$W^{s,\frac{n}{s}}$-maps with positive distributional Jacobians
Siran Li, Armin Schikorra

TL;DR
This paper extends the continuity and degree estimate results for maps with positive Jacobians from classical Sobolev spaces to fractional Sobolev spaces, broadening the understanding of their regularity and topological properties.
Contribution
It proves that maps in fractional Sobolev spaces with positive distributional Jacobians are continuous, generalizing classical results to fractional settings.
Findings
Maps in $W^{s,rac{n}{s}}$ with positive Jacobian are continuous for $s \\geq \frac{n}{n+1}$.
Degree estimates for sense-preserving maps extend to fractional Sobolev spaces.
Positive Jacobian implies regularity properties in fractional Sobolev spaces.
Abstract
We extend the well-known result that any , with strictly positive Jacobian is actually continuous: it is also true for fractional Sobolev spaces for any , where the sign condition on the Jacobian is understood in a distributional sense. Along the way we also obtain extensions to fractional Sobolev spaces of the degree estimates known for -maps with positive or non-negative Jacobian, such as the sense-preserving property.
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.
-maps with positive distributional Jacobians
Siran Li
Department of Mathematics, Rice University, MS 136 P.O. Box 1892, Houston, Texas, 77251-1892, USA
Department of Mathematics, McGill University, Burnside Hall, 805 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 0B9, Canada.
and
Armin Schikorra
Department of Mathematics, University of Pittsburgh, 301 Thackeray Hall, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA
Abstract.
We extend the well-known result that any , with strictly positive Jacobian is actually continuous: it is also true for fractional Sobolev spaces for any , where the sign condition on the Jacobian is understood in a distributional sense.
Along the way we also obtain extensions to fractional Sobolev spaces of the degree estimates known for -maps with positive or non-negative Jacobian, such as the sense-preserving property.
Contents
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Fractional Sobolev spaces
- 3 Degree of maps with signed Jacobians: Proof of Propositions 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 1.10
- 4 Continuity of maps with positive Jacobian: Proof of Theorem 1.5, 1.6
- A Two functions
1. Introduction
The following well-known theorem was first proven by Goldšteĭn and Vodopyanov [8]; see also [19, 5, 9] and the recent extension to manifolds in [7]:
Theorem 1.1**.**
Let be an open set. If and
[TABLE]
then is continuous.
The strict inequality is necessary as the following counterexample shows:
Example 1.2**.**
Let denote the unit ball in . Let be discontinuous, e.g. . Set
[TABLE]
Clearly and . However, is still discontinuous.
The aim of this note is to give a reasonable extension to Theorem 1.1 to fractional Sobolev spaces , . These are the spaces of maps with finite -Gagliardo semi-norm
[TABLE]
Clearly, for a pointwise definition of the Jacobian of to make sense, should be almost everywhere differentiable; however, as a distributional operator, the Jacobian also exists for maps in fractional Sobolev spaces , where is large enough. For the sake of presentation we restrict our attention to the critical scaling, that is to the Sobolev spaces , . The space denotes, as usual, the closure of -functions in the -norm.
Lemma 1.3**.**
Let be open with smooth boundary, . For111The case is also true (with replaced by ): it is the famous theorem by Coifman-Lions-Meyer-Semmes [3]. and the Jacobian operator extends to a bounded linear operator on in the following sense. The operator
[TABLE]
is well-defined for any which is a smooth approximation of and any which is a smooth approximation of in .
We recall a proof of Lemma 1.3 in Section 2.
We will restrict our attention to the case . This threshold appears in several situations on degree-type estimates in fractional Sobolev spaces; see, e.g., [6, 16]. It is exactly the case when (up to the boundary data) a map can serve as a testfunction for its own Jacobian . Lemma 1.3 warrants the following definition for a distributional Jacobian.
Definition 1.4**.**
Assume and is a smooth, bounded domain. Let .
- •
We say in if for any , a.e., there holds
[TABLE]
- •
We say if and for any , a.e.,
[TABLE]
Our main result is the following version of Theorem 1.1 for fractional Sobolev spaces .
Theorem 1.5**.**
Let , , for some open and bounded set with smooth boundary.
If then is continuous.
By the counterexample, Example 1.2, there is no hope of getting Theorem 1.5 under merely the assumption . However, as it is used for the planar Monge-Ampère equation, a curl-free condition is a remedy – similar properties are known, e.g. for -maps, see [14, Lemma 2.1.], or , , see [13]. Namely we have
Theorem 1.6**.**
Let for some open and bounded set with smooth boundary and for some . If and if in distributional sense, i.e. if
[TABLE]
then is continuous.
