In this paper, we study discrete elliptic Dirichlet problems. Applying a variational technique together with Morse theory, we establish several results on the existence and multiplicity of nontrivial solutions. Finally, two examples and numerical simulations are provided to illustrate our theoretical results.
Citation: Yuhua Long, Huan Zhang. Existence and multiplicity of nontrivial solutions to discrete elliptic Dirichlet problems[J]. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(7): 2681-2699. doi: 10.3934/era.2022137
[1] | Yutong Chen, Jiabao Su . Resonant problems for non-local elliptic operators with unbounded nonlinearites. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(9): 5716-5731. doi: 10.3934/era.2023290 |
[2] | Ping Yang, Xingyong Zhang . Existence of nontrivial solutions for a poly-Laplacian system involving concave-convex nonlinearities on locally finite graphs. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(12): 7473-7495. doi: 10.3934/era.2023377 |
[3] | Jiayi Fei, Qiongfen Zhang . On solutions for a class of Klein–Gordon equations coupled with Born–Infeld theory with Berestycki–Lions conditions on $ \mathbb{R}^3 $. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(4): 2363-2379. doi: 10.3934/era.2024108 |
[4] | David Barilla, Martin Bohner, Giuseppe Caristi, Shapour Heidarkhani, Shahin Moradi . Existence results for a discrete fractional boundary value problem. Electronic Research Archive, 2025, 33(3): 1541-1565. doi: 10.3934/era.2025073 |
[5] | Zongming Guo, Fangshu Wan . Weighted fourth order elliptic problems in the unit ball. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(6): 3775-3803. doi: 10.3934/era.2021061 |
[6] | Chenghua Gao, Enming Yang, Huijuan Li . Solutions to a discrete resonance problem with eigenparameter-dependent boundary conditions. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(3): 1692-1707. doi: 10.3934/era.2024077 |
[7] | Yijun Chen, Yaning Xie . A kernel-free boundary integral method for reaction-diffusion equations. Electronic Research Archive, 2025, 33(2): 556-581. doi: 10.3934/era.2025026 |
[8] | Hongjie Li . Recent progress on the mathematical study of anomalous localized resonance in elasticity. Electronic Research Archive, 2020, 28(3): 1257-1272. doi: 10.3934/era.2020069 |
[9] | Kelei Wang . Recent progress on stable and finite Morse index solutions of semilinear elliptic equations. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(6): 3805-3816. doi: 10.3934/era.2021062 |
[10] | Xiaoyong Qian, Jun Wang, Maochun Zhu . Existence of solutions for a coupled Schrödinger equations with critical exponent. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(7): 2730-2747. doi: 10.3934/era.2022140 |
In this paper, we study discrete elliptic Dirichlet problems. Applying a variational technique together with Morse theory, we establish several results on the existence and multiplicity of nontrivial solutions. Finally, two examples and numerical simulations are provided to illustrate our theoretical results.
Let N and Z be the sets of natural numbers and integers, respectively. For integers a, b, define Z(a,b):={a,a+1,...,b} with a≤b. Given the integers T1, T2≥2, we write Ω:=Z(1,T1)×Z(1,T2). Consider the existence and multiplicity of nontrivial solutions to the following discrete elliptic problem:
Δ21u(i−1,j)+Δ22u(i,j−1)+f((i,j),u(i,j))=0,(i,j)∈Ω, | (1.1) |
with Dirichlet boundary conditions
u(i,0)=u(i,T2+1)=0i∈Z(1,T1),u(0,j)=u(T1+1,j)=0j∈Z(1,T2), | (1.2) |
where Δ1, Δ2 are the forward difference operators defined by Δ1u(i,j)=u(i+1,j)−u(i,j), Δ2u(i,j)=u(i,j+1)−u(i,j), and Δ2u(i,j)=Δ(Δu(i,j)). Here, f((i,j),u) is continuously differentiable with respect to u and f((i,j),0)=0.
Advances in modern computing devices have made it increasingly convenient to determine the behavior of complex systems through simulations, contributing greatly to the increasing interest in discrete problems. As a result [1,2,3,4,5,6,7], difference equations have been widely investigated and numerous results have been obtained [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. With the development of science and technology in modern society and the progress of mathematical research, the study of difference equations has gradually shifted to the study of partial difference equations. For example, [17,18,19] deal with discrete Kirchhoff-type problems, whereas [20,21,22] present several results on multiple solutions to partial difference equations.
Equation (1.1) is a partial difference equation involving bivariate sequences with two independent integer variables over Ω. It is elementary, but illustrative of many problems that are of interest in various branches of science, such as chemical reactions, population dynamics with spatial migration, and even the computation and analysis of finite difference equations [23,24]. Therefore, Eq (1.1) has attracted considerable attention. For example, [24] shows that Eq (1.1) possesses at least two nontrivial solutions, while Zhang [25] studied Eq (1.1) using the extremum principle. Moreover, Eq (1.1) is regarded as a discrete analog of the partial differential equation
∂2u∂x2+∂2u∂y2+f(x,y,u(x,y))=0,(x,y)∈Ω, |
which has been extensively studied. Consequently, investigating problem (1.1)–(1.2) is of practical significance.
Morse theory is a very powerful tool for studying the existence of multiple solutions to both differential and difference equations having a variational structure [26,27,28,29,30]. Very recently, Long [18,19,20] studied partial difference equations via Morse theory and obtained rich results on the existence and multiplicity of nontrivial solutions. This encourages us to consider the existence and multiplicity of nontrivial solutions for problem (1.1)–(1.2) using Morse theory.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the variational structure and the corresponding functional are established according to (1.1)–(1.2). Moreover, we recall some related definitions and propositions that are beneficial to our results. Section 3 displays our main results and the corresponding proofs. Finally, two examples and numerical simulations are provided to illustrate our main results in Section 4.
