Beamer Rodiak UFPB2019

Some examples of Topological Structural Stability
Rodiak Figueroa López
DM–USFCar, São Carlos, SP, Brasil
Colóquio Departamental do DM-UFPB

22 de Agosto de 2019
Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Introduction
In this work we study topological structural stability for a family of

nonlinear semigroups Th (·) on Banach space Xh depending on the
parameter h. We also study the robustness of the internal dynamics
in global attractors of projected Banach spaces, generalizing previous
results for small perturbations of infinite dimensional dynamical
systems [3] and [4]. We apply the results an abstract semilinear
equation with Dumbbell and FEM discretizated type domains.

Theory of semigroups
Let Z be a metric space together with a metric d : Z × Z → R+ ,

where R+ = [0, ∞), and denote by C (Z ) the set of continuous
maps from Z into Z . Given a subset A of Z and > 0, the
−neighborhood of A is the set O (A) := {x ∈ Z : d(x, a) <
for some a ∈ A}.
Now, we introduce the notion of semigroup in the metric space Z .
Definition
A family {T (t) : t > 0} ⊂ C (Z ) is a semigroup in Z if
(i) T (0) = IZ , IZ is the identity map in Z .
(ii) T (t + s) = T (t)T (s), for all t, s > 0 and
(iii) (t, x) 7→ T (t)x ∈ Z is continuous from R+ × Z into Z .
A solution of T (·) corresponding to the initial condition x(0) = x0
is the mapping t 7→ T (t)x0 from R+ into Z .

Gradient semigroups
Definition
We say that a semigroup {T (t) : t > 0} with a global attractor A
and a family of isolated invariant sets S = {Ξ1 , Ξ2 , · · · , Ξn } is a
gradient semigroup with respect to S , or an S −gradient
semigroup, if there is a continuous function V : Z → R such that
(i) The real function [0, ∞) 3 t 7→ V (T (t)x) ∈ R is
non-increasing for each x ∈ Z ;
(ii) V is constant in each Ξi , for each i = 1, . . . , n; and
[n
(iii) V (T (t)x) = V (x) for all t > 0 if and only if x ∈ Ξi .
i=1
A function V with these properties is called a generalized Lyapunov
function for the semigroup {T (t) : t > 0} with respect to S , or
an S −Lyapunov function for the semigroup {T (t) : t > 0}.

For a gradient system, every trajectory on the attractor is both
forwards and backwards asymptotic to some equilibrium.
Furthermore, since V is non-increasing along trajectories but only
constant on elements of S , there cannot be any collection of
orbits producing a cycle between elements of S . We define such a
cycle formally as
Definition
Let T (·) be a semigroup which has a disjoint family of isolated
invariant sets S = {Ξ1 , · · · , Ξn }. A homoclinic structure
associated with S is a subset {Ξ`1 , Ξ`2 , · · · , Ξ`k } of S , k 6 n,
together with a set of global solutions {ξj : R → Z : 1 6 j 6 k}
such that
lim distZ (ξj (t), Ξ`j ) = 0 and lim distZ (ξj (t), Ξ`(j+1) ) = 0,
t→−∞ t→∞
where Ξ`k+1 := Ξ`1 and, if k = 1, the orbit γ(ξ1 ) is not contained

in Ξ`1 .

Dynamically gradient semigroups
We are now ready to define gradient-like or dynamically gradient

semigroups (See [4, Section 5.1]).
Definition
A semigroup T (·) with a global attractor A is dynamically gradient
with respect to the family S = {Ξ1 , Ξ2 , · · · , Ξn } of isolated
invariant sets, or dynamically S −gradient, if it satisfies the
following two properties:
(G1) Given a global solution ξ : R → Z in A, there exist
i, j ∈ {1, 2, · · · , n} such that
lim distZ (ξ(t), Ξi ) = 0 and lim distZ (ξ(t), Ξj ) = 0.

t→−∞ t→∞
(G2) The collection S contains no homoclinic structures.

Theorem ([3, 4])
Let {T (t) : t > 0} be a semigroup with a global attractor A, and

let S be a finite collection of isolated invariant sets. Then
{T (t) : t > 0} is S −gradient if and only if it is dynamically
S −gradient.
As an immediate consequence of this theorem we obtain the

following characterization of the attractor.
Corollary
Let {T (t) : t > 0} be a dynamically gradient semigroup with

respect to S = {Ξ1 , · · · , Ξn } a family of bounded isolated
invariant sets. If {T (t) : t > 0} has a global attractor A, then
n
[
A= W u (Ξj ). (1)
j=1

Figura: Structural stability implies that the two phase portraits are
homeomorphic. Source: Scholarpedia.

