Abstract
In this paper, we extend the spectral method developed (Dechicha and Puel (2023)) to any dimension
Keywords
Introduction
Setting of the problem
In this present paper, we deal with the kinetic Fokker–Planck (FP) equation, which describes in a deterministic way the Brownian motion of a set of particles. It is given by the following form
Recall that one of the motivations for studying the classical or fractional diffusion limit is to simplify the equations for some collisional kinetic models when the interaction between particles are the dominant phenomena and when the observation time is very large. For that purpose, we introduce a small parameter,
The goal is then to study the behavior of the solution
For Gaussian equilibria, it is classical (see [2,3,10,12,20] for Boltzmann and [11] for Fokker Planck) that by taking the classical time scaling
For slowly decreasing equilibria, or so-called heavy tail equilibria of the form
In the present work, we consider for any
The diffusion limit for the FP equation seems more complicated then the linear Boltzmann one, and the main difficulty is due to the fact that the Fokker–Planck operator Q has no spectral gap. In addition, for this equation, all the terms of the operator participate in the limit, i.e. the collision and advection parts. In [24], the classical scaling is studied and it is proved in any dimension d that we obtain a diffusion equation (1.4), with diffusion coefficient (1.5) as soon as
In this paper we focus on the case
This spectral problem for the FP operator has already been obtained recently in dimension 1 [21] with a method based on the reconnection of two branches on
Note that we don’t look at the same spectral problem as in the paper by E. Bouin and C. Mouhot [6]. Indeed, in this paper we were interested in the improvement and generalization of the construction given in [21] to solve the problem
Setting of the result
Before stating our main result, let us give some notations that we will use along this paper.
Notations. As in [21], in order to simplify the computation and work with a self-adjoint operator in
The operator
Main results
(Eigen-solution for the Fokker–Planck operator).
Assume that
The following convergence in the Sobolev space
The eigenvalue
where κ is a positive constant given by
Introduce V, the space defined by
Assume that
Then
The hypothesis (Fractional diffusion limit for the Fokker–Planck equation).
The proof of Theorem 1.1 is done in two main steps, both based on the Implicit Function Theorem (IFT). First, we consider what we call a penalized equation, given by
The aim of the first step is to show the existence of a unique solution for equation (1.16) for η and μ fixed, which is the purpose of Section 2. As we said above, we will decompose the operator “
In the second step, to ensure that the additional term vanishes, we have to chose
The last section is devoted to the proof of Theorem 1.2. It consists of two subsections, a priori estimates and limiting process in the weak formulation of equation (1.8).
Existence of solutions for the penalized equation
We start this section by some notations and definition of the considered operators. Let
Since If Note that the splitting of the potential W into
The purpose of this subsection is to show that the operator
We define the Hilbert space We have the embeddings
We define the sesquilinear form a on
Note that Note that the sesquilinear form a depends on λ and η and in order to simplify the notation, we omit the subscript when no confusion is possible. Let us denote by Since
The norm defined by
To prove this Lemma, we need the Hardy–Poincaré inequality that we recall in the following
Let
For
If we denote by
Let’s start with the right inequality:
To get inequality
In the remainder of this section, we will work with the norm
Before moving on to the continuity of a, we will prove a Poincaré type inequality which we give in the following lemma:
Let
We will split the integral of On While on
On the other hand, one has
The sesquilinear form a is continuous on
It follows from the previous lemma that allows to handle the term
By application of Riesz’s theorem to continuous sesquilinear forms, there exists a continuous linear map
Note that
Let
We have for all
Let
The proof is identical to that of the previous Lemma, just replace the inequality
Let denote by
Let
The sesquilinear form a depends continuously on η and holomorphically on λ.
The solution in the previous Proposition, is for λ and η fixed, and it depends on λ and η since a depends on these last parameters.
This proof was taken from [18] to prove the first statement of the Lax–Milgram lemma [page 235]. We want to prove that the linear map
First, the inequality (2.6) of Lemma 2.10,
The inequality (2.13) comes from
We will denote by
In this subsection, we use the operator
The function Φ satisfies the following assumptions:
For all v in The function Φ belongs to the weighted Sobolev space Even if it means multiplying Φ by a constant, we can take it such that Note that the operator
Let
The map
The map
1. The first point follows from the second inequality of the Proposition 2.14. Indeed, we have by (2.14), for all 2. Let
The map
First, since the two functions For that purpose, we will use Rellich’s theorem for the sequence Then, there exists
The map
The map F is continuous with respect to λ and η and we have
The map
We have
1. Let 2. The proof of this point is a direct consequence of the second point of Lemma 2.15. 3. The third point is immediate since 4. Recall that For the differential, we have
There is a unique function
By Proposition 2.17, F satisfies the assumptions of the Implicit Function Theorem around the point
For the following, we will take the function
The aim of this section is to prove Theorem 1.1. It is composed of three subsections. In the first one, we establish some
estimates for the solution
In this subsection, we will establish some
Let
For all
For all
We are going to prove the first point, the second is done in a similar way. Let denote
Before starting the proof, we will define some sets to simplify the notations and avoid long expressions. We set:
Decomposition of 
The part
The parts
∙
∙
∙
Let
We have for Then, by taking the square and applying the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, we get:
Now back to the estimate of
To handle
Let us denote
Now, we resume all the assumptions we did on
Finally, by injecting the inequality (3.28) into (3.2), we obtain:
In this subsection, we will show the existence of a μ, a function of η, such that the constraint
Let
For the first point, we proceed exactly as in (3.26), i.e. cutting the integral into two parts
Define
The expression of
The η order of
There exists
Consequently,
In this subsection, we will give an approximation for the eigenvalue
Before giving the Proposition which summarizes the essential points of this subsection, we will first start by introducing the rescaled function of
(Approximation of the eigenvalue).
Let
Note that the existence of solutions for equation (3.40) is obtained by passing to the limit in the rescaled equation (3.36), while the uniqueness is obtained by an integration by part on
In order to get the Proposition 3.5, we need to prove the following series of lemmas:
The first one show that the small velocities in the first direction do not participate in the limit of the diffusion coefficient.
For all
For all
The second one contains some important estimates on the rescaled solution for large velocities.
(Large velocities).
Let
For all
For all
1. By Remark 2.19, since
2. First, since
We will establish estimates on different ranges of (rescalated) velocities, and in order to avoid long expressions in the proof, we will fix some notations of “sets” as in the proof of Proposition 3.1. Let denote
Observe that
Since
1. Let
2. Recall that
The third Lemma contains some complementary estimates on the rescaled solution.
For all
The last one gives the formula of the diffusion coefficient.
We have the following limit:
We have by the Hardy–Poincaré inequality and the inequality (3.56):
First of all, since The estimates of Lemma 3.8 imply that the sequence By doing an expansion in λ for B and by Proposition 3.4, we get
The existence of the eigen-solution
The goal of this section is to prove Theorem 1.2. The proof was taken from Section 3 in [21] and adapted for the dimension d.
Let’s start by defining the two weighted Note that we will work with the Fourier transform of ρ and we will prove that
We start by recalling the following compactness lemma:
([21,24]).
For initial datum
The solution
The density
Up to a subsequence, the density
Up to a subsequence, the sequence
As a consequence, we have the following estimate:
Let
Recall the Nash type inequality [1,7,25]: for any h such that ([21]).
By solving equation (1.8), we write
Recall that
Let
For all
Let
From the two last items in Lemma 4.2, we have just to prove that for any given ξ, the Fourier transform
Footnotes
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank Gilles Lebeau for the fruitful discussions, as well as Pierre Raphaël for drawing their attention to Herbert Koch’s article.