Let E be a T1T2-dimensional Euclidean space equipped with the usual inner product (⋅,⋅) and norm |⋅|. Let
S={u:Z(0,T1+1)×Z(0,T2+1)→Rsuch thatu(i,0)=u(i,T2+1)=0,i∈Z(0,T1+1)andu(0,j)=u(T1+1,j)=0,j∈Z(0,T2+1)}. |
Define the inner product ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ on S as
⟨u,v⟩=T1+1∑i=1T2∑j=1△1u(i−1,j)△1v(i−1,j)+T1∑i=1T2+1∑j=1△2u(i,j−1)△2v(i,j−1),∀u,v∈S, |
and let the induced norm be
‖u‖=√⟨u,u⟩=(T1+1∑i=1T2∑j=1|△1u(i−1,j)|2+T1∑i=1T2+1∑j=1|△2u(i,j−1)|2)12,∀u∈S. |
Then, S is a Hilbert space and is isomorphic to E. Here and hereafter, we take u∈S as an extension of u∈E when necessary.
Consider the functional I:S→R in the following form:
I(u)=12T1+1∑i=1T2∑j=1|Δ1u(i−1,j)|2+12T1∑i=1T2+1∑j=1|Δ2u(i,j−1)|2−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1F((i,j),u(i,j))=12‖u‖2−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1F((i,j),u(i,j)),∀u∈S, | (2.1) |
where F((i,j),u)=∫u0f((i,j),τ)dτ. Note that f((i,j),u) is continuously differentiable with respect to u. It is clear that I∈C2(S,R) and solutions of the problem (1.1)–(1.2) are precisely the critical points of I(u). Moreover, for any u,v∈S, using the Dirichlet boundary conditions gives
⟨I′(u),v⟩=T2∑j=1T1+1∑i=1(Δ1u(i−1,j)⋅Δ1v(i−1,j))+T1∑i=1T2+1∑j=1(Δ2u(i,j−1)⋅Δ2v(i−1,j))−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(f((i,j),u(i,j))⋅v(i,j))=−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1{Δ21u(i−1,j)+Δ22u(i,j−1)+f((i,j),u(i,j))}v(i,j). | (2.2) |
Let Ξ be the discrete Laplacian, which is defined by Ξu(i,j)=Δ21u(i−1,j)+Δ22u(i,j−1). According to the conclusion of [31], we know that −Ξ is invertible and the distinct Dirichlet eigenvalues of −Ξ on [1,T1]×[1,T2] can be denoted by 0<λ1<λ2≤λ3≤⋯≤λT1T2. Let ϕk=(ϕk(1),ϕk(2),⋯,ϕk(T1T2))tr, k∈[1,T1T2], where each ϕk is an eigenvector corresponding to the eigenvalue λk. Let W−=span{ϕ1,...,ϕk−1}, W0=span{ϕk}, W+=(W−⊕W0)⊥. Then, S can be expressed as
S=W−⊕W+⊕W0. |
For later use, we define another norm as ‖u‖2=(T1∑i=1T2∑j=1|u(i,j)|2)12. Then, for any u∈S, we have that
λ1‖u‖22≤‖u‖2≤λT1T2‖u‖22. |
Next, we recall some preliminaries with respect to Morse theory.
We say that the functional I satisfies the Cerami condition ((C) for short) if any sequence {un}⊆S satisfying I(un)→c, (1+‖un‖)‖I′(un)‖→0 as n→∞ has a convergent subsequence. Note that if (C) is satisfied, then the deformation condition ((D) for short) is satisfied [32].
Definition 2.1. [28,33] Let u0 be an isolated critical group of I with I(u0)=c∈R, and U be a neighborhood of u0. The group
Cq(I,u0):=Hq(Ic∩U,Ic∩U∖u0),q∈Z |
is called the q-th critical group of I at u0. Let κ={u∈S|I′(u)=0}. For all a∈R, each critical point of I is greater than a and I∈C2(S,R) satisfies (D). Then, the group
Cq(I,∞):=Hq(S,Ia),q∈Z |
is called the q-th critical group of I at infinity.
To calculate the critical group at infinity, we need the following auxiliary proposition.
Proposition 2.1. [34]Suppose that S is a Hilbert space, {It∈C2(S,R)|t∈[0,1]}. I′t and ∂tIt are locally continuous. If I0 and I1 satisfy (C), and there exist a∈R and δ>0 such that
It(u)≤a⇒(1+‖u‖)‖It(u)‖≥δ,t∈[0,1], |
then
Cq(I0,∞)=Cq(I1,∞),q∈Z. | (2.3) |
In particular, if there is some R>0 such that
inft∈[0,1],‖u‖>R(1+‖u‖)‖I′t(u)‖>0 | (2.4) |
and
inft∈[0,1],‖u‖≤R(1+‖u‖)‖I′t(u)‖>−∞, | (2.5) |
then Eq (2.3) is satisfied.
The following three propositions are important in obtaining some nonzero critical points.
Proposition 2.2. [26]Let S be a real Hilbert space, I∈C2(S,R). Suppose that u0 is the isolated critical point of I with limited Morse index μ(u0) and null dimension ν(u0). I″(u0) is a Fredholm operator. Moreover, if u0 is the local minimizer of I, then
Cq(I,u0)≅δq,0Z,q=0,1,2,⋯. |
Proposition 2.3. [34]Assume that I∈C2(S,R) with S=S+⊕S− and 0 is the isolated critical point of I. If I has a local linking structure at 0 with k=dimS−<∞, then
Cq(I,0)≅δq,kZ,k=μ0ork=μ0+ν0. |
Proposition 2.4. [35]Let I∈C2(S,R) satisfy (D). Then,
(J1) if Cq(I,∞)≆0 holds for some q, then I possesses a critical point u such that Cq(I,u)≆0;
(J2) if 0 is the isolated critical point of I and there exists some q such that Cq(I,∞)≆Cq(I,0), then I has a nonzero critical point.
In our proofs, we also require the following Mountain Pass Lemma.
Proposition 2.5. [33]Let S be a real Banach space and I∈C1(S,R) satisfy the Palais–Smale condition ((PS) for short). Further, if I(0)=0 and
(J3) there exist constants ρ, a>0 such thatI|∂Bρ≥a,
(J4) there is some e∈S∖Bρ such that I(e)≤0.
