arxiv: v1 [math.ap] 24 Jan 2018

Transcription

1 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN arxiv:181.8v1 [math.ap] 24 Jan 218 Abstract. This work resents a set of sufficient conditions that guarantee a comact inclusion in the function sace of L vector fields defined on a domain that is either a bounded domain in R d or R d itself. The criteria are nonlocal and are given with resect to nonlocal interaction kernels that may not be necessarily radially symmetric. Moreover, these criteria for vector fields are also different from those given for scalar fields in that the conditions are based on nonlocal interactions involving only arts of the comonents of the vector fields. 1. Introduction and the main result The main objective of this note is to resent a comactness result related to the nonlocal function sace of vector fields defined on a domain R d by { } S ρ, () = u L (; R d ) : u S ρ, <, where the seminorm u Sρ, is secified by u S ρ, := ρ(y x) u(y) u(x)) (y x) y x y x dydx for 1 <. Here, ρ is called the nonlocal interaction kernel and is a nonnegative locally integrable. For = 2, the function sace S ρ,2 () has been used in a number of alications. For examle, in nonlocal continuum mechanics, it aears as the energy sace corresonding to the eridynamic strain energy in a small strain linear model. We refer to [22, 23, 24] for the relevant eridynamic models. Mathematical analysis of linearized eridynamic models have been extensively studied in [8, 9, 1, 11, 13, 17, 18, 26] along with results geared towards nonlinear models in [12, 15, 19, 3, 4]. Basic structural roerties of S ρ, () have also been investigated in [16, 19]. It is shown that, for any 1 <, S ρ, () is a searable Banach ( ) 1/, sace with norm u L + u S ρ, reflexive if 1 < <, and is a Hilbert sace for = 2. Under some extra assumtions on the kernel ρ, the sace is known to suort a Poincaré-Korn tye inequality over subsets that have trivial intersections Q. Du s research is artially suorted by US National Science Foundation grant DMS , US AFOSR MURI Center for Material Failure Prediction Through Peridynamics, and US Army Research Office MURI grant W911NF T. Mengesha s research is suorted by US National Science Foundation grant DMS

2 2 QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN with the zero set of the semi-norm Sρ, which is the class of affine mas with skewsymmetric gradient. These functional analytic roerties of the nonlocal sace can be used to demonstrate well-osednesss of some nonlocal variational roblems using the direct method of calculus of variations, see [19] for more discussions. What distinguishes the sace S ρ, () from some other nonlocal function saces is that the seminorm u Sρ, utilizes the rojected difference quotient D(u)(x, y) := u(y) u(x) y x (y x) y x, which is no more than the full difference quotient, thus making S ρ, () otentially a larger sace. For examle, for any ρ L 1 (R d ), the sace S ρ, () is big enough to continuously contain W 1, (; R d ), and there exists a constant C = C(d,, ) such that u S ρ, C Sym( u) L ρ L 1 (R) u W 1, (; R d ) where Sym( u) = 1 2 ( u + ut ) is the symmetric art of the gradient. A natural question is, relative to L (; R d ), how large the sace S ρ, () is. To characterize S ρ, (), we consider two different situations. On one hand, if ξ ρ(ξ) L 1 (R d ), then a simle calculation shows that S ρ, () = L (; R d ). On the other hand, in the case where ξ ρ(ξ) / L 1 (R d ), S ρ, () is a roer subset of L (; R d ). In the later case, we further inquire whether the sace is comactly embedded in L (; R d ). In this note we resent a sufficient condition on ρ that guarantees a comact embedding. Instead of radially symmetric kernels that have been often studied in the literature, we aim to establish the comactness for a more general class of kernels Relevant studies in the literature. There are various known results concerning the comactness of nonlocal function saces. For examle, under the condition that (1) ρ is radial and ξ ρ(ξ) is nonincreasing in ξ, if {u n } is a bounded sequence in S ρ, (), i.e., { } un L () + u n Sρ,() <, su n 1 then {u n } is recomact in the L loc (; Rd ) toology rovided that δ (2) lim δ B δ ρ(ξ)dξ =. Moreover, any limit oint belongs to S ρ, (). Observation like this is recisely the content of [19, Theorem 2.3]. A straightforward calculation shows that the kernels satisfying (2) include ρ(ξ) = ξ (d+(s 1)), for any [1, ), and any s (, 1), and ρ(ξ) = ξ d ln( ξ ).

3 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS 3 Condition (2) requires that ρ must have adequate singularity near. It is not clear whether condition (2) is necessary for comact embedding even for the class of kernels that are radial and nonincreasing. A simle calculation shows that (2) is violated if ξ ρ(ξ) is an integrable function (and therefore, S ρ, () = L (; R d )), and in fact in this case, (see [19]) lim inf δ lim δ δ B δ ρ(ξ)dξ =. There are, however, radial kernels with the roerty that ξ ρ(ξ) is (locally) nonintegrable, and δ B δ ρ(ξ)dξ = c > for which we do not know whether there is a comact embedding. One such kernel is ρ(ξ) = ξ d, and although one exects that the associated sace S ρ, () is comact in the L loc toology, a roof is not available at resent. Even under the condition (2), the requirement that ρ is radial and ξ ρ(ξ) is nonincreasing in ξ limits the alicability of the comactness result for a wider class of kernels. Moreover for bounded domains the available result so far is the comactness of S ρ, () with resect to the L loc toology, although intuitively it seems the same should hold in the L (; R d ) toology. In this aer we will artially address these deficiencies Main results. The first and main result is the comactness of S ρ, () in L (; R d ) over bounded domains for kernels satisfying (1) and (2). The recise statement of the result is the following. Theorem 1.1 (L comactness). Let 1 < and let ρ L 1 loc(r d ) be nonnegative and satisfying (1) and (2). Suose also that R d is a domain with Lischitz boundary. Then S ρ, () is comactly embedded in L (; R d ). That is, any bounded sequence {u n } in S ρ, () is recomact in L (; R d ). Moreover, any limit oint is in S ρ, (). To rove the L loc comactness for the set of vector fields that are defined on Rd, it turns out that the monotonicity assumtion on ρ can be relaxed. To make this recise in our second result, we identify the kernel ρ by the reresentative lim ρ(ξ)dξ, if x is a Lebesgue oint, ρ(x) = h B h (x), otherwise. For θ (, 1) and v S d 1, let us define ρ θ (rv) = inf θ [θ,1] ρ(θrv)θ.