Along the way of proving Theorem 1.5 and Theorem 1.6 we obtain degree estimates for maps with signed Jacobian which are of independent interest.
If then for any we have for almost every , by means of Sobolev embedding and Fubini’s theorem, Lemma 2.2. In particular, for any the degree is well-defined as the Brouwer degree of the map for almost every , cf. [4].
We first observe that with non-negative Jacobian is monotone in the following sense:
Proposition 1.7**.**
Let for open and . Let and assume that (in the trace sense) restricted to and is continuous.
If in , then for any we have
[TABLE]
We also have
Proposition 1.8**.**
Let for open and . Let and assume that is continuous on .
If , then for any we have
[TABLE]
Next, we obtain that if is continuous and the Jacobian of is positive then is sense-preserving:
Proposition 1.9**.**
Let , open, .
If in then for any ball if then .
If the Jacobian is positive, the image of a ball has an essential diameter comparable to the diameter of . This will be the main ingredient towards the proof of Theorem 1.5.
Proposition 1.10**.**
There exists some depending only on the dimension such that the following holds. Let , open, and . Assume that in . For any such that f\Big{|}_{\partial B(r)} is continuous, we can find a ball with
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
The number may be viewed as the “essential diameter” of .
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we refer to some needed results for Sobolev spaces. In Section 3 we prove the degree estimates for maps with signed Jacobians, namely Propositions 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 1.10. In Section 4 we prove Theorem 1.5 and Theorem 1.6.
Acknowledgments. This work has been done during SL’s stay as a CRM–ISM postdoctoral fellow at Centre de Recherches Mathématiques, Université de Montréal and Institut des Sciences Mathématiques. SL thanks these institutes for their hospitality. AS acknowledges funding by the Simons foundation, grant no 579261.
The authors would like to thank P. Hajłasz for helpful discussions; in particular he told us about Example 1.2.
2. Fractional Sobolev spaces
Lemma 1.3 was (essentially) proven in [17] as an extension of the ground-breaking paper [3], which showed that Jacobians of -maps can be tested with BMO-maps. The proof in [17] uses Littlewood-Paley theory and paraproducts. In [2] Brezis and Nguyen gave a simpler and more elegant proof of this result for . We present here the following slight adaptation of their argument due to [12].
We restrict our attention to the a priori estimates, from which the claim follows easily due to multi-linearity.
Proof of Lemma 1.3 (a priori estimates).
Let and . is an extension domain, [11, 20], so we may assume that . Then
[TABLE]
Extend and harmonically to , say to and respectively. We write . By Stokes’ theorem and Hölder’s inequality,
[TABLE]
If , then . Then, by trace estimates, see e.g. [12, Proposition 10.2], we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Here we also used the fact that . This is because is an extension domain; see [11, 20]. We conclude, because we have shown
[TABLE]
∎
The ensuing result on trace operators will be useful for the subsequent developments. For detailed treatments we refer to [15, §2.4.2, Theorem 1], [1, Theorem 7.43, Remark 7.45] and [18, Lemma 36.1].
Lemma 2.1** (Trace Theorem).**
Let be either bounded or the complement of a bounded set, with smooth boundary. If , with , then the trace operator on T=\Big{|}_{\partial\Omega} is a bounded, linear, surjective operator from to . The harmonic extension is a bounded linear right-inverse of .
The following is well-known for Sobolev functions in (it is essentially Fubini’s theorem):
Lemma 2.2** (Restriction theorem).**
For a smooth, bounded domain let . Fix . There exists a representative of such that for -almost every we have .
Moreover, for we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
As is an extension domain, see [11, 20], we may assume that and with outside a compact set. Denote by the harmonic extension of , and w.l.o.g. set . Then (see [12, Proposition 10.2])
[TABLE]
By Fubini’s theorem, for -almost every ,
[TABLE]
This implies that for almost every .
The last claim also follows from Fubini’s theorem in :
[TABLE]
∎
Lemma 2.3**.**
Let be a bounded domain with smooth boundary. For , such that :
- (1)
If and with on in the trace sense. Then
[TABLE]
belongs to the Sobolev space and
[TABLE] 2. (2)
In particular, if satisfies on in the trace sense, then and that
[TABLE]
belongs to .
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let be a ball in . Let for some and f\Big{|}_{\partial B(R)}\in C^{0}(\partial B(R)). Then there exists an approximation converging to in and uniformly on .
Proof.
W.l.o.g. .
By the trace theorem, Lemma 2.1, . Let be the harmonic extension of to . Then , again by Lemma 2.1. Also, since is continuous on , is also continuous. Set
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.3, and is locally uniformly continuous on . This last fact implies that
[TABLE]
converges uniformly to on as , and also in .
