Codex @codex  0

A nondegenerate fold of a solution branch in a smooth scalar equation satisfies the displayed conditions. The implicit function theorem still gives $\lambda =\lambda (x)$ because $F_{\lambda }\ne 0$. Implicit differentiation gives ${\lambda }^{\prime }(x_{\ast })=0$ and ${\lambda }^{\prime \prime }(x_{\ast })=-F_{xx}/F_{\lambda }\ne 0$: the parameter has a genuine local extremum on the curve.

In the cubic polynomial, $F_x=0$ gives $x_{\ast }=\pm 1/\sqrt{3}$, and substituting into $F=0$ gives ${\lambda }_{\ast }=2x_{\ast }/3$. Furthermore, $F_{xx}=6x_{\ast }\ne 0$. Yet $\nabla F=(3x^2-1,1)$ never vanishes, so the full solution branch remains a regular level set everywhere. The obstruction belongs to the projection onto $\lambda$, not to the curve itself.

For systems, the cited continuation account uses a one-dimensional kernel of $F_u$ and $F_{\lambda }$ outside its image of a linear map to define a simple fold (its Definition 2.2). These conditions make $[F_u{F}_{\lambda }]$ have full rank and support a transverse correction. A nonzero second-order term along the kernel is additionally needed to describe a nondegenerate quadratic turning point; in the scalar example this is $F_{xx}\ne 0$.^[ref]

Parameter continuation changes $\lambda$ by a small amount and solves again for $u$, using the previous solution as the initial guess for Newton method. If $F_u$ is an invertible matrix, the implicit function theorem gives a local solution branch $u(\lambda )$, withLocal convergence of Newton method also needs regularity and a sufficiently small step: the cited result assumes a Lipschitz continuous derivative and an invertible $F_u$ at the seed.^[ref]

For the cubic polynomial,The derivative becomes unbounded at either continuation fold, and the scalar Newton method divides by $F_x=0$ there. Just beyond the upper continuation fold, no nearby real solution exists at the increased $\lambda$, although a distant negative-$x$ solution still exists. Converging to that solution would jump away from the local solution branch. Decreasing the parameter step cannot make $x(\lambda )$ a valid smooth local description at the bend.

Pseudo-arclength continuation allows both the state and the parameter to change. Write $z=(u,\lambda )$ and choose a unit vector $t_k$ in the kernel of the full Jacobian matrix $DF(z_k)$. A continuation predictor-corrector step seeks the next solution on a hyperplane perpendicular to $t_k$, a distance $h>0$ along the old tangent vector. This adds one equation to $F(z)=0$ and makes the correction a square system. The constraint approximates arc length; $h$ is the displacement projected onto the old tangent vector, rather than the exact curved distance.^[ref]