Recovering time-dependent singular coefficients of the wave-equation - One Dimensional Case
O. Poisson
Aix Marseille Université, I2M, UMR CNRS 6632,
France ([email protected]).
1 Introduction
Let Ω=]0,b[⊂R, b>0, and consider the following initial boundary value problem
[TABLE]
where Lγu=∂t2u−∇x⋅(γ∇xu),
γ=γ(t,x) has the following properties :
There exist a positive constant k=1 and a smooth function t↦a(t)∈]0,b[
such that
[TABLE]
We make the following assumption
[TABLE]
where a˙=dtda.
The inverse problem were are concern with is to obtain some informations on a(⋅)
and k, by choosing carefully the data f and then measuring ∂xu(t,x) at x=0.
Since the velocity of waves in Ω∖D(t) is one, it is quite natural to
consider the following functions. We set
[TABLE]
For simplicity, and if it is unambiguous, we shall write ξ(t)=ξ, μ(t)=μ.
If needed, we extend a(t) in R∖[0,T] by a smooth extention, and
so we extend D={{t}×(a(t),b)), t∈[0,T]}, DC={{t}×(0,a(t)),
t∈[0,T]}, ∂D={(t,a(t)), t∈[0,T]} too (with the same notation)
by replacing [0,T] by R in their definition, in such a way that
[TABLE]
We put
[TABLE]
Remark 1.1**.**
Since ∣a˙∣<1 and a>0, it becomes obvious that {t≥s;a(t)=t−s}={ts}, and
that s↦ts and s↦t∗(⋅) are smooth and increasing.
In fact, t0 is the necessary time delay to have the first information on D(t), and
ts is the same, but with initial time at t=s.
We set
[TABLE]
Remark 1.2**.**
We obviously have μ(ts)=t∗(s) and ξ(ts)=s. Hence μ=t∗∘ξ and
ξ−1(⋅)=t(⋅).
We also define the coefficient of reflexion/transmition by
[TABLE]
Thanks to (H1D), the functions α and β are well-defined in [0,T].
We shall deal with data and measurements as functions in the usual Sobolev space Hs(I),
where s∈R and I⊂R is an non empty open interval.
If s∈(0,1) it can be defined by
[TABLE]
Our main result is the following
Theorem 1.3**.**
Assume that (u0,u1)∈Hr0(Ω)×Hr0−1(Ω) for some r0∈(0,21).
Fix f∈L2(−∞,T) such that
-
f∣(−∞,0)∈Hr0(−∞,0);
2. 2.
f∣(0,t)∈Hr0(1−t′/T)((0,t))* for 0<t<t′≤T;*
3. 3.
f∣(0,t′)∈Hr0(1−t/T)((0,t′))* for 0≤t<t′≤T.*
*Then, the following statements hold.
-
There exists a unique solution u of (1.6) in L2(ΩT).
-
The quantity ∂xu∣x=0 is defined in H−1(0,T) by continuous extension.
-
The distribution g=∂xu∣x=0+f′∈H−1(0,T) has the following form*
[TABLE]
where gA,gE satisfy the following properties:
- (i)
gA(μ)=2α(t)f′(ξ),∀μ∈[0,T]*.
*
2. (ii)
gA∣(0,μ)∈Hr0(1−ξ~/T)−1(0,μ)* for all μ0<μ≤T and all ξ~>ξ.*
3. (iii)
*If a˙(t)=1+kk then
gA∣(0,μ)∈Hr0(1−ξ~/T)−1(0,μ), ∀ξ~<ξ.
*
4. (iv)
There exists ε>0 such that
[TABLE]
The main consequence of this is
Corollary 1.4**.**
*Assume that a˙(t)=1+kk for all t, and
(u0,u1)∈Hr0(Ω)×Hr0−1(Ω) for some r0>0.
Let T>0. We claim that:
-
We can know if T≤μ0 or if T>μ0.
-
Assume that T>t∗(0)=μ0. Set*
[TABLE]
Then we can recover the functions s↦ts, 0≤s≤s∗, t↦a(t),
t0≤t≤tmax.
The constant k is the root of a second degree equation with known coefficients.
If a˙≤0 then this equation has no more than one positive root, and so,
we are able to reconstruct k.
