We analyze a non-linear elliptic boundary value problem that involves Laplace operator, for the existence of its positive solution in an arbitrary smooth bounded domain. The non-linearity here is driven by a singular, monotonically increasing continuous function in which is eventually positive. The novelty in proving the existence of a positive solution lies in the construction of a suitable subsolution. Our contribution marks an advancement in the theory of existence of positive solutions for infinite semipositone problems in arbitrary bounded domains, whereas the prevailing theory is limited to addressing similar problems only in symmetric domains. Additionally, using the ideas pertaining to the construction of subsolution, we establish the exact behavior of the solutions of “q-sublinear” problem involving Laplace operator when the parameter λ is very large. The parameter estimate that we derive is non-trivial due to the non-homogeneous nature of the operator and is of independent interest.
We consider the following boundary value problem
where Ω is a bounded domain in with a smooth boundary, , and is a parameter. The term . We make the following assumptions on f:
is a continuous monotonically increasing function with and is monotonically increasing.
for some .
Note that here . The type of nonlinear functions analyzed in this article leads to infinite semipositone problems. Establishing the existence of a positive solution to such problems is challenging due to the presence of the singular term which is negative. Moreover, due to the non-homogeneous nature of the associated operator, many conventional methods are not directly applicable.
The motivation to study the non-homogeneous operator Laplacian emanates from pure mathematical interest and also due to its applications in several scientific fields. The operator along with the associated energy functional was introduced first by Zhikov [39] in the field of elasticity theory. It can also be viewed as a generalization of the p-Laplacian and as an approximation of the mean curvature operator in Minkowski space which arises in the study of Born–Infeld equation, see [7] and [35]. The structure of the energy functional associated with Laplacian drives its application into diverse fields, for instance in the study of the geometry of anisotropic materials, modeling of elementary particles, chemical reaction design [10], biophysics [19], plasma physics etc. Though the non-homogeneity of the operator makes the mathematical treatments strenuous, it has been extensively studied in the literature, see [10,18,20,31] and [21] among others. Also active research on the existence and multiplicity of solutions for Laplace problems continues to unfold, even incorporating weight factors within the operator, see [32] and [34].
In general, the problem
with in Ω and on is called semipositone problem if h is a monotonically increasing continuous function such that and h is eventually positive, i.e. for large t. If , we call this an infinite semipositone problem. Semipositone problems exhibit certain unique characteristics which are not expected for positone problems (i.e. when ). A notable phenomenon is the occurrence of interior zeros in non-negative solutions of semipositone problems, making the proof of the existence of positive solutions more challenging (see [8]). However topological tools such as degree theory, fixed point methods, bifurcation theory etc. are found reliable in obtaining positive solutions to semipositone problems (see [11,24,28] and [14]). But all these methods depend strongly on the qualitative properties of the solutions, such as regularity, asymptotic behavior, a priori estimates, stability etc. Due to the non-homogeneity of the operator, such results were not available for the Laplace operator until recently. In [22], Giacomoni et.al. proved boundary regularity for the solutions of singular elliptic problems involving Laplacian and in [15] authors proved an asymptotic behavior of solutions for such problems. In light of these latest developments, we address the question of the existence of a positive solution to an infinite semipositone problem using a sub-super solution approach.
In recent years, semipositone problems for non-homogeneous operators are gaining considerable attention. Das et al. showed in [13] that a positive solution for such a problem exists in any bounded domain, as long as the reaction term is non-singular. In [37], authors study an infinite semipositone problem for Laplacian in an interval using a fixed point theorem. Hai and co-authors in [27] have recently examined a similar equation in a ball by assuming the radial nature of the solution and transforming it to an ODE. By using a representation formula, they derived necessary estimates and proved the existence of a positive solution. This approach, however, is limited to symmetrical domains and cannot be extended to arbitrary bounded open sets. Nevertheless, Hai et al., in a series of papers [1,24,25] and [26], explored similar problems in arbitrary bounded open sets in , but for the p-Laplace operator. Interested readers may also refer to [2,4,12] and [23] for semilinear or quasilinear elliptic problems with indefinite sign non-linearity in bounded domains. The significance of our paper is that it presents the first results of their kind for a Laplace operator in a general domain with an infinite semipositone non-linearity.
In Section 2, we focus on a general theory regarding the existence of positive minimal and maximal solutions and in Sections 3 and 4, we discuss specific examples. Our main result is stated below.