4 4 QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN It is clear that for a given v S d 1, ρ θ (rv) ρ(θrv)θ for any θ [θ, 1] and r (, ). In articular, this imlies ρ θ (ξ) ρ(ξ) for any ξ, with the equality holds if ρ is radial and ξ ρ(ξ) is nonincreasing in ξ. We now make a main assumtion that θ (, 1), Λ S d 1 and v Λ such that H d 1 (Λ) >, (3) ρ θ (rv) = ρ θ (rv ), v Λ and lim δ δ ρ θ (rv )r d 1 dr =. The first art of the assumtion (3) says that, on a conic region with aex at the origin, the kernel ρ is above a nonnegative function with aroriate singular growth near the origin. Note that on one hand, it is not difficult to see if ρ L 1 loc(r d ) is a nonnegative function that satisfies (1) and (2), then it also satisfies (3). On the other hand, if ρ satisfies (1) and (2), then given a nontrivial cone Λ, the kernel ρ(ξ) = ρ(ξ)χ B Λ 1 (ξ) satisfies (3) but not necessarily (1) and (2), where B1 Λ = {x B 1 : x/ x Λ}. Theorem 1.2 (L loc comactness). Suose that 1 <. Let ρ L1 (R d ) be a nonnegative function satisfying (3). Suose also that {u n } is a sequence of vector fields that is bounded in S ρ, (R d ). Then for any D R d oen and bounded, the sequence {u n D } is recomact in L (D; R d ). We should mention that although the focus is different, oerators that use nonsymmetric kernels like those satisfying the condition (3) have been studied in connection with semi-dirichlet forms and the rocesses they generate, see [14, 2] for more discussions. In articular, most of the examles of kernels listed in [14, Section 6] satisfy condition (3) Comactness criteria that involve sequence of kernels. For scalar fields, the above kinds of comactness results are commonlace for saces corresonding to secial kernels. The standard fractional Sobolev saces are the obvious examles. In [18, Lemma 2.2.], for more general radial and monotone decreasing kernels ρ, condition (2) is shown to be sufficient for the comact embedding of the sace { f L 2 () : δ f(y) f(x) 2 ρ(y x) < y x 2 } in L 2 (). The statement is certainly true for any 1 <. The roof of [18, Lemma 2.2.] actually relies on and modifies the argument used to rove another tye of comactness result by Bourgain, Brezis and Mironescu in [5, Theorem 4] that alies criteria involving a sequence of kernels. Their argument uses extensions of functions to R d where the monotonicity of ρ is used in an essential way to control the seminorm of the extended functions by the original semi-norm. That is, let us introduce a sequence of radial functions ρ n satisfying (4) n 1, ρ n, ρ n (ξ)dξ = 1, and lim ρ n (ξ)dξ =, for any r >. R d n ξ >r

5 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS 5 Assuming that for each n, ρ n is nondecreasing, and if (**) su ρ n (y x) f n(y) f n (x) <, n 1 y x then {f n } is recomact in L (), which is the result of [5, Theorem 4] obtained by showing that ( ) makes it ossible to aly a variant of the Riesz-Fréchet- Kolomogorov theorem [7]. In [18, Lemma 2.2.], for a fixed ρ, the condition (2) is used to relace the role layed by the condition (4). In [2, Theorem 1.2 ], the same result as in [5, Theorem 4] was roved by droing the monotonicity assumtion on ρ n for d 2. Moreover, in [2, Theorem 1.3 ] for dimension one (d = 1), the monotonicity assumtion is relaced by a condition similar in sirit to (3) to obtain the comactness result. In fact, the introduction of condition (3) in this aer is insired by the result in [2]. In addition, the roof in [2] avoids the extension of functions to R d but rather shows that the bulk of the mass of each f n, that is f n, comes from the interior and quantifies the contribution near the boundary. As a consequence, if ( ) holds, then as n there is no mass concentration or leak at the boundary, two main causes of failure of comactness. The comactness results were alied to establish some variational convergence results in [21]. Clearly if one merely relaces scalar functions in ( ) by vector fields, both comactness results [5, Theorem 4] and [2, Theorem 1.2] will remain true. It turns out the results will remain valid for vector fields even under a weaker assumtion. Indeed, following the argument [5, Theorem 4] and under the monotonicity assumtion that for n, ρ n is nondecreasing, it was roved in [16, Theorem 5.1] that if u n is a bounded sequence of vector fields satisfying (5) su ρ n (y x) D(u n )(x, y) dydx < n 1 then {u n } recomact in the L loc (; Rd ) toology with any limit oint being in W 1, (; R d ) when 1 < <, and in BD() when = 1. Here, BD() is the sace of functions with bounded deformation. Later, again under the monotonicity assumtion on ρ n, but using the argument of [2, Theorem 1.2] instead, it was roved in [19, Theorem 2.3] that in fact, (5) imlies that {u n } is recomact in the L (; R d ) toology. In this aer, we will rove a similar result relaxing the requirement that ρ n is a Dirac-Delta sequence. Theorem 1.3. Let ρ L 1 loc satisfy (1) and (2). For each n, ρ n is radial and ρ n satisfies (1) and that ρ n, ρ n ρ, weakly in L 1 loc(r d ). If {u n } is a bounded sequence in L (; R d ) such that (5) holds, then {u n } is recomact in L (; R d ). Moreover, any limit oint is in S ρ, ().

