arxiv: v2 [math.ap] 4 Nov 2018

Transcription

1 arxiv: v [math.ap] 4 Nov 018 Existence, multiplicity and regularity of solutions of elliptic problem involving non-local operator with variable exponents and concave-convex nonlinearity Reshmi Biswas and Sweta Tiwari Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati Guwahati, Assam , India Abstract In this paper, first we introduce the variable exponent fractional Sobolev spacew s(x,y),q(x),p(x,y) (). Then, using variational methods we study the existence and multiplicity of solution of the following variable order non-local problem involving concave-convex type nonlinearity: ( ) s( ) p( ) u(x) = λ u(x) α(x) u(x)+f(x,u), x, u = 0, x C := R n \, where λ > 0, p C(,(1, )), s C(,(0,1)) and q,α C(,(1, )) and f : R [0, ) is a Carathéodory function with subcritical growth. We also prove the uniform estimate for the solution of the above problem. Keywords: Non-local problem, fractional Laplacian with variable exponent, concave-convex non-linearity, uniform estimate 1 Introduction In this article, we study the existence, multiplicity and uniform estimates of the weak solutions of the following nonlocal problem in a smooth and bounded domain R n : ( ) s( ) p( ) u(x) = λ u(x) α(x) u(x)+f(x,u), x, (1.1) u = 0, x C := R n \, where the nonlocal operator with variable exponent ( ) s( ) p( ), is defined as b.reshmi@iitg.ac.in swetatiwari@iitg.ac.in ( ) s( ) p( ) u(x) := P.V. u(x) u(y) p(x,y) (u(x) u(y)) dy (1.) R n x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) 1

2 Reshmi Biswas, Sweta Tiwari up to a constant, for continuous functions s : (0,1) and p : (1, ) with s(x,y)p(x,y) < n for all (x,y). Here we consider the parameter λ > 0 and sub-critical growth assumption on f(x,t) as described later. In recent years, problems involving non-local operators have gained a lot of attentions due to their occurrence in real-world applications, such as, the thin obstacle problem, optimization, finance, phase transitions and also in pure mathematical research, such as, minimal surfaces, conservation laws etc. The celebrated work of Nezza, Palatucci and Valdinoci [1] provides the necessary functional set-up to study these non-local problems using variational method. We refer [] and references there in for more details on problems involving semi-linear fractional-laplacian operator. In continuation to this, problems involving quasilinear non-local fractional p-laplacian are extensively studied by many researchers including Squassina, Palatucci, Mosconi, Rădulescu et al. (see [3],[4],[5],[6] ). Here the authors have studied various aspects, viz, existence, multiplicity and regularity of solutions of quasilinear non-local fractional p-laplacian problem. Concerning the evolution equation involving nonlocal operator we refer [7],[8],[9] and references therein. In analogy to the Sobolev spaces with variable exponent (see [10],[11]), recently Kaufmann et.al. have introduced the fractional Sobolev spaces with variable exponent in [1]. As the variable growth of the exponent n the local p(x)-laplacian operator defined as div( u p(x) u) makes it more suitable for modeling problems like image restoration, obstacle problems compared to p-laplacian operator,henceforth, it is natural inquisitiveness to substitute the nonlocal fractional p-laplacian with the non-local operator with variable exponents as defined in (1.) and expect better modeling. Some results involving this type of operator associated variable exponent Sobolev spaces are studied in [13],[14],[15]. In present work, we study the existence, multiplicity and regularity of the solutions of problem involving non-local operator ( ) s( ) p( ) with variable exponents s and p. Here we would like to emphasis that in our work we have consider the variable growth on the exponent s as well. Also we would like to mention that the the embedding of the variable exponent fractional Sobolev space W s(x,y),q(x),p(x,y) () (see Section for definition) into L β(x) () for β(x) (0,p s (x)), where p s (x) is the critical exponent, is proved in the case p(x,x) q(x), unlike in [1], where the authors have taken the strict inequality as p(x,x) < q(x). Motivated by the pioneer work of Cerami et.al [16] of problems involving concave-convex nonlinearity in case of local operator and [17] in case of non-local operator, in present work we study the existence and multiplicity of solutions of non-local problem with variable exponents involving concave-convex nonlinearity. Also we establish the L bound on the weak solution of (1.1) using elegant bootstrap technique. The L bound on the weak solution of the problem involving fractional p-laplacian has been studied by Franzina and Palatucci in [3]. Now we precisely state the main results to be proved in this paper. For any function φ : R (or φ : R) we set φ := inf φ(x)( or φ := inf φ(x,y)) and φ + := supφ(x)( or φ + := sup φ(x,y)). (1.3) We also define the function space C + () := g C(,R) : 1 < g g + <. Now, we assume that the continuous variable exponent s : (0, 1) satisfies the following properties. (S1) s is symmetric, i.e., s(x,y) = s(y,x) for all (x,y). (S) 0 < s s(x,y) s + < 1 for all (x,y).

