The polarization tensor is a geometric quantity associated with a domain. It is a signature of the small inclusion’s existence inside a domain and used in the small volume expansion method to reconstruct small inclusions by boundary measurements. In this paper, we consider the question of the polarization tensor vanishing structure of general shape. The only known examples of the polarization tensor vanishing structure are concentric disks and balls. We prove, by the implicit function theorem on Banach spaces, that a small perturbation of a ball can be enclosed by a domain so that the resulting inclusion of the core-shell structure becomes polarization tensor vanishing. The boundary of the enclosing domain is given by a sphere perturbed by spherical harmonics of degree zero and two. This is a continuation of the earlier work (Kang, Li, Sakaguchi) for two dimensions.
In the inverse conductivity problem or the electrical impedance tomography, the measurement of boundary data is utilized to reconstruct inclusions buried inside the domain. When the inclusion is of small size, the small volume expansion shows that the leading order term of the boundary perturbation is expressed by the polarization tensor (abbreviated by PT afterwards) associated with the inclusion. Thus the polarization tensor is a signature of inclusion’s existence, which can be effectively used to reconstruct the inclusion (see, for example, [1,3,4,6–8,20]).
This paper is concerned with the problem of the opposite direction: hiding inclusions by making the PT vanish. Since the PT for simply connected homogeneous domain is either positive- or negative-definite, we consider the inclusions of core-shell structure. It is known that concentric disks and balls can be made to be PT vanishing (see (1.4) below), and these are the only known examples of the PT-vanishing inclusions.
We are concerned with the following question:
Polarization Tensor Vanishing Structure. Find a domain Ω enclosing the given domain D of arbitrary shape so that polarization tensor of the resulting inclusionof the core-shell structure vanishes.
The purpose of this paper is to prove that if the core D is a small perturbation of a ball in three dimensions, then there is Ω enclosing such that the inclusion becomes PT-vanishing. This is a continuation of the work [15], where a similar result is proved in two dimensions. So, we move directly to description of the problem and statement of the result leaving additional motivational remarks and historical accounts to that paper and references therein (see also recent survey article [12]).
To define the PT-vanishing structure of the core-shell shape, let D and Ω be bounded simply connected domains in () such that . The pair of domains may be regarded as an inclusion of the core-shell structure where the core D is coated by the shell . Let σ be a piecewise constant function, representing the conductivity distribution, defined by
where the conductivities , and of the core, the shell and the matrix are assumed to be isotropic (scalar). We then consider the following conductivity problem:
where a is a unit vector representing the background uniform field.
In absence of the inclusion the field is uniform, i.e., . This uniform field is perturbed by insertion of the inclusion and the perturbation is not zero in general. It is known that the solution u to (1.2), or the perturbation , admits the following dipole asymptotic expansion:
where is the surface area of , the -dimensional sphere, and M is a matrix and called the polarization tensor (PT), which is determined by the inclusion and conductivity ratios , namely,
(see, for example, [2,17]). The question of the PT-vanishing structure can be rephrased as follows: Given D of arbitrary shape, find so that .
If D is a disk or a ball, then one can choose Ω to be a concentric disk or ball and the conductivity parameters so that the perturbation of the uniform field a is zero outside Ω. In fact, if and in , and if the following relation among conductivities and the volume fractions holds:
where and is the volume fraction, then the solution u to (1.2) satisfies
This discovery of Hashin and Shtrikman [10,11] has laid significant implications in the theory of composite for which we refer to [17].
The inclusion is said to be neutral to multiple uniform fields if (1.5) holds for all constant vector a. However, a pair of concentric balls is the only structure neutral to multiple uniform fields as proved in [14]. It is worth mentioning that the problem (1.2) is well-posed even if is a positive-definite matrix. It is believed to be true, but has not been proved, that if is a positive-definite matrix, then the only inclusion neutral to multiple uniform fields is a pair of confocal ellipsoids whose common foci are determined by the eigenvalues of . See [14] for descriptions of this problem and a related over-determined problem (see also [12]). The question in two dimensions has been solved [13,18].