Figura: The phase portraits are not homeomorphic. Source: Scholarpedia.

Figura: Example of Topological Structural Stability.

Topological structural stability on a fixed Banach space

For Banach space Zh with h ∈ (0, 1]?

Some definitions of P−convergence
Let {Xh }h∈[0,1] a family of Banach spaces and P = {Ph }h∈(0,1] a

sequence of Ph : X0 → Xh , Ph ∈ L (X0 , Xh ), for h ∈ (0, 1], with the
following property:
h→0
kPh u0 kXh −→ ku0 kX0 , ∀u0 ∈ X0 . (2)
Definition
A sequence {uh }h∈(0,1] with uh ∈ Xh P−converges to u0 ∈ X0 if
kuh − Ph u0 kXh → 0 as h → 0.
P
We write this as uh −→ u0 . Similarly, the P−convergence of
sequences is defined as: A sequence {uhn }n∈N with uhn ∈ Xhn such
n→∞
that hn −→ 0 P−converges to u0 ∈ X0 if kuhn − Phn u0 kXhn → 0
as n → ∞.

Assume that {Yh }h∈[0,1] is a family of Banach spaces and Q =
{Qh }h∈(0,1] a sequence of bounded linear operators Qh : Y0 → Yh
with the following property:
h→0
kQh v0 kYh −→ kv0 kY0 , ∀v0 ∈ Y0 . (3)
Definition
A operator Ah : Xh → Yh PQ−converges to an operator A0 :
Q P
X0 → Y0 as h → 0 if Ah uh −→ A0 u0 whenever uh −→ u0 . We
PQ
write Ah −→ A0 as h → 0.

Definition
Let Ah ⊂ Xh , where Xh is a Banach space, for all h ∈ [0, 1].
(i) We say that the family of sets {Ah }h∈(0,1] is P−upper
semicontinuous at h = 0 if
h→0
distXh (Ah , Ph A0 ) := sup inf kuh − Ph ukXh −→ 0.
uh ∈Ah u∈A
(ii) We say that the family of sets {Ah }h∈(0,1] is P−lower

semicontinuous at h = 0 if
h→0
distXh (Ph A0 , Ah ) := sup inf kuh − Ph ukXh −→ 0.
u∈A uh ∈Ah
(ii) We say that the family of sets {Ah }h∈(0,1] is P−continuous

at h = 0 if it is P−upper semicontinuous and P−lower
semicontinuous at h = 0.

Topological structural stability on variable Banach spaces
We begin with a definition that is a generalization of the concept
of collectively asymptotically compact (see [1, Definition 4.2] or [4,
Definition 3.16]) for variable Banach spaces.
Definition
Let {Th (t) : t > 0}h∈[0,1] be a family of semigroups in the Banach
space Xh , for all h ∈ [0, 1]. We say that {Th (t) : t > 0}h∈(0,1] is
P−collectively asymptotically compact at h = 0 if, for any sequence
k→∞
{hk }k∈N in (0, 1] with hk −→ 0, uniformly bounded sequence
k→∞
{xk }k∈N with xk ∈ Xhk , sequence {tk }k∈N in (0, ∞) with tk −→ ∞
the sequence {Thk (tk )xk }k∈N has a P−convergent subsequence to
some element in X0 .
Remark
In case Xh = X0 and Ph = IX0 , for all h ∈ (0, 1], Th (·) is collectively
asymptotically compact at h = 0.
Definition
Let {Th (t) : t > 0}h∈[0,1] be a family of nonlinear semigroups in Xh ,
PP
for h ∈ [0, 1]. We say that Th (·) −→ T0 (·) uniformly in compact
subsets of R+ × X0 if for each τ > 0 and K ⊂ X0 compact, we have
lim sup sup kTh (t)Ph u0 − Ph T0 (t)u0 kXh = 0.

h→0 t∈[0,τ ] u0 ∈K
Remark
In case that Xh = X0 and Ph = IX0 , for h ∈ [0, 1]. The Definition
h→0
10 means that Th (t)x −→ T0 (t)x uniformly for (t, x) in compact
subsets of R+ × X0 in the sense of [3].