3 Uniform estimate and exisrence of multiple solutions 3 Here we also consider the following assumptions on the continuous variable exponent p : R n : (P1) s symmetric, i.e., p(x,y) = p(y,x) for all (x,y). (P) 1 < p p(x,y) p + < and s(x,y)p(x,y) < n for all (x,y). We assume the following hypotheses on f and variable exponent α: (F1) f : R [0, ) is a Carathéodory function such that f(x,t)t 0 for all (x,t) R. (F) There exists M > 0 such that f(x,t) M t r(x) 1 for all (x,t) R, where r C + () and p + < r r(x) < p np(x,x) s (x) := n s(x,x)p(x,x) for all x. (F3) There exist constants a > 0 and b > p + such that 0 < bf(x,t) tf(x,t) for all x, t > a, where F(x,t) := t 0 f(x,s)ds. (F4) The variable exponent α C + () such that α + < p. We define the weak solutions for problem (1.1) in the functional space (defined in Section ) as follows: Definition 1.1. A function u is called a weak solution of (1.1) if for every w we have u(x) u(y) p(x,y) (u(x) u(y))(w(x) w(y)) R n R n x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) = λ u(x) α(x) u(x)w(x)dx + f(x, u)w(x)dx. (1.4) The main results to be proved in this article are as follows: Theorem 1.. Let (S1) (S), (P1) (P) and (F1) (F4) hold. Then, there exists λ > 0 such that for all λ (0,λ ), the problem (1.1) admits at least two non-trivial weak solutions. Theorem 1.3. Let (S1) (S), (P1) (P) and (F1) (F) hold. Assume that r(x) in (F) satisfies r + < p s. Then, any weak solution of (1.1) belongs to L (). Remark 1. Consider the following eigen value problem involving the fractional-laplacian with variable exponent: ( ) s( ) p( ) u(x) = λ u(x) p(x,x) u(x), x, (1.5) u = 0, x C. Then, Theorem 1. guarantees the existence of a eigen function for (1.5) for all λ (0,λ ) for suitably chosen λ > 0 while the regularity of the associated eigen function is established by Theorem 1.3. Variable exponent fractional Sobolev spaces and functional setting In this section we introduce fractional Sobolev spaces with variable exponent and establish the preliminary lemmas and embeddings associated with these spaces. For this we assume that the

4 4 Reshmi Biswas, Sweta Tiwari variable exponents s(, ) satisfies (S1) (S) and p(, ) satisfies (P1) (P). We also assume that q C + (). Recalling the definition of the Lebesgue spaces with variable exponent in [10], we introduce the variable exponent fractional Sobolev space as follows: W = W s(x,y),q(x),p(x,y) () := u L q(x) u(x) u(y) p(x,y) () : λ p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) <, for some λ > 0. Set [u] s(x,y),p(x,y) u(x) u(y) p(x,y) := inf λ > 0 : λ p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) < 1. Then (W, W ) is a Banach space equipped with the norm u W := u L q(x) () +[u] s(x,y),p(x,y). We have the following Sobolev embedding theorem for W. Theorem.1. Let R n be a smooth bounded domain. Let s(, ) and p(, ) satisfy (S1) (S) and (P1) (P), respectively and q C + () such that q(x) p(x,x) for all x. Assume that β C + () such that β β(x) < p s(x) for x. Then there exits a constant K = K(n,s,p,q,β,) > 0 such that for every u W, u L β(x) () K u W. Moreover, this embedding is compact. Proof. Here we follow the approach as in [1]. As we have p, q, β, s are continuous on, it np(x, x) follows that inf x n s(x,x)p(x,x) β(x) = k 1 > 0. From this expression and continuity of the exponents p,q,β and s, it follows that there exists a finite family of disjoint open balls B i k i=1 with radius ǫ = ǫ(p,q,β,s,k 1 ) satisfying k i=1 B i such that and np(z, y) n s(z,y)p(z,y) β(x) = k 1 > 0 (.6) q(x) p(z, y) (.7) for all (z,y) B i B i and x B i, i = 1,,...,k, where B i = B i for each i = 1,,...,k. We set = inf (p(z,y) δ) and s i = inf s(z,y). (.8) (z,y) B i B i (z,y) B i B i Again, using continuity of p,q,β and s we can choose δ = δ(k 1 ), with p 1 > δ > 0, t i (0,s i ) and ǫ > 0 such that (.6), (.7) and (.9) give us and ti := n k 1 +β(x) (.9) n t i 3 q(x) p(x,x) > (.10) for all x B i, i = 1,,...,k. Indeed, from (.8) as = inf p(z,y) δ(k 1 ) < p(x,x) q(x) (z,y) B i B i for each x B i, we have (.10). Using Sobolev embedding results (Theorem 6.7, Theorem 6.9 in [1]) for constant exponent, we get a constant C = C(n,,t i,ǫ,b i ) > 0. such that ( ) u p C u(x) u(y) L iti(bi) u pi 1 L (Bi) +. (.11) B i B i x y n+tipi

