Erratum to “Positive Solutions for a Class of Quasilinear Schrödinger Equations with Nonlocal Term” [Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics (2022) 347-359]

Abstract

The original online version of this article (Liao, P., Ping, R. and Chen, S. (2022) Positive Solutions for a Class of Quasilinear Schr?dinger Equations with Nonlocal Term. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, 10, 347-359. https://doi.org/10.4236/jamp.2022.102027) needs some further amendments and clarification.

Keywords

Erratum

Share and Cite:

Liao, P. , Ping, R. and Chen, S. (2022) Erratum to “Positive Solutions for a Class of Quasilinear Schrödinger Equations with Nonlocal Term” [Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics (2022) 347-359]. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, 10, 1297-1303. doi: 10.4236/jamp.2022.104091.

1. Introduction

where N ≥ 3 , 0 < μ < N , 1 ≤ q ≤ N N − 2 , 2 N − μ N ≤ p < 2 N − μ N − 2 , the function V ∈ C ( ℝ N ,   ℝ + ) , g is a C 1 even function with g ′ ( t ) ≤ 0 for all t > 0 , g ( 0 ) = 0 , lim t → + ∞ g ( t ) = a , 0 < a < 1 .

2. Preliminary Results

Next, we introduce some minimization with corresponding energy functional and define

m b = inf u ∈ M b E ( u ) ,

where

M b = { u ∈ H 1 ( ℝ N ) : ‖ u ‖ L q + 1 = b } ,   b > 0 ,

and

E ( u ) = 1 2 ∫ ℝ N [ g 2 ( u ) | ∇ u | 2 + V ( x ) u 2 ] − λ 2 p ∫ ℝ N [ ( | x | ∗ | u | p ) | u | p ] .

We also define

ω b = inf v ∈ W b F ( v ) ,

where

W b = { v ∈ H V 1 ( ℝ N ) : ‖ G − 1 ( v ) ‖ L q + 1 = b } ,   b > 0 ,

and

F ( v ) = 1 2 ∫ ℝ N ( | ∇ v | 2 + V ( x ) G − 1 ( v ) 2 ) − λ 2 p ∫ ℝ N [ ( | x | ∗ | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) | G − 1 ( v ) | p ] .

Proof: For any v ∈ W b , let u = G − 1 ( v ) , from the definition of g, we get

∫ ℝ N | ∇ u | 2 = ∫ ℝ N | ∇ v | 2 g 2 ( G − 1 ( v ) ) ≤ 1 a 2 ∫ ℝ N | ∇ v | 2 < + ∞ ,

and

∫ ℝ N     u 2 ≤ ∫ ℝ N     V ( x ) G − 1 ( v ) 2 < + ∞ ,

so u ∈ M b . It follow that F ( v ) = E ( G − 1 ( v ) ) = E ( u ) ≥ m b , hence ω b ≥ m b , moreover, for any u ∈ M b , let v = G ( u ) , then u = G − 1 ( v ) . We assume E ( u ) < + ∞ , since u ∈ H 1 ( ℝ N ) , 2 < 2 N p 2 N − μ < 2 ∗ , then u ∈ L 2 N p 2 N − μ ( ℝ N ) . By Hardy-Little-Sobolev-inequality, we have

1 2 ∫ ℝ N [ g 2 ( u ) | ∇ u | 2 + V ( x ) u 2 ] = E ( u ) + λ 2 p ∫ ℝ N ( | x | ∗ | u | p ) | u | p ≤ E ( u ) + λ C 2 p ( ∫ ℝ N | u | 2 N p 2 N − μ ) 2 N − μ N < + ∞ . n

The proof of Lemma 2.4

Proof: (1) For any v ∈ H V 1 ( ℝ N ) , we have ∫ ℝ N | G − 1 ( v ) | 2 N p 2 N − μ ≤ C ∫ ℝ N | v | 2 N p 2 N − μ < + ∞ , where 2 ≤ 2 N p 2 N − μ < 2 * , similarly as the proof of Lemma2.3, by Hardy-Little-Sobolev-inequality, we have