Remark 1.5**.**
Obviously, from Corollary 1.4 and Remark 1.1, and since t0=a(t0)<b,
we can ensure the condition T>μ0 by choosing T≥2b.
In Theorem 1.3, the existence of such a function f is ensured, thanks to the following
Lemma 1.6**.**
For all R>0, there exists a function G(t), 0≤t≤1, such that
-
G∣(0,t)∈H(1−t′)/R(0,t)* for all 0<t<t′≤1.*
2. 2.
G∣(0,t′)∈H(1−t)/R(0,t′)* for all 0<t<t′≤1.*
Remark 1.7**.**
In Theorem 1.3, if (u0,u1)∈H0r0(Ω)×Hr0−1(Ω) for some
r0∈(21,1], and if u0(0) is known, then we can fix f∈L2(0,T) such that
-
f∣[0,t]∈Hr0(1−t/T)([0,t])* for 0<t≤T;*
2. 2.
f∣[0,t′]∈Hr0(1−t/T)([0,t′])* for 0<t<t′≤T,*
*and with f(0)=u0(0). Then, the same result holds than in Theorem 1.3, but with
r0∈(21,1].
If (u0,u1)∈Hr0(Ω)×Hr0−1(Ω) for some r0∈(21,1],
but if we don’t know the value of u0(0), then the information is not sufficient
(with our approach) to construct f so that the result of Theorem 1.3 holds
with this value r0∈(21,1], and so, we are obliged to come back to
the situation (u0,u1)∈Hr1(Ω)×Hr1−1(Ω), where r1<21.*
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we analyse the direct problem (1.6).
In Section 3 we construct an ansatz uA for (1.6) where f is the function
of Theorem 1.3.
In Section 4, we first prove Corollary 1.4, then Theorem 1.3.
In particular, we analyse the error uE=u−uA.
2 Study of the direct problem
2.1 Notations
We denote by (∣) the usual scalar product in L2(Ω;dx), by (∣)H the scalar product
in a Hilbert space H, by <;>H∗×H the duality product between a Hilbert space
H and its dual space H∗, by <;> the duality product in D′(ΩT)×D(ΩT)
or in D′(0,T)×D(0,T).
We put H1=L2(0,T;H01(Ω)), H−1=L2(0,T;H−1(Ω))=H1∗,
W={v∈H−1;∂tv∈H−1} with obvious norms.
We denote
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
(For r=21 we could set E0r as in the case r>21, but
the relations u0(0)=f(0) and u0(b)=0 should be modified).
We denote Ωt1,t2=(t1,t2)×Ω.
For data v0,v1,F, let v satisfying in some sense:
[TABLE]
We formally define the following operators:
[TABLE]
where u, v, are respectively solutions of (1.6), (2.5).
2.2 Main results
In this section and the one above, we state that Problems (1.6), (2.5) have
a unique solution for adequate spaces.
Lemma 2.1**.**
*1. The operator P is a continuous linear mapping from H01(Ω)×L2(Ω)×(L2(ΩT)+W) into C([0,T];H01(Ω))∩C1([0,T];L2(Ω)).
- The operator X(s) is continuous from H01(Ω)×L2(Ω)×(L2(ΩT)+W) into H01(Ω)×L2(Ω), for all s∈[0,T].*
Lemma 2.2**.**
*1. The operator P continuously extends as a continuous operator from L2(Ω)×H−1(Ω)×H−1 into L2(ΩT).
- The operator X(s) continuously extends as a continuous operator from
L2(Ω)×H−1(Ω)×H−1 into L2(Ω)×H−1(Ω),
for all s∈[0,T].*
Lemma 2.3**.**
*1. The operator P~ is a continuous linear mapping from E01 into
C([0,T]; H1(Ω))∩C1([0,T];L2(Ω)), and continuously extends as a continuous
operator from E0 into L2(ΩT).
- The operator X~(s) is continuous from E01 into H1(Ω)×L2(Ω),
and continuously extends as a continuous operator from E0 into
L2(Ω)×H−1(Ω), for all s∈[0,T].*
Lemma 2.4**.**
The operator Z (respect., Z~) is continuous from H01(Ω)×L2(Ω)×L2(ΩT) (respect., E01) into L2(0,T) and continuously extends as a continuous
operator from L2(Ω)×H−1(Ω)×H−1 (respect., E0) into H−1(0,T).
