$C^2$ estimate for oblique derivative problem with mean Dini coefficients
Hongjie Dong, Zongyuan Li

TL;DR
This paper proves that strong solutions to certain elliptic equations with oblique boundary conditions are twice differentiable up to the boundary under Dini continuity conditions on coefficients and boundary, extending previous results.
Contribution
It establishes new regularity results for elliptic equations with oblique derivatives under mean Dini conditions, including an extension to fully nonlinear cases.
Findings
Solutions are twice continuously differentiable up to the boundary.
Dini continuity of coefficients and boundary derivatives is sufficient for regularity.
Extension to fully nonlinear elliptic equations is achieved.
Abstract
We consider second-order elliptic equations in non-divergence form with oblique derivative boundary conditions. We show that any strong solutions to such problems are twice continuously differentiable up to the boundary provided that the mean oscillations of coefficients satisfy the Dini condition and the boundary is locally represented by a function whose first derivatives are Dini continuous. This improves a recent result in [6]. An extension to fully nonlinear elliptic equations is also presented.
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 · Numerical methods in inverse problems
estimate for oblique derivative problem
with mean Dini coefficients
Hongjie Dong
Brown University
Division of Applied Mathematics
Providence RI 02906
and
Zongyuan Li
Brown University
Division of Applied Mathematics
Providence RI 02906
Abstract.
We consider second-order elliptic equations in non-divergence form with oblique derivative boundary conditions. We show that any strong solutions to such problems are twice continuously differentiable up to the boundary provided that the mean oscillations of coefficients satisfy the Dini condition and the boundary is locally represented by a function whose first derivatives are Dini continuous. This improves a recent result in [6]. An extension to fully nonlinear elliptic equations is also presented.
Key words and phrases:
Oblique derivative problem, classical solutions, -mean Dini condition, domain
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 35J25, 35B65; Secondary 35J15
H. Dong and Z. Li were partially supported by the NSF under agreement DMS-1600593.
1. Introduction and Main Results
In this paper, we consider strong solutions to the oblique derivative problem in a bounded domain :
[TABLE]
For simplicity, the notation
[TABLE]
are used for matrices and vectors. We also denote to be the set of real-valued constant symmetric matrices. The following conditions regarding the elliptic operator and boundary condition will be assumed throughout this paper. All the coefficients in the elliptic operators are assumed to be bounded and measurable, and the leading coefficients are assumed to be symmetric and uniformly elliptic with elliptic constant :
[TABLE]
where is a constant. We also assume that the boundary operator is oblique, i.e., for some ,
[TABLE]
where is the unit outward normal direction.
We are interested in better regularity of -strong solutions to (1.1). As proved in [7], if has locally small bounded mean oscillations (small-BMO), , and can be locally represented by a Lipschitz function with sufficiently small Lipschitz constant, then for any , and imply that the strong solution . In this paper, we give minimal regularity assumptions on these objects such that any -strong solution is . Due to an example given in [8, Theorem 4], might not be bounded or even BMO if we merely assume the continuity of . Hence certain conditions on its modulus of continuity are needed.
For divergence form equations it is well known that any weak solution is if satisfies the so-called -increasing Dini condition, i.e., the modulus of continuity of is bounded by a Dini function (see definition below) satisfying that is non-increasing for some . This is the borderline case of the classical Campanato-type results, see [13, Section 5]. In this direction, later Li in [11] obtained the interior -regularity, if
[TABLE]
is a Dini function. Recently, in [4] the first named author and Kim generalized this result by assuming that
[TABLE]
is a Dini function, noting . In the same paper, under the same type of regularity assumptions, interior estimate was also proved for equations in non-divergence form. The corresponding boundary estimate for Dirichlet problem in domain can be found in [3].
Back to the oblique derivative problem, besides the same assumptions on as the interior case, certain regularity assumptions on and the boundary operator are also needed in order to obtain a global result. Direct computation shows that similar to Dirichlet problem, if , we can reduce the problem to the half space case by simply flattening the boundary. However, in the same spirit of [14, 19] and [7], we expect to be one derivative less regular, i.e., we expect the result still holds when . In this regard, a global estimate was proved in [6] given that , which means, e.g., the Dini integrals of their modulus of continuity (see definition below) are still Dini functions. The proof was based on an extension idea introduced in [19], which was also used in [7]. In this paper, using the estimate in [7], the regularized distance, and a delicate decomposition of solutions, we relax the regularity assumption to , which seems to be optimal for the global estimate. To the best of our knowledge, such result is new even when the coefficients are smooth.