5 Uniform estimate and exisrence of multiple solutions 5 As u(x) = k u(x) X Bi, we note that i=1 u L β(x) () k u L β(x) (B i). (.1) i=1 From (.9), we get β(x) < ti for all x B i, i = 1,...,k. Hence we can take a i C + () such 1 that β(x) = 1 p i + 1 ti a i(x). Now applying Hölder s inequality, we obtain u L β(x) (B i) k u L ti(bi) 1 L a i (x) (B i) k 3 u L ti(bi) (.13) for some constants k,k 3 > 0. From (.1) and (.13), we deduce k u L β(x) () k 4 u p, (.14) L iti(bi) where k 4 > 0 is a constant. Again, from (.10), < q(x) for all x B i, i = 1,...,k, we argue in a similar way as above to obtain m u L (Bi) k 5 u L q(x) () (.15) i=1 for some constant k 5 > 0. Next, for each i = 1,...,k, taking b i C + (B i B i ) such that 1 = 1 p(x,y) + 1 b and considering the measure in B i(x,y) i B i, given by dµ(x,y) =, x y n+(ti s(x,y))pi we observe using Hölder s inequality that there exist some constants k 6,k 7 > 0 such that u(x) u(y) pi 1 = B i B i x y n+tipi [ = B i B i i=1 ( ) pi u(x) u(y) x y s(x,y) ( ) pi U(x,y) dµ(x, y) B i B i x y n+(ti s(x,y))pi ] 1 k 6 U L p(x,y) (µ, B i B i) 1 L b i (x,y) (µ, B i B i) 1 k 7 U L p(x,y) (µ, B i B i), (.16) where the function U is defined in B i B i as U(x,y) = u(x) u(y) x y s(x,y), x y. Now, let λ > 0 be such that Choose Bi Bi u(x) u(y) p(x,y) λ p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) < 1. (.17) d i := sup 1, sup x y s(x,y) ti (x,y) B i B i Combining (.17) and (.18), we deduce ( ) p(x,y) U(x,y) dµ(x,y) = and λ i = λd i. (.18) ( ) p(x,y) u(x) u(y) B i B i λ i = B i B i λ i x y s(x,y) x y (s(x,y) ti)pi p(x,y) B i B i d i u(x) u(y) Bi Bi p(x,y) x y n+(ti s(x,y))pi u(x) u(y) p(x,y) λ p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) λ p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) < 1.

6 6 Reshmi Biswas, Sweta Tiwari Therefore from the above, we obtain U L p(x,y) (µ, B i B i) λ i = λd i, which implies U L p(x,y) (µ, B i B i) k 8 [u] s(x,y),p(x,y) B i k 8 [u] s(x,y),p(x,y), (.19) wherek 8 = max d u(x) u(y) pi 1 i > 1. Taking into account (.16) and (.19), we get i=1,,...,k B i B i x y n+tipi k 8 [u] s(x,y),p(x,y), which gives us m i=1 u(x) u(y) pi B i B i x y n+tipi 1 k9 [u] s(x,y),p(x,y) for some constant k 9 > 0. Thus using (.14), (.15) and (.0), we deduce k u L β(x) () k 4 u L p i (B i) i=1 (.0) k 10 m i=1 ( u L (Bi) + k 11 u L q(x) () +[u] s(x,y),p(x,y) ) u(x) u(y) pi 1 B i B i x y n+tipi = K u W, where the constants k 10,k 11 and K > 0. This proves that the space W is continuously embedded in L β(x) (). The compactness of this embedding in the bounded domain can be established by suitably extracting a convergent subsequence in L β(x) (B i ) for each i = 1,...,k of a bounded sequence u m in W and arguing as above. Next, for studying nonlocal problems involving the operator( ) s( ) p( ) with Dirichlet boundary data via variational methods, we introduce another new fractional type Sobolev spaces with variable exponents. One can refer [] and references there in for this type of spaces in fractional p-laplacian framework. Since the variable exponents p,s are continuous in and q is continuous in, using Tietze extension theorem, we can extend p,s to R n R n and q to R n continuously such that (S1) (S), (P1) (P) hold for all (x,y) R n R n and q C + (R n ). Set Q := (R n R n )\(C C) and define X = X s(x,y),q(x),p(x,y) () := u : R n R : u L q(x) () and Q u(x) u(y) p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) <. The space X is a normed linear space equipped with the following norm: u(x) u(y) p(x,y) u X := u L q(x) () +inf λ > 0 : Q λ p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) < 1. Next we define a subspace of X as = X s(x,y),q(x),p(x,y) 0 () := u X : u = 0 a.e. in C.