While the problem (1.2) requires at ∞ and the neutrality requires (1.5), the PT-vanishing property requires in-between them, namely,
as one can see from (1.3). This is the reason why the PT-vanishing inclusion is also called the weakly neutral inclusion, as used in the title of the earlier version of the manuscript (arXiv:1911.07250v1). However, the name ‘PT-vanishing structure’ seems to convey the meaning more directly, and the title has been changed accordingly in this new version of the manuscript.
To present the main result of this paper in a precise manner, let be the unit sphere in and let be the collection of all functions f on such that
where and be tangential gradient and Hessian on , and denotes the usual norm. The space with norm is defined similarly.
Let for some radius . The core in this paper is defined to be a perturbation of by a function . Denoting it by , it is defined by
The shell is defined also to be a perturbation of a ball. Let () and define its perturbation by
The perturbation function b for the shell is chosen from a subclass of : Let
We mention that is constant (a spherical harmonics of order 0) and , , is a spherical harmonics of order 2, and , , are mutually orthogonal and normalized so that the following holds for all l:
We take this normalization just for ease of notation. Let be the space spanned by and is defined for .
If h and b are sufficiently small, then and hence the PT corresponding to , which is denoted by , is well-defined. We choose , the radius of , so that and satisfy neutrality condition (1.4) for given conductivities , and . For that, , and need to satisfy
Then is neutral, namely, .
The following is the main result of this paper:
Given, letsatisfy the neutrality condition (
1.4
). There issuch that for eachwiththere issuch thatnamely, the inclusionof the core-shell structure is PT-vanishing. The mappingis continuous.
Let us briefly describe how Theorem 1.1 is proved. Since is a symmetric matrix, we can identify M with . We then regard M as a function from into , where U is a small neighborhood of 0 in and V is a small neighborhood of 0 in identified with , i.e.,
Moreover, since is neutral to multiple fields, it is PT-vanishing, namely, . We then show the Jacobian determinant of M is non-zero, namely,
Then, Theorem 1.1 follows from the implicit function theorem (Theorem 4.1).
The idea and structure of the proof are the same as those in [15]. However, since we are dealing with spherical harmonics in three dimensions in this paper, details are much more involved.
By switching roles of h and b, we obtain the following theorem:
Given, letsatisfy the neutrality condition (
1.4
). There issuch that for eachwiththere issuch that the inclusionof the core-shell structure is PT-vanishing. The mappingis continuous.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we review the definition of the PT in terms of a system of integral equations, and prove continuity and differentiability of the relevant integral operator. Section 3 includes some preliminary computations of quantities to be used in proving Theorem 1.1, which is proved in Section 4. This paper ends with a short conclusion.
The integral equations and its stability properties
Preliminary: Layer potentials and PT
Let be the fundamental solution to the Laplacian, that is, in two dimensions, and in three dimensions. Let D be a bounded simply connected domain with Lipschitz continuous boundary. Let and be the single layer potential and the Neumann–Poincaré operator, respectively, namely, for a function
and
where is the surface element on and denotes the outward normal derivative on . The relation between and is given by the following jump formula:
where I is the identity operator and subscripts ± denote the limits from outside and inside D, respectively.
Let Ω and D be two bounded domains such that , whose boundaries are assumed to be Lipschtiz continuous. The solution () to (1.2) when is represented as
where is the unique solution to the system of integral equations
Here is the l-th component of the outward unit normal vector to , is defined likewise, and the numbers λ and μ are given by
Here and afterwards, denotes the collection of square integrable functions on with the mean zero. We refer to the discussion in [15] for a proof of unique solvability of (2.5) on .
The PT of the core-shell structure is defined by
The expansion (1.3) of the solution u to (1.2) is valid with this PT.
Parametrizations of integral equations
We consider the system of integral equations (2.5) when and where and are defined by (1.7) and (1.8), respectively:
on . This system of equations admits a unique solution and there is a constant such that
We now transform (2.8) in three dimensions to a system of integral equations on where is the unit sphere. To do so, let
which is a change of variables from onto . Then the unit normal vector on is given by the relation
where
The tangential gradient , which was already used in Introduction, is defined to be
where and are two unit orthogonal tangent vector fields on , and is defined after extending h to a tubular neighborhood of . Note that is the Jacobian determinant of the change of variables , namely, the following formula holds:
Likewise, let
which is a change of variables from onto . Then the normal vector on is given by
where
Then it holds that
Straightforward calculations using (2.10)–(2.18) show that the following relations hold:
Let be the operator on defined by the integral kernel
Then,
where .
