Home On the weakly degenerate Allen-Cahn equation
Article Open Access

On the weakly degenerate Allen-Cahn equation

  • Maicon Sônego EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: May 16, 2019

Abstract

In this paper we consider a one-dimensional Allen-Cahn equation with degeneracy in the interior of the domain and Neumann boundary conditions. We allow the diffusivity coefficient vanish at some point of the space domain and we are addressed on the existence of stable non-constant solution.

1 Introduction

Consider the following semi-linear problem

ut(t,x)=(a(x)ux(t,x))x+f(u(t,x)),(t,x)R+×(0,1)ux(t,0)=ux(t,1)=0,tR+u(0,x)=u0(x),x(0,1) (1.1)

where f(u) = uu3 and a(⋅) ∈ C([0, 1]) satisfies

  1. a(x0) = 0 at some x0 ∈ (0, 1);

  2. a(x) > 0 for x ∈ [0, 1] ∖ {x0} and

  3. 1/aL1(0, 1).

With these conditions, the parabolic problem (1.1) is called weakly degenerate (see [1], for instance) with degeneracy in the interior of the space domain. A typical example for a(⋅) satisfying the conditions (H1)–(H3) is given by a(x) = ∣xx0α (0 < α < 1).

In this paper we are concerned to ensure the existence of solution to the evolution problem (1.1) and, mainly, to study the existence of stable solutions of the variational problem where the critical points of energy functional are stationary solutions of (1.1); that is

(a(x)ux(x))x+f(u)=0,x(0,1)ux(0)=ux(1)=0. (1.2)

Roughly speaking, we study the role of the degeneracy of function a(⋅) at x0 to the existence of a local minimizer of the energy functional associated to (1.2). This class of solutions (which we call stable solutions, see Definition 3.1 and Remark 3.2), in general, enjoys better qualitative and quantitative properties (monotonicity and symmetry, for instance) than the other solutions. In particular, when a minimizer is isolated – in this case we say asymptotically stable – it can describe the whole dynamics of the corresponding parabolic problem. We refer to the excellent monograph [2] for a comprehensive and complete presentation of the main results available on stable solutions.

Degenerate problems have always attracted the attention of many authors, [1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] and references therein. In these works it is assumed that the function a(⋅) degenerates at the boundary or in the interior of the space domain and the results are mainly related to the theory of control. In particular, in [1] the authors study degenerate parabolic problems with interior degeneracy, under Dirichlet boundary conditions, and show that under suitable assumptions, they generate analytic semi-groups. In addition, some applications to linear and semi-linear parabolic problems are provided. Similar results were achieved in [7], under Neumann boundary conditions, whose focus was to obtain Carleman estimates. With regard to existence of solution to the problem (1.1), the main results of the present work are based on these last two articles.

Here we will focus on a particular reaction term related to Allen-Cahn problem, f(u) = uu3. The Allen-Cahn equation has its origin in the theory of phase transitions ([8]) and it is used as a model for some nonlinear reaction-diffusion processes. For instance, assume that there are two populations 𝓐 and 𝓑 and that u is a density measuring the percentage of the two populations at every point; that is, if u(x) = 1 (u(x) = −1) at a point x, we have only population 𝓐 (population 𝓑) at x and u(x) = 0 means that at x we have 50% of 𝓐 and 50% of 𝓑. The non-homogeneity of the medium is expressed by the space dependence of the diffusion coefficient a(⋅). If this coefficient vanishes at some point, then this will lead to the interruption of the migration and/or interaction of the species. Evidently, u ≡ 1 or u ≡ −1 are two stable states of the system, however, our goal is to obtain existence of stable non-constant solutions.

The study of existence or non-existence of stable solutions to semi-linear problems (in particular those of the Allen-Cahn type), with a(x) ≡ 1 or a(⋅) strictly positive, is the subject of numerous articles and books. In the face of an extensive literature, we cite [9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14]and references therein. Of course, allowing a(⋅) vanishes at some point brings with it several technical difficulties. Since the operator Au := (aux)x is no longer elliptic (sometimes called degenerate elliptic), some basic analysis tools – such as the Maximum Principles, Hopf’s Lemma and Spectral Theory – can not be used. To the best of our knowledge, the present work is the first to study the role of a degenerate diffusion coefficient related to the existence of stable solutions.

The technique we use here stems from the one presented in [11] (see also [13, 14, 15]). After finding a invariant set for the flux of (1.1) – hence the need to ensure the existence of solution – we use some variational techniques, in a convenient weighted Sobolev space, to show existence of a local minimizer of the energy functional in this invariant set.