7 Uniform estimate and exisrence of multiple solutions 7 We equip with the norm as follows: u X0 := inf λ > 0 : = inf λ > 0 : Q u(x) u(y) p(x,y) λ p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) < 1, Rn Rn u(x) u(y) p(x,y) λ p(x,y) x y n(x,y)+sp(x,y) < 1. For u, we define the following modular function ρ X0 : R: Rn Rn u(x) u(y) p(x,y) ρ X0 (u) := x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y). (.1) The interplay between the norm in and the modular functionρ X0 can be studied in the following lemmas: Lemma.. Let u and ρ X0 be defined as in (.1). Then, we have the following: (i) u X0 < 1(= 1;> 1) ρ X0 (u) < 1(= 1;> 1). (ii) If u X0 > 1, then u p ρ X0 (u) u p+. (iii) If u X0 < 1, then u p+ ρ X0 (u) u p. Lemma.3. Let u,u m, m N. Then the following statements are equivalent: (i) lim m u m u X0 = 0, (ii) lim m ρ (u m u) = 0. The proofs of Lemma. and Lemma.3 follow in the same line as the proofs of Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3., respectively, in [10]. Now, we study the following Sobolev embedding theorem for the space. Theorem.4. Let R n be a smooth bounded domain. Let s(, ) and p(, ) satisfy (S1) (S) and (P1) (P) respectively such that s(x,y)p(x,y) < n for all (x,y) and q C + () such that p(x,x) q(x) < p s(x) for all x. Then for any β C + () such that 1 < r(x) < p s(x) for all x, there exits a constant C = C(n,s,p,q,β,) > 0 such that for every u, Moreover, this embedding is compact. u L β(x) (R n ) = u L β(x) () C u X0. Proof. First we note that, as p,s are continuous in and q,β are continuous in, using Tietze extension theorem, we can extend p,s to R n R n and q,β in R n such that p(x,x) q(x) and r(x) p s (x) for all x Rn. Next, we claim that there exists a constant C > 0 such that u L q(x) () 1 C u for all u. (.) This is equivalent to proving that inf u A u, where A := u : u L q(x) () = 1 is achieved. Let u m A be a sequence such that u m X0 inf u A u := C as m. This implies that u m is bounded in and L q(x) () and hence in W. Therefore, up to a subsequence u m u 0 in W as m. Now, from Theorem.1, it follows that u m u 0 strongly in L q(x) () as m.

8 8 Reshmi Biswas, Sweta Tiwari We extend u 0 to R n by setting u 0 (x) = 0 on x C. This implies u m (x) u 0 (x) a.e. x R n as m. By using Fatou s Lemma, we have Rn Rn u 0 (x) u 0 (y) p(x,y) Rn Rn u m (x) u m (y) p(x,y) liminf, x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) n x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) which implies that u 0 X0 liminf n u m x0 = C and hence u 0. Also, as u 0 L q(x) () = 1, we have u 0 A. Therefore u 0 X0 = C. This proves our claim and hence (.). From (.), it follows that u W = u L q(x) () +[u] s(x,y),p(x,y) u L q(x) () + u X0 (1+ 1 C ) u, which implies that is continuously embedded in W. Also as from Theorem.1, W is continuously embedded in L β(x) (), there exists a constant C(n,s,p,r,β,) > 0, such that u L β(x) (R n ) = u L β(x) () C(n,s,p,r,β,) u X0, (.3) To prove that the embedding given in (.3) is compact, let v m be a bounded sequence in. This implies that v m is bounded in W. Hence by using Theorem.1, we infer that there exists v 0 L β(x) () such that up to a subsequence v m v 0 strongly in L β(x) () as m. This completes the theorem. Using the above Sobolev embedding result together with Theorem.4.14 and Theorem in [11] we have the following proposition. Proposition.5. (, X0 ) is a uniformly convex and reflexive Banach space. Remark. From now onwards we takeq(x) = p(x,x) and consider the function spacex s(x,y),p(x,x),p(x,y) 0 (). For brevity we still denote X s(x,y),p(x,x),p(x,y) 0 () by. 3 Proof of main results In this section we give the proof of Theorem 1. and Theorem 1.3. First, we study the existence of multiple solutions of (1.1) with concave-convex nonlinearity. By the standard critical point theory, the weak solutions of (1.1) are characterized by the critical points of the associated energy functional J λ : R given as Rn Rn u(x) u(y) p(x,y) J λ (u) = p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) λ u α(x) dx F(x,u(x))dx. α(x) (3.4) Note that J λ is well-defined and Gâteaux differentiable on. Also J λ admits the mountain-pass geometry. Precisely, we have the following lemma. Lemma 3.1. Let J λ be defined as in (3.4). Then we have the followings. (i) There exists λ > 0 such that for any λ (0,λ ) we can choose R > 0 and 0 < δ < 1 such that J λ (u) R > 0 for all u with u X0 = δ. (ii) There exists φ, φ > 0 such that J(tφ) as t +. (iii) There exists ψ, ψ > 0 such that J(tψ) < 0 for all t 0 +.

