Abstract
In this paper we consider a linear elliptic equation in divergence form
Assuming the coefficients \(a_{ij}\) in \(W^{1,n}(\Omega )\) with a modulus of continuity satisfying a certain Dini-type continuity condition, we prove that any very weak solution \(u\in L^{n'}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) of (0.1) is actually a weak solution in \(W^{1,2}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\).
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Let \(n\ge 2\) and \(\Omega \subset {\mathbb {R}} ^n\) be a bounded open set. In this paper we study regularity properties of very weak solutions to the linear elliptic equation
where the matrix-field \(A:\Omega \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}^{n\times n}\), \(A(x)=(a_{ij}(x))_{i,j}\), is elliptic and belongs to \(W^{1,n}(\Omega ,\mathbb {R}^{n\times n})\cap L^\infty (\Omega ,\mathbb {R}^{n\times n})\), i.e.
and
for some positive constants \(\lambda ,\Lambda ,\) and M. Moreover, the matrix A is symmetric, that is \(a_{ij}=a_{ji}\) a.e. in \(\Omega \) for all \(i, j\in \{1, . . . , n\}\).
Finally we assume that the coefficients \((a_{ij}(x))_{i,j}\) are double-Dini continuous in \(\Omega \), i.e. \(a_{ij} \in C^0({\Omega })\) and
satisfies
A common type of double-Dini continuous functions are, of course, \(\omega (r)=r^\alpha \), \(0<\alpha \le 1\), thus an example of a matrix-field A satisfying (1.2) and (1.4) is \(A\in W^{1,p}(\Omega ,\mathbb {R}^{n\times n})\), with \(p>n\). On the other hand, condition (1.4) occurs not only for \(\omega (r)=r^\alpha \), but more generally for \(\omega (r)=\log ^\beta \left( \frac{1}{r}\right) \), \(\beta <-2\).
Given a measurable matrix \(A(x)=(a_{ij}(x))_{i,j}\) satisfying (1.3), a function \(u\in W^{1,2}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) is called a weak solution of (1.1) if
The celebrated result by De Giorgi in [5] states that if u is a weak solution of (1.1) then u is locally Hölder continuous.
Subsequently, J. Serrin produced in [14] a famous example, constructing an equation of the form (1.1) which has a solution \(u\in W^{1,p}(\Omega )\), with \(1<p<2\), and \(u\notin L^\infty _\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\). Serrin conjectured that if the coefficients \(a_{ij}\) are locally Hölder continuous, then any solution (in the sense of distributions) \(u\in W^{1,1}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) of (1.1) must be a (usual) weak solution, i.e. \(u\in W^{1,2}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\). Serrin’s conjecture was established by Hager and Ross [9], and then in full generality by Brezis [2] (see also [1] for a full proof) starting with \(u\in W^{1,1}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\), or even with \(u\in BV_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\), i.e., \(u\in L^1_\mathrm{loc} (\Omega )\) and its derivatives (in the sense of distributions) being Radon measures. Let us remark that in Brezis’s result the coefficients \(a_{ij}\), satisfying (1.3), are Dini continuous functions in \(\Omega \). The Dini continuity of the coefficients is optimal in some sense: for the unit ball \(B_1\) and continuous coefficients, Jin et al. [10] constructed a solution (in the sense of distributions) \(u\in W^{1,1}_\mathrm{loc}(B_1){\setminus } W^{1,p}_\mathrm{loc}(B_1)\) for every \(p>1\).
For \(A(x)=(a_{ij}(x))_{i,j}\) satisfying (1.2) and (1.3), we will consider a very weak solution \(u\in L^{n'}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) of (1.1), namely
with \(n'=\frac{n}{n-1}\).
Remark 1.1
It is not difficult to prove that the test functions \(\varphi \) in (1.5) can be taken in \(W^{2,n}(\Omega )\cap W^{1,\infty }(\Omega )\), with supp \(\varphi \Subset \Omega \). Indeed, one can argue by density to show that given a function \(\varphi \in W^{2,n}(\Omega )\cap W^{1,\infty }(\Omega )\) with compact support, we may find a sequence \(\varphi _k\in C^\infty _c(\Omega )\) such that \(\varphi _k\rightarrow \varphi \) strongly in \(W^{2,n}\) and \(\sup _k\Vert \varphi _k\Vert _{1,\infty }<\infty \) (so that \(D\varphi _k\) converges to \(D\varphi \) weakly* in \(L^\infty \)) and then taking the limit as k goes to infinite in the Eq. (1.5) for \(\varphi _k\).
The main result of the paper is the following.
Theorem 1.2
Let u be a very weak solution of (1.1), with \(A(x)=(a_{ij}(x))_{i,j}\) satisfying (1.2), (1.3) and (1.4), then u belongs to \(W^{1,2}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) and thus it is a weak solution.