Finally, let us remark that even our result of existence of solution to the problem (1.1), based on the works [1, 7], it is new and although it is essential to our main result, it may have interest of its own.

2 Existence of solution

In this section we deal with the existence of solution to the problem (1.1). It is important to note that the results of this section can easily be adapted to more general semi-linear equations.

Firstly, we should note that Au = (aux)x, in a suitable domain, generates a analytic semigroup. For this purpose, we introduce the following weighted spaces (sometimes, we use ′ to denote the derivative with respect to x):

Ha1(0,1):={uL2;u absolutely continuous in [0,1] and auL2(0,1)} (2.1)

with the norm

|u||Ha1(0,1)2:=||u||L2(0,1)2+||au||L2(0,1)2 (2.2)

and

Ha2(0,1):={uHa1(0,1);auH1(0,1)} (2.3)

with

||u||Ha2(0,1)2:=||u||Ha1(0,1)2+||(au)||L2(0,1)2.

Definition 2.1

If u0L2(0, 1), a function u is said to be a weak solution of (1.1) if

uC([0,T];L2(0,1))L2(0,T;Ha1(0,1))

and

01u(T,x)ϕ(T,x)dx01u0(x)ϕ(0,x)dx(0,T)×(0,1)uϕtdxdt=(0,T)×(0,1)auxϕxdxdt+(0,T)×(0,1)f(u)ϕdxdt

for all ϕH1(0, T; L2(0, 1)) ∩ L2(0, T; Ha1 (0, 1)).

Now we define the operator A by D(A) := {u Ha2 (0, 1); u′(0) = u′(1) = 0} and for any uD(A), Au = (au′)′.

The proof of the next two results can be found in [1, Lemma 2.1] (see also [7, Lemma 2.1]) and [7, Theorem 2.1], respectively.

Lemma 2.2

For all (u, v) ∈ D(A) × Ha1 (0, 1) one has

01(au)vdx=01auvdx.

Theorem 2.3

The operator A : D(A) → L2(0, 1) is self-adjoint, nonpositive on L2(0, 1) and it generates an analytic contraction semigroup.

Now we proceed as in [1]. Since A is a generator, and setting B(t)u := u, working in the spaces considered above, we can prove that the problem below (with cL(ℝ+ × (0, 1))) is well-posed in the sense of semigroup theory using some well-known perturbation technique (see [16], for instance).

ut(t,x)=(a(x)ux(t,x))x+c(t,x)u(t,x),(t,x)R+×(0,1)ux(t,0)=ux(t,1)=0,tR+u(0,x)=u0(x),x(0,1) (2.4)

Hence, for a fixed T > 0 we get the following result.

Theorem 2.4

If c(⋅, x) ∈ C1(ℝ+) for all x ∈ [0, 1] and u0D(A) then there is a unique weak solution

uH1(0,T;L2(0,1))L2(0,T;Ha2(0,1))C([0,T];Ha1(0,1)) (2.5)

of (2.4) and

supt[0,T]||u(t)||Ha1(0,1)2+0TutL2(0,1)2+xauxL2(0,1)2dtC||u0||Ha1(0,1)2, (2.6)

for a positive constant C.

Next result can be found in [1, Theorem 5.4]

Lemma 2.5

The set H1(0, T; L2(0, 1)) ∩ L2(0, T; Ha2 (0, 1)) is compactly imbedded in C([0, T]; L2(0, 1)) ∩ L2(0, T; Ha1 (0, 1)).

We are now in position to state the main result of this section. The proof follows the steps of [1, Theorem 4.12], however, some modifications are necessary because we consider Neumann boundary conditions and the specific nonlinear term f(u) = uu3.

Theorem 2.6

If u0(x) ∈ Ha1 (0, 1) then (1.1) has a solution

uH1(0,T;L2(0,1))L2(0,T;Ha2(0,1)).

Proof

We set X := C([0, T]; L2(0, 1)) ∩ L2(0, T; Ha1 (0, 1)) and for any (x, v) ∈ (0, 1) × X, cv(t, x) := d(t, x, v(t, x)) where d(t, x, u) = 1-u2. Now, we consider the function

T:vXuvX,

where uv is the unique solution of

ut(t,x)=(a(x)ux(t,x))x+cv(t,x)u(t,x),(t,x)R+×(0,1)ux(t,0)=ux(t,1)=0,tR+u(0,x)=u0(x),x(0,1). (2.7)

We use Theorem 2.4 to ensure that (2.7) has a unique weak solution uX. Now, we will prove that 𝓣 has a fixed point uv (that is, 𝓣(uv) = uv) to conclude that uv is a solution of (1.1).