9 Uniform estimate and exisrence of multiple solutions 9 Proof. (i). Using Lemma., Theorem.4, (F) and (F3), for u X0 < 1, we have Rn Rn u(x) u(y) p(x,y) u α(x) J λ (u) = p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) λ dx F(x,u)dx α(x) 1 + p + u p λ α max u α L α(x) (), u α+ L α(x) () M u r r L r(x) (), u r+ L r(x) () 1 + p + u p λc 1 α u α c r u r 1 p + λc 1 p + α u α c p + r u r u p+, where c 1,c > 0 are constants. Now for each λ > 0, we define the function, T λ : (0,+ ) R as T λ (t) = c 1 λ α tα p + +c 1 r tr p +. Then it is easy to check that t 0 = (λ p+ α r p + r α c1 c ) 1 r α is the point of local minimum with T λ (t 0 ) = λ r p+ r α c 3 0 as λ 0 +, where c 3 > 0 is a constant. Thus there exists λ > 0 such that for any λ (0,λ ) we can choose R > 0 and δ > 0 such that J λ (u) R > 0 for all u with u X0 = δ. (ii). Recalling Lemma 4 in [18], from (F3) it follows that, there exist two constants l 1,l > 0 such that F(x,t) l 1 t b l (3.5) for all (x,t) R. Now, for φ Cc () with φ > 0 and t > 0 sufficiently large such that tφ X0 > 1, using Lemma. and (3.5), we deduce that Rn Rn tφ(x) tφ(y) p(x,y) tφ α(x) J λ (tφ) = p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) λ dx F(x,tφ)dx α(x) tp+ + p φ p X λtα 0 α + φ(x) α(x) dx l 1 t b φ(x) b dx+l tp+ + p φ p l 1 t b φ(x) b dx+l, where is the Lebesgue measure of bounded domain. As from (F3) we have p + < b, it follows that J(tφ) as t +. (iii). Choose ψ Cc () such that ψ > 0 and for sufficiently small t > 0, tψ < 1. Then from (F1) and Lemma., we obtain Rn Rn tψ(x) tψ(y) p(x,y) tψ α(x) J λ (tψ) = p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) λ dx F(x,tψ)dx α(x) p ψ p X λtα 0 α + tp + ψ(x) α(x) dx. As from (F4) we have α + < p, it follows that J(tψ) < 0 as t 0 +. Here we recall Lemma A.1 in [19] which is used to prove that J λ satisfies Palais-Smale condition. Lemma 3.. Let p L () such that p 0, p 0. Let q : R is measurable function such that p(x)q(x) 1 a.e. in. Then for every u L p(x)q(x) (), u p( ) L q(x) () u p L p(x)q(x) () + u p+ L p(x)q(x) ().

10 10 Reshmi Biswas, Sweta Tiwari Lemma 3.3. The functional J λ satisfies (PS) c condition for any c R,c > 0. Proof. Letu m be a(ps) c sequence of the functionalj λ, i.e.,j λ (u m ) c and J λ (u m) X 0 0 as m. Note that, u m is bounded in. Indeed, if u m is unbounded in, we may assume that u m X0 + as m +. Now, for m large enough, using Lemma. and Theorem.4 together with (F3), we have c = J λ (u m ) 1 b J λ(u m ),u m Rn Rn u m (x) u m (y) p(x,y) u m (x) α(x) = p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) λ dx F(x,u m )dx α(x) 1 Rn Rn u m (x) u m (y) p(x,y) + λ u b x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) m (x) α(x) dx+ 1 f(x,u m )u m dx b b ( 1 > p + 1 ) Rn Rn u m (x) u m (y) p(x,y) ( λ 1 1 ) u b x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) m (x) α(x) dx b [ ] 1 + b f(x,u m)u m F(x,u m ) dx ( 1 > p + 1 ( ) u m p X b 0 λ 1 1 ) max u m α L b α(x) (), u m α+ L α(x) () ( 1 > p + 1 ) u m p X b 0 λc 4 u m X α+ 0 for some constant c 4 > 0. As from (F3) and (F4) we get p + < b and α + < p, respectively, the above expression gives a contradiction. Therefore the sequence u m is bounded in. Since is a reflexive Banach space ( Proposition.5), it follows that there exists u 1 such that up to a subsequence still denoted by u m, u m u 1 weakly in as m. Also by using Theorem.4, we get u m u 1 in L α(x) () and L r(x) () strongly and hence u m (x) u 1 (x) point-wise a.e. x R n as m. We claim that u m u 1 strongly in as m. For u,φ, we set the notation I(u),φ := Rn Rn u(x) u(y) p(x,y) (u(x) u(y))(φ(x) φ(y)) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y). (3.6) Then, clearly I(u 1 ),(u m u 1 ) 0, when m. Since u m is bounded in and J λ (u m) X 0 0 as m, for φ = u m u 1, taking into account (3.4) and (3.6), we deduce o m (1) = J λ (u m),(u m u 1 ) = I(u m ),(u m u 1 ) λ u m (x) α(x) u m (x)(u m u 1 )(x)dx f(x,u m (x))(u m u 1 )(x)dx. (3.7) The second term in the right hand side of (3.7) equals to o m (1). Indeed, using the fact that u m u 1 strongly in L α(x) () as m together with Hölder s inequality and Lemma 3., we get u m (x) α(x) u m (x)(u m u 1 )(x)dx u m (x) α(x) 1 (u m u 1 )(x) dx u α( ) m α(x) m u 1 L L () u α(x) () α(x) 1 u m α+ 1 L α(x) () + u m α 1 L α(x) () u m u 1 L α(x) () = o m (1). (3.8)

