Skip to main content

Carleman estimates and unique continuation property for abstract elliptic equations

Abstract

The unique continuation theorems for elliptic differential-operator equations with variable coefficients in vector-valued L p -space are investigated. The operator-valued multiplier theorems, maximal regularity properties and the Carleman estimates for the equations are employed to obtain these results. In applications the unique continuation theorems for quasielliptic partial differential equations and finite or infinite systems of elliptic equations are studied.

AMS: 34G10; 35B45; 35B60.

1 Introduction

The aim of this article, is to present a unique continuation result for solutions of a differential inequalities of the form:

‖ P ( x , D ) u ( x ) ‖ E ≤ ‖ V ( x ) u ( x ) ‖ E ,
(1)

where

P ( x ; D ) u = ∑ i , j = 1 n a i j ∂ 2 u ∂ x i ∂ x j + A u + ∑ k = 1 n A k ∂ u ∂ x k ,

here a ij are real numbers, A = A (x), A k = A k (x) and V (x) are the possible linear operators in a Banach space E.

Jerison and Kenig started the theory of L p Carleman estimates for Laplace operator with potential and proved unique continuation results for elliptic constant coefficient operators in [1]. This result shows that the condition V ∈ Ln/2,locis in the best possible nature. The uniform Sobolev inequalities and unique continuation results for second-order elliptic equations with constant coefficients studied in [2]. This was latter generalized to elliptic variable coefficient operators by Sogge in [3]. There were further improvement by Wolff [4] for elliptic operators with less regular coefficients and by Koch and Tataru [5] who considered the problem with gradients terms. A comprehensive introductions and historical references to Carleman estimates and unique continuation properties may be found, e.g., in [5]. Moreover, boundary value problems for differential-operator equations (DOEs) have been studied extensively by many researchers (see [6–18] and the references therein).

In this article, the unique continuation theorems for elliptic equations with variable operator coefficients in E-valued L p spaces are studied. We will prove that if n 1 p - 1 p ′ ≤2, 1 μ = 1 p - 1 p ′ , 1 p + 1 p | = 1 , V ∈ L μ (Rn; L(E)), p, μ∈ (1, ∞) and u∈ W p 2 ( R n ; E ( A ) , E ) satisfies (1), then u is identically zero if it vanishes in a nonempty open subset, where W p 2 ( R n ; E ( A ) , E ) is an E-valued Sobolev-Lions type space. We prove the Carleman estimates to obtain unique continuation. Specifically, we shall see that it suffices to show that if w ( x ) = x 1 + x 1 2 2 , then

‖ e t w u ‖ L p | ( R n ; E ) ≤ C ‖ e t w L ( ε x , D ) u ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) , 1 p + 1 p | = 1 , ∑ | α | ≤ 1 t ( 1 + 1 n − | α | ) ‖ e t w D α u ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) + ‖ e t w A u ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C ‖ e t w L ( ε x , D ) u ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) .

In the Hilbert space L2 (Rn; H), we derive the following Carleman estimate

∑ | α | ≤ 2 t 3 2 − | α | ‖ e t w D α u ‖ L 2 ( R n ; H ) + ‖ e t w A u ‖ L 2 ( R n ; H ) ≤ C ‖ e t w L 0 u ‖ L 2 ( R n ; H ) .

Any of these inequalities would follow from showing that the adjoint operator L t (x; D) = etwL (x; D) e-tw satisfies the following relevant local Sobolev inequalities

‖ u ‖ L p | ( R n ; E ) ≤ C ‖ L t u ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) , 1 p + 1 p | = 1 , ∑ | α | ≤ 1 t ( 1 + 1 n − | α | ) ‖ D α u ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) ‖ A u ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C ‖ L t u ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) ,

uniformly to t, where L0t = etwL0e-tw. In application, putting concrete Banach spaces instead of E and concrete operators instead of A, we obtain different results concerning to Carleman estimates and unique continuation.

2 Notations, definitions, and background

Let R and C denote the sets of real and complex numbers, respectively. Let

S φ = { ξ ∈ C , | arg ξ | ≤ φ } ∪ { 0 } , φ ∈ [ 0 , π ) .

Let E and E1 be two Banach spaces, and L (E, E1) denotes the spaces of all bounded linear operators from E to E1. For E1 = E we denote L (E, E1) by L (E). A linear operator A is said to be a φ-positive in a Banach space E with bound M > 0 if D (A) is dense on E and

‖ ( A + ξ I ) − 1 ‖ L ( E ) ≤ M ( 1 + | ξ | ) − 1

with λ ∈ S φ , φ ∈ (0, π], I is identity operator in E. We will sometimes use A + ξ or A ξ instead of A + ξI for a scalar ξ and (A + ξI)-1 denotes the inverse of the operator A + ξI or the resolvent of operator A. It is known [19, §1.15.1] that there exist fractional powers Aθ of a positive operator A and

E ( A θ ) = { u ∈ D ( A θ ) , u E ( A θ ) = A θ u E + u < ∞ , - ∞ < θ < ∞ } .

We denote by L p (Ω; E) the space of all strongly measurable E-valued functions on Ω with the norm

u L p = u L p ( Ω ; E ) = ∫ Ω u ( x ) E p d x 1 / p , 1 ≤ p < ∞ .

By Lp,q(Ω) and W p , q l ( Ω ) let us denoted, respectively, the (p, q)-integrable function space and Sobolev space with mixed norms, where 1 ≤ p, q < ∞, see [20].

Let E0 and E be two Banach spaces and E0 is continuously and densely embedded E.

Let l be a positive integer.

We introduce an E-valued function space W p l ( Ω ; E 0 , E ) (sometimes we called it Sobolev-Lions type space) that consist of all functions u ∈ L p (Ω; E0) such that the generalized derivatives D k l u= ∂ l u ∂ x k l ∈ L p ( Ω ; E ) are endowed with the

‖ u ‖ W p l ( Ω ; E 0 , E ) = ‖ u ‖ L p ( Ω ; E 0 ) + ∑ k = 1 n ‖ D k l u ‖ L p ( Ω ; E ) < ∞ , 1 ≤ p < ∞ .

The Banach space E is called an UMD-space if the Hilbert operator ( H f ) ( x ) = lim ε → 0 ∫ | x - y | > ε f ( y ) x - y dy is bounded in L p (R, E), p ∈ (1, ∞) (see e.g., [21, 22]). UMD spaces include, e.g., L p , l p spaces and Lorentz spaces L pq , p, q ∈ (1, ∞).

Let E1 and E2 be two Banach spaces. Let S (Rn; E) denotes a Schwartz class, i.e., the space of all E-valued rapidly decreasing smooth functions on Rn. Let F and F-1denote Fourier and inverse Fourier transformations, respectively. A function Ψ ∈ Cm (Rn; L (E1, E2)) is called a multiplier from L p (Rn; E1) to L q (Rn; E2) for p, q ∈ (1, ∞) if the map u → Ku = F-1 Ψ (ξ) Fu, u ∈ S (Rn; E1) is well defined and extends to a bounded linear operator

K: L p ( R n ; E 1 ) → L q ( R n ; E 2 ) .

We denote the set of all multipliers from L p (Rn; E1) to L q (Rn; E2) by M p q ( E 1 , E 2 ) . For E1 = E2 = E and q = p we denote M p q ( E 1 , E 2 ) by M p (E). The L p -multipliers of the Fourier transformation, and some related references, can be found in [19, § 2.2.1-§ 2.2.4]. On the other hand, Fourier multipliers in vector-valued function spaces, have been studied, e.g., in [23–28].

A set K ⊂ L (E1, E2) is called R-bounded [22, 23] if there is a constant C such that for all T1, T2, . . . , T m ∈ K and u1,u2, . . . , u m ∈ E1, m ∈ N

∫ 0 1 ∑ j = 1 m r j ( y ) T j u j E 2 dy≤C ∫ 0 1 ∑ j = 1 m r j ( y ) u j E 1 dy,

where {r j } is a sequence of independent symmetric {-1, 1}-valued random variables on [0,1]. The smallest C for which the above estimate holds is called a R-bound of the collection K and denoted by R (K).

Let

U n = { β = ( β 1 , β 2 , … , β n ) , β i ∈ { 0 , 1 } , i = 1 , 2 , … , n } , ξ β = ξ 1 β 1 ξ 2 β 2 … ξ n β n , | ξ β | = | ξ 1 | β 1 | ξ 2 | β 2 … | ξ n | β n .

For any r = (r1, r2, . . . , r n ), r i ∈ [0, ∞) the function (iξ)r, ξ ∈ Rn will be defined such that

( i ξ ) r = ( i ξ 1 ) r 1 … ( i ξ n ) r n , ξ 1 , ξ 2 , … , ξ n ≠ 0 , 0 , ξ 1 , ξ 2 , … , ξ n = 0 ,

where

( i t ) ν = | t | ν exp i Ï€ 2 sign  t , t ∈ ( - ∞ , ∞ ) , ν ∈ [ 0 , ∞ ) .

