arxiv:809.0707v [math.fa] 9 Sep 208 Product of extension domains is still an extension domain Pekka Koskela and Zheng Zhu Abstract Our main result Theorem. gives the following functional property of the class of W,p -extension domains. Let Ω R n and Ω 2 R m both be W,p -extension domains for some < p. We prove that Ω Ω 2 R n+m is also a W,p -extension domain. We also establish the converse statement. Introduction LetΩ R n beanopenset. For < p, weletw,p (Ω)denotethecorresponding Sobolev space of all functions u L p (Ω) whose first order distributional partial derivatives on Ω belong to L p (Ω). This space is normed by u W,p (Ω) := 0 α D α u L p (Ω). We say that u L p (Ω) is ACL (absolutely continuous on lines), if u has a representative ũ that is absolutely continuous on almost all line segments in Ω parallel to the coordinate axes. Then u W,p (Ω) if and only if u belongs to L p (Ω) and has a representative ũ which is ACL and whose (classical) partial derivatives belong to L p (Ω), see e.g. Theorem A.5 in [] and Theorem 2..4 in [20]. We say that Ω R n is a W,p -extension domain if there exists a constant C which only depends onω,n,p such thatforevery u W,p (Ω) thereexists afunction Eu W,p (R n ) with Eu Ω u and Eu W,p (R n ) C u W,p (Ω). For example, every Lipschitz domain is a W,p -extension domain for all p by the result of Calderón and Stein [7]. It is easy to give examples of domains that fail to be extension domains, for example, the slit disk Ω := D 2 (0,)\{(x,0) : 0 x < }. In general, the extension property for a fixed Ω may depend on the value of p, see [3], [6] and [2].
2 P. Koskela and Z. Zhu In [9], it was shown that any bi-lipschitz image of a W,p -extension domain is also a W,p -extension domain: if Ω R n is a W,p -extension domain and f : Ω Ω R n is bi-lipschitz, then Ω is also a W,p -extension domain. Our main result gives another functional property of Sobolev extension domain. Theorem.. Let < p. If Ω R n and Ω 2 R m are W,p -extension domains, then Ω Ω 2 R n+m is also a W,p -extension domain. Conversely, if Ω R n and Ω 2 R m are domains so that Ω Ω 2 R n+m is a W,p -extension domain, then both Ω and Ω 2 are necessarily W,p -extension domains. According to Theorem 7 in [9] (see [2] for related results), a domain Ω is a W, -extension domain if and only if it is uniformly locally quasiconvex, that is, there exist positive constants C and R, such that for all x,y Ω with x y < R, there exists a curve γ x,y Ω from x to y with l(γ x,y ) C x y. Here l(γ x,y ) is the length of the curve γ x,y. It is easy to check that the product of uniformly locally quasiconvex domains is still uniformly locally quasiconvex, and hence we only need to prove the first part of Theorem. for < p <. Our proof of the first part of Theorem. is based on the existence of an explicit extension operator constructed by Shvartsman in [4]. A result from [9] allows us to employ this operator. This procedure could in principle also be tried for the case of the higher order Sobolev spaces W k,p, k 2, but one does not seem to obtain suitable norm estimates. We would like to know whether the first part of Theorem. extends to the case of higher order Sobolev spaces or not; the second part does extend as can be seen from our proof below. 2 Preliminaries 2. Definitions and preliminary results Our notation is fairly standard. Throughout the paper C,C,C 2,... or γ,γ,γ 2,... will be generic positive constants which depend only on the dimension n, the domain Ω and indexes of spaces (s, p, q, etc.). These constants may change even in a single string of estimates. The dependence of a constant on certain parameters is expressed, for example, by the notation γ = γ(n,p). We write A B if there is a constant C such that A/C B CA. Definition 2.. A measurable set A R n is said to be Ahlfors regular (shortly, regular) if there are constants C A and δ A > 0 such that, for every cube Q with center in A and with diameter diamq δ A, we have (2.) Q C A Q A.
The product of Sobolev-extension domains 3 Given u L p loc (Rn ), < p, and a cube Q, we set ( ) Λ(u;Q) L p := Q p inf u C L C R p (Q) = inf u C p p dx, C R Q Q see Brudnyi [3] for the definition of a more general case. Sometimes, Λ(u;Q) L p is also called the local oscillation of u, for instance, see Triebel [8]. This quantity is the main object on the theory of local polynomial approximations which provides a unified framework for the description of a large family of spaces of smooth functions. We refer the readers to Brudnyi []-[6] for the main ideas and results in local approximation theory. Given a locally integrable function u on R n, we define its sharp maximal function u # by setting (2.2) u # (x) := supr Λ(u;Q(x,r)) L. r>0 In [8], Calderón proved that, for < p, a function u is in W,p (R n ), if and only if u and u # are both in Lp (R n ). Moreover, up to constants depending only on n and p, we have that (2.3) u W,p (R n ) u L p (R n ) + u # L p (R n ). This characterization motivates the following definition. Given < p, a function u L p loc (A), and a cube Q whose center is in A, we let Λ(u;Q) L p (A) denote the normalized best approximation of f on Q in L p -norm: (2.4) Λ(u;Q) L p (A):= Q p inf ( = inf C R Q C R u C L p (Q A) Q A u C p dx ) p. By u #,A, we denote the sharp maximal function of u on A, u #,A (x) := supr Λ(u;Q(x,r)) L (A), x A. r>0 Notice that u # = u #,R n. The following trace theorem by Shvartsman from [4], relates local polynomial approximation to extendability. Theorem 2.. Let A be a regular subset of R n. Then a function u L p (A), < p, can be extended to a function Eu W,p (R n ) if and only if u #,A := supr Λ(u;Q(,r)) L (A) L p (A). r>0
4 P. Koskela and Z. Zhu In addition, (2.5) u W,p (R ) u n L p (A) + u #,A L p (A) A with constants of equivalence depending only on n,k,p,c A and δ A. Here u W,p (R n ) A := inf{ Eu W,p (R n ) : Eu W,p (R n ),Eu A u a.e.}. For a set A R n of positive Lebesgue measure, we set C,p (A) = {u L p (A) : u #,A Lp (A)}, u C,p (A) = u L p (A) + u #,A L p (A). A result of Haj lasz, Koskela and Tuominen (Theorem 5 in [9]) that partially relies on Theorem 2. states the following Theorem 2.2. Let Ω R n be a domain and fix < p <. Then the following conditions are equivalent: (a) For every u W,p (Ω) there exists a function Eu W,p (R n ) such that Eu Ω = f a.e. (b) Ω satisfies the measure density condition (2.) and C,p (Ω) = W,p (Ω) as sets and the norms are equivalent. (c) Ω R n is a W,p -extension domain. In [4], Shvartsman constructed an extension operator for Theorem 2. explicitly as a variant of the Whitney-Jones extension. We describe this procedure in the next section. In particular, based on Theorem 2.2, for an arbitrary W,p -extension domainωwith < p <, thereisawhitney-type extensionoperatorfromw,p (Ω) to W,p (R n ). For an alternate Whitney-type extension operator see [0]. 2.2 Whitney type extension It will be convenient for us to measure distance via the uniform norm Thus every Euclidean cube x := max{ x i : i =,...,n}, x = (x,...,x n ) R n. Q = Q(x,r) = {y R n : y x r} is a ball in the -norm. Given a constant λ > 0, we let λq denote the cube Q(x,λr). By Q we denote the cube Q := 9 8 Q. As usual, given subsets A,B R n, we put diama := sup{ a a : a,a A} and dist(a,b) := inf{ a b : a A,b B}. We also set dist(x,a) := dist({x},a) for x R n. By A we denote the closure of A in R n and A := A\A the boundary of A. Finally, χ A denotes the characteristic function of A; we put χ A 0 if A =. The following property for Ahlfors-regular sets is well-known (see, e.g. [5]).
The product of Sobolev-extension domains 5 Lemma 2.. If A is an Ahlfors-regular subset of R n, then A = 0. In the remaining part of the paper, we will assume that S is a closed Ahlforsregular subset of R n. Since now R n \S is an open set, it admits a Whitney decomposition W S (e.g. see Stein [7]). We recall the main properties of W S. Theorem 2.3. W S = {Q k } is a countable family of closed cubes such that (i) R n \S = {Q : Q W S }; (ii) For every cube Q W S diamq dist(q,s) 4diamQ; (iii) No point of R n \S is contained in more than N = N(n) distinct cubes from W S. We also need certain additional properties of Whitney cubes which we present in the next lemma. These properties readily follow from (i)-(iii). Lemma 2.2. () If Q,K W S and Q K, then diamq diamk 4diamQ. 4 (2) For every cube K W S there are at most N = N(n) cubes from the family W S := {Q : Q W S } which intersect K. Let Φ S := {φ Q : Q W S } be a smooth partition of unity subordinated to the Whitney decomposition W S, see [7]. Proposition 2.. Φ S is a family of functions defined on R n with the following properties: (a) 0 φ Q (x) for every Q W S ; (b) suppφ Q Q (:= 9 8 Q),Q W S; (c) {φ Q (x) : Q W S } = for every x R n \S; (d) For every multiindex β, β k, and every cube Q W S D β φ Q (x) C(diamQ) β, x R n, where C is a constant depending only on n and k. Observe that the family of cubes W S constructed in [7] satisfies the conditions of Theorem 2.3 and Lemma 2.2 with respect to the Euclidean norm rather than the uniform one. However, a simple modification of this construction provides a family of Whitney cubes which have the analogous properties with respect to the uniform norm.
6 P. Koskela and Z. Zhu Let K = Q(x K,r K ) W S and let a K S be the point nearest to x K on S. Then by the property (ii) of Theorem 2.3, Q(a K,r K ) 0K. Fix a small 0 < ǫ and set K ǫ := Q(a K,ǫr K ). Let Q = Q(x Q,r Q ) be a cube from W S with diamq δ S, where δ S is as in Definition 2. for our regular sets. Set A Q := {K = Q(x K,r K ) W S : K ǫ Q ǫ,r K ǫr Q }. (Similar with K ǫ, we set Q ǫ := Q(a Q,ǫr Q )) we define a quasi-cube H Q by letting ) H Q := (Q ǫ S)\( {Kǫ : K A Q }. If diamq > δ S, we put H Q :=. The following result is Theorem 2.4 in [4]. Theorem 2.4. Let A be a closed regular subset of R n. Then there is a family of quasi-cubes H Ω = {H Q : Q W A } as discussed above with (i) H Q (0Q) A,Q W A ; (ii) Q γ H Q whenever Q W A with diamq δ A ; (iii) Q W A χ HQ γ 2. Here γ and γ 2 are positive constants depending only on n and C A. Next we present estimates of local polynomial approximations of the extension Ef, via corresponding local approximation of a function f defined on a closed regular subset A R n. We start by presenting two lemmas about properties of polynomials on subsets of R n. Given a measurable subset A R n and a function u L p (A), p, we let Ê (u;a) L p denote the local best constant approximation in L p -norm, see Brudnyi [3], (2.6) Ê (u;a) L p := inf C R u C L p (A). Thus Λ(u;Q) L p (A) = Q p Ê (u;q A) L p see (2.4). We note a simple property of Λ(u; ) L p (A) as a function of cubes: for every pair of cubes Q Q 2 ( ) Q2 p (2.7) Λ(u;Q ) L p (A) Λ(u;Q2 ) L Q p (A). Let A be a subset of R n with A > 0. We put (2.8) P A (u) := u(x)dx = A A A u(x)dx. Then from a result of Brudnyi in [5], also see Proposition 3.4 in [4], we have
The product of Sobolev-extension domains 7 Proposition 2.2. Let A be a subset of a cube Q with A > 0. Then the linear operator P A : L (A) R has the property that for every p and every u L p (A) u P A (u) L p (A) CÊ(u;A) L p. Here C = C(n, Q A ). According to Lemma 2., the boundary of a regular set is of measure zero, so Proposition 2.2 and Theorem 2.4 immediately imply the following corollary. Corollary 2.. Let S be a closed regular set and let Q W S be a cube with diamq δ S. There is a continuous linear operator P HQ : L (H Q ) R such that for every function u L p (S), p, Here γ = γ(n,k,θ S ). We put u P HQ (u) L p (H Q ) γê(u;h Q ) L p. (2.9) P HQ u = 0, if diamq > δ S. Now the map Q P HQ (f) is defined on all of the cubes in the family W S. This map gives rise to a bounded linear extension operator from L p (S) to L p (R n ), which is defined by the formula (2.0) Eu(x) := { u(x), x S, Q W S φ Q (x)p HQ u(x), x R n \S. Given a regular domain Ω R n, Ω is a closed regular set with Ω \ Ω = 0. Given a function u L p (Ω), the zero extension of u to the boundary Ω \ Ω (still denoted by u) belongs to L p (S), and we define the extension Eu of u to R n by the formula (2.0). When u C,p (S), Eu here is exactly the Eu from Theorem 2..By combining Theorem 2. and Theorem 2.2 together, we obtain the following result. Theorem 2.5. Let Ω R n be a W,p -extension domain for some < p <. Then for every u W,p (Ω) and Eu defined as in (2.0) for the zero extension of u to the boundary, we have Eu W,p (R n ) and Eu W,p (R n ) C u W,p (Ω), with come positive constant C independent of u.
8 P. Koskela and Z. Zhu 3 Proof of Theorem. Thefirstpartofourmaintheorem(for < p < )willbeobtainedasaconsequence of the following extension result. Theorem 3.. Let Ω R n be a W,p -extension domain for some < p <, and Ω 2 R m be a domain. Then for every function u W,p (Ω Ω 2 ), there exists a function E u W,p ( ) such that E u Ω Ω 2 u and E u W,p ( ) C u W,p (Ω Ω 2 ) with a positive constant C independent of u. Proof. Theorem2.3.2inZiemer s book[20] tellsusthatc (Ω Ω 2 ) W,p (Ω Ω 2 ) is dense in W,p (Ω Ω 2 ). With a small mollification in the proof of this result, it is easy to see that C (Ω Ω 2 ) L (Ω Ω 2 ) W,p (Ω Ω 2 ) isdense inw,p (Ω Ω 2 ). We begin by showing that we can extend the functions in C (Ω Ω 2 ) L (Ω Ω 2 ) W,p (Ω Ω 2 ). According to Theorem 2.2, Ω is Ahlfors regular. Let u C (Ω Ω 2 ) L (Ω Ω 2 ) W,p (Ω Ω 2 ). Then for y Ω 2, using the extension (2.0), we set { u y (x), x Ω, (3.) E u(x,y) = Eu y (x) := Q W Ω φ Q (x)p HQ u y (x), x R n \Ω. Here u y in (3.) is the zero extension of u y to the boundary Ω. In order to show E u W,p (R n Ω 2 ), we need to show that E u L p (R n Ω 2 ), and for every β with β =, we need to find a function v β L p (R n Ω 2 ), such that for every ψ C0 ( ) we have E u(x,y)d β ψ(x,y)dxdy = v β (x,y)ψ(x,y)dxdy. For the convenience of discussion and reading, we divide the rest of proof into three steps. Step : In this step, we show that E u L p ( ) and that the L p -norm of E u is controlled by the W,p -norm of u. By the Fubini theorem, u y W,p (Ω ) for almost every y Ω 2. Since Ω is a W,p -extension domain, Theorem 2.5 gives that E u(x,y) = Eu y (x) W,p (R n ) and Eu y L p (R n ) Eu y W,p (R n ) C u y W,p (Ω ), for every y Ω 2 with u y W,p (Ω ). Then by integrating with respect to y Ω 2, we obtain the desired result.
The product of Sobolev-extension domains 9 Step 2: Inthisstep, weshowthatthereexistfunctions x i E u L p ( )(i =,...,n) such that E u(x,y)ψ(x,y)dxdy = E u(x,y) ψ(x,y)dxdy x i x i for every ψ C c (Rn Ω 2 ). For simplicity of notation, we assume that i =. Fubini s theorem tells us that u y W,p (Ω ) for almost every y Ω 2. Then by Theorem 2.5, (3.) gives an extension Eu y W,p (R n ) for every y Ω 2 with u y W,p (Ω ). Then we set (3.2) { E u(x,y) := x Eu y (x), if y Ω 2 with u y W,p (Ω ), x 0, otherwise. Since Eu y W,p (R n ) for almost every y Ω 2, using Fubini s theorem, we obtain E u(x,y)ψ(x,y)dxdy= Eu y (x)ψ(x,y)dxdy x x Ω 2 = = Ω 2 R n R n Eu y (x) x ψ(x,y)dxdy E u(x,y) x ψ(x,y)dxdy, which means that (3.2) gives a first order distributional derivative of E u with respect to x. Then using the Fubini theorem twice and the fact that the linear operator E from W,p (Ω ) to W,p (R n ) is bounded, we obtain E u(x,y) p dxdy= Eu y (x) p dxdy x x Ω 2 C C Ω 2 R n Ω Ω Ω 2 ( u y (x) p + x u y (x) p ( u(x,y) p + x u(x,y) p ) dxdy ) dxdy, we have obtained the desired norm estimate. Step 3: Inthisstep, weshowthatthereexistfunctions y j E u L p ( )(j =,...,m) such that E u(x,y)ψ(x,y)dxdy = E u(x,y) ψ(x,y)dxdy y j y j for every ψ C c (Rn Ω 2 ). For simplicity of notation, we assume that j =.
0 P. Koskela and Z. Zhu Consider the projection which is defined by setting P : Ω 2 R m, P (y) = (y 2,y 3,...,y m ) =: ˇy for y = (y,...,y m ) Ω 2. Set Sˇy := P (ˇy ) Ω 2, the preimage of ˇy P (Ω 2 ). Then Sˇy is the union of at most countably many pairwise disjoint segments. Fix x R n \ Ω and ˇy P (Ω 2 ). To begin, we assume that Sˇy is a single segment. Now for y,ˇy,y 2,ˇy Sˇy, according to (3.), we have (3.3) E u(x,y,ˇy ) E u(x,y,ˇy 2 ) = Q W Ω φ Q (x) ( (P HQ u(x,y,ˇy ) (P HQ u(x,y 2,ˇy ) ). By the definition (2.8) of P HQ u and the facts that u is C and H Q Sˇy Ω Ω 2, we have (3.4) (P HQ u)(x,y,ˇy ) (P HQ u)(x,y 2,ˇy ) ( = u(w,y,ˇy ) u(w,y,ˇy 2 ) ) dw H Q ( ) y u(w,s,ˇy ) = ds dw. H Q y 2 Combining (3.3) and (3.4), we obtain (3.5) E u(x,y,ˇy ) E u(x,y,ˇy 2 ) = φ Q (x) Q W Ω y H Q y 2 u(w,s,ˇy ) dsdw; noticethatxiscontainedinthesupportofonlyfinitemanyφ Q, hencee u(x,s,ˇy )is absolutelycontinuousasafunctionofsonsˇy. Byrepeatingthisforeachcomponent of Sˇy, we conclude that E u(x,s,ˇy ) is absolutely continuous as a function of s on every component of Sˇy. From (3.5) and the Lebesgue differentiation theorem, we deduce that (3.6) E u(x,s,ˇy ) E u(x,s,ˇy ) E u(x,s,ˇy ) := lim s s s s = u(w,s,ˇy ) u(x,s,ˇy ) φ Q (x) dw = E, Q W H Q Ω
The product of Sobolev-extension domains exists for H a.e. s with (s,ˇy ) Sˇy. Fix ψ Cc (Rn Ω 2 ). Since E u(x,s,ˇy ) is absolutely continuous as a function of s on each segment of Sˇy, we conclude that E u(x,s,ˇy ) ψ(x,s,ˇy ) E u(x,s,ˇy ) ds= ψ(x,s,ˇy )ds. Sˇy In order to complete the definition of E u, we define E u = u when (x,y) Ω Ω 2 and E u = 0 when (x,y) Ω Ω 2. Then let us show that E u is a first order distributional derivative of E u with respect to y -coordinate. By the Fubini theorem, (3.6) and the fact that Ω = 0, we have E u(x,y) ψ(x,y) dxdy= R n = = R n P (Ω 2 ) Sˇy P (Ω 2 ) Sˇy E u(x,y) ψ(x,y) dy dˇy dx Sˇy E u(x,y) E u(x,y) ψ(x,y)dy dˇy dx ψ(x,y)dxdy. Now we show that E u L p (R n Ω 2 ) and that its norm is controlled by the Sobolev norm of u. Since Ω = 0, we have E u(x,y) p dxdy= u(x,y) p dxdy Ω Ω 2 + E u(x,y) (R n \Ω ) Ω 2 p dxdy. u As we know, for almost every y Ω 2, y L p (Ω ). Using the fact that E : L p (Ω ) L p (R n ) is a bounded linear operator, we obtain E u(x,y) R y n p dx C u(x,y) Ω p dx, for almost every y Ω 2. Then we do the integration with respect to y Ω 2 on the two sides of the inequality above, we obtain the desired inequality E u(x,y) p dxdy C u(x,y) p dxdy. Ω Ω 2 In conclusion, we have showed that the linear extension operator E is bounded from C (Ω Ω 2 ) L (Ω Ω 2 ) W,p (Ω Ω 2 ) to W,p ( ) for our fixed < p <. Since C (Ω Ω 2 ) L (Ω Ω 2 ) W,p (Ω Ω 2 ) is dense in W,p (Ω Ω 2 ), E extends to a bounded linear extension operator from W,p (Ω Ω 2 ) to W,p ( ).
2 P. Koskela and Z. Zhu Proof of Theorem.. Regarding the first part of the claim, by Theorem 3. we have a bounded extension operator E : W,p (Ω Ω 2 ) W,p (R n Ω 2 ), and it thus suffices to extend functions in W,p (R n Ω 2 ) to W,p (R n R m ). Given u W,p (R n Ω 2 ), define û(x,y) = u(y,x). Then û W,p (Ω 2 R n ) and the desired extension is obtained via Theorem 3. as Ω 2 R m is a W,p -extension domain. Towards the second part, by symmetry, it suffices to prove that Ω R n must be a W,p -extension domain whenever Ω Ω 2 is such a domain. Suppose first that Ω 2 has finite measure. Given u W,p (Ω), define v(x,y) = u(x). Then v W,p (Ω Ω 2 ). Let Ev W,p (R n R m ) be an extension of v. Then Ev W,p (R n {y}) for almost every y Ω 2. This follows via the Fubini theorem from the ACL-characterization of W,p given in our introduction. Since v(x,y) = u(x), we conclude that u must be the restriction of some function w W,p (R n ). This allows us to infer from Theorem 2.2 that Ω must be a W,p -extension domain. In case Ω 2 has infinite measure, we fix a ball B Ω 2 and pick a smooth function ψ with compact support so that ψ is identically on B. We still define v as above and set w = ψv. Then w W,p (Ω Ω 2 ) and we may repeat the above argument as w(x,y) = u(x) for almost every y B Ω 2. Pekka Koskela Zheng Zhu Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Jyväskylä, FI-4004, Finland. E-mail address: pekka.j.koskela@jyu.fi zheng.z.zhu@jyu.fi References [] Yu. A. Brudnyi, A multidimensional analog of a certain theorem of Whitney, Mat. Sb. (N.S.)82(24), 69-9 (970); English transl.: Math. USSR-Izv. 4, 568-586 (970). [2] Yu. A. Brudnyi, Approximations of functions of n variables by quasipolynomials, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 34,564-583 (970); English transl.: Math. USSR-Izv, 4. 568-596 (970). [3] Yu. A. Brudnyi, Spaces that are definable by means of local approximations, Trudy Moskov. Math. Obshch. 24, 69-32 (97); English transl.: Trans. Moscow Math Soc. 24, 73-39 (974). [4] Yu. A. Brudnyi, Piecewise polynomial approximation, embedding theorem and rational approximation, Lecture Notes in Mathematics Vol. 556 (Springer- Verlag, Berlin, 976), pp. 73-98. [5] Yu. A. Brudnyi, Investigation in the Theory of Local Approximations, Doctoral Dissertation, Leningrad University (977) (in Russian).
The product of Sobolev-extension domains 3 [6] Yu. A. Brudnyi, Adaptive approximation of functions with singularities, Trudy Moskov. Mat. Obshch. 55, 49-242 (994); English transl.: Trans. Moscow Math. Soc. 55, 23-86 (995). [7] Yu. A. Brudnyi and M. I. Ganzburg, On an Extremal Problem for Polynomials in n Variables, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 37, 344-355 (973); English transl.: Math. USSR Izv. 7, 345-356 (973). [8] A. P. Calderón, Estimates for singular integral operators in terms of maximal functions, Studia Math. 44, 563-582 (972). [9] P. Haj lasz, P. Koskela and H. Tuominen, Sobolev embeddings, extensions and measure density condition, J. Funct. Anal. 254 (2008), no.5, 27-234. [0] P. Haj lasz, P. Koskela and H. Tuominen, Measure density and extendability of Sobolev functions, Rev. Mat. Iberoam. 24 (2008), no. 2, 645-669. [] S. Hencl and P. Koskela, Lectures on Mappings of finite distortion, Lecture Notes in Mathematics. 2096, Springer, Cham, 204. [2] P. Koskela, T. Rajala and Y. Zhang, A geometric characterization of planar Sobolev extension domains, preprint. [3] P. Koskela, Extensions and imbeddings, J. Funct. Anal. 59, 369-384 (998) [4] P. Shvartsman, Local approximations and intrinsic characterizations of spaces of smooth functions on regular subset of R n, Math. Nachr. 279 () (2006) 22-24. [5] P. Shvartsman, On extension of Sobolev functions defined on regular subsets of metric measure spaces, J. Approx. Theory. 44 (2007) 396. [6] P.Shvartsman, OnSobolevextensiondomainsinR n,j.funct.anal.258(200), no. 7, 2205-2245. [7] E. M. Stein, Singular Integrals and Differentiability Properties of Functions (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ, 970). [8] H. Triebel, Theory of Function Spaces. II, Monographs in Mathematics Vol. 84 (Birkhäuser, Basel, 992). [9] H. Whitney, Functions differentiable on the boundaries of regions, Ann of Math. 35(3) (934) 482-485. [20] W. P. Ziemer, Weakly Differentiable Functions, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 20. New York: Springer-verlag. [2] N. Zobin, Whitney s problem on extendability of functions and an intrinsic metric, Adv. Math. 33 (998) 96-32.