F ( v ) = 1 2 ∫ ℝ N ( | ∇ v | 2 + V ( x ) G − 1 ( v ) 2 ) − λ 2 p ∫ ℝ N ( | x | ∗ | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) | G − 1 ( v ) | p ≤ 1 2 a 2 ∫ ℝ N ( | ∇ v | 2 + V ( x ) v 2 ) + λ C 2 p ( ∫ ℝ N | G − 1 ( v ) | 2 N p 2 N − μ ) 2 N − μ N ≤ 1 2 a 2 ∫ ℝ N ( | ∇ v | 2 + V ( x ) v 2 ) + λ C 2 p ( ∫ ℝ N | v | 2 N p 2 N − μ ) 2 N − μ N < + ∞ .

With the proof of continuity, note that F consist of three terms. By Lemma 1.1, we need to check the convolution term only. Using Hardy-Little-Sobolev-inequality

λ 2 p | ∫ ℝ N ( | x | ∗ | G − 1 ( v n ) | p ) | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − ∫ ℝ N ( | x | ∗ | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) | G − 1 ( v ) | p | ≤ λ 2 p ( | ∫ ℝ N | x | ∗ ( | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) | G − 1 ( v n ) | p |         + | ∫ ℝ N ( | x | ∗ | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) ( | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) | ) ≤ C | ( ∫ ℝ N | G − 1 ( v n ) | p r ) 1 r ( ∫ ℝ N ( | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) r ) 1 r |         + C | ( ∫ ℝ N | G − 1 ( v ) | p r ) 1 r ( ∫ ℝ N ( | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) r ) 1 r | ,

and

| | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − | G − 1 ( v ) | p | r ≤ C ( | v n | p r + | v | p r ) ,

where r = 2 N 2 N − μ . We know ‖ v n − v ‖ H V 1 ( ℝ N ) → 0 if n → + ∞ . So { v n } is bounded in H V 1 ( ℝ N ) . By Sobolev embedding theorem and Lemma 3.4 [22]

| ∫ ℝ N ( | x | ∗ | G − 1 ( v n ) | p ) | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − ∫ ℝ N ( | x | ∗ | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) | G − 1 ( v ) | p | → 0,       n → + ∞ .

For (2) we consider the second and the third terms of the functional F, we see for ϕ ∈ H V 1 ( ℝ N ) , using Hölder inequality, we get

| 1 2 t ∫ ℝ N     V ( x ) ( G − 1 ( v + t ϕ ) 2 − G − 1 ( v ) 2 ) − ∫ ℝ N V ( x ) G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) ϕ | = | ∫ 0 1     d s ∫ ℝ N     V ( x ) ( G − 1 ( v + t s ϕ ) g ( G − 1 ( v + t s ϕ ) ) − G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) ) ϕ | ≤ ∫ 0 1     d s ( ∫ ℝ N     V ( x ) | G − 1 ( v + t s ϕ ) g ( G − 1 ( v + t s ϕ ) ) − G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) | 2 ) 1 2 ∫ 0 1     d s ( ∫ ℝ N     V ( x ) ϕ 2 ) 1 2 .

Using the definition of g and Lemma 1.1, we know

| G − 1 ( v + t s ϕ ) g ( G − 1 ( v + t s ϕ ) ) − G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) | 2 ≤ | G − 1 ( v + t s ϕ ) + G − 1 ( v ) | 2 ≤ C ( | G − 1 ( v + t s ϕ ) | 2 + | G − 1 ( v ) | 2 ) ≤ C ( | v + t s ϕ | 2 + | v | 2 ) ≤ C ( | v | 2 + | ϕ | 2 ) .