Remark 1.3
It is worth noting that, under hypotheses (1.2) and (1.3), one can consider a very weak solution \(u\in L^{n'}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) to (1.1), but when dealing with the regularity properties of u some extra conditions on the coefficients \(a_{ij}\) must be considered. The counterexample constructed in [10] provides in fact continuous coefficients \(a_{ij}\) which belong also to \(W^{1,n}(B_1)\), showing that one can not expect a very weak solution \(u\in L^{n'}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) to be a weak solution in \(W^{1,2}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) under just conditions (1.2) and (1.3). For the sake of completeness, we will propose the example given in [10] in the “Appendix B”, underlining that the constructed coefficients belong also to \(W^{1,n}(B_1)\).
On the other hand, in Sect. 4 we propose an alternative to double Dini continuous coefficients which again bypasses the counterexample. In particular, under hypotheses (1.2) and (1.3) we consider a very weak solution in \(L^q_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\), with \(q>n'\).
Remark 1.4
In [15] Zhang and Bao deal with the case of very weak solutions \(u\in L^1_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) of (1.5), interpreting the coefficients as Lipschitz functions, due to the assumption made on the solutions. Thus our result represents a natural extension from their research.
2 Notation and preliminary results
We collect here the main definitions and notation and some useful results that will be needed in the sequel.
2.1 Notation
In the following, we denote by \(B_r(x)= \left\{ y\in {\mathbb {R}}^n: |y-x|<r \right\} \) the ball of radius r centered at x.
We indicate by \(\left\{ e_1, \ldots e_n \right\} \) the canonical basis of \({\mathbb {R}}^n\). Given \(h\in {\mathbb {R}}{\setminus } \left\{ 0 \right\} \), for a measurable function \(\psi : {\mathbb {R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) and for \(\ell =1, \ldots , n\), we introduce the notation
for the incremental quotient in the \(\ell \)-th direction. We recall that for every pair of functions \(\varphi , \psi \), we have
The following result pertaining to difference quotients of functions in Sobolev spaces is well known t (see [8, Proposition 4.8] for example).
Theorem 2.1
Let \(p>1\); if \(\psi \in W^{1,p}(\Omega )\), then \(\Delta _h^{\ell } \psi \in L^p(\Omega ')\) for any \(\Omega '\Subset \Omega \) satisfying \(h<\frac{\text {dist}(\Omega ', \partial \Omega )}{2}\), and we have
If \(\psi \in L^p(\Omega )\) and there exists \(L\ge 0\) such that, for every \(h < \text {dist}(\Omega ', \partial \Omega )\), \(\ell = 1,\ldots ,n\), we have
then \(\psi \in W^{1,p}(\Omega '), \Vert D_\ell \psi \Vert _{L^p(\Omega ')}\le L\) and \(\Delta _h^\ell \psi \rightarrow D_\ell \psi \) in \(L^p(\Omega ')\) as \(h\rightarrow 0\).
Finally, given \(p>1\), we denote by \(p'=\frac{p}{p-1}\) the conjugate exponent of p.
2.2 Dini continuous functions
We say that a continuous function f on \(\Omega \) is Dini continuous if the modulus of continuity \({\bar{f}}_{\Omega }: [0,diam(\Omega )]\rightarrow \mathbb {R}^+\) defined by
satisfies
We also denote by \(C^D(\Omega )\) the space of Dini continuous functions; it turns out to be a Banach space equipped with the following norm:
where \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _\infty \) is the usual uniform norm.
Let us remark that by the uniform continuity, any function in \(C^D(\Omega )\) may be extended up to the boundary of \(\Omega \) with the same modulus of continuity. Moreover,
for any \(0<\alpha \le 1\), where \(C^{0,\alpha }(\Omega )\) denotes the space of Hölder continuous functions.
The space \(C^{D}_c(\Omega )\) will denote the set of functions in \(C^D(\Omega )\) with compact support in \(\Omega \).
Lemma 2.2
The space \(C^{\infty }_c(\Omega )\) is dense in \(C^D_c(\Omega )\).
