Abstract
We examine initial-boundary value problems for diffusion equations with distributed order time-fractional derivatives. We prove existence and uniqueness results for the weak solution to these systems, together with its continuous dependency on initial value and source term. Moreover, we provide energy estimates of the solution for small and large times. Finally, under suitable assumption on the source term, we establish that the solution is analytic in time.
Keywords
Introduction
The time-fractional diffusion model of constant order (CO) α,
From a mathematical viewpoint, the forward problem associated with these equations was investigated in [12,17,18,20]. Namely, the fundamental solution to the Cauchy problem for both ordinary and partial distributed order fractional differential equations with continuous weight function was derived and investigated in detail in [12]. A uniqueness result for the solution to diffusion equations of DO was derived in [18] with the aid of an appropriate maximum principle and a formal solution was constructed by means of the Fourier method of variables separation. Unfortunately, there is no proof available in [18] of the convergence of the series describing this formal solution. Further, explicit strong solutions (and stochastic analogues) to DO time-fractional diffusion equations with Dirichlet boundary conditions were built in [20] for
Formally, single- or multi-term time-fractional diffusion equations can be seen as DO time-fractional diffusion equations associated with a density function of the form
In this paper, since the system under study is autonomous (the coefficients appearing in (1) are all space-dependent only), we rather follow the idea of [10,11] and characterize the weak solution to (1) as the original of the solution to the Laplace transform of (1) with respect to the time variable. With reference to the analysis carried out in [16] for multi term CO time-fractional diffusion equations, we aim to study the existence, uniqueness and regularity properties, and the stability with respect to the diffusion coefficients and the weight function μ, of a weak solution to (1).
Settings
In this paper, we assume that
We denote by A the operator generated in
Moreover, since
Weak solution
As already mentioned in the introduction, the usual definition given in [6] of a weak solution to CO time-fractional diffusion equations, is not suitable for DO time-fractional diffusion equations. Hence we rather follow the strategy implemented in [10] (which is by means of the Laplace transform of tempered distributions), that is recalled below.
Let
For all
Inspired by [10, Definition 2.2] we may now introduce the weak solution to (1) as follows.
Let
Notice that Equation (5) yields
A solution to the IBVP (1), as defined by Definition 1.1, is necessarily unique. Indeed, if
In the coming section we state several existence and uniqueness results for the weak solution to (1).
We first address the case where the initial state
Let
Then, for all
Here and in the remaining part of this text, the notation
Fix
Pick
Assume that
Estimate (8) holds for
Moreover, we notice that the second claim of Theorem 1.2 states that
Let
The following result claims that the solution to (1) is analytic in time, provided the source term can be holomorphically extended to a neighborhood of the positive real axis. This statement is of great interest in the analysis of inverse coefficient problems associated with time-fractional diffusion equations, see e.g. [9,10,15].
Let the conditions of Theorem
1.1
be satisfied with
The last result of this paper is similar to [16, Theorem 2.3], which was established in the framework of multi-terms time-fractional diffusion equations with positive constant coefficients. It is useful for the optimization approach to the inverse problem of determining the weight function μ together with the diffusion matrix Let
In Theorems 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3, the function F is assumed to be bounded in time over
Let us start by introducing the following notation: for all
Notice that the above definition is meaningful in the sense that, firstly, there exists a unique function
Brief comments and outline
To our best knowledge, the only mathematical paper besides this one, dealing with the existence and uniqueness issues for solutions to DO fractional diffusion equations, is [13]. But the analysis carried out in [13] is different from the one of the present paper in many aspects. As already mentioned in Section 1, the approach of [13] is variational whereas we study the original function of the solution to the Laplace transform of (1). This allows us to show existence of a unique weak solution to (1) within the class
Finally, we point out that Definition 1.1 of a weak solution to (1) (as the original function of the solution to the Laplace transform with respect to the time variable of this system) is inspired by the analysis carried out in [10], which is concerned with space dependent variable order (VO) time-fractional diffusion equations. It is well known that the weak solution to CO time-fractional diffusion equations can be expressed in terms of Mittag-Leffler functions, see e.g. [5,11]. Nevertheless, such an explicit representation formula is no longer valid for DO or space-dependent VO time-fractional diffusion equations, as the inversion method of the Laplace transform is technically more involved in these two cases. This specific difficulty arising from the non-constancy of the order of DO or VO time-fractional equations is the main difference with the analysis of their CO counterpart.