11 Uniform estimate and exisrence of multiple solutions 11 Since using (F), the third term in the right hand side of (3.7) gives us f(x,u m (x))(u m u 1 )(x)dx u m (x) r(x) 1 (u m u 1 )(x) dx, hence arguing same as above, we obtain f(x,u m (x))(u m u 1 )(x)dx = o m (1). (3.9) Thus using the fact u m u 1 as m together with (3.6), (3.7), (3.8) and (3.9), we deduce that I(u m ),(u m u 1 ) 0 as m and I(u 1 ),(u m u 1 ) 0 as m, which imply (I(um ) I(u 1 )),(u m u 1 ) = o m (1). (3.30) We denote v m = u m u 1. Then for 1 < p(x,y) <, taking into account Lemma., Hölder s inequality, Lemma 3. and Simon s inequality [0], we deduce Rn Rn v m (x) v m (y) p(x,y) x y 1 (p 1) p / n+s(x,y)p(x,y) R n R n [ um (x) u m (y) p(x,y) (u m (x) u m (y))(v m (x) v m (y)) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) p(x,y)/ u 1(x) u 1 (y) p(x,y) (u 1 (x) u 1 (y))(v m (x) v m (y)) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) um (x) u m (y) p(x,y) + u 1 (x) u 1 (y) p(x,y) p(x,y) ] x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) [ 1 um (x) u m (y) p(x,y) (u m (x) u m (y))(v m (x) v m (y)) (p 1) p / x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) R n R n R n R n p(x,y)/ u 1(x) u 1 (y) p(x,y) (u 1 (x) u 1 (y))(v m (x) v m (y)) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) ( um (x) u m (y) p(x,y) ) p(x,y) ( u1 (x) u 1 (y) p(x,y) + x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) [ = c 5 g 1 (x,y) p(x,y) g (x,y) p(x,y) + c 5 [ c 5 [ g p(, ) 1 L p(x,y) (R n R n ) + g 3 p+ g 1 p + L 1 (R n R n ) + g 1 p L 1 (R n R n ) + g 3 p ) p(x,y) ] g 1 (x,y) p(x,y) g 3 (x,y) p(x,y) ] ] g p(, ) p(, ) + g L p(x,y) (R n R n 3 ) L p(x,y) (R n R n ) L 1 (R n R n ) g p + L 1 (R n R n ) + g p L 1 (R n R n ) ], (3.31) L 1 (R n R n ) where c 5 > 0 is a constant and g i,i = 1,,3 are defined as follows. [ um (x) u m (y) p(x,y) (u m (x) u m (y))(v m (x) v m (y)) g 1 (x,y) = x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) u 1(x) u 1 (y) p(x,y) ] (u 1 (x) u 1 (y))(v m (x) v m (y)), x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) [ um (x) u m (y) p(x,y) ] g (x,y) = and g x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) 3 (x,y) = [ u 1(x) u 1(y) p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) ].

12 1 Reshmi Biswas, Sweta Tiwari Finally using Lemma. and (3.31), it follows that [ (I(um ρ X0 (v m ) c 5 ) I(u 1 )),(u m u 1 ) p + / + (I(um ) I(u 1 )),(u m u 1 ) p / u m p + + u m p + u 1 p + + u 1 p + ]. (3.3) Thus from (3.30) and (3.3), we estimate ρ X0 (v m ) 0 as m. Hence Lemma.3, gives us lim u m u 1 X0 0. Now for p(x,y) >, taking into account Lemma., Hölder s inequality, m Lemma 3., Simon s inequality [0] and (3.30), we deduce ρ X0 (v m ) p+ (I(um ) I(u 1 )),(u m u 1 ) = o m (1). Again using the same argument as used for (3.3) we conclude u m u 1 strongly in as m. This completes the lemma. Now, we give the proof of Theorem 1.. Proof of Theorem 1.: As from Lemma 3.1 and Lemma 3.3, there exists λ > 0 such that for all λ (0,λ ), J λ satisfies the mountain pass geometry and Palais-Smale condition, using mountain pass theorem, we infer that there existsu 1, a critical point ofj λ withj λ (u 1 ) = c > 0 = J λ (0). Hence there exists a non-trivial weak solution of the problem (1.1). Next, we prove the existence of the second weak solution of (1.1). From Lemma 3.1(iii), we get that inf u B δ (0) J λ (u) = c < 0, where B δ (0) = u : u X0 δ. Now by applying Ekeland s variational principle, for given any ǫ > 0 there exists w ǫ B δ () such that J λ (w ǫ ) < inf J λ (u)+ǫ and u B δ (0) J λ (w ǫ ) < J λ (u)+ǫ u w ǫ X0, for all u B δ (0), u w ǫ. (3.33) We choose ǫ > 0 such that 0 < ǫ < inf J λ(u) inf J λ (u). This implies w ǫ B δ (0). Now u B δ (0) u B δ (0) by taking u = w ǫ +tv for t > 0 and v B δ (0)\0, from (3.33), we deduce that J λ (w ǫ ) J λ (w ǫ +tv) lim ǫ v X0. t 0 t This implies, for all v B δ (0), J λ (w ǫ),v ǫ v X0. Now replacing v by v, it follows that J λ (w ǫ) X 0 ǫ. This implies the w m B δ (0) is a Palais-Smale sequence at level c < 0. In view of Lemma 3.3, we conclude that there exists u B δ (0) such that w m u strongly in as m and u is a critical point of J λ with J λ (u ) = c < 0. Thus, u is a nontrivial weak solution of (1.1). Also noticing the fact that J λ ( u ) J λ (u), we infer that u is non-negative. Clearly as J(u 1 ) = c > 0 > c = J(u ), u 1 u. Next, we give the proof for our second theorem in this article. We have the following comparison inequality which is useful to handle the variable exponent growth of the non-local operators. Lemma 3.4. Let u : R be a function such that u(x) > 1 a.e. x and η(, ) be a symmetric real valued function such that 0 η(x, y) < for all (x, y). Suppose, 0 η 0 η := inf (x,y) η(x,y). Then we have the following inequality uη(x,y) (x) u η(x,y) (y) u η0 (x) u η0 (y).

