Abstract
This paper focuses on a system of differential inclusions expressing hemivariational inequalities driven by competing operators constructed with p-Laplacians that involve two real parameters. The existence of a generalized solution is shown by means of an approximation process through approximate solutions in finite dimensional spaces. When the parameters are negative, the generalized solutions become weak solutions. The main novelty of this work is the solvability of systems of differential inclusions for which the ellipticity condition may fail.
Keywords:
system of differential inclusions; hemivariational inequalities; competing operators; p-Laplacian; Galerkin basis MSC:
35J87; 35J70; 35J92
1. Introduction
Consider the following system of differential inclusions subject to the Dirichlet boundary condition:
on a bounded domain for with a Lipschitz boundary . For a later use, denotes the Lebesgue measure of . In (1) we have, for and , the -Laplacian , -Laplacian , -Laplacian , and -Laplacian . Throughout the paper, corresponding to any real number we denote (the Hölder conjugate of r). Furthermore, and denote the first eigenvalues of and , respectively (see Section 2 for a brief review).
The multivalued term in the inclusion (1) is expressed as the generalized gradient of a locally Lipschitz function , so pointwise is a subset of . We reference [1] for the subdifferentiation of locally Lipschitz functionals. Some basic elements are presented in Section 2. Any is a point of ; thus, it has two components, i.e., . Hence, (1) is a system of two differential inclusions that we call hemivariational inclusions because they involve generalized gradients. The inclusion problem (1) incorporates systems of equations with discontinuous nonlinearities. Differential equations with discontinuous nonlinearities via the generalized gradients were first studied in [2].
According to the definition of generalized gradient, it is apparent that each solution to system (1) solves the inequality problem.
where the notation stands for the generalized directional derivative of the locally Lipschitz function F on . Problem (2) is a hemivariational inequality in the product space . The interest in hemivariational inequalities is that they allow nonconvex potentials. For the study of hemivariational inequalities, we refer to [3,4,5,6,7].
For the locally Lipschitz function , we assume the following condition:
- (H)
- There are positive constants , , , , , , , , with , , and such thatand
for all and .
In the statement of (1), there are two parameters and . The leading operators are and , for which the ellipticity condition fails when and , which is the main point of our work (note that and are arbitrary real numbers). In this case, they become the so-called competing operators that were introduced in [8]. Precisely, a competing operator was defined in reference [8] as versus ((-Laplacian) for . The essential feature of such an operator is that the ellipticity property is lost. For any and any scalar , the following expression does not have a constant sign when varies:
Systems of differential equations with competing operators were investigated in [9].
Due to the possible loss of ellipticity for system (1), we introduce a new type of solution called a generalized solution. It is said that is a generalized solution to problem (1) if there exists a sequence such that
- (i)
- in as for ;
- (ii)
- in as , with for , and a.e. on ;
- (iii)
- and .
The notion of a generalized solution was proposed in [10] for differential equations driven by competing operators and in [9] for systems of differential equations with competing operators. The notion of a generalized solution for hemivariational inequalities with competing operators was recently introduced in [7]. Here, for the first time, we define the generalized solution for a system of hemivariational inclusions exhibiting competing operators.
We also introduce the notion of a weak solution to system (1). By a weak solution to system (1), we understand any pair for which the following holds:
with satisfying a.e. on . Equivalently, (3) can be written in the system form as follows:
with as in (3), where the equalities hold in dual spaces and . Notice that any weak solution to system (1) is a generalized solution. Indeed, if is a weak solution, it is sufficient to take and in the definition of a generalized solution.
Our main results read as follows.
Theorem 1.
Assume that condition (H) holds. Then, there exists a generalized solution to system (1) for every .
Theorem 2.
In the proof of Theorem 1, we make use of approximation through finite dimensional subspaces via a Galerkin basis combined with minimization and nonsmooth analysis. We obtain a priori estimates, which are of independent interest in the context of competing operators. The proof of Theorem 2 relies on properties of the underlying spaces and of operators of the p-Laplacian type. We end the paper with an example illustrating the applicability of our results.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 is devoted to the related mathematical background. Section 3 contains the needed minimization results and estimates. Section 4 sets forth the finite dimensional approximation approach. Section 4 presents the proofs of Theorems 1 and 2, as well as an example.
2. Mathematical Background
Given a Banach space X with the norm , denotes the dual space of X, and denotes the duality pairing between X and . The norm convergence in X and is denoted by →, and the weak convergence is denoted by ⇀.
We outline basic elements of nonsmooth analysis. For a detailed treatment, we refer to [1]. A function on a Banach space X is called locally Lipschitz if, for every point , there are an open neighborhood U of u and a constant such that
The generalized directional derivative of a locally Lipschitz function at point in direction is defined by
and the generalized gradient of G at is the following set
The following relation links the two notions:
We illustrate these definitions in two significant situations. For a continuous and convex function , the generalized gradient coincides with the subdifferential of G in the sense of convex analysis. If the function is continuously differentiable, the generalized gradient of G is just the differential of G.