Now we formulate our problem precisely. A function is called a Dini function if
[TABLE]
We write its Dini integral as
[TABLE]
Both of the following notation are used for the average
[TABLE]
We also denote
[TABLE]
where the center will be omitted when it is the origin.
Definition 1.1**.**
For a function defined on , we consider two types of its oscillations:
[TABLE]
We say that is of -mean Dini oscillation (uniform Dini) if (, respectively) is a Dini function.
Clearly, any uniform Dini function is -mean Dini. On the other hand, according to a result by Spanne in [21], on a domain with exterior measure condition, any -mean Dini function is uniformly continuous with modulus of continuity given by . Simple calculation shows that if both and are -mean Dini functions defined on a bounded domain , then is -mean Dini.
A function is said to be if it is continuous with being uniform Dini. Below we give the formal definition of domains.
Definition 1.2**.**
A bounded domain is said to have boundary if there exists some function , such that
[TABLE]
Now we state our main result of this paper.
Theorem 1.3**.**
Consider the problem (1.1) in a domain . Assume that , and are of -mean Dini oscillation. Let be a strong solution to (1.1) with and being of -mean Dini oscillation. Then .
Remark 1.4*.*
Using the -wellposedness in [7] and bootstrap, this result still holds if we replace with for some .
Noting the solvability in [7], we immediately obtain the following.
Corollary 1.5**.**
Besides the assumptions of Theorem 1.3, if we further assume
[TABLE]
then there exists a unique solution to (1.1).
Our approach is also applicable to concave fully nonlinear elliptic equations
[TABLE]
under the “-mean Dini” assumptions given below in (4).
Assumption 1.6**.**
The function defined on satisfies
is concave. 2.
There exists a constant such that
[TABLE]
for any , , , , and . 3.
for any and , where represents the Lipschitz semi-norm. 4.
There exist and a Dini function , such that for any , we can find some function satisfying (1)-(3), such that
[TABLE]
It is worth noting that this class includes the Bellman equations
[TABLE]
where all the coefficients as well as are uniformly bounded satisfying the -mean Dini conditions of the following type:
[TABLE]
We also impose the sign conditions
[TABLE]
where is a constant. Now we present the regularity result for fully nonlinear equations.
Theorem 1.7**.**
In a bounded domain , consider the problem with the oblique derivative boundary condition on . Under the conditions , Assumption 1.6, and (1.4), for any boundary data , there exists a unique solution.
Bellman equations (1.3) with oblique derivative boundary condition arise naturally in the study of optimal stochastic control in domain with reflecting boundary conditions. In [17], Lions and Trudinger first studied the solvability of Bellman equations, assuming that all the coefficients, , and the boundary operators are sufficiently smooth. Later in [19], Safonov proved the unique solvability of (1.3) under the relaxed conditions
[TABLE]
See also [20]. Recently, there are also study of similar problems using the viscosity solution approach. For its framework and the solvability, we refer the reader to [9]. In this direction, Milakis and Silvestre in [18] studied the fully nonlinear, uniformly elliptic equation with Neumann boundary condition on half balls. They showed the regularity of viscosity solutions, and the regularity when is convex. Later in [12], Li and Zhang proved a similar result for with oblique derivative boundary condition in domain . In particular, when and is convex, they showed that any viscosity solution is in . The key step there is to prove a boundary Harnack inequality based on an Aleksandrov-Bakel’man-Pucci type estimate, and then design approximating problems. In our paper, due to the usage of the Campanato-type iteration, we are able to deal with the Dini case. Moreover, our operator are more general depending on lower-order terms and the variable .
2. Preliminary
2.1. Regularized distance and coordinate system
In Definition 1.2, a representation function is given for the domain . Here for studying problems with rough boundaries, we mollify properly to obtain a more suitable representation. This is the regularized distance. As in [6, Lemma 5.1], we can find some function , satisfying
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and for any multi-index with ,
[TABLE]
Here , and are positive constants depending on .
Next, we introduce the coordinate system adapted to our oblique derivative problem. For any , we choose an orthonormal coordinate system centered at such that the -axis is in the direction. Now, noting that is a inward normal on the boundary, due to the obliqueness (1.2), continuity of , and compactness, we can choose some independent of , such that
[TABLE]
Direct computation shows that there exists some constant , such that for any
[TABLE]
2.2. Estimates on the half space
We will use the notation
[TABLE]
throughout this paper. The first result is a weak type- estimate given in [6, Lemma 2.13].