Definition 2.1. The Banach space E is said to be a space satisfying a multiplier condition with respect to p, q ∈ (1, ∞) (with respect to p if q = p) when for Ψ ∈ C(n)(Rn; L (E1, E2)) if the set

ξ | β | + 1 p - 1 q D β Ψ ( ξ ) : ξ ∈ R n \ 0 , β ∈ U n

is R-bounded, then Ψ∈ M p q ( E 1 , E 2 ) .

Definition 2.2. The φ-positive operator A is said to be a R-positive in a Banach space E if there exists φ ∈ [0, π) such that the set

L A = { ξ ( A + ξ I ) - 1 : ξ ∈ S φ }

is R-bounded.

Remark 2.1. By virtue of [29] or [30] UMD spaces satisfy the multiplier condition with respect to p ∈ (1, ∞).

Note that, in Hilbert spaces every norm bounded set is R-bounded. Therefore, in Hilbert spaces all positive operators are R-positive. If A is a generator of a contraction semigroup on L q , 1 ≤ q ≤ ∞ [31], A has the bounded imaginary powers with ‖ ( − A i t ) ‖ L ( E ) ≤ C e ν | t | , ν< π 2 or if A is a generator of a semigroup with Gaussian bound in E ∈ UMD then those operators are R-positive (see e.g., [24]).

It is well known (see e.g., [32]) that any Hilbert space satisfies the multiplier condition with respect to p ∈ (1, ∞). By virtue of [33] Mikhlin conditions are not sufficient for operator-valued multiplier theorem. There are however, Banach spaces which are not Hilbert spaces but satisfy the multiplier condition (see Remark 2.1).

Let H k = { Ψ h ∈ M p q ( E 1 , E 2 ) , h = ( h 1 , h 2 , … , h n ) ∈ K } be a collection of multipliers in M p q ( E 1 , E 2 ) . We say that H k is a uniform collection of multipliers if there exists a constant M > 0, independent on h ∈ K, such that

F - 1 Ψ h F u L q ( R n ; E 2 ) ≤ M u L p ( R n ; E 1 )

for all h ∈ K and u ∈ S (Rn; E1).

We set

C b ( Ω ; E ) = u ∈ C ( Ω ; E ) , lim | x | → ∞ u ( x )  exists .

In view of [17, Theorem A0], we have

Theorem 2.0. Let E1 and E2 be two UMD spaces and let

Ψ ∈ C ( n ) ( R n \ 0 ; L ( E 1 , E 2 ) ) for  p , q ∈ ( 1 , ∞ ) .

If

R ξ | β | + 1 p - 1 q D ξ β Ψ h ( ξ ) : ξ ∈ R n \ 0 , β ∈ U n ≤ K β < ∞

uniformly with respect to h ∈ K then Ψ h (ξ) is a uniformly collection of multipliers from L p (Rn; E1) to L q (Rn; E2).

Let

χ = | α | + n 1 p - 1 q l , α = ( α 1 , α 2 , … , α n ) .

Embedding theorems in Sobolev-Lions type spaces were studied in [13–18, 32, 34]. In a similar way as [17, Theorem 3] we have

Theorem 2.1. Suppose the following conditions hold:

  1. (1)

    E is a Banach space satisfying the multiplier condition with respect to p, q ∈ (1, ∞) and A is a R-positive operator on E;

  2. (2)

    l is a positive and α k are nonnegative integer numbers such that 0 ≤ μ ≤ 1 - ϰ, t and h are positive parameters.

Then the embedding

D α W p l ( R n ; E ( A ) , E ) ⊂ L q ( R n ; E ( A 1 - χ - μ ) )

is continuous and there exists a positive constant C µ such that for

u ∈ W p l ( R n ; E ( A ) , E )

the uniform estimate holds

D α u L q ( R n ; E ( A 1 - χ - μ ) ) ≤ C μ h μ u W p l ( R n ; E ( A ) , E ) + h - ( 1 - μ ) u L p ( R n ; E ) .

Moreover, for u∈ W p l ( R n ; E ( A ) , E ) the following uniform estimate holds

A 1 - χ - μ u L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C μ h μ u W p l ( R n ; E ( A ) , E ) + h - ( 1 - μ ) u L p ( R n ; E ) .

3 Carleman estimates for DOE

Consider at first the equation with constant coefficients

L 0 u = ∑ k = 1 n D k 2 u + A u = f ( x ) ,
(2)

where D k = ∂ i ∂ k and A is the possible unbounded operator in a Banach space E.

Let w ( x ) = x 1 + x 1 2 2 and t is a positive parameter.

Remark 3.1. It is clear to see that

e t w L 0 [ e - t w u ] = L 0 t ( x , D ) u = e t w ∑ k = 1 n D k 2 ( e - t w u ) + e - t w A u = ∑ k = 1 n D k 2 u + A u + 2 t w 1 ∂ u ∂ x 1 + [ - t 2 w 1 2 + t ] u ,
(3)

where w 1 = ∂ w ∂ x 1 . Let L0t(x, ξ) is the principal operator symbol of L0t(x, D) on the domain B0, i.e.,

L 0 t ( x , ξ ) = ξ 1 2 - 2 i ξ 1 w 1 t + A + | ξ | | 2 - t 2 w 1 2 = G t ( x , ξ ) B t ( x , ξ ) ,

where

G t ( x , ξ ) = ξ 1 - i A + | ξ | | 2 1 2 + t w 1 , B t ( x , ξ ) = ξ 1 + i A + | ξ | | 2 1 2 - t w 1 , | ξ | | 2 = ∑ k = 2 n ξ k 2 .

Our main aim is to show the following result:

Remark 3.2. Since Q(ξ) ∈ S (φ) for all φ ∈ [0, π) due to positivity of A, the operator function A + |ξ||2, ξ ∈ Rn is uniformly positive in E. So there are fractional powers of A+|ξ||2 and the operator function A + | ξ | | 2 1 2 is positive in E (see e.g., [19, §1. 15.1]).

First, we will prove the following result.

Theorem 3.1. Suppose A is a positive operator in a Hilbert space H. Then the following uniform Sobolev type estimate holds for the solution of Equation (3)

∑ | α | ≤ 2 t 3 2 − | α | ‖ e t w D α u ‖ L 2 ( R n ; H ) + ‖ e t w A u ‖ L 2 ( R n ; H ) ≤ C ‖ e t w L 0 u ‖ L 2 ( R n ; H ) .
(4)

By virtue of Remark 3.1 it suffices to prove the following uniform coercive estimate

∑ | α | ≤ 2 t 3 2 − | α | ‖ D α u ‖ L 2 ( R n ; H ) + ‖ A u ‖ L 2 ( R n ; H ) ≤ C ‖ L 0 t u ‖ L 2 ( R n ; H )
(5)

for u ∈ W 2 2 ( R n ; H ( A ) , E ) .

To prove the Theorem 3.1, we shall show that L0t(x, D) has a right parametrix T, with the following properties.

Lemma 3.1. For t > 0 there are functions K = K t and R = R t so that

L 0 t ( x , D ) K ( x , y ) = δ ( x - y ) + R ( x , y ) , x , y ∈ B 0 ,
(6)

where δ denotes the Dirac distribution. Moreover, if we let T = T t be the operator with kernel K, i.e.,

T f ( x ) = ∫ B 0 K ( x , y ) f ( y ) d y , f ∈ C 0 ∞ ( B 0 ; E ) ,

and R is the operator with kernel R (x, y), then for large t > 0, the adjoint of these operators satisfy the following estimates

∑ | α | ≤ 2 t 2 − | α | ‖ D α T * f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) , ‖ A T * f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ,
(7)
t 1 2 ‖ R * f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ,
(8)
t − 1 2 ‖ D ν R * f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ∑ | α | ≤ | ν | − 1 ‖ D α f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) , 1 ≤ | ν | ≤ 2.
(9)

Proof. By Remark 3.2 the operator function A + | ξ | | 2 1 2 is positive in E for all ξ ∈ Rn. Since tw1 + iξ1 ∈ S(φ), due to positivity of A, for φ∈ [ π 2 , π ) the factor G t ( x , ξ ) =-i A + | ξ | | 2 1 2 + w 1 t + i ξ 1 has a bounded inverse G t - 1 ( x , ξ ) for all ξ ∈ Rn, t > 0 and

‖ G t − 1 ( x , ξ ) ‖ B ( H ) ≤ C ( 1 + | t w 1 + i ξ 1 | ) − 1 .
(10)

Therefore, we call G t (x, ξ) the regular factor. Consider now the second factor

B t ( x , ξ ) =i A + | ξ | | 2 1 2 - ( w 1 t + i ξ 1 ) .