13 Uniform estimate and exisrence of multiple solutions 13 Proof. Without loss of generality, we assume u(x) > u(y) > 1, x y in. Now, u η(x,y) (x) u η(x,y) (y) = u η(x,y) (x) u η(x,y) (y) [ η0 ] u(y) > u η0 (x) 1 u(x) = u η0 (x) u η0 (y) Now, we recall the following algebraic inequality from [1]: Lemma 3.5. Let 1 < p < + and κ 1. For every a,b,m 0 it holds that a b p (a b)(a κ m bκ m ) κpp (κ+p 1) a κ+p 1 p p m b κ+p 1 p m p, where a m = mina,m and b m = minb,m. Proof of the Theorem 1.3: Let u satisfy (1.4). Without loss of generality we assume that u(x) > 1 a.e. x. First we consider the case u(x) > 1 a.e. x. For m > 0, we define u m (x) := minm,u(x). Therefore, u m. By taking φ = u κ m, κ > 1 as test function in (1.4) and using Lemma 3.5 and (F), we deduce κ+p(x,y) 1 κ+p(x,y) 1 κp p(x,y) p(x,y) p(x,y) (x,y) um (x) um (y) p(x,y) R n R (κ+p(x,y) 1) p(x,y) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) n u(x) u(y) p(x,y) (u(x) u(y))(u κ m(x) u κ m(y)) R n R x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) n = λ u(x) α(x) u(x)φ(x)dx+ f(x,u(x))φ(x)dx (λ+m) u(x) r(x) 1+κ dx. (3.34) κ+p(x,y) 1 p(x,y) Lemma 3.4 and (F) give u γ := κ+r+ 1 r + κ+p(x,y) 1 p(x,y) (x) u κ+r + 1 r (y) u + κ+r + 1 r (x) u + m m m m (y). Set. Clearly γ 1. Taking into account (3.34) and the last inequality, it follows that κr r+ u β +r + 1 R n R n which implies κ+r + 1 r + m (x) u κ+r + 1 r m + (y) p(x,y) (λ+m) x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) = (λ+m) u γr+ L γr+ (), Rn Rn u γ m (x) uγ m (y) p(x,y) c x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) 6 γ r + u γr+ L γr+ () u(x) r+ 1+κ dx (3.35) for some constant c 6 = (λ+m) ( ) r + r + r > 0. Now using the fact lim u m(x) = u(x) a.e. x, m combining with Fatou s lemma and (3.35), we obtain Rn Rn ρ X0 (u γ u γ (x) u γ (y) p(x,y) ) = x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) Rn Rn u γ liminf m(x) u γ m(y) p(x,y) c m x y n+s(x,y)p(x,y) 6 γ r + u γr+. (3.36) L γr+ () Now, two cases arise, viz. u γ X0 < 1 or u γ X0 > 1. Case I- For u γ X0 < 1, in view of Sobolev embedding theorem (Theorem.4), there exists a constant c 7 > 0 such that u γ L θ(x) () = c 7 (3.37)

14 14 Reshmi Biswas, Sweta Tiwari for some θ C + () such that θ(x) < p s (x) for all x and r+ < θ < p s. If uγ L θ(x) () < 1 in (3.37), then using the assumption u(x) > 1 a.e. x together with the comparison results for variable exponent norm and modular function (Theorem 3. in [10]), we get u γθ L γθ () (u γ (x)) θ(x) dx u γ θ L θ(x) (). (3.38) From (3.37) and (3.38), we have u L γθ () c 1/γ 7 < 1. Letting γ, we get u L (). Similarly for u γ L θ(x) () > 1 in (3.37), in view of the assumption u(x) > 1 a.e. x together with the comparison results among variable exponent norm and modular function (Theorem 3. in [10]), we get u γθ L γθ () (u γ (x)) θ(x) dx u γ θ+ L θ(x) (). (3.39) Combining (3.37) and (3.39), we deduce u L γθ () uγ γθ+ /θ L θ(x) () (cθ+ /θ 7 ) 1/γ. Again by letting γ, we obtain u L (). Case II- For u γ X0 > 1, from Lemma., it follows that u γ p ρ X0 (u γ ). Thus taking into account this previous inequality together with (3.36) and Theorem.4, we estimate u γ L θ(x) () c 8 γ r+ /p u γr+ /p L γr+ (), (3.40) where c 8 > 0 is a constant. Thus, for u γ L θ(x) () < 1 in (3.40), using (3.38), we get u L γθ () c1/γ 8 (γ 1/γ ) r+ /p u r+ /p L γr+ (). (3.41) Now, we apply bootstrap argument for (3.41). Since r + < θ, there exists γ 1 > 0 such that γ 1 r + = θ. Putting γ = γ 1 in (3.41), we obtain u L γ 1 θ () c1/γ1 8 (γ 1/γ1 1 ) r+ /p u r+ /p. (3.4) L γ 1 r+ () Again we can choose γ = γ such that γ r + = γ 1 θ. Then from (3.41) and (3.4), we have u L γ θ () c1/γ1+1/γ 8 (γ 1/γ1 1 γ 1/γ ) r+ /p u r+ /p. Hence by using induction hypothesis, we L θ () deduce u L γmθ () c1/γm 8 (γm 1/γm where γ m = (θ /r + ) m. Now, (3.43) can be re-written as u L γmθ () c m j=1 1/γj 8 ( m j=1 )r+ /p u r+ /p L γmr+ (), (3.43) ( 1/γj ) ) r + /p 1/γ j γ j u r+ /p. (3.44) L θ () 1/γj Since γj > 1 for all j N and lim γ 1/γj j j = 1, there exists a constant c 9 > 1, independent of m such that (3.44) gives us u L γmθ () c m ( m ) r + j=1 1/γj j=1 8 c 1/ /p γ j 9 u r+ /p. (3.45) L θ () Note that, γ j = (θ /r + ) j > 1. This yields j=1 1/γ j and j=1 1/ γ j are convergent and γ m θ as m. Hence, letting m in (3.45), we get that u L (). Next, we consider the case when u γ L θ(x) () > 1 in (3.40). Then, combining (3.39) and (3.40), we obtain u L γθ () c1/γ 10 (γ1/γ ) d u d for some constant c L γr+ () 10 > 0 and d = r+ θ + p θ. Again repeating the bootstrap argument as above we can conclude u L (). For the case u(x) < 1 for a.e. x, we replace u by u in the above arguments and infer that u L (). This completes our theorem.