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let be a constant symmetric matrix with elliptic constant . Assuming that , satisfy
[TABLE]
then for any , we have
[TABLE]
where is a constant.
As a corollary, we have the following strong type- estimate.
Corollary 2.2**.**
Under the assumptions of Lemma 2.1, for any we have
[TABLE]
where is a constant.
Proof.
By using (2.5), for any ,
[TABLE]
Minimizing in , we obtain the desired estimate. ∎
We also need the following estimate.
Lemma 2.3**.**
Let . Assume that is a strong solution to
[TABLE]
where is a constant matrix as before and is a constant. Then we have satisfying
[TABLE]
where can be any constant symmetric matrix and .
Proof.
First, note that for , formally is a solution to
[TABLE]
By using the argument of finite-difference quotients, as a corollary of the Schauder estimate for elliptic equations with the Neumann boundary condition, we have the Lipschitz estimate
[TABLE]
for any . From this, we first differentiate the equation in the direction to obtain the corresponding estimate for . Then we differentiate in the direction for . Combining these, we have
[TABLE]
From this we can obtain (2.6) using interpolation and an iteration argument which can be found, for instance, in [2, Lemma 2.10]. ∎
2.3. -mean oscillation and more on Dini functions
In this paper, the following -mean oscillation of will be intensively studied. For any and ,
[TABLE]
We note a few properties of such -mean oscillation:
- (a)
If , for each we can find at least one minimizer. In this paper, we write for such a minimizer. 2. (b)
If is continuous at , then as . Indeed,
[TABLE]
Here in the last inequality, we used the fact that is a minimizer.
Later in the proof we will see, many steps in the classical Campanato’s iteration for -mean oscillation still work if we replace with .
The following property of Dini functions is useful in our iteration argument. This iteration was introduced in [1], and was also used in [4, 3, 6] for studying equations with -mean Dini coefficients. A nonnegative function is called comparable if there exists some constant , such that
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.4**.**
Assume that is a Dini function satisfying the almost increasing condition
[TABLE]
for some constant . Then
[TABLE]
is also a Dini function satisfying (2.8). Furthermore, up to a constant depending only on , we have
[TABLE]
In particular, as .
The proof is by direct computation which can be found in [1, Lemma 1] and [4, Lemma 2.7].
Clearly, given in Definition 1.1 is a non-decreasing function. One can simply check that satisfies (2.9) provided that the doubling property is satisfied, i.e., for any and , for some constant .
3. -Mean Oscillation Estimate
In this section, we focus on the equation without lower-order terms
[TABLE]
For any and , recall the -mean oscillation of in (2.7). For simplicity, we also denote
[TABLE]
Due to our assumptions, they are both Dini functions. The next proposition plays a key role in proving Theorem 1.3.
Proposition 3.1**.**
Assume that solves (3.1) in a bounded domain . If and are -mean Dini, and , then for any , and , we have
[TABLE]
where .
The rest of this section will be devoted to its proof.
3.1. Homogeneous case
We first consider the equation with constant coefficients and homogeneous boundary condition. Let be a constant symmetric matrix with elliptic constant . For , we choose the coordinate system centered at as before. Recall that in , we have
[TABLE]
i.e., the -direction is oblique. For , denote .
Lemma 3.2**.**
Assume that and satisfy
[TABLE]
Then for each , we can find some constant matrix such that
[TABLE]
holds for any , where is a constant.
Proof.
Clearly we only need to prove (3.4) for small . Here we consider where with given as in (2.1).
In , we flatten the boundary by taking the change of variables
[TABLE]
In the -variables, (3.3) becomes
[TABLE]
In the sequel, we denote
[TABLE]
Due to (2.1) and our choice of , is uniform Dini with
[TABLE]
Since in , for any two points we have
[TABLE]
and similarly
[TABLE]
From these and , we know
[TABLE]
In , we decompose , where is a strong solution to
[TABLE]
Recall that the notation stands for the average. Due to (2.2), on , and Hardy’s inequality, we have
[TABLE]
with
[TABLE]
Such solution exists. Indeed, we first reduce (3.8) to a Dirichlet problem in by taking the even extension in for and the source term, and the following extension for the leading coefficients
[TABLE]
Note that the extended problem has measurable coefficients only depending on , which are also continuous (actually equal to constants) near . Then the solvability follows from [5, Theorem 2.8]. See also the example on [5, pp. 6483].
Using Corollary 2.2, (3.9), and Hölder’s inequality, we obtain
[TABLE]
where in the last inequality, we used (3.6). Here the implicit constant depends on , , , and .
