A nonlinear model, which characterizes motions of shallow water waves and includes the famous Degasperis-Procesi equation, is considered. The essential step is the derivation of the L2(R) uniform bound of solutions for the nonlinear model if its initial value belongs to space L2(R). Utilizing the bounded property leads to several estimates about its solutions. The viscous approximation technique is employed to establish the well-posedness of entropy weak solutions.
Citation: Mingming Li, Shaoyong Lai. The entropy weak solution to a nonlinear shallow water wave equation including the Degasperis-Procesi model[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 1772-1782. doi: 10.3934/math.2024086
[1] | Jin Hong, Shaoyong Lai . Blow-up to a shallow water wave model including the Degasperis-Procesi equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 25409-25421. doi: 10.3934/math.20231296 |
[2] | Muhammad Shakeel, Amna Mumtaz, Abdul Manan, Marouan Kouki, Nehad Ali Shah . Soliton solutions of the nonlinear dynamics in the Boussinesq equation with bifurcation analysis and chaos. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(5): 10626-10649. doi: 10.3934/math.2025484 |
[3] | Mohammad Alqudah, Safyan Mukhtar, Haifa A. Alyousef, Sherif M. E. Ismaeel, S. A. El-Tantawy, Fazal Ghani . Probing the diversity of soliton phenomena within conformable Estevez-Mansfield-Clarkson equation in shallow water. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 21212-21238. doi: 10.3934/math.20241030 |
[4] | Abdulhamed Alsisi . The powerful closed form technique for the modified equal width equation with numerical simulation. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(5): 11071-11085. doi: 10.3934/math.2025502 |
[5] | Chenchen Lu, Lin Chen, Shaoyong Lai . Local well-posedness and blow-up criterion to a nonlinear shallow water wave equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 1199-1210. doi: 10.3934/math.2024059 |
[6] | Mina M. Fahim, Hamdy M. Ahmed, K. A. Dib, M. Elsaid Ramadan, Islam Samir . Constructing the soliton wave structure and stability analysis to generalized Calogero–Bogoyavlenskii–Schiff equation using improved simple equation method. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(5): 11052-11070. doi: 10.3934/math.2025501 |
[7] | Yousef Jawarneh, Humaira Yasmin, Ali M. Mahnashi . A new solitary wave solution of the fractional phenomena Bogoyavlenskii equation via Bäcklund transformation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 35308-35325. doi: 10.3934/math.20241678 |
[8] | Mostafa M. A. Khater, S. H. Alfalqi, J. F. Alzaidi, Samir A. Salama, Fuzhang Wang . Plenty of wave solutions to the ill-posed Boussinesq dynamic wave equation under shallow water beneath gravity. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(1): 54-81. doi: 10.3934/math.2022004 |
[9] | Gulnur Yel, Haci Mehmet Baskonus, Wei Gao . New dark-bright soliton in the shallow water wave model. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(4): 4027-4044. doi: 10.3934/math.2020259 |
[10] | Faeza Lafta Hasan, Mohamed A. Abdoon, Rania Saadeh, Ahmad Qazza, Dalal Khalid Almutairi . Exploring analytical results for (2+1) dimensional breaking soliton equation and stochastic fractional Broer-Kaup system. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 11622-11643. doi: 10.3934/math.2024570 |
A nonlinear model, which characterizes motions of shallow water waves and includes the famous Degasperis-Procesi equation, is considered. The essential step is the derivation of the L2(R) uniform bound of solutions for the nonlinear model if its initial value belongs to space L2(R). Utilizing the bounded property leads to several estimates about its solutions. The viscous approximation technique is employed to establish the well-posedness of entropy weak solutions.
This work focuses on the investigation of the equation
vt−vtxx+mvvx=3αvxvxx+αvvxxx, | (1.1) |
where constants α>0 and m>0. Equation (1.1) describes the motion of shallow water waves in certain sense [8]. In fact, the dydrodynamical equations derived in [8] includes Eq (1.1) as a special model.
