Boundary Pointwise $C^{1,\alpha}$ and $C^{2,\alpha}$ Regularity for Fully Nonlinear Elliptic Equations
Yuanyuan Lian, Kai Zhang

TL;DR
This paper establishes boundary pointwise $C^{1,eta}$ and $C^{2,eta}$ regularity for viscosity solutions of fully nonlinear elliptic equations, extending known results even for classical Laplace equations with simpler proofs.
Contribution
It provides new boundary regularity results for fully nonlinear elliptic equations, including the Laplace equation, with simplified proof techniques.
Findings
Boundary regularity results for fully nonlinear elliptic equations.
Extension of regularity results to classical Laplace equation.
Simplified proofs for boundary regularity.
Abstract
In this paper, we obtain the boundary pointwise and regularity for viscosity solutions of fully nonlinear elliptic equations. I.e., If is (or ) at , the solution is (or ) at . Our results are new even for the Laplace equation. Moreover, our proofs are simple.
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 Partial Differential Equations · Advanced Mathematical Modeling in Engineering · Navier-Stokes equation solutions
Boundary Pointwise and Regularity for Fully Nonlinear Elliptic Equations 111This research is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11701454), the Natural Science Basic Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China (Program No. 2018JQ1039) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. 31020170QD032).
Yuanyuan Lian
[email protected]; [email protected]
Kai Zhang
[email protected]; [email protected]
Department of Applied Mathematics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, Shaanxi, 710129, PR China
Abstract
In this paper, we obtain the boundary pointwise and regularity for viscosity solutions of fully nonlinear elliptic equations. I.e., If is (or ) at , the solution is (or ) at . Our results are new even for the Laplace equation. Moreover, our proofs are simple.
keywords:
Boundary regularity , Schauder estimate , Fully nonlinear elliptic equation , Viscosity solution
MSC:
[2010] 35B65 , 35J25 , 35J60 , 35D40
1 Introduction
Since 1980s, the fully nonlinear elliptic equations have been studied extensively (see [1] and [3] and the references therein). For the investigation on boundary behavior, there are usually two ways. One is to study the boundary regularity for viscosity solutions. Flattening the curved boundary by a transformation is widely applied (e.g. [9]). However, the lower order terms and variant coefficients arise inevitably. Moreover, only local estimates can be derived rather than pointwise estimates. Another way is to obtain a priori estimates first and then use the method of continuity to prove the existence of classical solutions. It often requires more smoothness on the boundary and the boundary value (e.g. [10]). In both cases, the proofs are usually complicated. We note that in [8], Ma and Wang also proved the boundary pointwise regularity by a barrier argument and a complicated iteration procedure.
In this paper, we study the boundary regularity for viscosity solutions and prove the pointwise and estimates under the corresponding pointwise geometric conditions on . Our results are new even for the Laplace equation and these geometric conditions are rather general. Moreover, the boundaries don’t need to be flattened and the proofs are simple.
The perturbation and compactness techniques are adopted here. We use solutions with flat boundaries to approximate the solution and the error between them can be estimated by maximum principles. Then, we can obtain the necessary compactness for solutions (see Lemma 2.7). This basic perturbation idea is inspired originally by [1]. The application to boundary regularity is inspired by [7]. Based on the compactness result, we can obtain the desired estimates at the boundary if the boundary is “almost” flat (see Lemma 3.1 and Lemma 4.1). This compactness technique has been inspired by [9] and [11]. Then in aid of the scaling, the estimates on curved boundaries can be derived easily and the perturbation is a matter of scaling in some sense. The treatment for the right hand term and the boundary value is similar.
In this paper, we use the standard notations and refer to 1.9 for details. Before stating our main results, we introduce the following notions.
Definition 1.1**.**
Let be a bounded set and be a function defined on . We say that is () at or if there exist a polynomial of degree and a constant such that
[TABLE]
There may exist multiple and (e.g. ). Then we take with
[TABLE]
where . Define
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Next, we give the definitions of the geometric conditions on the domain.