Lemma 2.5**.**
Let t1∈[0,T]. Assume that F∈H−1 has a compact support in O(t1).
Let v=P(v0,v1,F). Then there exists a neighborhood K~ of K(t1)
in DC such that v∣K~ does not depend on F, that, is,
if v0=v1=0, then v∣K~ vanishes, and, in particular,
supp ∂xv∣x=0⊂(μ(t1),T].
2.3 Proofs
Let us consider the familly of bilinear forms b(t), t∈R, defined by
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.1 is a corollary of the following general theorem (proof in appendix),
which is an extension of [1, XV section 4] where γ
did not depend on the variable t.
Theorem 2.6**.**
Let T>0 and Ω⊂Rn, n≥1, such that H01(Ω) is compact in L2(Ω).
Let γ(t,x)>0 be such that γ,γ−1∈C0([0,T];L∞(Ω)),
∂tγ∈L∞(ΩT).
Let F∈W∪L2(ΩT) and v0∈H01(Ω), v1∈L2(Ω).
Then, there exists a unique weak solution v to (2.5), that is,
v∈C([0,T];H01(Ω)), ∂tv∈C([0,T];L2(Ω)), v∣t=0=v0,
∂tv∣t=0=v1, and
[TABLE]
in the sense of D′(]0,T[), for all ϕ∈H01(Ω).
Moreover there exists a constant C such that
[TABLE]
Let us show that Lemma 2.2 is a straightforward consequence of
Lemma 2.1 with the operator P replaced by its adjoint P∗.
Let (v0,v1,F)∈L2(Ω)×H−1(Ω)×H−1.
By the principle of duality, we can write (2.5) as
[TABLE]
for all g∈L2(ΩT), where we put w=P∗(0,0,g).
Consequently (thanks to Lax-Milgram theorem), Equation (2.5) admits
a unique solution v∈L2(ΩT), and this shows Point 1 of Lemma 2.2.
Once again, we have
[TABLE]
for all (f0,f1)∈H01(Ω)×L2(Ω), where we put w=P∗(f0,f1,0).
This shows that (v∣t=T,∂tv∣t=T)∈L2(Ω)×H−1(Ω).
This proves Point 2 of Lemma 2.2 in the non-restrictive case s=T.
Let us prove Lemma 2.3. Let Φ(x)∈C∞(R) with Φ(0)=1
and with support in [0,am], where am≤a(t) for all t.
Let us consider f∈Hloc1(R) first. Set
[TABLE]
Problem (1.6) with unknown u is (at least formally) equivalent to the following one:
find v=u−uin satisfying (2.5) with
[TABLE]
Relation (2.9) shows that F∈L2(ΩT). In fact, we have F∈W also,
since
[TABLE]
and, for all φ∈D(ΩT),
[TABLE]
which shows that ∂tF(t,x)∈H−1. Similarly, we have
[TABLE]
which shows that F∈H−1 if f∈Lloc2(R) only. We set
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
The above analysis shows that R continuously extends as a continuous operator
from Lloc2(R) into H−1.
Similarly, S continuously extends as a continuous operator from E0 into
L2(Ω)×H−1(Ω).
Consequently, and since a solution to (1.6) can be written u=v+uin with
v=P(S(u0,u1,f),R(f)), Point 1 of Lemma 2.3 is proved.
Similarly, we prove Point 2 of Lemma 2.3, since we have
X~(s)(u0,u1,f)=X(s)(S(u0,u1,f),Rf)+(uin∣t=s,∂tuin∣t=s).
Let us prove Lemma 2.4.
Let (v0,v1,F)∈H01(Ω)×L2(Ω)×L2(ΩT).
As above, for all φ∈D(R) such that φ(T)=0, there exists a unique solution
q=qφ∈L2(ΩT) to
[TABLE]
since it is a particular case of Lemma 2.3 with reversal time.
Moreover, we have qφ∈C([0,T];H01(Ω)), ∂tqφ∈C([0,T];L2(Ω))
with
[TABLE]
By the duality principle, and thanks to (2.15), we have in the sense of D′([0,T)),
[TABLE]
which shows that ∂xv∣x=0∈L2(0,T) and that Z is a continuous mapping
from H01(Ω)×L2(Ω)×L2(ΩT) into L2(0,T).