6 6 QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN 1.4. Poincaré-Korn tye inequality as a by-roduct. We denote the set of affine mas with skew-symmetric gradient matrix by R. This class is sometimes referred as the set of infinitesimal rigid mas. Note that for a ositive radial ρ, u Sρ, = if and only if u R. A natural by-roduct of Theorem 1.3 is the Poincaré-Korn tye inequality stated below. Corollary 1.4 (Poincaré-Korn tye inequality). Suose that 1 < and V is a weakly closed subset of L (; R d ) such that V R = {}. Let ρ L 1 loc satisfies (1) and (2). Let ρ n be a sequence of radial functions, and for each n, ρ n satisfies (1) and that ρ n, ρ n ρ, weakly in L 1 loc(r d ). Then there exist constants C > and N 1 such that (6) u dx C ρ n (y x) u(y) u(x)) (y x) y x y x dydx for all u V L (; R d ) and n N. The constant C deends only on V, d, and the Lischitz character of. The rest of the aer is devoted to rove the main results and it is organized as follows. Theorem 1.2 and a useful corollary of it, Corollary 2.4, are roved in section 2. The roof of Theorems 1.1 and 1.3 and Corollary 1.4 are resented in section 3. Further discussions are given at the end of the aer. 2. Comactness in L loc (Rd ) In this section we rove the L loc (Rd ) comactness of vector fields stated in Theorem 1.2. To this end, let u L (R d ; R d ) be given, we introduce the function F [u] : R d [, ) defined by F [u](h) = (u(x + h) u(x)) h h dx, for h R d. R d 2.1. A few technical lemmas. We begin with the following lemma whose roof can be carried out following the argument used in [2]. Lemma 2.1. Suose that θ is given as in (3). There exists a constant C = C(θ, ) > such that for any δ >, and v S d 1 F [u](tv) C δ δ ρ θ (sv)s d 1 ds for any < t < δ and any u L (R d, R d ). ρ(hv)h d 1 F [u](hv) dh, h

7 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS 7 Proof. For any v S d 1 and t R, we may rewrite the function F as F [u](tv) = (u(x + tv) u(x)) v dx. R d It follows from [2, Lemma 3.1] that given < s < t, there exist C and θ = t s k (, 1) (k an integer) such that F [u](tv) t C { F [u](sv) We also have that for a given l N, ( ) θs F [u](θsv) lf [u] v 2 ( 1) l l s + F } [u](θsv). t { ( F [u](sv) + F [u] s sθ )} v. l Combining the above we have that for any l, there exists a constant C = C(, l ) such that { } F [u](tv) F [u](sv) (7) C(, l t ) + F [u]( θsv) s t where θ = 1 θ l. Now let us take θ as given in (3) and choose l large that 1 l < 1 θ. It follows that θ < θ 1. Then for any δ >, and any < s < δ τ, by multilying both sides of inequality (7) by ρ θ (vs) and integrating from to δ, we obtain δ ρ θ (sv)s d 1 ds F { δ [u](τv) C(, l τ ) ρ θ (sv)s d 1 F [u](sv) ds s } δ + ρ θ (sv)s d 1 F [u]( θsv) ds. τ Let us estimate the second integral in the above: I = 1 τ δ We first note that using the definition of ρ θ I 1 θ d 1 τ ρ θ (sv)s d 1 F [u]( θsv)ds. and since δ τ, we have ρ( θsv)( θs) d 1 F [u]( θsv) ds. ( θs) Our intension is to change variables h = θs. However, note that θ is a function of s, and by definition ( ) k θs = + 1 s τ for k τ l l s < k + 1.

8 8 QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN It then follows that by a change of variables I 1 τ k θ d 1 = 1 C k=1 θ d 1 k=1 τ (k+1) τ k τ(1 1 l ) (k+1 ρ( θsv)( θs) d 1 F [u]( θsv) ds ( θs) ρ(hv)h d 1 F [u](hv) h ρ(hv)h d 1 F [u](hv) dh, h dh k l + 1 where in the last estimates integrals over overlaing domains were counted at most a finite number of times. Combining the above estimates we have shown that there exists a constant C such that for any v S d 1, δ > and τ δ ( δ ) ρ θ (sv)s d 1 F [u](τv) ds C τ Rewriting the above and restricting v Λ we have that τ ρ(hv)h d 1 F [u](hv) dh. h F [u](τv) C δ ρ ρ(hv)h d 1 F [u](hv) dh. θ (sv)s d 1 ds h Now let < t < δ and alying the above inequality for τ = δ and τ = t + δ, we obtain F [u](tv) = F [u]((t + δ)v δv) 2 1 {F [u]((t + δ)v) + F [u](δv)} C This comletes the roof. δ δ ρ θ (sv)s d 1 ds ρ(hv)h d 1 F [u](hv) dh. h Corollary 2.2. Suose that ρ L 1 loc(r d ) and there exists a cone Λ S d 1 and a vector v Λ such that the function ρ(rv) = ρ(rv ) = ρ(r), for all v Λ and r r ρ(r) is nonincreasing. Then there exists a constant C = C(d,, Λ) such that for any δ >, and v Λ, F [u](tv) C δ δ ρ(s)sd 1 ds for any < t < δ and any u L (R d, R d ). ρ(hv)h d 1 F [u](hv) dh, h Proof. It suffices to note that for ρ L 1 loc(r d ) that satisfies the condition in the corollary for any θ (, 1), and any v Λ, ρ θ (rv) = r inf θ [θ,1] ρ(θrv)(θr) = ρ(rv) = ρ(rv ) = ρ(r). We may then reeat the argument in the roof of Lemma 2.1. Before roving one of the main results, we make an elementary observation.