Definition 1.2**.**
Let be a bounded domain and . We say that is () at or if there exist a coordinate system , a polynomial of degree and a constant such that in this coordinate system,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Then, define
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
In addition, we define
[TABLE]
Remark 1.3*.*
Throughout this paper, we always assume that and study the boundary behavior at [math]. When we say that is at [math], it always indicates that1.2 and1.3 hold. Furthermore, without loss of generality, we always assume that
[TABLE]
Remark 1.4*.*
In this definition, doesn’t need to be the graph of a function near . For example, let
[TABLE]
Then is at [math] by the definition. We will prove that the solution is at [math]. Hence, our results are new even for the Laplace equation.
Since we consider the viscosity solutions, the standard notions and notations for viscosity solutions are used, such as , , , , etc. For the details, we refer to [1], [2] and [3]. Without loss of generality, we always assume that the fully nonlinear operator is uniformly elliptic with ellipticity constants and , and . We call a constant universal if it depends only on and .
We use the Einstein summation convention in this work, i.e., repeated indices are implicitly summed over.
Now, we state our main results. For the boundary pointwise regularity, we have
Theorem 1.5**.**
Let where is a universal constant (see Lemma 2.1). Suppose that is at [math] and satisfies
[TABLE]
where and satisfies for some constant
[TABLE]
Then , i.e., there exists a linear polynomial such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where depends only on and , and depends also on .
Remark 1.6*.*
In [8], Ma and Wang only proved the boundary pointwise regularity for some with since the Harnack inequality was used. For instance, for the Laplace equation, we can obtain the regularity for any , which can not been inferred from [8].
For the boundary pointwise regularity, we have
Theorem 1.7**.**
Let where is a universal constant (see Lemma 2.2). Suppose that is at [math] and satisfies
[TABLE]
where and .
Then , i.e., there exists a quadratic polynomial such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where depends only on and , and depends also on .
Remark 1.8*.*
Note that the convexity of is not needed here, which is different from the interior regularity.
In the next section, we prepare some preliminaries. In particular, we prove the compactness and the closedness for a family of viscosity solutions. We obtain the boundary regularity in Section 3 and the boundary regularity in Section 4.
Notation 1.9**.**
: the standard basis of , i.e., . 2. 2.
and . 3. 3.
: the set of symmetric matrices and the spectral radius of for any . 4. 4.
R^{n}_{+}=\{x\in R^{n}\big{|}x_{n}>0\}. 5. 5.
B_{r}(x_{0})=\{x\in R^{n}\big{|}|x-x_{0}|<r\}, , and . 6. 6.
T_{r}(x_{0})\ =\{(x^{\prime},0)\in R^{n}\big{|}|x^{\prime}-x_{0}^{\prime}|<r\} and . 7. 7.
: the complement of and : the closure of , . 8. 8.
and . 9. 9.
and . Similarly, and .
2 Preliminaries
In this section, we introduce two lemmas stating the and regularity on flat boundaries. We will use them to approximate the solutions on curved boundaries. In addition, we prove the compactness and closedness for a family of viscosity solutions.
The following lemma concerns the boundary regularity. It was first proved by Krylov [6] and further simplified by Caffarelli (see [4, Theorem 9.31] and [5, Theorem 4.28]).
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let satisfy
[TABLE]
Then there exists a universal constant such that and for some constant ,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where is universal.
The next lemma concerns the boundary regularity. We refer [9, Lemma 4.1] for a proof.
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let satisfy
[TABLE]
Then there exists a universal constant such that and for some constants and ,
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where is universal.
Remark 2.3*.*
In2.1, the Einstein summation convention is used (similarly hereinafter). In2.2, denotes the matrix whose elements are all [math] except for (similarly hereinafter).
The following lemma presents a uniform estimate for solutions, which is a kind of “equicontinuity” up to the boundary.
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let . Suppose that satisfies
[TABLE]
with , , and .
Then
[TABLE]
where is universal.
Proof.
Let and . Then . Let solve
[TABLE]
Let and then satisfies (note that )
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.1,
[TABLE]
where is universal. For , by the Alexandrov-Bakel’man-Pucci maximum principle, we have
[TABLE]
where is universal. Hence,
[TABLE]
The proof for
[TABLE]
is similar and we omit it here. Hence, the proof is completed.∎
Remark 2.5*.*
The proof shows the idea that approximating the general solution by a solution with a flat boundary. This idea is inspired by [7].