Now, let (v0,v1,F)∈L2(Ω)×H−1(Ω)×H−1.
Then, Relation (2.17) and Estimate (2.16) imply
[TABLE]
which shows that ∂xv∣x=0∈(HT1)′⊂H−1(0,T), the dual space of
HT1={f∈H1(0,T);f(T)=0}, and that Z continuously extends as a continuous operator
from L2(Ω)×H−1(Ω)×H−1 into H−1(0,T).
This ends the proof of the property of Z in Lemma 2.4.
Since ∂xuin∣x=0=−f′, we have Z~(u0,u1,f)=Z(S(u0,u1,f),Rf),
and Point 2 of Lemma 2.4 is proved.
∎
By the well-known Sobolev interpolation theory, we have also proved:
Proposition 2.7**.**
*The operator P (respect., P~) continuously maps Hs(Ω)×Hs−1(Ω)×L2(0,T;Hs−1(Ω)) (respect., E0s) into L2(0,T;Hs(Ω)), s∈[0,1](∖21).
The operator Z (respect., Z~) continuously maps Hs(Ω)×Hs−1(Ω)×L2(0,T;Hs−1(Ω)) (respect., E0s) into Hs−1(0,T), s∈[0,1](∖21).*
Proof of Lemma 2.5. Denote K=K(t1). Notice that
K∩DC={(t1,a(t1))}.
We assume that v0=v1=0. Since suppF∩Ωt1=∅,
then, thanks to Lemma 2.2 with T replaced by t1,
v vanishes in Ωt1.
Let K′=intK the interior of K. The function v∣K∈L2(K′) satisfies
the following equations:
[TABLE]
It is well-known that this implies v∣K′=0, and so, supp ∂xv∣x=0⊂[μ(t1),T]. But since the support of F does not touch ∂K,
we similarly have v∣Kε(t1)=0, supp ∂xv∣x=0⊂[μ(t1)+δ,T],
for some ε>0 sufficiently small.
However, let us give a more straightforward and simple proof to the fact that
supp ∂xv∣x=0⊂[μ(t1)+δ,T].
Fix δ,ε>0 such that μ(t1)+δ>μ(t1+ε) and
supp F∩Kε(t1)=∅.
Let t2∈[t1,t1+ε], φ∈H01(0,μ(t2)) and set
w(t,x)=φ(t+x) for t2≤t≤μ(t2).
Observe that w=qφ of (2.14), but with (0,T) replaced by (t2,μ(t2)).
In fact, supp w⊂K(t2), and so w vanishes in D∩Ωt2,μ(t2).
We then have, similarly to (2.17),
[TABLE]
since v∣t2=∂tv∣t2=0 and supp F∩ supp w=∅.
Since φ is arbitrarily chosen, this shows that supp ∂xv∣x=0∩(t2,μ(t2))=∅, for all t2∈[t1,t1+ε].
Hence, supp ∂xv∣x=0⊂[μ(t1+ε),T].
∎.
3 Ansatz
3.1 Notations
For t∈[0,T] we put
[TABLE]
(Notice that K(t)⊂DC and K(t)∩D={(t,a(t)}).
For ε>0, t∈[0,T], we put Kε(t)=∪t≤s≤t+εK(s).
If q(x) is sufficiently smooth in Ω, then [q]t:=q(a(t)+0)−q(a(t)−0).
We write g1≃sg2 if g1 or g2∈Hs(0,T) and
g1−g2∈Hs+ε(0,T) for some ε>0.
We put C+j={f∈Cj(R);f∣R−=0}, j∈N, which is dense in
L2(R+)≈{f∈L2(R);f∣(−∞,0)=0}.
We consider for all t∈[0,T] the formal operator A(t)=−∇x(γ(t,⋅)∇x)
defined from H1(Ω) into H−1(Ω) by duality:
[TABLE]
Let f be a measurable function, we define the ansatz uA=UA(f) for (1.6) as follows.
Recall that ξ(t) and μ(t) are defined by (1.10), (1.11), and we have
[TABLE]
In addition, we put, for t∈[0,T],
[TABLE]
Thanks to Assumption (H1D), t↦ν(t) is invertible.