Let be defined by
Then,
where .
Let be defined by
Then,
Let be defined by
Then,
Thanks to above formulae, the integral equation (2.8) now takes the form
where
Let
and , (⊤ for transpose). Then (2.27) can be written in short as
on . Moreover, (2.9) shows that there is a constant depending on h and b such that
where denotes the norm on . Here and throughout this paper K denotes a positive constant which may differ at each appearance.
Continuity of the integral operator
We now consider the continuity of the operator with respect to h and b. For that we assume that . We first obtain the following proposition for the continuity. This proposition for two dimensions was obtained in [15]. Even though the idea and the procedure of the proof are almost identical, the proof here and there are technically dissimilar because of the nature of the integral kernels. For example, the integral kernels and have singularities of order 1 at in three dimensions, while there is no singularity in two dimensions. See the first paragraph of the following proof.
There issuch that ifand, then
is continuous atstrongly, namely, there is a constantsuch thatfor all.
is continuous atweakly, namely, for eachas.
We first deal with the operator and include the proof in detail here since the proof is more involved than that for the two-dimensional case in [15] due to the singularity. The operator can be treated similarly. The operators and can be dealt with in the same way as in two dimensions since their integral kernels do not have singularities. However, we include a brief proof since the details presented in this proof will be used in the later part of the paper.
One can easily see from (2.15) and (2.16) that
Here, we used the fact that . Therefore, we have
where
Let b be extended to by defining . Then, since
for , we have from Taylor’s theorem
for some constant K. Thus,
The constant K may differ at each occurrence. We then infer
One can also see that
Thus we have
where
Note that
We have from (2.21), (2.33) and (2.38) that
The singularity on the righthand side above is specific to three dimensions, and does not appear in two dimensions. Since
one can see from (2.37) and (2.40) that
provided that is sufficiently small (because of (2.40)). Thus we have
for all .
Let and δ be an arbitrary but fixed positive small number. For each , we write
If , then unless . Moreover, we have from (2.42)
provided that . Thus, by Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem, we infer that for each x as in . Further, we have
We then apply Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem once more to infer that as in .
To handle , we first observe that
Thus we have
where M is the maximal function, namely,
(up to some constant multiplication). Note that in the above the constant C differs at each occurrence. It then follows that
where the last inequality comes from the fact that the maximal function M is bounded on , for which we refer to [19].
So far, we have shown that
Since ,
where in . Since δ is arbitrary, we conclude that for each fixed .
Similarly, one can show that
for all , and
as in for each fixed .
To handle the operator , let
and
so that
One can see that
and
In fact, it is straightforward to derive (2.49). To show (2.50), we see that
for all . Furthermore, we have
provided that and are sufficiently small. Thus we have (2.50) by using a simple identity for positive numbers a and b:
It then follows from (2.49), (2.50) and (2.51) that
from which we conclude that
for all .
Similarly one can show that
for all . Now (2.31) and (2.32) follow, and the proof is complete. □
Note that is nothing but the operator appearing in (2.5), and so it is invertible. Note also that
Thanks to (2.31), the operator norm of is small if is small. Thus exists. So, we have the following corollary.
There issuch thatfor allfor someindependent of h and b satisfying.
Differentiability of the integral operator
We now look into differentiability of with respect to b when b belongs to , namely, b is of the form
where is given by (1.9). For such a b, is equivalent to
For the rest of this paper, we assume that b is of the form (2.54).
Let denote the partial derivative with respect to (). Since , . Thus we see from the definitions (2.46) and (2.47) that
and
We then see easily from (2.48) and (2.51) that
for some constant . Moreover, if and , then
Thus we see that the operator is bounded on and
for all .
Similarly one can see that the operator is bounded on and
for all .
Let and be the quantities defined by (2.34) and (2.39), respectively, with b and d of the form (2.54). We claim that the following inequalities hold for and :
In fact, since , we obtain from (2.34)
where
Using (2.35), we see that
for some K. Thus we arrive at
We then immediately obtain (2.57) and hence (2.58) when . By taking further derivatives in (2.61), one can also show (2.59) and (2.60). The case when can be proved similarly using (2.39).