Proof
Let \(f\in C_c^D(\Omega )\) that we extend to zero on \(\mathbb {R}^n{\setminus } \Omega \) and set \(f_\varepsilon (x)=(\rho _\varepsilon *f)(x)\), where \(\rho _\varepsilon \) is a standard mollifier. Then, if \(\varepsilon \) is sufficiently small, \(f_\varepsilon \in C^\infty _c(\Omega )\); we will prove that
It is easily seen that \(f_\varepsilon \) uniformly converges to f in \(\Omega \), thus in order to prove (2.2) we will just show that
as \(\varepsilon \) tends to 0. Observe that
and
which together yield
On the other hand, since \((\overline{f_\varepsilon - f})_{\Omega }\rightarrow 0\) pointwise, the dominated convergence theorem implies
which concludes the proof of (2.2). \(\square \)
Remark 2.3
The previous result ensures that \(C^D_c(\Omega )\) is a separable space, noting that \(C^1_c(\Omega )\) is separable with respect to the usual norm \(\Vert f\Vert _{1,\infty }:=\sum _{|\alpha |\le 1}\Vert D_\alpha f\Vert _{\infty }\), \(C^1_c(\Omega )\subseteq C^D_c(\Omega )\) and \({\bar{f}}_\Omega (r)\le r\Vert D f\Vert _{\infty }\), for every \(f\in C^1_c(\Omega )\).
Lemma 2.4
Let \(f,f_\varepsilon ,\) and g belonging to \(C^D(\Omega )\) such that \(f_\varepsilon \) converges to f in \(C^D\); then \(gf_\varepsilon \) converges to gf in \(C^D\).
Proof
As before, it is enough to prove the convergence of the seminorm since the uniform convergence is immediate. Then, writing the definition of the modulus of continuity, we have
Hence,
which goes to zero as \(\varepsilon \) tends to zero. \(\square \)
2.3 \(C^1\)-Dini regularity of solutions to divergence form elliptic equations with Dini-continuous coefficients
For the proof of our result, we will need the following extension of the Schauder regularity theory for elliptic equations in divergence form with Dini continuous coefficients (see [12, Theorem 1.1] and [6, Theorem 1.3], see also [11] which is inclusive of the parabolic case.). For the \(L^p\)-regularity theory we refer to [7], where the general case of VMO coefficients is treated (see also [13, Theorem 5.5.3 (a)] or [3, Theorem 2.2. Chapter 10] for the case of continuous coefficients).
Theorem 2.5
For \(\Omega \subset {\mathbb {R}}^n\), let \(a_{ij}\) satisfy (1.3) and (1.4); we consider \(f=(f_1,f_2,\dots , f_n)\) with \(f_j \in C^\infty _c(\Omega )\) for all \(j\in \{1,\dots ,n\}\). Assume that \(u\in H^1(\Omega )\) is a weak solution of the equation
Then \(u\in C^{1,D}(\Omega ')\), for any bounded open set \(\Omega '\), \(\Omega '\Subset \Omega \).
Moreover, let \(\Omega \) a \(C^{1,1}\) bounded open subset of \(\mathbb {R}^n\), let \(a_{ij}\) satisfy (1.2) and (1.3), and let \(f_j \in L^p(\Omega )\), for every \(j\in \{1,\dots ,n\}\), with \(1<p<\infty \), then there exists a unique solution \(u\in W^{1,p}_0(\Omega )\) to the problem
and
holds, where C depends on \(n, \lambda , \Lambda , p,\partial \Omega \), \(\Vert A\Vert _{W^{1,n}(\Omega ,\mathbb {R}^{n\times n})}\).
Remark 2.6
The first conclusion of Theorem 2.5 comes with an estimate of the Dini modulus of continuity of Du involving the Dini modulus of continuity of \(a_{ij}\) and \(f_j\). Actually, in [12, Theorem 1.1] and in [6, Theorem 1.3] only the continuity of Du is proved and these results are obtained with a weaker assumption on the coefficients \(a_{ij}\). Assuming (1.4) for the coefficients we are able to prove also the Dini continuity of the gradient of the solution. In “Appendix A” we will resume in broad terms the proof of [12, Theorem 1.1], developing it in order to get the needed Dini continuity result.
2.4 \(C^2\)-regularity of solutions to non divergence form elliptic equations with Dini-continuous coefficients
Let us first recall the \(W^{2,p}\)-solvability of the Dirichlet problem for non divergence elliptic equations with discontinuous coefficients (see [4, Theorem 4.2 and Theorem 4.4]).
Theorem 2.7
The Dirichlet problem
where \(\Omega \) is a \(C^{1,1}\) smooth and bounded subset of \(\mathbb {R}^n\), \(f\in L^p(\Omega )\) with \(1<p<\infty \), and \(a_{ij}\) satisfies (1.2) and (1.3), admits a unique solution \(u \in W^{2,p}(\Omega )\cap W^{1,p}_0(\Omega )\) and
where the constant C depends on \(n,p, \lambda , \Lambda , \partial \Omega , \Vert A\Vert _{W^{1,n}(\Omega ,\mathbb {R}^{n\times n})}\).
The next result specifies estimate (2.7); its proof is quite standard but we prefer to write it for the sake of completeness.
