Loading [MathJax]/jax/element/mml/optable/BasicLatin.js
Research article Special Issues

Brezis Nirenberg type results for local non-local problems under mixed boundary conditions

  • Received: 13 February 2024 Revised: 30 July 2024 Accepted: 08 November 2024 Published: 26 November 2024
  • 35A15, 35J25, 35J20

  • In this paper, we are concerned with an elliptic problem with mixed Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions that involve a mixed operator (i.e., the combination of classical Laplace operator and fractional Laplace operator) and critical nonlinearity. Also, we focus on identifying the optimal constant in the mixed Sobolev inequality, which we show is never achieved. Furthermore, by using variational methods, we provide an existence and nonexistence theory for both linear and superlinear perturbation cases.

    Citation: Lovelesh Sharma. Brezis Nirenberg type results for local non-local problems under mixed boundary conditions[J]. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2024, 16(4): 872-895. doi: 10.3934/cam.2024038

    Related Papers:

    [1] Mahmoud El Ahmadi, Mohammed Barghouthe, Anass Lamaizi, Mohammed Berrajaa . Existence and multiplicity results for a kind of double phase problems with mixed boundary value conditions. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2024, 16(3): 509-527. doi: 10.3934/cam.2024024
    [2] Yang Liu . Global attractors for a nonlinear plate equation modeling the oscillations of suspension bridges. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(3): 436-456. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023021
    [3] Xiulan Wu, Yaxin Zhao, Xiaoxin Yang . On a singular parabolic $ p $-Laplacian equation with logarithmic nonlinearity. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2024, 16(3): 528-553. doi: 10.3934/cam.2024025
    [4] Marvin Koonce, Jason Metcalfe . The sharp lifespan for a system of multiple speed wave equations: Radial case. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2025, 17(3): 662-682. doi: 10.3934/cam.2025026
    [5] Siegfried Carl . Quasilinear parabolic variational-hemivariational inequalities in $ \mathbb{R}^N\times (0, \tau) $ under bilateral constraints. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2025, 17(1): 41-60. doi: 10.3934/cam.2025003
    [6] Farrukh Dekhkonov . On a boundary control problem for a pseudo-parabolic equation. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(2): 289-299. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023015
    [7] Leandro Tavares . Solutions for a class of problems driven by an anisotropic $ (p, q) $-Laplacian type operator. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(3): 533-550. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023026
    [8] Panyu Deng, Jun Zheng, Guchuan Zhu . Well-posedness and stability for a nonlinear Euler-Bernoulli beam equation. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2024, 16(1): 193-216. doi: 10.3934/cam.2024009
    [9] Farrukh Dekhkonov . On one boundary control problem for a pseudo-parabolic equation in a two-dimensional domain. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2025, 17(1): 1-14. doi: 10.3934/cam.2025001
    [10] Huiyang Xu . Existence and blow-up of solutions for finitely degenerate semilinear parabolic equations with singular potentials. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(2): 132-161. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023008
  • In this paper, we are concerned with an elliptic problem with mixed Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions that involve a mixed operator (i.e., the combination of classical Laplace operator and fractional Laplace operator) and critical nonlinearity. Also, we focus on identifying the optimal constant in the mixed Sobolev inequality, which we show is never achieved. Furthermore, by using variational methods, we provide an existence and nonexistence theory for both linear and superlinear perturbation cases.



    In this study, we focus on elliptic operators of mixed local and non-local types (mixed Dirichlet and Neuman boundary conditions) concerning possible positive solutions for critical problems and possible optimizers of appropriate mixed Sobolev inequality. We examine the existence of solutions to the perturbed critical problem.

    {Tw=w21+λwp,w>0in O,w=0inUc,Ns(w)=0inΠ2,wν=0inO¯Π2. (Pλ)

    where U=(ΩΠ2(Ω¯Π2)) and ΩΠ2 is a bounded set with smooth boundary, n3, 1p<21=n+2n2 and λR. Here, ORn is a nonempty open set, Π1, Π2 are open subsets of RnˉO such that ¯Π1¯Π2=RnˉO, Π1Π2= and

    T=Δ+(Δ)s,fors(0,1). (1.1)

    An operator that combines classical Laplace operator Δ and fractional Laplace operator (Δ)s is referred to as being 'mixed'. The fractional Laplace operator is defined by

    (Δ)sw(x)=Cn,sP.V.Rnw(x)w(y)|xy|n+2sdy,s(0,1).

    The abbreviation "P.V." denotes the Cauchy principal value and

    Cn,s=(Rn1cos(z1)|z|n+2sdz)1.