From (2.41) we have, for ,
It then follows from (2.37), (2.40), and (2.57)–(2.60) that for
and hence
Thus we have
for all .
The following proposition is an immediate consequence of (2.55), (2.56) and (2.64).
There is a constantsuch that if b is of the form (
2.54
) and, thenis bounded onfor. Moreover, there issuch that if d is of the form (
2.54
) and, thenfor all.
Some computations
In this section we compute the quantities
for and . Here denotes the inner product on and . These quantities appear in computation of the Jacobian determinant of the PT at in the next section. Note that since is independent of b.
For computations in this section, the following three identities are useful:
and
for and for , where is the Kronecker delta.
These identities can be proved using the Funk–Hecke Formula [5, Theorem 2.22]: for , and for every homogeneous harmonic polynomial Y of degree n, the following formula holds
where the constants are given by
where are the Legendre polynomial of degree n in three dimensions. Note that the constant depends only on degree n. In fact, since
the relevant function f for (3.2) and (3.3) is . Since , and , we may apply (3.4) and (3.5) to derive (3.2) and (3.3). An additional remark may be required for the case when in (3.3). Even though is not harmonic, is. So we may apply (3.4) to this function and derive (3.3) when .
Let U be the unit ball so that . Since both sides of the equality in (3.2) are harmonic in , (3.2) holds for every . By the same reason, if , (3.3) holds for every . Thus we have from (3.2) and (3.3) that for every , and for every
and
By differentiating (3.7) in x, with the aid of the first equality in (3.2), we have for every , and for every
Similarly, by differentiating (3.8) in x, with the aid of (3.7), we have for every , and for every
unless . Even if , we can recover (3.10) by using (3.7) and .
We now compute the first quantity in (3.1). The following identities can be derived immediately from (2.34) and (2.61):
and the following from (2.39) (and by taking derivatives and using (3.6)):
Here and afterwards, we denote for , just for simplicity. We obtain from (2.63) and the above identities that
Since is constant, we see from (3.11) that
For , it is convenient to abuse notation and denote by the homogenous harmonic polynomial of order 2 such that it is the spherical harmonic when . If we use such notation, then by Taylor expansion we have
where , which are constants. Moreover, we have for
Using these two identities, we obtain
Recall the identity
which is a special case (of order 2) of Euler’s theorem on homogeneous functions. Using this identity and (3.6), we have
Plugging (3.15) into (3.11), we have
Then,
We now compute the right-hand side of (3.17). The second equality in (3.2) yields
Moreover, with the aid of (3.9) and (3.10), we compute
where the last inequality holds because . Then (3.17) together with (3.18) and (3.19) yields
Since the first term on the right-hand side above appears repeatedly, we write down the values here. Let
Then, is symmetric in l and , namely, , and for
which can be seen from (1.9) and (1.10). We then see that is symmetric in l and , and obtain for
To compute at point , we first observe that α and β given by (2.46) and (2.47) take the form
where
and
where
It then follows from (2.48) that
and hence
Since if , we have
Straightforward computations yield the following:
and for
Plugging these terms into (3.25) we have
Since is constant, this can be written as
To compute at , set
and
Then we have
where
We also have
where
Then
and hence
Since if , we have
Straightforward computations yield the following:
and
Plugging these terms into (3.29) we have
Thanks to (3.26), this formula can be rephrased as
where
We now compute . Thanks to (3.27) and (3.30), we have
Since is a function of variable , we may apply Funk–Hecke formula (3.4) to see that
Thus we have
where
We now compute the term . Clearly . For and for , by (3.12) we have
Then it follows from Euler’s theorem (3.14) that
Hence, by (3.13) and (3.31), we have for
Therefore we have
Before calculating (3.36), we prepare several integral formulas. Since formula (3.2) holds for every , we infer that for every and every ,
Moreover, by the Funk–Hecke formula, we have for every and for
and
Here we used the fact that the denominator of the integrands never vanish. The first equality in (3.39) can be also obtained by differentiating the first equality in (3.37) with respect to x, with the aid of (3.38). Moreover, by differentiating the second equality in (3.37) with respect to x, with the aid of the first equality of (3.39), we have for , and for every
Using (3.39) and (3.40), we have
and
where we used the fact that . Plugging these identities into (3.36) yields
Thus we see from (3.32) that is symmetric in and for :
In this section we prove Theorem 1.1 by showing that satisfies the hypothesis of the implicit function theorem: continuity in , continuous differentiability in b, and (1.13). Here we recall the implicit function theorem in the following form [16]:
Let X be a Banach space. Letbe an open subset of. Suppose thatis continuous and has the property that the derivative of F with respect to y exists and is continuous at each point of. Further assume that at point,Then there exist neighborhoodofand neighborhoodofsuch that, for each x in, there is a uniquesatisfyingThe function, thereby uniquely defined nearby the condition, is continuous.