We also mention a few things regarding the driving operators in system (1) (or hemivariational inequality (2)). Given any number , the Sobolev space is endowed with the norm , where denotes the norm. The dual space of is . As usual, denotes the Sobolev critical exponent, that is, if and otherwise. The Rellich–Kondrachov embedding theorem ensures that is compactly embedded into for every . In particular, there exists a positive constant such that
For the background of Sobolev spaces, we refer to [11]. Here, we solely recall that a Banach space with is separable. This implies the existence of a Galerkin basis of space , meaning a sequence of vector subspaces of satisfying
- (a)
- ;
- (b)
- ;
- (c)
- .
We refer to [12] for background related to Galerkin bases.
The negative r-Laplacian is the operator (nonlinear if ) given by
The first eigenvalue of is given by
More details can be found, e.g., in [3]. Since and , there are the continuous embeddings and , which can be readily verified through Hölder’s inequality. Therefore, the sums and entering system (1) are well defined.
3. Associated Euler Functional
We focus on nonsmooth function , for which assumption (H) holds true.
Lemma 1.
Assume that condition (H) is satisfied. Then, for each , there exist constants and such that
Proof.
Rademacher’s theorem ensures that there exists a gradient for almost all . On the other hand, for every , the function belongs to space on any bounded open interval I that contains . Therefore, we may write
Then, taking into account that
(see [1], p. 32), hypothesis (H) implies
Now, using Young’s inequality with , we arrive at (6), which completes the proof. □
Lemma 2.
Under assumption (H), the functional given by
is Lipschitz continuous on the bounded subsets of . The generalized gradient has the following property: if , with , then
Proof.
The verification of the Lipschitz condition for the function in (7) on the bounded subsets of the product space is straightforward. The Aubin–Clarke theorem on the subdifferentiation under the integral sign (see [1], p. 83) can be shown to be valid under hypothesis (H). This readily leads to Formula (8), thus completing the proof. □
In view of Lemma 2, the compact embeddings , yield the multivalued mapping . On this basis, we introduce the functional as follows:
for all .
Proposition 1.
Assume condition . Then, the functional J in (9) is locally Lipschitz, with the generalized gradient expressed as
for all .
Proof.
Proposition 2.
Assume condition . Then, the functional J in (9) is coercive on , that is, as .
Proof.
From (9) and (6) in Lemma 1, we infer, for every , that
for all , with constants and . Using (4), (5), and Hólder’s inequality, the preceding estimate entails
It is known from assumption (H) that and . A value of so small that and is selected. Since , , , and , we conclude that the functional J is coercive, which completes the proof. □
4. Finite Dimensional Approximations to Resolve System (1)
Let us fix a Galerkin basis of the space and a Galerkin basis of the space . It follows that is a Galerkin basis of the product space . Minimization in the finite dimensional space will enable us to construct a generalized solution to system (1).
Proposition 3.
Assume condition (H). For each positive integer n, there exist and with for a.e. such that
Proof.
According to Proposition 1, the functional in (9) is locally Lipschitz and, thus, continuous, while according to Proposition 2, J is coercive. Taking into account that the subspace of is finite dimensional, there exists satisfying
A necessary condition of optimality for (13) is that
In view of (10), inclusion (14) provides for which (11) and (12) hold. The fact that a.e. in is the consequence of Lemma 2. □
Proposition 4.
Assume condition . Then, the sequence in Proposition 3 is bounded in .
Proof.
Proposition 3 ensures that equalities (11) and (12) hold true. As , we are allowed to use in (11) and in (12) as test functions. In conjunction with Hölder’s inequality, this gives
and
with a.e. in . We are entitled to invoke hypothesis (H) to obtain
and
Through Young’s inequality with any , we find that
and
with positive constants and . Take the sum of Inequalities (15) and (16) and insert the preceding estimates, also using (4) and (5), which result in
Assumption (H) postulates that and , so we may choose a value of so small so as to have and . Because , , , and , we can conclude that the sequence is bounded in , thus completing the proof. □
Proposition 5.
Assume condition . The sequence given in Proposition 3 has the following property: there exists a constant such that
and
with and as stated in (11) and (12), respectively.
5. Proofs of the Main Results and Example
Proof of Theorem 1.
Consider the sequence , which is provided by Proposition 3 corresponding to the Galerkin basis of the space . It is known from Proposition 4 that the sequence is bounded in . Precisely, the bound in (19) holds.
Thanks to the reflexivity of the space , we may admit that along a subsequence, we have in and in , as for some . We will show that the weak limit is a generalized solution to system (1).
It is clear that condition (i) is verified. For each positive integer n, Proposition 3 provides with a.e. in such that (11) and (12) are satisfied. Proposition 5 ensures that the sequence is bounded in and that the sequence is bounded in . Specifically, the bounds are expressed in (17) and (18).