Recall also that the coefficient of reflexion/transmition, α and β, are defined
by (1.12), (1.13). Note that we have
[TABLE]
We also define:
[TABLE]
We put
[TABLE]
where we fix Φε∈C∞(R) so that Φε(r)=1 if r<21ε,
Φ1(r)=0 if r>ε, 0<ε≤21d(∂D,∂ΩT).
It is clear that the linear operator UA:f↦uA is bounded from
L2(R) into L2(ΩμT).
3.2 Properties of the Ansatz
Lemma 3.1**.**
*Let f∈C2(R). Then we have
-
uA∈C2([0,T];H1(Ω)), uA∣D∈C2(D),
uA∣DC∈C2(DC).
-
There exists a smooth function τ(t) with support in [t0,μ0] such that*
[TABLE]
*3) a) uA vanishes near x=b.
b)
Let gA=∂xuA∣x=0+f′. Then gA(μ)=2α(t)f′(ξ) for 0≤μ≤T,
where t, ξ, μ are related by (1.10), (1.11), (3.3).
- Put FA=LγuA in the sense that
FA(t,⋅)=dt2d2uA(t)+A(t)uA(t)∈H−1(Ω) for all t,
and FA∈C([0,T];H−1(Ω)).
Then, FA can be written
FA(t,x)=F1(t,x)−τ(t)f(ξ(t))δa(t)(x), where τ is smooth, and
F1∈C([0,T];L2(Ω)) is defined for 0≤t≤T by*
[TABLE]
where the functions Φj are smooth and independant of f,
with compact support in [ε/2,ε] for j=2,3, and in [b−ε,b−ε/2]
for j=4,5.
Proof. Point 1. is obvious, since we have, thanks to (3.4),
[TABLE]
Let us consider Point 2. For 0≤t≤T we have
[TABLE]
Thanks to (3.5) we get
[TABLE]
with
[TABLE]
This ends Point 2.
Let us consider Point 3 b), since 3 a) is obvious. For 0≤μ≤T we have
[TABLE]
This ends Point 3.
Let us prove Point 4.
A short computation yields (3.11).
Thanks to Point 2, we obtain FA=F1+τ(t)f(ξ) in the required sense.
This ends the proof of the lemma.
∎
We define the bounded operators UA : C2(R)∋f↦uA∈C2([0,T];H1(Ω)), T0: C2(R)∋f↦T0f∈C([0,T];H−1(Ω))
such that T0f(t)=τ(t)f(ξ)δa(t)(x), and
T1: C2(R)∋f↦T1f=F1∈C([0,T];L2(Ω)),
TA: C2(R)∋f↦TAf=FA∈C([0,T];H−1(Ω)).
Notice that T0f(t)∈H−s(Ω) for all s>21, t∈[0,T].
Obviously we have the following propositions and Lemma.
Proposition 3.2**.**
The operator UA continuously extends as a bounded operator from
L2(0,T) into C([0,T];H−1(Ω)).
Proposition 3.3**.**
The operator T0 continuously extends as a bounded operator from L2(0,T)
into L2(0,T;H−s(Ω)), ∀s>21.
Lemma 3.4**.**
*1) The operator TA is continuous from C2(R) into L2(0,T;H−1(Ω)) and,
for all s∈[0,21), it extends as a continuous operator from Hs(0,T) into
L2(0,T;Hs−1(Ω)).
-
The operator GA:f↦∂xUA(f)∣x=0+f′ is continuous
from C2(R) into C0([0,T]), and, for all s∈[0,21), it extends as
a continuous operator from Hs(0,T) into Hs−1(0,T).
-
Let f such as in Theorem 1.3, then gA:=GAf satisfies (ii) and (iii)
of Theorem 1.3.*
Proof of Lemma 3.4.
Point 1). Thanks to Lemma 3.3, it is sufficient to prove this with TA
replaced by T1. Thanks to the interpolation theory, it is sufficient to prove that T1
is a bounded operator from L2(0,T) into L2(0,T;H−1(Ω)) and from
H01(0,T) into L2(ΩT), that is obvious. Hence Point 1) holds.
Point 2) is obvious for the same reason.
Point 3) is obvious, since α(t)=0 for all t.
