Abstract
We consider the perturbed Hammerstein integral equation
in the case where it may hold that \(f(t,y)<0\), for each \((t,y)\in [0,1]\times [0,+\infty )\), and \(\lim _{y\rightarrow \infty }f(t,y)=-\infty \); in other words, f may be a strictly negative function on its entire domain and may uniformly blow up to \(-\infty \) as \(y\rightarrow +\infty \). We apply our results, in part, to radially symmetric solutions of PDEs of the form
subject to nonlocal boundary conditions and show that this problem can possess a positive solution even if \(\lim _{u\rightarrow \infty }g(u)=-\infty \). By using a nonstandard cone and attendant open set, these results are able to be guaranteed by imposing relatively straightforward conditions. In addition, our results apply to forcing terms f and g with polynomial growth at \(+\infty \) of any degree. We demonstrate that, in principle, our results can be applied to ecological modeling with density-dependent growth and nonlocal boundary conditions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
In this paper, we consider the existence of at least one positive solution of the perturbed Hammerstein integral equation
The specific conditions imposed on the various constituent parts of Eq. (1.1) will be detailed in Sect. 2, but essentially the functions \(\gamma \), H, and f are continuous, whereas the functional \(\varphi \) is a linear functional, realized as the Stieltjes integral \(\varphi (y)=\int _0^1y(t)\ d\alpha (t)\), where \(\alpha \) is of bounded variation on [0, 1] but not necessarily monotone. Under a well-known transformation, solutions of the perturbed Hammerstein integral Eq. (1.1) can correspond, for example, to radially symmetric solutions of the PDE
for \(0<R_1<R_2<+\infty \) and \(\varvec{x}\in \mathbb {R}^{n}\), where the element \(H\big (\varphi (u)\big )\) represents a nonlocal, possibly nonlinear boundary condition. We provide specific examples of this correspondence in Sects. 3 and 4. Problems such as (1.1)–(1.2) can arise in thermostat problems, beam deformation and displacement, and chemical reactor theory among other applications—see Infante and Pietramala [33, 39] and Cabada et al. [4], for example.
The main contribution of this paper is to demonstrate that by using the nonstandard cone
for a constant \(C_0>0\) to be determined later and a continuous function \(q{:}~[0,1]\rightarrow [0,1]\), together with the open set, for \(\rho >0\),
we can construct a new method for attacking problem (1.1) (and, thus, problem (1.2) by extension) in the case where
We have previously utilized a cone similar to \(\mathcal {K}\) together with the set \(\widehat{V}_{\rho }\) to deduce existence results in the case of sign-changing Green’s functions for perturbed Hammerstein integral equations [22, 27] as well as for the positone problem [21, 23].
We would like to remark briefly that problems similar to (1.2) (or, especially, the analogous problem in the ODEs setting) have been studied extensive in the local BCs setting within the context of so-called indefinite weight problems—see the recent article by Feltrin and Zanolin [13] and the references therein. In this context, the function \(\varvec{x}\mapsto a\big (|\varvec{x}|\big )\) is the “weight.” Once possible specialization of our results, therefore, is to the problem of (1.2) in which the weight a satisfies \(a(t)<0\) for all \(t\in [0,+\infty )\) and in which \(0>a(t)g(u)\rightarrow -\infty \) for each t as \(u\rightarrow +\infty \).
Because of the coercivity condition imposed on \(\varphi \), by means of \(\mathcal {K}\), as well as the open set \(\widehat{V}_{\rho }\), the conditions we impose are simple, flexible, and relatively easy to verify—this will be demonstrated via some examples in Sects. 3 and 4. The primary assumption that we impose on the map \((t,y)\mapsto f(t,y)\) is that
uniformly for \(t\in [0,1]\), for some \(\kappa _0>0\). We study first the case in which \(\kappa _0=1\); this is the focus of Sects. 2 and 3, whereas in Sect. 4 we study the more general case in which \(\kappa _0>1\). We divide the two cases since the latter introduces some additional technical complications.
Note that the condition \(\lim _{y\rightarrow \infty }f(t,y)=-\infty \) has some relevance in the realm of biological modeling. Indeed, it is common in density-dependent ecological modeling (e.g., the classical logistic differential equation) to have forcing terms that satisfy this condition. Of course, in such problems only positive solutions are of relevance. Therefore, there is perhaps some interest in developing methods that can guarantee existence of positive solutions to problems even in spite of forcing terms possessing this property. For instance, if we consider a diffusion problem of the form \(U_t=\Delta U(t,\varvec{x})+f\big (t,U(t,\varvec{x})\big )\), and then steady-state solutions in the one-dimensional setting correspond to solutions of (1.1). If U represents the density of some population, then forcing terms of the form \(f(t,y):=y(1-y)\) or \(f(t,y)=y(1-y)-\frac{y^2}{1+y^2}\) commonly occur in such density-dependent ecological modeling—see, for example, the well-known spruce budworm model [55]. In these cases, the forcing terms are of quadratic growth at \(+\infty \) and, in addition, uniformly blow up to \(-\infty \) as \(y\rightarrow +\infty \). In spite of the quadratic growth, our results could be applied since we can take \(\kappa _0=3\), for example.
In addition to the possible relevance of biological modeling, from a purely mathematical point of view, allowing the forcing term f to satisfy the condition \(\lim _{y\rightarrow \infty }f(t,y)=-\infty \) as well as \(f(t,y)<0\), for all (t, y), makes the analysis more challenging. Indeed, as we explain momentarily, accommodating these more general forcing terms requires discarding the “usual” approach to semipositone problems and inventing a new methodology for dealing with this type of problem.
More specifically, the typical analysis of semipositone problems, which can be traced back to Anuradha et al. [3], involves imposing the so-called semipositone condition, wherein one assumes that \(f(t,y)\ge -\eta _0\) for some \(\eta _0>0\)—or, more generally, \(f(t,y)\ge -u(t)\), for some nonnegative map \(u\in L^1\big ([0,1]\big )\), say, for each \(y\in [0,+\infty )\). Then, the standard methodology in the nonlocal setting (see [18, 19, 25], for instance) is to create a modified problem of the form
where \(H^*(z):=H\big (\max \{0,z\}\big )\) and \(y^*(t):=\max \big \{0,(y-w)(t)\big \}\) with \(w(t):=\lambda \int _0^1G(t,s)u(s)\ \mathrm{d}s\), and deduce that this problem has a positive solution under some collection of hypotheses. Finally, the correspondence \(z(t):=(y-w)(t)\) provides a positive solution of the original problem—see, for example, [19, Theorem 3.1].
Here, by contrast, we create a different modification. Instead, we consider the problem
where we put
and
and
Thus, the map \(t\mapsto w_y(t)\) is now parameterized by the function y, which is in contrast to the classical approach. The key observation is that since \(\varphi \) is a coercive linear functional due to the cone \(\mathcal {K}\), we can use this coercivity to control the quantity \(f\big (s,y^*(s)\big )\) so that even if \(\lim _{y\rightarrow \infty }f(t,y)=-\infty \), it can still hold that \(f\big (s,y^*(s)\big )+u(s)+\varphi (y)\ge 0\), for each \(s\in [0,1]\). In the end, it is then easy to show that the translation \(z(t):=\big (y-w_y\big )(t)\) produces a positive solution, z, of problem (1.1) from a positive solution, y, of problem (1.3). Finally, by using the open set \(\widehat{V}_{\rho }\) instead of a more classical open set such as either \(\Omega _{\rho }:=\big \{y\in \mathcal {K}{:}~\Vert y\Vert <\rho \big \}\) or \(V_{\rho }:=\left\{ y\in \mathcal {K}{:}~ \min _{t\in [a,b]}y(t)<\rho \right\} \) it turns out that we can achieve more refined results.