    Without discussing the specific instances of how this non-local operator is useful in the actual situations, and the motivations for investigating issues with them, see [1] and references therein for more details. The study of the mixed operators of the form L in (1.1) is motivated by a wide range of applications. The numerous applications serve as the motivation for the comprehensive analysis of operator T in the problem (Pλ), such as the concept of optimum exploration mathematical biology, we refer to [2,3,4,5,6], and other common uses include heat transmission in magnetized plasmas; see [7]. These types of operators are naturally developed in the applied sciences to investigate the changes in physical phenomena that have both local and nonlocal effects. Based on these operators, diffusion patterns change over different time scales, with the lower-order operator taking the lead for long-term patterns and the higher-order operator leading for short-term patterns they arise, for instance, in bi-modal power law distribution processes; see [8]. Further applications arise in the theory of optimal searching and biomathematics; we refer to [2,3] and the references therein. Also, this type of operator emerges in models derived from combining two distinct random processes in the probability theory; for a comprehensive explanation of such a phenomenon, refer to [9]. Recently, there has been a considerable focus on investigating elliptic problems having mixed-type operator T, as in (Pλ), exhibiting both local and nonlocal behaviour. Let us put some light on literature involving mixed operator L problems along the existing long list. Biagi, Dipierro, and Valdinoci [10] have provided a comprehensive analysis of a mixed local and non-local elliptic problem. Throughout their study, they proved the existence of solutions to the elliptic problem, explored the maximum principles that govern the behaviour of these solutions, and investigated the interior Sobolev regularity of the solutions.

    The investigation of mixed-type operators is a widely studied area that is emerging in diverse fields. This includes scenarios like combining the Lévy stable process, which finds intriguing applications in understanding animal cropping technique, as discussed in [2,3,11,12]. Aizicovici et al. in [13] have studied the nonlinear logistic equation of the superdiffusive type driven by a nonhomogeneous differential operator with Robin boundary condition and existence and multiplicity results of positive solutions to the linearly coupled Hartree systems with critical exponent involving the classical Laplace operator studied by Mao et al. in [14], and also interesting nonlocal Hilfer proportional sequential fractional multi-valued boundary value problems have been studied by [15]. Motivated by the investigation of non-linear problems having critical exponents, in particular those arising from optimizers of the Sobolev inequality, the concerns addressed in this paper are motivated. Their findings contribute to a better understanding of the characteristics of solutions to the following

    {Tu=g(u),u>0in O,u=0inRnO. (1.2)

    Authors have studied various interesting inequalities for mixed operator L in [16,17]. Lamao et al. in [18] found out the behavior and properties of solutions to (1.2), specifically focusing on their summability characteristics. We also refer to [19,20,21] for interested readers, where we point out that [21] contains a study of mixed operator Neumann problem. The non-linear generalization of L given by Δp+(Δp)s has also started gaining attention for mixed operators. Dipierro et al. in [22] were the first to consider mixed operator problems in the presence of classical as well as non-local Neumann boundary conditions. Their recent article discusses some characteristics and regularity results corresponding with a mixed local and non-local problem, further with certain specific incentives derived from mathematics models and population growth. It is worth commenting that none of these articles studies mixed operator problems under mixed boundary conditions. This made us curious about what happens when we set up a PDE involving mixed operator L under boundary conditions involving Dirichlet datum in some part and Neumann (local and non-local both) datum in the remaining part. To answer this, we started with (Pλ) and the combination of mixed operator as well as mixed Dirichlet Neumann boundary, which is the striking feature of our paper. In particular, when T=Δ in (Pλ), Grossi [23] studied classical problems with mixed boundary conditions and established solutions under some appropriate assumption on parameter λ. In [24], authors have studied the behaviour of the Sobolev constant with a mixed boundary condition, where the main goal is to examine appropriate emphasis concerning the Neumann boundary of a sequence that minimizes using the standard isoperimetric inequalities. In our study, we define a function space where it contains those functions that are vanishing on some part of RnˉO. Due to this behavior, the best constant depends on some part of RnˉO, but in the Dirichlet boundary case, best constant does not depend on O. For further study, see [24]. Biagi et al. [25] studied existence and non-existence outcomes to (Pλ) type problems under the Dirichlet boundary condition. The motivation for this paper arises from the investigation of nonlinear problems with critical exponents. These problems are modeled as

    Lu=f(u)+λg(u),

    under some conditions on u and L is some operator like (local/nonlocal/mixed). Here f(u) and g(u) represent the critical and subcritical nonlinearities, respectively, and λR is a parameter. With all the above literature as motivation where, many authors have studied the existence/nonexistence and multiplicity of the solutions. We are curious about the critical problem involving mixed local and nonlocal operator T under the mixed Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions. We proved similar results as in [25] pertaining to problem (Pλ) with mixed boundary conditions in the same spirit. There exists no single article at present that studies such a problem with mixed boundary conditions; hence, our article is a breakthrough in this regard. Last but not least, we try to provide a glimpse of problems available in literature, involving Dirichlet Neumann's mixed boundary datum to the readers. Brezis et al. in [26], consider the following Dirichlet boundary value problem:

    {Δu=up+f(x,u),u>0in Ω,u=0inΩ. (1.3)

    where Ω is the bounded domain of Rn, p=21n3 and in particular, f(x,u)=λu. They have studied the existence of solutions to (1.3) for every λ(0,λ1), (λ1 is the first eigenvalue of Δ) when n4 and problem (1.3) has no solution if λ(0,λ1) and Ω is star-shaped domain. In [27], Valdinoci et al. studied the fractional counterpart of problem (1.3) and its results can be seen as an extension of the classical Brezis-Nirenberg results. Recently, Biagi et al. in [28] have studied the corresponding Sobolev inequality and found the optimal constant, which is never achieved, and they also proved the existence and non-existence of a positive solution to a mixed elliptic problem (Pλ) with the Dirichlet boundary condition using the variational methods. Currently, we have worked on the first principle eigenvalue problem with mixed operators involving mixed boundary conditions in [29]. Using its advantage, we extend the results of [28] in our article. Our optimal constant does not depend on the whole domain as [28]: it only depends on some part of the boundary of the domain. Our findings offer specific advantages over existing results by introducing a novel approach to nonlinear problems with critical exponent, which enhances the understanding of this problem (Pλ) with mixed boundary conditions. These contributions hold substantial potential impact for both theoretical developments and practical applications in related fields. We also established L result of positive of solutions and maximum principle for problem (Pλ).

    First, we looked into the mixed Sobolev inequality for the case of the mixed operators where the domain is divided into two disjoint parts, Π1 and Π2. More precisely, suppose n3 and 2=2nn2 critical Sobolev exponent. Fix s(0,1). Let O be an open set that may not be bounded. We assume that w:RnR that are vanshis outside of U. So, we define the following mixed Sobolev inequality

    Sn,s(O,Π1)w2L2(O)w2L2(O)+Q|w(x)w(y)|2|xy|n+2sdxdy. (1.4)

    Here, constant Sn,s(O,Π1) is taken to be large enough for which inequality (1.4) is satisfied.

    We observe that equation (1.4) holds by choosing the constant that is less than or equal to the following classical Sobolev constant (which depends at some portion on the boundary of O)

    S(Π2)=(n(ξn2)1nCn22n)2, (1.5)

    where ξn is the measure of the unit ball in Rn and C=ΓnΓ(n2Γ(n2+1)(12)3n22, to further details, we refer to [23,24]. From [23], we have classical best Sobolev constant SnS(Π2). Since from well known the Sobolev inequality:

    S(Π2)w2L2(O)w2L2(O)w2L2(O)+Q|w(x)w(y)|2|xy|n+2sdxdy=ζ(w)2.

    Also, we can see the largest possible constant in (1.4) certainly satisfies Sn,s(O,Π1)S(Π2) and S(Π2) depends on some part of domain O. Our goal is to demonstrate the interaction between Sn,s(O,Π1) and S(Π2) in the following theorem.

    Theorem 1.1. Suppose s(0,1), ORn is an open set. Then, the following holds true

    Sn,s(O,Π1)=S(Π2). (1.6)

    In the following result, we show the optimal constant Sn,s(O,Π1) in (1.4) is never achieved.

    Theorem 1.2. Suppose ORn is an open set. Then, Sn,s(O,Π1) in (1.4) is never achieved.

    Now, our following result gives us surety of the nonexistence solutions to this problem (Pλ) for λ0 and star-shaped bounded domain.

    Theorem 1.3. Suppose λ0 and ORn is a star-shaped bounded domain. Then, (Pλ) has no solutions, where 1p<21.

    Proof. We follow the same ideas from [Theorem 1.3 in [25]] to complete this proof and also we can easily complete our proof by using Pohozaév identity and borrowed ideas from [Theorem 1.8 in [30]].

    Furthermore, analysis of the existence theory to the problem (Pλ) is dependent on λ. Let us quickly review the approach of Grossi et al. [23]. We used concepts from [25] to identify the existence of solutions and studied the properties of the map λSλ,s to determine the inequality Sλ,s<S(Π2). In the case of p=1 and for any range of λ, we show problem (Pλ) has no solution. However, (Pλ) has a solution inside an intermediate range of λ. More precisely, denoting by λ1,s the first eigenvalue of (Δ)s with mixed Dirichlet-Neumann boundary condition in a bounded open set O and by λ the first eigenvalue of T in O with mixed Dirichlet-Neumann boundary condition, see [29], we have the following result.

    Theorem 1.4. Let p=1 (linear case) and O be nonempty bounded open set. There exists λ[λ1,s,λ) such that the problem (Pλ) possesses at least one solution if λ(λ,λ). Furthermore, the following are true

    1. For λλ, problem (Pλ) has no solutions.

    2. Suppose 0<λλ1,s and B={wL2(O):wL2(O)S(Π2)n24}L2(O). Then (Pλ) have no solutions in B.

    In the case of the superlinear perturbation, the scenarios are very different, and the following outcome is demonstrated using the variational method, which is based on the Mountain pass geometry, see in [31] and to prove it we state the existence result below.

    Theorem 1.5. Suppose p(1,21), n3. Then, problem (Pλ) has a non-trivial solution

    1. If αs,n>τp.n, for all λ>0.

    2. If αs,nτp.n, λ>0 large enough.

    where,

    αs,n=min (1.7)

    The article is organized in the following way : Section 2 presents the functional framework suitable for mixed classical and fractional Laplace operators with mixed Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions. In Section 3, we focused on the analysis of mixed-order Sobolev-type inequality and proved the main results 1.1, 1.2. In Section 4, we present the analysis of the critical problem. Next, we provide an analysis of the critical problem in Section 4 and also for both cases and , we complete proof of Theorem 1.4, Theorem 1.5.