If m=4 and α=1, Eq (1.1) is turned into the Degasperis-Procesi (DP) model [12].
vt−vtxx+4vvx=3vxvxx+vvxxx. | (1.2) |
Degasperis et al. [13] construct a Lax pair to prove the integrability of DP model and obtain two infinite sequences of conserved quantities. The global weak solutions, global strong solutions and wave breaking conditions for (1.2) are studied within certain functional classes in [14,22,31]. The well-posedness and large time asymptotic features of the periodic entropy (discontinuous) solutions for Eq (1.2) is considered in [3]. Coclite and Karlsen [4] investigate entropy solutions to the DP model in the spaces L1(R)∩BV and L2(R)∩L4(R), respectively. The bounded solutions in L1(R)∩L∞(R) and discontinuous solutions are discussed in [5]. As the DP and Camassa-Holm (CH[2]) equations possess similar dynamical properties, here we mention several works about the CH model. The wave breaking for nonlinear equations including the CH model is discovered in Constantin [7,9]. Many dynamical results about the Camassa-Holm type models are derived and summarized in [1,10,11,15,16,23,24,25,28,33]. Guo et al. [17] consider the dynamical properties of the CH type models with high order nonlinear terms (also see [18,19,30,32]). Lai and Wu [21] study the existence of local solutions for a nonlinear model including the CH and DP model if initial data satisfy certain assumptions.
For model (1.1) endowed with initial value v(0,x)=v0(x)∈L2(R), we derive that
c1∥v0∥L2(R)≤∥v(t,⋅)∥L2(R)≤c2∥v0∥L2(R), | (1.3) |
in which c1>0 and c2>0 are constants.
The motivation of this work comes from the job in Coclite and Karlsen [5], in which the existence, uniqueness, stability of entropy solutions of DP equation are proved in L1(R)∩L∞(R). Under the condition v0(x) belonging to L1(R)∩L∞(R), we investigate the shallow water wave (or generalized DP) equation (1.1) and prove its well-posedness of entropy (discontinuous) solutions. The novelty element in our job is that we establish inequality (1.3), namely, the L2(R) uniform bound of solution v(t,x). The methods and ideas utilized in this work come from those presented in Coclite and Karlsen [4,5].
The organization of our work is that section two provides several lemmas about the viscous approximations of Eq (1.1) and section three gives our main result and its proof.
We define the smooth function λ(x) such that λ(x)≥0 for any x∈R, λ(x)=0 if |x|≥1 and ∫∞−∞λ(x)dx=1. For 0<ε<14, let λε(x)=1ε14λ(xε14) and v0,ε=λε⋆v0=∫Rλε(x−z,z)v0(z)dz. Provided that v0∈Hs(R) (s≥0), we conclude that v0,ε∈C∞.
For conciseness, we employ c to represent arbitrary positive constants, which do not depend on ε and t. Let Lp=Lp(R),1≤p≤∞.
Several properties of function v0,ε are summarized in the following conclusion.
Lemma 2.1. [21] Assume 1≤p<∞. Then
{v0,ε→v0inLp(ε→0),∥v0,ε∥L∞≤∥v0∥L∞,∥v0,ε∥L1≤∥v0∥L1,∥v0,ε∥Lp≤c∥v0∥Lp. |
Provided that (t,x)∈R+×R, the initial value problem for Eq (1.1) is written in the form
{∂tv−∂3txxv+mv∂xv=3α∂xv∂2xxv+αv∂3xxxv,v(0,x)=v0(x). | (2.1) |
Consider the viscous approximations of system (2.1)
{∂tvε−∂3txxvε+mvε∂xvε=3α∂xvε∂2xxvε+αvε∂3xxxvε+ε∂2xxvε−ε∂4xxxxvε,vε(0,x)=v0,ε(x). | (2.2) |
Using the operator Λ−2=(1−∂2∂x2)−1, we obtain that problem (2.2) becomes
{∂tvε+α2∂x(v2ε)+∂xHε=ε∂2xxvε,Hε(t,x)=m−α2Λ−2v2ε,vε(0,x)=v0,ε(x), | (2.3) |
in which
Hε(t,x)=m−α4∫Re−|x−ζ|v2ε(t,ζ)dζ. | (2.4) |
Lemma 2.2. Let v0∈Hs(R), s≥0 and 0<ε<14. Then problem (2.3) has a unique global smooth solution vε(t,x) belonging to C([0,∞);Hs(R)).