We demonstrate the aforementioned improvements in Sect. 3, but let us mention at this point that the results in this paper represent a significant improvement over those we presented in [24]. The main result of that article, namely [24, Theorem 3.1], requires numerous assumptions that we do not require here—see Remark 3.6 in Sect. 3. Moreover, while the results there were certainly applicable, our methodology here is far simpler to apply and yields better results. Finally, another upshot of the methodology we introduce here is that it should be readily applicable to numerous other problem utilizing negative forcing terms, and so, is much more widely applicable than the more narrowly structured results of [24].
To conclude the introduction we would like to mention some of the existing literature in the area of both semipositone problems and nonlocal boundary value problems. In particular, as we already mentioned, the paper by Anuradha et al. [3] is important as regards the semipositone problem. In more recent years, many papers have appeared on semipositone boundary value problems equipped with a variety of boundary conditions—see, for example, [1, 8, 18, 19, 29, 48, 58, 62, 74] and the references therein. In addition, a variety of works have appeared on radially symmetric solutions for elliptic PDEs, and some representative works include those by Cianciaruso et al. [7], Dhanya et al. [9], do Ó et al. [10,11,12], Herrón and Lopera [32], Infante and Pietramala [41] and Webb [63]. Of particular relevance to our work here, the papers [41, 63] address nonlocal boundary conditions in the elliptic PDEs setting, whereas [7] addresses nonlocal, possibly nonlinear boundary conditions in the elliptic PDEs setting.
The paper by Cianciaruso et al. [7] is particularly interesting and relevant because not only do they treat radially symmetric solutions of an elliptic PDE with possibly nonlinear, nonlocal boundary conditions, but the condition they impose on the equivalent of our H in (1.1) is essentially imposed only along the boundary of a set—i.e., only for y satisfying \(\Vert y\Vert =\rho \). It is thus interesting to compare this condition with the one we utilize in this work with our new set \(\widehat{V}_{\rho }\). We feel that the \(\widehat{V}_{\rho }\) set offers some advantages in that our existence results only involve checking the value of H at point and no other growth condition on H whatsoever—not even along some sort of topological boundary. In fact, in some cases (see, for example, [26, Remark 3.6]), the \(\widehat{V}_{\rho }\)-methodology can be superior to that of [7]. The same remarks can be made about the very recent work of Cabada et al. [5], which while couched in a somewhat more general context than [7], nonetheless employs the same basic framework inasmuch as the nonlocal elements are concerned.
More generally, as concerns nonlocal boundary value problems, numerous works have appeared over the past few years. In addition to the fundamental works of Webb and Infante [59,60,61], which addressed linear nonlocal boundary conditions, other interesting papers have also addressed linear nonlocal boundary conditions in a variety of settings, such as those by Graef and Webb [30], Infante et al. [35, 36, 38, 40], Jankowski [42], Karakostas and Tsamatos [44, 45], Karakostas [46], Webb [65] and Yang [70, 71]. On the other hand, as concerns the setting of nonlocal, potentially nonlinear boundary conditions, relevant works include those by Anderson [2], Goodrich [14,15,16,17, 20], Infante et al. [33, 34, 37, 39], Kang et al. [43], Karakostas [46] and Yang [68, 69]. In addition, a recent paper by Cianciaruso and Pietramala [6] addresses nonlocal, nonlinear boundary conditions in the context of \((p_1,p_2)\)-Laplacian equations; it is worth noting that in [6] the authors impose uniform growth conditions on the nonlinear elements (i.e., the equivalent of H in this paper), whereas, as noted earlier, due to our use of the \(\widehat{V}\)-type set here we impose only pointwise conditions—in fact, none of these preceding papers imposes only pointwise conditions on the nonlinear boundary element.
In addition, since we couch our results here in the context of perturbed Hammerstein integral equations, we note that there have been many works in this area over the past many years, including contributions by Cabada et al. [4], Cianciaruso et al. [7], Goodrich [22, 23], Lan et al. [49, 51,52,53], Liu and Wu [54], Xu and Yang [67] and Yang [72]. It is also worth noting that the classical articles by Picone [57] and Whyburn [66] make for interesting reading on the historical trajectory of nonlocal boundary value problems.
Finally, we would like to highlight the recent article by Lan and Yang [50]. In this article, the authors develop a new fixed point index, which can handle BVPs with forcing terms satisfying \(\lim _{y\rightarrow \infty }f(t,y)=-\infty \). And a distinguishing aspect of our results is that we allow the forcing term to be always strictly negative. In fact, because for “small” y we only require \(f(t,y)\ge -u(t)\), for each \(t\in [0,1]\), with \(u\in L^1\big ([0,1]\big )\), it is actually possible that our function f not only satisfies \(f(t,y)<0\) for all (t, y), but it may also be the case that \(\big |f(t,y)\big |\) is quite large—in other words, there is no restriction on just “how negative” the value f(t, y) may be for any particular pair (t, y). By contrast, the results of [50] require the forcing term to satisfy \(f(t,0)\ge 0\), a.e. \(t\in [0,1]\). Thus, in this sense, our results here have extra flexibility and applicability since, unlike [50], we do not even require the nonnegativity of the number f(t, 0) for any \(t\in [0,1]\). Moreover, since our results here permit the use of possibly nonlocal, nonlinear boundary conditions, this allows for some additional flexibility since the methodology of [50] did not address nonlocal boundary conditions. Thus, our results here are more flexible in this sense, too.
2 Preliminary lemmata and notation
We begin by listing the structural and regularity assumptions that we make regarding problem (1.1). Note that throughout this work we denote by \(\Vert \cdot \Vert \) the usual supremum norm on the space \(\mathscr {C}\big ([0,1]\big )\). As mentioned in Sect. 1, for the time being we restrict ourselves, via condition (H3.1), to the case in which \(\kappa _0=1\)—i.e., f grows sublinearly at \(+\infty \). In Sect. 4, we will consider the case in which any \(\kappa _0>1\) is allowed.
- H1: :
-
The functional \(\varphi \) has the form
$$\begin{aligned} \varphi (y):=\int _{[0,1]}y(t)\ \mathrm{d}\alpha (t), \end{aligned}$$where \(\alpha {:}~[0,1]\rightarrow \mathbb {R}\) satisfy \(\alpha \in BV\big ([0,1]\big )\). In addition, we let the constant \(C_1>0\) satisfy
$$\begin{aligned} \big |\varphi (y)\big |\le C_1\Vert y\Vert , \end{aligned}$$for each \(y\in \mathscr {C}\big ([0,1]\big )\). Finally, letting \(S_0\subseteq [0,1]\) be a set of full measure on which \(\mathcal {G}(s):=\sup _{t\in [0,1]}G(t,s)>0\), we assume that the constant \(C_0\) defined by
$$\begin{aligned} C_0:=\inf _{s\in S_0}\frac{1}{\mathcal {G}(s)}\int _0^1G(t,s)\ \mathrm{d}\alpha (t) \end{aligned}$$satisfies \(+\infty>C_0>0\).
- H2: :
-
The functions \(\gamma {:}~ [0,1]\rightarrow [0,+\infty )\) and \(H{:}~ [0,+\infty )\rightarrow [0,+\infty )\) are continuous, and the function \(\gamma \) satisfies the inequality
$$\begin{aligned} \varphi (\gamma )\ge C_0\Vert \gamma \Vert . \end{aligned}$$ - H3: :
-
The function \(f{:}~ [0,1]\times [0,+\infty )\rightarrow \mathbb {R}\) is continuous and satisfies the following two growth conditions.