By virtue of operator calculus and fractional powers of positive operators (see e.g., [19, §1.15.1] or [35]) we get that - [tw1 + iξ1] ∉ S (φ) for ξ1 = 0 and tw1 = |ξ||, i.e., the operator B t (x, ξ) does not has an inverse, in the following set

Δ t = { ( x , ξ ) ∈ B 0 × R n : ξ 1 = 0 , | ξ | | = t w 1 } .

So we will called B t the singular factor and the set Δ t call singular set for the operator function B t . The operator B t - 1 cannot be bounded in the set Δ t . Nevertheless, the operator B t - 1 , and hence L 0 t - 1 , can be bounded when (x, ξ) is sufficiently far from Δ t . For instance, if we define

Γ t = ( x , ξ ) ∈ B 0 × R n : | ξ | | ∈ t 4 , 4 t , | ξ 1 | ≤ t 4 ,

by properties of positive operators we will get the same estimate of type (10) for the singular factor B t . Hence, using this fact and the resolvent properties of positive operators we obtain the following estimate

‖ L 0 t − 1 ( x , ξ ) ‖ B ( E ) ≤ C ( 1 + | ξ | 2 + t 2 ) − 1 when  ( x , ξ ) ∈ c Γ t ,
(11)

where the constant C is independent of x, ξ, t and cΓ t denotes the complement of Γ t .

Let β∈ C 0 ∞ ( R ) such that, β(ξ) = 0 if |ξ|∈ 1 4 , 4 and β (ξ) = 0 near the origin. We then define

β 0 ( ξ ) = β 0 t ( ξ ) β 0 ( ξ ) =1-β ( | ξ | | / t ) β ( 1 - ξ 1 / t )

and notice that β0 (ξ) = 0 on Γ t . Hence, if we define

K 0 ( x , y ) = ( 2 π ) - n ∫ R n β 0 ( ξ ) e i ( ( x - y ) , ξ ) L 0 t - 1 ( y , ξ ) dξ
(12)

and recall (11), then by [31] it follows from standard microlocal arguments that

L 0 t ( x , D ) K 0 ( x , y ) = ( 2 π ) - n ∫ R n β 0 ( ξ ) e i ( ( x - y ) , ξ ) dξ+ R 0 t ( x , y ) ,

where R0tbelongs to a bounded subset of S-1 which is independent of t. Since operator R 0 t * also has the same property, it follows that for all f∈ C 0 ∞ ( B 0 ; H )

‖ D ν R 0 t * f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ∑ | α | ≤ | ν | − 1 ‖ D α f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) , 1 ≤ | ν | ≤ 2.

By reasoning as in [31] we get that tR0tbelongs to a bounded subset of S0. So, we have the following estimate

t ‖ D ν R 0 t * f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) .

Moreover, the Remark 3.2, positivity properties of A and, (11) and (12) imply that, the operator functions ∑ | α | ≤ 2 β 0 ( ξ ) t 2 - | α | ξ α L 0 t - 1 ( x , ξ ) and β 0 ( ξ ) A L 0 t - 1 ( x , ξ ) are uniformly bounded. Then, if we let T0 be the operator with kernel K0 (x, y), by using the Minkowski integral inequality and Plancherel's theorem we obtain

∑ | α | ≤ 2 t 2 − | α | ‖ D α T 0 f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) , ‖ A T 0 f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) .

For inverting L0t(x, D) on the set Γ t we will require the use of Fourier integrals with complex phase. Let β1 (ξ) = 1 - β0 (ξ). We will construct a Fourier integral operator T1 with kernel

K 1 ( x , y ) = ( 2 π ) - n ∫ R n β 1 ( ξ ) e i Φ ( x , y , ξ ) L 0 t - 1 ( y , ξ ) d ξ
(13)

so that the analogs of (16) and the estimates (7)-(9) are satisfied. Since G t - 1 ( x , ξ ) is uniformly bounded on Γ t , we should expect to construct the phase function Φ in (13) using the factor B t (x, ξ). Specifically, we would like Φ to satisfy the following equation

B t ( x , Φ x ) = B t ( y , ξ ) , y ∈ B 0 , ( x , ξ ∈ Γ t ) .
(14)

The Equation (14) leads to complex eikonal equation (i.e., a non-linear partial differential equation with complex coefficients).

( A + | Φ x | ( x , y , ξ ) | 2 ) 1 2 - [ w 1 ( x ) t + i Φ x 1 ( x , y , ξ ) ] = A + | ξ | | 2 1 2 - ( w 1 ( y ) t + i ξ 1 ) .
(15)

Since w1 (x) = 1 + x1, w1 (y) = 1 + y1, we have

Φ = ( x - y , ξ ) + ( x 1 - y 1 ) 2 ξ 1 2 ( 1 + y 1 ) + i ( x 1 - y 1 ) 2 | ξ | | 2 ( 1 + y 1 )
(16)

is a solution of (15). To use this we get

L 0 t ( x , D ) e i Φ ( x , y , ξ ) = e i Φ L 0 t ( x , Φ x ) + e i Φ ∂ 2 Φ ∂ x 1 2 .

Next, if we set

r ( x , y , ξ ) = G t ( y , ξ ) - G t ( x , ξ ) = - i [ w 1 ( y ) - w 1 ( x ) ] t
(17)

then it follows from L0t(x, ξ) = G t (x, ξ)B t (x, ξ) and (14) that

L 0 t ( x , Φ x ) = L 0 t ( y , ξ ) + B t ( y , ξ ) r ( x , y , ξ ) .
(18)

Consequently, (16)-(18) imply that

( 2 π ) n L 0 t ( x , D ) K 1 ( x , y ) = ∫ R n β 1 ( ξ ) e i Φ d ξ + ∫ R n β 1 ( ξ ) r ( x , y , ξ ) G t - 1 ( y , ξ ) e i Φ d ξ ∫ R n β 1 ( ξ ) A L 0 t - 1 ( y , ξ ) e i Φ d ξ + ∫ R n β 1 ( ξ ) ∂ 2 Φ ∂ x 1 2 L 0 t - 1 ( y , ξ ) e i Φ d ξ .
(19)

By reasoning as in [3] we obtain that the first and second summands in (19) belong to a bounded subset of S0. So, we see that the equality (5) must hold. Now we let K (x, y) = K0 (x, y) + K1 (x, y) and R (x, y) = R0 (x, y) + R1 (x, y), where

R 1 ( x , y ) = R 10 ( x , y ) + R 11 ( x , y ) , R 10 ( x , y ) = ∫ R n β 1 ( ξ ) r ( x , y , ξ ) G t - 1 ( y , ξ ) e i Φ d ξ , R 11 ( x , y ) = ∫ R n β 1 ( ξ ) ∂ 2 Φ ∂ x 1 2 L 0 t - 1 ( y , ξ ) e i Φ d ξ , T 0 f ( x ) = ∫ B 0 K 0 ( x , y ) f ( y ) d y , T 1 f ( x ) = ∫ B 0 K 1 ( x , y ) f ( y ) d y .

Due to regularity of kernels, by using of Minkowski and Hölder inequalities we get the analog estimate as (7) and (9) for the operators T0 and R10. Thus, in order to finish the proof, it suffices to show that for f ∈L2 (B0; E) one has

∑ | α | ≤ 2 t 2 − | α | ‖ D α T 1 * f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) + ‖ A T 1 * f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ,
(20)
t 1 2 ‖ R 11 * f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ,
(21)
t − 1 2 | | D ν R 11 * f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ∑ | α | ≤ | ν | − 1 ‖ D α f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) , 1 ≤ | ν | ≤ 2.
(22)

However, since R1,1 ≈ tT1, we need only to show the following

t 3 / 2 ‖ T 1 * f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) .
(23)

By using the Minkowski inequalities we get

‖ T 1 * f ‖ L 2 ( R n − 1 ; E ) ≤ ∫ − 1 4 1 4 ‖ ∫ B 0 K 1 * ( x , y ) f ( y ) d y | ‖ d y 1 ,

where K 1 * ( x , y ) = K Ì„ 1 ( y , x ) . The estimates (13) and (16) imply that

K 1 * ( x , y ) = ( 2 π ) - n ∫ R n - 1 e i x ′ - y ′ m ( x 1 , y 1 , ξ | ) d ξ | ,

where

m ( x 1 , y 1 , ξ | ) = ∫ - ∞ ∞ β 1 ( ξ ) e i ( x 1 - y 1 ) ξ 1 + ( x 1 - y 1 ) 2 ( i | ξ | | - ξ 1 ) / 2 ( 1 + x 1 ) L 0 t - 1 ( y , ξ ) d ξ 1 .

Consequently, it follows from Plancherel's theorem that

∫ R n - 1 K 1 * ( x , y ) f ( y ) d y | ≤ sup ξ | | m ( x 1 , y 1 , ξ | ) | ∫ R n - 1 | f ( y ) | 2 d y | 1 2 .
(24)

Note that for every N we have

e i [ ( x 1 - y 1 ) 2 | ξ | | / 2 ( 1 + x 1 ) ] ≤ C N [ 1 + t ( x 1 - y 1 ) 2 ] - N on supp  β 1 .