    Throughout this section, we set our notations and formulate the functional setting for (), which shall be useful throughout the paper. More precisely, we define the function spaces to study (), and also investigated the existence of an optimal constant for some mixed Sobolev-type inequalities.

    For every , we recall the fractional Sobolev spaces; see [32],

    We assume that is bounded with a smooth boundary. We define the function space as the completion of equipped with the following norm

    where is the Gagliardo seminorm of defined by

    The symbol is used throughout the article instead of to keep things simple. and .

    Specifically for , we have

    (2.1)

    In order to verify equation (2.1), suppose is bounded, then we can see as

    The Sobolev inequality allows us to deduce the existence of constant . Given

    by the classical Sobolev inequality, we infer the existence of a constant, independent by , such that

    (2.2)

    In particular, when , we have

    We now describe a few essential properties of space. The proof of the following proposition can be found in the appendix.

    Proposition 2.1. The space is a Hilbert space under the following inner product defined by

    Proposition 2.2. If s then for every , it holds

    Proof. By directly using the integrate by parts formula and a.e. in , we can follow Lemma 3.3 of [33] to obtain the conclusion.

    Definition 2.3. We say that is a weak solution to the problem () if

    (2.3)

    as a test function.

    We can see the definition 2.3 is well defined. Indeed, if , then

    Moreover, since and , using Hölder's inequality. We also have

    Now, we introduce the functional associated to () i.e.

    (2.4)

    we can see that functional is . If is a critical point of then we conclude that is a weak solution to (). Due to non-compactness, we can not use the standard minimization technique to prove the existence of the solution to () since functional does not satisfy the Palais-Smale condition.

    Remark 2.4. We can see this by the density argument to in , we may extend inequality (2.2) to every function , then we obtain

    The mixed Sobolev inequality (2.2) is the subject of further investigation in this section, that is,

    to proving Theorems 1.1 and 1.2. Because of this, our main aim is to figure out the sharp constant in (2.2), namely,

    (3.1)

    where

    Since, is dense in corresponding to the norm , using embedding , we have

    Furthermore, we know the constant is translation invariant.

    Let us recall some useful properties of . For a detail study of these properties, see in [23].

    Remark 3.1. We define

    (3.2)

    We observe that the constant , defined by (3.2), depends on some part of the boundary of , under some suitable hypotheses, is achieved. Lions et al. in [24], establish adequate geometric conditions for the domains and that guarantee the achieving of the optimal constant , utilizing symmetrization arguments derived from the classical isoperimetric inequality. We follow from [Theorem 2.1 in [34]] to get the following result and also for more study about the best Sobolev constant which depends on the domain , see in [23]. We recall the following result (in our notations) that represents the relations between and , is the classical Sobolev constant see [26].

    Theorem 3.2. Let be a bounded regular domain, then

    moreover, if is smooth and , then the constant is achieved, where is the classical best Sobolev constant.

    Properties of and

    1. The best constant is dependent on domain We have the following explicit expression

    (3.3)

    where, is the Euler Gamma function.

    2. For any open set , we have

    where, is the clousre of the space under the gradient norm .

    3. Suppose is a bounded set, then is never achieved.

    4. In particular, when , then and are attained by the family of functions

    where

    So, we can show the following Theorem 1.1.

    Proof of Theorem 1.1. Since, and also is translation-invariance. So, we have

    Now, to prove the reverse inequality, without loss of generality, we may suppose that , and such that . We see for any , there exists such that

    now set , for , we see that

    By the definition of , we can see

    Then, we have

    as , since . As is arbitrary, then using Remark 3.1, we obtain

    and we proved the required inequality: .

    We are now able to show Theorem 1.2.

    Proof of Theorem 1.2. By contrary argument, if we suppose there exists a nonzero function such that and We have by straightforwardness of the fact that , see above properties (2), we have

    that implies . Hence, must be constant in . We have a contradiction with the fact .

    Remark 3.3. Our Theorem 1.2 says that constant is never achieved in the space but if we show achieve in a limiting sense. More precisely, if which is defined in (4), we have

    Indeed,

    for some . Therefore (constant varies in the following calculations)

    So, Hence, and consequently and . Moreover, recalling that

    follows same idea of the proof of Theorem 1.1 we have

    From this, since . We obtain

    In the following section, we discussed the critical problems involving mixed operator settings with mixed boundary conditions.

    We now develop our study for the existence and non-existence of solutions to the problem ().

    Suppose is a bounded set with smooth boundary, is a real parameter, and Moreover, we adopt all the definitions and notation of Section s 2, 3. Finally, we introduce nonnegative space

    We are defining the definition of solution to ().

    Definition 4.1. We say that a is a weak solution to () if it satisfies the following properties

    1. ,

    2. For every test function we have

    To study the existence of solutions to (), first we prove the solution is non-negative and bounded by the following theorem.

    Theorem 4.2. Let be the solution to () and , . Then, the following facts hold:

    1. ,

    2. if , then a.e. in .

