A generalized Cauchy-Lipschitz theorem in low regularity spaces
Arnaud Heibig (ICJ)

TL;DR
This paper establishes well-posedness for a class of differential equations in low regularity spaces, extending classical results to include integro-differential operators with controlled derivative loss.
Contribution
It generalizes the Cauchy-Lipschitz theorem to low regularity spaces and includes integro-differential operators with limited derivative loss.
Findings
Proves well-posedness for abstract differential equations with low regularity.
Extends classical Lipschitz-based results to more general operators.
Identifies conditions on derivative loss for operator dominance.
Abstract
We prove well-posedness for some abstract differential equations of the first order. Our result covers the usual case of Lipschitz composition operators. It also contains the case of some integro-differential operators acting on spaces with low regularity indexes. The loss of derivatives induced by such operators has to be lower than one, in order to be dominated by the first order derivative involved in the problem.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsNonlinear Differential Equations Analysis · Advanced Banach Space Theory · Advanced Harmonic Analysis Research
A generalized Cauchy-Lipschitz theorem
in low regularity spaces.
ARNAUD HEIBIG1 Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]; Fax: +33 472438529
Abstract
We prove well-posedness for some abstract differential equations of the first order. Our result covers the usual case of Lipschitz composition operators. It also contains the case of some integro-differential operators acting on spaces with low regularity indexes. The loss of derivatives induced by such operators has to be lower than one, in order to be dominated by the first order derivative involved in the problem.
1 Université de Lyon, Institut Camille Jordan et Insa Lyon, Bât. Leonard de Vinci No. 401, 21 Avenue Jean Capelle, F-69621, Villeurbanne, France.
Keywords: Differential equations, irregular coefficients, Poincaré inequality, well-posedness, Cauchy-Lipschitz theorem, Besov spaces.
1 Introduction.
The aim of this note is to prove an extended Cauchy-Lipschitz theorem for problems formally written as and . Here, is a local operator loosing less than one derivative, i.e .
Theorem 1.1**.**
Let , , , , and . Assume that is a Lipschitz and local operator. Then, there exists such that, for any the problem: find with:
[TABLE]
admits exactly one distributional solution. This solution belongs to .
See part 3 for a definition of a local operator (assumption L2). In the above statement, the microscopic q-index plays practically no role, and similar statements hold within the functional frame of Sobolev spaces . Nevertheless, this microscopic index has some importance when dealing with critical spaces. Last, for other extensions of the ODE theory, see for instance [5], [6] and [8].
Notice that in the case of operators acting on smooth functions spaces, there’s no reason to work within , . Therefore, significant examples of applications of theorem 1.1 must be searched among irregular operators. Using Bony’s decomposition, a simple operator is given by with , , and . See section 7 for extensions and other examples.
Our proof makes use of Picard fixed point theorem. Since there’s some “residual” compactness for the above Cauchy problem ( order of derivation), this proof should be routine. Nevertheless, some technical difficulties arise, due to the fractional feature of the problem. and the low regularity index of the space . For such a space, multiplication, composition and, above all, restriction-extension operations, must be handled with care. In particular, all the constants of continuity have to be bounded when working on vanishing intervals , , even for equivalent norms. From this point of view, seems to be a critical space, and most of our proofs relies on the following simple fact: the family of zero-extension operators is equicontinuous under the condition . Equivalently, for such indexes, the characteristic function of an interval is a multiplier for .
The paper is organized as follows. In the second section, we recall some notations and basic results, merely a definition and some properties of the Besov spaces, the definition of the paraproduct and remainder, and also the definition of some duality brackets. The third part is devoted to the statement of the main theorem. The proof of uniform inequalities, essentially a uniform fractional Poincaré’s inequality and a fractional integration inequality, is given in a fourth part. The firth part contains the proof of the main theorem. The sixth part concerns some extensions of this theorem. We state a Peano’s type theorem, and also give a global existence result. Some examples are given in the last part.
2 Notations and classical
results.
Throughout this paper and are two Banach spaces, and is the space of continuous linear applications from to . In the sequel, we consider Banach-valued distributions, and generalize, often without comments, scalar results to that context. The reader is refered to [1], [2], but also to [12], [13], [14], [4], since the Banach-valued case follows from the scalar case by few additional arguments. 2. 2.
For , we denote by its conjugate exponent i.e . 3. 3.
The symbol stands for classical continuous embeddings. 4. 4.
Let and . The non-homogeneous Besov space can be defined as the space of tempered distribution such that (see[4]) . In the above writings, the analytic functions are defined by the standard dyadic procedure (se [4] p.99). In particular, for we have . For , set, for future reference . 5. 5.
For , , the usual paraproduct (case ) generalizes immediately as: , and for the remainder: . So that formally, we get the Bony decomposition . We shall use freely continuity results for the paradaproduct and remainder. See for instance [4] pp. 102-104 or [11] p.35. 6. 6.
