^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2p}} \log(1-2\eta M_0) + C} \to +\infty.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
For $\lambda > 2$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \geq
C \abs{\frac{1}{(1 - \lambda\eta M_0)^{\frac12 + \frac{1}{\lambda p}}} - \frac{C}{(1 - \lambda\eta M_0)^{\frac12 + \frac1\lambda}}} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \textup{\ref{thm:ak>0}}]
Let $N > 0 > n$ be as in~\eqref{eq:minmaxnN}, and set
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:etastarnN2}
\eta_* =
\begin{dcases}
\frac{1}{\lambda n} & \mbox{ if } \lambda < 0 \\
\frac{1}{\lambda N} & \mbox{ if } \lambda > 0.
\end{dcases}
\end{equation*}
\medskip

\noindent For $\lambda < 0$ and $1 \leq p < \infty$, Lemma~\ref{lem:estlamneg} implies that

\begin{align*}
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J}{\mathcal Q^{1 + \frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
\begin{cases}
C_2 (1 - \lambda \eta n)^{-\frac12 - \frac{1}{2\lambda p}},\quad & \lambda \in (-\infty,-1/p), \\
-C_3 \log(1 - \lambda \eta n),  & \lambda = -1/p, \\
C,  & \lambda \in (-1/p, 0),
\end{cases}
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J}{\mathcal Q^{1 + \frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
\begin{cases}
C_2 (1 - \lambda \eta n)^{-\frac12 - \frac{1}{2\lambda}},\quad & \lambda \in (-\infty,-1), \\
-C_3 \log(1 - \lambda \eta n),  & \lambda = -1, \\
C,  & \lambda \in (-1, 0).
\end{cases}
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{1}{\mathcal Q^{\frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim C, \qquad \lambda \in (-\infty,0),
\\
\bar{\mathcal P}_0 =
&\sim C, \qquad \lambda \in (-\infty,0),
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J^p}{\mathcal Q^{p+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
\begin{cases}
C_2(1 - \lambda \eta n)^{\frac12 - p - \frac1{2\lambda}},\quad & \lambda \in (-\infty, -1/(2p-1)), \\
-C_3 \log(1 - \lambda \eta n), & \lambda = -1/(2p-1), \\
C, & \lambda \in (-1/(2p-1),0),
\end{cases}
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{1}{\mathcal Q^{p+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
\begin{cases}
C_2(1 - \lambda \eta n)^{\frac12 - \frac1{2\lambda} - p},\quad & \lambda \in (-\infty, -1/(2p-1)), \\
-C_3 \log(1 - \lambda \eta n), & \lambda = -1/(2p-1), \\
C, & \lambda \in (-1/(2p-1),0)
\end{cases}
\end{align*}

\medskip
\noindent for $\eta_* - \eta > 0$ small. Similarly, for $\lambda > 0$ and $1 \leq p < \infty$,

\begin{align*}
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J}{\mathcal Q^{1 + \frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
C_5 (1 - \lambda \eta N)^{-\frac12 - \frac{1}{2\lambda p}}, \qquad \lambda \in (0,\infty),
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{\mathcal J}{\mathcal Q^{1 + \frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
C_5 (1 - \lambda \eta N)^{-\frac12 - \frac{1}{2\lambda}}, \qquad \lambda \in (0,\infty),
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{1}{\mathcal Q^{\frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
\begin{cases}
C_5 (1 - \lambda \eta N)^{\frac12 - \frac{1}{2\lambda p}},\quad & \lambda \in (0,1/p), \\
-C_6 \log(1 - \lambda \eta N), & \lambda = 1/p, \\
C,  & \lambda \in (1/p, \infty),
\end{cases}
\\
\bar{\mathcal P}_0 =
&\sim
\begin{cases}
C_5 (1 - \lambda \eta N)^{\frac12 - \frac{1}{2\lambda}},\quad & \lambda \in (0,1), \\
-C_6 \log(1 - \lambda \eta N), & \lambda = 1, \\
C,  & \lambda \in (1, \infty),
\end{cases}
\\
\int_0^1 \frac{1}{\mathcal Q^{p+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}} \, \mathrm{d} x
&\sim
C_5(1 - \lambda\eta N)^{\frac12 - \frac{1}{2\lambda} - p}, \qquad \lambda \in (0,\infty).
\end{align*}