9 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS 9 Lemma 2.3. Let 1 <. Given a cone Λ with aerture θ, there exists a ositive constant c, deending only on d, θ and, such that inf w s dσ(s) c >. w S d 1 Λ S d 1 The above lemma follows from the fact that the ma w w s dσ(s) Λ S d 1 is continuous on the comact set S d 1, and is ositive, for otherwise the ortion of the unit shere Λ will be orthogonal to a fixed vector which is not ossible since H d 1 (Λ) > Proof of Theorem 1.2. From the assumtion we have (8) su n 1 u n L + su ρ(x x) D(u n )(x, x ) dx dx <. n 1 R d R d We will use the comactness criterion in [16, Lemma 5.4], which is a variant of the well-known Riesz-Fréchet-Kolmogorov comactness criterion [7, Chater IV.27]. Let Λ be as given in (3). For δ >, let us introduce the matrix Q = (q ij ), where q ij = Λ s i s j dh d 1 (s) The symmetric matrix Q is invertible. Indeed, the smallest eigenvalue is given by λ min = min Qx, x = min x s 2 dh d 1 (s) which we know is ositive by Lemma x =1 x =1 Λ 2.3. We define the following matrix functions P(z) = dq 1 z z ( z ) z χ 2 B1 Λ(z), Pδ (z) = δ d P δ where B is the unit ball in R d, and B is its volume. Then for any δ >, R d P δ (z)dz = I. To rove the theorem, using [16, Lemma 5.4], it suffices to rove that (9) lim lim su u n P δ u n L (R d ) =. δ n

10 1 QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN We show next that the inequality (8) and condition (3) imly (9). To see this, we begin by alying Jensen s inequality to get u n (x) P δ u n (x) dx P δ (y x)(u n (y) u n (x))dy dx R d R d R d (y x) R Λ Q 1 d Bδ Λ(x) y x (u (y x) n(y) u n (x)) y x dy dx Λ Q 1 (y x) R d B Λ δ (x) y x (u (y x) (1) n(y) u n (x)) y x dy dx Λ Q 1 δ Bδ Λ τ d 1 F [u n ](τv)dh d 1 (v)dτ Λ C(d, ) δ Bδ Λ τ d 1 F [u n ](τv)dh d 1 (v)dτ Λ where as defined reviously F [u n ](τv) = v (u n (x + τv) u n (x)) dx, R d and B Λ δ = {x B δ : x/ x Λ}. Moreover, the fact that Λ Q 1 C(d,, Λ) for any δ > is also used. We can now aly Lemma 2.1 and use the condition (3) to obtain that C(d,, λ) δ Bδ Λ τ d 1 F [u n ](τv)dh d 1 (v)dτ Λ C(d,, Λ) δ δ ρ(hv)h d 1 F [u](hv) dh Bδ Λ τ d 1 dτ h δ Λ ρ θ (sv )s d 1 ds dhd 1 (v) C(d,, Λ) δ δ ρ θ (sv )s d 1 ds u n Sρ,(R d ). Therefore from the boundedness assumtion (8) we have, u n (x) P δ u n (x) δ dx C(, d, Λ) δ. R d ρ θ (sv )s d 1 ds Equation (9) now follows from condition (3) after letting δ. That comletes the roof.

11 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS A varient comactness in L loc (Rd ; R d ). A corollary of the theorem is the following result that uses a criterion involving a sequence of kernels. Much effort above was to show the theorem for kernel ρ satisfying (3), but the corollary below limits to those satisfying (1) and (2). Corollary 2.4. Let ρ L 1 loc satisfy (1) and (2). Let ρ n be a sequence of radial functions satisfying (1) and that ρ n ρ, weakly in L 1 as n. If su{ u n L (R d ) + u n Sρn, } < n 1 then {u n } is recomact in L loc (Rd ; R d ). Moreover, if A R d is a bounded subset, the limit oint of the sequence corresonding to A is in S ρ, (A). Proof. Using the matrix functions P(z) = dq 1 z z ( z ) z χ 2 B1 Λ(z), Pδ (z) = δ d P δ where Q is the constant matrix with the ij entry given by s i s j dh d 1 (s), and noting that Λ P δ (z)dz = I, R d for any δ >, and using Corollary 2.2 we can reeat the argument in the roof of Theorem 1.2 to obtain u n (x) P δ u n (x) δ δ dx C(, d) δ C(, d). R d ρ n (r)r d 1 dr ρ n (ξ)dξ B δ Now since ρ n ρ, weakly in L 1 as n, for a fixed δ >, it follows that lim u n (x) P δ u n (x) δ dx C(, d). n R d ρ(ξ)dξ B δ We now let δ, and use the assumtion (2) to obtain lim lim u n (x) P δ u n (x) dx =, δ n R d from which the comactness in the L loc toology follows. We next rove the final conclusion of the corollary. To that end, let A R d be a comact subset. For φ Cc (B 1 ), we consider the convoluted sequence of function φ ɛ u n, where φ ɛ (z) = ɛ d φ(z/ɛ) is the standard mollifier. Since u n u strongly in L (A; R d ) for a fixed ɛ >, we have as n, (11) φ ɛ u n φ ɛ u in C 2 (A; R d ).