By Schauder’s Theorem, it is sufficient to prove that

  1. 𝓣:BXBX,

  2. 𝓣 is a compact function and

  3. 𝓣 is a continuous function,

where

BX:={vX;||v||XCT||u0||L2(0,1)2},

CT it is the same constant of Theorem 2.4 and

||v||X:=supt[0,T]||u(t)||L2(0,1)2+0T||aux||L2(0,1)2dt.

The items (i) and (ii) are consequence of Theorem 2.4 and Lemma 2.5, respectively.

To prove (iii) we take vkX such that vkv in X, as k → ∞. We will prove that 𝓣(vk) = uvk := uk → 𝓣(v) = uv in X, as k → ∞. Recall that uk and uv are the solutions of (2.7) associated to vk and v, respectively. As D(A) is dense in Ha1 (0, 1) ([7]), (2.5) and (2.6) occurs for u0 Ha1 (0, 1). Hence, ukBY where Y = H1(0, T; L2(0, 1)) ∩ L2(0, T; Ha2 (0, 1)) and, up to a sub-sequence, uk converges weakly to some ū in Y. By Lemma 2.5, uk converges strongly to ū in X.

Multiplying the equation

utk(t,x)=(a(x)uxk(t,x))x+cvk(t,x)uk(t,x)

by a test function ϕH1(0, T; L2(0, 1)) ∩ L2(0, T; Ha1 (0, 1)) and integrating over (0, T) × (0, 1) (recall the Lemma 2.2) we get

01uk(T,x)ϕ(T,x)dx01u0(x)ϕ(0,x)dx0T01ϕt(t,x)uk(t,x)dxdt=0Ta(x)uxk(t,1)ϕ(t,1)dt0Ta(x)uxk(t,0)ϕ(t,0)dt0T01a(x)uxk(t,x)ϕx(t,x)dxdt+0T01cvk(t,x)uk(t,x)ϕ(t,x)dxdt.

We recall that uxk(t,1)=uxk(t,0)=0 and our next step is to prove that

  1. limk01uk(T,x)ϕ(T,x)dx=01u¯(T,x)ϕ(T,x)dx;

  2. limk0T01ϕt(t,x)uk(t,x)dxdt=0T01ϕt(t,x)u¯(t,x)dxdt;

  3. limk0T01a(x)uxk(t,x)ϕx(t,x)dxdt=0T01a(x)ux¯(t,x)ϕx(t,x)dxdt;

  4. limk0T01cvk(t,x)uk(t,x)ϕ(t,x)dxdt=0T01cv(t,x)u¯(t,x)ϕ(t,x)dxdt.

Since uk converges strongly to ū in X, it is immediate to prove (a)-(c). In order to prove (d) we recall that cvk(t, x) = 1 − (vk)2(t, x) and vk converges strongly to v in X. Therefore, we can conclude that vk converges to v a.e. as well as uk converges to ū a.e.. Thus,

0T01cvk(t,x)uk(t,x)ϕ(t,x)cv(t,x)u¯(t,x)ϕ(t,x)dxdt0T01(uk(t,x)u¯(t,x))cvk(t,x)ϕ(t,x)dxdt+0T01(cvk(t,x)cv(t,x))u¯(t,x)ϕ(t,x)dxdt=0T01uk(t,x)u¯(t,x)(1(vk)2(t,x))ϕ(t,x)dxdt+0T01(vk)2(t,x)v2(t,x)u¯(t,x)ϕ(t,x)dxdt,

and (d) holds by an application of Lebesgue Theorem.

We proved that ū is the unique weak solution of (2.4) in YX associated to v; that is ū = uv and (iii) is proved. It follows that 𝓣 has a fixed point uvY which is a solution of (1.1). The theorem is proved.□

3 Existence of stable solutions

We start by defining an energy functional E : Ha1 (0, 1) → ℝ by

E(u)=1201a(x)(u(x))2dx01F(u(x))dx (3.1)

where

F(u):=0u[ss3]ds=u22u44.

It is not difficult to verify that E is twice continuously differentiable and a simple computation give us that its critical points are weak stationary solutions of (1.1) (i.e. weak solutions of (1.2)).

Definition 3.1

Let u be a weak solution to (1.2). We say that u is stable if

01a(ϕ)2dx01f(u)ϕ2dx0, (3.2)

for any ϕ Ha1 (0, 1).