Let as before. By definition (2.7), , , are given by
where is the unique solution to (2.5). Using changes of variables (2.10) and (2.15), we see that
where
Let and
where ⊤ denotes the transpose. Then, we have
Note that is the solution of
We see from (2.11) and (2.16) that , , is given by
In what follows, we show that the mapping satisfies hypothesis of Theorem 4.1.
Continuity in. We only prove continuity of since the others can be handled in the same way.
Suppose and . Then we have
Thus,
We then infer using Corollary 2.2 that
for some constant K independent of as long as and are sufficiently small. We then infer from (2.32) that
as . It is obvious from (4.5) that . Thus we have . We then conclude using (4.3) that as .
Continuous differentiability inb. By differentiating (4.4) with respect to the -variable, we have
namely,
We mention that this argument is formal since we take the derivative of without proving its existence. However, this formal argument can be justified easily.
It is clear from (4.5) that is continuous in . Then Corollary 2.2, Proposition 2.3 and continuity of in imply that is continuous in . We then obtain from (4.3) that
which shows that is continuous in .
For ease of notation we put
Then derivatives of takes the following form
To compute terms on the right-hand side above, we first show that preserves the space spanned by and , , and on that space is given by
where μ is the number defined in (2.6) and
To do so, we need to compute , , and .
We see from (2.19), (2.21) and (3.6) that
Thus it follows from the second identity in (3.2) that
We see from (2.23) and (2.25) that
Thus, (3.38) and (3.39) yield
Thus,
The desired formula (4.8) now follows thanks to the relation , which comes from (1.4) (the neutrality condition) and (2.6) (definitions of λ and μ).
We now compute the first term on the right-hand side of (4.7). Since , we have
where the constant vector is defined by
By (4.2), , and hence . Therefore,
where is defined and computed in (3.21) and (3.22).
To compute the second term on the right-hand side of (4.7), namely, , we first observe from (4.6) that
Thus we have
where is the adjoint operator of . In view of (4.8), we have
and hence
For ease of notation, let . Then, one can see from (4.5) that are given by the following:
Note . Now straightforward but tedious computations yield for
It now remains to calculate . By (3.30) and (4.12), we have
It then follows from (3.23) and (3.42) that for :
We then have from (4.7), (4.14), (4.16), (4.18) and (4.19) that for :
Thus,
Thus, (1.13) is proved. □
By switching roles of h and b, let be the polarization tensor associated with domain . Similar computations yield
Thus we have Theorem 1.2.
Conclusion
In this paper we consider the problem of the PT-vanishing inclusion (or the weakly neutral inclusion) of the core-shell structure: Given a domain of arbitrary shape find a domain enclosing the given domain so that the core-shell structure is PT-vanishing. We show that such a domain for shell exists if the given domain is a small perturbation of a ball. The result of this paper is a proof of existence. As far as we are aware of, there is no known method of constructing such domains for shells. Even shells for ellipses or ellipsoids are not known. Thus it is quite interesting to find a way to construct shells for the PT-vanishing structure. In this regard, we mention that there is a numerical attempt to construct the PT-vanishing structure using shape derivative [9].
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
This paper is a revised version (with the title changed) of the earlier manuscript . This work is supported by NRF grants No. 2017R1A4A1014735 and 2019R1A2B5B01069967, JSPS KAKENHI Grant No. 18H01126, NSF of China grant No. 11901523, and a grant from Central South University.