12 12 QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN Using Jensen s inequality, we obtain that for any ɛ >, and n large, ρ n (y x) (φ ɛ u n (y) φ ɛ u n (x)) (y x) A A y x 2 dydx ρ n (y x) (u n (y) u n (x)) (y x) R d R y x d 2 dydx. Taking the limit in n for fixed ɛ, we obtain for any A comact that ρ(y x) (φ ɛ u(y) φ ɛ u(x)) (y x) y x 2 dydx su u n S ρn, <. n 1 A A where we have used (11) and the fact that ρ n converges weakly to ρ in L 1. Finally, let ɛ, we use the bounded convergence theorem to obtain that for any comact set A, A A ρ(y x) hence comleting the roof. (u(y) u(x)) (y x) y x 2 3. Global comactness dydx su u n S ρn, <, n 1 In this section we rove Theorem 1.1. We follow the aroach resented in [2]. The argument relies on controlling the L mass of each u n, u n dx, near the boundary by using the bound on the seminorm to demonstrate that in the limit when n there is no mass concentration or loss of mass at the boundary. This tye of control has been done for the sequence of kernels that converge to the Dirac Delta measure in the sense of measures. We will do the same for a fixed locally integrable kernel ρ satisfying the condition (2) Some technical estimates. In order to control the behavior of functions near the boundary by the semi-norm S,ρ, we first resent a few technical lemmas. Lemma 3.1. [2] Suose that 1 < and that g L (, ). Then there exists a constant C = C() such that for any δ > and t (, δ) δ 2δ g(x) dx Cδ g(x + t) g(x) dx t 3δ δ g(x) dx Proof. For a given t (, δ), choose k to be the first ositive integer such that kt > δ. Observe that (k 1)t δ, and so kt 2δ. Now let us write g(x) 2 1 ( g(x + kt) g(x) + g(x + kt) ) k k 1 g(x + jt + t) g(x) g(x + kt). j=

13 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS 13 We now integrate in x on both side over (, δ) to obtain that δ k 1 g(x) dx 2 1 k 1 k k 1 δ j= δ+jt j= jt δ g(x + jt + t) g(x + jt) dx g(x + kt) dx 3δ g(x + t) g(x) dx g(x) dx 2δ 3δ 2 1 k g(x + t) g(x) dx g(x) dx. Recalling that kt 2δ, we have that k 2 δ /t and we finally obtain the conclusion of the lemma with C = The above lemma will be used on functions of tye t u(x+tv) v, for v S d 1. Before doing so, we need to make some rearation first. Observe that since is a bounded oen subset of R d with a Lischitz boundary, there exist ositive constants r and κ with the roerty that for each oint ξ there corresonds a coordinate system (x, x d ) with x R d 1 and x d R and a Lischitz continuous function ζ : R d 1 R such that ζ(x ) ζ(y ) κ x y, B(ξ, 4r ) = {(x, x d ) : x d > ζ(x )} B(ξ, 4r ), and B(ξ, 4r ) = {(x, x d ) : x d = ζ(x )} B(ξ, 4r ). It is well known that a Lischitz domain has a uniform interior cone Σ(ξ, θ) at every boundary oint ξ such that B(ξ, 4 r ) Σ(ξ, θ). The uniform aerture θ (, π) of such cones deends on the Lischitz constant κ of the local defining function ζ, and does not deend on ξ. It is not difficult either to see that for any r (, 4r ), if y B r (ξ), then dist(y, ) = inf{ y (x, x d ) : (x, x d ) B 3r (ξ), x d = ζ(x )}. We now begin to work on local boundary estimates. To do that without loss of generality, after translation and rotation (if necessary) we may assume that ξ = and B(, 4r ) = {(x, x d ) : x d > ζ(x )} B(, 4r ), where ζ( ) =, and ζ(x ) ζ(y ) κ x y. We also assume that the Lischitz constant κ = 1/2 and the uniform aerture θ = π/4. As a consequence, ζ(x ) < x /2 for all x B 4r ( ). Given any < r < r, we consider the grah of ζ : Γ r := {x = (x, ζ(x )) R d : x B r ( )}. We denote the uer cone with aerture π/4 by Σ and is given by Σ = {x = (x, x d ) R d : x x d }. Finally we define τ = {x : dist(x, ) > τ} to be the set of oints in at least r units away from the boundary. Based on the above discussion we have that for any r (, r ], (12) B r/2 Γ r + (Σ B r ) B 3r. δ δ

14 14 QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN Indeed, let us ick x = (x, x d ) B r/2. The oint ξ = x (x, ζ(x )) = (, x d ζ(x )) Σ, since x d ζ(x ). Moreover, by the bound on the Lischitz constant ξ = x d ζ(x ) < r/2 + r/4 < r. On the other hand, for any we have x = (x 1, ζ(x 1)) + (x 2, (x 2 ) d ) Γ r + (Λ B r ), ζ(x 1 + x 2) ζ(x 1) x 2 /2 (x 2 ) d /2, showing that ζ(x 1 + x 2) < ζ(x 1) + (x 2 ) d and therefore x. It easily follows that x B 3r, as well. Lemma 3.2. Assume the above setu on the boundary of the domain. Let r (, r ), ξ Γ r and v Σ 36 Sd 1, then ξ + rv r. 2 2 Proof. We rove the lemma by showing that su su x B( r, 36 ) v Σ S 2 dist((x, ζ(x )) + rv, ) rv d 1 2, where v = (v, v d ) Σ S d 1. To show the above estimate, we first note that by the above lemma for any r (, r ), x B( r, 36 2 ) and v Σ Sd 1, the oint (x, ζ(x r )) + rv B(, 36 ). As a consequence of this and the observation we 2 made earlier we deduce that where x B(, dist((x, ζ(x )) + rv, ) = (x, ζ(x )) + rv (x, ζ(x )), r 4 2 ). Note that x x r 2 2. Now (x, ζ(x )) + rv (x, ζ(x )) 2 = x x + rv 2 + (ζ(x ) ζ(x ) + rv d ) 2 (ζ(x ) ζ(x ) + rv d ) 2. We may estimate the right hand side as ( ) (ζ(x ) ζ(x ) + rv d ) 2 (r v d ) ζ(x ) ζ(x ). r v d In the remaining we estimate the quantity on the right hand side of the above inequality to comlete the roof. Using the Lischitz continuity of ζ, we see that for any x B( r, 36 2 ), ) ζ(x ) 2ζ(x r v d x x 1 r v d 2,