Proposition 2.8
Suppose u is a solution of the elliptic Dirichlet problem (2.6) with \(a_{ij},f,p\) and \(\Omega \) as above. Then
Proof
Let
having in mind Theorem 2.7, if we prove that for any operator \(L\in {\mathcal {L}}\) and for any \(f\in L^p(\Omega )\), the solution u of
satisfies
we are done. Suppose it is not the case, then this is equivalent to say that for every \(N\in {\mathbb {N}}\), there exists an operator \(L_N=\sum _{i,j}a_{ij}^ND_{ij} \in {\mathcal {L}}\) and a function \(f_N\in L^p(\Omega )\) such that the corresponding solution \(u_N\) to the Dirichlet problem
satisfies
Let us define \(v_N= u_N/\Vert u_N\Vert _{L^p(\Omega )}\) and \(g_N={f_N}/{\Vert u_N\Vert _{L^p(\Omega )}}\), so that \(v_N\) solves (2.6) with \(L_N\) and \(g_N\). By the \(W^{2,p}\) estimate (2.7),
where C does not depend on N and hence,
Thus \(v_N\) is a precompact sequence: up to a non relabeled subsequence, we can suppose \(v_N \rightharpoonup u^*\) weakly in \(W^{2,p}(\Omega )\), for some \(u^* \in W^{2,p}(\Omega )\), moreover \(u^*\in W^{2,p}(\Omega )\cap W_0^{1,p}(\Omega )\). Similarly, we can also say that, for every \(i,j=1,\ldots ,n\), \(a_{ij}^N\rightharpoonup a_{ij}^*\) weakly in \(W^{1,n}(\Omega )\) and \(a_{ij}^N\rightarrow a_{ij}^*\) strongly in \(L^q(\Omega )\)\(\,\forall \,1\le q< \infty \). Thus, the operator \(L^*=\sum _{i,j}a_{ij}^*D_{ij}\) belongs to \({\mathcal {L}}\) and for \(\varphi \in L^{p'}(\Omega )\) we have
Therefore, \(L_N v_N\) converges weakly in \(L^p(\Omega )\) to \(L^*u^*\). On the other hand, using (2.9), we have
Passing to the limit in the equation satisfied by \(v_N\), we discover that the limit \(u^*\in W^{2,p}(\Omega )\cap W_0^{1,p}(\Omega )\) satisfies \(L^*u^*=0\) a.e. in \(\Omega \). By the uniqueness properties of the solutions to (2.6), it follows that \(u^*=0\). Thus \(v_N\) converges to zero and the argument becomes contradictory since \(\Vert v_N\Vert _{L^p(\Omega )}=1\). \(\square \)
In [6, Theorem 1.5] it is shown that solutions to elliptic equations in non divergence form with zero Dirichlet boundary conditions are \(C^2\) up to the boundary when the leading coefficients are Dini continuous functions.
Theorem 2.9
Assume that \(\Omega \) is a \(C^{2,1}\) smooth and bounded open subset of \(\mathbb {R}^n\), \(f\in C^D(\Omega )\) and \(a_{ij}\) satisfies (1.2), (1.3), and (1.4). Let \(u\in W^{2,2}(\Omega ) \cap W^{1,2}_0(\Omega )\) be a solution of the Dirichlet problem
then \(u \in C^{2}(\overline{\Omega })\).
Remark 2.10
The assumption in [6] about the coefficients is weaker then (1.4), since they assume that the modulus of continuity
with , satisfies
3 Proof of the main theorem
We use a duality argument in conjunction with the regularity properties for elliptic equations in divergence and in non divergence form, stated in Theorems 2.5 and 2.9.
Proof
Let \(\Omega '\Subset \Omega \) be an open set and choose a \(C^{2,1}\) open set \(\Omega _0\) with \(\Omega '\Subset \Omega _0\Subset \Omega \); let \(d(\Omega ',\partial \Omega _0)=d>0\). Let \(h_0=d/{4}\), and \(0<|h|<h_0\).
For the sake of clarity, we divide the proof into two steps.
Step 1 For \(\ell =1, \ldots , n\), we claim that \(\Delta ^{\ell }_hu\) is bounded in the dual space of Dini continuous functions with compact support \((C_c^D(\Omega '))'\).
Given a Dini continuous function \(w\in C^D_c(\Omega ')\), according to Theorem 2.9 combined with Theorem 2.7, the solution \(v\in W^{2,q}(\Omega _0)\), \(\forall q>1\), to the Dirichlet problem
enjoys the \(C^{2}\)-regularity up to the boundary of \(\Omega _0\).