Then, I possesses a critical value c≥a given by
c=infh∈Γsupx∈[0,1]I(h(x)), |
where
Γ={h∈C([0,1],S)|h(0)=0,h(1)=e}. |
In this section, we state our main results and provide detailed proofs. First, the following assumptions are required:
(f1) There exists k≥2 such that
λk≤lim inf|u|→∞f((i,j),u)u≤lim sup|u|→∞f((i,j),u)u≤λk+1,(i,j)∈Ω. |
(f2) There exists a subsequence {u(1)n,k}⊆span{ϕk} such that ‖u(1)n,k‖‖un‖→1 as ‖un‖→∞. Then, there exist δ1, N1>0 such that
T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(f((i,j),un(i,j))−λkun(i,j))u(1)n,k(i,j)≥δ1,n≥N1,(i,j)∈Ω. |
(f3) There exists a subsequence {u(1)n,k+1}⊆span{ϕk+1} such that ‖u(1)n,k+1‖‖un‖→1 as ‖un‖→∞. Then, there exist δ2, N2>0 such that
T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(λk+1un(i,j)−f((i,j),un(i,j)))u(1)n,k+1(i,j)≥δ2,n≥N2,(i,j)∈Ω. |
We are now in a position to state our main results.
Theorem 3.1. Let (f1), (f2), (f3) hold. Moreover, for all (i,j)∈Ω,
(V1)F″((i,j),0)<λ1,
(V2)F″((i,j),u)>0 for all u∈R
are satisfied. Then, problem (1.1)–(1.2) possesses at least three nontrivial solutions, among which one is positive and one is negative.
Consider the following sign condition:
(F0±) There exists δ>0 such that
±(2F((i,j),u)−λmu2)≥0,|u(i,j)|≤δ,(i,j)∈Ω. |
Then, we can state the following theorem.
Theorem 3.2. Suppose (f1), (f2), (f3) are satisfied. For all (i,j)∈Ω, let
(V3)f′((i,j),0)=λm,
(V4) there exists u0≠0 such that f((i,j),u0)=0.
Then, problem (1.1)–(1.2) possesses at least four nontrivial solutions if one of the following conditions is met:
(i)(F0+) with 2≤m≠k, (ii)(F0−) with 2<m≠k+1.
Theorem 3.3. Assume (f1), (f2), (f3), and (V3) are true. Further, if k=1 and either
(iii)(F0+) with m≠1, (iv)(F0−) with m≠2,
then problem (1.1)–(1.2) admits at least two nontrivial solutions.
To prove our results, (C) is necessary. First, we present a detailed proof to show that I satisfies (C).
Lemma 3.1. Let (f1), (f2), and (f3) hold. Then, I satisfies (C).
Proof. Suppose that {un}⊆S and there exists a constant c such that
I(un)→c,(1+‖un‖)‖I′(un)‖→0,asn→∞. |
Because S is a T1T2-dimensional space, it suffices to show that {un} is bounded. Otherwise, we can assume that
‖un‖→∞,asn→∞. |
Denote ¯un=un‖un‖. Then, ‖¯un‖=1, which means that {¯un} has some subsequences. Without loss of generality, we set the subsequence to be the sequence. Moreover, there exists ¯u∈S with ‖¯u‖=1 such that
¯un→¯u,asn→∞. |
For any φ∈S, we obtain
⟨I′(un),φ⟩‖un‖=⟨¯un,φ⟩−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(f((i,j),un(i,j))‖un‖,φ(i,j)). |
From (f1), there exist b≥λk+1 and N>0 such that
|f((i,j),un(i,j))|≤b(1+|un(i,j)|),u∈S,n>N,(i,j)∈Ω. |
Set b1=b‖un‖ such that, for n>N, we have
|f((i,j),un(i,j))|‖un‖≤b1(1+|¯un(i,j)|),u∈S,(i,j)∈Ω. | (3.1) |
If n≤N, then because f((i,j),⋅) is continuous in ⋅, we have
|f((i,j),un(i,j))|‖un‖≤max{|f((i,j),un(i,j))|‖un‖},u∈S,(i,j)∈Ω. | (3.2) |
Therefore, Eqs (3.1) and (3.2) ensure that {f((i,j),un)‖un‖} is bounded. Consequently, {f((i,j),un)‖un‖} has a convergent subsequence. We still denote this by {f((i,j),un)‖un‖}. Using (f1) once more, we can assume that there exists some p satisfying λk≤p≤λk+1 such that
f((i,j),un)‖un‖→p¯u,asn→∞. |
Hence,
△21¯u(i−1,j)+△22¯u(i,j−1)+p¯u=0,(i,j)∈Ω, |
which means that ¯u is the nontrivial solution of
△21u(i−1,j)+△22u(i,j−1)+pu=0,(i,j)∈Ω |
with boundary conditions
¯u(i,0)=¯u(i,T2+1)=0,i∈Z(1,T1),¯u(0,j)=¯u(T1+1,j)=0,j∈Z(1,T2). |
Together with the maximum principle and unique continuation property, this implies that p≡λk or p≡λk+1 for λk≤p≤λk+1.
If p≡λk, then ¯u∈W0 and
‖u(1)n,k‖‖un‖→1,n→∞. |
In fact, if ¯u∉W0, then p¯u=0, which leads to ‖¯u‖=0. In view of ‖¯u‖=1, this is a contradiction. Therefore, as n→∞, we have that
T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(f((i,j),un(i,j))−λkun(i,j))u(1)n,k(i,j)=−⟨I′(un),u(1)n,k⟩≤‖un‖‖I′(un)‖→0. | (3.3) |
Obviously, Eq (3.3) is inconsistent with (f2).
If p≡λk+1, then ¯u∈span{ϕk+1} and
‖u(1)n,k+1‖‖un‖→1,n→∞. |
Thus,
T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(λk+1un(i,j)−f((i,j),un(i,j)))u(1)n,k+1(i,j)=⟨I′(un),u(1)n,k+1⟩≤‖un‖‖I′(un)‖→0 |
as n→∞, which contradicts (f3). Therefore, {un} is bounded.
To calculate critical groups at infinity, we have the following lemma.
Lemma 3.2. Let μ∞=dim(W0⊕W−). If (f1), (f2), and (f3) are satisfied, then Cq(I,∞)≅δq,μ∞Z.