    Proof. We can easily prove by using [Theorem 4.1] [28] and also easily it can be followed from well know result Moser's iteration method; see [Theorem 1.1 in [35]]. By the fact that just using the definition of function space, a.e. in , implies that . Suppose and recall that is a solution of () (in the sense of Definition (4.1)), and since a.e. in , for every , we find

    (4.1)

    for each . By using the Strong Maximum Principle, refer to [29], we have a.e. in .

    Thanks to Theorem 4.2, we are able to prove Theorem 1.3.

    Next, for , we can start our study separately for the linear case and the superlinear case of the solvability of ().

    Let us start studying to solve the following problem ()

    ()

    In this context, we study for any , solutions to problem () correlates the first eigenvalues and of and of with mixed boundary conditions respectively.

    Definition 4.3. For is the bounded open set, we define

    (1) [see [36]], the first eigenvalue of with mixed boundary conditions as

    (4.2)

    (2) [see [29]] the first eigenvalue of with mixed boundary conditions as

    (4.3)

    We subsequently provide a brief overview of the main properties of , and in the following remark.

    Remark 4.4. (Some Properties of and ). As regards we observe that, since the map = N(u) is a norm for that is equivalent to the full , we refer to [32, Theorem 6.5] and recalling U is bounded since is bounded, one has

    where is the completion of under the norm . Furthermore, we can easily see that is truly achieved in this bigger space since the embedding is compact. So,

    Indeed, it is possible to choose the function to be strictly positive a.e. in .

    In addition, see in [36] or [Proposition 9 in [37]], since is a constrained minimizer of the functional and using the Lagrange Multiplier method,

    and it shows that is a weak solution to the following eigenvalue problem

    Similarly, we can see, since defines a norm on that is equivalent to the full -norm in , and

    Furthermore, it is easy to see that is truly achieved in the larger space and we know embedding is compact, that is,

    Indeed, it is possible to choose the function a.e. in .

    Moreover, see in [29], since is a constrained minimizer of the functional and using the Lagrange Multiplier method,

    and it shows that is a solution to the following eigenvalue problem

    We are approaching the proof of Theorem 1.4. Several independent results will help us to get this. Initially, we establish a lemma that connects the existence of solutions for () with the existence of constrained minimizers for an appropriate functional . We define

    (4.4)

    constrained to the manifold .

    We identify some useful properties of in the following remark.

    Remark 4.5. By using the definition of and Hölder's inequality, for every , we have

    1. ,

    2. .

    Additionally, keep in mind take note of Remark 4.4) and the definition of in (4.3), is attained in the space , easy to check

    Using properties of , we prove the next result.

    Lemma 4.6. We consider

    (4.5)

    Suppose that and is achieved; that is, there exists some function such that . Then, there exists a solution of ().

    Proof. By assumption, we know that there exists as a constrained minimizer for , that is, . We can easily see , then we may suppose that a.e. in . Furthermore, by the Lagrange multiplier method, , and we have

    (4.6)

    Now, take as a test function in (4.6), we obtain

    (4.7)

    As a consequence, setting , we see that a.e. in and for every using (4.6) and (4.7), we have

    then we obtain that

    Hence, we obtain as a solution to (). In this manner, we have completed the proof of this lemma.

    On account of Lemma 4.6, the sign of the real number plays a crucial role to study the solvability of (). In this perspective, we have already identified by Remark 4.5 that

    We are provided with additional information as a result of the following outcome together with Remark 4.5.

    Lemma 4.7. We have

    Proof. Suppose and using Remark 4.5, we have . On the other hand, to prove the reverse part of it, using the definition of that is defined by (4.2). For any , we have

    But we know, is dense in , we can see

    Thus we get the desired result .

    Lemma 4.8. The function is continuous on .

    Proof. First, we shall show the left continuity. Suppose , . So, using the definition of there exists such that

    using the monotonicity of and , deduce that

    As a consequence, setting , we conclude that

    Hence, is left continuous at .

    We find some other properties of in the following remark.

    Remark 4.9. By combining Remark 4.5 and Lemma 4.7, we conclude the following estimates:

    (i) ,

    (ii) ,

    (iii) .

    Proof of Theorem 1.4: First, we define

    (4.8)

    Based on Lemma 4.7, it is evident that . Furthermore, from Lemma 4.8 that is continuous, we can establish

    An observation worth noting is that on and on , again by the continuity of we deduce that , consequently recalling that is nonincreasing on , we have Now, we aim to show that the assertion of Theorem 1.4 satisfies with choice of . Specifically, we treat the following three cases separately:

    Case I: (If ), by the contrary statement, let us assume that that is the soluton to problem (). Then, setting

    Based on the characteristics of and using the definition of weak solution (1) (take and ), we have

    Consequently, from Lemma 4.7, we obtain

    (4.9)

    Hence, we conclude that is achieved at . Now, recalling (3.2), and since , from (4.9), we obtain

    which shows that is achieved. using the fact that and .

    Thus, we conclude that achieves the optimal Sobolev constant . We get a contradiction since is bounded and from Remark 3.1 that is never achieved in .