\bigskip

\noindent Applying these estimates to~\eqref{eq:uxlower} and~\eqref{eq:uxupper}, we obtain, as $\eta \nearrow \eta_*$, the following: \\
If $\lambda < -1$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \geq C\abs{\frac{1}{(1-\lambda\eta n)^{\frac12+\frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} -\frac{C}{(1-\lambda\eta n)^{\frac12+\frac{1}{2\lambda}}}} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
If $\lambda = -1$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \geq C\abs{\frac{1}{(1-\lambda\eta n)^{\frac12+\frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} + C\log(1-\lambda\eta n)} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
If $-1 < \lambda < -1/p$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \geq C \abs{\frac{1}{(1-\lambda\eta n)^{\frac12+\frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} - C} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
If $\lambda = -1/p$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \geq C \abs{\log(1-\lambda\eta n) + C} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
If $-1/(2p-1) < \lambda < 0$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \to C < \infty.
\end{equation*}
If $0 < \lambda < 1$, choose $p' \leq p$ such that $1 < p' < 3$ and $\frac{p'-1}{2p'} < \lambda < \frac1{p'}$. Then $\lambda + \frac{1}{2p'} - \frac12 > 0$, so that
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_{p} \geq \norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_{p'} \geq \frac{C}{(1-\lambda\eta N)^{\lambda+\frac{1}{2p'}-\frac12}} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
If $\lambda = 1$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p
&\geq \frac{C}{(-\log(1-\lambda\eta N))^{2 + \frac1p}} \abs{ \frac{1}{(1-\lambda\eta N)^{\frac12 + \frac1{2 p}}}+ \frac{C}{(1-\lambda\eta N)\log (1-\lambda\eta N)}} \\
&= \frac{C}{(1-\lambda\eta N)\abs{\log(1-\lambda\eta N)}^{3+\frac1p}} \abs{ (1-\lambda\eta N)^{\frac12 - \frac{1}{2p}} \log(1-\lambda \eta N) + C} \to +\infty.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
If $\lambda > 1$,
\begin{equation*}
\norm{u_x(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p \geq C \abs{ \frac{1}{(1-\lambda\eta N)^{\frac12+\frac{1}{2\lambda p}}} - \frac{C}{(1-\lambda\eta N)^{\frac12 + \frac{1}{2\lambda}}}} \to +\infty.
\end{equation*}
Finally, for $\eta_* - \eta > 0$ small,~\eqref{eq:rhonorm} yields
\begin{equation*}
\norm{\rho(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p^p
\sim
\begin{cases}
C(1 - \lambda \eta n)^{\frac12 - \frac1{2\lambda} - p},\quad & \lambda \in (-\infty, -1/(2p-1)), \\
C \abs{\log(1 - \lambda \eta n)}, & \lambda = -1/(2p-1), \\
C, & \lambda \in (-1/(2p-1),0).
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
for $\lambda < 0$ and
\begin{equation*}
\norm{\rho(\,\cdot\,,t)}_p^p
\sim
\begin{cases}
C(1-\lambda\eta N)^{-\lambda p}, & \lambda \in (0,1), \\
C(1-\lambda\eta N)^{-p}  \left|\log(1 - \lambda \eta n)\right|^{-2p - 1},\quad & \lambda = 1, \\
C(1-\lambda\eta N)^{\frac12 - \frac1{2\lambda} - p}, & \lambda \in (1,\infty),
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
for $\lambda > 0$. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