Now satisfies
[TABLE]
Noting (3.7), a rescaled version of Lemma 2.3 leads to
[TABLE]
with to be chosen later.
Combining this and (3.10), we obtain
[TABLE]
with the constant depending on . Now we translate back to the -coordinates. Combining
[TABLE]
together with (3.7), Hardy’s inequality, and Hölder’s inequality, we can continue the computation from (3.11):
[TABLE]
Here besides , the constant also depends on . This is almost (3.4), except that we also need to deal with coming from the change of variables. By (2.1) and the (generalized) triangular inequality,
[TABLE]
if we take
[TABLE]
If we also take (2.3) into consideration, similar computation leads to
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Now combining (3.12)-(3.13), we immediately obtain (3.4). ∎
3.2. Mean oscillation estimate for
Proof of Proposition 3.1.
First, for satisfying , in which case only the interior estimates are concerned, the decay of -mean oscillation can be found in [4, pp. 427]. Actually we have
[TABLE]
By a standard argument, it suffices to consider the case when . Choose the coordinate system centered at as in Section 2.1. We now reduce the original problem to the homogeneous case (3.3). For this, we introduce two auxiliary functions. Let be the strong solution to
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
In the above, is taken to be a usual cut-off function satisfying on and . Due to our previous choice of , we know the boundary condition is uniform oblique because
[TABLE]
According to [7, Theorem 2.4], such exists and it satisfies
[TABLE]
From this, we obtain
[TABLE]
where is a constant depending on .
Next, we consider the parabola
[TABLE]
which satisfies
[TABLE]
From our construction, satisfies
[TABLE]
Clearly . By the triangular inequality and Hölder’s inequality,
[TABLE]
Now we apply Lemma 3.2 with , , and replaced by , , and to obtain that there exists some such that for any ,
[TABLE]
Noting , we can further estimate the mean oscillation of by
[TABLE]
by applying the (generalized) triangular inequality and Hölder’s inequality. Here, we also used the fact that is a constant matrix and the inequality
[TABLE]
Now substituting the and terms in (3.18) by the corresponding estimates (3.2) and (3.17), taking infimum in , we obtain (3.1). The proposition is proved. ∎
4. Proof of Theorem 1.3
With all these preparations, we are ready to give the proof of our main results. To begin with, we make some reductions. Rewrite (1.1) as
[TABLE]
From [21], implies that is uniformly continuous, hence, is bounded. Also, by the Sobolev embedding, we have
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Using the uniqueness of solutions in [7], we have . Repeating if needed, in finite steps we obtain that
[TABLE]
Since the coefficients and have -mean Dini oscillations, and , we can deduce that and are of -mean Dini, and . Now, by moving all the lower-order terms to the right-hand side we only need to consider the equation (3.1). Also, due to the approximation given at the end of this section, we only need to prove an a priori estimate. In other words, we will estimate the modulus of continuity of assuming that . Under all these reductions, Proposition 3.1 applies.
First we will derive the decay of -mean oscillation from (3.1). From now on, we fix some and then choose small enough such that in (3.1) to get, for any ,
[TABLE]
Applying this times, we have
[TABLE]
where and are Dini functions derived from and as in (2.10).
Second, we estimate . For any point , we take as a minimizer in , which exists as explained in Section 2.3. By the triangular inequality,
[TABLE]
holds for any integer . Taking the average for , we obtain
[TABLE]
Now taking summation in , and using the property
[TABLE]
as noted in Section 2.3, we have
[TABLE]
where . The last inequality follows from (4) and Lemma 2.4, noting that both and satisfy (2.9). Using the interpolation inequality, we can further deduce that
[TABLE]
By the definition of , Hölder’s inequality, and (2.4), we get
[TABLE]
Similarly,
[TABLE]
where the first inequality follows by taking the average for on both sides of
[TABLE]
Using the triangular inequality, (4.3), and (4.4), we can derive from (4) that
[TABLE]
Because is bounded and , we can find some point such that
[TABLE]
Since is a Dini function, we can choose small enough (denoted by ) such that
[TABLE]
to absorb term. Finally we reach
[TABLE]
Next for any , , we estimate . Let . Due to (4.5), we only need to focus on the case . As before, we take the minimizers and for and . By the triangular inequality
[TABLE]
Taking the average for , noting that , we have
[TABLE]
Now we apply (4), (4.5), and the generalized triangular inequality to obtain
[TABLE]
Let be the integer such that
[TABLE]
From (4), interpolation inequalities, (4.5), and (2.4), we obtain
[TABLE]
where . Similarly, we can obtain the decay rate of . Substituting these into (4) and using Lemma 2.4 to bound by , we obtain that for any ,
[TABLE]
Clearly, the right-hand-side goes to zero as goes to zero, which gives us the desired estimate for the modulus of continuity of .