Suppose f satisfies (H1) and (H2). Also assume that there exists an ordered pairof sub-supersolutions for (
P
λ
) such thatand there exists a positive constantsatisfyingand. Heredenotes the distance of x toand. Then the problem (
P
λ
) admits a maximal and a minimal solution within the ordered interval.
The above theorem is rather a straightforward extension of results in [16] to the Laplace operator, thanks to the global regularity result proved in [22]. Rather the nontrivial step is to prove the existence of sub-supersolutions that satisfy the assumptions mentioned in the above theorem. Singular semipositone non-linearity combined with the non-homogeneity of the operator makes this task harder. In this context, we wish to emphasize that the results we prove here are not yet known even for the p-Laplace operator. In Section 3, under two more hypotheses on the non-linear function f, we prove the existence of an ordered pair of sub-supersolutions bounded below by . We assume that
there exist constants and such that for .
there exist and such that and for .
The condition (H4) implies . Now as an application of Theorem 1.1 we prove the next result.
Suppose that f satisfies hypotheses (H1)–(H4) and. Then for, there exists a positive solution for the problem (
P
λ
).
Motivated by the constructions given in [16] and [13], Theorem 1.2 is proved in Section 3 by the sub-supersolution approach. The additional hypothesis helps us to circumvent the non-homogeneity of the operator in a clever manner. If , this restriction of is not necessary as the operator is no more inhomogeneous.
In Section 4, we prove that (
P
λ
) admits a maximal solution for a specific non-linear function f. The existence of a global minimal or maximal solution is the foremost step in the bifurcation analysis of a semilinear elliptic problem. In [14], the author has shown the existence of a continuum of a branch of positive solutions emanating from infinity and a multiplicity result for an infinite semipositone problem for Laplacian under certain hypotheses. This phenomenon of multiple positive solutions for non-linearities with an indefinite sign is difficult to obtain and is understood completely only in the case of Laplacian in dimension one [17] and for the strictly semipositone problems in higher dimensions [9]. We believe that Theorem 1.3, combined with the understanding of the weighted eigenvalue problem for p-Laplacian, can provide insight into the multiplicity results for the related quasilinear semipositone problem.
Our second main result in this paper is proved in Theorem 1.3, Section 4. Before stating the theorem we shall make a note of the function space where we seek a positive solution and its properties as given in [3]. Let denote the positive cone in . Then the interior of denoted by consists of set of all where ν denotes the outward normal vector on . We shall prove that (
P
λ
) admits a maximal positive solution in .
Let,and. Then the problem (
P
λ
) admits maximal solutionfor large λ. Also, (
P
λ
) does not admit any positive solution when λ is small.
Proof of the above theorem essentially depends on the construction of a proper supersolution . In Section 5 of the paper we define to be the unique solution of
where . The existence and uniqueness of the positive solution can be established using standard methods. It is also evident through a comparison principle that if . Though we expect, as , proving this result is challenging due to the non-homogeneous nature of the Laplace operator.
Furthermore, the precise behavior of the solution for large λ remains unknown. In a recent work [15], inspired by discussions in [31], an explicit behavior of solutions for a singular elliptic problem is obtained using suitable scaling arguments. However, applying the same approach to establish the asymptotic behavior of solutions for (
Q
λ
) is not feasible. This is due to the possibility that the solution of the limiting problem corresponding to (
Q
λ
) might be the zero function, making it impossible to obtain a positive lower bound.
Consequently, we employ an alternative approach, similar to the technique used in the proof of Lemma 3.1. This approach yields a parameter estimate for (
Q
λ
), allowing us to accurately characterize the behavior of for large λ. The significance of Theorem 1.4 is noteworthy, holding implications beyond the current investigation. By applying relevant comparison principles, this result can aid in establishing the existence or non-existence of solutions for non-linear elliptic problems involving the Laplacian. A similar estimate derived in [15] for a double phase elliptic problem with a singular non-linearity is applied to demonstrate a uniqueness result.
Letbe the solution of the boundary value problem given in (
Q
λ
) and. Then there exist positive constantssuch that for alland for all,
We say on is a supersolution of (
P
λ
) if the following inequality holds for all and ,
and a similar definition holds for subsolution.
Notations: By we denote the distance of from the point x, i.e, . We write for the set .