We consider a partition of unity: let \(x_1,\ldots ,x_J\in \Omega '\) and \(\eta _1,\ldots ,\eta _J\in C^\infty (\mathbb {R}^n)\) be such that
and
We fix one of these balls and the related function \(\eta _k\); we omit to indicate the center \(x_k\) and the index k for \(\eta _k\) for simplicity.
In view of Remark 1.1, we can insert \(\varphi = \eta \Delta _{-h}^\ell v\) in (1.5), getting
We can rearrange the previous equation in order to have
With a simple change of variables, we get
where we also used (2.1). Thus, we finally have
Now, we estimate the six terms \({\mathcal {I}}_m\).
The use of Hölder’s inequality gives
combined with Sobolev’s embedding and Proposition 2.8 in the last inequality. Analogously
The terms \({\mathcal {I}}_3\) and \({\mathcal {I}}_4\) can be treated in the same way. Using Hölder’s inequality, Theorem 2.1 and Proposition 2.8, we have
Again, for \({\mathcal {I}}_5\) we have
We finally estimate \({\mathcal {I}}_6\). From (2.1), we get
The second term can be estimated as \({\mathcal {I}}_3\) and \({\mathcal {I}}_4\), thus:
Here we have used once more Theorem 2.9.
Finally, combining the estimates found for \({\mathcal {I}}_m\), \(m\in \left\{ 1, \ldots 6 \right\} \), from (3.2) we get
where C depends on \(\lambda , \Lambda , \Vert D\eta \Vert _{L^\infty (\mathbb {R}^n,\mathbb {R}^n)}, \Vert D^2\eta \Vert _{L^\infty (\mathbb {R}^n,\mathbb {R}^{n\times n})}, \Vert u\Vert _{L^{n'}(\Omega _0)}, \Vert A\Vert _{W^{1,n}(\Omega ,\mathbb {R}^{n\times n})}, \Vert w\Vert _{L^\infty (\Omega ')}\) and \(\Vert D^2v\Vert _{L^\infty (\Omega _0,\mathbb {R}^{n\times n})}\), as well as on the modulus of continuity of the coefficients \(a_{ij}\) and of the datum w. Summing over \(k=1,\ldots , J\), since v is the weak solution to the Dirichlet problem (3.1), we finally have
and we get
for every \(w\in C_c^D(\Omega ')\). By the uniform boundedness principle this means that \( \{\Delta ^{\ell }_hu \}_h \) is a family of equibounded elements in the dual space of Dini continuous functions \((C^D_c(\Omega '))'\). Since \((C^D_c(\Omega '))'\) is separable, we have that, up to a subsequence,
Step 2. We prove that \(u\in W^{1,p'}_{\text {loc}}(\Omega )\), with \(p>n\).
Using the previous Step we can easily deduce from (1.5) that
where the duality pairing is between \((C^D_c(\Omega '))'\) and \(C^D_c(\Omega ')\).
For \(j\in \{1,\ldots , n\}\), let \(f=(f_1,\ldots ,f_n)\) with \(f_j\in C_c^\infty (\Omega ') \) be such that
with \(p>n\). Introducing as before a regular set \(\Omega _0\) between \(\Omega '\) and \(\Omega \) we can possibly assume that \(\Omega \) is a \(C^{1,1}\) set. Let \(v\in W^{1,2}_0(\Omega )\) be the weak solution of the problem
By Theorem 2.5 we have that \( v \in W^{1,p}_0(\Omega ) \) and
Note that, since \(p>n\), this means also that the function v is Hölder continuous.
We take \(B_{R/2}\subset B_R\subset \Omega '\) a pair of concentric balls centered at \(x_0\in \Omega '\) and we consider \(\xi (x)=\xi (|x-x_0|)\) a smooth function such that \(\xi (t)=1\) for \(t\in [0,R/2]\) and \(\xi (t)=0\) for \(t\ge R\) .
We would like to use \(\varphi = \xi v\) as test function in (3.4). We first observe that, by Theorem 2.5, the function \(\xi v\) belongs to \(C^{1,D}_c(\Omega ')\). Moreover, proving Lemma 2.2, we actually proved that a mollification of a Dini continuous function with compact support strongly converges in \(C^D\) to the function itself. Thus, combining this fact with Lemma 2.4, we have that \(a_{ij}D_j(\xi v)_\varepsilon \) strongly converges in \(C^D\) to \(a_{ij}D_j(\xi v)\), where \((\xi v)_\varepsilon (x)=(\rho _\varepsilon *\xi v)(x)\), \(\rho _\varepsilon \) being a standard mollifier. This in turn implies that the use of \(\varphi = \xi v\) as test function in (3.4) is admissible:
Let us come back now to the equation satisfied by v. Let \(u_\varepsilon \) be a mollification of the solution u, that is \(u_\varepsilon =\rho _\varepsilon *u\), with \(\rho _\varepsilon \) a standard radial mollifier. We use \(\xi u_\varepsilon \) in (3.5):
Now we claim that this implies, when we pass to the limit as \(\varepsilon \rightarrow 0\), that
Note that the most delicate terms are the two involving the gradient of \(u_\varepsilon \). For a Dini continuous function w (the domain of w is not specified since the function will be multiplied by a function with compact support) we will show that
or, in other terms, recalling that \(\mu ^j\) is the limit in the weak\(^*\) topology of \((C^D_c(\Omega '))'\) of the incremental quotient of u
We have:
where in the last equality we used again that a mollified function of a Dini continuous function with compact support strongly converges in \(C^D\) to the function itself. Thus we obtain (3.7).