Proof. Utilizing the Theorem 2.3 in [6] completes the proof directly.
The following lemma, which illustrates the L2(R) uniform bound of solutions for problem (2.3), takes a key role to discuss the dynamical features of entropy solutions in L1(R)∩L∞(R) for Eq (1.1).
Lemma 2.3. Provided that v0∈L2(R) and vε satisfies (2.3), α>0 and m>0, then
c1∥v0∥L2(R)≤∥vε(t,⋅)∥L2(R)≤c2∥v0∥L2(R), | (2.5) |
ε∫t0∥∂xvε(τ,⋅)∥2L2(R)dτ≤c3∥v0∥2L2(R), | (2.6) |
in which constants c1>0, c2>0 and c3>0 does not depend on ε and t.
Proof. Set hε=(mα−∂2xx)−1vε. We have
mαhε−∂2xxhε=vε. | (2.7) |
Utilizing (hε−∂2xxhε) to multiply the first equation in (2.3) arises
∫R∂tvε(hε−∂2xxhε)dx−ε∫R∂2xxvε(hε−∂2xxhε)dx=−α∫Rvε∂xvε(hε−∂2xxhε)dx−∫R∂xHε(t,x)(hε−∂2xxhε)dx. | (2.8) |
From (2.8), we have
∫R∂tvε(hε−∂2xxhε)dx−ε∫R∂2xxvε(hε−∂2xxhε)dx=∫R(mα∂thε−∂3txxhε)(hε−∂2xxhε)dx−ε∫R(mα∂2xxhε−∂4xxxxhε)(hε−∂2xxhε)dx=∫R(mαhε∂thε−hε∂3txxhε−mα∂thε∂2xxhε+∂2xxhε∂3txxhε)dx−ε∫R(mαhε∂2xxhε−mα(∂2xxhε)2−hε∂4xxxxhε+∂2xxhε∂4xxxxhε)dx=∫R(mαhε∂thε−(mα+1)hε∂3txxhε+∂2xxhε∂3txxhε)dx−ε∫R(mαhε∂2xxhε−(mα+1)hε∂4xxxxhε+∂2xxhε∂4xxxxhε)dx=∫R(mαhε∂thε+(mα+1)∂xhε∂2txhε+∂2xxhε∂3txxhε)dx−ε∫R(−mα∂xhε∂xhε−(mα+1)∂2xxhε∂2xxhε−∂3xxxhε∂3xxxhε)dx=12ddt∫R(mαh2ε+(mα+1)(∂xhε)2+(∂2xxhε)2)dx+ε∫R(mα(∂xhε)2+(mα+1)(∂2xxhε)2+(∂3xxxhε)2)dx, | (2.9) |
in which we have utilized integration by parts.