Now it remains to remove the assumption . For this we consider the mollified problem:
[TABLE]
where for some fixed ,
[TABLE]
with corresponding moduli of continuity (either in the or sense), which are uniform with respect to . Note that as mentioned before, by the well-posedness, bootstrap, and the Sobolev embedding, we can derive that any -strong solution is also . According to [19], we can find a unique solution for each . Now, using (4.5), (4.7), the Arzela-Ascoli theorem, and a diagonal argument, we can obtain a subsequence which converges in for every . Clearly the limit and satisfies the equation. To see that satisfies the boundary condition, we extend
[TABLE]
to be zero outside , so that . Since the norm of is uniformly bounded, by passing to a further subsequence and noting that is weakly closed in , we obtain . Due to the uniqueness of strong solutions in small Lipschitz domains proved in [7], . Hence any -strong solution must also be . This finishes the proof of Theorem 1.3.
5. Nonlinear Equations
Our method can also be applied to derive the regularity for fully nonlinear equations. In this section, we prove Theorem 1.7. As preparation, we first introduce two lemmas, which can be viewed as the nonlinear version of Lemma 2.3 and Corollary 2.2, as well as an interpolation inequality. The first lemma deals with the function , satisfying
[TABLE]
Lemma 5.1**.**
For any continuous function and constant , there exists a unique solution in to
[TABLE]
Furthermore, there exists some constant , such that , and
[TABLE]
holds for any and any constant matrix .
Proof.
The unique solvability of (5.1) and the following boundary estimate of the Evans-Krylov type for Neumann problem are classical:
[TABLE]
See, for example, [20, Theorem 8.1]. Now we prove
[TABLE]
For this, consider
[TABLE]
where is the first submatrix of , , and is the affine function chosen suitably to make . Then , and satisfies
[TABLE]
From a rescaled version of (5.3) for , the Sobolev-Poincaré inequality, and the boundary Poincaré inequality, we obtain
[TABLE]
We can remove the term from the right-hand side. Indeed, by applying the boundary estimate of the Dirichlet problem
[TABLE]
we have
[TABLE]
where in the last inequality, again we use the boundary Poincaré inequality. Substituting this into (5.5), we obtain (5.4):
[TABLE]
From (5.4), we obtain (5.2) using standard scaling and iteration argument as mentioned in the proof of Lemma 2.3. Notice that the corresponding interior version of (5.4) can be obtained by a similar technique by applying the interior Evans-Krylov estimate and the Sobolev-Poincaré inequality to the function
[TABLE]
where is the affine function such that . The lemma is proved. ∎
The second lemma is a boundary -estimate in the spirit of [16]. See, for example, [7, pp. 19].
Lemma 5.2**.**
Suppose that and satisfy
[TABLE]
where is symmetric, bounded measurable, and uniformly elliptic with constant . Then there exists some , such that
[TABLE]
Recall the notation . Proceeding as in [10, Lemma 3.1.4, Theorem 3.2.1], we have the following interpolation inequality.
Lemma 5.3**.**
Let be a domain in satisfying the interior cone condition with opening and height . Then for any and ,
[TABLE]
Now we turn to the proof of Theorem 1.7. This is similar to that of Theorem 1.3, which we will sketch here.
Proof of Theorem 1.7.
The proof is spitted into several steps. We first derive the a priori estimates for corresponding to (4.7), assuming . Then we use the interpolation and the Aleksandrov-Bakel’man-Pucci (ABP) maximum principle in [15, Theorem 6.1] to obtain the estimate for and remove all the terms on the right-hand side of the estimates. Lastly, we construct a -approximating sequence. Using the uniform estimates, we can show that the limit exists, solves the problem, and is in .
Step 1: The a priori estimate. The key step is to derive the -mean oscillation estimate corresponding to (3.1): for any , and ,
[TABLE]
Here is defined in (2.7) with replaced by which is given in Lemma 5.2, and is introduced in Lemma 5.1. The Dini functions and are defined as follows
[TABLE]
Clearly, it suffices to prove (5.7) for two cases: or . We only focus on the first one, since the same argument below dealing with the Neumann problem in half balls will still work for the interior case. As before, we take the coordinates centered at .