For , we denote by () the characteristic function of . We set . Similarly, stands for the characteristic function of the interval . Last, is the unit function of . 7. 7.
Let be a smooth domain. The Besov space is defined as the restrictions of elements of to . The space is endowed with the quotient norm , the inf being taken on all the extensions of . 8. 8.
Let be a (smooth) domain of . For any , the restriction of a distribution to a domain is denoted by . The set is the set of elements with . For , we write . 9. 9.
We define duality-like pairings. The construction is similar to the one given in [4], p.70 and p.101 for the duality bracket. We restrict to the case of an interval , and assume that , , or equivalently . It follows that the extension by zero operators is continuous in both case:
- •
- •
where, as customary, we have denoted by the same letter the two operators. Hence, we define the pairing (or simply, , or ) by
[TABLE]
Hence . Function ”extends” continuously the pairing of given by .
Last, we will sometimes write in place of .
3 Statement of the theorem.
In order to state the main theorem, we have to define restriction procedures for an operator denoted below by . Let , . For any , , , define as the open ball of with center and radius , and set :
[TABLE]
Denote also by its closure in (similar notation for ). Until the end of the paper, we often and abusively identify with . We write for instance, in place of . In the sequel, we implicitely use the following
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let , , , and . Then, and .
Proof.
We only prove the first equality. Inclusion is clear. For the opposite inclusion, let and let . There exists such that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Set with and . By 3.2, . Hence, by 3.3, . With 3.2, this provides the lemma. ∎
Let now , , , , and be fixed. Let . Consider the following properties: for any , we have
- •
()
- •
()
When condition is satisfied, we define for any an operator:
[TABLE]
by restriction. It means that, for any we have:
[TABLE]
with and .
With these notations, the main result is the following
Theorem 3.1**.**
Let , , , , and . Assume that satisfies conditions and . Then, there exists and such that, for any the problem: find with:
[TABLE]
admits exactly one distributional solution. This solution belongs to .
The proof requires some lemmas which are detailed in the following section.
4 Uniform estimates.
The main goal of this section is to get uniform (in ) bounds in the required inequalities. In the sequel, for , we denote by the zero-extension operator.
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let , and . The family is equicontinuous.
Proof.
Let and let be any extension of . Since , is a multiplier for . Hence, is well defined in and . Therefore
[TABLE]
Taking the inf on all the extensions of , we get
[TABLE]
∎
We deduce from lemma 4.1 the integral formulation of the problem
Lemma 4.2**.**
Let , , . Let and . Then, problem: find with
[TABLE]
admits exactly one solution, given by
[TABLE]
Proof.
We only prove formula 4.3. For , formula 4.3 reduces to the usual integral formula. In the case , let be a sequence of functions converging to in . Set and . By the continuity of the bracket and the equicontinuity of (lemma 4.1), we get, for any (see part 2, 9.)
[TABLE]
Therefore
[TABLE]
so that in . Hence, from we get . The rest of the proof is omitted. ∎
We need two additional fractional inequalities. The first one (cf. b) in theorem 4.1) replaces the full integration in use in the standard proof of Cauchy-Lipschitz theorem.
Theorem 4.1**.**
a) Let , and . Then
[TABLE]
b) Let , , , . For any and any we have: .
Proof.
a)
[TABLE]
(see [12] page 206, or 4.13 below)
b) We first show that, for , and for any , the following inequality holds true:
[TABLE]
Set . Taking in account and , we get:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Since , we have, for the remainder:
[TABLE]
Notice that for and for . Using 4.9, 4.10, 4.11 and a), inequality 4.8 a follows.
Now, for and , denoting by any extension of and invoking 4.8:
[TABLE]
We take the inf on all the extensions , and get b). ∎
The second inequality is a uniform fractional Poincaré’s inequality. We give the proof for a restricted range of values . The general proof relies on tedious extension-retractation arguments and is omitted.
In the proof, for any open subset of , we use the function (or simply ) defined by . Recall the following inequality (see [12]), valid for any , , and
[TABLE]
By a duality argument, this inequality holds true for and (see [4] prop. 2.76). Therefore
Lemma 4.3**.**
Assume that , and let be a bounded interval of . There exists such that for any and any with , we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
a) Assume that . We first prove inequality 4.14 for . Theorem 3.3.5, p. 202 in [12] gives
[TABLE]
Note that
[TABLE]
for arbitrary small. With 4.15, it provides
[TABLE]
Next, arguing as in 4.4 and 4.5, we get
[TABLE]
Therefore, the case , follows from 4.16 and 4.17.
b) Assume that . In the general case , set . We have
[TABLE]
due to 4.13 since and . Next, the case provides
[TABLE]
by inequality 4.13 since and . Inequality 4.14 follows from 4.18 and 4.19. ∎
5 Proof of the theorem.
Before proceeding, we need a last uniform lemma.