Remark 3.2

Note that (3.2) is equivalent to the second variation of the energy functional E(⋅) at u to be non-negative. Therefore, local minimizers of E are stable solutions of (1.2).

In order to state our next results, we set Il, Ir two sub-intervals of (0, 1) such that Il ⊂ (0,x0) and Ir ⊂ (x0, 1).

Lemma 3.3

(Poincaré-type inequality). There exists a constant 𝓒j (j = l, r), depending only on Ij and aIj, such that

Ij(uuj¯)2dxCjIja(u)2dx (3.3)

for each function u Ha1 (Ij), where uj¯=1|Ij|Ijudx.

Proof

For brevity, we omit the sub-indices j = l, r. We argue by contradiction; that is, we suppose that for each k ∈ ℕ, there exists uk Ha1 (0, 1) such that

||ukuk¯||L2(I)>k||auk||L2(I), (3.4)

where uk¯:=1|I|Iukdx.

We renormalize by defining

vk:=ukuk¯||ukuk¯||L2(I),kN. (3.5)

It follows that vk¯:=1|I|Ivkdx=0, vkL2(I) = 1 and by (3.4)

||avk||L2(I)<1k,kN. (3.6)

In particular the functions {vk}k∈ℕ are bounded in Ha1 (I). As Ha1 (I) is compactly imbedded in L2(I) (the proof is analogous to that present in [1, Theorem 5.1]), there exist a sub-sequence {vkj}j∈ℕ and a function vL2(I) such that

vkjv in L2(I). (3.7)

From (3.5)

v¯:=1|I|Ivdx=0 and ||v||L2(I)=1. (3.8)

If ϕ C0 (I) we use (3.6) to conclude that

Ivϕdx=limjIvkjϕdx=limjIavkj1aϕdx=0.

Hence vH1(I) and v′ = 0 a.e. in I. It follows that v is constant in I which is a contradiction with (3.8).□

Now, we set the positive number

ϵ0:=14min{|Il|min{1,(1/Cl)},|Ir|min{1,(1/Cr)}} (3.9)

where 𝓒j (j = l, r) is the optimal constant in (3.3).

Our main result is stated as follow.

Theorem 3.4

If there is δ > 0 such that δ < 2ϵ0, Qδ := [x0δ, x0+δ] ∩ (IlIr) = ∅ and

maxxQδ{a(x)}<δ2ϵ0δ2, (3.10)

then (1.2) admits a non-constant stable solution.

For each t > 0, we consider

T(t):Ha1(0,1)Ha1(0,1)

defined by

T(t)[u0(x)]=u(t,x)

where u(t, x) is the solution of (1.1) with u(0, x) = u0(x) given by Theorem 2.6. Then tT(t)[u0(x)] is continuous for any u0 Ha1 (0, 1). Moreover, T(t) is a compact operator because T(t)[u0(x)] ∈ Ha2 (0, 1) and Ha2 (0, 1) is compactly imbedded in Ha1 (0, 1) (see [1, Theorem 5.2]). For simplicity, we denote T(t)[u0(x)] by T(t)u0.

Proposition 3.5

Consider the set

Λ(Il,Ir)=vHa1(0,1);1v(x)1x[0,1],Ilv<0,Irv>0,E(v)<ϵ014.

If u0Λ then T(t)u0Λ for all t > 0.

Proof

  1. −1 ≤ T(t)u0 = u(t, x) ≤ 1 in [0, 1] for all t > 0.

    If there is (, ) such that u(, ) > 1 then if T >

    uM:=max(0,T]×[0,1]u(t,x)>1

    and uM = u(, ) at some (, ) ∈ (0, T] × [0, 1]. We have three possibilities:

    1. ∈ (0, 1) ∖ {x0},

    2. = x0 or

    3. ∈ {0, 1}.

    If (i) holds we can apply the Maximum Principle in a sub-interval that does not contain x0. Hence, we have a contradiction since u(0, x) = u0(x) ≤ 1. For (iii), we use a one-dimensional version of Hopf’s Lemma and that ux(,0) = ux(, 1) = 0 to get a contradiction. Finally, we note that

    ut(t,x0)=u(t,x0)u3(t,x0),t>0

    and then ut(t,x0) < 0 for t near of . It follows that (ii) does not occur. Therefore u(t, x) ≤ 1 (t > 0) and analogously we prove −1 ≤ u(t, x) for all t > 0 which proves the Claim 1.