From it, exploiting the symmetry of \(a_{ij}\) and using (3.6) we get
We now estimate the three terms \(I_m\), \(m=1,2,3\). We have
By the definition of the norm in the space of Dini continuous functions we have
By simple computation we have
and, using the properties of the solution v (recall that \(p>n\)), the right hand side can be estimated as
To summarize, we have
The estimate of \(I_2\) and \(I_3\) simply comes by Hölder’s inequality and again by the properties of the solution v:
and
At the end, the estimates proved for \(I_1,I_2\) and \(I_3\) lead to
as well
Since f is an arbitrary smooth function in \({L^p(\Omega ',\mathbb {R}^n)}\), we conclude
which means, using a finite covering argument, that \(\mu ^j\) is a function in \(L^{p'}_{\text {loc}}(\Omega )\) and then \(u\in W^{1,p'}_{\text {loc}}(\Omega )\), since, for every \(\varphi \in C^\infty _c(\Omega )\) and for h small enough, we have
passing to the limit as \(h\rightarrow 0\), we derive
Since \(u \in W_{\text {loc}}^{1,p'}(\Omega )\), Brezis’s result implies that u is a weak solution of the equation (1.5), i.e. our statement. \(\square \)
4 Sobolev coefficients
As pointed out in the Introduction, very weak solutions in \(L^{n'}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) associated to coefficients in \(W^{1,n}(\Omega )\) are not weak solutions, due to the counterexample found in [10]. The quoted references on this problem have suggested us to consider Sobolev coefficients with a modulus of continuity satisfying the double Dini condition.
On the other hand, another way to get around the counterexample is to deal with very weak solutions in \(L^{q}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\), with \(q>n'\). The result is the following.
Theorem 4.1
Let \(u\in L^q_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\), \(q>n'\), be a very weak solution of (1.1), with \(A(x)=(a_{ij}(x))_{i,j}\) satisfying (1.2) and (1.3), then u belongs to \(W^{1,2}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) and thus it is a weak solution.
Proof
The proof rests on a duality and a bootstrap argument.
Step 1 We claim that \(u\in W^{1,\left( \frac{qn'}{q-n'}\right) '}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\).
We proceed as in the Step 1 of the proof of Theorem 1.2 to arrive to (3.2). Now we estimate the six terms \({\mathcal {I}}_m\). We use Hölder’s inequality and Proposition 2.8 to get
and finally, as for (3.3),
So, arguing as in the Step 1 of Theorem 1.2, we deduce
which in turn implies, thanks also to Theorem 2.1, that \(u\in W^{1,\left( \frac{qn'}{q-n'}\right) '}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\). Let us note that thanks to this, the equation satisfied by u may be rewritten as
where the test functions \(\varphi \) can be taken in \(W^{1,\frac{qn'}{q-n'}}(\Omega )\) with compact support. On the other hand, the summability of the solution u is not improved by its belonging to this Sobolev space, since \(\left( \frac{qn'}{q-n'}\right) '=\frac{qn'}{qn'-q+n'}\) and the Sobolev conjugate of \(\frac{qn'}{qn'-q+n'}\) is q.
Step 2 We prove that \(u\in W^{1,q}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\).
As in the Step 2 of the proof of Theorem 1.2, for \(j\in \{1,\ldots , n\}\) let \(f=(f_1,\ldots ,f_n)\) with \(f_j\in C_c^\infty (\Omega ') \) be such that
For every \(p>1\), let \(v\in W^{1,p}_0(\Omega )\) be the weak solution of the problem
By Theorem 2.5 we have in particular that
As before, we take \(B_{R/2}\subset B_R\subset \Omega '\) a pair of concentric balls centered at \(x_0\in \Omega '\) and we consider \(\xi (x)=\xi (|x-x_0|)\) a smooth function such that \(\xi (t)=1\) for \(t\in [0,R/2]\) and \(\xi (t)=0\) for \(t\ge R\) . We can choose \(\varphi =v\xi \) in (4.1) and \(\varphi =u\xi \) as test function in (4.2), so that
and
Subtracting the two equations and using the symmetry of \(a_{ij}\) we get
We estimate the three terms \(I_m\). We have
and finally
where the last inequality derives from the fact that the Sobolev conjugate of \(q'\) is \(\frac{qn'}{q-n'}\). To sum up we have obtained
as well
and, using a finite covering argument, this implies that \(u\in W^{1,q}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\). Let us observe that this Sobolev regularity improves the summability of u. In particular, \(u\in L^{q^*}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\), where \(q^*\) is the Sobolev conjugate of q.