∎
3.3 Modification of F1
The regularity of F1 is not sufficient for us, we replace it by the following one,
Fε,μ~, which is equivalent to F1 in the sense of Lemma 2.5.
Let μ~∈[0,T], put t~=μ−1(μ~), ξ~=ξ(t~),
ν~=ν(t~), and consider a smooth function ϕ(⋅;ε,μ~)
defined in R2 such that ϕ(t,x;ε,μ~)=1 for (t,x)∈Ωt~∪Kε/2(t~), ϕ(t,x;ε,μ~)=0 for t≥t~+ε and
(t,x)∈Kε(t~).
For s∈[0,21), f∈Hs(R) and F1=T1(f) we put
[TABLE]
We have the two following properties.
Lemma 3.5**.**
For ε<δ, the support of F1−Fε,μ~ is contained in O(t~).
Proof. Since F1−Fε,μ~=(1−ϕ(⋅;ε,μ~)F1, the support
of F1−Fε,μ~ is contained in supp (1−ϕ(⋅;ε,μ~))∩
supp F1. But supp (1−ϕ(⋅;ε,μ~))⊂ΩT∖(Ωt~∪int(Kε/2(t~))).
Then the proof is done if we show that (t~,a(t~))∈ supp (F1−Fε,μ~).
But, thanks to (3.11), the support of F1 is localized in {x≤ε}∪{x≥b−ε}
that does not touch ∂D.
∎
Lemma 3.6**.**
Let f as in Theorem 1.3. There exists c>0 and ε0>0, independent of f,
such that, for all ε∈(0,ε0), μ~∈[0,T], Fε,μ~∈C([0,T];Hr0(1−ξ~/T)+cε−1(Ω)).
To prove it, we use the following well-known property.
Proposition 3.7**.**
Let g∈Hs(R) for some s∈[−1,0]. Let r∈R∗ and G(t,x)=g(t+rx), (t,x)∈ΩT.
Then G∈C([0,T];Hs(Ω)).
Let us prove Lemma 3.6.
Observe that, by definition of ϕ(⋅;ε,μ~), and thanks to (3.11),
the support of Fε,μ~∣Ωμ~ is a subset of the set
[TABLE]
Firstly, let (t,x)∈Kε(t~)∪(Ωt~+ε∩DC).
Then we have t−x≤t~+ε, and so
[TABLE]
since the functions ξ and μ−1are smooth and non decreasing, and
δ<a(t~)=μ~−t~.
So, for ε sufficiently small and some c>0 (values that are independent of t,x),
we have
[TABLE]
Secondly, let (t,x)∈Ωt~+ε∩D∩{b−ε≤x≤b}.
Then t−kx≤ν(t)−kδ−ε and so, for ε sufficiently small
and some c>0,
[TABLE]
We thus have
[TABLE]
Since F1 is expressed in terms of f2′(t−x), f2(t−x) in DC, and
in terms of f3′(t−kx), f3(t−kx) in D, and since the support
of Fε,μ~ is contained in E(ε,μ~), then, thanks
to (3.12), (3.13), we see that Fε,μ~ can be expressed
in terms of f∣(−∞,r) and f′∣(−∞,r), r=ξ~−cε only.
Hence, thanks to Proposition 3.7, the conclusion follows.
∎
4 Proof of the main results
4.1 Proof of Corollary 1.4
Firstly, notice that α(t)=0⟺a˙(t)=1+kk.
-
If T≤μ0 then g=0 in (0,T), and if T>μ0 then
g=0 since g∣(μ0,T)∈Hr0(1−s∗/T)−1(μ0,T).
Hence, the knowledge of g provides T≤μ0 or T>μ0.
Let μ∈[μ0,T]. Thanks to Theorem 1.3, we can construct
[TABLE]
and so the invertible function μ↦ξ from [μ0,T] into [0,s∗].
(This implies that s∗ is recovered too).
Putting t=21(μ+ξ), we recover ts∗ which is t for μ=T, and also
the functions t↦ξ=ξ(t), t↦μ(t), t↦a(t)=21(μ(t)−ξ(t)),
for t∈[t0,ts∗].
We then construct the functions t(⋅)=(ξ(⋅))−1,
t∗(⋅)=2t(⋅)−id.