Proof. First, for t∈[0,1], let It:S→R be given as
It(u)=12T1+1∑i=1T2∑j=1|△1u(i−1,j)|2+12T1∑i=1T2+1∑j=1|△2u(i,j−1)|2−1−t4λkT1∑i=1T2∑j=1|u(i,j)|2−1−t4λk+1T1∑i=1T2∑j=1|u(i,j)|2−tT1∑i=1T2∑j=1F((i,j),u(i,j))=12‖u‖2−1−t4(λk+λk+1)‖u‖22−tT1∑i=1T2∑j=1F((i,j),u(i,j)). |
In the following, we prove that Eq (2.4) in Proposition 2.1 is true. Otherwise, there exists {un}⊆S, tn∈[0,1] such that
‖un‖→∞,(1+‖un‖)‖I′t(un)‖→0,n→∞. |
Denote ¯un=un‖un‖. Then, ‖¯un‖=1 and there exists ¯u∈S satisfying ‖¯u‖=1 such that ¯un→¯u as n→∞. From Lemma 3.1, we know that
f((i,j),un)‖un‖→p¯u,n→∞. |
Suppose that tn→t0, whereby is easy to show that ¯u is a solution subject to
{△21¯u(i−1,j)+△22¯u(i,j−1)−ξ(t0)¯u=0,(i,j)∈Ω,¯u(i,0)=¯u(i,T2+1)=0i∈Z(1,T1),¯u(0,j)=¯u(T1+1,j)=0j∈Z(1,T2), |
where ξ(t0)=1−t02λk+1−t02λk+1+t0p and λk≤ξ(t0)≤λk+1. By the maximum principle and unique continuation property, we find that
ξ(t0)≡λkorξ(t0)≡λk+1. |
Furthermore, t0=1 means that tn→1 as n→∞. Therefore,
‖u(1)n,k‖‖un‖→1or‖u(1)n,k+1‖‖un‖→1. |
Note that (f2) and (f3) are valid, and so
T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(f((i,j),un(i,j))−λkun(i,j))u(1)n,k(i,j)≥δ1>0,n>N1 |
or
T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(λk+1un(i,j)−f((i,j),un(i,j)))u(1)n,k+1(i,j)≥δ2>0,n>N2. |
Considering λk≤λk+1, we have
−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(f((i,j),un)−λkun(i,j))u(1)n,k(i,j)+1−tn2tn(λk−λk+1)‖u(1)n,k‖2→0,n→∞, |
which implies that
T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(f((i,j),un)−λkun(i,j))u(1)n,k(i,j)+o(1)=1−tn2tn(λk−λk+1)‖u(1)n,k‖2≤0,n→∞. |
Therefore,
lim supn→∞T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(f((i,j),un)−λkun(i,j))u(1)n,k(i,j)≤0 |
or
lim supn→∞T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(λk+1un(i,j)−f((i,j),un))u(1)n,k+1(i,j)≤0, |
which guarantees that Eq (2.4) is satisfied.
It is easy to show that Eq (2.5) is satisfied and I0, I1 satisfy (C). In fact, because
I0(u)=12‖u‖2−14(λk+λk+1)‖u‖22,u∈S, |
we have that
△21¯u(i−1,j)+△22¯u(i,j−1)+12(λk+λk+1)‖¯u‖2=0,(i,j)∈Ω, |
which is impossible for ‖¯u‖=1. Consequently, I0 satisfies (C). Moreover,
∂tIt=14(λk+λk+1)‖u‖2−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1F((i,j),u(i,j)) |
is continuous. According to Proposition 2.1, we have that
Cq(I,∞)=Cq(I1,∞)≅Cq(I0,∞),q∈Z. |
Note that u=0 is a unique nondegenerate critical point of I0 with μ0=dim(W0⊕W−). Thus,
Cq(I0,∞)≅Cq(I0,0)≅δq,μ∞Z,μ∞=μ0=dim(W0⊕W−). |
Further, we have that Cq(I,∞)≅δq,μ∞Z.
To gain some mountain pass-type critical points by applying the cut-technique, we verify the following compactness conditions.
Lemma 3.3. Let
f+((i,j),u)={f((i,j),u),u≥0,0,u<0, | (3.4) |
such that
λk≤lim infu→+∞f+((i,j),u)u≤lim supu→+∞f+((i,j),u)u≤λk+1. |
Then, the functional I+:S→R defined by
I+(u)=12‖u‖2−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1F+((i,j),u(i,j)) |
satisfies (PS), where F+((i,j),u)=∫u0f+((i,j),τ)dτ.
Proof. Let {un}⊆S be a (PS)c sequence, that is,
I+(un)→c,I′+(un)→0,n→∞. |
Similar to Lemma 3.1, assume that {un} is unbounded. Then, we have
|un(i,j)|→∞,n→∞,∀(i,j)∈Ω. | (3.5) |
Denote vn=un‖un‖, so that ‖vn‖=1. As S is a T1T2-dimensional Hilbert space, there exists v∈S satisfying ‖v‖=1 such that vn→v as n→∞. Hence, for any φ∈S, it holds that
⟨I′+(un),φ⟩‖un‖=⟨vn,φ⟩−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(f+((i,j),un(i,j))‖un‖,φ(i,j)). | (3.6) |
For any (i,j)∈Ω, write v+(i,j)=max{v(i,j),0}. Then, there exists α satisfying λk≤α≤λk+1 such that
limn→∞f+((i,j),un(i,j))‖un‖=limn→∞f+((i,j),un(i,j))un(i,j)vn(i,j)=αv+(i,j). |
Together with Eq (3.6), this yields
−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1{Δ21v(i−1,j)+Δ22v(i,j−1)+αv+(i,j)}φ(i,j)=0,n→∞, |
which implies that v is the nontrivial solution of
Δ21v(i−1,j)+Δ22v(i,j−1)+αv+(i,j)=0,(i,j)∈Ω | (3.7) |
with boundary conditions
v(i,0)=v(i,T2+1)=0,i∈Z(1,T1),v(0,j)=v(T1+1,j)=0,j∈Z(1,T2). | (3.8) |
Denote v(i0,j0):=min{v(i,j)|(i,j)∈Ω}. We aim to show that v(i0,j0)>0. Otherwise, αv+(i,j)=0 and
Δ21v(i0−1,j0)+Δ22v(i0,j0−1)=0,(i,j)∈Ω, |
which means that Δ1v(i0−1,j0)=Δ2v(i0,j0−1)=0. Moreover, v(i0−1,j0)=v(i0,j0)=v(i0,j0−1). Therefore, v≡0 for all (i,j)∈Ω. Additionally, v is the nontrivial solution of Eqs (3.7)–(3.8), which implies that v(i0,j0)>0, and so v(i,j)>0. Recall that λk≤α≤λk+1, we so we have that {un} is bounded.