    Case II: (If ), from Lemma 4.8, we know is continuous and . (Using the definition of ), i.e., (4.8), we have from this, following the same ideas of [Lemma 1.2, [26]], the best constant is achieved, i.e., such that

    Since, we have and , then we deduce that

    Thus, and it is achieved. Using Lemma 4.7, a solution to (), does exist.

    Case III: (If ) arguing by contradiction, we may assume that there exists a solution to () i.e., that such that a.e. in . We can see that

    (4.10)

    that is, is an eigenfunction for mixed operator corresponding to the eigenvalue .

    In particular, choosing , more specifically, using the above-mentioned identity (4.10) and recalling that is a solution to problem (), using the definition (2.3) (for ),

    we obtain

    since by using Theorem 4.2, we have a.e. in , which is contradiction with .

    In this section, we examine the proof of Theorem 1.5. We use the Mountain Pass Theorem to establish the existence of a solution for () if (superlinear case). The key obstacle when utilizing the Mountain Pass Theorem is confirming the fulfillment of a condition at a specified level , much like the scenario observed in the purely local case, see [26]. In particular, it is essential to demonstrate that the Palais-Smale condition holds for every that is strictly less than the first critical level as defined by the Mountain Pass Theorem. Keeping with the methodology in [26], we examine a slightly improved following energy functional about (2.4), namely

    (4.11)

    where denotes the positive part of . Now, it is simple to see that any nonzero critical point of is a solution to (). In particular, since we are assuming , we have in (in a weak sense) since we can see it by using the definition of the weak solution 1 and in the proof of Theorem 4.2. Note that a.e. in , allows us to apply the Weak Maximum Principle with mixed boundary conditions, which follow from [38, Theorem 1.2]. We have a.e. in then we deduce that . Hence a.e. in U is a solution to problem (). In the following lemma, our aim is to establish that the functional satisfies a local condition at level which is related to the best Sobolev constant .

    Lemma 4.10. The functional satisfies the for every .

    Proof. It is a well-known result. So, we can easily prove this lemma by following Lemma 4.10 in [25].

    The final step required to show Theorem 1.5 is demonstrating a path with energy below the critical obstacle. To do this, we first provide an auxiliary function similar to the one employed in [26].

    Now, we define a non-increasing cut-off function by

    (4.12)

    Then, we consider a function by

    (4.13)

    for given such that . Finally, for all , let

    Lemma 4.11. Suppose and . Furthermore, constants are given in (1.7). Then, the following statements hold true.

    (1) If , then there exists such that

    (2) If, instead, , then there exist , such that

    Proof. We have

    (4.14)

    we then turn to estimate the integrals of (4.14). We use the [Lemma 5.1 and Lemma 5.3 in [39]] and obtain the following integrals:

    and also for more ideas, we refer to [Proposition 21 in [27]].

    Next, it is easy to see that -norm of and

    (4.15)

    where the constant is adjusted line to line. Now, combining the above integrals and using (4.14) we deduce that

    (4.16)

    where and , suitable constants. Let us set

    (4.17)

    such that and as So, there exists such that

    We can see that for , we have for all , and the lemma is trivially established as a consequence of (4.16). On the other hand, if , we obtain

    (4.18)

    from which we may easily conclude that

    We now distinguish two cases, according to the assumptions.

    Case (1): (If ), for small enough, using equation (4.18), we have

    and using the fact that the following map

    is increasing in the closed interval containing , we have

    Case (2): (for ), let us start by claiming that

    (4.19)

    By contrary, we assume that , then choosing a sequence diverging to , as and from (4.18) we obtain

    which is a contradiction. Hence, we have .

    So, using (4.16) and (4.19), we have

    which implies the existence of such that

    for fix is small enough. Thus, our work is done.

    In the next lemma, we verify the functional satisfies Mountain Pass geometry. We follow the same arguments of [Proposition 3.1 in [31]].

    Lemma 4.12. There exist positive constants , such that

    (1) For any with , it holds that ,

    (2) There exists a large enough so that and

    Proof. By the Sobolev embedding and Remark (3.1), we have

    for any . Since , we can easily obtain the part (1) assuming is small enough. On the other hand, we have

    from which we easily complete our proof.

    Proof of Theorem 1.5. Hence, by using the Mountain Pass theorem and thanks to Lemmas 4.12, 4.10, and 4.11, we complete the proof of Theorem 1.5.

    In this paper, firstly we identify the optimal constant in the mixed Sobolev inequality under mixed boundary conditions. We prove optimal constant , which is our Theorem 1.1, and Theorem (1.2) says that constant is never achieved in the space , but if then it is achieved in the limiting sense. In addition, the aim of this manuscript is to prove the existence and non-existence of a positive solution for () using the variational methods. Moreover, we note that the case in Theorem 1.4 is different compared to the case in Theorem 1.5 in a structural aspect. However, Theorem 1.5 ensures the existence of solutions for all large enough, while Theorem 1.4 only recognizes solutions for in a certain interval, demonstrating that no solutions exist when is too large. Therefore, the case cannot be considered as the limit case of the setting .

    Lastly, we will come back to the study of () for sublinear perturbations ( and with some singular type nonlinearity with critical exponent under the mixed boundary conditions in future work.

    The author is responsible for all aspects of the research and manuscript.