- (1):
-
\(\lim _{y\rightarrow +\infty }\frac{f(t,y)}{y}=0,~\text {uniformly for}~t\in [0,1]\)
- (2):
-
There exists a map \(u\in L^1\big ([0,1];[0,+\infty )\big )\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} f(t,y)\ge -u(t) \end{aligned}$$for each \(t\in [0,1]\) and \(y\in \left[ 0,R_0\right] \), where
$$\begin{aligned} R_0:=\inf \big \{R^*\in (0,+\infty ){:}~f(t,y)\ge -C_0y,~\text {for all }y\ge R^*\big \}. \end{aligned}$$
- H4: :
-
The function \(G{:}~ [0,1]\times [0,1]\rightarrow [0,+\infty )\) satisfies:
- (1):
-
\(G\in L^1\big ([0,1]\times [0,1]\big )\);
- (2):
-
for each \(\tau \in [0,1]\) it holds that
$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{t\rightarrow \tau }|G(t,s)-G(\tau ,s)|=0,~\text {a.e.}~s\in [0,1];\quad \text {and} \end{aligned}$$ - (3):
-
\(\mathcal {G}(s):=\sup _{t\in [0,1]}G(t,s)<+\infty \) for each \(s\in [0,1]\).
- H5: :
-
There exists a continuous function \(q{:}~ [0,1]\rightarrow [0,1]\) with \(\Vert q\Vert \ne 0\) such that
- (1):
-
\(\gamma (t)\ge q(t)\Vert \gamma \Vert \), for each \(t\in [0,1]\); and
- (2):
-
\(q(t)\ge G(t,s)\ge q(t)\mathcal {G}(s)\), for each \((t,s)\in [0,1]\times [0,1]\).
Remark 2.1
Note that we
-
Make no assumptions on the behavior of H either asymptotically or on nondegenerate intervals—only pointwise assumptions will be made (see Theorem 3.1);
-
Make no growth assumptions on the behavior of \((t,y)\mapsto f(t,y)\) except when \(y\rightarrow +\infty \); and
-
Allow for forcing terms, f, such that not only can \(f(t,y)\rightarrow -\infty \) as \(y\rightarrow +\infty \) but also it can hold that \(f(t,y)<0\) for all \((t,y)\in [0,1]\times [0,+\infty )\) with no restriction at all on the size of the quantity \(\big |f(t,y)\big |\).
We would also like to point out that the range of allowable values of the parameter \(\lambda \) is explicitly computable here.
Remark 2.2
For commonly occurring kernels, G, the function q is easy to calculate. For example, if
then one may take \(q(t):=\min \{t,1-t\}\), for example.
We begin by mentioning some properties of the set \(\widehat{V}_{\rho }\), which was described in Sect. 1. The proof of this lemma can be isolated from [23, Lemmata 2.9–2.10] with only minor additions and alterations, and so, we omit the proof.
Lemma 2.3
Given numbers \(\rho >0\) and \(\rho _2>\rho _1>0\) each of the following is true.
-
(1)
The set \(\widehat{V}_{\rho }\) is open (relative to \(\mathcal {K}\)).
-
(2)
The set \(\widehat{V}_{\rho }\) is bounded.
-
(3)
\(\widehat{V}_{\rho _2}\supset \widehat{V}_{\rho _1}\)
-
(4)
\(\widehat{V}_{\rho _2}{\setminus }\overline{\widehat{V}}_{\rho _1}\ne \varnothing \)
-
(5)
Assuming that \(C_1>C_0\), it holds that \(\widehat{V}_{\rho }\subseteq \Omega _{\frac{\rho }{C_0}}{\setminus }\overline{\Omega }_{\frac{\rho }{C_1}}\ne \varnothing \).
-
(6)
If \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho }\), then \(\varphi (y)=\rho \).
For future use, we define the operator \(T{:}~ \mathcal {K}\rightarrow \mathcal {K}\) by
Recall that
Remark 2.4
We would like to point out that the cone \(\mathcal {K}\) above is related to the cones introduced by Graef et al. [28], Ma and Zhong [56] and Webb [64]. In some sense, it is an extension and amalgamation of the ideas introduced in those articles and then suitably modified to suit our purposes here.
Note that \(\mathcal {K}\ne \varnothing \), and it is not trivial—i.e., \(\mathcal {K}\ne \{0\}\). These facts are due to assumptions (H1)–(H5) and, in particular, the assumptions on \(\gamma \) that ensure that \(\gamma \in \mathcal {K}\). With this in mind, our next preliminary lemma is to demonstrate that \(T(\mathcal {K})\subseteq \mathcal {K}\).
Lemma 2.5
Assume that conditions (H1)–(H5) are satisfied. Then, with the operator T defined as in (2.1) it holds that \(T(\mathcal {K})\subseteq \mathcal {K}\).
Proof
We first show that when \(y\in \mathcal {K}\) it follows that \((Ty)(t)\ge q(t)\Vert Ty\Vert \) for each \(t\in [0,1]\). To this end, notice that, by definition, \(\gamma (t)H^*\big (\varphi (y-w_y)\big )\ge 0\), for each \(t\in [0,1]\). So, we certainly deduce that
At the same time, we claim that \(f\big (s,y^*(s)\big )+u(s)+\varphi (y)\ge 0\), for each \(s\in [0,1]\). To see that this claim is true, note that by the definition of the number \(R_0\), we know that if \(y^*(s)\in \left[ 0,R_0\right] \), then it follows that \(f\big (s,y^*(s)\big )+u(s)\ge 0\), whereas if \(y^*(s)\in \left( R_0,+\infty \right) \), then it holds that
using the fact that \(\Vert y\Vert \ge \Vert y^*\Vert \), for if \(y^*(s)>0\), then \(y(s)\ge y^*(s)>0\) by the definition of the map \(s\mapsto y^*(s)\). Thus, we conclude that \(f\big (s,y^*(s)\big )+u(s)+\varphi (y)\ge 0\), for each \(s\in [0,1]\). So, by the properties imposed on the kernel G we may estimate
Then, upon putting (2.2)–(2.3) together we conclude that
for each \(y\in \mathcal {K}\).
On the other hand, to see that \(\varphi (Ty)\ge C_0\Vert Ty\Vert \) whenever \(y\in \mathcal {K}\), we write
So, we conclude that \(T(\mathcal {K})\subseteq \mathcal {K}\), and this completes the proof. \(\square \)
We next provide a sequence of three lemmata, which collectively ensure that a fixed point of the operator T can, in fact, be related back to a solution of the original integral Eq. (1.1), provided that certain conditions are imposed on \(\lambda \) and the norm of the fixed point. Our first of these three lemmata provides a condition so that \(\varphi (y-w_y)\ge 0\) holds. This will be important in ensuring that solutions of the modified integral equation can, in fact, be related back to solutions of the original integral equation.
Lemma 2.6
Suppose that conditions (H1)–(H5) are true. Assume that \(\lambda \) is selected so that
If \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho }\), where \(\rho \) satisfies
then \(\varphi (y-w_y)\ge 0\).
Proof
Let \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho }\). Then, recalling that \(w_y:=\lambda \int _0^1G(t,s)\big [u(s)+\varphi (y)\big ]\ \mathrm{d}s\), we calculate
Consequently, for \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho }\) we deduce that \(\varphi (y-w_y)\ge 0\) provided that
Since, by assumption we have that \(-\lambda \int _0^1\int _0^1G(t,s)\ \mathrm{d}\alpha (t)\ \mathrm{d}s>0\), the above quantity is well defined. And this completes the proof. \(\square \)
Lemma 2.7
Suppose that conditions (H1)–(H5) are true. Assume that \(0<\lambda <\frac{1}{C_1}\). In addition, for the number \(\lambda \) so fixed, suppose that the number \(\rho \) satisfies
Then, whenever \(y\in \mathcal {K}{\setminus }\widehat{V}_{\rho }\), it follows that \(y^*\equiv y-w_y\).
Proof
Recall that the definition of the map \(t\mapsto y^*(t)\) is
Note that condition (H5) allows us to estimate
where to obtain the final inequality we have used both the fact that \(y\in \mathcal {K}{\setminus }\widehat{V}_{\rho }\), by assumption, so that
and the fact that by the restriction on \(\lambda \) in the statement of this lemma, it follows that \(1-\lambda C_1>0\). Thus, we conclude from the above remarks, the restriction on \(\rho \), and (2.5) that
for each \(t\in [0,1]\). Consequently, by the definition of the map \(t\mapsto y^*(t)\), we deduce that \(y^*\equiv y-w_y\), as claimed. \(\square \)
Remark 2.8
Note that Lemma 2.7 actually implies something stronger than the conclusion as stated. In particular, since \(\lambda \) is strictly less than \(C_1^{-1}\), it follows that the quantity
which appears in (2.5), is actually strictly greater than zero. This means that
whenever \(q(t)\ne 0\).