Since A is a positive operator in E, we have

‖ L 0 t − 1 ( x , ξ ) ‖ B ( E ) ≤ 1 + | − 2 i ξ 1 w 1 t + | ξ | 2 − t 2 w 1 2 | − 1

when -2i ξ 1 w 1 t+A+|ξ | 2 - t 2 w 1 2 ∈S ( φ ) . Then by using the above estimate it not easy to check that

∫ - ∞ ∞ β 1 ( ξ ) e i ξ 1 ( x 1 - y 1 ) - ( x 1 - y 1 ) 2 / 2 ( 1 + x 1 ) L 0 t - 1 ( y , ξ ) d ξ 1 = O ( t - 1 ) ,

i.e.,

| m ( x 1 , y 1 , ξ | ) | ≤ C t - 1 [ 1 + t ( x 1 - y 1 ) 2 ] - 1 .

Moreover, it is clear that

∫ - ∞ ∞ ( 1 + t x 1 ) - 1 d x 1 = O t - 1 2 .

Thus from (24) by using the above relations and Young's inequality we obtain the desired estimate

T 1 * f L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C t - 1 ∫ ∫ 1 + t ( x 1 - y 1 ) 2 f ( y 1 , ⋅ ) L 2 d y 1 d x 1 ≤ C t - 3 / 2 f L 2 ( R n ; H ) .

Moreover, by using the estimate (10) and the resolvent properties of the positive operator A we have

A T 1 * f L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) ≤ C f L 2 ( B 0 ; H ) .

The last two estimates then, imply the estimates (20)-(22).

Proof of Theorem 3.1: The estimates (7)-(9) imply the estimate (5), i.e., we obtain the assertion of the Theorem 3.1.

4 L p -Carleman estimates and unique continuation for equation with variable coefficients

Consider the following DOE

L ( x , D ) u = ∑ i , j = 1 n a i j ( x ) D i j 2 u + A u = f ( x ) , x ∈ R n ,
(25)

where D k = ∂ i ∂ k and A is the possible unbounded operator in a Banach space E and a ij are

real-valued smooth functions in B ε = {x ∈ Rn, |x| < ε}.

Condition 4.1. There is a positive constant γ such that ∑ i , j = 1 n a i j ( x ) ξ i ξ j ≥γ|ξ | 2 for all ξ ∈ Rn, x ∈ B 0 = { x ∈ R n , | x | < 1 4 } .

The main result of the section is the following

Theorem 4.1. Let E be a Banach space satisfies the multiplier condition and A be a R-positive operator in E. Suppose the Condition 4.1 holds, n ≥ 3, p = 2 n n + 2 and p' is the conjugate of p, w = x 1 + x 1 2 2 and a ij ∈ C∞ (B ε ). Then for u∈ C 0 ∞ ( B ε ; E(A)) and ∈>0, 1 t < 1 2 the following estimates are satisfied:

e t w u L p | ( R n ; E ) ≤ C e t w L ( ε x , D ) u L p ( R n ; E ) , 1 p + 1 p | = 1 ,
(26)
∑ α ≤ 1 t 1 + 1 n - α e t w D α u L p ( R n ; E ) + e t w A u L p ( R n ; E ) ≤
(27)
C e t w L ( ε x , D ) u L p ( R n ; E ) .

Proof. As in the proof of Theorem 3.1, it is sufficient to prove the following estimates

v L p | ( R n ; E ) ≤ C L t ε x , D v L p ( R n ; E ) , 1 p + 1 p | = 1 ,
(28)
∑ | α | ≤ 1 t ( 1 + 1 n - | α | ) D α v L p ( R n ; E ) + A v L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C L t ( ε x , D ) v L p ( R n ; E )
(29)

where,

L t ε x , D = e t w L ε x , D e - t w = L ε x , D + 2 t w 1 ∂ ∂ x 1 - ( t w 1 ) 2 - t 2 , w 1 = ∂ w ∂ x 1 .

Consequently, since w1 ≃ 1 on B ε , it follows that, if we let Q t (εx, D) be the differential operator whose adjoint equals

Q t * ( ε x , D ) = w 1 - 2 L ( ε x , D ) + 2 t w 1 - 1 ∂ ∂ x 1 - t 2 ,

then it suffices to prove the following

v L p | ( R n ; E ) ≤ C Q t ( ε x , D ) v L p ( R n ; E ) , 1 p + 1 p | = 1 , ∑ | α | t ( 1 + 1 n - | α | ) | | D α v | | L p ( R n ; E ) + | | A v | | L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C | | Q t ( ε x , D ) v | | L p ( R n ; E ) , v ∈ C 0 ∞ ( B ε ; E ( A ) ) .
(30)

The desired estimates will follow if we could constrict a right operator-valued parametrix T, for Q t * (εx, D) satisfying L p estimates. these are contained in the following lemma.

Lemma 4.1. For t > 0 there are functions K = K t and R = R t , so that

Q t * ε x , D K x , y = δ x - y + R x , y , x , y ∈ B ε ,
(31)

where δ denotes the Dirac distribution. Moreover, if we let T = T t be the operator with kernel K (x, y) and R be the operator with kernel R (x, y), then if ε and 1 t are sufficiently small, the adjoint of these operators satisfy the following uniform estimates

T * f L p 1 ( R n ; E ) ≤ C f L p ( R n ; E ) , 1 p + 1 p | = 1 ,
(32)
∑ | α | ≤ 1 t ( 1 + 1 n - | α | ) D α T * f L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C f L p ( R n ; E ) ,
(33)
A T * f L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C f L p ( R n ; E ) ,
t 1 n R * f L q R n ; E ≤ C f L q R n ; E , q = p , p | ,
(34)
t - 1 + 1 n ∇ R * f L p R n ; E ≤ C f L p R n ; E , f ∈ C 0 ∞ B ε ; E .
(35)

Proof. The key step in the proof is to find a factorization of the operator-valued symbol Q t * ε x , ξ that will allow to microlocally invert Q t * ε x , D near the set where Q t * ε x , ξ vanishes. Note that, after making a suitable choice of coordinates, it is enough to show that if L (x, D) is of the form

L x , D = D 1 2 + ∑ i , j = 2 n a i j D i D j , D j = 1 i ∂ ∂ x j

therefore, we can expressed Q t * ε x , ξ as

Q t * ε x , ξ = B t ε x , ξ G t ε x , ξ ,
(36)

where

B t x , ξ = w 1 - 1 ξ 1 + i A + w 1 - 1 a ε x , ξ | - t , G t x , ξ = w 1 - 1 ξ 1 - i A + w 1 - 1 a ε x , ξ | + t ,

where

a x , ξ | = ∑ i , j = 2 n a i j x ξ i ξ j .

The ellipticity of Q(x, D) and the positivity of the operator A, implies that the factor G t (x, ξ) never vanishes and as in the proof of Theorem 3.1 we get that

G t - 1 ε x , ξ B H ≤ C 1 + | w 1 - 1 a ε x , ξ | | 1 2 + | t + w 1 - 1 ξ 1 | - 1 ,
(37)
x ∈ B ε , ξ ∈ R n ,

i.e., the operator function G t (εx, ξ) has uniformly bounded inverse for (x, ξ) ∈ B ε ×Rn. One can only investigate the factor B t (εx, ξ). In fact, if we let

Δ t = x , ξ ∈ B ε × R n : ξ 1 = 0 , | ξ | | = t w 1 ,

then the operator function B t (x, ξ) is not invertible for (x, ξ) ∈ Δ t . Nonetheless, B t (εx, ξ) and Q t * ε x , ξ can be have a bounded inverse when (x, ξ) is sufficiently far away. For instance, if we define

Γ t = x , ξ ∈ B ε × R n : | ξ | | ∈ t 4 , 4 t , | ξ 1 | ≤ t 4 ,

by properties of positive operators we will get the same estimate of type (37) for the singular factor B t . Hence, we using this fact and the resolvent properties of positive operators we obtain the following estimate

Q t * - 1 ε x , ξ B E ≤ C 1 + | ξ | | + | t + w 1 - 1 ξ 1 | - 1 when x , ξ ∈ c Γ t .
(38)

As in § 3, we can use (38) to microlocallity invert Q t * ε x , D away from Γ t . To do this, we first fix β∈ C 0 ∞ R as in § 3. We then define

β 0 = β 0 t = 1 - β ξ | / t β 1 - ξ 1 / t .