For the right side in (2.8), making use of (2.7) and integration by parts gives rise to
−α∫Rvε∂xvε(hε−∂2xxhε)dx−∫R∂xHε(t,x)(hε−∂2xxhε)dx=−α∫Rvε∂xvε(hε−∂2xxhε)dx+∫R(Hε−∂2xxHε)(t,x)∂xhεdx=−α∫Rvε∂xvε(hε−∂2xxhε)dx+m−α2∫Rv2ε∂xhεdx=α2∫R∂x(v2ε)∂2xxhεdx+m2∫Rv2ε∂xhεdx=α2∫R∂x(v2ε)[mαhε−vε]dx+m2∫Rv2ε∂xhεdx=α2∫Rv2ε∂xvεdx=0. | (2.10) |
From (2.8)–(2.10), we derive that
mα∥hε∥2L2+(mα+1)∥∂xhε∥2L2+∥∂2xxhε∥2L2+2ε∫t0(mα∥∂xhε∥2L2+(mα+1)∥∂2xxhε∥2L2+∥∂3xxxhε∥2L2)dτ=mα∥hε(0,⋅)∥2L2+(mα+1)∥∂xhε(0,⋅)∥2L2+∥∂2xxhε(0,⋅)∥2L2. | (2.11) |
Utilizing (2.7) yields
∥vε(t,⋅)∥2L2(R)=∫R(−∂2xxhε+mαhε)2dx=∫R(∂2xxhε)2dx−2mα∫Rhε∂2xxhεdx+m2α2∫Rh2εdx=∫R(∂2xxhε)2dx+2mα∫R(∂xhε)2dx+m2α2∫Rh2εdx=m2α2∥hε∥2+2mα∥∂xhε∥2+∥∂2xxhε∥2. | (2.12) |
We utilize the definition of the norm L2(R), the right side of (2.11) and the left side of (2.12). From (2.11), (2.12) and Lemma 2.1, we derive that there exist constants c1>0 and c2>0 to guarantee that
c1∥v0∥L2(R)≤∥vε∥L2(R)≤c2∥v0∥L2(R). | (2.13) |
From (2.11), we have
ε∫t0∥∂xvε∥2L2dτ≤εc∫t0(mα∥∂xhε∥2L2+(mα+1)∥∂2xxhε∥2L2+∥∂3xxxhε∥2L2)dτ≤εc(∥hε(0,⋅)∥2L2+∥∂xhε(0,⋅)∥2L2+∥∂2xxhε(0,⋅)∥2L2)≤c∥v0,ε∥2L2≤c∥v0∥2L2. | (2.14) |
Applying (2.13) and (2.14) directly derives (2.5) and (2.6).
We give several estimates about the nonlocal term Hε(t,x) by applying Lemma 2.3.
Lemma 2.4. If v0∈L2(R), then
∥Hε∥L∞,∥∂xHε∥L∞≤c∥v0∥2L2, | (2.15) |
∥Hε(t,⋅)∥L1,∥∂xHε(t,⋅)∥L1,∥∂2xxHε(t,⋅)∥L1≤c∥v0∥2L2. | (2.16) |
Proof. Utilizing the expressions
Hε(t,x)=m−α4∫Re−|x−ζ|v2ε(t,ζ)dζ,∂xHε(t,x)=m−α4∫Re−|x−ζ|sign(ζ−x)v2ε(t,ζ)dζ |
and Lemma 2.3, we complete the proof of (2.15). Noting that
∫R|Hε(t,x)|dx,∫R|∂xHε(t,x)|dx≤c∫R(∫Re−|x−ζ|dx)v2εdζ≤c∥v∥2L2≤c∥v0∥2L2 |
and ∂2xxHε=Hε−m−α2v2ε, we finish the proof of (2.16).
Lemma 2.5. Provided that v0∈Ł1(R)∩L∞(R) and vε satisfies (2.3), Then the inequality
∥vε(t,⋅)∥L∞≤∥v0∥L∞+ct∥v0∥2L2 | (2.17) |
holds for any t≥0.
Proof. From problem (2.3), we have
∂tvε+αvε∂xvε−ε∂2xxvε=−∂xHε. | (2.18) |
Using Lemma 2.4 yields
∥∂xHε∥L∞(R)≤c∥v0∥2L2. |
Considering the function A(t)=∥v0∥L∞(R)+ct∥v0∥2L2 arises
dAdt=c∥v0∥2L2. |
From Lemma 2.1, we acquire ∥v0,ε∥L∞(R)≤A(0). Utilizing the comparison principle for parabolic equation (2.18) deduces that (2.17) holds.
Employing Lemmas 2.3, 2.4 and the approaches utilized in [4,5], we have the conclusion.
Lemma 2.6. Suppose t∈[0,T] and v0∈Ł1(R)∩L∞(R). Then
∥vε∥L1(R)≤∥v0∥L1(R)+ct∥v∥2L2(R), | (2.19) |
∂xvε(t,x)≤1t+MT, | (2.20) |
in which the constant MT depends on T.
Since the proofs to inequalities (2.19) and (2.20) are very analogous to those of Lemma 2.5 in Coclite [4] and Lemma 6 in [5], respectively, we omit their proofs.