Now let us consider the standard mollification . For small enough in comparison with , converges uniformly on to and in . This completes the proof. ∎
3. Degree of maps with signed Jacobians: Proof of Propositions 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 1.10
Here and hereafter, without further specifications, a null set is understood with respect to the Lebesgue measure .
For continuous for some given ball and some point , the degree of around this point is simply the number of times that winds around , i.e.,
[TABLE]
We can approximate by smooth functions which are uniformly close to . Moreover, the Brouwer degree of is the same as that of for small enough, since maps that are uniformly close to each other have the same Brouwer degree.
For the smooth functions we can compute the Brouwer degree from an integral formula: denote by the standard volume form on :
[TABLE]
Then, for all small enough,
[TABLE]
If we extend from a map to a map , then from Stokes’ theorem we may obtain:
[TABLE]
In the last equation we used the fact that . Most of our arguments below are based on choosing a suitable extension of .
3.1. Monotonicity for non-negative Jacobian: Proof of Proposition 1.7, Proposition 1.8
We only give the proof of Proposition 1.7, the proof of Proposition 1.8 is almost verbatim (it is the “” case).
Proof of Proposition 1.7.
Recall that and that . We set
[TABLE]
For this let us take as in Lemma A.1.
Let be the approximation in Lemma 2.4 and set (for )
[TABLE]
Then, by Stokes’ theorem, we have
[TABLE]
Below we assume for simplicity of notation. Observe that
[TABLE]
so we have , where
[TABLE]
From the properties of (see Lemma A.1), in particular, since whenever is small and whenever is large, we have
- (1)
. 2. (2)
. 3. (3)
for all .
Indeed, if , then and hence . Assume now . Since is symmetric, it suffices to show that the eigenvalues are nonnegative. Observe that and any orthonormal basis of are the eigenvectors of .
In the former case, we compute
[TABLE]
That is, the eigenvalue for the eigenvector is non-negative.
In the latter case, given any with , one has
[TABLE]
So the eigenvalue for any eigenvector perpendicular to is .
Therefore, all the eigenvalues of are non-negative, thus . 4. (4)
whenever .
Indeed, this is because
[TABLE]
where, for , we have
[TABLE]
This shows that is non-invertible, so .
Now, since is Lipschitz (and globally bounded), lies uniformly in and converges strongly in to .
On the other hand, for any fixed small enough there exists a neighborhood of where – this holds since on for all small enough, due to uniform convergence.
That is, for any small there exists a neighborhood around where .
This implies that and all lie in . By virtue of Lemma 2.3, we can extend these functions by zero to all of , and they belong consequently to .
That is, we have shown that
[TABLE]
The right-hand side is nonnegative by assumption, and Proposition 1.7 is proven. ∎
3.2. Positive Jacobian implies sense-preserving: Proof of Proposition 1.9
Proof of Proposition 1.9.
The proof is very similar to that of Proposition 1.7. With the notation used therein, we have
[TABLE]
where again
[TABLE]
for taken from Lemma A.1 with .
As before, we have . The assumption implies . It remains to show that if then , for the claim that in shall follow immediately.
So, assume that and . From Definition 1.4 we see that readily implies . That is, one of the eigenvalues of is zero. As computed in the proof of Proposition 1.7, the eigenvalues of are
[TABLE]
Since for all , implies that necessarily
[TABLE]
By the properties of (see Lemma A.1), we deduce that . Thus as claimed. ∎
3.3. Comparability of diameters: Proof of Proposition 1.10
The proof below is an adaptation from the argument in [19, 7]. Modifications are necessary due to the fact that we do not have a pointwise Jacobian.
Proof.
Since is continuous on , we can find a large ball of radius such that .
Take from Lemma A.2 for .
Let be the smooth approximation of from Lemma 2.4. For all small enough we have .
In particular if we set
[TABLE]
then on . Consequently (by an integration by parts argument it is easy to see that the integral of the Jacobian of a map on a ball only depends on the boundary value of that map, [10, Lemma 4.7.2]),
[TABLE]
Computing similar as in the proof of Proposition 1.7, setting
[TABLE]
we obtain
[TABLE]
As in the proof of Proposition 1.7, the map belongs to and converges strongly in that space to .
Moreover, as in the proof of Proposition 1.7, we can compute
[TABLE]
and by the properties of , see Lemma A.2,
[TABLE]
Moreover, since for , we have
[TABLE]
That is,
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.1 and Lemma 2.3 we can thus again extend and by zero to a -function. Thus, we conclude that
[TABLE]
Since by assumption and a.e., we may infer (see Definition 1.4) that
[TABLE]
That is,
[TABLE]
But by the properties of , see Lemma A.2, this implies
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
∎
4. Continuity of maps with positive Jacobian: Proof of Theorem 1.5, 1.6
The proof of Theorem 1.5 crucially relies on the diameter estimates of Proposition 1.10. Once we have this, we adapt the argument in [19] to fractional Sobolev spaces in a more or less straightforward fashion, namely Theorem 1.5 is a corollary of the following statement.