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let , , , and . Let also satisfies properties and . Then, there exists such that for any and we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
a) We first define an equicontinuous family of extension operators. Let with for . For any and set
[TABLE]
. It follows from lemma 4.2 that is an extension operator. Moreover, due to the continuity of the bracket and the equicontinuity of (see lemma 4.1), we have
[TABLE]
(the last inequality holds with in place of , and follows on using by the definition of the norms). Hence, is equicontinuous. We denote by a bound of the norms of the .
b) Let now . Note that . With a), it provides , hence
[TABLE]
Taking another , we get
[TABLE]
∎
We now prove theorem 3.1.
Proof.
We use Picard fixed point theorem. Let and let to be precised. Define:
[TABLE]
where is given by equation 4.3 with in place of and .
We prove that for small enough.
Let and . Appealing to lemmas 4.2, 4.3 and theorem 4.1 for we have:
[TABLE]
Due to lemma 5.1 and , we get:
[TABLE]
for small enough. It proves the stability. The proof that is a contraction is similar. ∎
6 Generalization.
Theorem 3.1 is not satisfactory for an operator defined on an arbitrary open set . We have to identify
[TABLE]
The following proposition asserts that (set of initial values of elements of ) and provides a uniform estimates on the time .
Proposition 6.1**.**
Let , , , and let be an open subset of . Then . Moreover, for any there exists , and such that for any with , we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
The inclusion is clear. We prove the reverse inclusion -i.e that for any , for some - and 6.1 at the same time.
Let . For small enough, we have . Denote by a constant of continuity for the embeddings and , and set \epsilon=R/\big{[}4(2C_{\infty}+1)\big{]}. Pick up with and define . We have . By definition of and , this implies that .
Let now with , and let . Since , appealing to theorem 4.1 b), we get, for any
[TABLE]
Set T_{0}=inf\Big{\{}\Big{(}C_{T}^{-1}\|\phi^{\prime}_{\epsilon}\|_{B_{p,q}^{-1/p^{\prime}+\delta}(]0,T[)}^{-1}[R/2-(2C_{\infty}+1)\epsilon]\big{)}^{1/(\delta-\alpha)},T\Big{\}}. From inequality 6.2 and lemma 3.1 2) we get , which proves the proposition. ∎
Due to corollary 3.1 , lemma 6.1 (and uniform estimates of the time of existence in the above proofs), we get corollary 6.1 below. We extend without comments the range of indexes, since the proof is easier for spaces of positive differential dimension . We also give a statement in the case of a continuous operator .
Corollary 6.1**.**
*Let , , , , and let be an open subset of . Let .
a) Assume that satisfies condition and . Then, there exists and such that, for any and any with , the problem: find with:
[TABLE]
*admits exactly one solution. This solution belongs to .
b) Assume that in a). Then, the solution exists on the whole interval .
c) Same assumptions as in a) except that is finite dimensional and is not Lipschitzian but continuous. In the conclusions of a), uniqueness is lost.
Proof.
We only prove b). Appealing to standard arguments, it’s enough to get a priori bounds in for a local solution defined on an interval . For , arguing as in the proof of theorem 3.1, we get, for any
[TABLE]
We do not prove that the constant is independent of . This can be done by using the operators (see proof of lemma 5.1). Hiding the term in the left hand side of 6.4, and using (equicontinuous family of embeddings) we get
[TABLE]
Set . Inequality 6.5 implies . By Gronwall lemma, it follows that is bounded on . Invoking one again 6.5, we get that is bounded on
∎
7 Examples.
Examples of operators endowed with properties and can be searched by means of Fourier series
[TABLE]
with and where the are continuous functions. Nevertheless, property is not easily characterized, and other decompositions must be looked for. See examples c) and d) below. We will need the following
Lemma 7.1**.**
Assume that , , with Then, for any open interval , and any , , we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
We only treat the case . For the remainder term, assume first that . Then
[TABLE]
Since . And for
[TABLE]
since . And for the paraproducts (see [4], p.103):
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
since and . ∎
In particular, the product is well defined and continuous in
[TABLE]
for and .
We now proceed with the examples. In the sequel, we restrict our use of theorem 6.1 to the initial range of values and .
a) (Cauchy-Lipschitz, see [3], [9]) Let be an open subset of and be a Lipschitz function. Define an operator
[TABLE]
by . Here, . Operator satisfies properties and . Hence, problem 3.5 is locally well posed in . This solution belongs to and is unique in this space.
b) Recall that for , is the space of bounded Holder functions with exponent .
In this b), we consider an operator of the form , where is either the Riemann-Liouville either the Caputo fractional derivative, which we now define.