Our final preliminary lemma demonstrates that solutions of the modified integral equation can be related back to solutions of the original integral equation by means of the map \(t\mapsto \big (y-w_y\big )(t)\).
Lemma 2.9
Suppose that conditions (H1)–(H5) are true. Assume that
If \(y_0\) is a positive solution of the modified integral Eq. (1.3) satisfying \(y_0\in \mathcal {K}{\setminus }\widehat{V}_{\rho ^*}\), where the number \(\rho ^*>0\) is defined by
then the function \(z{:}~[0,1]\rightarrow [0,+\infty )\) defined by \(z(t):=\big (y_0-w_{y_0}\big )(t)\) is a solution of the original integral Eq. (1.1).
Proof
Define the function \(z{:}~ [0,1]\rightarrow [0,+\infty )\) by \(z_0(t):=\big (y_0-w_{y_0}\big )(t)\). Since \(y_0\) solves the modified problem (1.3) we know that
By Lemma 2.6, the fact that
and the condition imposed on \(\lambda \) in the statement of this present lemma, we know that \(\varphi \big (y_0-w_{y_0}\big )\ge 0\), so that, by definition,
At the same time, since \(y_0\in \mathcal {K}{\setminus }\widehat{V}_{\rho ^*}\) we deduce from Lemma 2.7 that, in fact,
Consequently, we deduce from estimates (2.6)–(2.8) that
Thus, z solves the original integral Eq. (1.1). Finally, since \(\varphi (y_0)>\rho ^*\), we know from a combination of Lemma 2.7 and Remark 2.8 that \(z(t)=\big (y_0-w_{y_0}\big )(t)>0\) whenever \(q(t)\ne 0\). Hence, since \(\Vert q\Vert \ne 0\), it follows that \(\Vert z\Vert \ne 0\). Thus, z is a nontrivial, positive solution of the original integral Eq. (1.1). And this completes the proof. \(\square \)
We conclude this section by stating a fixed point result that we will utilize in Sects. 3 and 4. One may consult, for example, Guo and Lakshmikantham [31], Infante et al. [40], or Zeidler [73] for further details on these types of results.
Lemma 2.10
Let D be a bounded open set and, with \(\mathcal {K}\) a cone in a Banach space \(\mathscr {X}\), suppose both that \(D\cap \mathcal {K}\ne \emptyset \) and that \(\overline{D}\cap \mathcal {K}\ne \mathcal {K}\). Let \(D_1\supseteq \{0\}\) be open in \(\mathscr {X}\) with \(\overline{D}_1\subseteq D\cap \mathcal {K}\). Assume that \(T: \overline{D}\cap \mathcal {K}\rightarrow \mathcal {K}\) is a compact map such that \(Tx\ne x\) for \(x\in \mathcal {K}\cap \partial D\). If \(i_{\mathcal {K}}\left( T,D\cap \mathcal {K}\right) =1\) and \(i_{\mathcal {K}}\left( T,D_1\cap \mathcal {K}\right) =0\), then T has a fixed point in \((D\cap \mathcal {K}){\setminus }\left( \overline{D_1\cap \mathcal {K}}\right) \). Moreover, the same result holds if \(i_{\mathcal {K}}(T,D\cap \mathcal {K})=0\) and \(i_{\mathcal {K}}\left( T,D_1\cap \mathcal {K}\right) =1\).
3 Results for sublinear growth
We begin by stating and proving our main existence theorem for problem (1.1). We then provide some examples of the application of this theorem. Note that we will use the following notation both in this section and in Sect. 4.
-
For a continuous function \(f{:}~ [0,1]\times \mathbb {R}\rightarrow \mathbb {R}\), a set \([a,b]\subseteq [0,1]\), and numbers \(0\le r_1<r_2\le +\infty \), we denote
-
(1)
\(f^M_{[a,b]\times \left[ r_1,r_2\right] }:=\max _{(t,y)\in [a,b]\times \left[ r_1,r_2\right] }f(t,y)\);
-
(2)
\(f^m_{[a,b]\times \left[ r_1,r_2\right] }:=\min _{(t,y)\in [a,b]\times \left[ r_1,r_2\right] }f(t,y)\); and
-
(3)
\(|f|^M_{[a,b]\times \left[ r_1,r_2\right] }:=\max _{(t,y)\in [a,b]\times \left[ r_1,r_2\right] }\big |f(t,y)\big |\).
-
(1)
Theorem 3.1
Assume that conditions (H1)–(H5) are satisfied. Let \(\lambda _0>0\) be defined by
Suppose that for fixed \(\lambda \in \big (0,\lambda _0\big )\) that there exist numbers \(\rho _2>\rho _1>\rho ^*\), where \(\rho ^*\) is the number from Lemma 2.9, such that each of
and
is true. Then problem (1.1) has at least one positive solution.
Proof
The operator T is evidently completely continuous. Therefore, we omit the proof of this fact.
So, first suppose for contradiction that there exists \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho _1}\) such that \(y=Ty+\mu e\) for some \(\mu \ge 0\), where we put \(e(t):=\gamma (t)\). Note that this is an admissible choice of e since \(\gamma \in \mathcal {K}\), by assumption. Then, by applying \(\varphi \) to both sides of the operator equation and using that \(\varphi (y)=\rho _1\) we deduce that
where we have used equality (2.4) from the proof of Lemma 2.6 and the fact that \(f\big (s,y^*(s)\big )+u(s)+\varphi (y)\ge 0\), for each \(s\in [0,1]\), as demonstrated in Lemma 2.5. We have, in addition, used the fact that since condition (H1) holds, we must have that \(\int _0^1G(t,s)\ \mathrm{d}\alpha (t)>0\), a.e. \(s\in [0,1]\). Note also that
since from the proof of Lemma 2.6 we know that \(\varphi (y-w_y)=\rho _1-\varphi (w_y)\ge 0\), whence the above equality holds by the definition of the map \(z\mapsto H^*(z)\). But then by condition (3.1) in the statement of the theorem we obtain from inequality (3.3) that \(\rho _1>\rho _1\), which is a contradiction. Thus,
Importantly, by the lower bound imposed on the number \(\rho _1\) we note that
Conversely, suppose for contradiction the existence of \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho _2}\) such that \(\mu y=Ty\) for some \(\mu \ge 1\). Again applying \(\varphi \) to both sides of the operator equation and using that \(\varphi (y)=\rho _2\) we obtain that
which can thus be recast as
using that \(f\big (s,y^*(s)\big )+u(s)+\rho _2\ge 0\), for each \(s\in [0,1]\), and that \(\int _0^1G(t,s)\ \mathrm{d}\alpha (t)>0\), a.e. \(s\in [0,1]\). Now, recall that by Lemma 2.7 and the lower bound imposed on \(\rho _1\), we have that \(y^*\equiv y-w_y\). As such, \(y(t)\ge y(t)-w_y(t)=y^*(t)\ge 0\), for each \(t\in [0,1]\). Moreover, since \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho _2}\), it follows that \(\Vert y^*\Vert \le \Vert y\Vert \le \frac{\rho _2}{C_0}\). Putting all of this together, we see that from (3.5) follows the estimate
where we again use that
But then by condition (3.2) we obtain from (3.6) that \(1<1\), and so,
Finally, by (3.4) and (3.7) we deduce the existence of \(y_0\in \widehat{V}_{\rho _2}{\setminus }\overline{\widehat{V}}_{\rho _1}\) such that \(Ty_0=y_0\). Note that Lemma 2.3 ensures that \(\widehat{V}_{\rho _2}{\setminus }\overline{\widehat{V}}_{\rho _1}\ne \varnothing \). Since we must have \(\varphi (y_0)>\rho _1>\rho ^*>0\), it follows from Lemma 2.9 that \(y_0\) is, in fact, a solution of the original integral Eq. (1.1) and is, in fact, a nontrivial positive solution. And this completes the proof. \(\square \)
Remark 3.2
Obviously, we can swap the roles of the numbers \(\rho _1\) and \(\rho _2\) in the statement and proof of Theorem 3.1 and thereby obtain an obvious corollary, whose precise statement we omit. In particular, we can assume that \(\rho _1>\rho _2>\rho ^*\) instead.
