arxiv: v1 [math.ap] 21 Mar 2018

Transcription

1 SOLUTIONS CONCENTRATING AROUND THE SADDLE POINTS OF THE POTENTIAL FOR SCHRÖDINGER EQUATIONS WITH CRITICAL EXPONENTIAL GROWTH JIANJUN ZHANG, JOÃO MARCOS DO Ó, AND PAWAN KUMAR MISHRA arxiv: v1 [math.ap] 1 Mar 018 Abstract. In this paper, we deal with the following nonlinear Schrödinger equation ǫ u+v(x)u = f(u), u H 1 ( ), where f(t) has critical growth of Trudinger-Moser type. By using the variational techniques, we construct a positive solution u ǫ concentrating around the saddle points of the potential V(x) as ǫ 0. Our results complete the analysis made in [14] and [35], where the Schrödinger equation was studied in R N, N 3 for sub-critical and critical case respectively in the sense of Sobolev embedding. Moreover, we relax the monotonicity condition on the nonlinear term f(t)/t together with a compactness assumption on the potential V(x), imposed in [3]. 1. Introduction In the last decades, considerable attention has been paid to the standing wave solutions of the following nonlinear Schrödinger equation (1) ε v +V(x)v = f(v), v H 1 (R N ),N 3. An interesting class of solutions of (1) are families of solutions which develop a spike shape around some certain point in R N as ε 0. Without giving an exhaustive list of references, we cite [10, 8, 9, 18, 0, 1, 9, 8, 3]. Recall that based on a Lyapunov-Schmidt reduction, for N = 1 and f(t) = t 3 A. Floer and A. Weinstein [3] first constructed a single peak solution of (1) which concentrates around any given non-degenerate critical point of V(x). For f(t) = t p t, p (, ), Y. G. Oh [30] extended the result in [3] to the higher dimension case. In [3, 30], their arguments requires essentially a non-degeneracy condition. A first attempt to generalize the results of [3, 30], without non degeneracy condition, was made in [31] see also [4, 18]. In [31], by using purely variational approach, P. H. Rabinowitz proved the existence of positive solutions of (1) for small ε > 0 whenever lim infv(x) > inf V(x). x R N SubsequentlytheseresultswereimprovedbyM.delPinoandP.Felmerin[19,17]usingavariational approach applied to a truncated problem and assuming Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz((A-R) for short) 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. 35B5, 35B33, 35J61. Key words and phrases. Nonlinear Schrödinger equations, critical growth, Trudinger-Moser inequalities, lack of compactness, saddle potential. Corresponding author: J. M. do Ó. Research supported in part by INCTmat/MCT/Brazil, CNPq and CAPES/Brazil. 1

2 J. ZHANG, J. M. DO Ó, AND P. K. MISHRA and monotonicity condition on the nonlinearity. It is natural to ask whether this result holds for more general nonlinear term f(t), particularly, without (A-R) or the monotonicity condition on f(t)/t. In 007, in [10], J. Byeon and J. Jeanjean responded with an affirmative answer for N 3. Precisely, with the Berestycki-Lions conditions (cf. (1.1)-(1.3) in [7] or (f 1)-(f 3) in [10]), authors in [10] developed a new variational method to construct the spike solutions of (1), which concentrate around the local minimum of V. In these references only the case of the local minima of V(x) was considered Assumptions and Related results. Recently in [14], P. d Avenia et. al. have studied the existence of spike solutions around saddle or maximum points of V(x) without assuming the monotonicity on the nonlinearity f(t)/t and with the potential satisfying the following assumptions (V0) 0 < α 1 V(x) α, for all x R N ; Moreover, with respect to the critical point 0, it was assumed that the potential V(x) satisfies one of the following conditions: (V1) V(0) = 1, V is C 1 in a neighborhood of 0 and 0 is an isolated local maximum point of V. (V) V(0) = 1, V is C in a neighborhood of 0 and 0 is a non-degenerate saddle critical point of V. (V3) V(0) = 1, V is C N 1 in a neighborhood of 0, 0 is an isolated critical point of V(x) and there exists a vector space E such that: (a) V E has a local maximum at 0; (b) V E has a local minimum at 0. In [14], for sub-critical nonlinearity, following the approach as in [17], the authors have defined a modified energy functional and constructed a different mini-max argument which involves suitable deformations of certain cones in H 1 (R N ). Further this result for critical nonlinearity was studied in [35]. Before stating our main result, we shall introduce the main hypotheses on f(t). In what follows, we assume that f C(R,R) and satisfies (f 1 ) lim t 0 f(t)/t = 0. { f(s) 0, α > 4π, (f ) lim s + = e αs 1 +, α < 4π. (f 3 ) There exists µ > such that tf(t) µf(t) > 0, where F(t) := t 0 f(τ)dτ. (f 4 ) There exist p >, λ p > 0 such that f(t) λ p t p 1 for all t > Motivation and Main result. In a very interesting work [1], under the Berestycki-Lions conditions, J. Byeon and K. Tanaka improved the result in [10] and obtained the existence of positive solutions to (1), which concentrate around more general critical points (such as local maximum points and special saddle points) of V(x). See also [14] for related results. Further, J. Zhang, Z. Chen and W. Zou [33] extended the result in [10] to the critical case and general nonlinear term f(t). In 008, J. Byeon, L. Jeanjean and K. Tanaka [11] considered the concentration phenomenon of the problem around the local minima of the potential in the cases: N = 1,. In particular, for N = they assume that f C(R +,R + ) and satisfies the subcritical growth. In [], J. M. do Ó and M. A. S. Souto proved the existence of one spike solution around a local minima of V(x), where the nonlinear term f(t) has critical growth of Trudinger-Moser type at, i.e., f(t) behaves like exp(α 0 t ) for some α 0 > 0 as t +. In [] (A-R), the monotonicity and other conditions on f(t) were also required.

3 SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION IN R WITH SADDLE POTENTIAL 3 Motivated by [, 14], we consider the two-dimensional case of problem (1). To be more precise, we study the concentration phenomenon of the following problem around saddle points of the potential V(x), (P ε ) ε v +V(x)v = f(v), v H 1 ( ), where f(t) has the maximal growth on t which allows us to treat this problem variationally in H 1 ( ) motivated by the Trudinger Moser type inequality due to D. Cao [13] (see also [6]). This result can be compared with [14, ] as follows. In [14] the problem was studied with subcritical nonlinearity of Sobolev type and the concentration behavior around the saddle points of the potential V(x). On the other hand, in [] the problem was considered with the maximal growth on nonlinearity of Trudinger-Moser type, but the concentration behavior was investigated around the local minima of the potential. Let C p be denoted by the best constant in the Sobolev embedding of H 1 ( ) into L p ( ), i.e., /p C p u dx) (R p ( u +u ) dx, u H 1 ( ). The main theorem of this paper reads as Theorem 1.1. Assume that f satisfies hypotheses (f 1)-(f 4) with ( )p p µ λ p > C p p, p µ and V(x) satisfies (V0) and one of (V1), (V) or (V3). Then there exists ε 0 > 0 such that (P ε ) admits a positive solution u ε for ε (0,ε 0 ). Moreover, there exists {y ε } such that εy ε 0 and u ε (ε( +y ε )) converges to a ground state solution of () u+u = f(u), u > 0, u H 1 ( ). We mention that the nonlinear elliptic problems involving critical growth of Trudinger-Moser type have been studied by many authors; see, for example, Adimurthi [], D. Cao [13], de Figueiredo et al. [15], J. M. do Ó et al. [, 6] and N. Lam, G. Lu [6]. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section, we give some preliminary results and the variational setting. In Section 3, we define a truncation of the problem which will be used throughout the present paper. Moreover, a compactness result is established. In Section 4, we introduce some results related to the corresponding limit problem, most of which are well-known. The min-max argument is exposed in Section 5, where we show the main estimates of the min-max level m ε associated to the truncation problem. These estimates play a crucial role in proving the existence of solutions. In Section 6, a key asymptotic estimate on m ε is proved. Finally, in Section 7, we show that the solutions of the truncated problem actually solve the original problem for ε small.. Preliminaries and variational setup In this section we give some preliminary definitions and results which will be used in our subsequent arguments. We will follow the following notations. For any R > 0, B(x,R) denotes the ball centered at x and with radius R > 0 in. Moreover, for any ε > 0, let Λ ε := ε 1 Λ = { x εx Λ }. Using the change of variable x εx, problem (P ε ) is transformed as (3) u+v(εx)u = f(u) in.

4 4 J. ZHANG, J. M. DO Ó, AND P. K. MISHRA The energy functional I ε : H 1 ( ) R, corresponding to problem (3) is given by I ε (u) = 1 ( u +V(εx)u )dx F(u)dx and defined on the Hilbert space H 1 ( ) with the inner product and norm given by u,v = ( u v +uv) dx, u ( = u,v = u +u ) dx. Using the following Moser-Trudinger inequality (see [6]), it is standard to verify that the functional I ε is well defined and C 1 with the Fréchet derivative given by I ε R (u),φ = ( u φ+v(εx)uφ)dx f(u)φdx, for φ C0 (R ). Lemma.1. If u H 1 ( ) and α > 0, then ( ) e αu 1 dx <. Moreover, if u L 1, u L M and α < 4π, then there exists a constant C which depends only on α and M, such that ( ) e αu 1 dx C. Throughout this paper, we denote standard norm in H 1 ( ) by. The strong and weak convergence of sequences of functions are denoted by and respectively in the space H 1 ( ). 3. Compactness result for truncated problem We will not study problem (3) in its original form. First, we will make a suitable truncation of the nonlinearity f(t). Then we will find a solution of the truncated problem. At the end, under a suitable control over the solution of the truncated problem, we come back to the solution of the original problem. For that, let us define with f(t) = { min{f(t),at}, t 0, 0, t < 0, 0 < a < ( 1 ) α 1, µ where α 1 is introduced in (V0). In the following we consider the balls B i := B(0,R i ) (i = 0,1,,...,5) with R i < R i+1 for i = 0,1,,3,4, where R i are small positive constants and will be determined later. For some technical reasons, we choose R 1 satisfying x B 1 with V(x) = 1, τ V(x) 0, where τ is tangent to B 1 at x. Next we define χ : R, 1, x B 1, R χ(x) = x R 1, x B \B 1, 0, x B c

5 and then SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION IN R WITH SADDLE POTENTIAL 5 g(x,t) =χ(x)f(t)+(1 χ(x)) f(t), G(x,t) := t 0 g(x,τ)dτ = χ(x)f(t)+(1 χ(x)) F(t), where F(t) and F(t) are primitives of f(t) and f(t) respectively. We also denote and χ ε (x) = χ(εx) g ε (x,t) := g(εx,t) = χ ε (x)f(t)+(1 χ ε (x)) f(t). Therefore, the truncated problem related to problem (3) looks like the following ( P ε ) u+v(εx)u = g ε (x,u) in. The solutions of ( P ε ) are the critical points of the associated energy functional Ĩε : H 1 ( ) R, defined as Ĩ ε (u) = 1 ( u +V(εx)u )dx G ε (x,u)dx, where G ε (x,t) := t We now state the following compactness result. 0 g ε (x,τ)dτ = χ ε (x)f(t)+(1 χ ε (x)) F(t). Proposition 3.1. For( every) ε > 0, the functional Ĩε satisfies the Palais-Smale condition, (PS) c in short, for all c < µ, where µ is introduced in (f3). Proof. Step 1: The sequence {u n } is bounded. Since {u n } is a (PS) c sequence for Ĩε, Ĩ ε (u n ) = 1 ( u n +V(εx)u n )dx G ε (x,u n )dx c and Ĩ ε (u n),u n = ( u n +V(εx)u n )dx g ε (x,u n )u n dx = o( u n ). Then, by (f3) we have µĩε(u n ) Ĩ ε (u n),u n ( µ ) = 1 ( un +V(εx)u ) n dx χ ε (x)(µf(u n ) f(u n )u n ) dx R (1 χ ε (x)) (µ F(u n ) f(u ) n )u n dx R ( µ ) 1 ( un +V(εx)u ) µ n dx a u ndx \B1 [( ε µ )α 1 1 µ ] a u n which implies that {u n } is bounded in H 1 ( ).

6 6 J. ZHANG, J. M. DO Ó, AND P. K. MISHRA Step : For any given δ > 0, there exists R = R(δ) > 0 such that (4) lim sup u n H 1 (B(0,R) c ) δ. n As a sequence, there exists ε 0 > 0 such that for any ε (0,ε 0 ), we have ( ( )) c, µ lim sup u n < µc 0 n µ < 1 for some c 0. In fact, by Step 1, there exists ε 0 > 0 such that for ε (0,ε 0 ), \B1 ε B(0,R). Then limsup n \B u 1 ε δ ndx α 1, lim sup u n dx limsup [µĩε(u n ) Ĩ ε(u n ),u n + µ ] n n µ a u ndx \B1 ε ] [µc+ µaδ. µ α 1 It follows that by choosing δ > 0 small, we have limsup n u n < µc 0 µ < 1, for some ( ( )) c 0 c, µ. In the following, we prove (4). We take R > 0 such that B ε B(0,R/). Let φ R a cut-off function such that φ R = 0 in B(0,R/), φ R = 1 in B(0,R) c, 0 φ R 1 and φ R C/R. Then Ĩ ε(u n ),φ R u n = [ u n (φ R u n )+V(εx)u nφ R ]dx g ε (x,u n )φ R u n dx = o n (1). Since {u n } is bounded, therefore ( un +V(εx)u ) n φr dx = f(un )φ R u n dx u n u n φ R dx+o n (1) R a u ndx+ C R +o n(1) which implies u n H 1 (B(0,R) c ) C/R+o n(1). Taking R large, the proof of Step follows. Step 3: For any δ given above and small enough, we claim that ( ) lim sup g ǫ (x,u n )u n dx+ g ǫ (x,u)udx δ. n \B R (0) \B R (0) Indeed, by (f 1 )-(f ), for any ε > 0,α > 4π,q > 1, there exists some C 1 > 0 (independent of ε,n) such that g ε (x,t) C 1 t + t (e αt 1), t R. Then \B R (0) g ǫ (x,u n )u n dx C 1 \B R (0) u n dx+ \B R (0) u n (eαu n 1)dx ( C 1 u n H 1 (BR c (0)) + u n q dx \B R (0) ) 1 q ( (e qαu n 1)dx )1 q,

7 SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION IN R WITH SADDLE POTENTIAL 7 where q,q > 1 and 1/q+1/q = 1. Choosing q > 0 (close to 1) and α > 4π (close to 4π) such that qα u n < 4π for n large, by Step and Lemma.1, there exists C > 0 (independent of n,r) such that for n large, g ǫ (x,u n )u n dx C 1 δ +C u n L q (BR c (0)). \B R (0) By [1, Theorem 4.1], H 1 (BR c(0)) Lq (BR c(0)) and there exists C q > 0 (independent of R) such that Thus (5) u L q (B c R (0)) C q u H 1 (B c R (0)), u H 1 (B c R(0)). \B R (0) g ǫ (x,u n )u n dx (C 1 +CC q )δ δ/, by choosing δ small enough. On the other hand, since g ǫ (x,u)u L 1 ( ), we can choose R > 0 large enough such that (6) g ǫ (x,u)udx δ/. \B R (0) Combining (5) and (6), the proof of Step 3 follows. Step 4: For every compact set K g ǫ (x,u n )dx = lim n K K g ǫ (x,u)dx. Since {u n } is bounded in H 1 ( ). Hence u n u in L 1 (K) for any compact set K and g ǫ (x,u n ) L 1 (K). Moreover, since {u n } is a bounded (PS) c sequence, we have sup g ǫ (x,u n )u n dx <. n Now the proof of the claim follows from [16, Lemma.1]. Step 5: For R given above, we claim that g ǫ (x,u n )u n dx = lim n B R (0) B R (0) g ǫ (x,u)udx. Since the sequence {u n } is bounded, up to a subsequence, u n u in H 1 ( ) and a.e. in as n. Let P(x,t) = g ǫ (x,t)t,q(t) = e αt 1,t R, where α > 4π with α u n < 4π for n large. Obviously, by (f 1 )-(f ), and P(x,t) lim = 0 uniformly for x B R (0) t Q(t) sup Q(u n )dx <, P(x,u n ) P(x,u), a.e. x B R (0). n B R (0) Strauss s compactness lemma yields the result desired.

8 8 J. ZHANG, J. M. DO Ó, AND P. K. MISHRA Step 6: We show that u n u in H 1 ( ) as n. Since Ĩǫ(u n ),u n 0 as n, (7) ( u n +V(ǫx)u n)dx = g ǫ (x,u n )u n dx+o n (1). By Step 4, it is easy to verify that u is a critical point of Ĩǫ, so (8) ( u +V(ǫx)u )dx = g ǫ (x,u)udx. Combing Step 3, Step 5, (7) and (8), we get lim ( u n +V(ǫx)u n n )dx = ( u +V(ǫx)u )dx. As a consequence, u n u in H 1 ( ) as n. 4. The limit problems As mentioned before, we study the following limit problem (9) u+ku = f(u) in for some k > 0. The associated energy functional Φ k : H 1 ( ) R is defined by Φ k (u) = 1 ( u +ku )dx F(u)dx. In [5], with the similar assumptions on f(t) as in Theorem 1.1, C. O. Alves, M. A. S. Souto and M. Montenegro proved that there exists a radially asymmetric ground state solution U of (9) (See also [] for similar results under more restrictive assumptions). Moreover, U satisfies 1 (10) U dx = Φ k (U) < 1 (F(U) and k ) U dx = 0. Moreover by [34, Proposition.1], every radially asymmetric solution of (9) is decreasing in r = x and decays exponentially at infinity. Let S k be the set of nontrivial solutions of (9) and U Hrad 1 (R ) be a ground state solution of (9), then Now we define S k g := Φ k(u) = inf{φ k (u) : u S k }. (11) m k = inf γ Γ k max t [0,1] Φ k(γ(t)) with Γ k = {γ C([0,1],H 1 rad (R )) : γ(0) = 0,Φ k (γ(1)) < 0}. Following the proof of [5, Corollary 1.5], m k = S k g. Moreover, there exists γ Γ k such that U γ([0,1]) and max Φ k(γ(t)) = m k. t [0,1] For k = 1, for simplicity, let Φ := Φ 1, m := m 1. Similar as in [14, Lemma.4], we show the monotonicity of m k using the following compactness result in [5]. Lemma 4.1. Under the assumptions of Theorem 1.1, for any sequence {v n } in Hrad 1 (R ) such that sup n v n L ( ) = ρ < 1, sup n v n L ( ) < together with v n v in Hrad 1 (R ) and a. e. in as n, we have lim F(v n )dx = F(v)dx. n

9 SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION IN R WITH SADDLE POTENTIAL 9 Lemma 4.. Under the assumptions of Theorem 1.1, we have 0 < m k < 1 ( 1 1 ) µ and the map m : (0,+ ) (0,+ ), m(k) = m k is strictly increasing and continuous. Proof. Similar as in [5], we get that m k p p λ /(p ) p C p/(p ) p. Then, for ( )p p µ λ p > C p p, p µ ( ) we have m k < µ. Obviously, m k > 0. Now, we show the monotonicity of m. For any 0 < k 1 < k and γ Γ k, it is clear that γ Γ k1 and m k1 max t [0,1] Φ k 1 (γ(t)) < max t [0,1] Φ k (γ(t)) = m k. To prove the continuity of m, for any {k j } j (0, ) with k j k > 0 as j, we take γ Γ k, then for j large enough γ Γ kj, m kj max t [0,1] Φ k j (γ(t)) max t [0,1] Φ k(γ(t)) = m k. So limsup j m kj m k. On the other hand, let U j be a radially symmetric ground state solution of (9) with k = k j, then {U j } j is bounded in H 1 ( ) and U j = m k j < 1/. Up to a subsequence, we assume that U j U in Hrad 1 (R ) and a. e. in. Then by Lemma 4.1 F(U j )dx F(U)dx. Therefore, we conclude our result by the lower semi-continuity of the norm. 5. The min-max analysis This section is devoted to studying the min-max argument. Inspired by [14], let us define the following topological cone and a family of deformations of C ε : C ε = { γ t ( ξ) t [0,1],ξ B ε 0 E} Γ ε = { η C ( C ε,h 1 ( ) ) η(u) = u, u C ε }, where C ε is the topological boundary of C ε. Here γ t = γ(t) is the curve at which the infimum in (11) is achieved for k = 1, see [5, Lemma.1]. Define the min-max level m ε = inf η Γ ε max u C ε Ĩ ε (η(u)). Now following a similar idea as in [14], we state the following propositions without proof to make the paper self contained. Proposition 5.1. There exist ε 0 > 0, δ > 0 such that for every ε (0,ε 0 ) Ĩ ε Cε m δ.

10 10 J. ZHANG, J. M. DO Ó, AND P. K. MISHRA Proposition 5.. lim supm ε m. ε 0 Now we aim to give a similar estimate as in Proposition 5. from below. In order to do this we compare this level with another min-max level, which we will define with the help of barycenter type maps as below. Recall that in case of (V1), E =, whereas, in case of (V), E is the space formed by eigenvectors associated to negative eigenvalues of D V(0). Define π E as the orthogonal projection on E and h ε : E defined as h ε (x) = π E (x)χ B ε 3 (x), where χ B ε 3 is the characteristic function of B3 ε. Let us define β ε : H 1 ( )\{0} E such that for any u H 1 ( )\{0} For δ > 0 small, let where β ε (u) = Ξ ε = Σ H1 ( )\{0} Observe that, since Ĩε Φ α1, we have b ε = inf R h ε (x)u dx R u. dx max Σ Ξ ε u Σ Ĩ ε (u), Σ is connected and compact, u 0,u 1 Σ s.t. u 0 δ,ĩε(u 1 ) < 0, u Σ, β ε (u) = 0. b ε m α1 > 0. Now similar to [14, Lemma 3.3], we give the following lemma, whose proof is omitted. Lemma 5.1. There exists ε 0 > 0 such that for any ε (0,ε 0 ), m ε b ε. The following proposition gives us the desired estimate from below. We will prove this result in Section 6. Proposition 5.3. lim inf ε 0 m ε m. Using the above propositions we get the following theorem on the existence of solutions for the truncated problem ( P ε ). Theorem 5.1. There exists ε 0 > 0 such that for ε (0,ε 0 ) and ( )p p µ λ p > C p p, p µ there exists a positive solution u ε of problem ( P ε ). Moreover, Ĩε(u ε ) = m ε. Proof. By Propositions 5. and 5.3, we deduce that m ε m as ε 0. From Proposition 5.1 we get that for small values of( ε, m ε > ) max Cε Ĩ ε. Moreover, from Proposition 3.1 that Ĩε satisfies ( the ) (PS) c condition for c < µ. By Lemma 4., for ε > 0 small, we know m ε < µ. Therefore, a classical min-max theorem implies that m ε is a critical value of Ĩ ε for ε sufficient small. Let us denote by u ε a critical point associated to m ε. By the maximum principle, u ε is positive..

11 SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION IN R WITH SADDLE POTENTIAL Proof of Proposition 5.3 In order to prove this proposition, we give some lemmas. Lemma 6.1. There exists ε 0 > 0 such that, for any ε (0,ε 0 ), there exist u ε H 1 ( ), with β ε (u ε ) = 0, and λ ε E such that (1) u ε +V(εx)u ε = g ε (x,u ε )+λ ε h ε (x)u ε and Ĩε(u ε ) = b ε. Moreover, {u ε } is bounded in H 1 ( ). Proof. Let ε > 0 be fixed. By a classical min-max theorem, there exists a sequence {u n } H 1 ( ), which is a constrained (PS) sequence at level b ε satisfying β ε (u n ) = 0 and {λ n } E such that (13) Ĩ ε (u n ) b ε, as n +, (14) Ĩ ε (u n) λ n h ε (x)u n u ndx 0, as n +. In light of (13) and (14), together with β ε (u n ) = 0 and repeating the arguments of Proposition 3.1, we get that limsup n u n < µc 0 µ < 1 (c 0 is given in Proposition 3.1) and, therefore, up to a subsequence, it converges weakly to some u ε H 1 ( ). By choosing R large enough such that φ R h ε = 0, it can be proved as in Proposition 3.1 that u n u ε in H 1 ( ). Then Ĩε(u ε ) = b ε. Since b ε > 0, we get u ε 0 and β ε (u ε ) = lim β ε(u n ) = 0. Next we claim that λ n is bounded. By (f 1 )- n (f ), for any given δ > 0 and γ > 4π, thereexists C δ > 0 such that f(t) δ t +C δ (e γt 1), t R. By Hölder s inequality and Lemma.1, for any φ C0 (R ), there exists C 1,C > 0 such that ( )1 g ε (x,u n )φ(x)dx f(u n )φ(x) dx C 1 δ +C δ (e R R qγu q n 1)dx C, by choosing γ > 4π (close to 4π) and q > 1 ((close to 1)) such that qγ u n < 4π for n large. Hence from (14), to show boundedness of {λ n } it is enough to prove that h ε (x)u n φdx is bounded away from zero. For this h ε (x)u n φdx = π E (x)u n φdx π E (x)u ε φdx. B ε 3 Since u ε 0, we are done. Hence λ n is bounded in E and converges strongly to some λ ε. This completes the proof. Lemma 6.. For ( )p p µ λ p > C p p p µ and u ε satisfying (1) with β ε (u ε ) = 0, we have limsup ε 0 u ε < 1. Proof. For ( )p p µ λ p > C p p, p µ ) (. By Proposition 3. and Lemma 3.1, m ε < µ ( m < µ as in Proposition.1, we have limsup ε 0 u ε < 1. B ε 3 ) α 1 for ε small. Thus, similar

12 1 J. ZHANG, J. M. DO Ó, AND P. K. MISHRA Lemma 6.3. u ε χ B ε 0 in L ( ) as ε 0. Proof. To the contrary, we assume that u ε χ B ε 0 in L ( ) as ε 0, then by the boundedness of {u ε } in H 1 ( ) and the Sobolev interpolation inequality, (15) u ε χ B ε 0 in L q ( ) for any q. Recalling that β(u ε ) = 0, we know u ε is nonnegative. By the definition of f, f(u ε ) au ε which implies from (15) that B 1(1 χ(εx)) f(u ε ε )u ε 0 as ε 0. Then \Bε ( u ε +V ε (x)u ε )dx = χ ε (x)f(u ε )u ε dx+ f(u ε )u ε dx+o ε (1) B ε \B ε χ ε (x)f(u ε )u ε dx+a u ε dx+o ε (1), which implies that (16) ( u ε +(V ε (x) a)u ε )dx B ε B ε \B ε χ ε (x)f(u ε )u ε dx+o ε (1). Now, we claim that lim ε 0 B χ ε ε (x)f(u ε )u ε dx = 0. In fact, by (f 1 )-(f ), for any given γ > 4π, there exists C γ > 0 such that f(t) C γ t+t(e γt 1), for any t 0. By Hölder s inequality, ( ) 1 ( χ ε (x)f(u ε )u ε dx C γ u q )1 q ε dx+ u q ε dx (e qγu ε 1)dx, B ε B ε B ε where q,q > 1 with 1/q + 1/q = 1, γ > 4π (close to 4π) and q > 1 (close to 1) such that qγ u ε < 4π for ε small. Then the claim follows from Lemma.1 and (15). Finally, by (16) and the claim above, we have u ε 0 as ε 0, which contradicts the fact that m ε b ε m α1 > 0. This concludes the proof. Lemma 6.4. u ε L ((B ε 4 )c ) 0 as ε 0. Proof. Let φ ε : R be a smooth function such that { 0, in B ε φ ε (x) = 3, 1, in (B4 ε)c and with0 φ ε 1 and φ ε Cε. By Lemma 6.1 andφ ε h ε = 0, wehave that I ε(u ε ),φ εu ε = 0. Since (χ ε ) and (φ ε ) have disjoint support, we get using the definition of g ε, ( u ε +V(εx)u ε)φ εdx+ u ε φ ε u ε φ ε dx a u ε φ ε dx. Using Hölder s inequality, for some C > 0, (17) ( u ε +u ε)φ εdx Cε. Observe that (18) (u ε φ ε ) dx ( u ε φ ε +u ε φ ε )dx u ε φ εdx+cε. B ε

13 SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION IN R WITH SADDLE POTENTIAL 13 By the Sobolev embedding of H 1 ( ) L ( ) and (18)-(17), a u ε φ ε dx a ( (u ε φ ε ) + u ε φ ε )dx R a u ε φ εdx+cε+ u ε φ εdx R C ( u ε +u ε )φ εdx+cε 0 as ε 0, which yields that u ε L ((B4 ε)c ) 0 as ε 0. Lemma 6.5. λ ε = O(ε). Proof. The proof follows the same steps as in [14, Lemma 4.4]. Let From Lemma 6.5, we can suppose that there exists λ E such that { H ε = Lemma 6.6. u ε χ Hε 0 in L ( ) as ε 0. λ ε λ = lim ε 0 ε. x λ x α 1 ε Proof. Let H ε = { x λ x α 1 3ε} Hε. We show that dx 0, as ε 0. Suppose by contradiction that (19) Since β ε (u ε ) = 0 and λ E, we have 0 = λ hε (x)u ε dx = λ x u ε dx+ Therefore and (H ε) c B ε 3 H ε H ε α 1 u 3ε εdx (H ε )c B3 ε u ε u ε (H ε )c B ε 3 dx 0, as ε 0. H ε Bε 3 u ε H ε B ε 3 }. λ x u ε dx α 1 3ε λ x u εdx λ R 3 ε dx 0, as ε 0. (H ε) c B ε 3 H ε Bε 3 u ε dx+ u εdx H ε B ε 3 λ x u ε dx. This last formula, together with (19), implies that u ε χ B ε 3 0 in L ( ) but we get a contradiction with Lemma 6.3 and so the lemma is proved. Now we prove the compactness result of Lions type for the exponential critical growth. The idea is similar as in C. O. Alves, J. M. do Ó and O. H. Miyagaki [4].

14 14 J. ZHANG, J. M. DO Ó, AND P. K. MISHRA Lemma 6.7. Let (u ε ) H 1 ( ) obtained in Lemma 6.1. If there exists R > 0 such that lim sup u ε dx = 0, ε 0z B R (z) then Proof. Using the hypothesis from [7], we get that as ε 0, lim G ε (x,u ε )dx = lim g ε (x,u ε )u ε dx = 0. ε 0 ε 0 lim sup u ε dx = 0, ε 0z B R (z) (0) u ε 0 in L q ( ) for all q (, ). By (f 1 )-(f ), for every δ > 0 and γ > 4π, there exists C δ > 0 such that f(t) δt+c δ t(e γt 1), t 0. Hence g ε (x,u ε )u ε dx f(u ε )u ε dx δ u ε dx+c δ u ε (e γu ε 1)dx. By Hölder s inequality and (e t 1) r (e rt 1) for r > 1, we get ( ) 1 ( g ε (x,u ε )u ε dx δc +C δ u ε q q dx )1 (e γqu q ε 1)dx. Choosing γ > 4π and q > 1 with qγ u ε < 4π for ε small, by Lemma.1, we get ( ) 1 g ε (x,u ε )u ε dx δc +D δ u ε q q dx. Hence taking the limit as ε 0 together with (0) and (f3), we get the required result. The next result is a splitting Lemma for the exponential critical growth. In the higher dimension, for the Sobolev critical growth, a similar result has been obtained in [35]. The idea of the proof is somewhat similar to [35, Lemma 4.7]. Lemma 6.8. Assume (f1)-(f). Let (u k ) H 1 ( ) with u k u in H 1 ( ), a. e. in and limsup k u k < 1. Then up to a subsequence, (f(u k ) f(u) f(u k u))φdx = o k (1) φ, uniformly for φ C0 ( ). Proof. By (f1), for any given ε > 0, there exists a constant c ε (0,1) such that f(t) ε t for all t < c ε. By (f), for every γ > 4π and ε > 0, there exists C ε > (large enough) such that f(t) ε(e γt 1) for every t > C ε 1. Also using the continuity of the term f(t) t in a compact interval [c ε,c ε 1], we get f(t) C t for t [c ε,c ε 1]. Hence for all t R, f(t) C(ε) t +ε(e γt 1). Now choose R = R(ε) such that (1) f(u) φ dx Cε φ. \B(0,R)

15 SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION IN R WITH SADDLE POTENTIAL 15 By the continuity of f, there exists δ (0,c ε ) such that f(t 1 ) f(t ) < εc ε for t 1 t < δ, t 1, t < C ε +1. Set A k := {x \B(0,R) u k (x) c ε }, by u k u < c ε +δ < c ε, we get (f(u k )) f(u k u) φ dx ε ( u k + u k u ) φ dx A k { u δ} Set B k := {x \B(0,R) u k (x) C ε }, then (f(u k )) f(u k u) φ dx ε B k { u δ} A k { u δ} ε( u k + u k u ) φ Cε φ. B k { u δ} ) ( )) ((e γu k 1 + e γ(u k u) 1 φ dx. Since (u k u) = u k u +o k(1), we get limsup k (u k u) < 1. Hence B k { u δ} ( )1 q (f(u k )) f(u k u) φ dx ε φ (e γqu k 1)dx B k { u δ} ( +ε φ (e γq(u k u) 1)dx B k { u δ} )1 q. Now choosing γ > 4π (close to 4π) and q > 1 (close to 1) such that γq u k γq (u k u) < 4π for k large, together with Lemma.1, for some C > 0, (f(u k )) f(u k u) φ dx Cε φ, for large k. B k { u δ} < 4π and Set C k := {x \B(0,R) c ε u k (x) C ε }. Since u k H 1 ( ), C k <. Then, (f(u k )) f(u k u) φ dx c ε ε φ C k 1 ε uk φ Cε φ. C k { u δ} Thus from the above estimates, () Note that, ( \B(0,R)) { u δ} f(u k ) f(u k u) C(ε)( u k + u k u )+ε (f(u k )) f(u k u) φ dx Cε φ, for large k. ( ) (e γu k 1)+(e γ(u k u) 1). Hence ( \B(0,R)) { u δ} ε +C(ε) ( \B(0,R)) { u δ} ( \B(0,R)) { u δ} (f(u k )) f(u k u) φ dx ( ) (e γu k 1)+(e γ(u k u) 1) φ dx ( u k + u k u ) φ dx.

16 16 J. ZHANG, J. M. DO Ó, AND P. K. MISHRA Now again arguing as before, limsup k u k u < 1 for large k and choosing γ > 4π (close to 4π) and q > 1 (close to 1) such that γq u k < 4π and γq (u k u) < 4π for k large, we get (f(u k )) f(u k u) φ dx ( \B(0,R)) { u δ} ε ( \B(0,R)) { u δ} ( ) (e γu k 1)+(e γ(u k u) 1) φ dx Cε φ. Since u H 1 ( ), ( \B(0,R)) { u δ} 0 as R. Thus for large R > 0, we get C(ε) ( u k + u k u ) φ dx Hence Thus (3) ( \B(0,R)) { u δ} C(ε)( u k 3 + u k u 3 ) φ 3 ( \B(0,R)) { u δ} 1 3 ε φ. ( \B(0,R)) { u δ} \B(0,R) (f(u k )) f(u k u) φ dx Cε φ, for large k. (f(u k )) f(u k u) φ dx Cε φ, for large k. Finally, similar as above, for any ε > 0, there exists C ε > 0 such that f(t) C ε t +ε(e γt 1),t R, where γ > 4π (close to 4π), q > 1 and γq (u k u) < 4π for k large. Then f(u k u) φ dx B(0,R) C ε u k u φ dx+ε (e γ(u k u) 1) φ dx B(0,R) B(0,R) ( )1 ( )1 C ε u k u dx φ dx B(0,R) +ε ( φ q dx B(0,R) ) 1 q ( B(0,R) B(0,R) (e qγ(u k u) 1)dx By Lemma.1 and u k u in L (B(0,R)), we know for k large enough, there exists C > 0 (independent of ε) such that f(u k u) φ dx Cε φ. B(0,R) Set D k := {x B(0,R) : u k (x) u(x) > 1}. Note that u k (x) u(x) a. e. in B(0,R) as k. Hence D k 0 as k. Noting that u liminf k u k < 1, similar as above, for some C > 0 (independent of ε), f(u k ) f(u) φ dx C(ε) ( u k + u ) φ dx+ε D k D k D k C(ε) ( u k + u ) φ dx+cε φ. D k )1 q. ( ) (e γu k 1)+(e γu 1) φ dx

17 SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION IN R WITH SADDLE POTENTIAL 17 Since u k u in L (B(0,R)), by using the fact that D k 0 as k, for some C > 0 (independent of ε), f(u k ) f(u) φ dx Cε φ. D k Now, since u H 1 ( ), u L 0 as L. Hence choosing L = L(ε) large enough such that f(u k ) f(u) φ dx (B(0,R)\D k ) {u L} C(ε) (B(0,R)\D k ) {u L} ( ) ( u k + u ) φ dx+ε (e γu k 1)+(e γu 1) φ dx (B(0,R)\D k ) {u L} C(ε)( u k 3 + u 3 ) φ 3 (B(0,R)\D k ) { u L} 1 3 +Cε φ Cε φ. On the other hand, by the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem, f(u k ) f(u) φ dx Cε φ, for large k. Thus (4) (B(0,R)\D k ) {u L} B(0,R) f(u k ) f(u) f(u k u) φ dx Cε φ, for large k, which, combing (1) and (3), yields the result desired. Proposition 6.1. There exist n N, c > 0 and, for all i = 1,...,n, there exist y i ε B ε H ε, ȳ i B and u i H 1 ( )\{0} such that εy i ε ȳ i, y i ε y j ε, if i j, u ε ( +yε) i u i in H 1 ( ), u i c, n u ε u i ( yε) i H 1 (H ε) 0, and u i is a positive solution of u i +V(ȳ i )u i = g(ȳ i,u i )+ λ ȳ i u i. i=1 Proof. Denote by ũ ε the even reflection of u ε Hε with respect to H ε. Observe that {ũ ε } is bounded in H 1 ( ) and does not converge to 0 in L ( ) (recall Lemma 6.6). Now we claim that g ε (x,u ε )u ε dx 0 as ε 0. Suppose not then using the fact the u ε solves problem (1) we get that u ε 0 in H 1 ( ) as ε 0 which contradicts the fact that b ε > 0. Noting that limsup ε 0 u ε < 1, by Lemma 6., and using the even symmetry of ũ ε we get limsup ε 0 ũ ε limsup ε 0 u ε < 1. Noting that 0 g ε (x,u ε )u ε dx f(u ε )u ε dx 0 as ε 0, by Lemma 6.7, there exists yε 1 with u ε c > 0. B(y 1 ε,1) By Lemma 6.4, we can assume that y 1 ε H ε B ε 5. Then there exists u 1 H 1 ( ) such that v 1 ε = u ε ( +y 1 ε) u 1, weakly in H 1 ( ). Observe that v 1 ε solves the equation v 1 ε +V(εx+εy1 ε )v1 ε = g(εx+εy1 ε,v1 ε )+λ ε h ε (x+y 1 ε )v1 ε,

18 18 J. ZHANG, J. M. DO Ó, AND P. K. MISHRA Now denote limεyε 1 = ȳ ε 0 1. By (f 1 )-(f ), for every δ > 0 and γ > 4π, there exists C δ > 0 such that ( )1 g ε (x+yε 1,v1 ε (x))v1 ε (x)dx Cδ+C δ (e γq(v1 ε) q 1)dx, which is bounded for some q,γ with qγ vε 1 = qγ u ε < 4π. By [16, Lemma.1], lim ε 0 g(εx+εy 1 ε,v 1 ε)φdx = and so, passing to the limit, u 1 is a nontrivial weak solution of g(ȳ 1,u 1 )φdx, for all φ C 0 ( ) u 1 +V(ȳ 1 )u 1 = g(ȳ 1,u 1 )+ λ ȳ 1 u 1. Since yε 1 H ε, we have that λ ȳ 1 α 1 / and so ȳ 1 B (otherwise u 1 should be 0) and, by (f1), there exists c > 0 such that u ε u 1 > c. Let us define wε 1 = u ε u 1 ( yε 1 ). We consider two possibilities: either wε 1 H 1 (H ε) 0 or not. In the first case the proposition should be proved by taking n = 1. In the second case, there are still two sub-cases: either wε 1 L (H ε) 0 or not. Step 1: Assume that wε 1 L (H ε) 0. In such case, we can repeat the previous argument to the sequence {wε 1}: we take w1 ε as the even reflection of wε 1 with respect to H ε. Observe that w 1 ε w 1 ε = u ε ( +y 1 ε) u 1 = u ε u 1 +o ε (1), which implies that limsup ε 0 w 1 ε < 1. Applying Lemma 6.7, there exists y ε R such that B(y ε,1) w 1 ε dx c > 0. By Lemma 6.4, we get the following (B ε 4 )c w 1 ε dx 0 as ε 0 which implies yε H ε B5 ε. Therefore, as above, there exists u H 1 ( ) \ {0} such that vε = w1 ε ( +y ε ) u, weakly in H 1 ( ). Observe that vε solves the following problem v ε +V(εx+εy ε )v ε g(εx+εy ε,v ε ) λ ε h ε (x+y ε )v ε = (V(ȳ 1 ) V(εx+εy ε ))u 1(y +y ε y1 ε )+(λ ε h ε (x+y ε ) λ ȳ 1 )u 1 (y +y ε y1 ε ) + ( g(εx+εy ε,u ε(x+y ε )) g(εx+εy ε,v ε ) g(ȳ 1,u 1 (y +y ε y1 ε ))). Take any φ C0 (R ) with φ = 1, then by the fact that limεyε = ȳ ε 0, we get ( (V(ȳ 1 ) V(εx+εyε))u 1 (y +yε yε)φdx 1 0, uniformly as ε 0 V(ȳ 1 ) V(εx+εy ε) u 1 dx and ( (λ ε h ε (x+yε ) λ ȳ 1 )u 1 (y +yε y1 ε )φdx λ ε h ε (x+yε ) λ ȳ 1 u 1 dx 0, uniformly as ε 0. )1 φ )1 φ

19 Now (5) SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION IN R WITH SADDLE POTENTIAL 19 (g(εx+εyε,u ε (x+yε)) g(εx+εy ε,v ε) g(ȳ 1,u 1 (y +yε yε)))φ(x+y 1 ε 1 yε)dx = (g(εx+εyε,u ε(x+yε )) g(εx+εy ε,v ε ) g(εx+εy1 ε,u 1(y +yε y1 ε )))φ(x+y1 ε y ε )dx R + g(εx+εyε,u 1 1 (y +yε yε)) g(ȳ 1 1,u 1 (y +yε yε))φ(x+y 1 ε 1 yε)dx 0, uniformly as ε 0, by making use of Lemma 6.8 in the first integral in (5) and the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem in the second integral in (5). Therefore v ε +V(εx+εy ε)v ε g(εx+εy ε,v ε) λ ε h ε (x+y ε)v ε = o ε (1), where o ε (1) 0 strongly in H 1 ( ). Next following [16, Lemma.1] again, we get lim g(εx+εyε,v ε)φdx = g(ȳ,u )φdx, for all φ C0 ( ) ε 0 and passing to the limit, u is a nontrivial weak solution of u +V(ȳ )u = g(ȳ,u )+ λ ȳ u. Also, by (f1) and the weak convergence, there exists c > 0 such that u > c, u ε u 1 + u +o ε (1). Next we show that, yε 1 y ε + as ε 0. On the contrary, we assume y1 ε y ε < c for ε small and some c > 0. Since we have c w 1 B(yε,1) ε dx = u ε (x+y 1 B(yε y1 ε,1) ε ) u 1(x) dx. let ṽ ε (x) = u ε (x+yε 1) u 1(x), then ṽ ε 0 in H 1 ( ) and ṽ ε dx c > 0. B(0,1+c ) Thus following the argument as above, we get a contradiction. Let us define w ε := w 1 ε u ( y ε) = u ε u 1 ( y 1 ε) u ( y ε). Again, if w ε H 1 (H ε) 0, the proof is completed for n =. Suppose now that w ε H 1 (H ε) 0, w ε L p+1 (H ε) 0. In such case we can repeat the argument again. Observe that we would finish in a finite number of steps to conclude the proof. The only possibility left is the following: (6) at a certain step j, w j ε H 1 (H ε) 0, and w j ε L (H ε) 0, where w j ε = u ε j k=1 u k( y k ε). Step : The assertion (6) does not hold. Suppose by contradiction (6), there exists δ > 0 such that Let us define j u ε H 1 (H ε) u k ( yε k ) H 1 (H +δ. ε) k=1 { Hε 1 = x λ x a }, ε

20 0 J. ZHANG, J. M. DO Ó, AND P. K. MISHRA where α 1 < a 1 < α 1 3. We claim that (7) w j ε L (H 1 ε ) 0. Otherwise, let us fix R > 0 large enough, similar as in [35, 14], for ε small enough we have (8) u ε H 1 (H ε\ j k=1 B(yk ε,r)) δ. By (f 1 )-(f ), for any σ > 0 and γ > 4π (close to 4π) with γ u ε < 4π for ε small, there exists C σ > 0 such that g ε (x,u ε )u ε C σ u ε +σ(e γu ε 1), x. By Lemma.1 and choosing a cut-off function φ as in [14], multiplying (1) by φu ε, we have ( uε +V(εx)u C ε) dx R Dσ C σ Hε 1\( j k=1 B(yj ε,r)) u ε dx. H ε\( j k=1 B(yj ε,r)) for some D > 0. Combining (8) and the arbitrariness of D,σ, we can get a contradiction. Finally, by (7) repeating the procedure above and similar as in [35, 14], we can finish the proof. Proof of Proposition 5.3 Proof. We distinguish two cases as in [14]. Case 1: λ.ȳi 0 In this case, similar to [35], using β ε (u ε ) = 0 and Proposition 6.1, we get λ.ȳ i = 0 for all i = 1,,,n. Hence using (f3) b ε = Ĩε(u ε ) 1 ( ) 1 µ I ε (u ε),u ε = µ g ε(x,u ε )u ε G ε (x,u ε ) dx ( ) 1 B ε µ g ε(x,u ε )u ε G ε (x,u ε ) dx Hε n ( ) 1 n = µ g(ȳ i,u i )u i G(ȳ i,u i ) dx+o ε (1) = Jȳi (u i )+o ε (1), i=1 where J y : H 1 ( ) R, J y (u) = 1 ( u +V(y)u )dx G(y,u)dx. Hence n lim infb ε Jȳi (u i ). ε 0 Since g(ȳ i,s) f(s) for all s 0, we have lim inf ε 0 b ε i=1 n m V(ȳi ). In case of n using the monotonicity of m k, since ȳ i B, the conclusion holds. In case of n = 1, by β ε (u ε ) = 0, we get that π E (εx)u ε dx 0 as ε 0. Hence, π E(ȳ 1 ) u 1dx = 0, B3 ε Hε which implies that ȳ 1 E. Thus liminf ε 0 b ε m V(ȳ1 ) > m. Case : λ.ȳ i < 0 This case is similar to Case in [14]. i=1 i=1

21 SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION IN R WITH SADDLE POTENTIAL 1 7. Proof of Theorem 1.1 In this section, we conclude the proof of Theorem 1.1 by studying the asymptotic behavior of the solution obtained in Section 5. Let u ε be a critical point of Ĩε at level m ε. The following result describes the behavior of u ε as ε 0. The proof is similar as in [14]. Proposition 7.1. Given a sequence ε j 0, there exist a subsequence (still denoted by ε j ) and a sequence of points y εj R N such that ε j y εj 0, u εj U( y εj ) 0, where U is a positive ground state solution of u+u = f(u). To show that u ε solves problem (P ε ), it is enough to prove that u ε (x) 0 as ε 0 uniformly in x (B ε 1 )c. By Proposition 7.1 and U L ( ), we can use the idea from [, 34] to get sup ε u ε L ( ) <. By Proposition 7.1, we obtain u ε H 1 ((B ε 0 )c ) u ε U( y ε ) + U( y ε ) H 1 ((B ε 0 )c ) 0, as ε 0. For any x (B1 ε)c, B(x,) \B0 ε. Thus by uniform elliptic estimates, there exists C > 0, independent of x, such that as ε 0. This concludes the proof. u ε (x) C u ε H 1 (B(x,)) C u ε H 1 ((B ε 0 )c ) 0 References [1] Robert A. Adams and John J. F. Fournier, Sobolev Spaces(second edition), Academic Press(003). [] Adimurthi. Existence of positive solutions of the semilinear Dirichlet problem with critical growth for the n- Laplacian. Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (4), 17(3): , [3] C. O. Alves. Existence of a positive solution for a nonlinear elliptic equation with saddle-like potential and nonlinearity with exponential critical growth in. Milan J. Math., 84(1):1, 016. [4] C. O. Alves, J. M. do Ó, and O. H. Miyagaki. On nonlinear perturbations of a periodic elliptic problem in involving critical growth. Nonlinear Anal., 56(5): , 004. [5] C. O. Alves, M. A. S. Souto, and M. Montenegro. Existence of a ground state solution for a nonlinear scalar field equation with critical growth. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 43(3-4): , 01. [6] J. M. B. do Ó. N-Laplacian equations in RN with critical growth. Abstr. Appl. Anal., (3-4): , [7] H. Berestycki and P.-L. Lions. Nonlinear scalar field equations. I. Existence of a ground state. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 8(4): , [8] J. Byeon. Mountain pass solutions for singularly perturbed nonlinear Dirichlet problems. J. Differential Equations, 17():57 81, 005. [9] J. Byeon. Singularly perturbed nonlinear Dirichlet problems with a general nonlinearity. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 36(4): , 010. [10] J. Byeon and L. Jeanjean. Standing waves for nonlinear Schrödinger equations with a general nonlinearity. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 185():185 00, 007. [11] J. Byeon, L. Jeanjean, and K. Tanaka. Standing waves for nonlinear Schrödinger equations with a general nonlinearity: one and two dimensional cases. Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 33(4-6): , 008. [1] J. Byeon and K. Tanaka. Semi-classical standing waves for nonlinear Schrödinger equations at structurally stable critical points of the potential. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 15(5): , 013. [13] D. M. Cao. Nontrivial solution of semilinear elliptic equation with critical exponent in. Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 17(3-4): , 199. [14] P. d Avenia, A. Pomponio, and D. Ruiz. Semiclassical states for the nonlinear Schrödinger equation on saddle points of the potential via variational methods. J. Funct. Anal., 6(10): , 01. [15] D. G. de Figueiredo, J. M. do Ó, and B. Ruf. Elliptic equations and systems with critical Trudinger-Moser nonlinearities. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., 30(): , 011.

22 J. ZHANG, J. M. DO Ó, AND P. K. MISHRA [16] D. G. de Figueiredo, O. H. Miyagaki, and B. Ruf. Elliptic equations in with nonlinearities in the critical growth range. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 3(): , [17] M. del Pino and P. Felmer. Semi-classical states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations: a variational reduction method. Math. Ann., 34(1):1 3, 00. [18] M. del Pino and P. L. Felmer. Local mountain passes for semilinear elliptic problems in unbounded domains. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 4():11 137, [19] M. del Pino and P. L. Felmer. Semi-classical states for nonlinear Schrödinger equations. J. Funct. Anal., 149(1):45 65, [0] M. Del Pino and P. L. Felmer. Spike-layered solutions of singularly perturbed elliptic problems in a degenerate setting. Indiana Univ. Math. J., 48(3): , [1] Y. Ding and F. Lin. Solutions of perturbed Schrödinger equations with critical nonlinearity. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 30():31 49, 007. [] J. M. do Ó and M. A. S. Souto. On a class of nonlinear Schrödinger equations in R involving critical growth. J. Differential Equations, 174():89 311, 001. [3] A. Floer and A. Weinstein. Nonspreading wave packets for the cubic Schrödinger equation with a bounded potential. J. Funct. Anal., 69(3): , [4] C. Gui. Existence of multi-bump solutions for nonlinear Schrödinger equations via variational method. Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 1(5-6):787 80, [5] L.Jeanjean andk.tanaka.aremarkonleast energysolutions inr N.Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 131(8): , 003. [6] N. Lam and G. Lu. Elliptic equations and systems with subcritical and critical exponential growth without the Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz condition. J. Geom. Anal., 4(1): , 014. [7] P.-L. Lions. The concentration-compactness principle in the calculus of variations. The limit case. II. Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana, 1():45 11, [8] W. M. Ni and I. Takagi. Locating the peaks of least-energy solutions to a semilinear Neumann problem. Duke Math. J., 70():47 81, [9] W. M. Ni and J. Wei. On the location and profile of spike-layer solutions to singularly perturbed semilinear Dirichlet problems. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 48(7): , [30] Y. G. Oh. Existence of semiclassical bound states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations with potentials of the class (V) a. Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 13(1): , [31] P. H. Rabinowitz. On a class of nonlinear Schrödinger equations. Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 43():70 91, 199. [3] X. Wang. On concentration of positive bound states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations. Comm. Math. Phys., 153():9 44, [33] J. Zhang, Z. Chen, and W. Zou. Standing waves for nonlinear Schrödinger equations involving critical growth. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (), 90(3):87 844, 014. [34] J. Zhang and J. M. do Ó. Standing waves for nonlinear Schrödinger equations involving critical growth of Trudinger-Moser type. Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 66(6): , 015. [35] J. Zhang and W. Zou. Solutions concentrating around the saddle points of the potential for critical Schrödinger equations. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 54(4): , 015. (J. Zhang) School of Science Chongqing Jiaotong University Chongqing , PR China address: zhangjianjun09@tsinghua.org.cn (J. M. do Ó) Department of Mathematics Federal University of Paraíba , João Pessoa-PB, Brazil address: jmbo@pq.cnpq.br

23 SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION IN R WITH SADDLE POTENTIAL 3 (P. K. Mishra) Department of Mathematics Federal University of Paraíba , João Pessoa-PB, Brazil address: pawanmishra3184@gmail.com