Thanks to the above point and to (i) of Theorem 1.3, the smooth function
α(⋅) can be recover as the unique one such that μ↦g(μ)−α(t)f′(ξ)
belongs to Hε+r0(1−ξ/T)(0,μ) for some ε>0 and all μ∈(0,T).
Then, k is root of the following equation:
[TABLE]
Denote by k1,k2 the roots, such that k1≤k2. We show that k1≤0.
A short computation shows that
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
If a˙≤0 then, the second equality in (4.2) implies that it is impossible
to have 0<k1≤k2.
?????????,
∎
Remark 4.1**.**
Theorem 1.3 allows us to recover t∗(⋅)=μ∘ξ−1 as:
[TABLE]
and shows that
[TABLE]
4.2 Analysis of the error
Let (u0,u1,f), r0 as in Theorem 1.3. Put u=P~(u0,u1,f),
g=Z~(u0,u1,f), uA=UA(f) and
[TABLE]
where uA is defined in Section 3.
Let us prove the estimate (1.14) (see (iv) of Theorem 1.3).
For the sake of clarity, we replace μ, t, ξ, respectively by μ~,
t~=μ−1(μ~), ξ~=ξ(t~).
Put uE,0=u0−uA(0), u_{E,1}=u_{1}-\partial_{t}u_{A}\big{|}_{t=0}.
In view of Subsection 3, the function uE satisfies
[TABLE]
So we have uE=P(uE,0,uE,1,−FA).
Recall that, thanks to Lemma LABEL:l.T0, we have T0(f)∈L2(0,μ~;H−s(Ω)),
for all s>21. Thanks to Proposition 2.7, we have
[TABLE]
Let us prove that uE,0∈Hr0(Ω), uE,1∈Hr0−1(Ω).
Observe that uA(0)(x)=(f(−x)+f2(x)+f2(−x)Φε(x))χx<a(0)+f3(−x/k)Φε(x−b+2ε))χx>a(0).
For x<a(0)=t0 we have
[TABLE]
and, similarly, ξ(μ−1(−x))≤ξ(μ−1(0))<0.
For x>a(0) we have
[TABLE]
Hence, uA(0) can be expressed in terms of f(ξ) for ξ<0.
Since f∣(−∞,0]∈Hr0(−∞,0), then uA(0)∈Hr0(Ω).
Thanks to the asumption on u0, we then have
uE,0∈Hr0(Ω). Similarly, we have uE,1∈Hr0−1(Ω).
Thanks to (3.6), the regularity of f2∣(0,μ~) is given by
those of f∣(0,ξ~), that is, f2∣(0,μ~)∈Hr0(1−ξ′/T)((0,μ~)),
for all ξ′>ξ~. Thus, thanks to Proposition 2.7, we have
[TABLE]
Thanks to Lemma 2.5 with t1 replaced by t~ and T by μ~,
and to Lemma 3.5, we have
[TABLE]
Thanks to Lemma 3.6, if ε>0 is sufficiently small, we have
[TABLE]
and so, thanks to (4.10) and by applying Proposition 2.7, we obtain
[TABLE]
for some ε>0 (independent of μ~).
Thanks to (4.8), (4.9) (4.11), and since
gE=Z(uE,0,uE,1,0)+Z(0,0,T(0)f)+Z(0,0,−F1), the proof of (1.14) is done.
∎
5 Appendix: the function G
Let I=(0,1) and a dense sequence {an}n∈N∗ in I.
We set
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where z+=max(0,z) for z∈R. The function G is increasing.
For 0<s<1 we set the following Sobolev space:
[TABLE]
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let b∈(0,1], r>−21, s∈(0,1), a∈[0,b).
Set f(x)=((x−a)+)r, Ib=(0,b).
We have f∈Hs(Ib) if, and only if, r>s−1/2. In such a case, we have
[TABLE]
for some Cs>0.
Proof. Firstly, let b=1. We have
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
If a=0, then K1=0. If a>0, then K1<∞ if, and only if, 2r>2s−1.
In such a case, we have
[TABLE]
Let 2r>2s−1. We have
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Since C(r,s)>0, then K2=+∞ if 2r≤2s−1.
Hence, the sum K1+K2 converges iff 2r>2s−1.
If 2r>2s−1, thanks to (5.2) and (5.3), we obtain (5.1).