By the dominated convergence theorem

| ∫ 0 1     d s ∫ ℝ N     V ( x ) ( G − 1 ( v + t s ϕ ) g ( G − 1 ( v + t s ϕ ) ) − G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) ) ϕ | → 0,   t → 0.

For the third term, we have

λ | ∫ ℝ N [ | x | − μ ∗ | G − 1 ( v n ) | p ] | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v n ) g ( G − 1 ( v n ) ) ϕ − ∫ ℝ N [ | x | − μ ∗ | G − 1 ( v ) | p ] | G − 1 ( v ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) ϕ | ≤ λ | ∫ ℝ N [ | x | − μ ∗ ( | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) ] | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v n ) g ( G − 1 ( v n ) ) ϕ |     + λ | ∫ ℝ N ( | x | − μ ∗ | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) ( | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v n ) g ( G − 1 ( v n ) ) − | G − 1 ( v ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) ) ϕ | ≤ C ∫ ℝ N ( ( | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − | G − 1 ( v ) | p ) r ) 1 r ∫ ℝ N ( | | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v n ) g ( G − 1 ( v n ) ) ϕ | r ) 1 r     + C ( ∫ ℝ N | G − 1 ( v ) | p r ) 1 r ( ∫ ℝ N ( | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v n ) g ( G − 1 ( v n ) ) − | G − 1 ( v ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) ) p p − 1 r ) p − 1 p r ( ∫ ℝ N | ϕ | p r ) 1 p r .

and

| | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − | G − 1 ( v ) | p | r ≤ C ( | v n | p r + | v | p r ) ,

| | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v n ) g ( G − 1 ( v n ) ) − | G − 1 ( v ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) | p p − 1 r ≤ C ( | v n | p r + | v | p r ) ,

where r = 2 N 2 N − μ , 2 ≤ p r < 2 * . Since ‖ v n − v ‖ H V 1 ( ℝ N ) → 0 if n → + ∞ , H V 1 ( ℝ N ) embedding into L r ( ℝ N ) is compact and { v n } is bounded in H V 1 ( ℝ N ) . Using Lemma 3.4 [22], we know

| ∫ ℝ N [ | x | − μ ∗ | G − 1 ( v n ) | p ] | G − 1 ( v n ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v n ) g ( G − 1 ( v n ) ) ϕ − ∫ ℝ N [ | x | − μ ∗ | G − 1 ( v ) | p ] | G − 1 ( v ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) ϕ | → 0,   n → + ∞ .

By Lemma 1.1

| 〈 F ′ ( v ) ,   ϕ 〉 | = | ∫ ℝ N     ∇ v ∇ ϕ + ∫ ℝ N V ( x ) G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) ϕ           − ∫ ℝ N [ | x | − μ ∗ | G − 1 ( v ) | p ] | G − 1 ( v ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) ϕ | ≤ C ‖ v ‖ H V 1 ( ℝ N ) ‖ ϕ ‖ H V 1 ( ℝ N ) + C ‖ v ‖ L p r ( ℝ N ) p − 1 ‖ ϕ ‖ L p r ( ℝ N ) .

from Sobolev embedding theorem, we get F ′ ( v ) is a continuous linear functional on H V 1 ( ℝ N ) .n

3. Main Conclusion

Remark 3.1. From assumption of V, we know H V 1 ( ℝ N ) embedding into L p ( ℝ N ) is compact. In the process of the proof of theorem 3.1, it is important for us to construct auxiliary function, then by implicit function theorem to prove it and lemma 3.4 [22] play a great role in this paper. Moreover, when q ≥ 2 * is a open question for Equation (1.1), someone could do it if they are interested.

Proof of Theorem 3.1: Step 1: By the assumptions of (V1) or (V2), ω b is achieved at some 0 ≤ v b ≤ W b with v b ≠ 0 .

