We analyze the asymptotic behavior of the eigenvalues of nonlinear elliptic problems under Dirichlet boundary conditions and mixed (Dirichlet, Neumann) boundary conditions on domains becoming unbounded. We make intensive use of Picone identity to overcome nonlinearity complications. Altogether the use of Picone identity makes the proof easier with respect to the known proof in the linear case. Surprisingly the asymptotic behavior under mixed boundary conditions critically differs from the case of pure Dirichlet boundary conditions for some class of problems.
In this paper we study nonlinear elliptic eigenvalue problems on domains which become unbounded in one or several directions. We have basically focused on operators related to the p-Laplacian. To be more precise let us introduce some notations that we will use in the rest of the paper.
Let and let , be two open bounded sets in and respectively. For every let us define . We will denote, for every
with
∇, and will denote gradient vectors in , and respectively. Let be an -symmetric matrix of the type
where is an matrix. We will assume that A is an uniformly bounded and uniformly positive definite matrix on . Precise conditions on the matrix A will be clarified in Section 3. We start considering the following eigenvalue problem with Dirichlet boundary condition for any ,
We are interested in the study of the asymptotic behaviour of the first eigenvalue of the above problem as . In the linear case , in a seminal paper of Chipot and Rougirel (see [13]), it was proved that the k-th eigenvalue of (1.1)(see [13] for the definition of k-th eigenvalue) converges to the first eigenvalue of the corresponding cross section problem that we now introduce in the general case ,
We will denote by and W respectively the first eigenvalue and the first normalized () eigenfunction of (1.2). In the first part of the paper we are able to prove that also in the nonlinear case the first eigenvalue of (1.1) converge to the first eigenvalue of the problem (1.2) on cross section. Moreover, we would like to introduce the following minimization problem on the infinite strip in order to get a deeper insight of the asymptotic behaviour of :
Precisely we prove the following theorem.
Letanddenote the first eigenvalue of (
1.2
), then there exists a constant C depending only on A,, p, such thatfor every. Moreover.
The lower bound in Theorem 1.1 was proved by Chipot and Rougirel (see [13]), in the linear case , using an approximation argument for the matrix A that relies on the linearity of the equation and it is not clear if the same argument can be employed in the non linear case. In this paper we present a complete different argument that relies on a clever use of Picone identity (see Theorem 2.2). In spite of the difficulty of non linearity our approach turns out to be simpler and shorter than [13]. The upper bound in Theorem 1.1 is obtained, in a similar manner as in ([13]), by constructing a suitable test function on the truncated domains and then letting ℓ tending to infinity.
The second part of the paper concerns the eigenvalue problem for the same operator as in (1.1), but with mixed boundary conditions. For technical reasons (which precisely the construction of test function “” in the proof of Theorem 1.2), we can only allow the domain to become unbounded in one direction, i.e. we assume that and . Namely we consider the following eigenvalue problem on :
where ν denotes the outward unit normal to . For the case , in Chipot, Roy and Shafrir [14] it was proved that when ℓ goes to plus infinity the limit of the first eigenvalue exists. In addition this limit is strictly smaller than if and only if a.e. on . In the nonlinear case , we prove that this gap phenomenon still holds under the same condition a.e. on . In particular we prove the following theorem.
For, we haveprovideda.e. on, otherwisefor all.
The main steps to prove the above theorem uses the same argument as in [14]. The first step is to study a “dimension reduction” problem, namely we let ℓ go to zero in (1.3). As a matter of fact it turns out that if and only if a.e. on . This provides us the main tool to construct test functions on in order to prove the gap phenomenon for large values of ℓ. We address the readers to [1,4,21] and the references there in, for the general study of problems on “dimension reduction”.
Asymptotic behavior when the parameter for different type of problems subject to different boundary conditions were studied in past. We refer to [9] and [10] for the study of Stokes problem and elliptic equations with Neuman boundary conditions. Asymptotic behaviour for the minimizers of purely variational problem is done in [11,25]. We refer to [3,5–8,12,15–20,22,23,29] and the reference mentioned there in for other related work in this direction.