Givensuch thatfor somethere exists a uniquesolvingin the weak sense.
We will prove the existence of a solution to (2.1) by the direct minimization technique. The energy functional corresponding to (2.1) is weakly lower semi-continuous on the space . Using Hölder’s and Hardy’s inequality we can show that E is coercive. Thus E possesses a global minimizer and by weak comparison principle this minimizer w is the unique weak solution of the required problem. □
Let h and w be as in Lemma
2.2
. Then there exist constantsand, depending only onand Ω such thatand.
Let u be the solution of
and by lemma 3.1 from [25], there exists such that .
Also, let be the solution of
Then, by weak comparison principle and proposition 2.7 from [22], there exists a constant such that in Ω. Again
and . By a similar reasoning in Ω and therefore, we have, . Then from (2.1) and (2.2), we have,
and . Now we conclude the proof by applying Lieberman’s boundary regularity result given in Theorem 1.7 of [29]. □
In this section, from now on, we assume that (
P
λ
) admits a positive subsolution . Also we assume that for some positive constant and where is given in Theorem 1.1. We define the set
Fix a and let and . Then for some . Let w be the unique weak solution of in Ω, on which is now guaranteed to exist by Lemma 2.2. Since g is monotonically increasing and , we have
Now by weak comparison principle, we have . Also, by Lemma 2.3, , for some . Hence, we define the map as follows.
We define the map as iff w is the weak solution of
Clearly, is a well-defined map from to itself. Next, we show that the map is completely continuous.
is completely continuous.
Fix , then and . Let such that . Choose δ small enough so that and . Let be the unique solution of
and w be the unique solution of
Note that pointwise as . As , by Lemma 2.3 there exists an such that . Now by Ascoli Arzela theorem, upto a subsequence, in . Also for all ,
Passing through the limit in the equation (2.7), we get
Thus is a weak solution of (2.6) and by uniqueness . In a standard way, we can show that every subsequence of the original sequence converges to w and hence is continuous. In other words, in as . Using the fact that , we conclude that is completely continuous. □
Since g is monotonically increasing, we know that maps X into itself where . Also, the map is completely continuous. Now our result follows due to the celebrated Theorem 6.1 of Amann [3]. □
Sub-super solution construction
In this section, we consider and focus on constructing an ordered pair of sub and supersolutions for the problem (
P
λ
) bounded below by a constant multiple of the distance function. Here we assume f satisfies all the hypotheses – mentioned in the introduction.
Assume f satisfies (H1)–(H3). Letbe the first eigen function ofwith zero Dirichlet boundary condition. Definewhere. Then, for large λ,is a subsolution for the problem (
P
λ
) satisfying.
From the definition, since it is clear that and . We only need to show that ψ is a subsolution for (
P
λ
) when λ is large. We have, for ,
Thus we write,
where
Now as , we have and by Vasquez [38], on . Thus there exist and such that for ,
Using (3.1) and (3.2) we have
The last inequality is obtained directly from the definition of ψ. Now that is negative and f is monotone increasing, so for and , we have, in ,
Hence,
In , there exists a positive constant μ such that and thus . Also using the monotonicity of f and the assumption (H3) on f, we have for ,
Further, without loss of generality, we assume . Therefore, in , we have, for ,
whenever and and . Since , by taking we have,
Now from (3.4) and (3.6) we have the required result. □
Assume f satisfies (H1), (H2) and (H4). Then the problem (
P
λ
) admits a super-solution for all.
Let be such that where is the open ball of radius R around origin and e be the unique solution of
We know that must be a radial function and where
and is the p-conjugate. Since , we can choose a constant such that
We claim that the function is a supersolution for (
P
λ
).
Again using (H4),
Also,
and in Ω for some . Thus, from (3.9) and (3.10) we have
Hence, ϕ is a super-solution for (
P
λ
). □
We note that under the hypotheses – using Lemma 3.1 and Lemma 3.2, the problem (
P
λ
) admits a pair of sub-supersolutions for large λ. Also in and hence can be chosen large enough so that in . We can now adapt the idea of the proof of Theorem 1.1 to show the existence of a minimal and a maximal solution within the ordered interval . □
Existence of maximal solution
In this section, we are interested in the following boundary value problem:
where and . It is evident that satisfies the hypotheses . We define the solution set to be
Our aim in this section is to prove the existence of a positive maximal (global maximal) solution for the Dirichlet problem (
P
˜
λ
) belonging to the set . We can verify that defined in Lemma 3.1 is a positive subsolution of (
P
˜
λ
). If there exists a supersolution such that , then Theorem 1.2 can be applied and it guarantees a maximal solution in the ordered interval . Our aim in this section is to redefine our supersolution appropriately so that the resulting solution obtained by Theorem 1.2 is in fact a maximal solution (global maximal solution). We make the following definition.