It is clear that β0 (ξ) = 0 on Γ t . Consequently, if we define

K 0 x , y = 2 π - n ∫ R n β 0 ξ e i x - y , ξ Q t * - 1 ε y , ξ d ξ
(39)

and recall (37), then we can conclude that standard microlocal arguments give that

Q t * ε x , D K 0 x , y = 2 π - n ∫ R n β 0 ξ e i x - y , ξ d ξ + R 0 x , y ,
(40)

where R0 belongs to a bounded subset of S-1 that independent of t. Since the adjoint operator R 0 * also is abstract pseudodifferential operator with this property, by reasoning as in [31, Theorem 6] it follows that

∇ R 0 * f L p R n ; E ≤ C f L p R n ; E , f ∈ C 0 ∞ B ε ; E ,
(41)
t R 0 * f L q R n ; E ≤ C f L q R n ; E , f ∈ C 0 ∞ B ε ; E ,
(42)
q = p , p ′ , 1 p + 1 p ′ = 1 .

Moreover, the positivity properties of A and the estimate (38) imply that the operator functions ∑ α ≤ 2 β 0 ξ t 2 - α ξ α Q t * - 1 ε x , ξ and β 0 ξ A Q t * - 1 ε x , ξ are uniformly bounded. Next, let T0 be the operator with kernel K0. Then in a similar way as in [31] we obtain that

∑ α ≤ 1 t 2 - α D α T 0 * f L p R n ; E ≤ C f L p R n ; E ,
(43)
A T 0 * f L p R n ; E ≤ C f L p R n ; E

which also the first estimate is stronger than the corresponding inequality in Lemma 4.1. Finally, since T0 ∈ S-2 and 1 p - 1 p | = 2 n it follows from imbedding theorem in abstract Sobolev spaces [17] that

T 0 * f L p | R n ; E ≤ C f L p R n ; E , f ∈ C 0 ∞ B ε ; E .
(44)

Thus, we have shown that the microlocal inverse corresponding to cΓ t , satisfies the desired estimates.

Let β1 (ξ) = 1-β0 (ξ). To invert Q t * ε x , D for (x, ξ) ∈ Γ t , we have to construct a Fourier integral operator T1, with kernel

K 1 x , y = 2 π - n ∫ R n β 1 ξ e i Φ x , y , ξ Q 0 t * - 1 ε y , ξ d ξ ,
(45)

such that the analogs of (39) and (32)-(35) are satisfied. For this step the factorization (36) of the symbol Q t * ε y , ξ will be used. Since the factor G t (εx, ξ) has a bounded inverse for (x, ξ) ∈ Γ t , the previous discussions show that we should try to construct the phase function in (46) using the factor B t (εx, ξ). We would like Φ (x, y, ξ) to solve the complex eikonal equation

B t ε x , Φ x = B t ε y , ξ , x , y ∈ B ε , ξ ∈ supp  β 1 ,
(46)

Since B t (εx, Φ x ) - B t (εy, ξ) is a scalar function (it does not depend of operator A ), by reasoning as in [3, Lemma 3.4] we get that

Φ ( x , y , ξ ) = ϕ ( x ′ , y , ξ ′ ) + ψ ( x , y , ξ ) ,

where Ï• is real and defined as

ϕ x ′ , y , ξ ′ = x 1 - y 1 ξ 1 + O x ′ - y ′ 2 ξ ′ ,

while

ψ x , y , ξ = x 1 - y 1 ξ 1 + O x 1 - y 1 2 ξ ′

and

Im ψ x , y , ξ ≥ c x 1 - y 1 2 ξ ′ , c > 0 .
(47)

Then we obtain from the above that

Q t * ε x , D e i Φ x , y , ξ = e i Φ Q t * ε x , Φ x + e i Φ w 1 - 2 L ε x , D Φ .

Next, if we set

r x , y , ξ = G t ε y , ξ - G t ε x , ξ = w 1 - 1 y ξ 1 - i a ε y , ξ ′ - w 1 - 1 x ξ 1 - i a ε x , ξ ′
(48)

then it follows from (36) and (48) that

e i Φ Q t * ε x , Φ x = e i Φ Q t * ε y , ξ + e i Φ B t ε y , ξ r x , y , ξ + O t - N
(49)

for every N when β1 (ξ) ≠ 0. Consequently, (49), (50) imply that

2 π n Q t * ε x , D K 1 x , y = ∫ β 1 ξ e i Φ d ξ + ∫ β 1 ξ r x , y , ξ G t - 1 ε y , ξ e i Φ d ξ
w 1 - 2 ∫ β 1 ( ξ ) Q t * - 1 ( ε y , ξ ) ( L ( ε x , D ) Φ ) e i Φ d ξ + O ( t - N ) .
(50)

By reasoning as in Theorem 3.1 we obtain from (51) that

Q t * ( ε x , D ) K 1 ( x , y ) = ( 2 π ) - n ∫ β 1 ( ξ ) e i ( x - y , ξ ) d ξ + R 10 ( x , y ) + R 11 ( x , y ) ,

where

R 11 ( x , y ) = ( 2 π ) - n w 1 - 2 ∫ β 1 ( ξ ) Q t * - 1 ( ε y , ξ ) ( L ( ε x , D ) Φ ) e i Φ d ξ
(51)

while R10 belongs to a bounded subset of S-1 and tR10 belongs to a bounded subset of S0. In view of this formula, we see that if we let K (x, y) = K0 (x, y) + K1 (x, y) and R (x, y) = R0 (x, y)+R1 (x, y), where R1 = R10 +R11, then we obtain (31). Moreover, since R10 satisfies the desired estimates, we see from Minkowski inequality that, in order to finish the proof of Lemma 4.1, it suffices to show that for f∈ C 0 ∞ ( B ε ; E )

‖ T 1 * f ‖ L p | ( R n ; E ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) ,
(52)
∑ | α | ≤ 1 t ( 1 + 1 n − | α | ) ‖ D α T 1 * f ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) ,
(53)
t 1 n ‖ R 11 * f ‖ L q ( R n ; E ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L q ( R n ; E ) , q = p , p | ,
(54)
t − 1 + 1 n ‖ ∇ R 11 * f ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C ‖ f ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) ,
(55)

where 1 p + 1 p | =1.

To prove the above estimates we need the following prepositions for oscillatory integral in E-valued L p spaces which generalize the Carleson and Sjolin result [36].

Preposition 4.1. Let E be Banach spaces and A∈ C 0 ∞ ( R n , L ( E ) ) . Moreover, suppose Φ ∈ C∞ satisfies | ∇Φ| ≥ γ > 0 on supp A. Then for all λ > 1 the following holds

∫ e i λ Φ ( x ) A ( x ) d x L ( E ) ≤ C N λ - N , N = 1 , 2 , …

where C N -depends only on γ if Φ and A (x) belong to a bounded subset of C∞ and C∞ (Rn, L (E)) and A is supported in a fixed compact set.

Proof. Given x0 ∈ supp A. There is a direction ν ∈ Sn-1such that |(ν, ∇Φ)| ≥ γ 2 on some ball centered at x0. Thus, by compactness, we can choose a partition of unity φ j ∈ C 0 ∞ consisting of a finite number of terms and corresponding unit vectors ν j such that ∑ j = 1 m φ j ( x ) =1 on supp A and | ( ν j , ∇ Φ ) |≥ γ 2 on supp φ j . For A j = φ j A it suffices to prove that for each j

∫ e i λ Φ ( x ) A j ( x ) d x L ( E ) ≤ C N λ - N , N = 1 , 2 , … .

After possible changing coordinates we may assume that ν j = (1, 0, . . . , 0) which means that ∂ Φ ∂ x 1 ≥ γ 2 on supp φ j . If let L ( x ; D ) = ∂ Φ ∂ x 1 - 1 1 i λ ∂ ∂ x 1 , then L ( x ; D ) e i λ Φ ( x ) = e i λ Φ ( x ) . Consequently, if L * = ∂ ∂ x 1 1 i λ ∂ Φ ∂ x 1 - 1 is a adjoint, then

∫ e i λ Φ ( x ) A ( x ) d x = ∫ e i λ Φ ( x ) ( L * ) N A j ( x ) d x .

Since our assumption imply that (L*)N A j (x) = O (λ-N), the result follows.

Preposition 4.2. Suppose Φ ∈ C∞ is a phase function satisfying the non-degeneracy condition det ∂ 2 Φ ∂ x i ∂ x j ≠ 0 on the support of

A ( x , y ) ∈ C 0 ∞ ( R n × R n , L ( E ) ) .

Then for T λ f= ∫ R n e i λ Φ ( x , y ) A ( x , y ) f ( y ) dx,λ>0 the following estimates hold

T λ f L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C λ - n - 1 p ′ f L p ( R n ; E ) , 1 ≤ p ≤ 2 , T λ f L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C λ - n p ′ f L p ( R n ; E ) , 1 p + 1 p ′ = 1 .