Some preliminary results
In this section we will summarize some standard features about eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of p-Laplacian type operators. Let Ω be a bounded open regular subset of , , we will denote by , the usual spaces of functions defined by
equipped with the norm
and
Thanks to the classical Poincaré inequality, we will always assume that the space is equipped with the norm
Let be a symmetric, uniformly positive definite and uniformly bounded matrix in . We assume that is i.e. each component is . Therefore we consider the following Dirichlet eigenvalue problem:
For reader convenience we will refer to the weak formulation of (2.2), which consists in the following:
We denote by and the first eigenvalue and the first eigenfunction of (2.2) respectively. Now we collect some properties of the first eigenpair .
The following properties verified byand
is finite and strictly positive.
fulfill the following variational chracterization by means of the Rayleigh quotient,
is bounded and is infor some.
is simple and the functiondoes not change sign in Ω.
In the case of pure p-Laplacian eigenvalue problem the properties listed above are well known. The reader is addressed to [2,24,26–28] for the proof. In the general case of equation (2.2) the same results can be proved with obvious slight modifications.
One of the main tools for the proof of the main result of this paper is the following Picone’s identity. For the sake of completeness we give here the proof of this fundamental inequality (see also [2]).
(Picone’s identity).
Suppose A is a symmetric positive definite matrix onand u, v two differentiable functions withand. DefineandThen. Moreovera.e. in Ω if and only ifa.e. in Ω.
The equality case trivially follows by expanding . Now by hypothesis on the matrix A, we can write . Thus
Using Young’s inequality we have,
where . Equality holds when
Therefore we get . So when, and we must have and and thus we obtain . Therefore, . On the other hand if, then a.e. on and thus a.e. on . Therefore we conclude that a.e. in Ω. □
Convergence of the first eigenvalue for Dirichlet case
Resuming the notation used in the introduction we denote to be an open subset of , where , are two open bounded sets in , and respectively and . The variables in , and are denoted by and respectively. We will write accordingly.
The matrix
is an -symmetric matrix, and assume that the block matrix is regularity.
We will assume that A is uniformly bounded and uniformly positive definite matrix on ; namely there exists two positive constants M, λ such that
In the following will denote the norm of matrices, the euclidean norm, and “·” the usual euclidean scalar product.
In this section we investigate the asymptotic behaviour of the first eigenvalue of the problem (1.1) for . Indeed we prove Theorem 1.1 which claim that converges to the first eigenvalue of the problem (1.2). For the reader convenience we quote the weak formulation of the problem (1.2).
Remember that and W denote the first eigenvalue and the first normalized () eigenfunction of the problem (3.1) respectively.
As observed in the introduction, the first eigenvalue has a variational characterization by the Rayleigh quotient:
Moreover, is simple and the eigenfunction W is differentiable and has constant sign in the domain, that we should fix as the positive sign in the sequel.
By an abuse of notation we still denote with W the extension of W on defined by setting . Then we have
Let ϕ be any function in . We are now in position to use Picone’s identity 2.2 because W is and , then we get
Integrating over and using Green’s theorem we deduce
Then using (3.2) we acquire
Since the last inequality holds true for any we deduce by density in
The estimate from below for the eigenvalue quoted in Theorem 1.1 is then proved.
To prove the estimate from above we use a suitable test function in the Rayleigh quotient characterizing . Let us choose be a smooth function in such that
in ;
, everywhere.
Let W be the first eigenfunction of the section problem as above. The function
is a good test function in (2.3). Thus, using Minkowski inequality and structure condition of the matrix A we have
Where we also used the fact that . Recalling that W is an eigenfunction we deduce
In the last estimate we also used the fact that . Now we observe that, since W is an eigenfunction and thanks to the ellipticity condition on the matrix A, the following implication holds true
Using the elementary inequality for , and denoting with the Lebesgue measure in we get
Hence the estimate from above is then proved.
Clearly, for any , we have and for the lower bound of we proceed exactly in the same way as it is done in (3.3) where is replaced by . Then letting we conclude that . □
The gap phenomenon for mixed boundary conditions
In this section we are concerned about the mixed boundary eigenvalue problem. Let us discuss some results that would be required to the main proof of the Theorem 1.2. As we mentioned in the introduction, first we study the asymptotic behavior of as , which is a key ingredient to proof of the Theorem 1.2.
An appropriate space for mixed boundary eigenvalue problem is
where and the boundary value is defined in the sense of trace. Thanks to the classical Poincaré inequality, the space becomes a Banach space with respect to the norm (2.1).