We say that is a global supersolution to (
P
˜
λ
) if
We now prove that the solution of the following BVP
is a global supersolution to (
P
˜
λ
). The existence and uniqueness of the positive solution of (4.1) can be proved via a global minimization technique and Lemma A.1. Let us denote to be the unique solution of (4.1) and since , serves as a supersolution for (
P
˜
λ
). Using the comparison principle proved in Lemma A.1, we can show that if u is any solution of (
P
˜
λ
), then . Thus, is a global supersolution of (
P
˜
λ
).
We first show that for large λ, in Ω. Since is a positive subsolution of (
P
˜
λ
), we have,
and on , i.e, is a positive subsolution of (4.1) also. Consequently, by Lemma A.1, we have in Ω for .
Now Theorem 1.1 ensures the existence of a positive maximal solution for the problem (
P
˜
λ
) within the ordered interval . Let us call this maximal solution . Again if u is any other positive solution of (
P
˜
λ
), then Lemma A.1 gives in . By the construction of , clearly i.e, is the global maximal solution of (
P
˜
λ
).
Next suppose λ is small enough and there exists a positive solution for (
P
˜
λ
). Since is monotone increasing, so there exists some such that in Ω,
Let be the solution of and . Then by weak comparison principle, in Ω. Now by Proposition 10 of [33], as , in . Thus by comparison principle any such solution must be negative which is a contradiction and proves Theorem 1.3. □
Asymptotic estimates
In this section we analyze the behavior of the function in detail when . To get a deeper understanding of the solution of equation (4.1), we define so that
where which tends to 0 as . Note that there exists a constant , independent of λ, such that . The uniform upper bound we obtain here is true for any .
There exists a positive constant M, independent of λ, such that.
We adapt the idea of De Giorgi–Stampacchia iteration method to obtain the uniform estimate. First of all we define where , so that where δ is to be chosen later. Hereafter, for convenience, we simply write v for . Then v satisfies:
and on . For , we define , , and . Then, in Ω and on . Clearly, and . Also we note that and so by Lebesgue Dominated Convergence Theorem, .
Now define . Then on the set . Taking as test function in the weak formulation of (5.2), we get,
Since we have,
Now, as in (3.64) of Proposition 3.4 from [5], we get,
Using the above estimate in (5.3) we get,
By Hölder’s inequality with the exponents and we have,
To derive the last inequality in the previous line we have used (5.4) and (5.5). Therefore for some and ,
Now we shall define . Then following the induction argument as in [5], Proposition 3.4 we have . We also know that , thus a.e. in Ω or a.e. in Ω. Hence a.e. in Ω and since we have the required estimate. □
From Lemma 5.1, there exists a positive constant such that a.e. in Ω. Let w be the weak solution of
Therefore, by weak comparison principle, , . Now following the ideas of the proof in Proposition 2.1 of [15], we get that for some positive constant , independent of γ, and for all , . i.e
Now we let . In order to obtain a lower bound we resonate some of the ideas used in Lemma 3.1. Define
where , and is the first eigen function of such that and is to be chosen later.
Claim: is a subsolution of (4.1) for some admissible range of λ.
Proceeding same as Lemma 3.1 we get, for ,
where and since , there exist and such that and in . Therefore, being non-negative by definition, we have,
On the other hand, in , there exists such that . Then since as , from (5.9) we get,
for some positive constants (which depends on s only) and . Since in , , so and consequently . First we choose such that for . Also note that for . Therefore from (5.11) we have for ,
Thus (5.10) and (5.12) together establish that for , is a positive subsolution of (4.1). We know that is defined to be the positive solution of the same equation (4.1). By the comparison Lemma A.1, we have for , or
Now since is the first eigen function of , so taking , there exists a positive constant such that for all ,
Thus combining (5.7) and (5.13) we get the desired estimate. □
Footnotes
Appendix
The following result provides an extension of a comparison lemma from [36] to Laplacian.