Based on the above lemma, the following corollary follows easily:
Corollary 2.6**.**
For any and , there exists (depending only on and ) such that if satisfies
[TABLE]
with , , and , then
[TABLE]
Next, we prove the equicontinuity of the solutions, which provides the necessary compactness.
Lemma 2.7**.**
For any and , there exists (depending only on and ) such that if satisfies
[TABLE]
with , , and , then for any with , we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Corollary 2.6, for any , there exists depending only on and such that for any with and , we have
[TABLE]
If , by the interior Hölder estimate,
[TABLE]
where and are universal. Take small enough such that
[TABLE]
Then by combining2.3 and2.4, the conclusion follows. ∎
Now, we give a closedness result for viscosity solutions.
Lemma 2.8**.**
Let satisfy
[TABLE]
Suppose that uniformly on compact subsets of , , and .
In addition, assume that for any , uniformly on . That is, for any , there exists such that for any and , we have
[TABLE]
Then and
[TABLE]
Proof.
We only prove the case for a subsolution. From [2, Theorem 3.8], in holds. For any and , let be small to be specified later and . Since converges to uniformly, there exists such that for any and , we have
[TABLE]
Take large enough such that and . Note that . Then we can take small such that . Hence,
[TABLE]
Therefore, is continuous up to and on . ∎
3 Boundary regularity
In this section, we give the proof of the boundary regularity. First, we prove that the solution in Theorem 1.5 can be approximated by a linear function provided that the prescribed data are small enough.
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let and be as in Lemma 2.1. For any , there exists such that if satisfies
[TABLE]
with , , and , then there exists a constant such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where depends only on and .
Proof.
We prove the lemma by contradiction. Suppose that the lemma is false. Then there exist and sequences of such that
[TABLE]
with , , and , and
[TABLE]
where is taken small such that
[TABLE]
Note that are uniformly bounded. In addition, by Lemma 2.7, are equicontinuous. More precisely, for any , , there exist and such that for any and with , . Hence, there exists a subsequence (denoted by again) such that converges uniformly to some function on compact subsets of . By the closedness (Lemma 2.8), satisfies
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.1, there exists such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Hence, by noting3.2, we have
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.7, for small and large, we have
[TABLE]
Hence, from3.1,
[TABLE]
Let , we have
[TABLE]
which contradicts with3.3. ∎
Remark 3.2*.*
As pointed out in [11, Chapte 1.3], the benefits of the method of compactness are that it doesn’t need the solvability of some equation, and the difference between the solution and the auxiliary function doesn’t need to satisfy some equation.
Now, we can prove the boundary regularity.
Proof of Theorem 1.5. We make some normalization first. Let . Then
[TABLE]
Next, we assume that and . Otherwise, we may consider . Then the regularity of follows easily from that of . Let . Then
[TABLE]
Let be as in Lemma 3.1. We assume that , , and where is a constant (depending only on and ) to be specified later. Otherwise, we may consider
[TABLE]
where . By choosing small enough (depending only on and ), the above assumptions can be guaranteed. Without loss of generality, we assume that .
To prove that is at [math], we only need to prove the following. There exists a sequence () such that for all
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where is the universal constant as in Lemma 2.1 and , depending only on and , is as in Lemma 3.1 .
We prove the above by induction. For , by setting , the conclusion holds clearly. Suppose that the conclusion holds for . We need to prove that the conclusion holds for .
Let , and
[TABLE]
Then satisfies
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
By3.7, there exists a constant depending only on and such that (). Then it is easy to verify that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
By Lemma 3.1, there exists a constant such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Let . Then3.7 holds for . Recalling3.8, we have
[TABLE]
Hence,3.6 holds for . By induction, the proof is completed.∎
Remark 3.3*.*
From the above proof, it shows clearly that the reason for the requirement of is to estimate on (see3.9). This observation is originated from [7] and is key to the regularity below.
4 regularity
In the following, we prove the boundary regularity. From the proof for the regularity, it can be inferred that if
[TABLE]
the regularity follows almost exactly as the regularity. However, the above can’t be guaranteed by choosing a proper coordinate system, which is different from the regularity. As pointed above, the requirement for is to estimate on . If the term vanishes, the requirement for may be relaxed. This is the key idea for the regularity.