Let , , and let . We set
[TABLE]
. For (), define the Caputo derivative of order as
[TABLE]
Let . For , we have
[TABLE]
and similarly for . It follows that
[TABLE]
continuously. Notice now that, for any , we have . Hence, 7.5 provides
[TABLE]
continuously. Similarly, for , , using formulas 7.3 and 7.5, we obtain
[TABLE]
continuously. By standard embeddings and real interpolation formulas (see [12] p. 204) we get, for small enough
[TABLE]
continuously.
We now work with vector valued fuctions, for which the above notations and results can readily be extended. Until the end of this b), and A\in W^{1,\infty}\big{(}\mathbb{R}^{n},\mathbf{M}_{n\times n}(\mathbb{R})\big{)} are fixed. For and , , we write . In the sequel, . Using 7.2, we can define, for small enough
[TABLE]
by . Operator satifies properties and . Hence, under condition , problem 3.5 admits a unique solution in . This solution belongs to .
Similarly, the Riemann-Liouville derivative is given, for , by
[TABLE]
Using 7.5 we get, for
[TABLE]
continuously. Coming back to the vector-valued case, let and let such that . Using 7.7 and 7.2, we get that
[TABLE]
with is well defined. Operator satifies properties and . Therefore, under condition , problem 3.5 is locally well posed, with a solution .
c) We assume here that . In this c), we abusively write in place of .
Let \kappa\in C^{0}\big{(}[0,T],B_{p,q}^{-1/p^{\prime}+\eta}(]0,T[,\mathbb{R})\big{)}. Our goal is to give a meaning to the formula for . Let and . We have
[TABLE]
using the continuity of the bracket and the fact that is a multiplier for . Hence
[TABLE]
By theorem 11 in [10] and the fact that within the range of indexes , we conclude that
[TABLE]
with for any , is a well defined and continuous operator. Restricted to , it satisfies properties and . Due to theorem 6.1 b), we thus have the existence and uniqueness of a solution of problem with .
This can be generalized to related operators, for instance , in the scalar or Banach-valued case; or operators \int_{0}^{t}f\big{(}m(u)(s)\big{)}\kappa(s,t)ds with etc…
d) Let be a Banach algebra. Let . Let and let be given Lipschitz functions . Consider
[TABLE]
with
[TABLE]
(for results on composition operators, see [7]). Due to the hypothesis on , one can find with and . For such , lemma 7.1 applies and the product is continuous in . Hence, is well defined, continuous and satisfies properties L1 and L2 under the (sufficient) assumption that, for any with , we have
[TABLE]
Definition 7.10 can be generalized for instance as
[TABLE]
with \kappa\in C^{0}\big{(}\mathbb{R}^{n},B^{\sigma}_{p,q}(]0,T[,\mathcal{A})\big{)}, \phi\in C^{0}\big{(}\mathbb{R}^{n}\times B^{s}_{p,q}(]0,T[,\mathcal{A}),B^{s}_{p,q}(]0,T[,\mathcal{A})\big{)}, a Radon measure on and with an extra condition analogous to 7.11.
. This work was supported by the LABEX MILYON (ANR-10-LABX-0070) of University de Lyon, within the program ”Investissement d’Avenir” (ANR-11-IDEX 0007) operated by the French National Research Agency (ANR).
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] H. Amann, Operator‐Valued Fourier Multipliers, Vector‐Valued Besov Spaces, and Applications , Mathematische Nachrichten, Volume 186, Issue 1, pp. 5–56, 1997.
- 2[2] H. Amann, Linear and Quasilinear Parabolic Problems: Volume II: Function Spaces and Linear Differential Operators , Birkhauser, Basel, Boston, Berlin, 1997.
- 3[3] V.I. Arnold, Ordinary differential equations, Springer, 1992.
- 4[4] H.Bahouri, J. Y. Chemin, R. Danchin, Fourier Analysis and Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations , vol. 343, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2011.
- 5[5] A. Bohun, F. Bouchut, G. Crippa, Lagrangian flows for vector fields with anisotropic regularity. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire 33 (2016), no. 6, pp.1409-1429.
- 6[6] F. Bouchut, F. James, One-dimensional transport equations with discontinuous coefficients , mathrev Journal of Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods Applications, Volume 32, Issue 7, pp. 891-933, June 1998.
- 7[7] G. Bourdaud and W. Sickel, Composition Operators on Function Spaces with Fractional Order of Smoothness, Harmonic analysis and nonlinear partial differential equations, 93–132, RIMS Kôkyûroku Bedual besovssatsu, B 26, Res. Inst. Math. Sci. (RIMS), Kyoto, 2011.
- 8[8] R. Di Perna and P.L Lions, Ordinary differential equations, transport theory and Sobolev spaces, Inventiones Mathematicae, 𝟗𝟖 ( 𝟑 ) 98 3 \bf{98}(3) , 1989, p. 511-549.
