Uniqueness of Viscosity Solutions to the Dirichlet Problem Involving Infinity Laplacian ()
1. Introduction
In this paper, we study the following Dirichlet boundary value problem
(1)
where the domain
, the function
and
(2)
is the h-homogeneous quasilinear operator related to the infinity Laplacian.
The choice
reduces the operator (2) to the normalized infinity Laplacian
(3)
The operator (3) has been investigated extensively, see for papers [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] and the references therein. Peres et al. [5] obtained the uniqueness of the viscosity solutions of the following Dirichlet problem corresponding to the normalized infinity Laplacian by a “tug-of-war” game theory
(4)
where
and g are continuous functions. In [3] , Lu and Wang established the existence and uniqueness results of the solution to the problem (4) based on the partial differential equation’s methods. The normalized infinity Laplacian equations associated with some “tug-of-war” game have attracted much attention. One can see López-Soriano et al. [6] and Peres et al. [7] .
Another operator is the infinity Laplacian
which is the case of
. The operator
first appeared in Aronsson’s studies of the absolutely minimizing Lipschitz extension (AMLE) [8] [9] [10] [11] in the 1960s. For a bounded domain Ω, a function
is said to be an AMLE function in Ω if for any
and any
with
on
, there holds
For more details on AMLE, one can refer to Aronsson et al. [12] .
The infinity Laplacian is quasilinear and highly degenerate, and we usually consider the viscosity solutions of the infinity Laplacian equation which defined by Crandall and Lions [13] . The viscosity solutions to the homogeneous infinity Laplacian equation
is said to be the infinity harmonic functions. Jensen [14] proved that the AMLE functions are equivalent to the infinity harmonic functions and proved the existence and uniqueness of AMLE. Crandall et al. [15] showed that the infinity harmonic functions, the AMLE functions and the property comparison with cones are equivalent. The property comparison with cones from above (below) is as follows: For any
,
and any
, if
then
A function u enjoys comparison with cones in
if u enjoys comparison with cones both from above and below. For more results on the infinity Laplacian, one can see [15] - [22] etc.
We also mention that the Dirichlet boundary value problems involving the infinity Laplacian have been studied extensively and the comparison principles have proved to be useful tools in the investigation of existence and uniqueness of solutions to the Dirichlet boundary value problems.
In [23] , Lu and Wang proved the comparison principle of the equation
(5)
if the continuous function
has one sign. They also showed the existence and uniqueness of viscosity solutions for (5) under the Dirichlet boundary condition. Bhattacharya and Mohammed [24] proved the comparison principle of the equation
when the continuous function
has one sign and is non-decreasing in t. They also established the local Lipschitz continuity, existence and nonexistence of viscosity solutions to the corresponding Dirichlet boundary value problem. For the local Lipschitz continuity results, one can also see [25] . Liu and Yang [26] gave the comparison principle of the equation
(6)
and established the existence and uniqueness results of viscosity solutions of (6) under the Dirichlet boundary condition
on
, where
. In [27] , Li and Liu established the comparison principle of the equation
when the right hand side
is non-decreasing in t and has one sign. In addition, it is also necessary to prove the comparison principle during the studies of the Dirichlet eigenvalue problem related to the infinity Laplacian, see for example [28] [29] [30] .
In this paper, we study the Dirichlet boundary value problem (1) involving the strongly degenerate operator
.
Now we state the comparison principle for the equation
(7)
where
is continuous. We propose some basic hypothetical conditions for the right hand side
.
(F-1):
is positive and the map
is non-increasing in
for each
, where
.
(F-2):
is negative and the map
is non-decreasing in
for each
, where
.
Theorem 1. Let
be a bounded domain. Suppose that the function
is non-decreasing in t and satisfies the condition (F-1) or (F-2). Assume that
and
satisfy
and
in the viscosity sense, respectively. If
on
, then
in Ω.
We prove the comparison principle Theorem 1 based on the double variables method in the viscosity solution theory. Clearly, the result reduces to Li and Liu [27] if the nonhomogeneous term
is independent of the gradient Du. It is worth pointing out that, unlike the case
, the operator
is quasilinear even in 1-dimension. Thus, we must make more subtle analysis. Due to the strong degeneracy of the operator
and the dependence of the nonlinear term
on p, we have to perturb twice to make the Jensen’s method useful [14] and consider the monotonicity of F with respect to the variable p.
Our work is divided as follows: In Section 2, we recall the definition of the viscosity solutions. In Section 3, we establish the local Lipschitz continuity of the viscosity solution. Then, we present a proof of the comparison principle for the Equation (7) by the double variables method based on the viscosity solutions theory. Based on the comparison principle, we give the uniqueness theorem of the corresponding Dirichlet problem.
2. Definition of Viscosity Solutions
In this section, we first list some notations that appear in the paper.
: the ball of radius
centered at the point
.
: the Euclidean norm of
.
: the diameter of the domain Ω, that is, the maximum of the distance between all two points in Ω.
: the distance from the point
to the boundary
, that is, the minimum of the distance between
and the all points on
.
and
: for any
,
I: the
identity matrix.
Now we introduce the definition of viscosity solutions to the Equation (7).