\section{Three-point boundary conditions}\label{sec:threept}

In this section, we establish finite time blowup of a local-in-time solution of the IVP
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ghs3}
\begin{cases}
u_{xxt}+uu_{xxx}+(1-2\lambda)u_xu_{xx}-2\kappa\rho\rho_x=0, & x\in[0,1],\quad t > 0, \\
\rho_t + u\rho_x = 2\lambda \rho u_x, & x\in[0,1],\quad t > 0, \\
u(x,0) = u_0(x), \quad \rho(x,0) = \rho_0(x), & x \in [0,1],
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
with the homogeneous three-point boundary condition
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ghs_3p}
u(1,t) = u_x(0,t) = u_x(1,t) = 0, \qquad \rho(1,t) = 0
\end{equation}
for particular values of $\lambda$ and $\kappa$ (see Theorem~\ref{thm:threept}). For smooth $(u_0,\rho_0)$ satisfying the appropriate boundary condition, our result implies the existence of parameter values $(\lambda,\kappa)$ such that solutions to~\eqref{eq:ghs}--\eqref{eq:pbc} stay smooth for all time, whereas those of~\eqref{eq:ghs3}--\eqref{eq:ghs_3p} blowup in finite time.

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \textup{\ref{thm:threept}}]

Multiplying~\eqref{eq:ghs3}i) by $x$ and integrating by parts yields
\begin{equation*}
0 = -\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t} \int_0^1 u_x \, \mathrm{d} x + (1 + \lambda) \int_0^1 u_x^2 \, \mathrm{d} x + \kappa \int_0^1 \rho^2 \, \mathrm{d} x
\end{equation*}
Set
\begin{equation*}
H(t) := \int_0^1 u_x \, \mathrm{d} x = -u(0,t),
\end{equation*}
so that
\begin{equation*}
H'(t) = (1 + \lambda) \norm{u_x}_2^2 + \kappa \norm{\rho}_2^2.
\end{equation*}
Note that by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality,
\begin{equation*}
H(t)^2 \leq \norm{u_x}_2^2.
\end{equation*}
Then for $\lambda > -1$ and $\kappa \geq 0$,
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:3pricatti}
H'(t) \geq (1 + \lambda)H(t)^2 \geq 0.
\end{equation*}
Thus choosing $H(0) > 0$ we see that, as long as the solution exists, $H(t) > 0$. Integrating then yields
\begin{equation*}
0 < \frac{1}{H(t)} \leq \frac{1}{H(0)} - (1 + \lambda)t,
\end{equation*}
whose right-hand side vanishes as $t$ approaches the finite time $T=\frac{1}{(1+\lambda)H(0)}$. The case $(\lambda,\kappa) \in (-\infty,-1) \times (-\infty,0]$ can be handled similarly.
\end{proof}

\begin{appendix}

\section{Solving on characteristics} \label{app:soln}

In this section we summarize the derivation of the solution formulae for~\eqref{eq:ghs}--\eqref{eq:pbc} along characteristics for arbitrary $(\lambda,\kappa) \in \mathbb R\setminus\{0\} \times \mathbb R$. We use the notation in Section~\ref{sec:intro} for any auxiliary functions. For detailed computations, the reader is referred to Section~2 of~\cite{Sar15}. In brief, the method of characteristics is used to write $u_x \circ \gamma$ and $\rho \circ \gamma$ in terms of the Jacobian $\gamma_x$. The system is reformulated as a second-order nonlinear ODE for $\gamma_x$, which is then solved via reduction of order.