  2. E(u(t, x)) < ϵ014.

    Indeed, it is true because

    ddtE(u(t,x))=01(ut(t,x))2dx<0 and E(u(0,x))<ϵ014.
  3. Ilu(t, x)dx < 0 and Iru(t, x)dx > 0 for all t > 0.

    By contradiction, let t1 > 0 be such that u1(x) := u(t1, x) satisfies

    Ilu1(x)dx=0.

    Then, by Lemma 3.3

    Ilu12dxClIla(u1)2dx.

    Now, note that

    0f(s)s, for 1s00f(s)s for 0s1.

    Hence,

    F(u1)=0u1f(s)ds0u1sds=(u1)22,

    and

    E(u1)=1201a(u1)2dx01F(u1)dx12ClIl(u1)2dx01F(u1)dx1ClIlF(u1)dxIlF(u1)dx(0,1)IlF(u1)dx. (3.11)

    We also have

    E(u1)E(u0)<ϵ014.

    Therefore, as F(u1) ≤ F(1) = 1/4

    ϵ0>1Cl1IlF(u1)dx(0,1)IlF(u1)dx+14>1Cl1IlF(u1)dx+|Il|14

    and

    • if 1Cl1 then ϵ0 > |Il|4 or

    • if 1Cl<1 then ϵ0 > |Il|4Cl.

      In both cases we have a contradiction. Similarly we prove that Iru(t, x)dx > 0 for all t > 0. It is proved that Λ is invariant under T(t) for t ≥ 0.□

Proposition 3.6

If Λ ≠ ∅ then (1.1) has at least one non-constant stationary solution uΛ which is stable in Ha1 (0, 1).

Proof

If vΛ, by Proposition 3.5, γ(v) := {T(t)v; t ≥ 0} ⊂ Λ and because the system is gradient (E is a functional of Lyapunov) γ(v) is compact. It follows that

ω(v):=limtnT(tn)v=u, for some real sequence (tn).

If 𝓔 is the set of all equilibrium solutions to (1.1) then ω(v) ⊂ 𝓔. Hence, if uω(v) then −1 ≤ u ≤ 1, E(u) ≤ E(v) < ϵ0 − (1/4) and, as before, it is possible to prove that Il u < 0, Ir u > 0; that is, ω(v) ⊂ Λ.

Therefore, if vΛ, Λ ∩ 𝓔 ≠ ∅. Moreover Λ ∩ 𝓔 is compact in Ha1 (0, 1). Indeed, we note that Λ ∩ 𝓔 is bounded in Ha1 (0, 1) because for any uΛ ∩ 𝓔, −1 ≤ u ≤ 1 and

a(x)u(x)=0xu3(s)u(s)ds,x(0,1) (see (2.2)).

It is not difficult to see that 𝓔 is closed in Ha1 (0, 1). Now, as T(t)[Λ ∩ 𝓔] = Λ ∩ 𝓔 and T(t) is a compact operator, we conclude that Λ ∩ 𝓔 is compact in Ha1 (0, 1).

Because of the continuity of E, there is e0Λ ∩ 𝓔 such that E(e0) ≤ E(v) for all vΛ ∩ 𝓔. More than that, E(e0) ≤ E(v) for all vΛ since otherwise there would be v1Λ such that E(v1) < E(e0). As before ω(v1) ⊂ Λ and then, for all vω(v1),

E(v)E(v1)<E(e0)

which is a contradiction.

The next step is to prove that e0 is a local minimum of E in Ha1 (0, 1). Let Λj (j = 1, …, 4) be the sets

  • Λ1 := {u Ha1 (0, 1); −1 < u < 1 a.e. in (0, 1)};

  • Λ2 := {u Ha1 (0, 1); Il u < 0};

  • Λ3 := {u Ha1 (0, 1); Ir u > 0};

  • Λ4 := {u Ha1 (0, 1); E(u) < ϵ014 }.

  1. j=14Λj is an open set in Ha1 (0, 1).

    Indeed, Λj (j = 2, …, 4) are open in Ha1 (0, 1) by the continuity of the functionals E, El(u) := Il u and Er(u) := Ir u in Ha1 (0, 1). It is not difficult to prove that Λ1 is open in Ha1 (0, 1) using that Ha1 (0, 1) ↪ C(0, 1). Claim 1 is proved.