Acknowledgement
R. Dhanya was supported by SERB MATRICS grant MTR/2022/000780 when this project was being carried out. Sarbani Pramanik was supported by Prime Minister’s Research Fellowship.
References
1.
T.Alotaibi and D.Hai, On singular quasilinear problems with sign-changing coefficients, Complex Variables and Elliptic Equations65(3) (2020), 481–488. doi:10.1080/17476933.2019.1622689.
2.
C.O.Alves, A.R.de Holanda and J.A.dos Santos, Existence of positive solutions for a class of semipositone problem in whole , Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh Section A: Mathematics150(5) (2020), 2349–2367. doi:10.1017/prm.2019.20.
3.
H.Amann, Fixed point equations and nonlinear eigenvalue problems in ordered Banach spaces, SIAM review18(4) (1976), 620–709. doi:10.1137/1018114.
4.
G.Anello and F.Faraci, Two solutions for an elliptic problem with two singular terms, Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations56(4) (2017), 1–31.
5.
G.M.Bisci, V.D.Rădulescu and R.Servadei, Variational Methods for Nonlocal Fractional Problems, Vol. 162, Cambridge University Press, 2016.
6.
V.Bobkov and M.Tanaka, Generalized Picone inequalities and their applications to -Laplace equations, Open Mathematics18(1) (2020), 1030–1044. doi:10.1515/math-2020-0065.
7.
D.Bonheure, P.d’Avenia and A.Pomponio, On the electrostatic Born–Infeld equation with extended charges, Communications in Mathematical Physics346(3) (2016), 877–906. doi:10.1007/s00220-016-2586-y.
8.
A.Castro and R.Shivaji, Non-negative solutions for a class of non-positone problems, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh Section A: Mathematics108(3–4) (1988), 291–302. doi:10.1017/S0308210500014670.
9.
A.Castro and G.Sudhasree, Uniqueness of stable and unstable positive solutions for semipositone problems, Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications22(4) (1994), 425–429. doi:10.1016/0362-546X(94)90166-X.
10.
L.Cherfils and Y.Il’Yasov, On the stationary solutions of generalized reaction diffusion equations with p q-Laplacian, Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis4(1) (2005), 9. doi:10.3934/cpaa.2005.4.9.
11.
M.Chhetri, P.Drábek and R.Shivaji, Existence of positive solutions for a class of p-Laplacian superlinear semipositone problems, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh Section A: Mathematics145(5) (2015), 925–936. doi:10.1017/S0308210515000220.
12.
M.Choubin, S.H.Rasouli, M.B.Ghaemi and G.A.Afrouzi, Positive solutions for a class of infinite semipositone problems involving the p-Laplacian operator, Le Matematiche68(2) (2013), 159–166.
13.
U.Das, A.Muthunayake and R.Shivaji, Existence results for a class of p–q Laplacian semipositone boundary value problems, Electronic Journal of Qualitative Theory of Differential Equations2020(88) (2020), 1–7. doi:10.14232/ejqtde.2020.1.88.
14.
R.Dhanya, Positive solution curves of an infinite semipositone problem, Electronic Journal of Differential Equations2018(178) (2018), 1.
15.
R.Dhanya and M.S.Indulekha, Parameter estimates and a uniqueness result for double phase problem with a singular nonlinearity, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications530(1) (2024), 127608. doi:10.1016/j.jmaa.2023.127608.
16.
R.Dhanya, E.Ko and R.Shivaji, A three solution theorem for singular nonlinear elliptic boundary value problems, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications424(1) (2015), 598–612. doi:10.1016/j.jmaa.2014.11.012.
17.
J.Díaz, J.Hernández and F.Mancebo, Branches of positive and free boundary solutions for some singular quasilinear elliptic problems, Journal of mathematical analysis and applications352(1) (2009), 449–474. doi:10.1016/j.jmaa.2008.07.073.
18.
L.F.Faria, O.H.Miyagaki and D.Motreanu, Comparison and positive solutions for problems with the -Laplacian and a convection term, Proceedings of the Edinburgh Mathematical Society57(3) (2014), 687–698. doi:10.1017/S0013091513000576.
19.
P.C.Fife, Lecture notes in biomathematics, Mathematical Aspects of Reacting and Diffusing Systems28 (1979), 185.