The following lemma is similar to Lemma 3.1, but without the term in the estimate.
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let and be as in Lemma 2.2. For any , there exists such that if satisfies
[TABLE]
with , , , , and , then there exist constants such that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where depends only on and .
Proof.
As before, we prove the lemma by contradiction. Suppose that the lemma is false. Then there exist and sequences of such that
[TABLE]
with , , , , , and
[TABLE]
where is taken small such that
[TABLE]
Since and are Lipschitz continuous with a uniform Lipschitz constant depending only on and , there exists such that on compact subsets of . On the other hand, as before, are uniformly bounded and equicontinuous. Hence, by Lemma 2.8, we can assume that converges uniformly to some function on compact subsets of and satisfies
[TABLE]
By the estimate for (see Theorem 1.5) and noting , we have
[TABLE]
where and is universal. Since converges to uniformly,
[TABLE]
Hence, .
By Lemma 2.2, there exist such that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Since . For large, there exists with and such that
[TABLE]
where denotes the matrix whose elements are all [math] except (similarly hereinafter).
By noting4.2, we have
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.7, for small and large, we have
[TABLE]
Hence, from 4.1,
[TABLE]
Let , we have
[TABLE]
which contradicts with4.3. ∎
The following is the essential result for the regularity. The key is that if , the regularity holds even if .
Theorem 4.2**.**
Let and be at [math]. Assume that satisfies
[TABLE]
with . Suppose that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Then , i.e., there exists a quadratic polynomial such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where depends only on and , and depends also on .
Proof.
As before, we make some normalization first. Let . Then
[TABLE]
Let be as in Lemma 4.1. As before, we assume that , , and where is a constant (depending only on and ) to be specified later.
To prove that is at [math], we only need to prove the following. There exist sequences () such that for all ,
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where is the universal constant as in Lemma 2.2 and , depending only on and , is as in Lemma 4.1.
We prove the above by induction. For , by setting , the conclusion holds clearly. Suppose that the conclusion holds for . We need to prove that the conclusion holds for .
Let , and
[TABLE]
Then satisfies
[TABLE]
where for ,
[TABLE]
Then is uniformly elliptic with ellipticity constants and and . By4.11, there exists a constant depending only on and such that (). Then it is easy to verify that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
In addition, by4.5 and4.8, we have
[TABLE]
Hence,
[TABLE]
By Lemma 4.1, there exists constants such that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Let . Then4.10 and4.11 hold for . Recalling4.12, we have
[TABLE]
Hence,4.9 holds for . By induction, the proof is completed.∎
Proof of Theorem 1.7. In fact, Theorem 4.2 has contained the essential ingredients for the regularity. The following proof is just the normalization in some sense.
Assume that satisfies1.2 and1.3 with for some . By scaling, we can assume that .
Let for . (In the following proof, always denotes a symmetric matrix.) Then is uniformly elliptic with the same ellipticity constants and satisfies
[TABLE]
where .
Next, let and . Then is uniformly elliptic with the same ellipticity constants and satisfies
[TABLE]
where . Hence,
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where is universal.
Note that (see [1, Proposition 2.13]),
[TABLE]
Then by Theorem 1.5, for , and
[TABLE]
where is universal.
Let and . Then is uniformly elliptic with the same ellipticity constants and satisfies
[TABLE]
where .
Next, let and . Then for some and (note that )
[TABLE]
where is universal. Moreover, satisfies
[TABLE]
where .
Then it is easy to verify that , and
[TABLE]
where is universal.
By Theorem 4.2, and hence is at [math], and the estimates1.7 and1.8 hold. ∎
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Professor Dongsheng Li for useful discussions.
References
- Caffarelli and Cabré [1995]
Caffarelli, L.A., Cabré, X..
Fully nonlinear elliptic equations.
volume 43 of American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications.
American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1995.
doi:10.1090/coll/043.
- Caffarelli et al. [1996]
Caffarelli, L.A., Crandall, M.G., Kocan, M., Świȩch, A..