Let { v n } ∈ W b be a minimizing sequence for ω b . Set u n = G − 1 ( v n ) , then { u n } ∈ M b is a minimizing sequence for m b . We can assume u n ≥ 0 . It shows that E ( u n ) → m b , so there exist C > 0 such that

C ≥ E ( u n ) = 1 2 ∫ ℝ N [ g 2 ( u n ) | ∇ u n | 2 + V ( x ) u n 2 ] − λ 2 p ∫ ℝ N [ ( | x | ∗ | u n | p ) | u n | p ] ≥ a 2 ∫ ℝ N [ | ∇ u | 2 + V ( x ) u n 2 ] − λ 2 p ∫ ℝ N ( | x | ∗ | u n | p ) | u n | p .

By Hölder inequality and Hardy-Little-Sobolev-inequality,

∫ ℝ N [ ( | x | ∗ | u n | p ) | u n | p ] ≤ ( ∫ ℝ N | u n | p r ) 2 r ≤ ( ( ∫ ℝ N | u n | 2 ) θ p r 2 ( ∫ ℝ N | u n | q + 1 ) ( 1 − θ ) p r q + 1 ) 2 r = ( ∫ ℝ N | u n | 2 ) θ p b 2 ( 1 − θ ) p q + 1 ≤ b 2 p − θ p + θ p q − q − 1 q + 1 ( ε ∫ ℝ N | u n | 2 + C ( ε ) b ) .

where θ = 2 ( q + 1 ) − 2 p r ( q − 1 ) p r , 0 < θ p < 1 , r = 2 N 2 N − μ , ε > 0 , C ( ε ) = ( ε θ p ) − θ p 1 − θ p ( 1 − θ p ) , then

C ≥ E ( u n ) ≥ a 2 ∫ ℝ N [ | ∇ u n | 2 + V ( x ) u n 2 ] − λ b 2 p − θ p + θ p q − q − 1 q + 1 2 p ( ε ∫ ℝ N     V ( x ) u n 2 + C ( ε ) b ) ≥ ( a 2 − λ ε b 2 p − θ p + θ p q − q − 1 q + 1 2 p ) ( ∫ ℝ N | ∇ u n | 2 + V ( x ) | u n | 2 ) − λ 2 p C ( ε ) b 2 p − θ p + θ p q q + 1 .

Taking ε > 0 small enough such that a 2 − λ ε b 2 p − θ p + θ p q − q − 1 q + 1 2 p > 0 . It implies that u n ( x ) is bounded in H V 1 ( ℝ N ) . By the compact embedding result from H V 1 ( ℝ N ) into L r ( ℝ N ) for 2 ≤ r < 2 ∗ . We may assume that u n ⇀ u b in H V 1 ( ℝ N ) , u n → u b in L r ( ℝ N ) for 2 ≤ r < 2 ∗ and u n ( x ) → u b ( x ) a.e x ∈ ℝ N . Hence u b ∈ M b , since u n ≥ 0 , u b ≥ 0 and u b ≠ 0 . Similarly as the proof of Lemma 2.4 (1), we have

∫ ℝ N ( | x | ∗ | u n | p ) | u n | p → ∫ ℝ N ( | x | ∗ | u b | p ) | u b | p ,   n → + ∞ .

Hence

m b = lim n → ∞ E ( u n ) ≥ lim inf n → ∞ { 1 2 ∫ ℝ N [ g 2 ( u n ) | ∇ u n | 2 + V ( x ) u n 2 ] − λ 2 p ∫ ℝ N ( | x | ∗ | u n | p ) | u n | p } ≥ E ( u b ) .

Step 2: Set h q + 1 ( v ) = 1 q + 1 ∫ ℝ N | G − 1 ( v ( x ) ) | q + 1 for 2 ≤ q + 1 < 2 * , then h q + 1 ( v ) ∈ C 1 ( H V 1 ( ℝ N ) , ℝ ) .