If we are willing to strengthen the conditions on H somewhat, then we can recast Theorem 3.1 in the following manner. In particular, Corollary 3.3 indicates how Theorem 3.1 can be simplified somewhat if we assume that the map \(z\mapsto H(z)\) is increasing.
Corollary 3.3
Assume that conditions (H1)–(H5) are satisfied. In addition, assume that the map \(z\mapsto H(z)\) is increasing. Let \(\lambda _0\) be defined by
Suppose that for fixed \(\lambda \in \big (0,\lambda _0\big )\) that there exist numbers \(\rho _2>\rho _1>\rho ^*\), where \(\rho ^*\) is the number from Lemma 2.9, such that each of
and
is true. Then problem (1.1) has at least one positive solution.
Proof
The proof that \(i_{\mathcal {K}}\left( T,\widehat{V}_{\rho _1}\right) =0\) does not change at all. On the other hand, the only change in the proof that \(i_{\mathcal {K}}\left( T,\widehat{V}_{\rho _2}\right) =1\) is that since
and H is an increasing map, we deduce that
And from this the proof of the corollary follows at once. \(\square \)
We now provide an example in the context of radially symmetric solutions to elliptic PDEs.
Example 3.4
We consider the problem
where in (1.2) we have defined the maps \(w\mapsto f(w)\), \(\xi \mapsto h(\xi )\), and \(z\mapsto H(z)\) as follows.
Note that
and \(f(w)<0\), for all \(w\ge 0\). Thus, this problem is not semipositone. Moreover, since \(\lim _{w\rightarrow \infty }\frac{f(w)}{w}=0\), we can select \(\kappa _0=1\) here.
Note that since we are considering Dirichlet-type nonlocal boundary conditions in the above PDE, here we shall select the kernel \((t,s)\mapsto G(t,s)\) of our integral Eq. (1.1) to be
In addition, we put \(\gamma (t):=1-t\) in (1.1). Then, preceding PDE can be related to the ODE
where \(\phi (t)=\left( e^{1-t}\right) ^{2}\) for \(t\in [0,1]\). A description of the process of deriving of the above ODE from the original elliptic PDE can be found, among other places, in [47, 52, 53]. So we consider the ODE
Routine calculations demonstrate that in this case we have both that
and that
Moreover, we find that \(C_1:=\frac{2}{3}\). In addition, due to the form of G above, we put \(q(t):=\min \{t,1-t\}\), and then notice that \(\gamma (t)\ge q(t)\Vert \gamma \Vert \), for \(t\in [0,1]\). Finally, note that
With the preceding constants in hand and using the notation introduced earlier in this and the preceding section, we calculate that
and so, we may put \(u(t)\equiv 9.09\) here. With this choice of the map \(t\mapsto u(t)\), we calculate
This means that
Since we have chosen \(\lambda =1\) in the above PDE, we conclude that we may set \(\rho ^*:=18.18\).
With the preliminary calculations completed, we now will use Corollary 3.3 to show that the PDE has at least one positive (radially symmetric) solution. Notice that Corollary 3.3 is applicable since H is an increasing function. In addition, we will swap the roles of \(\rho _1\) and \(\rho _2\) in the statement of the corollary—i.e., we will take \(\rho _1>\rho _2>\rho ^*\), which, as remarked in Remark 3.2, is permissible and does not affect the application of the existence result. So, to see that the corollary is applicable, we simply notice that if we put \(\rho _2:=50\), then
which verifies condition (3.9), whereas if we put \(\rho _1:=100\), then
which verifies condition (3.8). Thus, Corollary 3.3 may be applied to the PDE to deduce the existence of at least one positive solution, \(w_0\), satisfying the localization
Remark 3.5
Observe that the boundary condition appearing in Example 3.4 is nonlocal and piecewise linear and affine since
Thus, strictly speaking, our nonlocal boundary conditions do not have to be nonlinear. Both piecewise linear and affine boundary conditions, for example, can be accommodated by the existence results presented in this section.
Remark 3.6
A comparison of the application of Corollary 3.3 to [24, Theorem 3.1] reveals that our methodology here is much simpler and more elegant. For example, to apply [24, Theorem 3.1] we would need to assume
-
that \(\gamma \) satisfies a technical condition [24, Condition (H2.1)];
-
that H is sublinear at infinity [24, Condition (H2.2)];
-
that \(\lambda _0\) satisfies a very technical condition [24, Condition (H7)] that while able to be checked is computationally complicated;
-
a condition on the number \(R_0\) of condition (H3) that is much more complicated [24, Condition (H6)]; and
-
an additional auxiliary condition on the map \((t,s)\mapsto G(t,s)\) [24, Statement of Theorem 3.1].
All in all, our methodology here is significantly simpler. In addition and as pointed out in Sect. 1, because of this significant simplification, the methodology here should be able to applied to a much wider variety of problems than merely (1.1).
We conclude with a brief mention of the specialization of the preceding results to the special setting in which
which was mentioned toward the beginning of Sect. 1. In this case, we note that (H3.1)–(H3.2) become, respectively:
-
\(a(t)\left( \lim _{y\rightarrow \infty }\frac{g(y)}{y}\right) =0\); and
-
\(a(t)g(y)\ge -u(t)\).
This allows, in, say, Theorem 3.1, for the map \(t\mapsto a(t)\) to satisfy \(a(t)<0\) for all \(t\in [0,1]\) with no restriction on the size of \(\big |a(t)\big |\). While this is not directly comparable to, say, Feltrin and Zanolin [13] (e.g., there local boundary conditions are considered, multiplicity of solutions are considered, and the weight changes sign); nonetheless, our results here provide a complementation to some of the known results in the nonpositive weight setting.
4 Results for more general polynomial growth
In this section, we demonstrate that if we are willing to let the admissible range of \(\lambda \) be defined in a more complicated manner, then we can accommodate more general polynomial growth at \(+\infty \). In particular, we replace assumption (H3.1) with the new assumption (\(\hbox {H3}^{\prime }.1\)) below; note that we still assume in condition (\(\hbox {H3}^{\prime }\)) the other assumptions imposed in condition (H3).
- \(\mathbf{H3 }^{\prime }:\) :
-
The function \(f{:}~ [0,1]\times [0,+\infty )\rightarrow \mathbb {R}\) is continuous and satisfies the following two growth conditions.
- (1):
-
There exists a number \(\kappa _0\in (1,+\infty )\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{y\rightarrow \infty }\frac{f(t,y)}{y^{\kappa _0}}=0, \end{aligned}$$uniformly for \(t\in [0,1]\).
- (2):
-
There exists a map \(u\in L^1\big ([0,1];[0,+\infty )\big )\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} f(t,y)\ge -u(t) \end{aligned}$$for each \(t\in [0,1]\) and \(y\in \left[ 0,R_0'\right] \), where
$$\begin{aligned} R_0':=\inf \big \{R^*\in (0,+\infty ){:}~ f(t,y)\ge -C_0^{\kappa _0}y^{\kappa _0},~\text {for all}~y\ge R^*\big \}. \end{aligned}$$
In addition, instead of the operator T, which we utilized in Sect. 3, we will need in this context the slightly modified operator \(T_{\kappa _0}{:}~\mathcal {K}\rightarrow \mathcal {K}\) defined by
Of course, this means that we will also need to modify the map \(w_y{:}~[0,1]\rightarrow \mathbb {R}\) to
Note that the assumptions in Sect. 3 dealt with the case \(\kappa _0=1\), whereas condition (\(\hbox {H3}^{\prime }\).1) generalizes this to allow for \(\kappa _0>1\). Let us recall, as explained in Sect. 1, that the case in which \(\kappa _0>2\) is particularly interesting, for many density-dependent ecological models fall into this category since their forcing terms possess quadratic polynomial growth at \(+\infty \).