On viscosity solutions of fully nonlinear equations with measurable ingredients.
Comm Pure Appl Math 1996;49(4):365–397.
doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0312(199604)49:4<365::AID-CPA3>3.0.CO;2-A.
- Crandall et al. [1992]
Crandall, M.G., Ishii, H., Lions, P.L..
User’s guide to viscosity solutions of second order partial differential equations.
Bull Amer Math Soc (NS) 1992;27(1):1–67.
doi:10.1090/S0273-0979-1992-00266-5.
- Gilbarg and Trudinger [2001]
Gilbarg, D., Trudinger, N.S..
Elliptic partial differential equations of second order.
Classics in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001.
- Kazdan [1985]
Kazdan, J.L..
Prescribing the curvature of a Riemannian manifold.
volume 57 of CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics.
Published for the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC; by the American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1985.
doi:10.1090/cbms/057.
- Krylov [1983]
Krylov, N.V..
Boundedly inhomogeneous elliptic and parabolic equations in a domain.
Izv Akad Nauk SSSR Ser Mat 1983;47(1):75–108.
- Li and Zhang [2018]
Li, D., Zhang, K..
Regularity for fully nonlinear elliptic equations with oblique boundary conditions.
Arch Ration Mech Anal 2018;228(3):923–967.
doi:10.1007/s00205-017-1209-x.
- Ma and Wang [2012]
Ma, F., Wang, L..
Boundary first order derivative estimates for fully nonlinear elliptic equations.
J Differential Equations 2012;252(2):988–1002.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2011.10.007. doi:10.1016/j.jde.2011.10.007.
- Silvestre and Sirakov [2014]
Silvestre, L., Sirakov, B..
Boundary regularity for viscosity solutions of fully nonlinear elliptic equations.
Comm Partial Differential Equations 2014;39(9):1694–1717.
URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/03605302.2013.842249. doi:10.1080/03605302.2013.842249.
- Trudinger [1983]
Trudinger, N.S..
Fully nonlinear, uniformly elliptic equations under natural structure conditions.
Trans Amer Math Soc 1983;278(2):751–769.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1999182. doi:10.2307/1999182.
- [11]
Wang, L..
Regularity theory.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1Caffarelli and Cabré [1995] Caffarelli, L.A., Cabré, X.. Fully nonlinear elliptic equations. volume 43 of American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications . American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1995. doi: 10.1090/coll/043 . · doi ↗
- 2Caffarelli et al. [1996] Caffarelli, L.A., Crandall, M.G., Kocan, M., Świȩch, A.. On viscosity solutions of fully nonlinear equations with measurable ingredients. Comm Pure Appl Math 1996;49(4):365–397. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0312(199604)49:4<365::AID-CPA 3>3.0.CO;2-A . · doi ↗
- 3Crandall et al. [1992] Crandall, M.G., Ishii, H., Lions, P.L.. User’s guide to viscosity solutions of second order partial differential equations. Bull Amer Math Soc (NS) 1992;27(1):1–67. doi: 10.1090/S 0273-0979-1992-00266-5 . · doi ↗
- 4Gilbarg and Trudinger [2001] Gilbarg, D., Trudinger, N.S.. Elliptic partial differential equations of second order. Classics in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001.
- 5Kazdan [1985] Kazdan, J.L.. Prescribing the curvature of a Riemannian manifold. volume 57 of CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics . Published for the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC; by the American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1985. doi: 10.1090/cbms/057 . · doi ↗
- 6Krylov [1983] Krylov, N.V.. Boundedly inhomogeneous elliptic and parabolic equations in a domain. Izv Akad Nauk SSSR Ser Mat 1983;47(1):75–108.
- 7Li and Zhang [2018] Li, D., Zhang, K.. Regularity for fully nonlinear elliptic equations with oblique boundary conditions. Arch Ration Mech Anal 2018;228(3):923–967. doi: 10.1007/s 00205-017-1209-x . · doi ↗
- 8Ma and Wang [2012] Ma, F., Wang, L.. Boundary first order derivative estimates for fully nonlinear elliptic equations. J Differential Equations 2012;252(2):988–1002. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2011.10.007 . doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2011.10.007 . · doi ↗