In fact, for any φ ∈ H V 1 ( ℝ N ) , by Lemma 1.1 and Hölder’s inequality, we have

| 〈 h ′ q + 1 ( v ) , φ 〉 | = | ∫ ℝ N | G − 1 ( v ) | q − 1 G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) φ | ≤ C ( ∫ ℝ N | v | q + 1 ) q q + 1 ( ∫ ℝ N | φ | q + 1 ) 1 q + 1 ≤ C ‖ φ ‖ H V 1 ( ℝ N ) .

then h ′ q + 1 ( v ) ∈ ( H V 1 ( ℝ N ) ) * .

| 〈 h ′ q + 1 ( v n ) − h ′ q + 1 ( v ) , φ 〉 | = | ∫ ℝ N ( | G − 1 ( v n ) | q − 1 G − 1 ( v n ) g ( G − 1 ( v n ) ) − | G − 1 ( v ) | q − 1 G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) ) φ | ≤ ( ∫ ℝ N | | G − 1 ( v n ) | q − 1 G − 1 ( v n ) g ( G − 1 ( v n ) ) − | G − 1 ( v ) | q − 1 G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) | q + 1 q ) q q + 1 ( ∫ ℝ N | φ | q + 1 ) 1 q + 1 . (1)

and

| | G − 1 ( v n ) | q − 1 G − 1 ( v n ) g ( G − 1 ( v n ) ) − | G − 1 ( v ) | q − 1 G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) | q + 1 q ≤ C ( | v n | q + 1 + | v | q + 1 ) ,

Since v n → v in H V 1 ( ℝ N ) , H V 1 ( ℝ N ) embedding into L r ( ℝ N ) is compact and { v n } is bounded in H V 1 ( ℝ N ) , where 2 ≤ r < 2 * . By 2 ≤ q + 1 < 2 * and Lemma 3.4 [22], we have

| 〈 h ′ q + 1 ( v n ) − h ′ q + 1 ( v ) , φ 〉 | → 0,   n → + ∞ .

then h q + 1 ( v ) ∈ C 1 ( H V 1 ( ℝ N ) ,   ℝ ) for 2 ≤ q + 1 < 2 * .

Step 3: For any b ≥ 0 , there exist β ( b ) ∈ ℝ such that 0 < u b = G − 1 ( v b ) ∈ M b is a weak solution of Equation (1.1) with λ = λ ( b ) . In fact, by lemma2.4,

〈 F ′ ( v ) , φ 〉 = ∫ ℝ N     ∇ v ∇ φ + ∫ ℝ N V ( x ) G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) φ     − λ ∫ ℝ N [ | x | − μ ∗ | G − 1 ( v ) | p ] | G − 1 ( v ) | p − 2 G − 1 ( v ) g ( G − 1 ( v ) ) φ .

Take limit t → 0 , we get 〈 F ′ ( v b ) , v 〉 ≥ 0 , by arbitrariness of v, one has 〈 F ′ ( v b ) , − v 〉 ≥ 0 . It follows that 〈 F ′ ( v b ) , v 〉 = 0 , for every v ∈ N ( h ′ q + 1 ( v b ) ) . Set v ′ ∈ H V 1 ( ℝ N ) be such that 〈 h ′ q + 1 ( v b ) , v ′ 〉 = 1 , for every φ ∈ H V 1 ( ℝ N ) , let

ψ = φ − 〈 h ′ q + 1 ( v b ) , φ 〉 v ′ .

Then ψ ∈ N ( h ′ q + 1 ( v b ) ) , it means 〈 F ′ ( v b ) , ψ 〉 = 0 , i.e.

〈 F ′ ( v b ) , φ 〉 = 〈 F ′ ( v b ) , v ′ 〉 〈 h ′ q + 1 ( v b ) , φ 〉 .

Put β = β ( b ) = 〈 F ′ ( v b ) , v ′ 〉 , we have

〈 F ′ ( v b ) , φ 〉 = β 〈 h ′ q + 1 ( v b ) , φ 〉 ,

n

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Copyright © 2026 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.