In the same manner as Lemma 3.3, we can state the following.
Lemma 3.4. If
λk≤lim infu→−∞f−((i,j),u)u≤lim supu→−∞f−((i,j),u)u≤λk+1, |
where
f−((i,j),u)={f((i,j),u),u≤0,0,u>0, | (3.9) |
then the functional I−:S→R defined by
I−(u)=12‖u‖2−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1F−((i,j),u(i,j)) |
satisfies (PS), where F−((i,j),u)=∫u0f−((i,j),τ)dτ.
Lemma 3.5. If all conditions of Theorem 3.1 are fulfilled, then I+ has a critical point u+>0 such that Cq(I+,u+)≅δq,1Z and I− has a critical point u−<0 such that Cq(I−,u−)≅δq,1Z.
Proof. We prove the case of I+; the proof of I− is similar and is omitted for brevity. With the aid of Proposition 2.5, we need only prove that I+ satisfies (J3), (J4). According to (V1), there exist ρ, ρ1>0 such that F″((i,j),0)<ρ1<λ1 and
F((i,j),u)≤12ρu2,|u(i,j)|≤ρ. |
Then, for any (i,j)∈Ω and u∈S with ‖u‖≤√λ1ρ1, we have
I+(u)=12‖u‖2−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1F+((i,j),u(i,j))=12‖u‖2−∑u∈UF((i,j),u(i,j))≥12‖u‖2−12ρ1∑u∈U|u(i,j)|2≥12‖u‖2−12ρ1T1∑i=1T2∑j=1|u(i,j)|2≥12‖u‖2−12ρ1λ1‖u‖2>0, |
with U={(i,j)∈Ω|u(i,j)≥0}, which ensures (J3) is valid.
Using (f1), there exist γ>λk−1(≥λ1), b2∈R such that
F((i,j),u)≥γ2u2+b2,∀u∈R. |
For t>ρ, choose e∈span{ϕ1}. Then, we have
I+(te)=12‖te‖2−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1F((i,j),te(i,j))≤12‖te‖2−γ‖te‖222−b2T1T2=12‖te‖2−γ‖te‖22λ1−b2T1T2=t22(1−γλ1)‖e‖2−b2T1T2≤0. |
Therefore, (J4) is satisfied.
By the Mountain Pass Lemma, I+ possesses a critical point u+≠0. Moreover, there exists a sequence {u+n} such that I′+(u+n)→I′+(u+) as n→∞. For any φ∈S, we have
⟨I′+(u+n),φ⟩=⟨u+n,φ⟩−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1(f+((i,j),u+n(i,j)),φ(i,j)). |
Letting n→∞,
limn→∞f+((i,j),u+n(i,j))=limn→∞f+((i,j),u+n(i,j))u+n(i,j)u+n(i,j)=αu+(i,j),(i,j)∈Ω, |
which leads to
Δ21u+(i−1,j)+Δ22u+(i,j−1)+αu+(i,j)=0 |
with λk≤α≤λk+1 and u+(i,j):=max{u(i,j),0}. Similar to the proof of Lemma 3.3, u+ is positive.
We now calculate Cq(I+,u+). Recalling Eq (2.1), we find that
⟨I″(u+)v,v⟩≥0,∀v∈S |
and there exists some v0≠0 such that
⟨I″(u+)v0,v⟩=0,∀v∈S, |
which implies that v0 is a solution of
{Δ21v0(i−1,j)+Δ22v0(i,j−1)−F″((i,j),u+)v0(i,j)=0,(i,j)∈Ω,v0(i,0)=v0(i,T2+1)=0,i∈Z(1,T1),v0(0,j)=v0(T1+1,j)=0,j∈Z(1,T2). |
Combining this with (V2), it follows that
{Δ21v(i−1,j)+Δ22v(i,j−1)−λF″((i,j),u+)v(i,j)=0,(i,j)∈Ω,v(i,0)=v(i,T2+1)=0,i∈Z(1,T1),v(0,j)=v(T1+1,j)=0,j∈Z(1,T2) |
admits an eigenvalue λ=1 such that dimker(I″(u+))=1. Hence, we conclude that Cq(I,u+)≅Cq(I+,u+)≅δq,1Z. This completes the proof.
It is time for us to give the detailed proof of Theorem 3.1 using Proposition 2.4.
Proof of Theorem 3.1 Given I′(0)=0 and (V1), then
⟨I″(0)u,u⟩≥(1−F″((i,j),0)λ1)‖u‖2,(i,j)∈Ω, |
which implies that 0 is the local minimizer of I. From Proposition 2.2, we have
Cq(I,0)≅δq,0Z,q∈Z. | (3.10) |
Furthermore, Lemma 3.2 ensures that
Cq(I,∞)≅δq,μ∞Z,q∈Z. |
Then, according to Proposition 2.4, there exists some critical point u1≠0 of I such that
Cμ∞(I,u1)≆0. | (3.11) |
Consequently, we conclude that u+, u− and u1 are nontrivial critical points of I with u+>0 and u−<0. The proof of Theorem 3.1 is achieved.
Before verifying Theorem 3.2 using Proposition 2.3, we need the following lemma about local linking.
Lemma 3.6. Let (V3) and (F0+) (or (F0−)) hold. Then, I has a local linking at 0 with respect to
S=S−⊕S+, |
where S−=span{ϕ1,ϕ2,...,ϕm} (or S−=span{ϕ1,ϕ2,...,ϕm−1}).
Proof. Suppose that (F0+) is satisfied. Then, there exists δ>0 such that |u(i,j)|≤δ, ‖u‖≤δ√λT1T2, and
F((i,j),u)≥12λmu2. |
For u∈S− with 0<‖u‖≤δ√λT1T2, we have
I(u)=12‖u‖2−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1F((i,j),u(i,j))≤12‖u‖2−12λm‖u‖22≤12(1−λmλm)‖u‖2=0. | (3.12) |
For u∈S+ with 0<‖u‖<δ√λT1T2, we obtain
I(u)≥12‖u‖2−12λmλm+1‖u‖2=12(1−λmλm+1)‖u‖2>0. | (3.13) |
Obviously, I(0)=0. Combining this with Eqs (3.12) and (3.13), it is clear that I has a local linking at 0.