Let ΩT=[0,T]×R and Ω∞=[0,∞)×R. According to the definitions of weak solutions in [4,5], we state the following concepts.
Definition 2.1. Provided that the following two assumptions hold,
(a) v∈L∞(R+;L2(R)),
(b) ∂tv+α2∂x(v2)+∂xH(t,x)=0 in D′(Ω∞), namely, ∀g(t,x)∈C∞c(Ω∞),
∬Ω∞(v∂tg+αv22∂xg−∂xH(t,x)g)dxdt+∫Rv0(x)g(0,x)dx=0, | (2.21) |
then function v is called a weak solution of system (2.1).
Definition 2.2. Assume that the following three assumptions hold.
(a) v satisfies Definition 2.1,
(b) v belongs to L∞(ΩT),
(c) Entropy θ(v)∈C2(R) is a convex function with entropy flux q satisfying q′(v)=αθ′(v)v and
∂tθ(v)+∂xq(v)+θ′(v)∂xH≤0inD′(Ω∞), |
namely, ∀g(t,x)∈C∞c(Ω∞),g(t,x)≥0
∬Ω∞(θ(v)∂tg+q(v)∂xg−θ′(v)∂xHg)dxdt+∫Rθ(v0(x))g(0,x)dx≥0, | (2.22) |
Then v is called an entropy weak solution of system (2.1).
Remark 1. Utilizing the arguments in [4,5], for any constant k∈R, we choose θ(v)=|v−k| and q(v):=α2sign(v−k)(v2−k2), which are the Kruzkov entropies/entrop fluxes to satisfy (2.22). The assumptions (a) and (b) in Definition 2.2 guarantee that (2.22) makes sense (see Kruˇzkov [20]). Based on the statement in [4,20], we state that the entropy formulation (2.22) contains the weak formulation (2.21).
The entropy weak solutions for Eq (2.1) are usually discontinuous. However, it possesses the following L1(R) property, illustrating that the entropy solution for Eq (1.1) is unique.
Theorem 3.1. (L1-stability) For any T>0, suppose that v1(t,x) and v2(t,x) are two entropy weak solutions of problem (5) with initial data v01,v02∈L1(R)∩L∞(R), respectively. Then
∥v1(t,⋅)−v2(t,⋅)∥L1(R)≤eCTt∫∞−∞|v01(x)−v02(x)|dx, | (3.1) |
in which CT depends on v01,v02 and T.
Utilizing the device of doubling the space variable in Kruˇzkov [20] or some statements in [4,5], we can prove inequality (3.1). Here, we omit its proof.
We let vεn denote any subsequence of vε (ε→0). The existence of vε is ensured by Lemma 2.2. The compensated compactness methods in [27,29] shall be employed to handle with the problem of strong convergence for vεn.
Lemma 3.1. [27] Suppose that a family of functions {vε}ε>0 satisfy
∥vε∥L∞≤CT. |
For an arbitrary convex function θ∈C2(R) and for q(v)=βvθ′(v) (constant β>0), let the sequence
{∂tθ(vε)+∂xq(vε)}ε>0 |
be compact in H−1loc((0,∞)×R). Then there exists v∈L∞((0,T)×R) to ensure that
vεn→vinLploc((0,∞)×R), |
where 1≤p<∞.
Lemma 3.2. [26] Suppose a bounded open subset Ω∈Rn, n≥2. Let distribution sequence {Kn}∞n=1 be bounded in W−1,∞(Ω) and satisfy
Kn=K(1)n+K(2)n, |
in which {K(1)n}∞n=1 belongs to a compact subset of H−1loc(Ω) and {K(2)n}∞n=1 belongs to a bounded subset of L1loc(Ω). Then {Kn}∞n=1 belongs to a compact subset of H−1loc(Ω).