Now, we are ready to state the following theorem on the behavior
of global attractors under perturbation.
Theorem (Topological structural stability)
Let {Th (t) : t > 0}h∈[0,1] be a family of nonlinear semigroups

P−collectively asymptotically compact at h = 0 on a Banach space
PP
Xh , for h ∈ [0, 1] and that Th (t) −→ T0 (t) uniformly on compact
subsets of R+ × X0 . Suppose that
(a) for each h ∈ [0, 1], the semigroup {Th (t) : t > 0} has a global
attractor Ah , with suph∈[0,1] supxh ∈Ah kxh kXh < ∞;
(b) there is a p ∈ N such that for any h ∈ [0, 1], the
semigroup {Th (t) : t > 0} has a disjoint family of isolated
invariant bounded sets Sh := {Ξ1,h , Ξ2,h , . . . , Ξp,h } that
behave P−continuously at h = 0, i.e, for each i = 1, . . . , p,
we have
distXh (Ξi,h , Ph Ξi,0 ) + distXh (Ph Ξi,0 , Ξi,h ) → 0 as h → 0;

(c) {T0 (t) : t > 0} is a gradient semigroup with respect to S0 =
{Ξ1,0 , Ξ2,0 , . . . , Ξp,0 };
(d) the family of local unstable manifold of Ξi,h behaves
P−continuously at h = 0, that is, there exists a ρ > 0 such
that
distXh (Whu,ρ (Ξi,h ), Ph W0u,ρ (Ξi,0 ))

h→0
+ distXh (Ph W0u,ρ (Ξi,0 ), Whu,ρ (Ξi,h )) −→ 0; and
(e) There exists a δ0 > 0 such that, for all h ∈ [0, 1] and
j = 1, · · · , p; Ξj,h is the maximal invariant for the semigroup
Th (·) inside Oδ0 (Ph Ξj,0 ). Besides, δ0 is such that the δ0 -
neighborhoods of the Ph Ξj,0 ’s are disjoints.

Then,
1 the family {Ah }h∈(0,1] is P−upper semicontinuity at h = 0
whenever (a) holds;
2 the family {Ah }h∈(0,1] is P−lower semicontinuity at h = 0
whenever (a), (b), (c) and (d) hold; and
3 there exist an h0 ∈ (0, 1] such that, for al h ∈ [0, h0 ],
{Th (t) : t > 0}h∈(0,1] is a gradient semigroup with respect
to Sh = {Ξ1,h , Ξ2,h , . . . , Ξp,h } whenever (a), (b), (c) and (e)
hold. Consequently,
p
[
Ah = W u (Ξi , h), ∀h ∈ [0, h0 ].
i=1

Applications
• We consider the evolution equation of parabolic type of the form


ut (x, t) − ∆u (x, t) + u (x, t) = f (u (x, t)), x ∈ Ω , t > 0,
∂u (x, t)
 = 0, x ∈ ∂Ω ,
∂n
(4)
where Ω ⊂ RN , N > 2, is a bounded smooth domain, ∈ (0, 1] is a
∂
parameter, ∂n is the outside normal derivative and f ∈ C 2 (R) which
is bounded and has bounded derivatives up to the second order.
The domain Ω is a dumbbell type domain consisting of two
disconnected domains, that we denote by Ω, joined by a thin
channel, R , which degenerates to a line segment as the parameters
approaches zero, see Figure 4.

Under standard dissipative assumption on the nonlinearity f of the
type,
f (s)
lim sup < 0,
|s|→+∞ s
equation (4) has an attractor A ⊂ H 1 (Ω ), for ∈ (0, 1].
Figura: Dumbbell domain

On the other hand, passing to the limit as → 0, the limit “domain”
will consist of the domain Ω and a line in between. We denote by
P0 and P1 the points where the line segment touches Ω, see Figure
5.
Figura: Limit “domain”

The limiting equation is

wt (x, t) − ∆w (x, t) + w (x, t) = f (w (x, t)), x ∈ Ω, t > 0,



 ∂w (x, t)
= 0, x ∈ ∂Ω,

∂n
vt (s, t) − Lv (s, t) + v (s, t) = f (v (s, t)), s ∈ R0 ,





v (0) = w (P0 ), v (1) = w (P1 ),

(5)
where w is a function that lives in Ω and v lives in the line segment
R0 . Moreover, L is a differential operator which depends on the
geometry of the channel R , more exactly, on the way the channel
R collapses to the segment line R0 . More specifically Lv = g1 (gvx )x
where g has suitable geometric properties. Again, this system has
an attractor A0 in H 1 (Ω) × H 1 (R0 ) =: H 1 (Ω0 ).