The reflexivity of the spaces and implies that we can pass to relabeled subsequences satisfying in and in for some .
We claim that and , that is, for all and for all . We only prove the first assertion because the second one can be checked analogously. Let and suppose, first, that . Fix some m with . Then, for each , the element v can be used as a test function in (11), which gives
In the limit, as , we obtain . If is arbitrary, we obtain , owing to the density of in , as required by condition (c) of the Galerkin basis. Therefore, the claim is proven, which shows that condition (ii) in the definition of the generalized solution to system (1) is satisfied.
Now, we deal with condition (iii) in the definition of the generalized solution to (1). It is known from (11) and (12) that
On the other hand, according to assertion (ii), one has
Combining the preceding estimates renders
Lemma 2 guarantees that the functional given in (7) is Lipschitz continuous on the bounded subsets of ; thus, its generalized gradient is a bounded multifunction, which means that the image of every bounded set is a bounded set. Hence, on the basis of the inclusion and Proposition 4, we are led to the conclusion that the sequence is bounded in . Recalling that in and in , the Rellich–Kondrachov compact embedding theorem provides strong convergence in . It turns out that
Inserting this into (20) and (21), we see that requirement (iii) in the definition of the generalized solution is fulfilled. Therefore, is a generalized solution to system (1). The proof of Theorem 1 is complete. □
Proof of Theorem 2.
Assume that and . Let be a generalized solution to system (1). Then, there exists a sequence satisfying conditions (i), (ii), and (iii).
Using conditions (i) and (iii), as well as and the monotonicity of , we derive
This enables us to use the property of the operator , meaning that in and provide (refer to [3]). Therefore, the property of the operator implies the strong convergence in . According to the continuity of the operators and in the norm topologies, we have in . Similarly, we prove that in and in .
Lemma 2 establishes that the functional in (7) is Lipschitz continuous on the bounded subsets of . Since , the sequence is bounded in up to subsequence in and in for some . Taking into account the strong convergence in , we find that due to the fact that the generalized gradient is strongly-weakly* closed.
At this point, it suffices to pass to the limit as in condition (ii) in the definition of the generalized solution of system (1) to deduce that in the dual space , the following equality holds:
This is equivalent to (3). Since , hypothesis and the Aubin–Clarke theorem (see [1]) confirm the validity of the pointwise inclusion for almost all . We conclude that is a weak solution to system (1).
The existence of a weak solution to system (1) when and follows from Theorem 1 and the first part of Theorem 2 that we have already proven. The proof is, thus, complete. □
Here is an example showing how our results can be applied.
Example 1.
Let denote the generalized gradient of the absolute value function on , that is, if , if , and . Given the numbers and , consider on the bounded domain the following system of hemivariational inclusions:
where Δ stands for the ordinary Laplacian operator, i.e., . This is system (1) for , , and given by for all , since for all .
Setting (so ), it is seen that condition is fulfilled. Indeed, for every , we have
If in place of and , we take and , respectively. Theorem 2 ensures the existence of a weak solution in for the obtained system.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement
Data are contained within the article.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflicts of interest.
References
- Clarke, F.H. Optimization and Nonsmooth Analysis; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1983. [Google Scholar]
- Chang, K.C. Variational methods for non-differentiable functionals and their applications to partial differential equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1981, 80, 102–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carl, S.; Le, V.K.; Motreanu, D. Nonsmooth Variational Problems and Their Inequalities. Comparison Principles and Applications; Springer Monographs in Mathematics; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Costea, N.; Kristaly, A.; Varga, C. Variational and Monotonicity Methods in Nonsmooth Analysis; Frontiers in Mathematics; Birkhäuser: Cham, Switzerland, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Haslinger, J.; Miettinen, M.; Panagiotopoulos, P.D. Finite Element Method for Hemivariational Inequalities. Theory, Methods and Applications; Nonconvex Optimization and Its Applications; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1999; Volume 35. [Google Scholar]
- Moameni, A. Critical point theory on convex subsets with applications in differential equations and analysis. J. Math. Pures Appl. 2020, 141, 266–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Motreanu, D. Hemivariational inequalities with competing operators. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2024, 130, 107741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Z.; Livrea, R.; Motreanu, D.; Zeng, S. Variational differential inclusions without ellipticity condition. Electron. J. Qual. Theory Differ. Equ. 2020, 43, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gambera, L.; Marano, S.A.; Motreanu, D. Quasi-linear Dirichlet systems with competing operators and convection. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2024, 530, 127718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Motreanu, D. Quasilinear Dirichlet problems with competing operators and convection. Open Math. 2020, 18, 1510–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brezis, H. Functional Analysis, Sobolev Spaces and Partial Differential Equations; Universitext; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Galewski, M. Basic Monotonicity Methods with Some Applications; Compact Textbooks in Mathematics; Birkhäuser: Cham, Switzerland, 2021. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).