    The authors express their sincerely gratitude to the anonymous referees for their useful comments and suggestions. The author received assistance from the UGC Grant with reference no. 191620169606 funded by the Government of India.

    The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.



    [1] E. Nezza, G. Palatucci, E. Valdinoci, Hitchhiker's guide to the fractional Sobolev spaces, Bull. Sci. Math., 136 (2012), 521–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bulsci.2011.12.004 doi: 10.1016/j.bulsci.2011.12.004
    [2] S. Dipierro, E. Lippi, E. Valdinoci, Nonlocal logistic equations with Neumann conditions, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire, 40 (2023), 1093–1166. https://doi.org/10.4171/aihpc/57https://doi.org/10.4171/aihpc/57 doi: 10.4171/aihpc/57
    [3] S. Dipierro, E. Valdinoci, Description of an ecological niche for a mixed local/nonlocal dispersal: an evolution equation and a new Neumann condition arising from the superposition of Brownian and Lévy processes, Phys. A, 575 (2021), 126052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2021.126052 doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2021.126052
    [4] C. Kao, Y. Lou, W. Shen, Evolution of mixed dispersal in periodic environments, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. B, 17 (2012), 2047–2072. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdsb.2012.17.2047 doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2012.17.2047
    [5] A. Massaccesi, E. Valdinoci, Is a nonlocal diffusion strategy convenient for biological populations in competition? J. Math. Biol., 74 (2017), 113–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-016-1019-z
    [6] B. Pellacci, G. Verzini, Best dispersal strategies in spatially heterogeneous environments: optimization of the principal eigenvalue for indefinite fractional Neumann problems, J. Math. Biol., 76 (2018), 1357–1386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-017-1180-z doi: 10.1007/s00285-017-1180-z
    [7] D. Blazevski, D. Negrete, Local and nonlocal anisotropic transport in reversed shear magnetic fields: Shearless cantori and nondiffusive transport, Phy. Review E, 87 (2013), 063106, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.87.063106 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.87.063106
    [8] G. Pagnini, S. Vitali, Should I stay or should I go? Zero-size jumps in random walks for Lévy flights, Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal., 24 (2021), 137–167. https://doi.org/10.1515/fca-2021-0007 doi: 10.1515/fca-2021-0007
    [9] L. Zheng, J. He. A class of singular nonlinear boundary value problems in the theory of pseudoplastic fluids. J. Northeast. Univ. Nat. Sci., 19 (1998), 208–211.
    [10] S. Biagi, S. Dipierro, E. Valdinoci, E. Vecchi, Mixed local and nonlocal elliptic operators: regularity and maximum principles, Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 47 (2022), 585–629. https://doi.org/10.1080/03605302.2021.1998908 doi: 10.1080/03605302.2021.1998908
    [11] E. Montefusco, B. Pellacci, G. Verzini, Fractional diffusion with Neumann boundary conditions: the logistic equation, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst, 18 (2013), 2175–2202. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdsb.2013.18.2175 doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2013.18.2175
    [12] B. Pellacci, G. Verzini, Best dispersal strategies in spatially heterogeneous environments: optimization of the principal eigenvalue for indefinite fractional Neumann problems, J. Math. Biol, 76 (2018), 1357–1386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-017-1180-z doi: 10.1007/s00285-017-1180-z
    [13] S. Aizicovici, N. S. Papageorgiou, V. Staicu, Nonlinear nonhomogeneous logistic equations of superdiffusive type, Appl. Set-Valued Anal. Optim, 4 (2022), 277–292. https://doi.org/10.23952/asvao.4.2022.3.03 doi: 10.23952/asvao.4.2022.3.03
    [14] A. Mao, X. Luo. Multiplicity of solutions to linearly coupled Hartree systems with critical exponent, J. Nonlinear Var. Anal., 7 (2023), 173–200. https://doi.org/10.23952/jnva.7.2023.2.01 doi: 10.23952/jnva.7.2023.2.01
    [15] A. Samadi, S. K. Ntouyas, J. Tariboon, Nonlocal Hilfer proportional sequential fractional multi-valued boundary value problems, J. Nonlinear Funct. Anal, 2023 (2023), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.23952/jnfa.2023.22 doi: 10.23952/jnfa.2023.22
    [16] S. Biagi, S. Dipierro, E. Valdinoci, E. Vecchi, A faber-krahn inequality for mixed local and nonlocal operators, JAMA, 150 (2023), 405–448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11854-023-0272-5 doi: 10.1007/s11854-023-0272-5
    [17] S. Biagi, S. Dipierro, E. Valdinoci, E. Vecchi, A Hong-Krahn-Szegö inequality for mixed local and nonlocal operators, Math. Eng., 5 (2023), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3934/mine.2023014 doi: 10.3934/mine.2023014
    [18] C. LaMao, S. Huang, Q. Tian, C. Huang, Regularity results of solutions to elliptic equations involving mixed local and nonlocal operators, AIMS Math., 7 (2022), 4199–4210. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2022233 doi: 10.3934/math.2022233
    [19] N. Abatangelo, M. Cozzi, An elliptic boundary value problem with fractional nonlinearity, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 53 (2021), 3577–3601. https://doi.org/10.1137/20M1342641 doi: 10.1137/20M1342641