Lemma 3.3. Suppose v0∈L1(R)∩L∞(R) and vε satisfies system (2.3). For a subsequence {vεn}∞n=1 of {vε}ε>0, an arbitrary T>0 and 1≤p<∞, then there has a limit function
v∈L∞(R+;L2(R))∩L∞((0,T);L∞∩L1(R)) | (3.2) |
to ensure that
vεn→vinLp((0,T]×R). | (3.3) |
Proof. Assume that θ:R→R and q′(v)=αθ′(v)v are defined in Definition 2.2. We set
∂tθ(vε)+∂xq(vε)=K(1)ε+K(2)ε, |
where
{K(1)ε=ε∂2xxθ(vε),K(2)ε=−εθ″(vε)(∂xvε)2+θ′(vε)∂xHε(t,x). |
We require that
{K(1)ε→0inH−1(ΩT),K(2)εis uniformly bounded inL1(ΩT). | (3.4) |
Utilizing Lemmas 2.3, 2.4 and 2.6 yields
{∥ε∂2xxθ(vε)∥H−1(R+×R)≤√εc∥θ′∥L∞∥v0∥L2(R)→0,∥εθ″(vε)(∂xvε)2∥≤c∥θ″∥L∞(R)∥v0∥L2(R),∥θ′(vε)∥L1((0,T)×R)≤c∥θ′∥L∞(R)∥v0∥L2(R), |
which leads to (3.4). Employing Remark 1, Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2, for 1≤p<∞, we deduce that there must have a subsequence vεn,n=1,2,3,⋅⋅⋅ and v satisfying (3.2) to guarantee that
vεn→va.e inΩ∞,vεn→vinLploc(Ω∞). | (3.5) |
From Lemmas 2.5 and 2.6, combining (3.5), we obtain (3.3).
Lemma 3.4. Assume v0∈L1(R)∩L∞(R) and vε solves system (2.3). Let {εn}∞n=1 and v be stated in Lemma 3.3. For an arbitrary T>0 and 1≤p<∞, then there has a function H satisfying
Hεn→HinLp([0,T);W1,p(R)). |
The procedures to prove Lemma 3.4 are analogous to that of Lemma 9 in [5]. Its proof is omitted here.
Theorem 3.2. Suppose that v0∈L1(R)∩L∞(R). Then system (2.1) has only one entropy weak solution.
Proof. Provided that g(t,x)∈C∞c(R+×R), we deduce from (2.21) that
∫R+∫R(vε∂tg+α2v2ε∂xg−∂xHεg+εvε∂2xxg)dxdt+∫Rv0,εg(0,x)dx=0. |
We conclude that in the sense of Definition 2.1, v in Lemma 3.3 is a weak solution to system (2.1). It needs to confirm that the weak function v obeys the entropy inequalities in the sense of Definition 2.2. Let q′(v)=αvθ′(v). Provided that θ∈C2(R) is a convex function, we utilize the convexity of θ and system (2.3) to obtain
∂tθ(vε)+∂xq(vε)+θ′(vε)∂xHε=ε∂2xxθ(vε)−εθ″(vε)(∂xvε)2≤ε∂2xxθ(vε). |
Therefore, from Lemmas 3.3 and 3.4 and the above the entropy inequality, we establish the existence of entropy solutions. Utilizing Theorem 3.1, we have the uniqueness. The proof is finished.
In this work, we investigate a nonlinear shallow water wave equation, which includes the famous Degasperis-Procesi equation. Firstly, we derive that the viscous solutions are uniformly bounded in L2(R) space. Secondly, several estimates about the viscous solutions are established under the condition that the initial value belongs to space L2(R)∩Ł∞(R). Finally, we prove that the existence and uniqueness of entropy weak solutions the nonlinear equation in the space L2(R)∩Ł∞(R).