Proposition 4.1**.**
Let . Assume that , satisfies the following: for any and -almost all radii , there holds
[TABLE]
Then is continuous. Moreover, for any ball , , and , we have
[TABLE]
Observe that an easy extension of Proposition 4.1 holds for -maps whenever .
Proof of Theorem 1.5.
Fix and let . W.l.o.g. . Let such that is continuous on and . By Lemma 2.2 we know this happens for -a.e. and .
By Proposition 1.10, for almost any we have the monotonicity
[TABLE]
Indeed, by Lemma 2.2, for almost any the map is continuous on and . Thus
[TABLE]
where is understood as
[TABLE]
The trace f\Big{|}_{\partial B(r)} is -a.e. attained by sequences of f\Big{|}_{\partial B(\tilde{r})} as . If is as in the definition of above then for -almost every we have . So, we find a sequence with and f\Big{|}_{\partial B(r_{i})} converging -a.e. to f\Big{|}_{\partial B(r)}. Thus, whenever ,
[TABLE]
This establishes (4.1).
Now, we may deduce from (4.1) that, for almost any ,
[TABLE]
From here one concludes the continuity property with Proposition 4.1. ∎
Proof of Proposition 4.1.
By Sobolev embedding for ,
[TABLE]
Thus we find
[TABLE]
In view of Lemma 2.2 we obtain
[TABLE]
This readily implies the claim. ∎
Theorem 1.6 also follows from Proposition 4.1, and additionally the following distortion argument.
Lemma 4.2**.**
Let , open, . Assume that and in distributional sense.
For set . Then .
Proof.
Let be an approximation of in . We have
[TABLE]
That is, for any ,
[TABLE]
Integrating by parts and the pointwise a.e. convergence of to implies
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
In particular if and we have , i.e. . ∎
Proof of Theorem 1.6.
By Lemma 4.2 and Theorem 1.5 we have is continuous, and indeed we have a estimate on the modulus of continuity of by Proposition 4.1. This estimate is uniform in , and by Arzela-Ascoli we conclude that still enjoys the same continuity estimate. ∎
Appendix A Two functions
Lemma A.1**.**
For any there exists such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Observe that if satisfies the above assumptions for , then satisfies the assumptions for generic . So, w.l.o.g. .
Set
[TABLE]
Observe that , and that . Also,
[TABLE]
In particular, and . That is, . The only thing left to check is that
[TABLE]
is non-negative. But this is immediate. ∎
Lemma A.2**.**
For any and any there exists with the following properties:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Setting we can reduce to the case , which we shall now consider.
Set . Then the differential inequalities become
[TABLE]
Clearly we can find a -function that satisfies these conditions, e.g.
[TABLE]
where is any smooth non-decreasing function such that , , and .
Then is bounded, has derivatives bounded, and satisfies all the other assumptions as well. ∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] R. A. Adams and J. J. F. Fournier. Sobolev spaces , volume 140 of Pure and Applied Mathematics (Amsterdam) . Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, second edition, 2003.
- 2[2] H. Brezis and H. Nguyen. The Jacobian determinant revisited. Invent. Math. , 185(1):17–54, 2011.
- 3[3] R. Coifman, P.-L. Lions, Y. Meyer, and S. Semmes. Compensated compactness and Hardy spaces. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) , 72(3):247–286, 1993.
- 4[4] I. Fonseca and W. Gangbo. Degree theory in analysis and applications , volume 2 of Oxford Lecture Series in Mathematics and its Applications . The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 1995. Oxford Science Publications.
- 5[5] I. Fonseca and W. Gangbo. Local invertibility of Sobolev functions. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 26(2):280–304, 1995.
- 6[6] P. Gladbach and H. Olbermann. Coarea formulae and chain rules for the Jacobian determinant in fractional Sobolev spaces. ar Xiv:1903.07420 , 2019.
- 7[7] P. Goldstein, P. Hajłasz, and M. R. Pakzad. Finite distortion Sobolev mappings between manifolds are continuous. ar Xiv e-prints , page ar Xiv:1705.05773, May 2017.
- 8[8] V. M. Goldšteĭn and S. K. Vodopyanov. A test of the removability of sets for L p 1 subscript superscript 𝐿 1 𝑝 L^{1}_{p} spaces of quasiconformal and quasi-isomorphic mappings. Sibirsk. Mat. Ž. , 18(1):48–68, 237, 1977.