Step 3 We claim that if \(q>n\) then u is a weak solution.
By the previous step, we deduce that if \(q>n\) then the solution u is in \(L^\infty _\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\). At this point, it is not difficult to prove, arguing as in Step 1, that \(u\in W^{1,n}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\).
Step 4 We prove that \(u\in L^\infty _\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\).
We just observed that if \(q>n\) we are done. Let us consider now \(q\le n\). The solution u is in \(W^{1,q}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) and by the Sobolev’s embedding \(u\in L^{q^*}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\), where \(q^*=\frac{qn}{n-q}\) if \(q<n\) and any number greater then 1 if \(q=n\). Arguing exactly as in the Step 2 we derive that \(u\in W^{1,q^*}_\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\), which in turn implies that u is in \(L^\infty _\mathrm{loc}(\Omega )\) if \(q^*>n\). We already noticed in Step 3 that this gives the desired result. Let us observe that if \(q=n\), \(q^*\) is any number greater then 1 and so this can be chosen greater then n, while if \(q<n\), \(q^*>n\) is equivalent to \(q>\frac{n}{2}\). We can iterate this procedure. Given \(q>n'=\frac{n}{n-1}\) after (at most) \(n-1\) times we deduce that u is locally bounded.
By Step 3 the locally boundedness of the solution gives the desired result.
\(\square \)
References
Ancona, A.: Elliptic operators, conormal derivatives and positive parts of functions (with an appendix by Haïm Brezis). J. Funct. Anal. 257, 2124–2158 (2009)
Brezis, H.: On a conjecture of J. Serrin. Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl. 19, 335–338 (2008)
Chen, Y.Z., Wu, L.C.: Second Order Elliptic Equations and Elliptic Systems. Translations of Mathematical Monographs, vol. 174. American Mathematical Society, Providence (1998)
Chiarenza, F., Frasca, M., Longo, P.: \(W^{2, p}\)- solvability of the Dirichlet problem for non divergence elliptic equations with \(VMO\) coefficients. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 336, 841–853 (1993)
De Giorgi, E.: Sulla differenziabilità e l’analiticità delle estremali degli integrali multipli regolari. Mem. Accad. Sci. Torino Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Nat. 3, 25–43 (1957)
Dong, H., Escauriaza, L., Kim, S.: On \(C^1, C^2\), and weak type-\((1,1)\) estimates for linear elliptic operators, part II. Math. Ann. 370, 447–489 (2018)
Di Fazio, G.: \(L^p\) estimates for divergence form elliptic equations with discontinuous coefficients. Boll. Un. Mat. Ital. A (7) 10, 409–420 (1996)
Giaquinta, M., Martinazzi, L.: An Introduction to the Regularity Theory for Elliptic Systems. Harmonic Maps and Minimal Graphs. Edizioni della Normale, Pisa (2012)
Hager, R.A., Ross, J.: A regularity theorem for linear second order elliptic divergence equations. Ann. Sc. Norm. Sup. Pisa 23, 283–290 (1971)
Jin, T., Maz’ya, V., Schaftingen, J.V.: Pathological solutions to elliptic problems in divergence form with continuous coefficients. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Ser. I 347, 773–778 (2009)
Kuusi, T., Mingione, G.: New perturbation methods for nonlinear parabolic problems. J. de Math. Pures et Appl. 98(4), 390–427 (2012)
Li, Y.: On the \(C^1\) regularity of solutions to divergence form elliptic systems with Dini-continuous coefficients. Chin. Ann. Math. Ser. B 38(2), 489–496 (2017)
Morrey, C.B.: Multiple integrals in the Calculus of Variations. Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, vol. 130. Springer, New York (1996)
Serrin, J.: Pathological solutions of elliptic differential equations. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa (3) 18, 385–387 (1964)
Zhang, W., Bao, J.: Regularity of very weak solutions for elliptic equation of 601 divergence form. J. Funct. Anal. 262, 1867–1878 (2012)
Acknowledgements
Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II within the CRUI-CARE Agreement. Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II within the CRUI-CARE Agreement. The authors are members of Gruppo Nazionale per l’Analisi Matematica, la Probabilità e le loro Applicazioni (GNAMPA) of INdAM. The first author was partially supported by the Academy of Finland Grant 314227. The research of R. S. has been funded by PRIN Project 2017JFFHSH.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix A: The \(C^1\)-Dini regularity of solutions to divergence form elliptic equations with Dini-continuous coefficients
As announced in Remark 2.6, we will specify the modulus of continuity of the gradient of solutions to (2.4) in the proof of [12, Theorem 1.1]. We will consider only the main points of the proof referring for the rest to [12]. The set \(\Omega \) is supposed to be the ball \(B_4\) centered at 0 and \(\Omega '=B_1\). The improvement regards Proposition 1.1 in [12]: for the sake of completeness we will sketch the proof, modifying the original when needed.