Proof. In view of [3, Remark 2.1] we have

| ∇ x [ Φ ( x , y ) - Φ ( x , z ) ] | ≃ | y - z |
(56)

where |y - z| is small. By using a smooth partition of unity we can decompose A (x, y) into a finite number of pieces each of which has the property that (57) holds on its support. So, by (57) we can assume

| ∇ x [ Φ ( x , y ) - Φ ( x , z ) ] | ≥ C | y - z |
(57)

on supp A for same C > 0. To use this we notice that

T λ f 2 2 = ∫ ∫ K λ ( y , z ) f ( y ) f ̄ ( z ) d y d z ,

where

K λ ( y , z ) = ∫ R n e i λ [ Φ ( x , y ) - Φ ( x , z ) ] A ( x , y ) Ā ( x , z ) d x .
(58)

Hence, by virtue of Preposition 4.1 and by (58) we obtain that

K λ ( y , z ) L ( E ) ≤ C N 1 + | λ | | y - z | - N ,  for all  N .

Consequently, by Young's inequality, the operator with kernel K λ acts

L p ( R n ; E )  to  L p ( R n ; E ) .

By (59) we get that

T λ f L 2 ( R n ; E ) ≤ C λ - n f L 2 ( R n ; E ) .

Moreover, it is clear to see that

T λ f L ∞ ( R n ; E ) ≤ C λ - n f L 1 ( R n ; E ) .

Therefore, by applying Riesz interpolation theorem for vector-valued L p spaces (see e.g., [19, § 1.18]) we get the assertion.

In a similar way as in [3, Preposition 3.6] we have.

Preposition 4.3. The kernel K1 (x, y) can be written as

K 1 ( x , y ) = ∑ j = 0 , 1 A j ( x , y ) t n - 2 e i t φ j ( x ′ , y ) | t ( x ′ - y ′ ) | ( n - 2 ) / 2 | t ( x - y ) | ,

where, for every fixed N, the operator functions A j satisfy

D α A j ( x , y ) ≤ C α ( 1 + t ( x 1 - y 1 ) 2 ) - N | x ′ - y ′ | - | α | ,

and moreover, the phase functions φ j are real and the property that when ε is small enough, 0 < δ ≤ ε and y1 ∈ [-ε, ε] is fixed, the dilated functions

( x ′ , y ′ ) → ( - 1 ) j δ - 1 φ j ( δ x ′ , y 1 , δ y ′ )

in the some fixed neighborhood of the function φ 0 ( x ′ , y ′ ) =| x ′ - y ′ | in the C∞ topology. Then, the following estimates holds

| K 1 ( x , y ) | ≤ C t n - 2 ( 1 + t | x 1 - y 1 | ) - 1 .
(59)

Proof. By representation of K1 (x, y) and Φ (x, y, ξ) we have

K 1 ( x , y ) ≃ t n - 2 ∫ R n β 1 ( t ξ ) e i t Φ ( x , y , ξ ) Q 0 t * - 1 ( ε y , ξ ) d ξ .

Then, by using (36) in view of positivity of operator A, by reasoning as in [3, Preposition 3.6] we obtain the assertion.

Let us now show the end of proof of Lemma 4.1. Let η∈ C 0 ∞ ( R ) be supported in 1 4 , 4 such that ∑ ν  =  - ∞ ∞ η ( 2 ν s ) =1,s>0 and set η 0 ( s ) =1- ∑ ν  =  - ∞ 0 η ( 2 ν s ) . Then we define kernels K1,ν, ν = 0, 1, 2, . . . , as follows

K 1 , ν = η ( t 2 - ν | x ′ - y ′ | ) K 1 ( x , y ) , ν > 0 η 0 ( t | x ′ - y ′ | ) K 1 ( x , y ) , ν = 0 .

Let T1,νdenotes the operators associated to these kernels. Then, by positivity properties of the operator A and by Prepositions 4.2, 4.3 we obtain for f∈ C 0 ∞ ( B ε ; E ) the following estimates

‖ T 1 , ν * f ‖ L p ′ ( R n ; E ) ≤ C 2 − 2 ν / n ‖ f ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) , 1 p + 1 p 1 = 1 ,
(60)
‖ T 1 , ν * f ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) ≤ C ( t 2 − ν ) − 1 / p ′ t − ( 1 + 1 n ) ‖ f ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) .
(61)

By summing a geometric series one sees that these estimates imply (52) and (53) for case of α = 0.

Let us first to show (60). One can check that the estimate (59) implies that the L r norm of K 10 * is O (tn-2t -n/r). But, if we let r = n/n - 2, it is follows from Young inequality and the fact that 1 p - 1 p ′ = 2 n that

‖ T 1 , 0 * f ‖ L p | ( R n ; E ) ≤ C t n − 2 t − n / r ‖ f ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) = C ‖ f ‖ L p ( R n ; E )

as desired. To prove the result for ν > 0, set B ε ′ = { x ′ ∈ R n - 1 , | x ′ | < ε } and let K 1 ν * be the kernel of the operator T 1 , ν * . Then, if we fix x1 and y1, it follows that the L p ( B ε ′ ; E ) → L p ( B ε ′ ; E ) norm of the operator

T 1 , v ′ * g ( x ′ ) = ∫ B ′ ε K 1 ν * ( x , y ) g ( y ′ ) d y ′

equal ( 2 ν t - 1 ) ( n - 1 ) 1 - 1 p + 1 p ′ times the norm of the dilated operator

T ̃ 1 , ν * g ( x ′ ) = ∫ B ′ ε K 1 ν * ( x 1 , δ x ′ , y 1 , δ y ′ ) g ( y ′ ) d y ′ ,

where δ = 2νt-1. By Preposition 4.3, the kernel in last integral equals the complex conjugate of

t n - 2 η ( t 2 - - ν | x ′ - y ′ | ) ∑ j = 0 , 1 A j ( y 1 , δ y ′ , x 1 , δ x ′ ) e i ( t δ ) δ - 1 φ j ( δ y ′ , x 1 , δ x ′ ) | t ( x ′ - y ′ ) | ( n - 2 ) / 2 | t ( x 1 , δ x ′ , y 1 , δ y ′ ) | ,

and, consequently by using the Proposition 4.2, for 0 < δ ≤ ε and for supp g⊂ B ε ′ we obtain that

‖ T ˜ 1 , ν * g ( x ′ ) ‖ L p ' ( R n ; E ) ≤ C ( t δ ) − ( n − 2 ) / p ′ t n − 2 ( t δ ) − ( n − 2 ) / 2 t − 1 [ ( x 1 − y 1 ) 2 + δ 2 ] − 1 / 2 ‖ g ‖ L p ( R n ; E ) .

This estimate implies

‖ ∫ B ′ ε K 1 ν * ( x , y ) g ( y ′ ) d y ′ ‖ L p ( B ′ ε ; E ) ≤ C t − 2 n [ ( x 1 − y 1 ) 2 + ( 2 ν / t ) 2 ] − 1 / 2 ‖ g ‖ L p ( B ′ ε ; E ) .

For r= n n - 2 we set

∫ - ∞ ∞ ( x 1 - y 1 ) 2 + ( 2 ν / t ) 2 - r / 2 d x 1 1 / r = C ( t / 2 ν ) 2 / n .

Then, the desired estimate (60) follows from the above estimate and Young's inequality. The other inequality (61), follows from a similar argument.

Preposition 4.4. The estimates (32)-(34) imply (30).

Proof. Indeed, (31) implies that

v ( x ) = T * ( Q t ( ε x , D ) v ) - R * v ( x ) ,

and so Minkowski's inequality, (32) and (34) give that

‖ v ‖ p ′ , E ≤ ‖ T * ( Q t ( ε x , D ) v ) ‖ p ′ , E + ‖ R * v ‖ p ′ , E ≤ ‖ Q t ( ε x , D ) v ‖ p , E + C t − 1 n ‖ v ‖ p ′ , E

which implies that the first inequality in (30) for sufficiently large t. Moreover, in a similar way, using (32) and (33) we get (30) for α = 0. To prove (30) for |α| = 1, we use (33), (34) and obtain

‖ ∇ v ‖ p , E ≤ ‖ ∇ T * ( Q t ( ε x , D ) v ) ‖ p , E + ‖ ∇ R * v ‖ p , E ≤ C t − 1 n ‖ Q t ( ε x , D ) v ‖ p , E + C t 1 − 1 n ‖ v ‖ p , E .

Hence, the result follows.

Now we can show the end of the proof of Theorem 4.1. Really, we obtain the estimate (30), which implies the estimates (26) and (27). That is the assertion of Theorem 4.1 is hold.

Theorem 4.2. Assume all conditions of Theorem 4.1 are satisfied, then for u∈ W p , 1 oc 2 ( B 0 ; E ( A ) , E ) if ‖ L ( x , D ) u ‖ E ≤ ‖ V u ‖ E and V∈ L n 2 , 1 oc ( B 0 ; E ) then u is identically 0 if it vanishes in a nonempty open subset.