Proof of Theorem 3.2 Denote μ0=dimspan{ϕ1,...,ϕm−1}, ν0=dimspan{ϕm}. Let (V3) be true. Then, 0 is degenerate. Taking account of Proposition 2.3, we find that
Cq(I,0)≅δq,μ0+ν0Z,q∈Z. |
In contrast, Lemma 3.2 gives Cq(I,∞)≅δq,μ∞Z. Therefore, Proposition 2.4 guarantees the existence of u∗ such that
Cμ∞(I,u∗)≆0. |
Moreover, m≠k implies that μ0+ν0≠μ∞. Thus, u∗≠0.
From (V4), there exists u0≠0 such that f((i,j),u0)=0. Without loss of generality, we can assume that u0>0. In the sequence, we intend to obtain the local minimizer of I. Define
˜f((i,j),u)={0,u<0,f((i,j),u),u∈[0,u0],0,u>u0, | (3.14) |
and let
˜I(u)=12‖u‖2−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1˜F((i,j),u(i,j)),u∈S, |
where ˜F((i,j),u)=∫u0˜f((i,j),τ)dτ. Then, ˜I is coercive and continuous. Therefore, there exists a minimizer ˜u0 of ˜I. From the maximum principle, we deduce that ˜u0=0 or 0<˜u0(i,j)<u0 for all (i,j)∈Ω. Moreover, (V3) means that 0 is not a minimizer. Consequently, ˜u0≠0 is a local minimizer of I and Cq(I,˜u0)≅δq,0Z, q∈Z.
Denote ˆF((i,j),u)=∫u0ˆf((i,j),τ)dτ, where
ˆf((i,j),v)=f((i,j),v+˜u0)−f((i,j),˜u0),(i,j)∈Ω,v∈S. |
The corresponding functional is then given by
ˆI(v)=12‖v‖2−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1ˆF((i,j),v(i,j)),v∈S. |
If v is a nonzero critical point of ˆI, then ˜u0+v is a critical point of I with
Cq(ˆI,v)=Cq(I,˜u0+v). |
Define
ˆf+((i,j),v)={ˆf((i,j),v),v≥0,0,v<0, | (3.15) |
and construct the corresponding functional as
ˆI+(v)=12‖v‖2−T1∑i=1T2∑j=1ˆF+((i,j),v(i,j)),v∈S, |
with ˆF+((i,j),u)=∫u0ˆf+((i,j),τ)dτ. Then, ˜u0 is a local minimizer of I for ˆI+ satisfying (PS), which leads to v=0 being a local minimizer of ˆI+. Thus, (J3) is fulfilled. Applying (f1) yields
ˆI+(te)≤0,t→+∞, |
which ensures that (J4) is satisfied. By Lemma 2.5, ˆI+ possesses a critical point v+>0. Furthermore, ˆI possesses a critical point v+ with Cq(ˆI,v+)≅δq,1Z, q∈Z. As a result, u+=˜u0+v+ is a critical point of I satisfying Cq(I,u+)≅δq,1Z, q∈Z. Similarly, u−<˜u0 is a critical point of I satisfying Cq(I,u−)≅δq,1Z. Therefore, u∗, ˜u0, u± are four nontrivial solutions of I and ˜u0, u+ are positive.
For the case u0<0, repeating the above steps shows that I has four nontrivial solutions, among which there are two negative solutions. Therefore, I admits four nontrivial solutions and the proof is finished.
Proof of Theorem 3.3 Similar to the proof of Theorem 3.2, we find that Cq(I,0)≅δq,μ0+ν0Z, q∈Z. Because k=1, Cq(I,∞)≅δq,1Z and there exists some critical point ¯u∗ such that C1(I,¯u∗)≆0. Moreover, u∗ is the critical point of I satisfying Cq(I,¯u∗)≅δq,1Z. From m≠1, we conclude that ¯u∗≠0. If κ={0,¯u∗}, the Morse equality implies that
(−1)μ0+ν0+(−1)1=(−1)1. | (3.16) |
Of course, Eq (3.16) is impossible. Therefore, problem (1.1)–(1.2) possesses at least two nontrivial solutions.
Finally, we present two examples to verify the feasibility of our results.
Example 4.1. Take T1=3, T2=2, and consider
Δ21u(i−1,j)+Δ22u(i,j−1)+(λ12−λk+λk+12)u(i,j)1+[u(i,j)]2+λk+λk+12u(i,j)=0 | (4.1) |
with the boundary value conditions of Eq (1.2).
Because f((i,j),u)=(λ12−λk+λk+12)u(i,j)1+[u(i,j)]2+λk+λk+12u(i,j), it follows that
F″((i,j),u)=λk+λk+12u4+(32(λk+λk+1)−λ12)u2+λ12>0. |
It is not difficult to verify that f((i,j),0)=0, F″((i,j),0)=λ12<λ1, and
λk≤lim|u|→∞f((i,j),u)u=λk+λk+12≤λk+1, |
which means that (f1), (V1) and (V2) are satisfied. If ‖u(1)n,k‖‖un‖→1 as ‖un‖→∞, then we obtain
3∑i=12∑j=1((λ12−λk+λk+12)un(i,j)1+[un(i,j)]2+λk+λk+12un(i,j)−λkun(i,j))u(1)n,k(i,j)=3∑i=12∑j=1((λ12−λk+λk+12)un(i,j)1+[un(i,j)]2+λk+1−λk2un(i,j))u(1)n,k(i,j)=3∑i=12∑j=1[λ12−λk+λk+121+1[u(1)n,k(i,j)]2+λk+1−λk2[u(1)n,k(i,j)]2]→+∞. |
Therefore, (f2) is satisfied. Similarly, (f3) is valid. Therefore, Theorem 3.1 guarantees that problem (4.1)–(1.2) admits at least three nontrivial solutions, of which one is positive and one is negative.
Example 4.2. Take T1=3, T2=2, and consider
Δ21u(i−1,j)+Δ22u(i,j−1)+2(λm−λk+λk+12)u2−u2+λk+λk+12u=0 | (4.2) |
with the boundary value conditions of Eq (1.2).