Now, we define appropriate spaces Up , for 1 < p < ∞ and ∈ [0, 1]
as follows, Up := Lp (Ω ), for (0, 1] with norm
1−N
k · kUp := k · kLp (Ω) + p k · kLp (R )
and U0p = Lp (Ω) ⊕ Lp (R0 ) with norm
k(w , v )kU0p := kw kLp (Ω) + kv kLpg (0,1) ,
where Lpg (0, 1) is the space Lp (0, 1) with the norm

Z 1 1
p
p
kv kLpg (0,1) := g (s)|v (s)| ds .
0
We will also consider the spaces H1 = H 1 (Ω) ⊕ H 1 (R ) with the
norm
1−N
k · kH1 = k · kH 1 (Ω) + 2 k · kH 1 (R )
and H01 = H 1 (Ω) ⊕ H 1 (R0 ).
Since both equations (4) and (5) are posed in different space
domains, the first one in Ω and the second one in Ω ∪ R0 , we need
to devise a tool to compare functions defined in this two different
sets. A tool given in [3, 2] is to define the extension operator
E : U0p → Up as follows

w (x), x ∈ Ω,
E (w , v )(x) :=
v (s), x = (s, y ) ∈ R .
Proposition ([3])
For ∈ (0, 1], E : U0p → Up is a bounded linear operator and
kE (w , v )kUp = k(w , v )kU0p for all (w , v ) ∈ U0p .

With this, we will see that problem (4) can be written as a semilinear
abstract equation of form

ut + A u = F (u ), t > 0
(6)
u (0) = u0 ∈ Up
for family of spaces Up , where A : D(A ) ⊂ Up → Up , for ∈

(0, 1]. Also, problem (5) can also be written as

ut + A0 u = F0 (u), t > 0
(7)
u(0) = u0 ∈ U0p
in space U0p , where A0 : D(A0 ) ⊂ U0p → U0p . The nonlinearity

F : U → U is the Nemitskı̆i operator generated by f , that is
F (u )(x) = f (u (x)).

We also define the projection operator M : Up → U0p given by
M (ψ ) = (w , v ) where w (x) = ψ (x), x ∈ Ω and v (s) = Ts ψ ,
s ∈ (0, 1), where
Z
s 1
T ψ (x) = s ψ (s, y )dy , Γs = {y : (s, y ) ∈ R }.
|Γ | Γs
Proposition ([3])
For ∈ (0, 1], M ∈ L (Up , U0p ) and kM (w , v )kL (Up ,U0p ) 6 1.
Moreover, M ◦ E = IU0p .

We can see that family of linear operators E : U0p → Up satisfy the
property
→0
kE ukUp −→ kukU0p , for all u ∈ U0p , (8)
by using of Proposition 0.4.
Definition
We say that a sequence {u }∈(0,1] , u ∈ Up , E −converges to u0 ∈
→0 E
U0p if ku − E ukUp −→ 0. We write this as u −→ u0 .

Theorem ([2])
Let {T (t) : t > 0} the solution operator associated to (4) and (5)
and A be its global attractor, ∈ [0, 1]. Then, there are 0 > 0,
L > 0, β > 0, γ ∈ (0, 1) and C > 0 such that
(a)
θN
kT (t)u − E T0 (t)M v kLp (Ω ) 6 Ce βt t −γ (ku − v kUp + p ),
θ
kT (t)u − E T0 (t)M v kUp 6 Ce βt t −γ (ku − v kUp + ), p
for each p > N, θ ∈ (1/2, 2p/(N + 2p)), for all t > 0.