Fix $x \in [0,1]$, and define, for as long as $u$ exists, characteristics $\gamma$ via the initial value problem
\begin{equation} \label{eq:characteristics}
	\dot\gamma(x,t)=u(\gamma(x,t),t), \qquad \gamma(x,0)=x,
\end{equation}
where $\dot{} = \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}$. Differentiating in space yields
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gamma_xt}
	\dot\gamma_{x}=u_x(\gamma(x,t),t)\cdot \gamma_x, \qquad \gamma_x(x,0)=1,
\end{equation}
so that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gammax_deriv}
	\gamma_x = e^{\int_0^tu_x(\gamma(x,s),s) \, \mathrm{d} s}
\end{equation}
Differentiating $\rho \circ \gamma$ in time and using~\eqref{eq:ghs}ii) immediately gives
\begin{equation} \label{eq:rhochar}
	\rho(\gamma(x,t),t) = \rho_0(x) \cdot e^{2\lambda\int_0^tu_x(\gamma(x,s),s) ds} = \rho_0(x) \cdot \gamma_x^{2\lambda}.
\end{equation}
Now, it follows from~\eqref{eq:gamma_xt} and~\eqref{eq:rhochar} that~\eqref{eq:ghs}i) along characteristics is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:uxGamma}
\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}\left(u_x(\gamma(x,t),t)\right)=\lambda\left(\dot\gamma_{x}\gamma_{x}^{-1}\right)^2+\kappa\left(\rho_0\cdot\gamma_x^{2\lambda}\right)^2+I(t).
\end{equation}
Differentiating~\eqref{eq:gamma_xt} in time, substituting into~\eqref{eq:uxGamma}, and re-arranging yields the following second-order nonlinear ODE for $\omega(x,t) = \gamma_x(x,t)^{-\lambda}$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ODEnonhomo}
	\ddot w(x,t)+\lambda I(t)\omega(x,t)=-\lambda\kappa\rho_0(x)^2\omega^{-3}.
\end{equation}
First consider the corresponding linear homogeneous ODE
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ODEhomo}
	\ddot y(x,t)+\lambda I(t)y(x,t)=0.
\end{equation}
Suppose $\phi_1(t)$ and $\phi_2(t)$ are two linearly independent solutions to~\eqref{eq:ODEhomo} satisfying $\phi_1(0)=\dot\phi_2(0)=1$ and $\dot\phi_1(0)=\phi_2(0)=0$. Then the general solution to~\eqref{eq:ODEhomo} is of the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gensol}
y(x,t) = c_1(x)\phi_1(t) + c_2(x)\phi_2(t),
\end{equation}
where, by reduction of order,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:reduction}
	\phi_2(t)=\phi_1(t)\eta(t), \qquad \eta(t)=\int_0^t\frac{\mathrm{d}s}{\phi_1(s)^2}.
\end{equation}
Since $\dot\omega = -\lambda \gamma_x^{-\lambda-1}\dot\gamma_x$ and $\gamma_x(x,0) = 1$, it follows that $\omega(x,0) = 1$ and $\dot\omega(x,0) = -\lambda u_0'(x)$, from which the coefficients $c_1(x)$ and $c_2(x)$ may be obtained. This reduces~\eqref{eq:gensol} to
\begin{equation} \label{eq:yreduce}
y(x,t) = \phi_1(t) \mathcal J(x,t),
\end{equation}
Turning to the nonhomogeneous equation~\eqref{eq:ODEnonhomo}, write
\begin{equation} \label{eq:omegaxt}
\omega(x,t) = z(\eta(t))y(x,t),
\end{equation}
for some function $z$ with $z(0) = 1$ and $z'(0) = 0$. Plugging~\eqref{eq:omegaxt} into~\eqref{eq:ODEnonhomo} and yields the following IVP for $\mu(x,\eta) = z(\eta)\mathcal J(x,t)$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:mu}
\begin{cases}
\mu_{\eta\eta} = -\lambda\kappa\rho_0(x)^2 \mu^{-3}, \\
\mu(x,0) = 1, \quad \mu_\eta(x,0) = -\lambda u_0'(x).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Writing~\eqref{eq:mu} as a first-order equation, solving for $\mu_\eta$, integrating, and solving for $z(\eta)$ yields
\begin{equation}
z(\eta) = \frac{\mathcal Q(x,t)}{\mathcal J(x,t)^2}.
\end{equation}
It follows from $\omega(x,t) = \gamma_x(x,t)^{-\lambda}$ and equations~\eqref{eq:yreduce} and~\eqref{eq:omegaxt} that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gammaxphi1}
\gamma_x(x,t) = \left[ \phi_1(t)^2 \mathcal Q(x,t) \right]^{-\frac{1}{2\lambda}}.
\end{equation}
It remains to determine $\phi_1$. Note that by the uniqueness of solutions to~\eqref{eq:characteristics} and periodicity that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gammaperiodic}
\gamma(x+1,t) = 1 + \gamma(x,t)
\end{equation}
for all $x \in [0,1]$. Integrating~\eqref{eq:gammaxphi1} in space therefore yields
\begin{equation} \label{eq:phi1}
\phi_1(t) = \bar{\mathcal{P}}_0(t)^\lambda.
\end{equation}
It follows that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gammaxfinal}
\gamma_x = \bar{\mathcal{P}}_0^{-1} \mathcal Q^{-\frac{1}{2\lambda}}.
\end{equation}
The resulting expressions~\eqref{eq:ux} and~\eqref{eq:rho} for $u_x$ and $\rho$ follow from~\eqref{eq:gammaxfinal},~\eqref{eq:gammax_deriv}, and~\eqref{eq:rhochar}.