  2. e0 j=14Λj . By an application of Maximum Principle (recall that e0 ∈ 𝓔), it is possible to conclude that −1 < e0(x) < 1 for all x ∈ (0, 1) ∖ {x0}. This implies that e0Λ1. Clearly, Ile0 ≤ 0 and Ire0 ≥ 0 and if the equality occurs we get a contradiction as before. Thus e0Λ1Λ2. We have that E(e0) ≤ ϵ0 − (1/4) and if E(e0) = ϵ0 − (1/4) then for any vΛ,

    E(v)<ϵ0(1/4)=E(e0)

    which contradicts E(e0) ≤ E(v) for all vΛ. Therefore e0Λ4 and this proves Claim 2. Thus, e0 is a local minimum of E in Ha1 (0, 1) and then

    E(e0)ϕ0ϕHa1(0,1)

    i.e.

    01a(x)(ϕ(x))2f(e0)ϕ2dx0ϕHa1(0,1)

    which proves that e0 is a stable non-constant (e0Λ) solution of (1.2).□

    Finally, we are in position to prove our main result.

Proof of the Theorem 3.4

We shall prove that Λ ≠ ∅ and the theorem follows by Proposition 3.6.

Consider the signed distance function defined in ℝ by

d(x,x0)=|xx0|,xx0|xx0|,x<x0

and ξ : ℝ → ℝ defined by

ξ(t)=1,tδtδ,δ<t<δ1,tδ.

We will show that w0(x) := ξ(d(x, x0))∣(0,1)Λ. It is not difficult to see that w0 Ha1 (0, 1); −1 ≤ w0 ≤ 1; Ilw0 < 0 and Irw0 > 0.

Now, if we set aMδ:=maxxQδ{a(x)} and recalling that (d′(x, x0))2 = 1 and F(1) = F(−1) = 1/4,

E(w0)=1201a(x)(w0(x))2dx01F(w0(x))dx=12Qδa(x)(w0(x))2dxQδF(w0(x))dx(12δ)4aMδ1δ2|Qδ|(12δ)4=aMδ2δ+δ214.

By (3.10), E(w0) < ϵ0 − (1/4) and then w0Λ which proves the Theorem 3.4.□

Remark 3.7

It is common to say that the solution e0 obtained in this work “is trapped at the bottom of an energy well”. That is why we say that it is stable. A natural question is whether such a solution is asymptotically stable; that is, to know if the solutions of the corresponding parabolic problem (problem (1.1)) with the initial data near e0 tend to e0 as t → ∞. This type of stability – also called linearized stability or Lyapunov stability – in general, it is accomplished by studying the spectrum of the corresponding linearized problem. However, the degeneracy considered here makes it impossible to carry out such a study. This question has been studied when the degenerate operator has an uniformly elliptic direction; which, obviously, the operator considered here does not have. For all the details on this issue, we cite [17].

Remark 3.8

In the case where A = (aux)x is strongly degenerate; that is, aW1,∞(0, 1) satisfies (H1) and (H2) but 1/aL1(0, 1), can not be carried out in an analogous way. The hypotheses (H1)-(H3) are essential in all results of this work which makes the strongly degenerate case an open problem.

References

[1] G. Fragnelli, G. R. Goldstein, J. A. Goldstein, and S. Romanelli, Generators with interior degeneracy on spaces of L2 type, Electron. J. Differential Equations. (2012) 1–30.Search in Google Scholar

[2] L. Dupaigne, Stable Solutions of Elliptic Partial Differential Equations, CRC press, 2011.10.1201/b10802Search in Google Scholar

[3] P. Cannarsa, G. Fragnelli, and J. Vancostenoble, Regional controllability of semilinear degenerate parabolic equations in bounded domains,Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications. (2), (2006), 320, 804–818.10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.07.006Search in Google Scholar

[4] P. Caldiroli, R. Musina, Existence and nonexistence results for a class of nonlinear, singular sturm-liouville equations, Advances in Differential Equations. (3), (2001), 6, 303–326.10.57262/ade/1357141213Search in Google Scholar

[5] P. Caldiroli, R. Musina, On a variational degenerate elliptic problem, Nonlinear Differential Equations and Applications NoDEA. (2), (2000), 7, 187–199.10.1007/s000300050004Search in Google Scholar

[6] F. Alabau-Boussouira, P. Cannarsa and G. Fragnelli, Carleman estimates for degenerate parabolic operators with applications to null controllability, Journal of Evolution Equations. (2), (2006), 6, 161–204.10.1007/s00028-006-0222-6Search in Google Scholar

[7] I. Boutaayamou, G. Fragnelli and L. Maniar, Carleman estimates for parabolic equations with interior degeneracy and Neumann boundary conditions, Journal ďAnalyse Mathématique. (1), (2018), 135, 1–35.10.1007/s11854-018-0030-2Search in Google Scholar