References
1.
H.Ammari and H.Kang, Reconstruction of Small Inhomogeneities from Boundary Measurements, Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 1846, Springer-Verlag, 2004.
2.
H.Ammari and H.Kang, Polarization and Moment Tensors, Applied Mathematical Sciences, Vol. 162, Springer, New York, 2007.
3.
H.Ammari and H.Kang, Expansion methods, in: Handbook of Mathematical Mehtods of Imaging, Springer, 2011, pp. 447–499. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-92920-0_11.
4.
H.Ammari, H.Kang, E.Kim and M.Lim, Reconstruction of closely spaced small inclusions, SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis42(6) (2005), 2408–2428. doi:10.1137/S0036142903422752.
5.
K.Atkinson and W.Han, Spherical Harmonics and Approximations on the Unit Sphere: An Introduction, Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 2044, Springer-Verlag, 2012.
6.
G.Bal and O.Pinaud, Small volume expansions for elliptic equations, Asymptotic Analysis70 (2010), 13–50. doi:10.3233/ASY-2010-1002.
7.
Y.Capdeboscq and M.S.Vogelius, A general representation formula for boundary voltage perturbations caused by internal conductivity inhomogeneities of low volume fraction, Math. Model. Numer. Anal.37(1) (2003), 159–174. doi:10.1051/m2an:2003014.
8.
D.J.Cedio-Fengya, S.Moskow and M.S.Vogelius, Identification of conductivity imperfections of small diameter by boundary measurements. Continuous dependence and computational reconstruction, Inverse Problems14 (1998), 553–594. doi:10.1088/0266-5611/14/3/011.
9.
T.Feng, H.Kang and H.Lee, Construction of GPT-vanishing structures using shape derivative, J. Comp. Math.35 (2017), 569–585. doi:10.4208/jcm.1605-m2016-0540.
10.
Z.Hashin, The elastic moduli of heterogeneous materials, J. Appl. Mech.29 (1962), 143–150. doi:10.1115/1.3636446.
11.
Z.Hashin and S.Shtrikman, A variational approach to the theory of the effective magnetic permeability of multiphase materials, J. Appl. Phy.33 (1962), 3125–3131. doi:10.1063/1.1728579.
12.
Y.-G.Ji, H.Kang, X.Li and S.Sakaguchi, Neutral inclusions, weakly neutral inclusions, and an over-determined problem for confocal ellipsoids, in: Geometric Properties of Parabolic and Elliptic PDE’s, Springer INdAM Series, to appear, arXiv:2001.04610.
13.
H.Kang and H.Lee, Coated inclusions of finite conductivity neutral to multiple fields in two dimensional conductivity or anti-plane elasticity, Euro. J. Appl. Math.25(3) (2014), 329–338. doi:10.1017/S0956792514000060.
14.
H.Kang, H.Lee and S.Sakaguchi, An over-determined boundary value problem arising from neutrally coated inclusions in three dimensions, Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, Classe di ScienzeXVI(4) (2016), 1193–1208.
15.
H.Kang, X.Li and S.Sakaguchi, Existence of weakly neutral coated inclusions of general shape in two dimensions, Appl. Anal., published online. doi:10.1080/00036811.2020.1781821.
16.
S.G.Krantz and H.R.Parks, The Implicit Function Theorem: History, Theory, and Applications, Springer Science+Business Media, New York, 2003.
17.
G.W.Milton, The Theory of Composites, Cambridge Monographs on Applied and Computational Mathematics, Cambridge University Press, 2002.
18.
G.W.Milton and S.K.Serkov, Neutral coated inclusions in conductivity and anti-plane elasticity, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A457 (2001), 1973–1997. doi:10.1098/rspa.2001.0796.
19.
E.M.Stein, Singular Integrals and Differentiability Properties of Functions, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1970.
20.
M.S.Vogelius and D.Volkov, Asymptotic formulas for perturbations in the electromagnetic fields due to the presence of inhomogeneities of small diameter, Math. Model. Numer. Anal.34 (2000), 723–748. doi:10.1051/m2an:2000101.