\section{Integral estimates} \label{app:int}

In this section we briefly outline the technique used to estimate the spatial integrals in~\eqref{eq:uxlower} and~\eqref{eq:uxupper} as $\eta \nearrow \eta_*$. The proofs of Lemmas \ref{lem:estlamneg} and \ref{lem:estlampos} are identical so we only prove the former. The estimates are based on a Taylor approximation, with the $b \geq 1/2$ case following by straightforward integration. For the $0 < b < 1/2$ case, we make use of the Gauss hypergeometric series (see~\cite{hypergeo1,hypergeo2,hypergeo3})
\begin{equation} \label{eq:hypergeo}
{}_2F_1\left[a,b;c;z\right]\equiv\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{\left(a\right)_k(b)_k}{\left(c\right)_k\,k!}z^k,\qquad \lvert z\rvert< 1
\end{equation}
defined for $c\notin\mathbb{Z}^-\cup\{0\}$ and $(x)_k,\, k\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}$, the Pochhammer symbol
\begin{equation}
(x)_0=1, \qquad (x)_k=x(x+1)\cdots(x+k-1).
\end{equation}
We also need the following two results:
\begin{lemma}[see~\cite{hypergeo2,hypergeo3}] \label{lem:analcont}
Suppose $\lvert\text{arg}\left(-z\right)\rvert<\pi$ and $a,b,c,a-b\notin\mathbb{Z}.$ The analytic continuation for $\lvert z\rvert>1$ of the series (\ref{eq:hypergeo}) is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:analform}
\begin{split}
{}_2F_1[a,b;c;z]=&\frac{\Gamma(c)\Gamma(a-b)(-z)^{-b}{}_2F_1[b,1+b-c;1+b-a;z^{-1}]}{\Gamma(a)\Gamma(c-b)}
\\
&+\frac{\Gamma(c)\Gamma(b-a)(-z)^{-a}{}_2F_1[a,1+a-c;1+a-b;z^{-1}]}{\Gamma(b)\Gamma(c-a)}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}[see~\cite{SS13}] \label{lem:hyper}
Suppose $b\in(-\infty,2)\backslash\{1/2\},\,\,0\leq\left|\beta-\beta_0\right|\leq1$ and $\epsilon\geq C_0$ for some $C_0>0.$ Then
\begin{equation} \label{eq:derseries}
\frac{1}{\epsilon^b}\,\frac{d}{d\beta}\left((\beta-\beta_0){}_2F_1\left[\frac{1}{2},b;\frac{3}{2};-\frac{C_0(\beta-\beta_0)^2}{\epsilon}\right]\right)=(\epsilon+C_0(\beta-\beta_0)^2)^{-b}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \textup{\ref{lem:estlamneg}}]
A Taylor expansion about $\underline{x}$ yields
\begin{equation} \label{eq:htaylor}
\varepsilon + h(x) - m \sim \varepsilon + C_1(x - \underline{x})^2.
\end{equation}
For $\varepsilon > 0$ small and $b > 1/2$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:intapprox1}
\begin{split}
\int_{\underline{x} - \delta}^{\underline{x} + \delta} \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{\left(\varepsilon + h(x) - m\right)^b}
&\sim \int_{\underline{x} - \delta}^{\underline{x} + \delta} \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{(\varepsilon + C_1\left(x - \underline{x}\right)^2)^b} \\
&= \frac{1}{\varepsilon^b} \int_{\underline{x} - \delta}^{\underline{x} + \delta} \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{(1 + ( \sqrt{C_1/\varepsilon}(x - \underline{x}))^2)^b} \\