Denote
f((i,j),u)=2(λm−λk+λk+12)u2−u2+λk+λk+12u. |
Then, f((i,j),0)=0 and there exists u=±√4λmλk+λk+1≠0 such that f((i,j),u)=0, which means that (V4) is satisfied.
A direct computation yields
F((i,j),u)=(λk+λk+12−λm)ln(2−u2)+λk+λk+14u2 |
and
f′((i,j),u)=2(λm−λk+λk+12)(2+u2)(2−u2)2+λk+λk+12, |
and so f′((i,j),0)=λm and (V3) is valid.
As ‖un‖→∞, if ‖u(1)n,k‖‖un‖→1, then
3∑i=12∑j=1(2(λm−λk+λk+12)un(i,j)2−[un(i,j)]2+λk+λk+12un(i,j)−λkun(i,j))u(1)n,k(i,j)=3∑i=12∑j=1(2(λm−λk+λk+12)un(i,j)1+[un(i,j)]2+λk+1−λk2un(i,j))u(1)n,k(i,j)=3∑i=12∑j=1[2λm−(λk+λk+1)1+1[u(1)n,k(i,j)]2+λk+1−λk2[u(1)n,k(i,j)]2]→+∞. |
Therefore, (f2) is satisfied. Similar to (f2), we can show that (f3) is satisfied.
In the following, we verify (f1) and (F0+). If we write
A=(4−10−100−14−10−100−1400−1−1004−100−10−14−100−10−14), |
then A is positive-definite and the eigenvalues of A are
λ1=3−√2,λ2=3,λ3=5−√2,λ4=3+√2,λ5=5,λ6=5+√2. |
Let m=2, k=3. Then, 5−√2≤lim inf|u|→∞f((i,j),u)u=lim sup|u|→∞f((i,j),u)u=4≤3+√2, which means that (f1) is satisfied. Further, there exists δ>0 such that, when |u(i,j)|≤δ, the following holds for any (i,j)∈Z(1,3)×Z(1,2):
2F((i,j),u)−3u2=2ln(2−u2)+u2≥0. |
In fact, for any (i,j)∈Ω, we can choose δ=1>0, and then 0<[u(i,j)]2≤1 for 0<|u(i,j)|≤1. This means that ln(2−u2)≥0 and 2F((i,j),u)−3u2≥0. Thus, (F0+) holds and all conditions of Theorem 3.2 are satisfied. Consequently, Theorem 3.2 ensures that (4.2)–(1.2) admits at least four nontrivial solutions.
More clearly, using Matlab, we find that problem (4.2)–(1.2) has 36 nontrivial solutions. Some examples of these solutions are as follows: (0.5061,0.6548,0.5061,0.5061,0.6548,0.5061), (−0.5061,−0.6548,−0.5061,−0.5061,−0.6548,−0.5061), (−1.9858,2.1015,0.6084,1.9858,−2.1015,−0.6084), and (1.2137,−4.7492,1.2137,13.9612,−1.5032,13.9612).
This paper is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (Grant No. 11971126). The authors wish to thank the handling editor and the anonymous referees for their valuable comments and suggestions.
All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.
[1] |
J. S. Yu, J. Li, Discrete-time models for interactive wild and sterile mosquitoes with general time steps, Math. Biosci., 346 (2022), 108797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mbs.2022.108797 doi: 10.1016/j.mbs.2022.108797
![]() |
[2] |
Y. H. Long, L. Wang, Global dynamics of a delayed two-patch discrete SIR disease model, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 83 (2020), 105117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2019.105117 doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2019.105117
![]() |
[3] |
Y. H. Long, Existence of multiple and sign-changing solutions for a second-order nonlinear functional difference equation with periodic coefficients, J. Differ. Equation Appl., 26 (2020), 966–986. https://doi.org/10.1080/10236198.2020.1804557 doi: 10.1080/10236198.2020.1804557
![]() |
[4] |
Y. H. Long, Existence of two homoclinic solutions for a nonperiodic difference equation with a perturbation, AIMS Math., 6 (2021), 4786–4802. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2021281 doi: 10.3934/math.2021281
![]() |
[5] |
Y. H. Long, J. L. Chen, Existence of multiple solutions to second-order discrete Neumann boundary value problems, Appl. Math. Lett., 83 (2018), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2018.03.006 doi: 10.1016/j.aml.2018.03.006
![]() |
[6] |
J. S. Yu, Z. M. Guo, X. F. Zou, Periodic solutions of second order self-adjoint difference equations, J. Lond. Math. Soc., 71 (2005), 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1112/S0024610704005939 doi: 10.1112/S0024610704005939
![]() |
[7] |
Y. H. Long, S. H. Wang, J. L. Chen, Multiple solutions of fourth-order difference equations with different boundary conditions, Bound. Value Probl., 2019 (2019), 152. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-019-1265-2 doi: 10.1186/s13661-019-1265-2
![]() |
[8] |
Y. H. Long, S. H. Wang, Multiple solutions for nonlinear functional difference equations by the invariant sets of descending flow, J. Differ. Equation Appl., 25 (2019), 1768–1789. https://doi.org/10.1080/10236198.2019.1694014 doi: 10.1080/10236198.2019.1694014
![]() |
[9] | Y. H. Long, Q. Q. Zhang, Sign-changing solutions of a discrete fourth-order Lidstone problem with three parameters, J. Appl. Anal. Comput., 2022. |
[10] | S. Heidarkhani, F. Gharehgazlouei, M. Imbesi, Existence and multiplicity of homoclinic solutions for a difference equation, Electron. J. Differ. Equations, 115 (2020), 1–12. https://www.webofscience.com/wos/alldb/full-record/WOS:000591718300001 |
[11] |
F. Gharehgazlouei, S. Heidarkhani, New existence criterion of infinitely many solutions for partial discrete Dirichlet problems, Tbilisi Math. J., 13 (2020), 43–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.32513/tbilisi/1601344897 doi: 10.32513/tbilisi/1601344897
![]() |
[12] |
M. Bohner, G. Caristi, S. Heidarkhani, S. Moradi, Existence of at least one homoclinic solution for a nonlinear second-order difference equation, Int. J. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 20 (2019), 433–439. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijnsns-2018-0223 doi: 10.1515/ijnsns-2018-0223
![]() |
[13] |
S. Heidarkhani, G. A. Afrouzi, S. Moradi, An existence result for discrete anisotropic equations, Taiwanese J. Math., 22 (2018), 725–739. http://dx.doi.org/10.11650/tjm/170801 doi: 10.11650/tjm/170801
![]() |
[14] |
S. Heidarkhani, G. A. Afrouzi, S. Moradi, G. Caristi, Existence of multiple solutions for a perturbed discrete anisotropic equation, J. Differ. Equation Appl., 23 (2017), 1491–1507. https://doi.org/10.1080/10236198.2017.1337108 doi: 10.1080/10236198.2017.1337108