Proposition A.1
For \(B_4\subset {\mathbb {R}}^n\), \(n\ge 1\), let \(a_{ij}\), defined on \(B_4\), satisfy (1.3) and (1.4) and let \(f=(f_1,f_2,\dots , f_n)\) with \(f_j \in C^\infty _c(B_4)\) for all \(j\in \{1,\dots ,n\}\). Assume that \(u\in H^1(B_4)\) is a weak solution of (2.4), then there exist \(a\in {\mathbb {R}}\) and \(b\in {\mathbb {R}}^n\) such that
where \(\delta (r)\), depending on \(n, \lambda , \Lambda ,\) and on the modulus of continuity of \(a_{ij}\) and f, is a monotonically increasing positive function defined on (0, 1) satisfying
Remark A.2
As shown in [12, Proposition 1.2], \(\delta (r)\) will be the modulus of continuity of Du.
Proof
The proof is carried out for \(f=0\). We use the same notation of [12], denoting by \(\varphi \) the modulus of continuity such that
where \(A=(a_{ij})_{i,j}\). Observe that in our case, assuming (1.4), \(\varphi (r)\) has the following form
which is double-Dini continuous since \(\varphi (r)\le {\bar{A}}_{B_4}(r)\), and satisfies
with \(\mu >1\). As in [12], by induction, one will find, for \(k\ge 0\), \(w_k\in H^1(B_{3/4^{k+1}})\) such that
,
see [12, (14), (15), (16), (17), and (18) of Proposition 1.1]. Here and in the sequel C will denote a universal constant.
For \(x\in B_{1/4^{k+1}}\), using (A.3), (A.4), (A.6) and Taylor expansion,
We then derive from (A.5) and the above, using Hölder’s inequality, that
Proposition A.1 follows from the above with \(\displaystyle {a=\sum _{j=0}^\infty w_j(0)}\), \(\displaystyle {b=\sum _{j=0}^\infty D w_j(0)\cdot x}\), and
the symbol \(\simeq \) standing for \(=\) up to a constant. It remains to prove that \(\delta (r)\) is a Dini modulus of continuity. Thanks to assumption (1.4), it occurs if we show the Dini continuity of the second term in the previous sum. It yields
so that, integrating by parts,
It is easy to see that \(\lim _{r\rightarrow 0}r\int _{\frac{r}{2}}^1\frac{\varphi (s)}{s^2}ds=0\), and thus the thesis follows by the Dini continuity of \(\varphi \). \(\square \)
Appendix B: The counterexample
To construct the example, one first considers, for \(r\in (0,1)\) and for \(\beta >1\), the function
for some \(r_0>1\). One takes then \(A(x)=(a_{ij}(x))_{i,j}\) defined by
with \(r_0\) large enough so that \(\alpha \ge -\frac{1}{2}\), A being then uniformly elliptic.
Let us check now that \(A\in W^{1,n}(B_1,\mathbb {R}^{n\times n})\). Simple computation gives
for every \(i,j,\ell =1,\ldots , n\) (the symbol \(\lesssim \) stand for \(\le \) up to a constant). On the other hand
which in turn implies
if \(r_0\) is big enough. Thus, the belonging of A to \(W^{1,n}(B_1,\mathbb {R}^{n\times n})\) is provided by the estimate
With such an A, which is continuous but not Dini-continuous, in [10] the authors construct a solution of (1.1) (in the sense of distributions) \(u\in W^{1,1}_\mathrm{loc}(B_1){\setminus } W^{1,p}_\mathrm{loc}(B_1)\) for every \(p>1\). In particular, let us observe that such a solution belongs to \(L^{n'}_\mathrm{loc}(B_1)\).
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
La Manna, D.A., Leone, C. & Schiattarella, R. On the regularity of very weak solutions for linear elliptic equations in divergence form. Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl. 27, 43 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00030-020-00646-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00030-020-00646-8