The weak formulation of the eigenvalue problem (1.3) is given by
The first eigenvalue for (4.1) is associated with a variational characterization
Moreover, the first eigenvalue is simple and the corresponding eigenfunction has constant sign in the domain.
(Dimension Reduction).
For, we havewhere
The reason why we find Λ as the limiting value will be clarified by the following observation. Let
be a positive definite matrix in and we write any vector with . Then it is easy to see by using elementary calculus that for any fixed we have
and the minimum in (4.3) is attained for . Applying (4.3) with we obtain, for any ,
It is clear by (4.4) the lower bound
Let be a neighbourhood of for . Fix for any and let be an approximation of the characteristic function of , as :
Hence for one has pointwise. Let us define a function on by
We emphasize that the function defined above does not necessarily belong to the space , since the first eigenfunction W is atmost in . To resolve this difficulty, we provide a smooth approximation argument, motivated by [4, Ch. 14]. Now define a family of functions in by using standard mollification which satisfies the following
Then we define
By using simple elementary inequality for the vectors a, b and
and using the fact that is an odd function in we infer that
Now
Hence by using Minkowski inequality we have
where
and
where
Then by properties (4.6) of the function , and for fixed we have
where () are positive constants independent of ℓ, and we define
Since pointwise as and then by dominated convergence theorem we conclude that as . Now we estimates the above integrals , in the following:
Estimate for:
Estimate for: Again applying Minkowski inequality and by (4.10) we obtain
Now plugging the estimates (4.11), (4.12) into (4.9) we obtain
Therefore combining (4.8) and (4.13) we have
Letting and using the fact in , we infer that
which together with (4.5) gives the desired result. □
Case 1: Suppose the condition holds first i.e. a.e. on . Then we obtain
By the proof of the above theorem there exists and such that the function defined by (4.7) satisfies
Let be a constant whose value will be choose later. For we define a function as follows,
where
By simple change of variable we get
and thus we have
Similarly we have
Let and . Using Minkowski inequality and the fact that is an even function of on S. We estimate the above last integral as follows
where
and , since for some , then we have .
Now plugging the above estimates into (4.17) and then using the elementary inequality which stated in Section 3 we obtain
Combining (4.15), (4.16) and (4.18) we get
Therefore,
By (4.14) it is clear that for a fixed large enough α such that the RHS of the above is negative and get the desired result.
Case 2: Suppose the condition of the Theorem doesn’t hold i.e. in . Then Λ becomes and by (4.4) we conclude that . Now by choosing as a test function in (4.2) then we get . This completes the proof of the theorem. □
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The second author would like to thank Prof. Itai Shafrir for several discussion on the subject, during his stay in Technion, Israel. We once again thank Itai Shafrir for suggesting us the use of Picone identity in the proof of Theorem . The work of the second author is supported by INSPIRE grant IFA14-MA43 and Matrix grant MTR/2019/000585.
References
1.
E.Acerbi, G.Buttazzo and D.Percivale, A variational definition of the strain energy for an elastic string, Journal of Elasticity25(2) (1991), 137–148. doi:10.1007/BF00042462.
2.
W.Allegretto and Y.X.Huang, A Picone’s identity for the p-Laplacian and applications, Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods and Applications32(7) (1998), 819–830. doi:10.1016/S0362-546X(97)00530-0.
3.
V.Ambrosio, L.Freddi and R.Musina, Asymptotic analysis of the Dirichlet fractional Laplacian in domains becoming unbounded, 2019, preprint arXiv:1910.11611.
4.
A.Braides, Γ-Convergence for Beginners, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002.
5.
A.Ceccaldi and S.Mardare, On correctors to elliptic problems in long cylinders, J. Elliptic Parabol. Equ.5(2) (2019), 473–491. doi:10.1007/s41808-019-00047-8.
6.
M.Chipot, ℓ Goes to Plus Infinity, Birkhäuser, 2002.
7.
M.Chipot, On the asymptotic behaviour of some problems of the calculus of variations, J. Elliptic Parabol. Equ.1 (2015), 307–323. doi:10.1007/BF03377383.
8.
M.Chipot, Asymptotic Issues for Some Partial Differential Equations, Imperial College Press, London, 2016.
9.
