On the $L^p$-theory of vector-valued elliptic operators
K. Khalil, A. Maichine

TL;DR
This paper develops an $L^p$-theory for vector-valued elliptic operators, proving their generation of analytic semigroups under certain conditions, and explores regularity, domain, and positivity properties.
Contribution
It introduces new $L^p$-theoretic results for vector-valued elliptic operators with coupling, including semigroup generation and regularity analysis.
Findings
Operators generate analytic semigroups in $L^p$ spaces.
Established local elliptic regularity results.
Characterized positivity of the semigroup.
Abstract
In this paper, we study vector--valued elliptic operators of the form acting on vector-valued functions and involving coupling at zero and first order terms. We prove that admits realizations in , for , that generate analytic strongly continuous semigroups provided that is a matrix potential with locally integrable entries satisfying a sectoriality condition, the diffusion matrix is symmetric and uniformly elliptic and the drift coefficients and are such that are bounded. We also establish a result of local elliptic regularity for the operator , we investigate on the…
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
TopicsHolomorphic and Operator Theory · Spectral Theory in Mathematical Physics · Advanced Harmonic Analysis Research
On the –theory of vector–valued elliptic operators
K. KHALIL
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Sciences Semlalia, Cadi Ayyad University, B.P. 2390-40000, Marrakesh-Morocco.
and
A. MAICHINE
Mohammed VI Polytechnic University, Lot 660, Hay Moulay Rachid Ben Guerir, 43150, Morocco
Abstract.
In this paper, we study vector–valued elliptic operators of the form acting on vector–valued functions and involving coupling at zero and first order terms. We prove that admits realizations in , for , that generate analytic strongly continuous semigroups provided that is a matrix potential with locally integrable entries satisfying a sectoriality condition, the diffusion matrix is symmetric and uniformly elliptic and the drift coefficients and are such that are bounded. We also establish a result of local elliptic regularity for the operator , we investigate on the -maximal domain of and we characterize the positivity of the associated semigroup.
Key words and phrases:
Elliptic operator, semigroup, sesquiliner form, system of PDE, local elliptic regularity, maximal domain
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary: 35K40, 47F05; Secondary: 47D06, 35J47, 47A50
1. Introduction
The present paper deals with a class of vector–valued elliptic operators of the form
[TABLE]
acting on smooth functions , for some integers , and involving coupling through the first and zero order terms. More precisely, for , one has
[TABLE]
for each .
We point out that the operator appears in the study of Navier-Stokes equations. More precisely, in [25, 26], H. Triebel used a reduced form of Navier–Stokes type equations on (where in such case) that matches vector–valued semilinear parabolic evolution equations via the Leray/Helmoltz projector, see [25, Chapter 6] for details. Moreover, a similar reduction method were applied in [11, 12] to convert Navier-Stokes equation to a semilinear parabolic system. The linear operator in [11, 12] is more appropriate to our situation. Besides, parabolic systems appear also in the study of Nash equilibrium for stochastic differential games, see [7, 8, 19] and [1, Section 6].
In the scalar case, the theory of elliptic operators, is by now well understood, see [21] and [16] for bounded and unbounded coefficients respectively. However, the situation is quite different in the vector–valued case. Indeed, the interest into operators as in (1.1) in the whole space with possibly unbounded coefficients has started only in 2009 by Hieber et al. [10] with coupling through the lower order term of the elliptic operator and the motivation were the Navier-Stokes equation. Afterwards, few papers appeared, see [1, 3, 6, 14, 15, 17, 18]. In [1, 3, 6] the authors studied the associated parabolic equation in -spaces, assuming, among others, that the coefficients of the elliptic operator are Hölder continuous. In [6], solution to the parabolic system has been extrapolated to the -scale provided the uniqueness.