(b) If all equilibrium points E0 = {u∗1,0 , . . . , u∗n,0 } of (5) are
hyperbolic (hence there are only a finitely many of them), the
semigroup {T (t) : t > 0} has a set of exactly n equilibria,
E = {u∗1, , . . . , u∗n, }, all of them hyperbolic, for p > N,
N 1
ku∗i, − E u∗i,0 kLp (Ω ) 6 C p and ku∗i, − E u∗i,0 kUp 6 C p ,
1 6 i 6 n.
Theorem
(c) There is a ρ > 0 such that, if Wρu (u∗i, ) = W u (u∗i, ) ∩
Lp (Ω ) p
Bρ (u∗i, ) (or Wρu (u∗i, ) = W u (u∗i, ) ∩ BρU (u∗i, )), there is
a Cθ > 0 such that
p (Ω )
dist L
(Wρu (u∗i, ), E Wρu (u∗i,0 ))
p (Ω ) θN
+ dist L
(E Wρu (u∗i,0 ), Wρu (u∗i, )) 6 Cθ p ,
Up
( or dist (Wρu (u∗i, ), E Wρu (u∗i,0 ))
p θ
+ dist U (E Wρu (u∗i,0 ), Wρu (u∗i, )) 6 Cθ p ),
where dist X (A, B) := supa∈A inf b∈B ka − bkX is the Hausdorff

semi-distance between the subsets A and B of the Banach space
X.

Next we present the main result of this section.
Theorem
Under the same conditions of Theorem 15. Suppose that {T0 (t) :
t > 0} is a gradient nonlinear semigroup in U0p with respect to
E0 = {u∗1,0 , . . . , u∗n,0 }, then there is an 0 > 0 such that the family
{T (t) : t > 0}∈(0,1] of nonlinear semigroups in Up is gradient with
respect to E = {u∗1, , . . . , u∗n, }, for all ∈ [0, 0 ]. Consequently,
n
[
A = W u (u∗i, ), ∀ ∈ [0, 0 ].
i=1

Proof. We note first to show this result we need to prove the
hypotheses of Theorem 11.
We can see that, EE −convergence of T (·) on compact subsets of
R+ × U0p , follows directly from the item (a) of Theorem 15 put
v = E u0 , where u E −converges to u0 .

Now, let us prove the E −collectively asymptotically compactness at
= 0. We know that the nonlinear semigroup T0 (t) : U0p → U0p
is compact for t > 0 (see [4, p. 198]), so that for every bounded
sequence in U0p , say {u k }k∈N in B0 with B0 ⊂ U0p bounded, it
follows that there are a subsequence of {T0 (t)u k }k∈N (denoted by
the same) and some u 0 ∈ U0p such that kT0 (t)u k − u 0 kU0p → 0 as
k → ∞. From item (a) of Theorem 15 and [5, Remark 4.5], that
is, β < 0, we obtain
θ
kT (t)v − E u 0 kUp 6 Ce βt t −γ p + kE T0 (t)M v − E u 0 kUp
θ
6 Ce βt t −γ p + kT0 (t)M v − u 0 kU0p .
Thus, given the sequences k → 0, tk → ∞ as k → ∞ and

{vk }k∈N in Bk a bounded subset of Upk , the compact asymptotic
E −collectivity at = 0 follows from the fact of taking u k = Mk vk
along with the Proposition 0.5.

The existence of global attractor A ⊂ Up for T (·), ∈ [0, 1], was
shown in [4, 5]. In general, the attractors A lie in more regular
spaces. In particular, they lie in U∞ , ∈ [0, 1]. With this, the
condition (a) of Theorem 11 holds.
Clearly, item (b) of Theorem 11 is valid due to item (b) of Theorem
15 (for more details see [3]).
From item (c) of Theorem 15 follows the condition (d) of Theorem
11.

To see the hypothesis (e) of Theorem 11 , we just have to
observe that, by Theorem 15, all of the equilibrium points E =
{u∗1, , . . . , u∗n, }, for the semigroup T (·) in Up , are hyperbolic,
1
and by estimate ku∗i, − E u∗i,0 kUp 6 C p , 1 6 i 6 n, we can
see that Oδ0 (u∗i, ) is the maximal invariant set in Oδ0 /2 (E u∗i,0 ) for
δ0 > 0 small enough. Because in this neighborhood u∗i, is the only
global solution for T (·), so if A is an invariant set for T (·) inside
Oδ0 /2 (E u∗i,0 ), it is an union of global solutions ξ : R −→ Up for
T (·) (see [4, Lemma 1.4]), therefore each one of these solutions ξ
must be equal to u∗i, , consequently A = {u∗i, } and (e) is satisfied.
Furthermore, the conditions of the Theorem 11 are satisfied, then
the result follows.

• Consider the boundary value problem (BVP)

ut = Lu + f (u), t > 0, x ∈ Ω

u = 0, t > 0, x ∈ ∂Ω, (9)

u(x, 0) = u 0 (x).