The article is organized as follows. In Section 2 we prove Theorem 1.1 by showing existence of a unique weak solution to the IBVP (1), enjoying a Duhamel-like representation formula. Section 3 contains the proof of Theorems 1.2 and 1.3, based on careful analysis of the above mentioned representation of the solution. In Section 4 we establish the time analytic property of the solution to (1), claimed in Theorem 1.4. Next, in Section 5, we prove Theorem 1.5 stating that the weak solution to (1) depends continuously on the distributed order weight function, the diffusion coefficients and the electric potential. Finally, in the Appendix, we collect the proof of an auxiliary result used in the derivation of Theorem 1.3.
Representation of the solution: Proof of Theorem 1.1
The proof of Theorem 1.1 is based on an effective representation of the solution to the IBVP (1), that is derived in Section 2.2 and presented in Proposition 2.1. As a preamble, several useful properties of the function
Three auxiliary results on w
We start by lower bounding
Let
We start with (15). The case of
We turn now to proving (16). To this end, we infer from (18)–(19) that
The second result provides for all
Let
Let us first consider the case where
Finally, we estimate from above the mapping
Assume that
The mapping
The function
Since
Armed with the three above lemmas, we may now turn to showing that the IBVP (1) admits a unique solution enjoying a Duhamel representation formula.
For
Let μ, T,
The proof is divided into two steps, the first one being concerned with the case of a uniformly vanishing source term F, whereas the second one deals with an identically zero initial state
1) Step 1:
Further, with reference to (30) with
Moreover, in light of (30), we infer from [23, Theorem 19.2 and the following remark] and the holomorphicity of
Next, as both functions
It remains to prove that u is expressed by (25) with
2) Step 2:
It remains to show that
Now, with reference to Step 1 and Step 2, the function represented by (25) is a solution to (1) from the superposition principle. Moreover, it is unique by virtue of Remark 1.1.
It remains to show the last claim of Proposition 2.1. This can be done with the aid of Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3, yielding existence of a constant
Theorem 1.1 being a straightforward byproduct of Proposition 2.1, we may now turn to proving Theorems 1.2 and 1.3.
The proof of Theorems 1.2 and 1.3 is by means of suitable time-decay estimates for the operators
Time-decay estimates
We start with
Let the weight function
In light of (26), it is enough to estimate
We start with
We turn now to estimating
We turn now to examining the time-evolution of the operator
Assume that
We proceed as in the proof of Lemma 3.1, the main novelty being that the function
Having established Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2, we may now prove Theorem 1.2.
We examine the two cases
a) We first assume that
Let us now prove (8). We stick with the notations used in the proof of Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2 and establish for every
b) Suppose that
Proof of Theorem 1.3
The derivation of Theorem 1.3 essentially relies on the following technical result, whose proof is postponed to the appendix.
Assume that
As a matter of fact we know from (25) that
With reference to Duhamel’s representation formula (25) of the weak solution to (1), we may treat the two cases
1) Step 1:
We start by noticing that
2) Step 2:
First, since F is extendable to a holomorphic function of
Further, for
Furthermore, using that
Similarly, by setting
Finally, putting (25), (27), (38), (73) and (75) together, we obtain that the solution u to (1) reads
Lipschitz stability: Proof of Theorem 1.5
The strategy of the proof of the stability inequality (12) essentially follows the lines of the derivation of [16, Theorem 2.3] and boils down to the estimates (7)–(8) established in Theorem 1.2.
For the sake of notational simplicity, we start by rewriting the IBVP (1) with
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The work of ZL was partially supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (S) 15H05740, JSPS (ZL). The work of YK and ÉS was partially supported by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche under grant ANR-17- CE40-0029.
ZL thanks Grant-in-Aid for Research Activity Start-up 16H06712, JSPS, and National Youth Fund 11801326, NSFC, China. YK and ÉS would like to thank the Department of Mathematical Sciences of The University of Tokyo, where part of this article was written, for its kind hospitality.