In what concerns a Schrödinger type operator , which corresponds to in (1.1), and its associated semigroup, a comprehensive study in -spaces can be find in [14, 15, 17, 18]. Indeed, in [17], it has been associated a sesquilinear form to , for symmetric potential , and it has been established a consistent -semigroup in , , which is analytic for . This is done by assuming that is pointwisely semi-definite positive with locally integrable entries and is symmetric, bounded and satisfies the well-known ellipticity condition. Moreover, the author investigated on compactness and positivity of the semigroup. In [15], the authors associated a -semigroup, in -spaces, which is not necessarily analytic, to the Schrödinger operator with typically nonsymmetric potential, provided that the diffusion matrix is, in addition to the ellipticity condition, differentiable, bounded together with its first derivatives, is semi–definite positive and its entries are locally bounded. Here, the authors followed the approach adopted by Kato in [13] for scalar Schrödinger operators with complex potential. The main tool has been local elliptic regularity and a Kato’s type inequality for vector–valued functions, i.e.,
[TABLE]
for smooth functions , where , see [15, Proposition 2.3]. Further properties such as maximal domain and others have been also investigated. The papers [14, 18] focused on the domain of the operator and further regularity properties. So that, under growth and smoothness assumptions on , the authors coincide the domain of with its natural domain , for , where refers to the domain of multiplication by in . Furthermore, ultracontractivity, kernel estimates and, in the case of a symmetric potential, asymptotic behavior of the eigenvalues have been considered in [18].
In this article, using form methods and extrapolation techniques, we give a general framework of existence of analytic strongly continuous semigroup associated to suitable realizations of in -spaces, for , under mild assumptions on the coefficients of . Namely, we assume that is bounded and elliptic, and are bounded with a semi–boundedness condition on their divergences and has locally integrable entries and satisfies the following pointwise sectoriality condition
[TABLE]
for all and all . For further regularity, we assume that the entries of are in and is locally bounded. Note that, in [15, Proposition 5.4], see also [18, Proposition 4.5], the above inequality has been stated as a sufficient condition for the analyticity of the semigroup generated by realizations of in , . Moreover, by [14, Example 4.3], one can see that without such a condition one may not have an analytic semigroup. Note also that, even in the scalar case, the existence of a semigroup in -spaces associated to elliptic operators with unbounded drift and/or diffusion terms is not a general fact, see [24] and [20, Propostion 3.4 and Proposition 3.5]. Furthermore, we point out that coupling through the diffusion (second order) term does not lead to -contractive semigroups, see [5].
On the other hand, we establish a result of local elliptic regularity for solutions to elliptic systems, see Theorem 4.2. Namely, for given two vector–valued locally –integrable functions satisfying in a weak sense (distribution sense). Then belongs to , for . This result generalizes [2, Theorem 7.1] to the vector–valued case. Thanks to this result we prove that the domain of , for , coincides with the maximal domain :
[TABLE]
We also characterize the positivity of the semigroup . We prove that is positive if, and only if, the operator is coupled only through the potential term and the coupling coefficients , , are negative or null.
The organization of this paper is as follows: in Section 2, we associate a sesquilinear form to the operator in and we deduce the existence of an analytic –semigroup associated to . In Section 3, we prove that is quasi –contractive and we extend to an analytic –semigroup in by extrapolation techniques. In Section 4, we establish a local elliptic regularity result and we show that the domain of the generator of coincides with the maximal domain of in , for . Section 5 is devoted to determine the positivity of .
Notation
Let denotes the fields or , any integers, the inner-product of , . So that, for , in , and .
The space , , is the vector–valued Lebesgue space endowed with the norm
[TABLE]
We denote by the duality product between and for where . For , we denote it simply by .
We write if belongs to for every bounded , with is the indicator function of .
For , denotes the vector–valued Sobolev space constituted of vector–valued functions such that , for all , where is the classical Sobolev space of order over . Note that all the derivatives are considered in the distribution sense. is the set of all measurable functions such that the distributional derivative belongs to , for all such that . For , we write if for all .
2. The sesquilinear form and the semigroup in
We consider the following differential expression
[TABLE]
where and the derivatives are considered in the sense of distributions. Here, and are matrices where the entries are scalar functions: , and and are matrix functions with vector–valued entries: . So that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for each .
Actually, for for some , , and are vector–valued distributions and are defined as follow
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for every .
Throughout this paper we make the following assumptions
Hypotheses (H1):
- •
is measurable such that, for every , is symmetric and there exist such that
[TABLE]
for all .