20.
G.M.Figueiredo, Existence and multiplicity of solutions for a class of p & q elliptic problems with critical exponent, Mathematische Nachrichten286(11–12) (2013), 1129–1141. doi:10.1002/mana.201100237.
21.
L.Gasiński and P.Winkert, Existence and uniqueness results for double phase problems with convection term, Journal of Differential Equations268(8) (2020), 4183–4193. doi:10.1016/j.jde.2019.10.022.
22.
J.Giacomoni, D.Kumar and K.Sreenadh, Sobolev and Hölder regularity results for some singular nonhomogeneous quasilinear problems, Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations60(3) (2021), 1–33. doi:10.1007/s00526-021-01994-8.
23.
J.Goddard, E.K.Lee, L.Sankar and R.Shivaji, Existence results for classes of infinite semipositone problems, Boundary Value Problems2013(1) (2013), 1. doi:10.1186/1687-2770-2013-1.
24.
D.Hai, Singular boundary value problems for the p-Laplacian, Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications73(9) (2010), 2876–2881. doi:10.1016/j.na.2010.06.037.
25.
D.Hai, On a class of singular p-Laplacian boundary value problems, Journal of mathematical analysis and applications383(2) (2011), 619–626. doi:10.1016/j.jmaa.2011.05.060.
26.
D.Hai, L.Sankar and R.Shivaji, Infinite semipositone problems with asymptotically linear growth forcing terms, Differential and Integral Equations25(11/12) (2012), 1175–1188.
27.
D.Hai, R.Shivaji and X.Wang, Positive radial solutions for a class of (p, q) Laplacian in a ball, Positivity27(1) (2023), 1–8. doi:10.1007/s11117-022-00959-1.
28.
D.Hai and J.Williams, Positive radial solutions for a class of quasilinear boundary value problems in a ball, Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications75(4) (2012), 1744–1750. doi:10.1016/j.na.2011.08.052.
29.
G.M.Lieberman, The natural generalization of the natural conditions of Ladyzhenskaya and Ural’tseva for elliptic equations, Communications in Partial Differential Equations16(2–3) (1991), 311–361. doi:10.1080/03605309108820761.
30.
P.Lindqvist, On the equation , Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society109(1) (1990), 157–164, https://www-jstor-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/2048375.
31.
S.A.Marano and S.J.Mosconi, Some recent results on the Dirichlet problem for -Laplace equations, Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems-Series S11(2) (2018), 279–291. doi:10.3934/dcdss.2018015.
32.
N.S.Papageorgiou, A.Pudełko and V.D.Rădulescu, Non-autonomous -equations with unbalanced growth, Mathematische Annalen385(3–4) (2023), 1707–1745. doi:10.1007/s00208-022-02381-0.
33.
N.S.Papageorgiou, V.D.Rădulescu and D.D.Repovš, Nonlinear nonhomogeneous singular problems, Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations59(1) (2020), 1–31. doi:10.1007/s00526-019-1640-y.
34.
N.S.Papageorgiou, V.D.Rădulescu and Y.Zhang, Strongly singular double phase problems, Mediterranean Journal of Mathematics19(2) (2022), 82. doi:10.1007/s00009-022-02013-6.
35.
A.Pomponio and T.Watanabe, Some quasilinear elliptic equations involving multiple p-Laplacians, Indiana University Mathematics Journal (2018), 2199–2224. doi:10.1512/iumj.2018.67.7523.
36.
S.Prashanth and K.Sreenadh, Multiplicity results in a ball for p-Laplace equation with positive nonlinearity, Adv. Differential Equations7(7) (2002), 877–896. doi:10.57262/ade/1356651709.
37.
I.Sim and B.Son, Positive solutions to classes of infinite semipositone -Laplace problems with nonlinear boundary conditions, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications494(1) (2021), 124577. doi:10.1016/j.jmaa.2020.124577.
38.
J.L.Vázquez, A strong maximum principle for some quasilinear elliptic equations, Applied Mathematics and Optimization12(1) (1984), 191–202. doi:10.1007/BF01449041.
39.
V.V.Zhikov, Averaging of functionals of the calculus of variations and elasticity theory, Mathematics of the USSR-Izvestiya29(1) (1987), 33. doi:10.1070/IM1987v029n01ABEH000958.