For , as before, we find solving (3.14), as well as the parabola defined in (3.16). Note that according to [7], such solution exists, and the following -version of (3.2)
[TABLE]
holds. Observe that the right-hand side is a Dini function. Now satisfies
[TABLE]
where is the function chosen in Assumption 1.6 and
[TABLE]
As in the linear case, we first prove the mean oscillation estimate for ,
[TABLE]
which can be compared to (3.4). To prove this, we flatten the boundary for the problem (5.9) using the change of variables (3.5). For , the equation becomes
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
We decompose , where solves
[TABLE]
Such exists and satisfies the boundary estimate according to Lemma 5.1. Recalling (3.7), we can further deduce from a rescaled version of (5.2) that for any ,
[TABLE]
Taking the difference between (5.11) and the first line of (5.12), noting that , we see that satisfies (5.6) with , , and replaced by , , and . By Lemma 5.2,
[TABLE]
Using , Assumption 1.6, Hardy’s inequality, and (5.8), we can estimate as follows
[TABLE]
Combining (5.13) and (5.14), and following the proof of Lemma 3.2, we obtain (5.10). Then, the same steps as in the proof of Proposition 3.1 leads to (5.7). The iteration argument in the proof of Theorem 1.3 gives, for any ,
[TABLE]
where as before, .
Step 2: Interpolation and maximum principle. In this step, we aim to bound and remove all the terms from the right-hand side of (5.15). Noting (2.3), we can choose the parameters
[TABLE]
for the interior cone at each point. Using Lemma 5.3 and (5.15), we obtain, for ,
[TABLE]
Now, choose sufficiently small to absorb the first term on the right-hand side. Then, noting the sign condition (1.4), we can use the ABP estimate in [15, Theorem 6.1] to bound . This leads to
[TABLE]
Substituting back into (5.15) and using the ABP estimate again, we conclude
[TABLE]
Step 3: Approximation. We fix some constant , and take the mollification
[TABLE]
with corresponding moduli of continuity (in the sense of or Assumption 1.6), which are uniform with respect to . According to [20, Theorem 3.3], for each , there exists a unique solution to
[TABLE]
Notice that (5.16) and (5.17) give us the pre-compactness of the family . Similar compactness argument as in the linear case gives us the unique solution to the original problem. ∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Hongjie Dong. Gradient estimates for parabolic and elliptic systems from linear laminates. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 205(1):119–149, 2012.
- 2[2] Hongjie Dong. L p subscript 𝐿 𝑝 L_{p} estimates for parabolic equations. In Lectures on the analysis of nonlinear partial differential equations. Part 4 , volume 4 of Morningside Lect. Math. , pages 55–91. Int. Press, Somerville, MA, 2016.
- 3[3] Hongjie Dong, Luis Escauriaza, and Seick Kim. On C 1 superscript 𝐶 1 C^{1} , C 2 superscript 𝐶 2 C^{2} , and weak type- ( 1 , 1 ) 1 1 (1,1) estimates for linear elliptic operators: part II. Math. Ann. , 370(1-2):447–489, 2018.
- 4[4] Hongjie Dong and Seick Kim. On C 1 superscript 𝐶 1 C^{1} , C 2 superscript 𝐶 2 C^{2} , and weak type- ( 1 , 1 ) 1 1 (1,1) estimates for linear elliptic operators. Comm. Partial Differential Equations , 42(3):417–435, 2017.
- 5[5] Hongjie Dong and N. V. Krylov. Second-order elliptic and parabolic equations with B ( ℝ 2 , VMO ) 𝐵 superscript ℝ 2 VMO B({\mathbb{R}}^{2},\rm{VMO}) coefficients.S Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 362(12):6477–6494, 2010.
- 6[6] Hongjie Dong, Jihoon Lee, and Seick Kim. On conormal and oblique derivative problem for elliptic equations with dini mean oscillation coefficients. to appear in Indiana Univ. Math. J. , ar Xiv:1801.09836 .
- 7[7] Hongjie Dong and Zongyuan Li. On the W p 2 subscript superscript 𝑊 2 𝑝 W^{2}_{p} estimate for oblique derivative problem in Lipschitz domains, 2018. ar Xiv:1808.02124 .
- 8[8] Luis Escauriaza and Santiago Montaner. Some remarks on the L p superscript 𝐿 𝑝 L^{p} regularity of second derivatives of solutions to non-divergence elliptic equations and the Dini condition. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl. , 28(1):49–63, 2017.