- •
, for all .
- •
, for every and there exists such that
[TABLE]
for all and all .
Let us define, for every , to be the symmetric part of , where is the conjugate matrix of . denotes the antisymmetric part of .
We start by a technical lemma
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let and assume satisfying (2.3). Then
[TABLE]
*for every . Moreover, the inequality holds true also when substituting by .
In particular,*
[TABLE]
for every measurable and such that .
Proof.
For , is a sesquilinear form over . Taking into the account that, for every , Then, (2.4) follows by (2.3) and [21, Proposition 1.8]. Moreover, (2.4) holds true also when taking instead of in the left hand side of the inequality. Now, Cauchy Schwartz inequality yields (2.5). ∎
Let us now consider the sesquilinear form given by
[TABLE]
with domain
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
The form satisfies the following properties
Proposition 2.2**.**
Assume Hypotheses (H1) are satisfied. Then,
- •
* is densely defined;*
- •
there exists such that is accretive: , for all ;
- •
* is continuous;*
- •
* is closed on .*
Proof.
Clearly, and thus, is densely defined. Moreover, by application of Young’s inequality, one obtains, for every and every ,
[TABLE]
So by choosing and , one obtains , which shows that is accretive.
On the other hand, according to [17, Proposition 2.1], is a Banach space, where
[TABLE]
It is then enough to show that is equivalent to to conclude the closedness of , where is the graph norm associated to and it is given by
[TABLE]
Here is such that is accretive. Let us first prove that . Let , one has , where
[TABLE]
The claim then follows by application of Young’s inequality when estimating as in the align above. Conversely, since , in a similar way one deduces that .
It remains to show that is continuous in , that is
[TABLE]
In view of (2.5), Cauchy-Schwartz inequality and the continuity of , c.f. [17, Proposition 2.1 (iii)], one gets
[TABLE]
∎
We, finally, conclude the main theorem of this section as an immediate consequence of [21, Proposition 1.51 Theorem 1.52] and Proposition 2.2
Theorem 2.3**.**
Assume Hypotheses (H1) are satisfied. Then, admits a realization in that generates an analytic -semigroup . Moreover, there exists such that
[TABLE]
3. Extrapolation of the semigroup to the –scale
In this section we extrapolate to an analytic strongly continuous semigroup in . For that purpose, it suffices to prove that there exists such that satisfies the following -contractivity property:
[TABLE]
From now on, we use the following notation:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for every in . We also drop the and denotes simply and for the ease of notation.
In this section we make use of the following hypotheses
Hypotheses (H2):
- •
, for all , and there exists such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for every and .
We state, now, the first result of this section
Proposition 3.1**.**
Assume Hypotheses (H1) and (H2). Then there exists such that is -contractive.
Proof.
According to the characterization of -contractivity property given by [23, Theorem 1], it suffices to prove that: for such that is accretive, the following statements hold:
- (1)
implies , 2. (2)
where . The first item follows by [17, Lemma 3.2]. Let us show (2). Set and let be bigger enough, so that is accretive and . According to [17, Lemma 3.2], we claim that
[TABLE]
for every . Therefore,
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Now, one has
[TABLE]
Consequently, since by (2.3), a.e., it follows that
[TABLE]
On the other hand,
[TABLE]
Applying an integration by part, one obtains
[TABLE]
where is (pointwisely) the conjugate matrix of .
Summing up one obtains
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Since by [18, Lemma 2.4], one has
[TABLE]
Then,
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
Moreover, according to (3.3) that holds true also for , one gets
[TABLE]
Now, taking in consideration (3.5), (3.7) and (3), one obtains
[TABLE]
Moreover, in view of Young’s inequality, for every there exists such that
[TABLE]
Consequently, for being such that , say , and , one gets
[TABLE]
and this ends the proof.
∎
Hence, we have the following main result of this section.
Theorem 3.2**.**
Let and assume Hypotheses (H1) and (H2). Then, has a realization in that generates an analytic -semigroup .
Proof.