Since most of the calculations carry over to this more general case with only minor to moderate modification, we will not provide so many details but rather just highlight the relevant changes. Therefore, we next present the analogues of Lemmata 2.5–2.7 and 2.9, suitably modified for the case in which \(\kappa _0>1\).
Lemma 4.1
Assume that conditions (H1)–(H2), (\(\hbox {H3}^{\prime }\)), and (H4)–(H5) are satisfied. Then, with the operator \(T_{\kappa _0}\) defined as in (4.1) it holds that \(T_{\kappa _0}(\mathcal {K})\subseteq \mathcal {K}\).
Proof
That \(y\in \mathcal {K}\) implies that \(\big (T_{\kappa _0}y\big )(t)\ge q(t)\Vert T_{\kappa _0}y\Vert \) for each \(t\in [0,1]\) only changes slightly and only in the case when \(y^*(s)\in \left( R_0',+\infty \right) \) for some \(s\in [0,1]\). In particular, if \(y^*(s)\in \left( R_0',+\infty \right) \), then
On the other hand, there is no change to the part of the proof that \(\varphi \left( T_{\kappa _0}y\right) \ge C_0\big \Vert T_{\kappa _0}y\big \Vert \) whenever \(y\in \mathcal {K}\). So, we conclude that \(T_{\kappa _0}(\mathcal {K})\subseteq \mathcal {K}\), and this completes the proof. \(\square \)
Lemma 4.2
Assume that conditions (H1)–(H2), (\(\hbox {H3}^{\prime }\)), and (H4)–(H5) are satisfied. Let \(\rho >0\) be given and assume that \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho }\). If \(\lambda :=\lambda (\rho )\) satisfies
then \(\varphi (y-w_y)>0\).
Proof
Let \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho }\). Then, using the restriction on \(\lambda \) given in the statement of the lemma we calculate
which proves the claim and completes the proof. \(\square \)
Remark 4.3
Unlike in Sects. 2 and 3, in which the choice of \(\lambda \) was entirely in terms of initial data, in this case the choice of \(\lambda \) will depend upon the selection of the number \(\rho \). Nonetheless, the range of admissible values of \(\lambda \) remains computable as the examples in the sequel demonstrate.
Lemma 4.4
Assume that conditions (H1)–(H2), (\(\hbox {H3}^{\prime }\)), and (H4)–(H5) are satisfied. Let \(\rho >0\) be given and assume that \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho }\). If \(\lambda :=\lambda (\rho )\) satisfies
then it follows that \(y^*\equiv y-w_y\).
Proof
Similar to inequality (2.5) from earlier, we observe that
where the final inequality in (4.3) follows from the upper bound imposed on \(\lambda \) in the statement of the lemma. And this completes the proof. \(\square \)
Remark 4.5
Just as with Remark 2.8 earlier, from inequality (4.3) we see that because of the strict upper bound on \(\lambda \) in the statement of Lemma 4.4, it actually holds that \(\big (y-w_y\big )(t)>0\) for each t such that \(q(t)\ne 0\).
Lemma 4.6
Assume that conditions (H1)–(H2), (\(\hbox {H3}^{\prime }\)), and (H4)–(H5) are satisfied. Suppose that there are numbers \(+\infty>\rho _2>\rho _1>0\) such that \(y_0\) is a positive solution of the modified integral Eq. (4.1) satisfying \(y_0\in \widehat{V}_{\rho _2}{\setminus }\overline{\widehat{V}}_{\rho _1}\). If the number \(\lambda :=\lambda \left( \rho \right) \) satisfies
then the function \(z{:}~[0,1]\rightarrow [0,+\infty )\) defined by \(z(t):=\big (y_0-w_{y_0}\big )(t)\) is a solution of the original integral Eq. (1.1).
Proof
Since \(y_0\) solves the modified problem (4.1), we know that
Consequently, we may write
Similar to the proof of Lemma 2.9, since \(y_0\in \widehat{V}_{\rho _2}{\setminus }\overline{\widehat{V}}_{\rho _1}\) and given the restrictions on \(\lambda \), we see that Lemma 4.4 implies that \(y_0^*\equiv y_0-w_{y_0}\equiv z\). At the same time, by Lemma 4.2, the fact that
and the condition imposed on \(\lambda \) in the statement of this lemma, we know that \(\varphi \big (y_0-w_{y_0}\big )\ge 0\). Consequently, from the preceding discussion and estimate (4.4) we deduce that z solves the original integral Eq. (1.1). Finally, just as in the proof of Lemma 2.9 again, we know from the preceding lemmata and remarks that, in fact, \(\Vert z\Vert >0\) so that z is a nontrivial, positive solution of (1.1). And this completes the proof. \(\square \)
We next present the following corollary to Lemma 4.6. The corollary formalizes the observation that under certain conditions, the upper bound on \(\lambda \) given in the statement of Lemma 4.6 can be simplified.
Corollary 4.7
Suppose that the number \(\rho _2\) in the statement of Lemma 4.6 satisfies
Then the restriction on \(\lambda \) as given in Lemma 4.6 can be simplified to
Proof
Consider the map \(G{:}~[0,+\infty )\rightarrow [0,+\infty )\) defined by
where \(\alpha _1\) and \(\alpha _2\) are positive constants. A simple calculation demonstrates that
Evidently, \(G'(\rho )>0\) if and only if \((1-\kappa _0)\rho ^{\kappa _0}>-\alpha _2\). Since \(1-\kappa _0<0\), we conclude that \(G'(\rho )>0\) if and only if
Thus, if this inequality holds for each \(\rho \in \left[ \rho _1,\rho _2\right] \), then
On the other hand, consider the map \(H{:}~ [0,+\infty )\rightarrow [0,+\infty )\) defined by
Then we calculate
Clearly, then, \(H'(\rho )>0\) if and only if
Thus, the condition \(\rho ^{\kappa _0}<\frac{\alpha _4}{\alpha _3(\kappa _0-1)}\) ensures that \(H'(\rho )>0\). And this implies that
whenever \(\rho ^{\kappa _0}<\frac{\alpha _4}{\alpha _3\left( \kappa _0-1\right) }\) for each \(\rho \in \left[ \rho _1,\rho _2\right] \).
Finally, define \(\alpha _i\), \(1\le i\le 4\), as follows.
Notice that \(\alpha _i>0\), for each i. Then, the conclusion of the corollary follows immediately from the observation that \(\rho _1^{\kappa _0}<\rho _2^{\kappa _0}\). \(\square \)
Finally, we present an existence theorem, which is the analogy of Theorem 3.1.
Theorem 4.8
Assume that conditions (H1)–(H2), (\(\hbox {H3}^{\prime }\)), and (H4)–(H5) are satisfied. Suppose that there exist numbers \(\rho _2>\rho _1>0\) and a number \(\lambda :=\lambda \left( \rho _1,\rho _2\right) >0\) such that each of
and
and
is true. Then problem (1.1) has at least one positive solution.
Proof
Similar to the first part of the proof of Theorem 3.1, for \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho _1}\) and using (4.2) we find that
Then, combining condition (4.5) with inequality (4.6) leads to a contradiction. Conversely, the calculation for \(y\in \partial \widehat{V}_{\rho _2}\) changes in the obvious way, and so, we skip the details of that calculation. \(\square \)
Of course, we can provide an analogy of Corollary 3.3 in this more general setting. We do so next. Since the proof of Corollary 4.9 is very similar to that of Corollary 3.3, we omit the proof. Furthermore, in light of Corollary 4.7 we can provide additional corollaries beyond Corollary 4.9. But we omit their statements.