Proof. Suppose

‖ L ( x , D ) u ‖ E ≤ ‖ V u ‖ E + ‖ V ′ . ∇ u ‖ E
(62)

in a connected open set G, where V∈ L n 2 , 1 oc ( G ; E ) , V ′ ∈ L ∞ , 1 oc ( G ; E ) and u∈ W p , 1 oc 2 ( G ; E ( A ) , E ) . Then, after the possibly change of variables, one sees that Theorem 4.2 would follow if we could show that if

supp  u ∩ { x ∈ B ε , x 1 ≥ 0 } ⊂ { 0 }
(63)

then 0 ∉supp u. Moreover, by making a proper choice of geodesic coordinate system, we may assume L (x, D) as

L ( x , D ) = D 1 2 + ∑ i , j = 2 n a i j D i D j , D j = 1 i ∂ ∂ x j .

Then argue as in [29], first set u ε (x) = u (εx) where ε is chosen small enough so that (26) and (27) hold for B ε . Let η∈ C 0 ∞ ( B ε ) be equal to one when |x| < ε 2 and set U ε = ηu ε . Then if V ε (x) = V (εx) and

L ( ε x , D ) U ε = ε 2 η ( L u ) ( ε x ) + ∑ 0 < | α | ≤ 2 1 α ! D α η ( L ( α ) ( ε x , D ) ) u ε

which implies that

‖ L ( ε x , D ) U ε ‖ E ≤ C 0 ( 1 + ‖ V ε ‖ E ) ‖ U ε ‖ E + C 0 ‖ ∇ U ε ‖ E , x ∈ B ε / 2 .
(64)

Let

S δ = { x ∈ B ε : - δ ≤ x 1 ≤ 0 , δ > 0 } .

If the condition (63) holds, then we can always choose δ to be small enough that

S δ ∩ supp  u ⊂ B ε / 2 ,

and so that if C is as in (26), (27) and C0 is as in (64) then

C C 0 ( ∫ S δ 0 ( 1 + ‖ V ε ‖ E ) n / 2 d x ) 2 / n < 1 2 .

Next, (26), (27) imply

‖ e t w U ε ‖ L p ′ ( S δ ; E ) + t 1 / n ‖ e t w ∇ U ε ‖ L p ( S δ ; E ) ≤ ‖ e t w L ( ε x , D ) U ε ‖ L p ( B ε ; E ) ≤ C ‖ e t w L ( ε x , D ) U ε ‖ L p ( S δ ; E ) + C ‖ e t w L ( ε x , D ) U ε ‖ L p ( c S δ ; E ) .

If we recall that 1 p - 1 p ′ = n 2 , then we see that (64) and Hölder's inequality imply

C ‖ e t w L ( ε x , D ) U ε ‖ L p ( S δ ; E ) ≤ C C 0 ‖ 0 ( 1 + ‖ V ε ‖ E ) e t w U ε ‖ L p ( S δ ; E ) + C C 0 ‖ e t w ∇ U ε ‖ L p ( S δ ; E ) ≤ 1 2 ‖ e t w U ε ‖ L p ′ ( S δ ; E ) + C C 0 ‖ e t w ∇ U ε ‖ L p ( S δ ; E ) .

Thus, by (63) for sufficiently large t > 0 and B ̃ δ = { x ∈ B ε : x 1 < - δ } we can conclude that

‖ e t w U ε ‖ L p ′ ( S δ ; E ) + ‖ e t w ∇ U ε ‖ L p ( S δ ; E ) ≤ 2 C ‖ e t w L ( ε x , D ) U ε ‖ L p ( S δ ; E ) .

finally, since w' (x) = 1 + x1> 0 on B ε , this forces Uε (x) = 0 for x ∈ S δ and so 0 ∉ supp u which completes the proof.

Consider the differential operator

P ( x , D ) u = ∑ i , j = 1 n a i j D i D j u + A u + ∑ k = 1 n A k D k u ,

where a ij are real-valued functions numbers, A = A (x), A k = A k (x), V (x) are the possible linear operators in a Banach space E.

By using Theorem 4.2 and perturbation theory of linear operators we obtain the following result

Theorem 4.3. Assume:

  1. (1)

    all conditions of Theorem 4.1 are satisfied;

  2. (2)

    A k A 1 2 - μ k ∈ L ∞ ( B 0 ; L ( E ) )  for  0< μ k < 1 2 .

Then, for Dαu ∈ Lp,loc(B0; E) if ||P (x, D) u|| E ≤ ||Vu|| E and V∈ L n 2 , loc ( B 0 ; E ) , then u is identically 0 if it vanishes in a nonempty open subset.

Proof. By condition (2) and by Theorem 2.1, for all ε > 0 there is a C (ε) such that

∑ k = 1 n ‖ A k ∂ u ∂ x k ‖ L p ( B 0 ; E ) ≤ ε ‖ u ‖ W p 2 ( B 0 ; E ( A ) , E ) + C ( ε ) ‖ u ‖ L p ( B 0 ; E ) .

Then, by using (29) and the above estimate we obtain the assertion.

5 Carleman estimates and unique continuation property for quasielliptic PDE

Let Ω ⊂ Rl be an open connected set with compact C2m-boundary ∂ Ω. Let us consider the BVP for the following elliptic equation

L u = ∑ i , j = 1 n a i j ( x ) D i D j u + ∑ k = 1 n d k ( x , y ) D k u + ∑ | α | ≤ 2 m a α ( y ) D y α u = f ( x , y ) , x ∈ R n , y ∈ Ω ⊂ R l ,
(65)
B j u = ∑ | β | ≤ m j b j β ( y ) D y β u ( x , y ) = 0 , x ∈ R n , y ∈ ∂ Ω , j = 1 , 2 , … , m ,
(66)

where u = (x, y), D j =-i ∂ ∂ τ j , T= ( T 1 , … , T n + l ) . Let Ω ̃ = R n ×Ω.

Let Q denotes the operator generated by the problem (64), (65).

Theorem 5.1. Let the following conditions be satisfied;

  1. (1)

    a α ∈C ( Ω ̄ ) for each |α| = 2m and a α ∈ [ L ∞ + L r k ] ( Ω ) for each |α| = k < 2m with r k ≥ q and 2m-k> 1 r k ;

  2. (2)

    b jβ ∈ C2m-mj(∂ Ω) for each j, β and m j < 2m, ∑ j = 1 m b j β ( y | ) σ j ≠0, for |β| = m j , y|∈ ∂G, where σ = (σ1, σ2, . . . , σ n ) ∈ Rm is a normal to ∂G ;

  3. (3)

    for y∈ Ω ̄ ,ξ∈ R l ,λ∈S ( φ ) ,φ∈ ( 0 , π 2 ) ,|ξ|+|λ|≠0 let λ+ ∑ | α | = 2 m a α ( y ) ξ α ≠0;

  4. (4)

    for each y0 ∈ ∂ Ω local BVP in local coordinates corresponding to y0

    λ + ∑ | α | = 2 m a α ( y 0 ) D α ϑ ( y ) = 0 , B j 0 ϑ = ∑ | β | = m j b j β ( y 0 ) D β u ( y ) = h j , j = 1 , 2 , … , m

has a unique solution ϑ ∈C0 (R+) for all h = (h1, h2, . . . , h m ) ∈ Rm, and for ξ1 ∈ Rl-1with

| ξ | | + | λ | ≠ 0 ;
  1. (5)

    Condition 4.1 holds, a ij ∈ C∞ (B ε ), n ≥ 3, p= 2 n n + 2 and p' is the conjugate of p and w= x 1 + x 1 2 2 ;

  2. (6)

    d k ∈ L ∞ (Rn × Ω).

Then:

  1. (a)

    for sufficiently large b > 0, t ≥ t0 and for n 1 p - 1 p ′ ≤2,p∈ ( 1 , ∞ ) the Carleman type estimate

    ‖ e − t w u ‖ L p 1 q ( Ω ˜ ) ≤ C ‖ e − t w ( Q + b ) u ‖ L p 2 q ( Ω ˜ )

holds for u∈ W p 1 q 2 ( Ω ̃ ) .

  1. (b)

    for V∈ L μ ( Ω ̃ ) and 1 μ = 1 p - 1 p ′ the differential inequality

    ‖ ( Q + b ) u ( x , . ) ‖ L q ( Ω ) ≤ ‖ V ( x ) u ( x , . ) ‖ L q ( Ω )

has a unique continuation property.

Proof. Let E = L q (Ω). Consider the following operator A which is defined by

D ( A ) = W q 2 m ( Ω ; B j u = 0 ) , A u = ∑ | α | ≤ 2 m a α ( y ) D α u ( y ) .

For x ∈ Rn also consider operators

A k ( x ) u = d k ( x , y ) u ( y ) , k = 1 , 2 , … , n .