The authors declare they have not used any Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
Thanks are given to the reviewers for their valuable comments, which lead to the meaningful improvement of this work.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
[1] |
A. Bressan, A. Constantin, Global conservative solutions of the Camassa-Holm equation, Arch. Ration. Mech. An., 183 (2007), 215–239. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00205-006-0010-z doi: 10.1007/s00205-006-0010-z
![]() |
[2] |
R. Camassa, D. D. Holm, An integrable shallow water equation with peaked solitons, Phys. Rev. Lett., 71 (1993), 1661–1664. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.1661 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.1661
![]() |
[3] |
G. M. Coclite, K. H. Karlsen, Periodic solutions of the Degasperis-Procesi equation: Well-posedness and asymptotics, J. Funct. Anal., 268 (2015), 1053–1077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2014.11.008 doi: 10.1016/j.jfa.2014.11.008
![]() |
[4] |
G. M. Coclite, K. H. Karlsen, On the well-posedness of the Degasperis-Procesi equation, J. Funct. Anal., 233 (2006), 60–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2005.07.008 doi: 10.1016/j.jfa.2005.07.008
![]() |
[5] | G. M. Coclite, K. H. Karlsen, Bounded solutions for the Degasperis-Procesi equation, Boll. Unione Mat. Ital., 9 (2008), 439–453. |
[6] |
G. M. Coclite, H. Holden, K. H. Karlsen, Wellposedness for a parabolic-elliptic system, Discrete Cont. Dyn. Syst., 13 (2005), 659–682. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcds.2005.13.659 doi: 10.3934/dcds.2005.13.659
![]() |
[7] |
A. Constantin, J. Escher, Wave breaking for nonlinear nonlocal shallow water equations, Acta Math., 181 (1998), 229–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02392586 doi: 10.1007/BF02392586
![]() |
[8] |
A. Constantin, D. Lannes, The hydrodynamical relevance of the Camassa-Holm and Degasperis-Procesi equations, Arch. Ration. Mech. An., 192 (2009), 165–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00205-008-0128-2 doi: 10.1007/s00205-008-0128-2
![]() |
[9] |
A. Constantin, J. Escher, Well-posedness, global existence and blowup phenomena for a periodic quasi-linear hyperbolic equation, Commun. Pur. Appl. Math., 51 (1998), 475–504. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0312(199805)51:5<475::AID-CPA2>3.0.CO;2-5 doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0312(199805)51:5<475::AID-CPA2>3.0.CO;2-5
![]() |
[10] |
A. Constantin, On the scattering problem for the Camassa-Holm equation, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A, 457 (2001), 953–970. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2000.0701 doi: 10.1098/rspa.2000.0701
![]() |
[11] |
A. Constantin, R. I. Ivanov, J. Lenells, Inverse scattering transform for the Degasperis-Procesi equation, Nonlinearity, 23 (2010), 2559–2575. http://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/23/10/012 doi: 10.1088/0951-7715/23/10/012
![]() |
[12] | A. Degasperis, M. Procesi, Asymptotic integrability, In: Symmetry and Perturbation Theory (A. Degasperis and G. Gaeta, eds.), World Scientific, Singapore, 1 (1999), 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812833037 |
[13] | A. Degasperis, D. D. Holm, A. N. W. Hone, Integrable and non-integrable equations with peakons, World Scientific Publishing, 2003, 37–43. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812704467_0005 |
[14] |
J. Escher, Y. Liu, Z. Y. Yin, Global weak solutions and blow-up structure for the Degasperis-Procesi equation, J. Funct. Anal., 241 (2006), 457–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2006.03.022 doi: 10.1016/j.jfa.2006.03.022
![]() |
[15] |
I. L. Freire, Conserved quantities, continuation and compactly supported solutions of some shallow water models, J. Phys. A-Math. Theor., 54 (2020), 015207. https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/abc9a2 doi: 10.1088/1751-8121/abc9a2
![]() |
[16] |
G. L. Gui, Y. Liu, P. J. Olver, C. Z. Qu, Wave-breaking and peakons for a modified Camassa-Holm equation, Commun. Math. Phys., 319 (2013), 731–759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-012-1566-0 doi: 10.1007/s00220-012-1566-0