[8] S. M. Allen, J. W. Cahn, A microscopic theory for antiphase boundary motion and its application to antiphase domain coarsening, Acta Metallurgica. (6), (1979), 27, 1085–1095.10.1016/0001-6160(79)90196-2Search in Google Scholar

[9] G. Fusco, J. K. Hale, Stable equilibria in a scalar parabolic equation with variable diffusion, SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis. (6), (1985), 16, 1152–1164.10.21236/ADA131221Search in Google Scholar

[10] K. Kurata, H. Matsuzawa. Multiple stable patterns in a balanced bistable equation with heterogeneous environments, Applicable Analysis. (7), (2010), 89, 1023–1035.10.1080/00036811003717947Search in Google Scholar

[11] H. Matano, Asymptotic behavior and stability of solutions of semilinear diffusion equations, Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences. (2), 15, (1979), 401–454.10.2977/prims/1195188180Search in Google Scholar

[12] A. S. do Nascimento, Bifurcation and stability of radially symmetric equilibria of a parabolic equation with variable diffusion, Journal of Differential Equations. (1), (1989), 77, 84–10310.1016/0022-0396(89)90158-7Search in Google Scholar

[13] A. S. do Nascimento, On the role of diffusivity in some stable equilibria of a diffusion equation, Journal of Differential Equations. (2), (1999), 155, 231–244.10.1006/jdeq.1998.3579Search in Google Scholar

[14] J. C. Simal, A. S. do Nascimento and Maicon Sônego, Sufficient conditions on diffusivity for the existence and nonexistence of stable equilibria with nonlinear flux on the boundary, Electronic Journal of Differential Equations. (2012), 1–14.Search in Google Scholar

[15] N. Consul, J. Solá-Morales, Stable nonconstant equilibria in parabolic equations with nonlinear boundary conditions, Comptes Rendus de ľAcadémie des Sciences. Série 1, Mathématique.(3), (1995), 321, 299–304.Search in Google Scholar

[16] J. A. Goldstein, Semigroups of Linear Operators and Applications. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, New York, 1985.Search in Google Scholar

[17] D. D. Monticelli, K. R. Payne, Maximum principles for weak solutions of degenerate elliptic equations with a uniformly elliptic direction, Journal of Differential Equations. (7), (2009), 247, 1993–2026.10.1016/j.jde.2009.06.024Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2018-09-15
Accepted: 2018-11-29
Published Online: 2019-05-16