The problem (5.1), (5.2) can be rewritten in the form (4.1), where u (x) = u (x, .), f (x) = f (x, .) are functions with values in E = L q (Ω). Then by virtue of [24, Theorems 3.6 and 8.2] the (1) condition of Theorem 4.1 is satisfied. Moreover, by using the embedding W q 2 m ( Ω ) ⊂ L q ( Ω ) and interpolation properties of Sobolev spaces (see e.g., [19, §4]) we get that there is ε > 0 and a continuous function C (ε) such that

‖ d k ∂ u ∂ x k ‖ L q ≤ ε ‖ u ‖ W q 2 m + C ( ε ) ‖ u ‖ L q .

Due to positive of the operator A, then we obtain that

‖ d k ∂ u ∂ x k ‖ L q ≤ ε ‖ A u ‖ L q + C ( ε ) ‖ u ‖ L q .

Then it is easy to get from the above estimate that (2) condition of the Theorem 4.3 is satisfied. By virtue of (5) condition, (2) condition of the Theorem 4.1 is fulfilled too. Hence, by virtue of Theorems 4.1 and 4.3 we obtain the assertions.

6 Carleman estimates and unique continuation property for infinite systems of elliptic equations

Consider the following infinity systems of PDE

∑ k = 1 n a k ( x ) D k 2 u m ( x ) + ( d m ( x ) + λ ) u m ( x ) + ∑ k = 1 n ∑ j = 1 ∞ d k j m ( x ) D k u j ( x ) = f m ( x ) , x ∈ R n , m = 1 , 2 , … .
(67)

Let

D ( x ) = { d m ( x ) } , d m > 0 , u = { u m } , D u = { d m u m } , m = 1 , 2 , … ,
l q ( D ) = { u : u ∈ l q , ‖ u ‖ l q ( D ) = ‖ D u ‖ l q = ( ∑ m = 1 ∞ | d m u m | q ) 1 q < ∞ } , x ∈ R n , 1 < q < ∞ .

Let O denotes the operator generated by the problem (66).

Theorem 6.1. Let the following conditions are satisfied:

  1. (1)

    a k ∈ C b (Rn), a k (x) ≠ 0, x ∈ Rn, k = 1, 2, . . . , n and the Condition 4.1 holds;

  2. (2)

    there are 0 < ν < 1 2 such that

    sup m ∑ j = 1 N b m j ( x ) d k j m - ( 1 2 - ν ) ( x ) < M ,

a.e. for x ∈ Rn.

Then:

  1. (a)

    for sufficiently large b > 0, t ≥ t0 and for n ( 1 p - 1 p | ) ≤ 2 , 1 < p ≤ p | < ∞ the Carleman type estimate

    ‖ e − t w u ‖ L p | ( R n ; l q ) ≤ C ‖ e − t w ( O + b ) u ‖ L p ( R n ; l q )

holds for u∈ W p 2 ( R n ; l q ( D ) , l q ) .

  1. (b)

    for V∈ L μ Ω ̃ ; L ( E ) and 1 μ = 1 p - 1 p | the differential inequality

    ‖ ( O + b ) u ( x ) ‖ l q ≤ ‖ V ( x ) u ( x ) ‖ l q

has a unique continuation property.

Proof. Let E = l q and A, A k (x) be infinite matrices, such that

A = [ d m ( x ) δ j m ] , A k ( x ) = [ d k j m ( x ) ] , m , j = 1 , 2 , … , ∞ .

It is clear to see that this operator A is R-positive in l q and all other conditions of Theorems 4.1 and 4.3 are hold. Therefore, by virtue of Theorems 4.1 and 4.3 we obtain the assertions.

References

  1. Jerison D, Kenig CE: Unique continuation and absence of positive eigenvalues for Schrodinger operators. Arkiv Math 1986, 62: 118-134.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Kenig CE, Ruiz A, Sogge CD: Uniform sobolev inequalities and unique continuation for second order constant coefficient differential operators. Duke Math J 1987, 55(2):329-347.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Sogge CD: Oscillatory integrals, Carleman inequalities and unique continuation for second order elliptic differential equations. J Am Soc 1989, (2):491-516.

  4. Wolff T: Unique continuation for Δ u ≤ V ∇ u and related problems. Rev Mat Iberoamericana 1990, 6(3-4):155-200.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Koch H, Tataru D: Carleman estimates and unique continuation for second order elliptic equations with non-smooth coefficients. Commun Pure Appl Math 2001, 54(3):330-360.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Amann H: Linear and Quasi-Linear Equations. Volume 1. Birkhauser, Basel; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Aubin JP: Abstract boundary-value operators and their adjoint. Rend Mat Sem Univ Padova 1970, 43: 1-33.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Ashyralyev A: On well-posedeness of the nonlocal boundary value problem for elliptic equations. Numer Funct Anal Optim 2003, 24(1 & 2):1-15.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Favini A: Su un problema ai limiti per certa equazini astratte del secondo ordine. Rend Sem Mat Univ Padova 1975, 53: 211-230.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Krein SG: Linear differential equations in Banach space. American Mathematical Society, Providence; 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Yakubov S: A nonlocal boundary value problem for elliptic differential-operator equa-tions and applications. Integr Equ Oper Theory 1999, 35: 485-506.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Yakubov S, Yakubov Ya: Differential-Operator Equations, Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations. Chapmen and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shakhmurov VB: Separable anisotropic differential operators and applications. J Math Anal Appl 2006, 327(2):1182-1201.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Shakhmurov VB: Nonlinear abstract boundary value problems in vector-valued function spaces and applications. Nonlinear Anal Series A Theory, Method & Appl v 2006, 67(3):745-762.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Shakhmurov VB: Imbedding theorems and their applications to degenerate equations. Diff Equ 1988, 24(4):475-482.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Shakhmurov VB: Coercive boundary value problems for regular degenerate differential-operator equations. J Math Anal Appl 2004, 292(2):605-620.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Shakhmurov VB: Embedding and maximal regular differential operators in Banach-valued weighted spaces. Acta Math Sinica 2006, 22(5):1493-1508.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Shakhmurov VB: Embedding theorems and maximal regular differential operator equations in Banach-valued function spaces. J Inequal Appl 2005, 2(4):329-345.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Triebel H: Interpolation Theory, Function Spaces, Differential operators. North-Holland, Amsterdam; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Besov OV, Ilin VP, Nikolskii SM: Integral Representations of Functions and Embedding Theorems. Nauka, Moscow 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Burkholder DL: A geometrical conditions that implies the existence certain singular integral of Banach space-valued functions. In Proc Conf Harmonic Analysis in Honor of Antonu Zigmund, Chicago 1981. Volume 12. Wads Worth, Belmont; 1983:270-286.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Bourgain J: Some remarks on Banach spaces in which martingale differences are un-conditional. Arkiv Math 1983, 21: 163-168.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Clement Ph, de Pagter B, Sukochev FA, Witvliet H: Schauder decomposition and multiplier theorems. Studia Math 2000, 138(2):135-163.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Denk R, Hieber M, Prüss J: R -boundedness, Fourier multipliers and problems of elliptic and parabolic type. Mem Am Math Soc 2003, 166(788):viii+114.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Lizorkin PI: ( L p , L q )-Multiplicators of Fourier Integrals. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR 1963, 152(4):808-811.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. McConnell Terry R: On Fourier multiplier transformations of Banach-valued functions. Trans Am Mat Soc 1984, 285(2):739-757.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Strkalj Z, Weis L: On operator-valued Fourier multiplier theorems. Trans Amer Math Soc 2007, 359: 3529-3547.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Zimmermann F: On vector-valued Fourier multiplier theorems. Studia Math 1989, 93(3):201-222.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Hörmander L: The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators. Volume 1-4. Springer-Verlag, New York and Berlin; 1983-1985.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Weis L: Operator-valued Fourier multiplier theorems and maximal L p regularity. Math Ann 2001, 319: 735-758.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. Portal P, Strkalj Ž: Pseudodifferential operators on Bochner spaces and an application. Mathematische Zeitschrift 2006, 253: 805-819.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Lizorkin PI, Shakhmurov VB: Embedding theorems for classes of vector-valued functions. Volume 1. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii Mathematika; 1989:70-78.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pisier G: Les inegalites de Khintchine-Kahane d'apres C. In Borel, Seminare sur la geometrie des espaces de Banach 7. Ecole Polytechnique, Paris; 1977-1978.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lions JL, Peetre J: Sur une classe d'espaces d'interpolation. Inst Hautes Etudes Sci Publ Math 1964, 19: 5-68.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Dore G, Yakubov S: Semigroup estimates and noncoercive boundary value problems. Semigroup Form 2000, 60: 93-121.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Carleson L, Sjölin P: Oscillatory integrals and a multiplier problem for the disc. Studia Matemaica XLIV 1972, 287-299.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Veli B Shakhmurov.

Additional information

Competing interests

The author declares that they have no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shakhmurov, V.B. Carleman estimates and unique continuation property for abstract elliptic equations. Bound Value Probl 2012, 46 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-2770-2012-46

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-2770-2012-46

Keywords