M.Chipot and S.Mardare, Asymptotic behaviour of the Stokes problem in cylinders becoming unbounded in one direction, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9)90(2) (2008), 133–159. doi:10.1016/j.matpur.2008.04.002.
10.
M.Chipot and S.Mardare, The Neumann problem in cylinders becoming unbounded in one direction, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9)104(5) (2015), 921–941. doi:10.1016/j.matpur.2015.05.008.
11.
M.Chipot, A.Mojsic and P.Roy, On some variational problems set on domains tending to infinity, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst.36(7) (2016), 3603–3621. doi:10.3934/dcds.2016.36.3603.
12.
M.Chipot and A.Rougirel, On the asymptotic behaviour of the solution of elliptic problems in cylindrical domains becoming unbounded, Communications in Contemporary Mathematics4(01) (2002), 15–44. doi:10.1142/S0219199702000555.
13.
M.Chipot and A.Rougirel, On the asymptotic behaviour of the eigenmodes for elliptic problems in domains becoming unbounded, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.360(7) (2008), 3579–3602. doi:10.1090/S0002-9947-08-04361-4.
14.
M.Chipot, P.Roy and I.Shafrir, Asymptotics of eigenstates of elliptic problems with mixed boundary data on domains tending to infinity, Asymptot. Anal.85(3–4) (2013), 199–227. doi:10.3233/ASY-131182.
15.
M.Chipot and K.Yeressian, Exponential rates of convergence by an iteration technique, C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris346(1–2) (2008), 21–26. doi:10.1016/j.crma.2007.12.004.
16.
M.Chipot and K.Yeressian, On the asymptotic behavior of variational inequalities set in cylinders, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst.33(11–12) (2013), 4875–4890. doi:10.3934/dcds.2013.33.4875.
17.
I.Chowdhury, G.Csató, P.Roy and F.Sk, Study of fractional Poincaré inequalities on unbounded domains, 2019, preprint arXiv:1904.07170.
18.
I.Chowdhury and P.Roy, On the asymptotic analysis of problems involving fractional Laplacian in cylindrical domains tending to infinity, Commun. Contemp. Math.19(5) (2017), 21 pp. doi:10.1142/S0219199716500358.
19.
I.Chowdhury and P.Roy, Fractional Poincaré inequality for unbounded domains with finite ball condition: Counter example, 2020, preprint arXiv:2001.04441.
20.
L.Djilali and A.Rougirel, Galerkin method for time fractional diffusion equations, J. Elliptic Parabol. Equ.4(2) (2018), 349–368. doi:10.1007/s41808-018-0022-5.
21.
I.Fonseca and G.Francfort, 3D-2D asymptotic analysis of an optimal design problem for thin films, Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik505 (1998), 173–202. doi:10.1515/crll.1998.505.173.
22.
S.Guesmia, Some results on the asymptotic behavior for hyperbolic problems in cylindrical domains becoming unbounded, J. Math. Anal. Appl.341(2) (2008), 1190–2012. doi:10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.11.001.
23.
S.Guesmia, Some convergence results on quasi-linear parabolic boundary value problems in cylindrical domains of large size, Nonlinear Anal.70(9) (2009), 3320–3331. doi:10.1016/j.na.2008.04.036.
24.
A.Lê, Eigenvalue problems for the p-Laplacian, Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods and Applications64(5) (2006), 1057–1099. doi:10.1016/j.na.2005.05.056.
25.
H.Le Dret and A.Mokrane, On problems in the calculus of variations in increasingly elongated domains, Chinese Annals of Mathematics, Series B39(2) (2018), 163–182. doi:10.1007/s11401-018-1058-4.
26.
P.Lindqvist, A nonlinear eigenvalue problem, Topics in mathematical analysis3 (2008), 175–203. doi:10.1142/9789812811066_0005.
27.
P.Tolksdorf, Regularity for a more general class of quasilinear elliptic equations, Journal of Differential equations51(1) (1984), 126–150. doi:10.1016/0022-0396(84)90105-0.
28.
N.S.Trudinger, On Harnack type inequalities and their application to quasilinear elliptic equations, Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics20(4) (1967), 721–747. doi:10.1002/cpa.3160200406.
29.
K.Yeressian, Asymptotic behavior of elliptic nonlocal equations set in cylinders, Asymptot. Anal.89(1–2) (2014), 21–35. doi:10.3233/ASY-141224.