It is worth noting that the operator
is highly degenerate and singular at the points where the gradient vanishes, one should give a reasonable explanation at these points. Here we adopt the definition of viscosity solutions based on the semi-continuous extension [13] [29] [31] . Hence, one can rewrite the Equation (7) as
where
,
and
is the set of all
real symmetric matrices. When
, we have
for any
. Thus, we can define the following continuous extension of
:
Now we give the definition of viscosity solutions to the Equation (7).
Definition 1. Let
be a bounded domain. We say that
is a viscosity subsolution of (7) if and only if for any
and
such that
and
for all
near
, there holds
Similarly, we say that
is a viscosity supersolution of (7) if and only if for any
and
such that
and
for all
near
, there holds
If a continuous function
is both a viscosity supersolution and viscosity subsolution of (7), then we say that
is a viscosity solution of (7).
We can define the viscosity subsolutions and viscosity supersolutions equivalently by super-jets and sub-jets [13] .
Definition 2. The second-order super-jet of
at
is the set
and the closure of
is
Similarly, the second-order sub-jet of
at
is the set
and the closure of
is
Definition 3. We say that
is a viscosity subsolution of (7) if
Similarly, we say that
is a viscosity supersolution of (7) if
A function
is a viscosity solution of the Equation (7) if
is both a viscosity supersolution and viscosity subsolution of (7).
3. Comparison Principle
In this section, we mainly prove the comparison principle of the Equation (7), which immediately implies the uniqueness theorem.
First, we establish the local Lipschitz continuity of a viscosity solution to
, where C is a constant. One can refer to [23] [25] etc. for more regularity results of the infinity Laplacian.
Lemma 2. Let C be a constant. If
satisfies
in the viscosity sense, then
is locally Lipschitz continuous in Ω. Moreover, for any given
, there exists a constant L such that
where L depends on
and
.
Proof. Set
(8)
where
and
. For any
, we consider the function
where
is defined in (8). It is clear that
. For
, it is easy to check that
Since
, we have
in
.
Obviously, we have
for any
. For any
, one can verify that
where we have used (8). Thus,
on
. Since
and
in
, we have
in
by the comparison principle in [27] . Therefore, for any
and any
, we get
(9)
Note that
for any
. According to (9), for any
, we have
and
That is,
Therefore, for any
, we have
where L depends on
and
.
Remark. Let C be a constant. If
satisfies
in the viscosity sense, then the similar result is also valid.
Next we give the proof of the comparison principle by the double variables method based on the viscosity solutions theory.
Proof of Theorem 1. Suppose that
satisfies the condition (F-1). Define
Since
is non-decreasing in t and satisfies the condition (F-1), we have
in the viscosity sense. That is,
is a viscosity subsolution of the Equation (7).
Next we want to show
in
when
. Instead, suppose that
at some point
and
According to [13] , we double the variables
Let
attain its maximum at
. According to ( [13] , Proposition 3.7), we obtain
and
Clearly, we have
,
as
. Due to
, there exists an open set
such that
and
as
.
Set
Note that the function
has a local maximum at
and
has a local minimum at
.
We discuss the following two cases: either
or
for j large enough.
Case 1: When
, we have
and
. Since
is a viscosity subsolution, we get
It is contrary to
.
Case 2: When
, we apply the jets and maximum principle for semi-continuous functions ( [13] , Theorem 3.2). There exist
symmetric matrices
and
such that
and
(10)
where
. Following from the inequality (10), we have
. Since
and
in the viscosity sense, by the definition of the viscosity subsolution and supersolution, we obtain
(11)
where we have used
. Due to
attains its maximum at
, we get
(12)
Since
is a viscosity subsolution, we see that
is locally Lipschitz continuous according to Lemma 2. We take
in (12) and obtain
where L is the Lipschitz constant of
. Then we have
Therefore, upon taking a subsequence if necessary, we can assume
. Taking the limit in (11), we get
Thus,
(13)
Since
is non-decreasing in
and
, we obtain
It is a contradiction to (13).
Thus, we have
in Ω when
. Letting
, we have
in Ω.
Now suppose that
satisfies the condition (F-2). Define
Since
is non-decreasing in
and satisfies the condition (F-2), one has
in the viscosity sense. Thus,
is a viscosity subsolution of the Equation (7). Then one can prove that
in Ω by the similar procedure. We leave it to the reader.
With the comparison principle in hand, the uniqueness theorem of the corresponding Dirichlet problem follows immediately.
Theorem 3. Let
be a bounded domain. If the function
is non-decreasing in
and satisfies the condition (F-1) or (F-2), then there exists at most one viscosity solution to the Dirichlet problem (1).
When the right side hand
is independent of the variables
and
, Lu and Wang [23] constructed a counterexample to show that the uniqueness is invalid if
changes its sign. And the case
is covered by Jensen’s theorem [14] . But for the case
, the uniqueness is open.
Remark. If
and
in the problem (1), then the viscosity solution to the problem (1) is positive. Similarly, if
and
in the problem (1), then the viscosity solution to the problem (1) is negative.
Acknowledgements
We thank the anonymous referees for the careful reading of the manuscript and useful suggestions and comments.