Let . Instead of considering , we assume . In view of Theorem 2.3 and Proposition 3.1, the semigroup is analytic in and –contactive. Therefore, using the Riesz-Thorin interpolation Theorem, has a unique analytic bounded extension to . Moreover, for every , one claims
[TABLE]
where . Since by Theorem 2.3, the semigroup is strongly continuous in , it follows directly from (3) that is strongly continuous in .
For the case , we argue by duality. Indeed, the adjoint semigroup is associated to , the formal adjoint of , where
[TABLE]
Since the coefficients of satisfy Hypotheses (H1) and (H2), similarly to , then is an analytic -semigroup in which is quasi -contractive. Consequently, is quasi contractive in . So, the same interpolation arguments yield an extrapolation of to a holomorpic -semigroup in , for . ∎
Remarks 3.3*.*
a) The semigroups , , can be extrapolated to a strongly continuous semigroup in . This follows, according to [27], as a consequence of the consistency and the quasi-contractivity of , .
b) If there exists a nonnegative locally bounded function such that and
[TABLE]
Then, for every , has a compact resolvent and thus is compact. The proof of this claim is identical to [17, Proposition 4.3].
4. Local elliptic regularity and maximal domain of
Since the coefficients of are real, from now on, we consider vector–valued functions with real components. Thus, acts on , for every and its associated semigroup acts on . Moreover, we assume that and thus
[TABLE]
Throughout this section, we use the notation and, in addition to Hypotheses (H1), we assume the following
Hypotheses (H3):
- •
, for all .
- •
, for all .
Remark 4.1*.*
The assumption is actually without loss of generalities. Indeed, for every , one has
[TABLE]
Hence, has the same expression of (4.1) and the matrices , and satisfy Hypotheses (H1) and (H2).
4.1. Local elliptic regularity
Here we give a regularity result for weak solutions to systems of elliptic equations. The following theorem generalizes [2, Theorem 7.1] to the vector valued case.
Theorem 4.2**.**
Let and assume Hypotheses (H1)–(H3). Let and belong to such that in the distribution sense. Then, .
Proof.
Let and belong to and assume that in the sense of distributions. Hence,
[TABLE]
for each . Now, let and . A straightforward computation yields
[TABLE]
Then, by (4.2) one gets
[TABLE]
Actually, . Indeed, since and belong to , then , and lie in and thus in , for every . On the other hand, for every , one has
[TABLE]
which shows that , for every . Similarly, we get the claim for . Therefore, for all ,
[TABLE]
Thus, according to [4, Proposition 2.2], and this is true for every , which implies that .
Now, coming back to (4.2), one obtains . We then conclude by [2, Theorem 7.1] that belongs to . ∎
4.2. -maximal domain
The aim of this section is to coincide the domain of the generator of with its maximal domain in . We start by showing that .
Lemma 4.3**.**
Let and assume Hypotheses (H1)–(H3). Then, and , for all .
Proof.
Let . One has and integrating by parts, one claims , for all . Therefore, and . Moreover, one has
[TABLE]
Since , for all , and by consistency of the semigroups , , Equation (4.3) holds true in , that is
[TABLE]
By consequence, and for all . ∎
We next show that the space of test functions is a core for , for . That is, is dense in by the graph norm.
Proposition 4.4**.**
Let and assume Hypotheses (H1)–(H3). Then, the set of test functions is a core for .
Proof.
Fix and let be bigger enough so that it belongs to . It suffices to prove that is dense in . For this purpose, let be such that , for all . Then,
[TABLE]
in the sense of distributions. By Theorem 4.2, one obtains for all . Then, (4.4) holds true almost everywhere on .
Now, consider such that and define for . Assume and multiply (4.4) by for . Integrating by parts, one obtains
[TABLE]
for all and some . Moreover, according to [18, Lemma 2.4], one has
[TABLE]
So that, choosing and , one gets
[TABLE]
Upon , one obtains
[TABLE]
A straightforward computation yields
[TABLE]
So that tends to [math] as . Therefore, upon , one claims
[TABLE]
Hence, .
On the other hand, if , multiplying (4.4) by , in a similar way, one gets
[TABLE]
It thus follows that by letting tends to .
∎
We show in the next that the domain is equal to the -maximal domain of .