Here Ω ⊂ Rn , n ≥ 2, is a bounded smooth domain, u 0 ∈ H01 (Ω), L

is a second order elliptic operator
n n
X ∂ ∂u X ∂u
Lu = aij (x) − bj (x) − (c(x) + λ)u, (10)
∂xi ∂xj ∂xj
i,j=1 j=1
with smooth coefficients aij , bj , c and a dissipative nonlinearity f .

The parameter λ will be specified below. We assume that L is
a uniformly strongly elliptic operator, that is, there is a constant
ϑ > 0, such that
n
X n
X
ξk2 , ∀x ∈ Ω, ξ = (ξ1 , . . . , ξn ) ∈ Rn . (11)

aij (x)ξi ξj ≥ ϑ
i,j=1 k=1

As usual, problem (9) can be written as an abstract evolution
equation in the Hilbert space X = L2 (Ω) given by
(
u̇ + Au = F (u), t > 0,
(AP)
u(0) = u 0 ∈ X 1/2 ,
where the operator A : D(A) ⊂ X → X is given by Au = −Lu for all

u ∈ D(A) = H 2 (Ω)∩H01 (Ω) and Nemitskii’s operator F : X 1/2 → X
associated to f , that is, F (u(t))x = f (u(t, x)). We know that A is a
sectorial operator in X , then −A generates an analytic and compact
C0 −semigroup {e −At : t ≥ 0}. Assume that λ is chosen such that
the spectrum of A is located to the right of the imaginary axis with
Re σ(A) > 0. Then, X 1 = D(A), X 0 = L2 (Ω) and X 1/2 = H01 (Ω).

We assume that f : R → R is a C 2 (R) function and
|f 0 (s)| ≤ C (1 + |s|γ−1 ), (C)
for all s ∈ R where 1 ≤ γ < n+2n−2 if n ≥ 3 and γ ≥ 1 if n = 2.

Under this growth condition the problem (AP) is locally well posed in
X 1/2 and F is locally Lipschitz continuous and Frechet differentiable.
If in addition we assume that
f (u)
lim sup ≤0 (D)
|u|→∞ u
then, all solutions of (AP) are globally defined. In this case we have,
for each u 0 ∈ X 1/2 , a globally defined solution t 7→ u(t, u 0 ) ∈ X 1/2 ,
t ≥ 0, which defines the compact nonlinear semigroup {T (t) : t ≥
0} where T (t)u 0 = u(t, u 0 ), t ≥ 0.

Under the above hypotheses the nonlinear semigroup {T (t) : t ≥ 0}
associated to (AP) has a global attractor A in X 1/2 and the attractor
A satisfies
sup kukL∞ (Ω) < ∞. (12)
u∈A
This bound enables us to cut off the nonlinearity f in such a way

that it becomes bounded with bounded derivatives up to second
order. Now, as the operator A is sectorial, it can be associated with
a sesquilinear form σ(·, ·) : X 1/2 × X 1/2 → C such that
σ(u, v ) = hAu, v iX , u ∈ D(A), v ∈ X 1/2 , (13)

1/2
|σ(u, v )| ≤ c1 kukX 1/2 kv kX 1/2 , u, v ∈ X (14)
Re σ(u, u) ≥ c2 kuk2X 1/2 , u∈X 1/2
, (15)
where the constants c1 , c2 = ϑ/2 are positive.

With the following hypotheses, we can now make the discretization
to problem (AP):
Assumption
Let Ω ⊂ Rn be a polyhedral domain with n ≥ 2 which has

{T h }h∈(0,1] a quasi-uniform family of subdivisions with positive
constant ρ. Let (K , P, N ) be a reference element of class C 0 ,
satisfying K is star-shaped with respect to some ball, P1 ⊆ P ⊆
0
W 2,∞ (K ) and N ⊆ C (K ) .
From this assumption, we obtain that the space

1/2
Xh := {I h υ : υ ∈ C (Ω), υ ∂Ω = 0} ⊂ X 1/2 ∩ C (Ω),

(16)
has finite dimension, where I h is the interpolation operator.