© 2020 M. Sônego, published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Public License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. On the moving plane method for boundary blow-up solutions to semilinear elliptic equations
  3. Regularity of solutions of the parabolic normalized p-Laplace equation
  4. Cahn–Hilliard equation on the boundary with bulk condition of Allen–Cahn type
  5. Blow-up solutions for fully nonlinear equations: Existence, asymptotic estimates and uniqueness
  6. Radon measure-valued solutions of first order scalar conservation laws
  7. Ground state solutions for a semilinear elliptic problem with critical-subcritical growth
  8. Generalized solutions of variational problems and applications
  9. Existence and non-existence results for Kirchhoff-type problems with convolution nonlinearity
  10. Nonlinear Sherman-type inequalities
  11. Global regularity for systems with p-structure depending on the symmetric gradient
  12. Homogenization of a net of periodic critically scaled boundary obstacles related to reverse osmosis “nano-composite” membranes
  13. Noncoercive resonant (p,2)-equations with concave terms
  14. Evolutionary quasi-variational and variational inequalities with constraints on the derivatives
  15. Sharp estimates on the first Dirichlet eigenvalue of nonlinear elliptic operators via maximum principle
  16. Localization and multiplicity in the homogenization of nonlinear problems
  17. Remarks on a nonlinear nonlocal operator in Orlicz spaces
  18. A Picone identity for variable exponent operators and applications
  19. On the weakly degenerate Allen-Cahn equation
  20. Continuity results for parametric nonlinear singular Dirichlet problems
  21. Construction of type I blowup solutions for a higher order semilinear parabolic equation
  22. Singularly perturbed Choquard equations with nonlinearity satisfying Berestycki-Lions assumptions
  23. Comparison results for nonlinear divergence structure elliptic PDE’s
  24. Constant sign and nodal solutions for parametric (p, 2)-equations
  25. Monotonicity formulas for coupled elliptic gradient systems with applications
  26. Berestycki-Lions conditions on ground state solutions for a Nonlinear Schrödinger equation with variable potentials
  27. A class of semipositone p-Laplacian problems with a critical growth reaction term
  28. The role of superlinear damping in the construction of solutions to drift-diffusion problems with initial data in L1
  29. Reconstruction of Tesla micro-valve using topological sensitivity analysis
  30. Lewy-Stampacchia’s inequality for a pseudomonotone parabolic problem
  31. Global well-posedness of nonlinear wave equation with weak and strong damping terms and logarithmic source term
  32. Regularity Criteria for Navier-Stokes Equations with Slip Boundary Conditions on Non-flat Boundaries via Two Velocity Components
  33. Homoclinics for singular strong force Lagrangian systems
  34. A constructive method for convex solutions of a class of nonlinear Black-Scholes equations
  35. On a class of nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equations with potential well
  36. Superlinear Schrödinger–Kirchhoff type problems involving the fractional p–Laplacian and critical exponent
  37. Regularity for minimizers for functionals of double phase with variable exponents
  38. Boundary blow-up solutions to the Monge-Ampère equation: Sharp conditions and asymptotic behavior
  39. Homogenisation with error estimates of attractors for damped semi-linear anisotropic wave equations
  40. A-priori bounds for quasilinear problems in critical dimension
  41. Critical growth elliptic problems involving Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev critical exponent in non-contractible domains
  42. On the Sobolev space of functions with derivative of logarithmic order
  43. On a logarithmic Hartree equation
  44. Critical elliptic systems involving multiple strongly–coupled Hardy–type terms
  45. Sharp conditions of global existence for nonlinear Schrödinger equation with a harmonic potential
  46. Existence for (p, q) critical systems in the Heisenberg group
  47. Periodic traveling fronts for partially degenerate reaction-diffusion systems with bistable and time-periodic nonlinearity
  48. Some hemivariational inequalities in the Euclidean space
  49. Existence of standing waves for quasi-linear Schrödinger equations on Tn
  50. Periodic solutions for second order differential equations with indefinite singularities
  51. On the Hölder continuity for a class of vectorial problems
  52. Bifurcations of nontrivial solutions of a cubic Helmholtz system
  53. On the exact multiplicity of stable ground states of non-Lipschitz semilinear elliptic equations for some classes of starshaped sets
  54. Sign-changing multi-bump solutions for the Chern-Simons-Schrödinger equations in ℝ2
  55. Positive solutions for diffusive Logistic equation with refuge
  56. Null controllability for a degenerate population model in divergence form via Carleman estimates
  57. Eigenvalues for a class of singular problems involving p(x)-Biharmonic operator and q(x)-Hardy potential
  58. On the convergence analysis of a time dependent elliptic equation with discontinuous coefficients
  59. Multiplicity and concentration results for magnetic relativistic Schrödinger equations
  60. Solvability of an infinite system of nonlinear integral equations of Volterra-Hammerstein type
  61. The superposition operator in the space of functions continuous and converging at infinity on the real half-axis
  62. Estimates by gap potentials of free homotopy decompositions of critical Sobolev maps
  63. Pseudo almost periodic solutions for a class of differential equation with delays depending on state
  64. Normalized multi-bump solutions for saturable Schrödinger equations
  65. Some inequalities and superposition operator in the space of regulated functions
  66. Area Integral Characterization of Hardy space H1L related to Degenerate Schrödinger Operators
  67. Bifurcation of time-periodic solutions for the incompressible flow of nematic liquid crystals in three dimension
  68. Morrey estimates for a class of elliptic equations with drift term
  69. A singularity as a break point for the multiplicity of solutions to quasilinear elliptic problems
  70. Global and non global solutions for a class of coupled parabolic systems
  71. On the analysis of a geometrically selective turbulence model
  72. Multiplicity of positive solutions for quasilinear elliptic equations involving critical nonlinearity
  73. Lack of smoothing for bounded solutions of a semilinear parabolic equation
  74. Gradient estimates for the fundamental solution of Lévy type operator
  75. π/4-tangentiality of solutions for one-dimensional Minkowski-curvature problems
  76. On the existence and multiplicity of solutions to fractional Lane-Emden elliptic systems involving measures
  77. Anisotropic problems with unbalanced growth
  78. On a fractional thin film equation
  79. Minimum action solutions of nonhomogeneous Schrödinger equations
  80. Global existence and blow-up of weak solutions for a class of fractional p-Laplacian evolution equations
  81. Optimal rearrangement problem and normalized obstacle problem in the fractional setting
  82. A few problems connected with invariant measures of Markov maps - verification of some claims and opinions that circulate in the literature
Downloaded on 18.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/anona-2020-0004/html
Scroll to top button