15 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS 15 where we have used x x r 2 2 and the fact that for any v = (v, v d ) Σ S d 1, v d 1. The last inequality imlies that 2 su su x B( r, 36 ) v Σ S d 1 2 ( ) ζ(x ) ζ(x ) 1 r v d 2. This comletes the roof of the lemma Near boundary estimate. In this subsection we establish the near boundary estimate in the following lemma. Lemma 3.3. Suose that R d is a domain with Lischitz boundary. Let 1 <. Then there exist ositive constants C 1, C 2, r and ɛ (, 1) with the roerty that for any r (, r ), u L (; R d ), and any nonnegative and nonzero ρ L 1 loc(r d ) that is radial, we have u dx C 1 (r) u C 2 r dx + ρ(x y) D(u)(x, y) dx dy. ɛ r ρ(h)dh B r() The constant C 1 may deend on r but the other constants C 2 and r deend only on d, and the Lischitz constant of. Here for any τ >, we define τ = {x : dist(x, ) > τ}. Proof. Following the above discussion, let us ick η and assume without loss of generality that η =, the function ζ that defines the boundary has a Lischitz constant not bigger than 1/2 and the aerture is π/4. Assume first that u L (; R d ), and vanishes on r/2. Let us ick ξ = (x, ζ(x )) such that x < r and v Σ S d 1. Let us introduce the function g ξ v(t) = u(ξ + tv) v, t (, 3r ). Then for all ξ Γ r/(36 2) and v Σ S d 1, ξ + rv r/2. It follows that, by assumtion on the vector field u, the function g ξ v(t) L (, 2r) and g ξ v(t) = for t (r, 2r). We then aly Lemma 3.1 to get a constant C > such that for any t (, r), r r u(ξ + sv) v ds C r (u(ξ + sv + tv) u(ξ + sv)) v ds, where we used the fact that u vanishes on r/2. Noting that ξ = (x, ζ(x )) for some x B r R d 1, we integrate first in the above estimate with resect to 36 2 t

16 16 QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN x B r 36 2 to obtain that B r 36 2 r 36 2 C r u(ξ + sv) v ds dx B r r (u(ξ + sv + tv) u(ξ + sv)) v t ds dx By making a nonlinear change of variables y = (x, ζ(x )) + sv, we note that the Jacobian of this ma is 1 and mas the cylinder B τ [τ 1, τ 2 ] to Γ τ + Σ (B τ2 \ B τ1 ). As a consequence, for all v Σ S d 1, B r 36 2 r 36 2 u(ξ + sv) v ds dx = Γ r 36 +Σ B r u(y) v dy, and r B r (u(ξ + sv + tv) u(ξ + sv)) v ds dx t (u(y + tv) u(y)) v = Γr+Σ Br dy. t It then follows from the above two equalities and the inclusion (12) that for all v Σ S d 1 and all t (, r), (13) B r 72 2 u(y) v dy C r (u(y + tv) u(y)) v B 3r t dy Multilying the left hand side of (13) by ρ(tv)t d 1 and integrating in t (, r) and in v Σ S d 1, we get r Σ S d 1 = B r 72 2 B r 72 2 u(y) v ρ(tv)t d 1 dy dσ(v) dt Σ B r u(y) z z ρ(z)dz dy.

17 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS 17 Using Lemma 2.3, we observe that z u(y) B r 72 Σ B r z ρ(z)dz dy 2 = u(y) u(y) B r 72 Σ B r u(y) z z 2 (14) ( r ) t d 1 ρ(t)dt u(y) Similarly, we have (15) ) c ρ(ξ)dξ (B r r Σ S d 1 B r 72 2 B r 72 2 u(y) dy. ρ(z)dz dy Σ S d 1 u(y) u(y) w (u(y + tv) u(y)) v B3r ρ(tv)t d 1 dy dσ(v) dt = B 3r B 4r t Σ Br (u(y + z) u(y)) z z z B 4r D(u)(x, y) ρ(x y)dy dx. ρ( z )dzdy dh d 1 (w) dy Combining inequalities (14), (15) and (13) we obtain that (16) c u(y) r dy D(u)(x, y) ρ(x y)dy dx B r 72 B 2 ρ(ξ)dξ 4r B 4r B r for some ositive constant c which only deends on d, and the Lischitz constant of the domain. In articular, the estimate (16) holds true at all boundary oints ξ. The next argument is used in the roof of [2, Lemma 5.1]. By alying standard covering argument, it follows from the inequality (16) that there exist ositive constants ɛ (, 1/4) and C with the roerty that for all r (, r ), such that for all u L (; R d ) that vanishes in r/2 (17) u r dx C D(u)(x, y) ρ(x y)dy dx. \ 2ɛ r ρ(ξ)dξ B r The ositive constants ɛ and C deend only on and the Lischitz character of the boundary of. Now let u L (; R d ), and let φ C () be such that: φ(x) =, if x r/2 ; φ(x) 1, if x r/4 \ r/2 ; φ(x) = 1, if x \ r/4 and φ C/r