![]() |
[17] |
Z. G. Guo, X. G. Li, C. Xu, Some properties of solutions to the Camassa-Holm-type equation with higher-order nonlinearities, J. Nonlinear Sci., 28 (2018), 1901–1914. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00332-018-9469-7 doi: 10.1007/s00332-018-9469-7
![]() |
[18] |
A. A. Himonas, C. Holliman, The Cauchy problem for a generalized Camassa-Holm equation, Adv. Differential Equ., 19 (2014), 161–200. https://doi.org/10.57262/ade/1384278135 doi: 10.57262/ade/1384278135
![]() |
[19] |
A. A. Himonas, C. Holliman, C. Kenig, Construction of 2-peakon solutions and ill-posedness for the Novikov equation, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 50 (2018), 2968–3006. https://doi.org/10.1137/17M1151201 doi: 10.1137/17M1151201
![]() |
[20] |
S. N. Kruˇzkov, First order quasilinear equations in several independent variables, Math. USSR-Sb., 10 (1970), 217–243. https://doi.org/10.1070/SM1970v010n02ABEH002156 doi: 10.1070/SM1970v010n02ABEH002156
![]() |
[21] |
S. Y. Lai, Y. H. Wu, A model containing both the Camassa-Holm and Degasperis-Procesi equations, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 374 (2011), 458–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2010.09.012 doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2010.09.012
![]() |
[22] |
Y. Liu, Z. Y. Yin, Global existence and blow-up phenomena for the Degasperis-Procesi equation, Commun. Math. Phys., 267 (2006), 801–820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-006-0082-5 doi: 10.1007/s00220-006-0082-5
![]() |
[23] |
H. Lundmark, J. Szmigielski, Multi-peakon solutions of the Degasperis-Procesi equation, Inverse Probl., 19 (2003), 1241–1245. http://doi.org/10.1088/0266-5611/19/6/001 doi: 10.1088/0266-5611/19/6/001
![]() |
[24] |
F. Y. Ma, Y. Liu, C. Z. Qu, Wave-breaking phenomena for the nonlocal Whitham-type equations, J. Differ. Equations, 261 (2016), 6029–6054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2016.08.027 doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2016.08.027
![]() |
[25] |
Y. Matsuno, Multisoliton solutions of the Deagsperis-Procesi equation and their peakon limit, Inverse Probl., 21 (2005), 1553–1570. http://doi.org/10.1088/0266-5611/21/5/004 doi: 10.1088/0266-5611/21/5/004
![]() |
[26] |
F. Murat, L′ injection du cˆone positif de H−1 dans W−1,q est compacte pour tout q<2, J. Math. Pures Appl., 60 (1981), 309–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/00263209808701214 doi: 10.1080/00263209808701214
![]() |
[27] |
M. E. Schonbek, Convergence of solutions to nonlinear dispersive equations, Commun. Part. Diff. Eq., 7 (1982), 959–1000. https://doi.org/10.1080/03605308208820242 doi: 10.1080/03605308208820242
![]() |
[28] |
P. L. Silva, I. L. Freire, Existence, persistence, and continuation of solutions for a generalized 0-Holm-Staley equation, J. Differ. Equations, 320 (2022), 371–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2022.02.058 doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2022.02.058
![]() |
[29] | L. Tartar, Compensated compactness and applications to partial differential equations, In: Heriot-Watt Symposium, Nonlinear analysis and mechanics, Pitman Boston, Mass., IV, 1979. |
[30] |
K. Yan, Wave breaking and global existence for a family of peakon equations with high order nonlinearity, Nonlinear Anal. Real, 45 (2019), 721–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nonrwa.2018.07.032 doi: 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2018.07.032
![]() |
[31] |
Z. Yin, On the Cauchy problem for an integrable equation with peakon solutions, Illinois J. Math., 47 (2003), 649–666. https://doi.org/10.1215/ijm/1258138186 doi: 10.1215/ijm/1258138186
![]() |
[32] |
S. Zhou, C. Mu, The properties of solutions for a generalized b-family equation with peakons, J. Nonlinear Sci., 23 (2013), 863–889. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00332-013-9171-8 doi: 10.1007/s00332-013-9171-8
![]() |
[33] |
Y. Zhou, On solutions to the Holm-Staley b-family of equations, Nonlinearity, 23 (2010), 369–381. https://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/23/2/008 doi: 10.1088/0951-7715/23/2/008
![]() |