Proposition 4.5**.**
Let and assume Hypotheses (H1)–(H3). Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
We first show that . Let and such that and in . Let be a bounded domain of and . Consider, on , the differential operator
[TABLE]
A straightforward computation yields
[TABLE]
Thus, converges in . Taking into the account that is an elliptic operator with bounded coefficients on , thus the domain of , with Dirichlet boundary condition, coincides with . In particular, converges in , which implies that . Now, the arbitrariness of and yields . Furthermore, converges locally in to and by pointwise convergence of subsequences, one claims .
In order to prove the other inclusion it suffices to show that is one to one on , for some . Indeed, this implies that , where is the realization of on . Since , thus . Now, let be such that . Arguing similarly as in the proof of Proposition 4.4, one obtains and this ends the proof.
∎
Remark 4.6*.*
It is relevant to have , for , which is equivalent to the coincidence of domains , where refers to the maximal domain of multiplication by in . Actually, in [18, Section 3], it has been shown the following
[TABLE]
for all , provided that , with such that and satisfies
[TABLE]
for some . Now, taking into the account, the Landau’s inequality
[TABLE]
for every , one claims
[TABLE]
Therefore, .
5. Positivity
In this section we characterize the positivity of the semigroup for . Since the family of semigroups , , is consistent, i. e., , for every , and all , it suffices to characterize the positivity of . For this purpose, we endow with the usual partial order: if and only if, , for all . As in Section 4, we assume that . By positivity of we mean a.e., for every and all such that a.e.
We apply the Ouhabaz’ criterion for invariance of closed convex subsets by semigroups, c.f. [23, Theorem 3] and [22]. We then get the following result
Theorem 5.1**.**
Assume Hypotheses (H1). Then, the semigroup is positive, if and only if, and almost everywhere and for every .
Proof.
Let and , where . Then, is a closed convex subset of and is the corresponding projection. Now, let such that is accretive. According to [23, Theorem 3 (iii)], is positive if, and only if, the form satisfies the following
- •
implies ,
- •
, for all , where .
Now, assume that is positive. Let , and . Set . One has
[TABLE]
Letting , by dominated convergence theorem, one gets for every , which implies that almost everywhere. On the other hand, considering, for every ,
[TABLE]
where is the k-th component of , for every . Then,
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
where indicates the -th component of . So, by letting , one deduces that almost everywhere and for each . In a similar way, one gets a.e. by considering instead of , where
[TABLE]
So that almost everywhere.
Conversely, assume and for all . Let , then, by [17, Theorem 4.2], one gets . Furthermore, it follows, by [9, Theorem 7.9], that and . Let us now prove that . One has
[TABLE]
This ends the proof. ∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] D. Addona, L. Angiuli, L. Lorenzi, M. Tessitore, On coupled systems of Kolmogorov equations with applications to stochastic differential games , ESAIM Control. Optim. Calc. Var., 23 no 3 (2017), 937–976.
- 2[2] S. Agmon, The L p subscript 𝐿 𝑝 L_{p} approach to the Dirichlet problem. I. Regularity theorems , Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa (3), 13 (1959), 405–448.
- 3[3] L. Angiuli, L. Lorenzi, D. Pallara, L p superscript 𝐿 𝑝 L^{p} -estimates for parabolic systems with unbounded coefficients coupled at zero and first order , J. Math. Anal. App., 444 (2016), 110–135.
- 4[4] V. I. Bogachev, N. V. Krylov, M. Röckner, Elliptic equations for measures: Regularity and global bounds of densities , J. Math. Pures Appl., 85 (2006), 743–757.
- 5[5] A. Cialdea, The L p superscript 𝐿 𝑝 L^{p} -dissipativity of partial differential operators , Lecture Notes of TICMI, Tbilisi University Press, 2010.
- 6[6] S. Delmonte, L. Lorenzi, On a class of weakly coupled systems of elliptic operators with unbounded coefficients , Milan J. Math. 79 (2011), 689–727.
- 7[7] A. Friedman, Differential games , Pure and Applied Mathematics 25 , Wiley-Interscience, New York-London, 1971.
- 8[8] A. Friedman, Stochastic differential games , J. Diff. Equa. 11 (1972), 79–108.