15 Uniform estimate and exisrence of multiple solutions 15 References [1] E. Di Nezza, G. Palatucci and E. Valdinoci, Hitchhiker s guide to the fractional Sobolev spaces, Bull. Sci. Math., 136 (01), [] G. M. Bisci,V. D. Rǎdulescu and R. Servadei, Variational Methods for Nonlocal Fractional Problems Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 16, (016). [3] G. Franzina and G. Palatucci, Fractional p-eigenvalues, Riv. Math. Univ. Parma (N.S.), 5(), (014), [4] G. Molica Bisci and Vicenţiu D Rădulescu, Multiplicity results for elliptic fractional equations with subcritical term, NoDEA Nonlinear Differential Equations Appl., (4), (015), [5] Sunra Mosconi, Marco Squassina, Nonlocal problems at nearly critical growth, Nonlinear Analysis, 136, (016), [6] S. Mosconi and M. Squassina, Recent progresses in the theory of nonlinear nonlocal problems, Bruno Pini Math. Anal. Semin., 016, Univ. Bologna, Almar Mater Stud., Bologna, 016. [7] J.L. Vázquez, The Dirichlet problem for the fractional p-laplacian evolution problem, J. Differential equations, 60, (016), [8] Jacques Giacomoni and Sweta Tiwari, Fractional p- laplacian parabolic problem: Existence and global behaviour of solutions., Electronic Journal of Differential Equations, 44, (018), 1-0. [9] J. Giacomoni, T. Mukherjee and K. Sreenadh, Existence and stabilization results for a singular parabolic equation involving the fractional Laplacian, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. S, 1() (019), doi: /dcdss.0190 [10] X. Fan and D. Zhao,On the spaces L p(x) () and W m,p(x) (), J. Math. Anal. Appl., 63, (001), [11] L. Diening, P. Harjulehto, P. Hasto and M. Ruzicka, Lebesgue and Sobolev spaces with variable exponents, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 017, (011). [1] U. Kaufmann, J. D. Rossi and R. Vidal, Fractional Sobolev spaces with variable exponents and fractional p(x)-laplacians, Electron. J. Qual. Theory Differ. Equ., 76, (017), [13] Anouar Bahrouni, Comparison and sub-super solution principles for the fractional p(x)- Laplacian, J. of Math. Anal. Appl., 458, (018), [14] A. Bahrouni and V. D Rǎdulescu, On a new fractional Sobolev space and applications to nonlocal variational problems with variable exponent, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. - Series S, 11, (018), 379. [15] Del Pezzo, Leandro and Julio D. Rossi, Traces for fractional Sobolev spaces with variable exponents, Advances in Operator Theory,, (017), [16] A. Ambrosetti, H. Brezis and G. Cerami, Combined effects of concave and convex nonlinearities in some elliptic problems, J. Funct. Anal., 1, (1994),

16 16 Reshmi Biswas, Sweta Tiwari [17] B. Barrios, E. Colorado, R. Servadei and F. Soria, A critical fractional equation concaveconvex power nonlinearities, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire, 31, (015), [18] R. Servadei and E. Valdinoci, Variational methods for non-local operators of elliptic type, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst, 33(5), 013, [19] Jacques Giacomoni, Sweta Tiwari and Guillaume Warnault, Quasilinear parabolic problem with p(x)-laplacian: existence, uniqueness of weak solutions and stabilization, NoDEA Nonlinear Differential Equations Appl., 3, (016), 4. [0] J. Simon, Régularité de la solution d une équation non-linéaire dans R n, Journée d Analyse Non Linéaire. Proceedings, Besançon, France, Lectures notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag (1997). [1] L. Brasco, E. Lindgren and E. Parini, The fractional Cheeger problem, Interfaces and Free Boundaries, 16, (014),