Secondly, the case b∈(0,1) is easily proved by setting a=a′b, x=x′b, y=y′b.
∎
Lemma 5.2**.**
For 0<s<1 and b∈(0,1], we have G∈Hs(0,b) if s<1−b and G∈Hs(0,b) if s>1−b.
Proof. For x,y∈I, we have, thanks to the Schwarz inequality,
[TABLE]
Let Ib=(0,b), Ab={n∈N∗;an≥b}, Bb=N∗∖Ar={n;an<b}.
For all n∈Bb, thanks to Lemma 5.1, we have fn∈H1−b(0,1), since 1/2−an>(1−b)−1/2.
For all n∈Ab, we have fn∈H1−b(Ib), since fn∣Ib=0.
Let 0<s<1−b. By using (5.4), and (5.1), we have
[TABLE]
since (b−an)2(1−s−an)≤1 for all n∈Bb, 0<s<1−b.
Let s∈(1−b,1). For all n∈N∗ and x>y we have G(x)−G(y)≥fn(x)−fn(y).
Fix n∈A1−s∩Bb, that is, 1−s≤an<b.
Thanks to Lemma 5.1, we have fn∈Hs(Ib), and then
[TABLE]
This ends the proof.
∎
6 Proof of Theorem 2.6
Let F∈L2(ΩT), v0∈H01(Ω), v1∈L2(Ω).
Denote M1:={v∈C([0,T];H01(Ω)), ∂tv∈C([0,T];L2(Ω))},
M01={v∈M; v∣t=0=0, ∂tv∣t=0=0},
6.1 Energy estimate.
Put
[TABLE]
We claim that, for all v∈M1 such that Lγv=:f∈L2(ΩT)+W,
the following (standart) estimate, which implies (2.6), holds.
[TABLE]
for some constant C.
Proof. It is sufficient to show (6.1) for t=T. Assume that f∈L2(ΩT).
Put ρ=supQγ∣γ˙∣ and Π0∈C1([0,T];(0,+∞))
such that δ−1Π0≤−Π0′ for some δ∈(0,ρ1).
(For example, Π0=e−δt).
Put
[TABLE]
We formally have, thanks te the Schwarz inequality,
[TABLE]
Hence, we obtain
[TABLE]
and so,
[TABLE]
Then (6.2) follows.
6.2 Uniqueness
Consequently, if v∈M01 satisfies (2.5) with F=0, then E(t)(v)≡0 for all t,
and so v≡0. This shows that Problem (2.5) admits at most one solution in M1.
6.3 Existence
Let (λj,ej)1≤j be the familly of spectral values of the positive
operator −Δx in H01(Ω), i.e such that (ei,ej)L2(Ω)=δij,
−Δej=λjej, and λj↗+∞.
The data v0,v1, F are then written
v0=∑j=1∞v0,jej, v1=∑j=1∞v1,jej, F(t,⋅)=∑j=1∞Fj(t)ej,
with
[TABLE]
Let N∈N∗, and put EN=span{e1,…,eN},
Vk,N=(vk,1,…,vk,N), k=0,1, FN=∑j=1NFj(t)ej,
BN(t)=(bi,j(t))1≤i,j≤N with bi,j(t)=(∇ei,∇ej)L2(Ω;γ(t,⋅)dx),
and consider the following vectorial differential equation:
find VN(t)=(v1(t),…,vN(t)) such that
[TABLE]
with the initial condition VN(0)=V0,N, dtdVN(0)=V1,N.
Since BN(⋅) is continuous, the theorem of Cauchy-Lipschitz implies existence
and uniqueness for VN(t).
Note that BN(t) is positive since, for all U=(u1,…,uN), setting
u(x)=∑j=1Nujej(x), we have
[TABLE]
where C is a constant such that 0<C≤γ in Q.
Let vN(t)=∑j=1Nvj(t)ej(x).
Then, a standart energy estimate for EN(t)(vN)=21(V˙N2(t)+VN(t)BN(t)VN(t)),
as above, implies that there exists a positive constant C such that
[TABLE]
Passing to the limit N→+∞, we can conclude by standard arguments
that (vN)N converges to a function v∈C([0,T];H01(Ω)) satisfying (2.5).
The proof of Theorem 2.6 in done in the case F∈L2(ΩT).
The case F∈W is similar.