    [20] G. Barles, E. Chasseigne, A. Ciomaga, C. Imbert, Lipschitz regularity of solutions for mixed integro-differential equations. J. Differential Equations, 252 (2012), 6012–6060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2012.02.013
    [21] G. Bisci, V. Radulescu, R. Servadei, Variational methods for nonlocal fractional problems, volume 162 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 162 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316282397
    [22] S. Dipierro, E. Lippi, E. Valdinoci, Linear theory for a mixed operator with Neumann conditions, Asymptot. Anal, 128 (2022), 571–594. https://doi.org/10.3233/asy-211718 doi: 10.3233/asy-211718
    [23] M. Grossi, On some semilinear elliptic equations with critical nonlinearities and mixed boundary conditions, Rend. Mat. Appl., 10 (1990), 287–302.
    [24] P. Lions, F. Pacella, M. Tricarico, Best constants in Sobolev inequalities for functions vanishing on some part of the boundary and related questions, Indiana. Univ. Math. J., 37 (1988), 301–324. https://doi.org/10.1512/iumj.1988.37.37015 doi: 10.1512/iumj.1988.37.37015
    [25] S. Biagi, S. Dipierro, E. Valdinoc, E. Vecchi, A Brezis-Nirenberg type result for mixed local and nonlocal operators, preprint, 2022, arXiv: 2209.07502. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2209.07502
    [26] H. Brezis, L. Nirenberg, Positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponents, Comm. Pure Appl. Math, 36 (1983), 437–477. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.3160360405 doi: 10.1002/cpa.3160360405
    [27] R. Servadei, E. Valdinoci, The Brezis-Nirenberg result for the fractional Laplacian, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 367 (2015), 67–102. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9947-2014-05884-4 doi: 10.1090/S0002-9947-2014-05884-4
    [28] S. Biagi, D. Mugnai, E. Vecchi, A Brezis-Oswald approach to mixed local and nonlocal operators, Commun. Contemp. Math., 26 (2024), 2250057. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219199722500572 doi: 10.1142/S0219199722500572
    [29] J Giacomoni, T. Mukherjee, L. Sharma, Eigenvalue problem associated with mixed operators under mixed boundary conditions, In preparation.
    [30] G. Anthal, J. Giacomoni, K. Sreenadh, A Choquard type equation involving mixed local and nonlocal operators, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 527 (2023), 127440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2023.127440 doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2023.127440
    [31] B. Barrios, E. Colorado, R. Servadei, F. Soria, A critical fractional equation with concave-convex power nonlinearities, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré C Anal. Non Linéaire, 32 (2015), 875–900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anihpc.2014.04.003 doi: 10.1016/j.anihpc.2014.04.003
    [32] E. Di Nezza, G. Palatucci, E. Valdinoci, Hitchhiker's guide to the fractional Sobolev spaces, Bull. Sci. Math, 136 (2012), 521–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bulsci.2011.12.004 doi: 10.1016/j.bulsci.2011.12.004
    [33] S. Dipierro, X. Ros-Oton, E. Valdinoci, Nonlocal problems with Neumann boundary conditions, Rev. Mat. Iberoam., 33 (2017), 377–416. https://doi.org/10.4171/RMI/942 doi: 10.4171/RMI/942
    [34] B. Abdellaoui, E. Colorado, I. Peral, Effect of the boundary conditions in the behaviour of the optimal constant of some Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg inequalities. Application to some doubly critical nonlinear elliptic problems, Adv. Differential Equations, 11 (2006), 667–720. https://doi.org/10.57262/ade/1355867690 doi: 10.57262/ade/1355867690
    [35] X. Su, E. Valdinoci, Y. Wei, J. Zhang, Regularity results for solutions of mixed local and nonlocal elliptic equations, Math. Z., 302 (2022), 1855–1878. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00209-022-03132-2 doi: 10.1007/s00209-022-03132-2
    [36] T. Leonori, M. Medina, I. Peral, A. Primo, F. Soria, Principal eigenvalue of mixed problem for the fractional Laplacian: moving the boundary conditions, J. Differential Equ., 265 (2018), 593–619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2018.03.001 doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2018.03.001
    [37] R. Servadei, E. Valdinoci, Variational methods for non-local operators of elliptic type, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst, 33 (2013), 2105–2137. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcds.2013.33.2105 doi: 10.3934/dcds.2013.33.2105
    [38] S. Biagi, S. Dipierro, E. Valdinoci, E. Vecchi, Mixed local and nonlocal elliptic operators: regularity and maximum principles, Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 47 (2022), 585–629. https://doi.org/10.1080/03605302.2021.1998908 doi: 10.1080/03605302.2021.1998908
    [39] J. da Silva, A. Fiscella, V. Viloria, Mixed local-nonlocal quasilinear problems with critical nonlinearities, J. Differential Equations, 408 (2024), 494–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2024.07.028 doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2024.07.028
  • cam-16-04-038-s001.pdf
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2024 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(883) PDF downloads(60) Cited by(0)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog