Abstract
In this paper, a new class of Sobolev spaces with kernel function satisfying a Lévy-integrability-type condition on compact Riemannian manifolds is presented. We establish the properties of separability, reflexivity, and completeness. An embedding result is also proved. As an application, we prove the existence of solutions for a nonlocal elliptic problem involving the fractional \(p(\cdot , \cdot )\)-Laplacian operator. As one of the main tools, topological degree theory is applied.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Let \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g})\) be a compact Riemannian manifold of dimension N. The purpose of this paper is to present fundamental properties of a new class of Sobolev spaces with general kernel on \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g}).\) In addition, we shall solve the following equation:
Here, \(s\in (0,1)\) is fixed, \(r\in C( {\mathcal {U}},\) \((1, \infty )),\) \(\lambda >0 ,\) \({\mathcal {U}} \subset {\mathcal {M}}\) is an open bounded subset of \({\mathcal {M}},\) \(\beta \) is a suitable potential function in \({\mathbb {R}}^{+}\) with \(\beta \in L^{\infty }({\mathcal {U}}),\) \(p\in \mathcal {C}( {\mathcal {U}} \times {\mathcal {U}}, (1, \infty ))\) satisfies the following conditions:
and \(f:{\mathcal {M}} \times {\mathbb {R}} \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) is a Carathéodory function, such that:
\(({\mathcal {B}}_{1})\) There exist \(\alpha >0\) and a continuous function \(q:{\mathcal {M}} \rightarrow (1, +\infty ),\) such that
and
and the operator \(({\mathcal {L}}_{{g}} ^{K})_{p(y,\cdot )}\) is defined by
for every \(z \in {\mathcal {M}},\) where
(see Definition 2.1). Furthermore, \(K: {\mathcal {U}} \times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (0, +\infty ) \) is a symmetric kernel function satisfying the following variant of Lévy-integrability type condition:
and the following coercivity condition for some \(\alpha _{0}>0\)
We give examples of symmetric kernel functions that satisfy Lévy-integrability and coercivity type conditions.
Example
The following functions satisfy conditions (1.4)–(1.5).
-
\(\clubsuit \) \(K(y, z)= d_{g}(y,z)^{-N-sp(y,z))}.\)
-
\(\clubsuit \) \(K(y, z)= \frac{\alpha _{0}}{d_{g}(y,z)^{N+sp(y,z))}},\) where \(\alpha _{0}\) is a positive real.
-
\(\clubsuit \) \(K(y, z)= \exp \left( \frac{1}{d_{g}(y,z)^{N+sp(y,z))}} \right) . \)
-
\(\clubsuit \) \(K(y, z)= \exp \left( -\delta d_{g}(y,z)^{2}\right) , \) where \(\delta \) is a positive real.
Recently, results on fractional Sobolev spaces and problems involving the \(p(y,\cdot )\)-operator and their applications have received a lot of attention. For example, Kaufmann et al. [27] first introduced the new class \(W^{s, q(y), p(y, z)}({\mathcal {U}})\) defined by
where \(q\in C(\overline{{\mathcal {U}}}, (1, \infty ))\) and \(K(y, z)=|y-z|^{N+s p(y, z)}\), and they proved the existence of a compact embedding
such that \(1< r(y)<p^{\star }_{s} (y),\) for every \(y\in \overline{{\mathcal {U}}}.\) They also studied solvability of the following fractional \( p(y,\cdot )\)-Laplacian problem:
with \(h \in L^{a(y)}({\mathcal {Q}}), a(y)>1.\)
For more results on the functional framework, we refer to Bahrouni and Rădulescu [9] who proved the solvability of the following problems:
using Ekeland’s variational method, where \({\mathcal {U}}\) is an open bounded subset of \({\mathbb {R}}^{N}, \lambda >0, \) \( r(y)< p^{-}= \min _{(y, z)\in {\mathcal {U}}\times {\mathcal {U}}} p(y, z), \) and \({\mathcal {L}} w\) is the fractional \(p(y,\cdot )\) Laplacian operator.
Bahrouni [8] continued to study the space \(W^{s, q(y, p(y, z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) More specially, he proved the strong comparison principle for \(\left( -\Delta \right) ^{s}_{p(y,.)}\) and by using the sub-supersolution method, he showed the solvability of the following nonlocal equation:
where \({\mathcal {U}}\) is an open bounded domain, \(s\in (0,1),\) p is a continuous function, and h satisfies the following growth:
\(\hbox {where}\ r\in C( {\mathbb {R}}^{N},{\mathbb {R}}),~ 1< r(y)< p^{\star }_{s} (y),~\hbox {for every}~ y\in {\mathbb {R}}^{N}.\)
The generalized fractional Sobolev space was studied in [8, 9, 27] and further developed in [26]. They proved a fundamental compact embedding for this space and investigated the multiplicity and boundedness of solutions to the following problem:
where \(p\in C({\mathbb {R}}^{N}\times {\mathbb {R}}^{N}, (1, +\infty ))\) is such that p satisfies the following conditions:
\(f:{\mathbb {R}}^{N}\times {\mathbb {R}} \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}} \) is a Carathéodory function, and \(\left( -\Delta _{p(y)}\right) ^{s}\) is an operator defined by
\(\hbox {where}\ B_{\varepsilon }(y)=\{ z \in {\mathbb {R}}^{N}: |z-y|< \varepsilon \}.\)
The approaches for ensuring the existence of weak solutions for a class of nonlocal fractional problems with variable exponents were addressed in greater depth in [1, 2, 6, 8,9,10,11, 17, 18, 26, 27, 29, 31, 33] and the references therein. In the non-Euclidean case, classical Sobolev spaces on Riemannian manifolds have been investigated for more than seventy years [5, 25, 30]. The theory of these spaces has been applied to isoperimetrical inequalities [25] and the Yamabe problem [35]. In [22] the authors investigated the theory of generalized Sobolev spaces on compact Riemannian manifolds. Moreover, they proved the compact embeddability of these spaces into the Hölder space. They also studied a PDE problem involving \(p(\cdot )\)-Laplacian operator.
In addition, the authors in [21] studied variable exponent function spaces on complete non-compact Riemannian manifolds. They used classical assumptions on the geometry to establish compact embeddings between Sobolev spaces and the Hölder function space. Finally, they also showed the existence of solutions to the \(p(\cdot )\)-Laplacian problem. The authors in [24] introduced the fractional Sobolev spaces on Riemannian manifolds. As a consequence, they investigated fundamental properties, such as compact embeddings, completeness, density, separability, and reflexivity. They also investigated the existence of solutions to the following equation:
where \({\mathcal {M}} \) is a compact manifold of dimension d, \( {\mathcal {U}} \subset {\mathcal {M}}\) is an open bounded subset of \({\mathcal {M}},\) \(s \in (0,1),\) \(p>1\) with \(d>ps ,\) \(f:{\mathcal {M}}\times {\mathbb {R}} \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) is a Carathéodory function, and the operator \(\left( -{\mathcal {L}}_{g}\right) _{p}^{s} w(y),\) \( y\in {\mathcal {M}}\) is defined by
Aberqi et al. [2] introduced the space \(W^{s, p(y, z)}({\mathcal {M}})\) and proved some important properties of this space and studied the following problem:
Fractional Sobolev spaces and problems involving the \(p(\cdot , \cdot )\)-Laplacian operator have attracted significant attention in recent decades. This class of operators appears rather naturally in a variety of applications, including optimization and financial mathematics, we cite the well-known example by Carbotti et al. [16] who obtained the following equation:
where \({\mathcal {A}}:=a \partial ^2-b(-\Delta )^s\) with \(a, b \geqslant 0\) and \(r \in {\mathbb {R}}.\) Here, \(S_t\) is the price at time t and V the value of option. They are also useful in optimal control, engineering, quantum mechanics, obstacle problems, elasticity, image processing, minimal surfaces, stabilization of Lévy processes, game theory, population dynamics, fluid filtration, and stochastics, see for example [4, 7, 15, 17, 19, 20, 23, 32, 33] and the references therein.
Our work’s novelty is extending general Sobolev spaces to Sobolev spaces \(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\) with kernel function K on \({\mathcal {M}}.\) We shall prove important properties of this new class of spaces. In particular, we shall investigate the existence of solutions to problem (1.1) using the topological degree method. This work generalizes previous results [1, 2, 8, 9, 12, 24, 26, 27]. However, the main difficulty is presented by the fact that the \(p(\cdot , \cdot )\)-Laplacian operator has a more complicated nonlinearity than the p-Laplacian operator. For example, it is non-homogeneous. Other complications are due to the non-Euclidean framework of our problem. Also checking for example the density of the space \(C^{\infty }({\mathcal {M}})\) in \(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}),\) because the notion the translation in Riemannian manifolds is not defined. To the best of our knowledge, there were no such results prior to this work.
Our first major result is the following theorem.
Theorem 1.1
Suppose that \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g})\) is a compact N-dimensional Riemannian manifold, \({\mathcal {U}}\) is a smooth open subset of \({\mathcal {M}},\) \(K:{\mathcal {U}}\times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (0, +\infty ) \) is a symmetric function satisfying Lévy-integrability and coercivity conditions, \(q\in C^{+}({\mathcal {M}}), \) \(p:{\mathcal {U}}\times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (1, +\infty )\) satisfies conditions (1.2)–(1.3) and
and \(\mathfrak {\ell }:\overline{{\mathcal {M}}} \rightarrow (1,+ \infty )\) is a continuous variable exponent, such that
Then, the space \(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\) is continuously embeddable in \(L ^{\mathfrak {\ell }(y)}({\mathcal {U}})\) and there exists a positive constant \(C= C(N, s, p, q, {\mathcal {U}} )\) such that
Moreover, this embedding is compact.
Our second main result is related to the investigation of the following fractional \(p(y,\cdot )\)-Laplacian problem with a general kernel K:
Using Berkovits’ topological degree, we study the existence of solutions and prove the following theorem.
Theorem 1.2
Suppose that \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g})\) is a compact N-dimensional Riemannian manifold, \({\mathcal {U}}\) is a smooth open subset of \({\mathcal {M}},\) \(K:{\mathcal {U}}\times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (0, +\infty ) \) is a symmetric function satisfying Lévy-integrability and coercivity conditions. Assume that assumption \( ({\mathcal {B}}_{1})\) holds. Then, problem (1.1) has at least one weak solution \(w\in W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}). \)
This paper is organized as follows: in Sect. 2, we collect the main definitions and properties of generalized Lebesgue spaces and generalized Sobolev spaces on compact manifolds and provide crucial background on recent Berkovits degree theory. In Sect. 3, we establish completeness, separability, and reflexivity properties of our spaces (Lemmas 3.2, 3.3, and 3.5). In Sect. 4, we prove our first main result (Theorem 1.1). In Sect. 5, we prove our second main result (Theorem 1.2). Finally, in Appendix, we prove some lemmas needed for the proofs of our main results.
2 Preliminaries
2.1 Generalized Lebesgue Spaces on Compact Manifolds
Throughout this section, \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g})\) will be a compact Riemannian manifold of dimension N. To start, we briefly review some fundamental Riemannian geometry concepts that will be needed. For more details see [5, 24, 25].
A local chart on \({\mathcal {M}}\) is a pair \(({\mathcal {U}}, \varphi ),\) where \({\mathcal {U}}\) is an open subset of \({\mathcal {M}}\) and \(\varphi \) is a homeomorphism of \({\mathcal {U}}\) onto an open subset of \({\mathbb {R}}^{N}.\) Furthermore, a collection \(({\mathcal {U}}_{i}, \varphi _{i})_{i \in J}\) of local charts, such that \({\mathcal {M}}= \bigcup _{j\in J} {\mathcal {U}}_{j},\) is called an atlas of manifold \({\mathcal {M}}.\) For some atlas \(({\mathcal {U}}_{j}, \varphi _{j})_{j \in J}\)of \({\mathcal {M}},\) we say that a family \(({\mathcal {U}}_{j}, \varphi _{j}, \beta _{j})_{j\in J}\) is a partition of unity subordinate to the covering \(({\mathcal {U}}_{j}, \varphi _{j})_{j\in J}\) if the following holds:
-
(1)
\(\sum _{j\in J} \beta _{j}=1, \)
-
(2)
\( ({\mathcal {U}}_{j}, \varphi _{j})_{j\in J}\) is an atlas of \({\mathcal {M}},\)
-
(3)
\( \text {supp} (\beta _{j}) \subset {\mathcal {U}}_{j},\) for every \(j\in J.\)
Definition 2.1
(See [25]) Suppose that \( w:{\mathcal {M}}\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) is a continuous function with compact support, \(({\mathcal {U}}_{j}, \varphi _{j})_{j\in J}\) is an atlas of \({\mathcal {M}},\) and \(({\mathcal {U}}_{j}, \varphi _{j}, \beta _{j})_{j\in J}\) is a partition of unity subordinate to \( ({\mathcal {U}}_{j}, \varphi _{j})_{j\in J}.\) We define the Riemannian measure of w in \({\mathcal {M}}\) as follows:
where \({\textrm{d}}v_{{g}}(y)=|{g}_{ij}|^{\frac{1}{2}} {\textrm{d}}y \) is the Riemannian volume element on \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g}), {g}_{ij} \) are the components of the metric g in the local chart \(({\mathcal {U}}_{j}, \varphi _{j})_{j\in J}, \) and \( {\textrm{d}}y\) is the Lebesgue volume of \({\mathbb {R}}^{N}.\)
Definition 2.2
(See [5]) Let \(\gamma :[{a},{b}] \rightarrow {\mathcal {M}}\) be a differentiable curve in \({\mathcal {M}}\) such that \(\gamma \in C^{1}([{a}, {b}], {\mathcal {M}}).\) Then the length of \(\gamma \) is given by
Definition 2.3
(See [5]) For any \((y, z)\in {\mathcal {M}}^{2},\) we define the distance \(d_{{g}}(y, z)\) between y and z as follows
Theorem 2.4
(Stine’s theorem [5]) For any \(({a}, {b})\in {\mathcal {M}}^{2},\) \( d_{{g}}({a}, {b}) \) defines a distance on \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g}), \) and the topology determined by \(d_{{g}}({a}, {b}) \) is equivalent to the topology of \({\mathcal {M}}\) as a manifold.
Next, we recall basic definitions and preliminary facts on the generalized Lebesgue spaces \(L^{ q({x})}({\mathcal {U}})\) on compact manifolds, where \({\mathcal {U}}\) is an open subset of manifold \({\mathcal {M}}.\) For more background, we refer to [2, 5, 25]. We need to recall the notion of the covariant derivative.
Definition 2.5
(See [25]) Let \(\nabla \) be the Levi–Civita connection. For \( w \in C^\infty (M),\) \( \nabla ^{k} w\) denotes the kth covariant derivative of w. In local coordinates, the pointwise norm of \( \nabla ^{k} w\) is given by
When \(k=1,\) the components of \( \nabla w\) in local coordinates are given by \((\nabla w)_i=\nabla ^{i} w.\) By definition, one has that
We consider the set:
\(\text {for every } y \in {\mathcal {M}},~ q^{-}= \min _{y \in {\mathcal {M}} } q(y), ~ q^{+}= \max _{y \in {\mathcal {M}} } q(y).\)
Definition 2.6
(See [21]) Let \( q\in C^{+}({\mathcal {M}}) \) and \(k\in {\mathbb {N}}.\) We define the Sobolev space \(L_{k}^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})\) as the completion of \( C_{k}^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})\) with respect to the norm \( |w|_{L_{k}^{q(y)}}({\mathcal {M}}),\) where
and
where \( | \nabla ^{j}w|\) is the kth covariant derivative of w.
Lemma 2.7
(See [1]) For every \( w\in L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}}),\) the following properties hold :
-
(i)
If \(\quad |w|_{L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})}<1,\) then \( |w|^{q^{-}}_{L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})}\le \rho _{q(y)}(w) \le |w|^{q^{+}}_{L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})}.\)
-
(ii)
If \(\quad |w|_{L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})}>1,\) then \( |w|^{q^{+}}_{L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})}\le \rho _{q(y)}(w) \le |w|^{q^{-}}_{L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})}.\)
-
(iii)
\( |w|_{L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})}<1, =1, >1\) if only if \( \rho _{q(y)}(w)<1, =1, >1,\)
where \(\rho _{q(y)}:L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}}) \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) is the mapping defined as follows
Proposition 2.8
(See [2]) For every w and \( w_{n} \in L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}}),\) the following statements are equivalent :
-
(i)
\( \lim _{n\rightarrow +\infty } |w_{n}-w|_{L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})}= 0,\)
-
(ii)
\( \lim _{n\rightarrow +\infty } \rho _{q(y)}(w_{n}-w)=0,\)
-
(iii)
\( w_{n}\rightarrow w\) in measure on \({\mathcal {M}}\) and \( \lim _{n \rightarrow +\infty } \rho _{q(y)}(w_{n}) - \rho _{q(y)}w)=0.\)
Lemma 2.9
(Hölder’s inequality, see [1]) For every \(q \in C^{+}({\mathcal {M}}),\) the following inequality holds :
\(\text {for every } ({v}, w) \in L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})\times L^{{q^{\prime }}(y)}({\mathcal {M}}),\) where \(\frac{1}{q(y)}+ \frac{1}{{q^{\prime }}(y)}=1.\)
Lemma 2.10
(Simon’s inequality, see [34]) For every \( y, z \in {\mathbb {R}}^{N},\) the following holds :
where \( c_{n}=\left( \frac{1}{2}\right) ^{-n}\) and \( C_{n}=\frac{1}{n-1}.\)
2.2 Topological Degree Theory
Let E be a real separable Banach space and \(E^{*}\) its dual. Given a non-empty set \(U \subset E, \) denote by \(\bar{U}\) and by \( \partial U \) its closure and boundary, respectively.
Definition 2.11
(See [13]) Let \(f: U \subset E \rightarrow E^{*}\) be an operator.
-
(1)
We say that f is an \(\left( S_{+}\right) \)-map if for \(\{\{z_{n}\}_{n \in {\mathbb {N}}}, z\} \subset U,\) we have
$$\begin{aligned} z_{n} {\mathop {\rightharpoonup }\limits ^{\text {weakly}}}z \,\, \text {weakly and} \,\,\, \limsup _{n \rightarrow \infty }\left\langle f z_{n}, z_{n}-z\right\rangle \le 0 \,\,\,\Rightarrow \,\,\, z_{n} \rightarrow z\cdot \end{aligned}$$ -
(2)
We say that f is a quasi-monotone operator if for every \(\{\{z_{n}\}_{n \in {\mathbb {N}}}, z\} \subset U,\) we have
$$\begin{aligned} z_{n} {\mathop {\rightharpoonup }\limits ^{\text {weakly}}}z \Rightarrow \limsup _{n \rightarrow \infty }\left\langle f z_{n}, z_{n}-z\right\rangle \ge 0. \end{aligned}$$
Definition 2.12
(Condition \(\left( S_{+}\right) _{{\mathfrak {B}}},\) see [28]) Suppose that \(U_{1} \subset E \) is such that \(U \subset U_{1}, \) \({\mathfrak {B}}:U_{1}\rightarrow E^{*} \) is a bounded operator, and \(f:U \subset E \rightarrow E \) is an operator.
-
(1)
We say that f satisfies condition \(\left( S_{+}\right) _{{\mathfrak {B}}}\) if for every \(\{\{z_{n}\}_{n \in {\mathbb {N}}}, z\} \subset U,\) the following combined properties
$$\begin{aligned} {\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} z_{n} {\mathop {\rightharpoonup }\limits ^{\text {weakly}}}z \\ a_{n}= {\mathfrak {B}}(z_{n}) {\mathop {\rightharpoonup }\limits ^{\text {weakly}}}a \\ \limsup _{n \rightarrow +\infty } \left\langle f z_{n}, a_{n}-a\right\rangle \ge 0 \end{array}\right. } \end{aligned}$$(2.1)imply \( z_{n} \rightarrow z.\)
-
(2)
(Property \((Q M)_{{\mathfrak {B}}}).\) We say that f satisfies condition \((Q M)_{{\mathfrak {B}}}\) if for every \(\{\{z_{n}\}_{n \in {\mathbb {N}}}, z\} \subset U,\) we have
$$\begin{aligned} z_{n} {\mathop {\rightharpoonup }\limits ^{\text {weakly}}}z\quad \text {and} \quad a_{n}={\mathfrak {B}} z_{n} {\mathop {\rightharpoonup }\limits ^{\text {weakly}}}a \Rightarrow \limsup _{n \rightarrow \infty }\left\langle f z_{n}, a-a_{n}\right\rangle \ge 0 \cdot \end{aligned}$$
We consider the following sets
Let \(U \subset D_{f}\) and \({\mathfrak {B}} \in {\mathcal {F}}^{\star }_{0}(U),\) where \(D_{f}\) denotes the domain of f. We denote by \({\mathcal {N}}\) the collection of all bounded open sets in E. The following operators will be considered:
Lemma 2.13
(See [28]) Let \(\omega \) be a bounded open set in uniformly convex Banach space E, \({\mathfrak {B}}: \overline{\omega } \rightarrow E^{*}\) a bounded operator, and \(f: \overline{\omega } \rightarrow E.\) Then, we have
-
(1)
If f is locally bounded and satisfies condition \(\left( S_{+}\right) _{{\mathfrak {B}}}\) and \({\mathfrak {B}}\) is continuous, then f has the property \((Q M)_{{\mathfrak {B}}}.\)
-
(2)
The operator f has the property \((Q M)_{{\mathfrak {B}}},\) if for all \(\{\{z_{n}\}_{n \in {\mathbb {N}}}, z\} \subset U\)
$$\begin{aligned} z_{n} \rightharpoonup z \quad \text {and} \quad a_{n}= {\mathfrak {B}}z_{n} \rightharpoonup a \,\, \Rightarrow \liminf \left\langle f z_{n}, a_{n}-a\right\rangle \ge 0. \end{aligned}$$ -
(3)
If operators \(f_{1}, f_{2}: \overline{\omega } \rightarrow E \) satisfy \((Q M)_{{\mathfrak {B}}}\) condition, then \(f_{1}+f_{2}\) and \(\alpha f_{1}\) also satisfy \((Q M)_{{\mathfrak {B}}}\) condition, for every positive numbers \(\alpha .\)
-
(4)
Let \(f_1:\overline{\omega } \rightarrow E \) be an operator of the type \(\left( S_{+}\right) _{{\mathfrak {B}}}\) and \(f_2: \overline{\omega } \rightarrow E\) an operator satisfying the property \((Q M)_{{\mathfrak {B}}}.\) Then, \(f_1+f_2\) satisfies condition \(\left( S_{+}\right) _{{\mathfrak {B}}}.\)
Lemma 2.14
(See [11]) Let B be a bounded open set in E, \({\mathfrak {B}} \in {\mathcal {F}}^{\star }_{0}(\overline{B})\) continuous, and \(g: D_{g} \subset E^{*} \rightarrow E\) a demi-continuous operator, such that \({\mathfrak {B}}(\bar{B}) \subset D_{g}.\) Then, the following properties hold :
-
(a)
If g is quasi-monotone operator, then \( {I} +{g} \circ {\mathfrak {B}} \in {\mathcal {F}}_{{\mathfrak {B}}}(\bar{B}),\) where I denotes the identity operator.
-
(b)
If g is an operator of type \(\left( S_{+}\right) ,\) then \( {g}\circ {\mathfrak {B}} \in {\mathcal {F}}_{{\mathfrak {B}}}(\overline{B}).\)
Definition 2.15
(See [14]) Let \( B\subset E\) be a bounded open set, \({\mathfrak {B}} \in {\mathcal {F}}^{\star }_{0}(\overline{B})\) continuous, and \( f, g\,\, \in {\mathcal {F}}_{{\mathfrak {B}}}(\overline{E}).\) Then, the map \( {H}:[0,1] \times \overline{E} \rightarrow E\) given by
is called an admissible affine homotopy.
Lemma 2.16
(See [11]) Let \(B\subset E\) be a bounded open set, \({\mathfrak {B}} \in {\mathcal {F}}^{\star }_{0}(\overline{B})\) continuous, and \({ f}, { g} \in {\mathcal {F}}_{{\mathfrak {B}}}(\overline{E}).\) Then, the homotopy \( {H}(s,\cdot )\) satisfies condition \(\left( S_{+}\right) _{\overline{B}}.\)
Theorem 2.17
(See [11]) There exists a unique degree function
satisfying the following properties :
-
(1)
If \(a \in F,\) then \(d({I}, F, a)=1.\)
-
(2)
If \(G:[0,1] \times \overline{B} \rightarrow F\) is a bounded admissible affine homotopy with a common continuous essential inner map and \(b:[0,1] \rightarrow F\) is a continuous mapping in E, then \(d(G(x, \cdot ), F, b(x))\) is constant for every \(x \in [0,1]\) and \(b(x) \notin G(t, \partial F).\)
-
(3)
If \(F_{1}\) and \(F_{2}\) are disjoint open subsets of E with \(a \notin f\left( \overline{F} \backslash \left( E_{1} \cup E_{2}\right) \right) ,\) then
$$\begin{aligned} d(f, F, a)=d\left( f, F_{1}, a\right) +d\left( f, F_{2}, a\right) . \end{aligned}$$ -
(4)
If \(d(f, F, a) \ne 0,\) then \(fu=a\) has a solution in F.
3 Fractional Sobolev Spaces with a General Kernel on Compact Riemannian Manifolds
In this section, we shall introduce fractional Sobolev spaces with a general kernel and prove several qualitative lemmas.
Definition 3.1
Suppose that \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g})\) is a Riemannian compact manifold of dimension N, \({\mathcal {U}}\) is a smooth open subset of \({\mathcal {M}},\) \(K:{\mathcal {U}} \times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (0, +\infty ) \) is a symmetric function satisfying Lévy-integrability and coercivity conditions, \( q\in C^{+}({\mathcal {M}}), \) and \(p:{\mathcal {U}} \times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (1, +\infty )\) satisfying conditions (1.2)–(1.3). We define fractional Sobolev space \(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\) with general kernel K(y, z) on compact manifold \({\mathcal {M}}\) as the set of all measurable functions \(w \in L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {U}}),\) such that \( \int _{{\mathcal {M}}^2}\frac{|w(y)-w(z)|^{p(y,z)}}{\lambda ^{p(y,z)}} K(y, z) {\textrm{d}}v_{{g}}(y) {\textrm{d}}v_{{g}}(z)<\infty , \text { for some } \lambda >0\) and endow it with the natural norm:
where
is the Gagliardo seminorm of u and \((L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {U}}), |.|_{q(y)})\) is a variable exponent Lebesgue space.
Lemma 3.2
Suppose that \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g})\) is a Riemannian compact manifold of dimension N, \({\mathcal {U}}\) is a smooth open subset of \({\mathcal {M}},\) \(K:{\mathcal {U}} \times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (0, +\infty ) \) is a symmetric function satisfying Lévy-integrability and coercivity conditions, \(q\in C^{+}({\mathcal {M}}), \) and \(p:{\mathcal {U}} \times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (1, +\infty )\) satisfies conditions (1.2)–(1.3). Then, \(( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}), \Vert \cdot \Vert )\) is a Banach space.
Proof
Let \(\{ w_{n}\}_{n\in {\mathbb {N}}}\) be a Cauchy sequence in \(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) For any \(\varepsilon >0,\) there exists \(N_{\varepsilon }\ge 0,\) such that for every \(n, m\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(n, m\ge N_{\varepsilon },\)
Since \((L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {U}}), |.|_{q(y)})\) is a Banach space, there exists \(w\in L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {U}}),\) such that \(w_{n}\rightarrow w \) strongly in \(L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {U}})\) as \(n \rightarrow +\infty . \) Thanks to the converse of the dominated convergence theorem, it follows that for a subsequence still denoted \(\{w_{n}\},\) we have that \(w_{n} \rightarrow w \) as \(n \rightarrow +\infty \) a.e on \({\mathcal {U}}.\)
Let \(\ell \) be an integer, such that \(\ell \ge N_{\varepsilon }\) and \(w_{\ell }\in W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) We use Fatou’s lemma and inequality (3.1) to get
Thus, \(w \in W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) We combine Fatou’s lemma and inequality (3.1), and obtain
That is, \(w_{n}\rightarrow w \) in \(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\) as \(n \rightarrow +\infty .\) \(\square \)
Lemma 3.3
Suppose that \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g})\) is a compact Riemannian manifold with \(\dim {\mathcal {M}}=N,\) \({\mathcal {U}}\) is a smooth open subset of \({\mathcal {M}},\) \(K:{\mathcal {U}}\times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (0, +\infty ) \) is a symmetric function satisfying Lévy-integrability and coercivity conditions, \(q\in C^{+}({\mathcal {M}}),\) and \(p:{\mathcal {U}}\times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (1, +\infty )\) satisfies conditions (1.2)–(1.3). Then, \(( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}), \Vert \cdot \Vert ) \) is a uniformly convex space.
Proof
Let \(w, {v}\in W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}),\) and \(\eta \in (0, 2),\) such that
Case 1: \(p^{-}\ge 2.\) Thanks to [3, Inequality 28], we get
Thanks to (3.2), it follows that
We take \( \delta =\delta (\eta ),\) such that
and get
Case 2: \( 1<p(y,z)<2.\) Note that
with, \( \frac{1}{p(y,z)}+\frac{1}{p{'}(y,z)}=1.\) By the reverse Minkowski’s inequality [3, Theorem 2.13] and [3, Inequality 27], we have that
therefore
To complete the argument, choose \( \delta =\delta (\eta ) ,\) such that \( 1-(\frac{\eta }{2})^{p^{\prime }(y,z)}= (1-\delta )^{p^{\prime }(y,z)}\cdot \) \(\square \)
Remark 3.4
According to the Milman–Petits theorem [3], \( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\) is a reflexive space.
Lemma 3.5
Suppose that \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g})\) is a compact Riemannian manifold with \(\dim {\mathcal {M}}=N,\) \( {\mathcal {U}}\) is a smooth open subset of \({\mathcal {M}},\) \(K:{\mathcal {U}} \times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (0, +\infty ) \) is a symmetric function satisfying conditions Lévy-integrability and coercivity conditions, \(q\in C^{+}({\mathcal {M}}), \) and \(p:{\mathcal {U}} \times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (1, +\infty )\) satisfies conditions (1.2)–(1.3). Then, \(( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}), \Vert \cdot \Vert ) \) is a separable space.
Proof
Let \( L:W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\rightarrow L ^{q(y)}({\mathcal {M}})\times L ^{p(y,z)}({\mathcal {M}}\times {\mathcal {M}})\) be the operator defined by
L is clearly well-defined and is an isometry. By [13, Proposition 3.17], the space \( ( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}), \Vert \cdot \Vert ) \) is indeed separable. \(\square \)
4 Proof of Theorem 1.1
In this section, we shall prove Theorem 1.1, establishing an embedding of \(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\) into \(L ^{\mathfrak {\ell }(y)}({\mathcal {U}}).\)
Proof
Let p, q, and \( \mathfrak {\ell }\) be continuous functions and \({\mathcal {U}}\) an open subset of \({\mathcal {M}}.\) There exist two positive constants \( \alpha _{1}\) and \( \alpha _{2},\) such that
and
for every \(y\in \overline{{\mathcal {U}}}.\) Let \(t\in (0, s). \) We use the continuity of \( p, q, \mathfrak {\ell },\) (4.1), and (4.2) to find a constant \( \varepsilon =\varepsilon ( p, q, \mathfrak {\ell }, \alpha _{1}, \alpha _{2})\) and a finite family of disjoint Lipschitz sets \({\mathcal {U}}_{j},\) such that \({\mathcal {U}}= \bigcup _{j=1}^{N} {\mathcal {U}}_{j} \text { and } \hbox {diam} ( {\mathcal {U}}_{j})< \varepsilon ,\)
Put \( p_{j}= \inf _{(y, z)\in {\mathcal {U}}_{j} \times {\mathcal {U}}_{j}} \{p(y, z)-\delta \}.\) By the continuity of the involved exponents, we can choose \( \delta =\delta (\alpha _{2}), \) with \( p^{-}-1>\delta >0,\) such that
Therefore, we have the following
By [24, Lemma 2.4 ], there exists a constant \( C=C(N, t, \varepsilon , p_{j}, {\mathcal {U}}_{j}),\) such that (see [24] for more details):
Now, we shall prove the following three inequalities.
-
(a)
There exists a constant \( c_{1}>0,\) such as: \( c_{1} |w| _{L^{\mathfrak {\ell }(y)}({{\mathcal {U}}})} \le \sum _{j=0}^{N} \Vert w\Vert _ {L^{p_{j}^{*}}( {\mathcal {U}}_{j})}.\)
-
(b)
There exists a constant \( c_{2}>0,\) such as: \( \sum _{j=0}^{N} \Vert w\Vert _ {L^{p_{j}}( {\mathcal {U}}_{j})} \le c_{2} |w| _{L^{q(y)}({{\mathcal {U}}})}.\)
-
(c)
There exists a constant \( c_{3}>0,\) such as: \( \sum _{j=0}^{N} [w]^{t, p_{j}}({\mathcal {U}}_{j})) \le c_{3}[w]^{s, p(y, z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\)
We shall first prove (a). We have that
where \( \chi _{{\mathcal {U}}_{j}}\) is a characteristic function. Hence, we have
Combining the statement (4.3) with the Hölder inequality, we obtain
Similarly, by using the fact that \(q(y) > p_j\) for every \( y\in {\mathcal {U}}_{j}, \) we get (b).
Now, we show (c). Put
We use the Hölder inequality and the definition of \( p_{j}, \) to get
where
Next, we prove that \(|G|_{L^{p(y, z)}}\le C [w]^{s, p(y, z)}({\mathcal {U}}_{j}).\) Let \(\lambda >0\) be such that
Put \( k=\sup \{1, \sup _{(y, z)\in {\mathcal {U}} \times {\mathcal {U}}} d_{{g}}(y, z)^{s-t} \} \) and \( \breve{\lambda }= \lambda k.\) Then we have
therefore
It now follows from (1.5), inequalities (a), (b), (c), and [24, Lemma 2.4] that
We show that this embedding is compact. Let \(\{w_{n} \}\) be a bounded sequence in \(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}),\) we need to prove that there exists \(w \in L^{\mathfrak {\ell }(y)}({\mathcal {M}}),\) such that for every \(\mathfrak {\ell }(y)\in (1, p^{*}_{s}):\)
Since \({\mathcal {M}}\) is a compact Riemannian N-manifold, we can cover \({\mathcal {M}}\) by a finite number of charts \( ({\mathcal {U}}_{j}, \varphi _{j})_{j=1, \ldots , m}\) satisfying
where \(g_{ij}^{s}\) are bilinear forms and \(Q>1.\) Let \(\eta _{j}\) be a smooth partition of unity subordinate to the chart \( ({\mathcal {U}}_{j}, \varphi _{j})_{j=1, \ldots , m}.\) Let \( w_{n} \in W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {M}}).\) Then
where \(B_{0}(1)\) is an open unit ball of \({\mathbb {R}}^{N}.\) By [27, Theorem 1.1], there exists \(w_{j} \in L^{\mathfrak {\ell }(y)}(\varphi _{j}({\mathcal {U}}_{j})) ,\) such that
Hence
Finally, we put
\(\square \)
5 Proof of Theorem 1.2
In this section, we shall prove our existence result stated in Theorem 1.2.
Definition 5.1
We say that \(w\in W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}) \) is a weak solution of problem (1.1) if for every \( h\in (W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}))^{*}\) we have,
We consider the functional \(\zeta :W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}} \) defined by
Then it follows from [9, 27] that \(\zeta \in C^{1}(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}), {\mathbb {R}})\) and
Proof
Let \( w\in W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) Then w is a weak solution of problem (1.1) if and only if
where \( L, \,S\) are the operators defined in Lemmas 6.1 and 6.2. Since S is bounded, continuous, and quasi-monotone (see Lemma 6.1) and L is strictly monotone, thanks to the Minty–Browder Theorem [36, Theorem 26 A], we have that \( L^{-1}=G\) is bounded continuous of type \( (S_{+}).\)
Equation (5.1) is equivalent to
To solve (5.2), we shall use the Berkovits topological degree introduced in Sect. 2. To this end, we first show that the set
is bounded. Let \( h\in D \) and take \( w= Gh. \) Using the growth condition \(({\mathcal {B}}_{1}),\) the Hölder inequality, the Young inequality, and continuous embedding \( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}) \hookrightarrow L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {U}}),\) we get
Since S is bounded, it follows that D is bounded in \( (W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}))^*.\) As a result, there exists a positive constant \( \eta >0,\) such that
Furthermore, \( h+ tS\circ Gh \ne 0\) for every \( (h, t)\in \partial B_{\eta }(0) \times [0, 1]. \) Using Lemma 2.13, and \( i+ S\circ G\in {\mathcal {F}}_{{\mathfrak {B}}}(\overline{B_{\eta }(0)})\) and \( i=L\circ G \in {\mathcal {F}}_{{\mathfrak {B}}}(\overline{B_{\eta }(0)})\) are present. Next, \( i+ S\circ G \) is also bounded because the operators \( i,\, S\) and G are all bounded. We come to the conclusion that
We consider the map \( {H}:[0, 1]\times \overline{B_{\eta }(0)} \rightarrow (W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}))^{*}\) given by
By the statements (1)–(2) in Theorem 2.17, we can deduce
by applying the homotopy invariance and normalization properties of the degree d from Theorem 2.17. Therefore there exists \( w \in B_{\eta }(0),\) such that \(h+S\circ G h=0.\) We can now deduce that \( w= Gh\) is a weak solution to problem (1.1) in \(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) This completes the proof. \(\square \)
Data Availability
This manuscript contains no associated data.
References
Aberqi, A., Bennouna, J., Benslimane, O., Ragusa, M.A.: Existence results for double phase problem in Sobolev–Orlicz spaces with variable exponents in complete manifold. Mediterr. J. Math. 19(4), 158 (2022)
Aberqi, A., Benslimane, O., Ouaziz, A., Repovš, D.D.: On a new fractional Sobolev space with variable exponent on complete manifolds. Bound. Value Probl. 2022(1), 7 (2022)
Adams, R.A., Fournier, J.J.: Sobolev Spaces. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2003)
Applebaum, D.: Lévy processes - from probability to finance and quantum groups. Not. Am. Math. Soc. 51(11), 1336–1347 (2004)
Aubin, T.: Nonlinear Analysis on Manifolds. Monge–Ampere Equations, vol. 252. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin (2012)
Ayazoglu, R., Saraç, Y., Şener, S.Ş, Alisoy, G.: Existence and multiplicity of solutions for a Schrödinger–Kirchhoff type equation involving the fractional \(p(\cdot ,\cdot )\)-Laplacian operator in \({\mathbb{R}}^{N}\). Collect. Math. 72, 129–156 (2021)
Bae, J.H., Kim, Y.H.: Critical points theorems via the generalized Ekeland variational principle and its application to equations of \(p (x)\)-Laplace type in \({\mathbb{R}}^{N}\). Taiwan. J. Math. 23(1), 193–229 (2019)
Bahrouni, A.: Comparison and sub-supersolution principles for the fractional \(p (x)\)-Laplacian. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 458(2), 1363–1372 (2018)
Bahrouni, A., Rădulescu, V.D.: On a new fractional Sobolev space and applications to nonlocal variational problems with variable exponent. Discret. Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. S 11(3), 379–389 (2018)
Benslimane, O., Aberqi, A., Bennouna, J.: Existence and uniqueness of weak solution of \( p (x) \)-Laplacian in Sobolev spaces with variable exponents in complete manifolds. Filomat 35(5), 1453–1463 (2021)
Berkovits, J.: Extension of the Leray–Schauder degree for abstract Hammerstein type mappings. J. Differ. Equ. 234(1), 289–310 (2007)
Biswas, R., Bahrouni, A., Fiscella, A.: Fractional double phase Robin problem involving variable-order exponents and logarithm-type nonlinearity. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 45(17), 11272–11296 (2022)
Brézis, H.: Functional Analysis, Sobolev Spaces and Partial Differential Equations, vol. 2. Springer, Berlin (2011)
Brouwer, L.E.J.: Über abbildungen von mannigfaltigkeiten. Math. Ann. 71, 97–115 (1912)
Caffarelli, L.A., Golse, F., Guo, Y., Kenig, C.E., Vasseur, A.: Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations. Springer, Berlin (2012)
Carbotti, A., Dipierro, S., Valdinoci, E.: Local Density of Solutions to Fractional Equations, De Gruyter Studies in Mathematics Vol. 74, De Gruyter, Berlin (2019)
Chang, S.Y.A., Del Mar Gonzàlez, M.: Fractional Laplacian in conformal geometry. Adv. Math. 226(2), 1410–1432 (2011)
Chen, Y., Levine, S., Rao, M.: Variable exponent, linear growth functionals in image restoration. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 66(4), 1383–1406 (2006)
Choi, E., Kim, J., Kim, Y.: Infinitely many solutions for nonlinear elliptic equations of \(p (x)\)-Laplace type without the Ambrosetti and Rabinowitz condition. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. 148, 1–31 (2018)
Diening, L., Harjulehto, P., Hästö, P., Ružickǎ, M.: Lebesgue and Sobolev Spaces with Variable Exponents. Springer, Berlin (2011)
Gaczkowski, M., Górka, P.: Sobolev spaces with variable exponents on Riemannian manifolds. Nonlinear Anal. 92(4), 47–59 (2013)
Gaczkowski, M., Górka, P., Pons, D.J.: Sobolev spaces with variable exponents on complete manifolds. J. Funct. Anal. 270(4), 1379–1415 (2016)
Gilboa, G., Osher, S.: Nonlocal operators with applications to image processing. Multiscale Model. Simul. 7(3), 1005–1028 (2009)
Guo, L., Zhang, B., Zhang, Y.: Fractional \(p\)-Laplacian equations on Riemannian manifolds. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 2018(156), 1–17 (2018)
Hebey, E.: Nonlinear Analysis on Manifolds: Sobolev Spaces and Inequalities, vol. 5. American Mathematical Society, Providence (2000)
Ho, K., Kim, Y.H.: A-priori bounds and multiplicity of solutions for nonlinear elliptic problems involving the fractional \(p (\cdot )\)-Laplacian. Nonlinear Anal. 188, 179–201 (2019)
Kaufmann, U., Rossi, J.D., Vidal, R.E.: Fractional Sobolev spaces with variable exponents and fractional \(p(x)\)-Laplacians. Electron. J. Qual. Theory Differ. Equ. 2017, 1–10 (2017)
Kim, I.S., Hong, S.J.: A topological degree for operators of generalized \(({S}_{+})\) type. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2015, 1–16 (2015)
Liu, H., Fu, Y.: Embedding theorems for variable exponent fractional Sobolev spaces and an application. AIMS Math. 6(9), 9835–9858 (2021)
Palais, S.R.: Seminar on the Atiyah–Singer Index Theorem, vol. 57. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1965)
Rădulescu, D., Repovš, D.D.: Partial Differential Equations with Variable Exponents. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2015)
Ružičkǎ, M.: Electrorheological fluids: Modeling and mathematical theory, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1748. Springer, Berlin (2000)
Servadei, R., Valdinoci, E.: Mountain pass solutions for non-local elliptic operators. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 389(2), 887–898 (2012)
Simon, J.: Régularité de la solution d’une équation non linéaire dans \({\mathbb{R}}^{N}\). In: Journées d’Analyse Non Linéaire: Proceedings, Besançon, France, June 1977, pp. 205–227. Springer, Berlin (1978)
Trudinger, N.S.: Remarks concerning the conformal deformation of Riemannian structures on compact manifolds. Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa-Classe di Scienze 22(2), 265–274 (1968)
Zeidler, E.: Nonlinear Functional Analysis and its Applications, II/B: Nonlinear Monotone Operators, vol. 178. Springer Science & Business Media, New York (1990)
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the referees for comments and suggestions.
Funding
The third author was supported by the Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency grants P1-0292, J1-4031, J1-4001, N1-0278, N1-0114, and N1-0083.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The authors declare that their contributions are equal.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare to have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This file has been typeset with the option draft to illustrate that feature and its purpose.
Appendix
Appendix
Lemma 6.1
Suppose that \(({\mathcal {M}}, {g})\) is a compact N-dimensional Riemannian manifold, \({\mathcal {U}}\) is a smooth open subset of \({\mathcal {M}},\) \(K:{\mathcal {U}}\times {\mathcal {U}} \rightarrow (0, +\infty ) \) is a symmetric function satisfying Lévy-integrability and coercivity conditions. Assume that assumption \( ({\mathcal {B}}_{1})\) holds. Then, the operator \(L:W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\rightarrow (W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}))^{*} \) is continuous, bounded and strictly monotone, and
-
(i)
L is an operator of type \( (S_{+}),\)
-
(ii)
\( L:W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\rightarrow (W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}))^{*} \) is a homeomorphism.
Proof
It is obvious that L is bounded. We show that L is continuous. Assume that \(w_{n} \rightarrow w\) in \(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\) and we show that \( L(w_{n}) \rightarrow L(w)\) in \( (W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}))^{*}.\) Indeed
Put
and
where, \( \frac{1}{p(y,z)}+ \frac{1}{p^{\prime }(y,z)}=1.\) Thanks to the Hölder inequality, we have
Thus
Let
and
Since \( w_{n}\rightarrow w \) in \( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}),\) we have \( V_{n}\rightarrow V\) in \( L ^{p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}} \times {\mathcal {U}}).\) Therefore, there exists a subsequence of \( \{V_{n}\}_{n\in {\mathbb {N}}}\) and \( h(y,z)\in L ^{p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}\times {\mathcal {U}}),\) such that \( V_{n} \rightarrow V\) a.e in \({\mathcal {U}}\times {\mathcal {U}}\) and \( |V_{n}|\le h(y,z).\) Therefore we have \( G_{n} \rightarrow G\) a.e in \({\mathcal {U}}\times {\mathcal {U}}\) and
We use the dominated convergence theorem to get
By Lemma 2.10, L is strictly monotone. Now, we show that L is mapping of type \( (S_{+}).\) Let \( \{w_{n}\}_{n\in {\mathbb {N}}} \subset W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}) \) be a sequence with \( w_{n} \rightharpoonup w\) in \(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\) and \( \limsup _{n \rightarrow +\infty }\left\langle L\left( w_{n}\right) -\right. \) \(\left. L(w ), w_{n}-w\right\rangle \le 0.\) Using (i), we get
By Theorem 1.1, we have that \( w_{n}(y) \rightarrow w(y) \text { a.e. in } {\mathcal {U}}.\) This, in combination with Fatou’s lemma, gives us
On the other hand, we have
Using Young’s inequality, we can see there is a positive constant \( c>0,\) such that
According to (6.1)–(6.3), we get
As a consequence of the Brezis–Lieb Lemma [13], (6.1), and (6.4), L is of type \( (S_+)\cdot \)
We show that L is a homeomorphism. It is easy to see that L is coercive and injective. Thanks to the Minty–Browder Theorem [36, Theorem 26 A], L is surjective. Therefore, L is a bijection. There exists a map \( G:(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}))^{*}\rightarrow W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}),\) such that \( G\circ L= id_{W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})}\) and \( L\circ G= id_{(W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}))^{*}}.\)
We show that G is continuous. Let \( g_{n}, g \in W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\) be such that \( g_{n}\rightarrow g \text { in } W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) Let \( t_{n}=G(g_{n}), w=G(g). \) Then \( L(w_{n})=g_{n}\) and \( L(w)=g.\) Since \( \{t_{n}\}_{n\in {\mathbb {N}}}\) is bounded in \( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}),\) we have \( t_{n}\rightharpoonup w \) in \( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) It follows that
Since L is of type \( (S_{+}),\) we get \( t_{n} \rightarrow w \) in \( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) This completes the proof. \(\square \)
Lemma 6.2
If f satisfies \(({\mathcal {B}}_{1}),\) then the operator \( S: W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}) \rightarrow ( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}))^{*}\) defined by
for every \( \varphi \in \left( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}})\right) ^{*} \) is compact.
Proof
Let
We shall show that \( S_{1}\) and \( S_{2}\) are both bounded and continuous. For every \(w\in W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}),\)
This implies that \( S_{1} \) is bounded in \( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) By condition \(( {\mathcal {B}}_{1}),\) there exists \(\alpha >0 ,\) such that
Therefore
Hence, \( S_{2}\) is bounded in \( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) Next, we show that \( S_{2}\) is continuous. Let \( w_{n} \in W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}) ,\) such that \( w_{n} \rightarrow w \) in \( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) Then \( w_{n} \rightarrow w \) in \( L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) Hence, there exists a subsequence, still denoted by \( w_{n},\) and a measurable function g in \( L^{q(y)}({\mathcal {U}}),\) such that \( w_{n}(y) \rightarrow w\) and \( |w_{n}(y)|\le g(y),\) a.e in \({\mathcal {U}}.\)
Since f is a Carathéodory function, we have
According to condition \( ({\mathcal {B}}_{1}),\) we have that
Using (6.5), we obtain
The dominated convergence theorem implies that \(S_{2} w_{n} \rightarrow S_{2} w \text { in } L^{q^{\prime }(y)}({\mathcal {U}}),\) so \( S_{2} \) is continuous in \( W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}).\) Because the canonical embedding \( i:W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}) \hookrightarrow L ^{q(y)}({\mathcal {U}})\) is compact, its adjoint operator \( i^{*}:L ^{q^{\prime }(y)}({\mathcal {U}}) \rightarrow (W_{K}^{q(y), p(y,z)}({\mathcal {U}}))^{*}\) is also compact. As a result, compositions \( i^{*}\circ S_{2}\) and \( S_{2} \circ i^{*}\) are compact, so we come to the conclusion that the operator S is compact and this completes the proof. \(\square \)
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Aberqi, A., Ouaziz, A. & Repovš, D.D. Fractional Sobolev Spaces with Kernel Function on Compact Riemannian Manifolds. Mediterr. J. Math. 21, 6 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00009-023-02517-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00009-023-02517-9
Keywords
- Nonlinear elliptic problem
- fractional Sobolev space
- kernel function
- Lévy-integrability condition
- compact Riemannian manifold
- existence of solutions
- topological degree theory