18 18 QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN on. Alying (17) to the vector field φ(x)u(x), we obtain that u r dx C D(φu)(x, y) ρ(x y)dy dx \ ɛ r ρ(ξ)dξ B r We may rewrite as follows ( ) φ(x)u(y) φ(y)u(x) D(φu)(x, y) = (φ(x) + φ(y))d(u)(x, y) y x It then follows that D(φu)(x, y) ρ(x y)dy dx 2 1 [φ(x) + φ(y)]d(u)(x, y) ρ(x y)dy dx φ(x)u(y) φ(y)u(x) (y x) y x y x ρ(x y)dy dx = 2 1 (I 1 + I 2 ). The first term I 1 can be easily estimated as I 1 = [φ(x) + φ(y)]d(u)(x, y) ρ(x y)dy dx 2 D(u)(x, y) ρ(x y)dy dx. Let us estimate the second term, I 2. We first break it into three integrals. I 2 = φ(x)u(y) φ(y)u(x) (y x) y x y x ρ(x y)dy dx = + + A B C (y x) y x. where A = \ r/4 \ r/4, B = ( \ r/8 ) r/4 ( r/4 ( \ r/8 ) ) and C = \ (A B). We estimate each of these integrals. Let us begin with the simle one:. After observing that φ(x) = φ(y) = 1 for all x, y \ r/4, we have that A A = \ r/4 \ r/4 D(u)(x, y) ρ(x y)dy dx, and the later is bounded by the semi norm. Next, we note that set B is symmetric with resect to the diagonal, and as a result, = 2 B \ r/8 r/4

19 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS 19 and when (x, y) ( \ r/8 ) r/4, we that φ(x) = 1, and so we have B = 2 u(y) φ(y)u(x) (y x) \ r/8 r/4 y x y x ρ(x y)dy dx 2 φ(y)d(u)(x, y) ρ(x y)dy dx \ r/8 r/4 + 2 u(y) \ r/8 r/4 y x ρ(x y)dy dx 2 D(u)(x, y) ρ(x y)dy dx \ r/8 r/ u(y) ρ(x y)dy dx r r/4 \ r/8 where we have used the fact that dist( \ r/8, r/4 ) = r/8. As a consequence we have that B 2 D(u)(x, y) ρ(y x)dy dx + 24 r ( h > r 8 ρ(h)dh ) r/4 u(y) dy. To estimate the integral on C, we first observe that for any (x, y) C, then dist(x, ) r 8 and dist(y, ) r 8. Using this information, adding and subtracting φ(x)u(x) we can then estimate as follows: C 2 1 D(u)(x, y) ρ(y x)dy dx C φ(x) φ(y) u(x) ρ( x y )dy dx C x y 2 1 D(u)(x, y) ρ(y x)dy dx + C ρ(h)dh u(x) r B dx R r 8 where we used the estimate φ C, and denoted R = diam(). r

20 2 QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN We then conclude that there exists a universal constant C > such that for any r small u dx C r D(u)(x, y) ρ(y x)dy dx \ ɛ r ρ( y )dy B r + 1 ) ρ(h)dh u r B dx. R r 8 It then follows that, u dx = ɛ r ɛ r u dx + \ ɛ r u dx + C + C ρ L 1 (B R ) r u dx r ρ( y )dy B r u dx. r/8 D(u)(x, y) ρ(y x)dy dx We hence comlete the roof of Lemma 3.3 after choosing ɛ sufficiently small, say for examle ɛ < 1/8, that u dx C(r) u r dx + C ρ( y )dy D(u)(x, y) ρ(y x)dy dx, ɛ r B r() as desired Comactness in L (): roof of Theorem 1.1. Let u n be a bounded sequence in S ρ, (). Let φ j C () such that φ j 1 in 1/j. Then the sequence {φ j u n } n is bounded in S ρ, (R d ), and so by Theorem 1.2, φ j u n is re comact in. In articular, {u n } is relatively comact in L ( j ). From this one can extract a subsequence u nj such that u nj u in L loc (). It is easy to see that u L (). In fact, using the ointwise convergence and Fatou s lemma, we can see that u S ρ, (). What remains is to show that u nj u in L (). To that end, we aly Lemma 3.3 for the function u nj u, to obtain that u nj u dx C 1 (r) ɛ r r u nj u dx + C 2 u nj u S ρ,() ρ(h)dh B r for all small r. We now fix r and let j to obtain that lim su u nj u r dx C (1 + u S ρ, ). j ρ(h)dh B r

21 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS 21 We then let r, to obtain that lim su j u nj u dx = Comactness for a sequence of kernels: roof of Theorem 1.3. Arguing as above and by Corollary 2.4, we have that there is a subsequence u nj u in L loc (), and that u S ρ,(). To conclude, we aly Lemma 3.3 for the function u nj u corresonding to ρ nj to obtain u nj u r dx C 1 (r) u nj u dx + C 2 u nj u S ρ,() ɛ r ρ nj (h)dh B r and let j and aly the weak convergence of ρ n to obtain that lim su u nj u r dx C (1 + u S ρ, ). j ρ(h)dh B r We then let r Poincaré-Korn tye inequality: roof of Corollary 1.4. We recall that given V L (; R d ) satisfying the hyothesis of the corollary, there exists a constant P such that for any u V, (18) u dx P ρ(y x) u(y) u(x)) y x (y x) y x dydx, where one can find the result in [1] or [17]. We take P to be the best constant. We claim that given any ɛ >, there exists N = N(ɛ) N such that for all n N, (6) holds for C = P +ɛ. We rove this by contradiction. Assume otherwise and assume that there exists C > P for every n, there exists u n V L (; R d ), u n L = 1, and ρ n (y x) u n (y) u n (x)) (y x) y x y x dydx < 1 C By Theorem 1.3, u n is recomact in L (; R d ) and therefore any limit oint u will have u L = 1, and will be in V L (; R d ). Moreover, following the same rocedure as in the roof of Corollary 2.4, we obtain that ρ(y x) u(y) u(x) (y x) y x y x dydx lim inf ρ n (y x) u n (y) u n (x)) (y x) n y x y x dydx 1 C < 1 P which gives the desired contradiction since P is the best constant in (18).