![]() |
[15] |
S. Heidarkhani, M. Imbesi, Multiple solutions for partial discrete Dirichlet problems depending on a real parameter, J. Differ. Equation Appl., 21 (2015), 96–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/10236198.2014.988619 doi: 10.1080/10236198.2014.988619
![]() |
[16] |
Z. Zhou, J. X. Ling, Infinitely many positive solutions for a discrete two point nonlinear boundary value problem with ϕc-Laplacian, Appl. Math. Lett., 91 (2019), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2018.11.016 doi: 10.1016/j.aml.2018.11.016
![]() |
[17] |
Y. H. Long, X. Q. Deng, Existence and multiplicity solutions for discrete Kirchhoff type problems, Appl. Math. Lett., 126 (2022), 107817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2021.107817 doi: 10.1016/j.aml.2021.107817
![]() |
[18] | Y. H. Long, Multiple results on nontrivial solutions of discrete Kirchhoff type problems, J. Appl. Math. Comput., 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12190-022-01731-0. |
[19] | Y. H. Long, Nontrivial solutions of discrete Kirchhoff type problems via Morse theory, Adv. Nonlinear Anal., 11 (2022), 1352–1364. |
[20] | Y. H. Long, H. Zhang, Three nontrivial solutions for second-order partial difference equation via Morse theory, J. Funct. Spaces, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/1564961 |
[21] |
S. J. Du, Z. Zhou, On the existence of multiple solutions for a partial discrete Dirichlet boundary value problem with mean curvature operator, Adv. Nonlinear Anal., 11 (2022), 198–211. https://doi.org/10.1515/anona-2020-0195 doi: 10.1515/anona-2020-0195
![]() |
[22] |
S. H. Wang, Z. Zhou, Three solutions for a partial discrete Dirichlet boundary value problem with p-Laplacian, Bound. Value Probl., 2021 (2021), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-021-01514-9 doi: 10.1186/s13661-021-01514-9
![]() |
[23] | S. S. Cheng, Partial difference equations, Taylor Francis, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780367801052 |
[24] |
H. S. Tang, W. Luo, X. Li, M. J. Ma, Nontrivial solutions of discrete elliptic boundary value problems, Comput. Math. Appl., 55 (2008), 1854–1860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2007.08.030 doi: 10.1016/j.camwa.2007.08.030
![]() |
[25] |
G. Zhang, Existence of nontrivial solutions for discrete elliptic boundary value problems, Numer. Methods Partial Differ. Equations, 22 (2006), 1479–1488. https://doi.org/10.1002/num.20164 doi: 10.1002/num.20164
![]() |
[26] |
J. B. Su, L. G. Zhao, An elliptic resonance problem with multiple solutions, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 319 (2006), 604–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.10.059 doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.10.059
![]() |
[27] |
Q. Wang, W. J. Liu, M. Wang, Nontrivial periodic solutions for second-order differential delay equations, J. Appl. Math. Comput., 7 (2017), 931–941. http://dx.doi.org/10.11948/2017058 doi: 10.11948/2017058
![]() |
[28] | K. C. Chang, Infinite dimensional Morse theory and multiple solutions problem, Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, 1993. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0385-8 |
[29] |
K. C. Chang, Solutions of asymptotically linear operator via Morse theory, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 34 (1981), 693–712. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.3160340503 doi: 10.1002/cpa.3160340503
![]() |
[30] |
Y. H. Long, H. P. Shi, X. Q. Peng, Nontrivial periodic solutions to delay difference equations via Morse theory, Open Math., 16 (2018), 885–896. https://doi.org/10.1515/math-2018-0077 doi: 10.1515/math-2018-0077
![]() |
[31] |
M. Imbesi, G. M. Bisci, Discrete elliptic Dirichlet problems and nonlinear algebraic systems, Mediterr. J. Math., 13 (2016), 263–278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00009-014-0490-2 doi: 10.1007/s00009-014-0490-2
![]() |
[32] |
P. Bartolo, V. Benci, D. Fortunato, Abstract critical point theorems and applications to nonlinear problems with strong resonance at infinity, Nonlinear Anal., 7 (1983), 981–1012. https://doi.org/10.1016/0362-546X(83)90115-3 doi: 10.1016/0362-546X(83)90115-3
![]() |
[33] | J. Mawhin, M. Willem, Critical point theory and Hamiltonian systems, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1989. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2061-7 |
[34] |
Z. P. Liang, J. B. Su, Multiple solutions for semilinear elliptic boundary value problems with double resonance, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 354 (2009), 147–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2008.12.053 doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2008.12.053
![]() |
[35] |
J. B. Su, Multiplicity results for asymptotically linear elliptic problems at resonance, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 278 (2003), 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00707-2. doi: 10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00707-2
![]() |
1. | Yuhua Long, Dan Li, Multiple nontrivial periodic solutions to a second-order partial difference equation, 2023, 31, 2688-1594, 1596, 10.3934/era.2023082 | |
2. | Huan Zhang, Yin Zhou, Yuhua Long, Results on multiple nontrivial solutions to partial difference equations, 2022, 8, 2473-6988, 5413, 10.3934/math.2023272 | |
3. | Huan Zhang, Yuhua Long, Multiple Existence Results of Nontrivial Solutions for a Class of Second-Order Partial Difference Equations, 2022, 15, 2073-8994, 6, 10.3390/sym15010006 | |
4. | Yuhua Long, Qinqin Zhang, Infinitely many large energy solutions to a class of nonlocal discrete elliptic boundary value problems, 2023, 0, 1534-0392, 0, 10.3934/cpaa.2023037 |