Corollary 4.9
Assume that conditions (H1)–(H2), (\(\hbox {H3}^{\prime }\)), and (H4)–(H5) are satisfied. In addition, assume that the map \(z\mapsto H(z)\) is increasing. Suppose that there exist numbers \(\rho _2>\rho _1>0\) and a number \(\lambda :=\lambda \left( \rho _1,\rho _2\right) >0\) such that each of
and
and
is true. Then problem (1.1) has at least one positive solution.
We conclude with a couple examples to illustrate the use of the preceding existence theorem.
Example 4.10
For \(\lambda >0\) to be selected later, we consider the problem
where we define the maps \(w\mapsto f(w)\), \(\xi \mapsto h(\xi )\), and \(z\mapsto H(z)\) as follows.
Note that
and \(f(w)<0\), for all \(w\ge 0\). Thus, this problem is not semipositone. Moreover, since \(\lim _{w\rightarrow \infty }\frac{f(w)}{w^4}=0\), we can select \(\kappa _0=4\) here. Note that we are using the same nonlocal element as we did in Example 3.4.
In a manner similar to that utilized in Example 3.4, we consider here the ODE
Since the nonlocal element in this problem is the same as in Example 3.4 and, furthermore, the kernel \((t,s)\mapsto G(t,s)\) is identical as well, we once again obtain the following.
Moreover, we have that
from which it follows that here we may select \(u(t)\equiv 1.942\times 10^{10}\). So, in this case, we calculate that
where \(\rho _1\) and \(\rho _2\) will be selected momentarily.
So, using the conditions imposed by Corollary 4.9 we obtain the following inequalities.
Routine computations show that these inequalities are satisfied for, respectively, \(\rho _1=90\) and \(\rho _2=50\). (Note that as in Example 3.4 here we swap the roles of \(\rho _1\) and \(\rho _2\) as stated in Theorem 4.8 in the sense that \(\rho _1>\rho _2>0\).) Moreover, for these choices of \(\rho _1\) and \(\rho _2\) we may select, for example, \(\lambda \in \left( 0,3.861\times 10^{-9}\right) \). In particular, this means that we deduce the existence of at least one positive solution, say \(w_0\), to the PDE
whenever \(0<\lambda <3.861\times 10^{-9}\). Notice that \(w_0\) satisfies the localization \(w_0\in \widehat{V}_{90}{\setminus }\overline{\widehat{V}}_{50}\).
Our next example, Example 4.11 demonstrates that the upper bound on \(\lambda \) can change by several orders of magnitude depending upon, for example, the map \((t,y)\mapsto f(t,y)\) selected.
Example 4.11
For \(\lambda >0\) to be selected later, we consider the problem
where we define the maps \(w\mapsto f(w)\), \(\xi \mapsto h(\xi )\), and \(z\mapsto H(z)\) as follows.
So, here we can select \(\kappa _0=3\). Note that we are using the same nonlocal element as we did in the previous examples.
In this example, we have that
from which it follows that here we may select \(u(t)\equiv 139,325\). In can then be shown that the conditions of Corollary 4.9 are satisfied if we put \(\rho _2:=50\) and \(\rho _1:=200\) here. With these choices of \(\rho _1\) and \(\rho _2\), straightforward computations allow us to conclude that the PDE has a positive solution, say, \(w_0\in \widehat{V}_{200}{\setminus }\overline{\widehat{V}}_{50}\), for each \(\lambda \) satisfying \(0<\lambda <3.686\times 10^{-5}\).
Remark 4.12
With H as in Example 4.11 consider the problem
This is precisely the problem considered in Example 4.11 with the exception that the forcing term f is now \(f(w):=w(1-w)\), which is a logistic-type forcing term. It can be shown that the results of Example 4.11 apply to this forcing term as well.
References
Anderson, D.R., Zhai, C.: Positive solutions to semi-positone second-order three-point problems on time scales. Appl. Math. Comput. 15, 3713–3720 (2010)
Anderson, D.R.: Existence of three solutions for a first-order problem with nonlinear nonlocal boundary conditions. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 408, 318–323 (2013)
Anuradha, V., Hai, D.D., Shivaji, R.: Existence results for superlinear semipositone BVPs. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 124, 757–763 (1996)
Cabada, A., Infante, G., Tojo, F.: Nonzero solutions of perturbed Hammerstein integral equations with deviated arguments and applications. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal. 47, 265–287 (2016)
Cabada, A., Infante, G., Tojo, F.A.F.: Nonlinear perturbed integral equations related to nonlocal boundary value problems. Fixed Point Theory 19, 65–92 (2018)
Cianciaruso, F., Pietramala, P.: Multiple positive solutions of a \((p_1, p_2)\)-Laplacian system with nonlinear BCs. Bound. Value Probl. 2015, 163 (2015)
Cianciaruso, F., Infante, G., Pietramala, P.: Solutions of perturbed Hammerstein integral equations with applications. Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl. 33, 317–347 (2017)
Dahal, R.: Positive solutions of semipositone singular Dirichlet dynamic boundary value problems. Nonlinear Dyn. Syst. Theory 9, 361–374 (2009)
Dhanya, R., Morris, Q., Shivaji, R.: Existence of positive radial solutions for superlinear, semipositone problems on the exterior of a ball. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 434, 1533–1548 (2016)
do Ó, J.M., Lorca, S., Ubilla, P.: Local superlinearity for elliptic systems involving parameters. J. Differ. Equ. 211, 1–19 (2005)
do Ó, J.M., Lorca, S., Ubilla, P.: Three positive solutions for a class of elliptic systems in annular domains. Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. 48, 365–373 (2005)
do Ó, J.M., Lorca, S., Ubilla, P.: Positive solutions for a class of multi parameter ordinary elliptic systems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 332, 1249–1266 (2007)
Feltrin, G., Zanolin, F.: Multiple positive solutions for a superlinear problem: a topological approach. J. Differ. Equ. 259, 925–963 (2015)
Goodrich, C.S.: Positive solutions to boundary value problems with nonlinear boundary conditions. Nonlinear Anal. 75, 417–432 (2012)
Goodrich, C.S.: On nonlocal BVPs with boundary conditions with asymptotically sublinear or superlinear growth. Math. Nachr. 285, 1404–1421 (2012)
Goodrich, C.S.: On nonlinear boundary conditions satisfying certain asymptotic behavior. Nonlinear Anal. 76, 58–67 (2013)
Goodrich, C.S.: On a nonlocal BVP with nonlinear boundary conditions. Results Math. 63, 1351–1364 (2013)
Goodrich, C.S.: A note on semipositone boundary value problems with nonlocal, nonlinear boundary conditions. Arch. Math. (Basel) 103, 177–187 (2014)
Goodrich, C.S.: Semipositone boundary value problems with nonlocal, nonlinear boundary conditions. Adv. Differ. Equ. 20, 117–142 (2015)
Goodrich, C.S.: On nonlinear boundary conditions involving decomposable linear functionals. Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. (2) 58, 421–439 (2015)
Goodrich, C.S.: Coercivity of linear functionals on finite dimensional spaces and its application to discrete BVPs. J. Differ. Equ. Appl. 22, 623–636 (2016)
Goodrich, C.S.: Perturbed Hammerstein integral equations with sign-changing kernels and applications to nonlocal boundary value problems and elliptic PDEs. J. Integral Equ. Appl. 28, 509–549 (2016)
Goodrich, C.S.: Coercive nonlocal elements in fractional differential equations. Positivity 21, 377–394 (2017)
Goodrich, C.S.: A new coercivity condition applied to semipositone integral equations with nonpositive, unbounded nonlinearities and applications to nonlocal BVPs. J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 19, 1905–1938 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11784-016-0340-x
Goodrich, C.S.: On semipositone nonlocal boundary value problems with nonlinear or affine boundary conditions. Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. 60, 635–649 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0013091516000146
Goodrich, C.S.: The effect of a nonstandard cone on existence theorem applicability in nonlocal boundary value problems. J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 19, 2629–2646 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11784-017-0448-7