22 22 QIANG DU, TADELE MENGESHA, AND XIAOCHUAN TIAN 4. Discussions In this work we have resented a set of sufficient conditions that guarantee a comact inclusion in the sace of L vector fields. The criteria are nonlocal and given with resect to nonlocal interaction kernels that may not be necessarily radially symmetric. The L -comactness is established for a sequence of vector fields where the nonlocal interactions involve only art of their comonents, so that the results and discussions reresent significant dearture from those known for scalar fields. It is not clear yet whether these set of conditions are necessary. In this regards there are still some outstanding questions in relation to the set of minimal conditions on the interaction kernel as well as on the set of vector fields that imly L -comactness. An alication of the comactness result that will be exlored elsewhere includes designing of aroximation schemes for nonlocal system of equations of eridynamictye similar to the one done in [25] for nonlocal equations. References [1] B. Aksoylu and T. Mengesha. Results on non-local boundary-value roblems. Numer. Func. Analysis Otim. 31, , 21. [2] G. Barles, E. Chasseigne and C. Imbert. On the Dirichlet roblem for second-order ellitic integro-differential equations. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 57(1), (28) [3] J. C. Bellido and C. Mora-Corral. Existence for nonlocal variational roblems in eridynamics. SIAM J. Math. Anal. Vol. 46, No. 1, , 214. [4] J. C. Bellido, C. Mora-Corral and P. Pedregal. Hyerelasticity as a Γ-limit of eridynamics when the horizon goes to zero. Calculus of Variations and PDEs, 27, 215, DOI 1.17/s [5] J. Bourgain, H. Brezis, and P. Mironescu. Another look at Sobolev saces. In: Menaldi, J.L., et al. (eds.) Otimal control and artial differential equations, (A volume in honor of A. Benssoussan s 6th birthday). IOS Press, 21. [6] H. Brezis. How to recognize constant functions. Connections with Sobolev saces. Russ. Math. Surv., 57, , 22. [7] H. Brezis. Functional analysis, Sobolev saces and artial differential equations. Sringer, Chicago, 21. [8] Q. Du, M. Gunzburger, R.B. Lehoucq, and K. Zhou. Analysis and Aroximation of Nonlocal Diffusion Problems with Volume Constraints. SIAM Rev., 54, , 212. [9] Q. Du, M. Gunzburger, R.B. Lehoucq, and K. Zhou. A nonlocal vector calculus, nonlocal volume constrained roblems, and nonlocal balance laws. Math. Models Methods Al. Sci., 23, , 213. [1] Q. Du, M. Gunzburger, R.B. Lehoucq, and K. Zhou. Analysis of the volume-constrained eridynamic Navier equation of linear elasticity. Journal of Elasticity, 113, , 213. [11] Q. Du and K. Zhou. Mathematical analysis for the eridynamic non-local continuum theory. ESIAM: Math. Mod. Numer. Analysis 45, , 211. [12] E. Emmrich and D. Puhst. Well-osedness of the eridynamic model with Lischitz continuous airwise force function. Communications in Mathematical Sciences, 11, , 213. [13] E. Emmrich and O. Weckner. On the well-osedness of the linear eridynamic model and its convergence towards the Navier equation of linear elasticity. Commun. Math. Sci. 5, , 27. [14] M. Felsinger, M. Kassmann, and P. Voigt. The Dirichlet roblem for nonlocal oerators. Math. Z. (215) 279:779 89

23 NONLOCAL CRITERIA FOR COMPACTNESS IN THE SPACE OF L VECTOR FIELDS 23 [15] R. Liton. Dynamic brittle fracture as a small horizon limit of eridynamics. Journal of Elasticity, 117, 1, 21 5, 214. [16] T. Mengesha. Nonlocal Korn-tye characterization of Sobolev vector fields. Comm. Cont. Math., 14: 12528, 28., 212. [17] T. Mengesha and Q. Du. Nonlocal Constrained Value Problems for a Linear Peridynamic Navier Equation, Journal of Elasticity, 116, 27-51, 214. [18] T. Mengesha and Q. Du. The bond-based eridynamic system with Dirichlet-tye volume constraint. Proc. Royal Soc. Edin., 144A, , 214. [19] T. Mengesha and Q. Du. On the variational limit of a class of nonlocal functionals related to eridynamics. Nonlinearity 28 (215) [2] A. Ponce, An estimate in the sirit of Poincare s inequality. J. Eur. Math. Soc., 6,1,1 15, 24. [21] A. Ponce. A new aroach to Sobolev saces and connections to Γ-convergence. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 19, , 24. [22] S.A. Silling. Reformulation of elasticity theory for discontinuities and long-range forces. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 48, , 2. [23] S.A. Silling. Linearized theory of eridynamic states. J. Elast. 99, , 21. [24] S.A. Silling, M. Eton, O. Weckner, J. Xu, E. Askari. Peridynamic states and constitutive modeling. J. Elast. 88, , 27. [25] X. Tian, and Q. Du. Nonconforming discontinuous Galerkin methods for nonlocal variational roblems. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 53, 2, , 215. [26] K. Zhou and Q. Du. Mathematical and numerical analysis of linear eridynamic models with non-local boundary. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 48, , 21. Deartment of Al Phys and Al Math, and the Data Science Institute, Fu Foundation School of Eng. & Al Sci, Columbia University, New York, NY 127 address: qd2125@columbia.edu Deartment of Mathematics, University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN address: mengesha@utk.edu Deartment of Mathematics, University of Texas, Austin, TX address: xtian@math.utexas.edu