&\sim \frac{2}{\varepsilon^{b-\frac12}\sqrt{C_1}} \int_0^{\pi/2} \cos^{2b-2}\theta \, \mathrm{d}\theta \\
&=  \frac{\Gamma \left(b-\frac{1}{2}\right)}{\Gamma (b)} \sqrt{\frac{\pi}{C_1}} \cdot \frac{1}{\varepsilon^{b-\frac12}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Setting $\varepsilon = m - \frac{1}{\lambda\tau}$, we find that for $\tau_* - \tau > 0$ small,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:intapprox2}
\int_{I} \frac{\mathrm{d} x}{(1 - \lambda \tau h(x))^b} \sim \frac{C_2}{(1 - \lambda\tau m)^{b - \frac12}}.
\end{equation}
The case $b = 1/2$ follows by a similar argument. Estimate~\eqref{eq:lamneg}iii) follows trivially if $b \leq 0$; to establish the estimate for $0 < b < \frac12$, we use Lemmas \ref{lem:analcont} and \ref{lem:hyper}. The Taylor approximation~\eqref{eq:htaylor} and Lemma \ref{lem:hyper} imply that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:intapprox3}
\begin{split}
\int_{\underline{x}-\delta}^{\underline{x}+\delta} \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{(\varepsilon + h(x) - m)^b}
&\sim
\int_{\underline{x}-\delta}^{\underline{x}+\delta} \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{(\varepsilon + C_1(x - \underline{x})^2)^b} \\
&=
\frac{2\delta}{\varepsilon^b} {}_2F_1 \left[ \frac12,b,\frac32,-\frac{C_1\delta^2}{\varepsilon} \right]
\end{split}
\end{equation}
for $\varepsilon \geq C_1\geq \delta^2C_1 > 0$, i.e. $-1 \leq -\frac{\delta^2C_1}{\epsilon} < 0$. If we let $\varepsilon > 0$ become sufficiently small enough, so that $-\frac{\delta^2C_1}{\varepsilon} < -1$, then the analytic continuation formula yields
\begin{equation} \label{eq:analcontapprox}
\frac{2\delta}{\varepsilon^b} {}_2F_1\left[\frac{1}{2}, b; \frac32;-\frac{C_1\delta^2}{\varepsilon}\right]
= \frac{2\delta^{1-2b}}{(1-2b)C_1^b} + \frac{\Gamma\left(b-\frac12\right)}{\Gamma\left(b\right)} \sqrt{\frac{\pi}{C_1}} \varepsilon^{b-\frac12}  + \psi(\varepsilon)
\end{equation}
for $\psi(\epsilon)=\textsl{o}(1)$ as $\varepsilon \to 0$. Since $1-2b>0$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:intapprox4}
\int_{\underline{x}-\delta}^{\underline{x}+\delta} \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{(\varepsilon + C_1(x - \underline{x})^2)^b}
\sim
\frac{\Gamma\left(b-\frac12\right)}{\Gamma\left(b\right)} \sqrt{\frac{\pi}{C_1}} \varepsilon^{b-\frac12}.
\end{equation}
Setting $\varepsilon = m - \frac{1}{\lambda\tau}$ in~\eqref{eq:intapprox4}, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{eq:intapprox5}
\int_{\underline{x}-\delta}^{\underline{x}+\delta} \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{(1 - \lambda\tau h(x))^b} \sim C
\end{equation}
for $\tau_*-\tau>0$ small.
\end{proof}

\end{appendix}