Goodrich, C.S.: New Harnack inequalities and existence theorems for radially symmetric solutions of elliptic PDEs with sign changing or vanishing Green’s function. J. Differ. Equ. 264, 236–262 (2018)
Graef, J., Kong, L., Wang, H.: A periodic boundary value problem with vanishing Green’s function. Appl. Math. Lett. 21, 176–180 (2008)
Graef, J., Kong, L.: Positive solutions for third order semipositone boundary value problems. Appl. Math. Lett. 22, 1154–1160 (2009)
Graef, J., Webb, J.R.L.: Third order boundary value problems with nonlocal boundary conditions. Nonlinear Anal. 71, 1542–1551 (2009)
Guo, D., Lakshmikantham, V.: Nonlinear Problems in Abstract Cones. Academic Press, Boston (1988)
Herrón, S., Lopera, E.: Non-existence of positive radial solution for semipositone weighted \(p\)-Laplacian problem. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 2015, 1–9 (2015)
Infante, G.: Nonlocal boundary value problems with two nonlinear boundary conditions. Commun. Appl. Anal. 12, 279–288 (2008)
Infante, G., Pietramala, P.: Existence and multiplicity of non-negative solutions for systems of perturbed Hammerstein integral equations. Nonlinear Anal. 71, 1301–1310 (2009)
Infante, G., Pietramala, P.: Eigenvalues and non-negative solutions of a system with nonlocal BCs. Nonlinear Stud. 16, 187–196 (2009)
Infante, G., Pietramala, P.: Perturbed Hammerstein integral inclusions with solutions that change sign. Comment. Math. Univ. Carolin. 50, 591–605 (2009)
Infante, G., Pietramala, P.: A third order boundary value problem subject to nonlinear boundary conditions. Math. Bohem. 135, 113–121 (2010)
Infante, G., Minhós, F., Pietramala, P.: Non-negative solutions of systems of ODEs with coupled boundary conditions. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 17, 4952–4960 (2012)
Infante, G., Pietramala, P.: Multiple nonnegative solutions of systems with coupled nonlinear boundary conditions. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 37, 2080–2090 (2014)
Infante, G., Pietramala, P., Tenuta, M.: Existence and localization of positive solutions for a nonlocal BVP arising in chemical reactor theory. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 19, 2245–2251 (2014)
Infante, G., Pietramala, P.: Nonzero radial solutions for a class of elliptic systems with nonlocal BCs on annular domains. Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl. NoDEA 22, 979–1003 (2015)
Jankowski, T.: Positive solutions to fractional differential equations involving Stieltjes integral conditions. Appl. Math. Comput. 241, 200–213 (2014)
Kang, S., Zhang, G., Shi, B.: Existence of three periodic positive solutions for a class of integral equations with parameters. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 323, 654–665 (2006)
Karakostas, G.L., Tsamatos, P. Ch.: Existence of multiple positive solutions for a nonlocal boundary value problem. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal. 19, 109–121 (2002)
Karakostas, G.L., Tsamatos, P. Ch.: Multiple positive solutions of some Fredholm integral equations arisen from nonlocal boundary-value problems. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 2002(30), 1–17 (2002)
Karakostas, G.L.: Existence of solutions for an \(n\)-dimensional operator equation and applications to BVPs. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 71, 17 (2014)
Lan, K.Q.: Multiple positive solutions of semilinear differential equations with singularities. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 63, 690–704 (2001)
Lan, K.Q.: Eigenvalues of semi-positone Hammerstein integral equations and applications to boundary value problems. Nonlinear Anal. 71, 5979–5993 (2009)
Lan, K.Q.: Positive solutions of systems of Hammerstein integral equations. Commun. Appl. Anal. 15, 521–528 (2011)
Lan, K.Q., Yang, G.: A fixed point Index theory for nowhere normal-outward compact maps and applications. J. Appl. Anal. Comput. 6, 665–683 (2016)
Lan, K.Q., Lin, W.: Multiple positive solutions of systems of Hammerstein integral equations with applications to fractional differential equations. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 83, 449–469 (2011)
Lan, K.Q., Lin, W.: Positive solutions of systems of singular Hammerstein integral equations with applications to semi linear elliptic equations in annuli. Nonlinear Anal. 74, 7184–7197 (2011)
Lan, K.Q., Webb, J.R.L.: Positive solutions of semilinear differential equations with singularities. J. Differ. Equ. 148, 407–421 (1998)
Liu, X., Wu, J.: Positive solutions for a Hammerstein integral equation with a parameter. Appl. Math. Lett. 22, 490–494 (2009)
Ludwig, D., Aronson, D.C., Weinberger, H.F.: Spatial patterning of the spruce budworm. J. Math. Biol. 8, 217–258 (1979)
Ma, R., Zhong, C.: Existence of positive solutions for integral equations with vanishing kernels. Commun. Appl. Anal. 15, 529–538 (2011)
Picone, M.: Su un problema al contorno nelle equazioni differenziali lineari ordinarie del secondo ordine. Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. 10, 1–95 (1908)
Sun, J.P., Li, W.T.: Existence of positive solutions to semipositone Dirichlet BVPs on time scales. Dyn. Syst. Appl. 16, 571–578 (2007)
Webb, J.R.L., Infante, G.: Positive solutions of nonlocal boundary value problems involving integral conditions. Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl. NoDEA 15, 45–67 (2008)
Webb, J.R.L., Infante, G.: Positive solutions of nonlocal boundary value problems: a unified approach. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 74, 673–693 (2006)
Webb, J.R.L., Infante, G.: Non-local boundary value problems of arbitrary order. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 79, 238–258 (2009)
Webb, J.R.L., Infante, G.: Semi-positone nonlocal boundary value problems of arbitrary order. Commun. Pure Appl. Anal. 9, 563–581 (2010)
Webb, J.R.L.: Positive solutions of some three point boundary value problems via fixed point index theory. Nonlinear Anal. 47, 4319–4332 (2001)
Webb, J.R.L.: Boundary value problems with vanishing Green’s function. Commun. Appl. Anal. 13, 587–595 (2009)
Webb, J.R.L.: Remarks on a non-local boundary value problem. Nonlinear Anal. 72, 1075–1077 (2010)
Whyburn, W.M.: Differential equations with general boundary conditions. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 48, 692–704 (1942)
Xu, J., Yang, Z.: Positive solutions for a system of nonlinear Hammerstein integral equations and applications. J. Integral Equ. Appl. 24, 131–147 (2012)
Yang, Z.: Positive solutions to a system of second-order nonlocal boundary value problems. Nonlinear Anal. 62, 1251–1265 (2005)
Yang, Z.: Positive solutions of a second-order integral boundary value problem. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 321, 751–765 (2006)
Yang, Z.: Existence and nonexistence results for positive solutions of an integral boundary value problem. Nonlinear Anal. 65, 1489–1511 (2006)
Yang, Z.: Existence of nontrivial solutions for a nonlinear Sturm–Liouville problem with integral boundary conditions. Nonlinear Anal. 68, 216–225 (2008)
Yang, Z.: Positive solutions for a system of nonlinear Hammerstein integral equations and applications. Appl. Math. Comput. 218, 11138–11150 (2012)
Zeidler, E.: Nonlinear Functional Analysis and Its Applications I: Fixed-Point Theorems. Springer, New York (1986)
Zhao, Z.: Positive solutions of semi-positone Hammerstein integral equations and applications. Appl. Math. Comput. 219, 2789–2797 (2012)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Goodrich, C.S. Radially symmetric solutions of elliptic PDEs with uniformly negative weight. Annali di Matematica 197, 1585–1611 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10231-018-0738-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10231-018-0738-8
Keywords
- Hammerstein integral equation
- Negative weight
- Coercivity
- Radially symmetric solution
- Density-dependent growth