1/2
In this framework, the finite element approximation Ah : Xh →
1/2
Xh of the operator A is given by
1/2
hAh φh , ψh iX = σ(φh , ψh ), φh , ψh ∈ Xh . (17)
That is, the operator Ah is associated with the sesquilinear form
1/2 1/2
σh (·, ·) which is the restriction of σ(·, ·) to Xh × Xh . Then the
problem (AP) can be discretized in the following form
(
u̇h + Ah uh = Fh (uh )
1/2 (APh )
uh (0) = uh0 ∈ Xh ,
1/2 1/2
where Fh := Ph F : Xh → Xh , for all h ∈ (0, 1].
1/2
We introduce a Ritz or elliptic projection operator P̃h : X 1/2 → Xh
with respect to X 1/2 −inner product given by
1/2
σ(P̃h u, φh ) = σ(u, φh ), ∀φh ∈ Xh . (18)
Definition
1/2
We say that a sequence {uh }h∈(0,1] , uh ∈ Xh , P̃−converges to
h→0 P̃
u ∈ X 1/2 if kuh − P̃h ukX 1/2 −→ 0. We write this as uh −→ u.

Theorem
Suppose that T (·) is a gradient nonlinear semigroup in X 1/2 with
respect to E = {u1∗ , . . . , up∗ } (all hyperbolic points), then there is an
h0 > 0 such that the family {Th (·)}h∈[0,1] of nonlinear semigroups
1/2 ∗ , . . . , u ∗ }, for all
in Xh is gradient with respect to Eh = {uh,1 h,p
h ∈ [0, h0 ]. Consequently,
p
[
∗
Ah = W u (ui,h ), ∀h ∈ [0, h0 ].
i=1
∗ ∈ E
Moreover, if the family of local unstable manifold of uh,i h
behaves P̃−continuously at h = 0, that is, there exists a ρ > 0
such that
h→0
distX 1/2 (Whu,ρ (uh,i
∗
),P̃h W u,ρ (ui∗ ))+distX 1/2 (P̃h W u,ρ (ui∗ ),Whu,ρ (uh,i
∗
)) −→ 0,
then the family {Ah }h∈(0,1] is P̃−continuous at h = 0.

Muchas Gracias !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Muito Obrigado !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Referencias bibliográficas
Aragão-Costa, E. R.; Caraballo, T.; Carvalho, A. N.; Langa, J.
A., Stability of gradient semigroups under perturbations.
Nonlinearity, v. 24, n. 7, p. 2099–2117, 2011.
Arrieta, J. M.; Bezerra, F. D. M.; Carvalho, A. N. Rate of
convergence of attractors for some singularly perturbed
parabolic problems. Topological Methods in Nonlinear
Analysis, Torun, v. 41, n. 2, p. 229–253, 2013.
Arrieta, J.M.; Carvalho, A. N.; Lozada-Cruz, G., Dynamics in
dumbbell domains. I. Continuity of the set of equilibria.
Journal Differential Equations 231 (2006), n. 2, 551–597.
dumbbell domains. II. The limiting problem. Journal of
Differential Equations, 247 (2009), n. 1, p. 174–202.
dumbbell domains. III. Continuity of attractors. Journal of
Differential Equations,
Rodiak Figueroa247
López (2009), n. 1, ofp.Topological
Some examples 225–259. Structural Stability
Babin, A.V., and Vishik, M.I., Attractors in evolutionary
equations, Studies in Mathematics ans its Applications 25,
North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1992.
BRENNER, S. C.; SCOTT, L. R. The mathematical theory
of finite element methods. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1996.
Carvalho, A. N.; Langa, J. A., An extension of the concept of
gradient semigroup wich is stable under perturbations. Journal
of Differential Equations, New York, v. 246, n. 7, p.
2646–2668, 2009.
Carvalho, A. N.; Langa, J. A.; Robinson, J. C. Attractors for
infinite-dimensional non-autonomous dynamical systems,
Applied Mathematical Sciences 182, Springer, New York,
2013.
Carvalho, A.N., Piskarev, S., A general approximations
scheme for attractors of abstract parabolic problems,
Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 27 (2006), n. 7-8, p. 785–829.
Ladyzhenskaya, O., Attractors for semigroups and
evolution equations. [Lincei Lectures] Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 1991.
Nolasco de Carvalho, A. Analise Funcional II, Notas de aula,
ICMC-USP, São Carlos, 2011.
Pazy, A., Semigroups of linear operators and applications
to partial differential equations, Applied Mathematical
Sciences, Springer-Verlag, New york, 2nd edition, 1992.
Stummel, F., Diskrete Konvergenz linearer Operatoren I.
Mathematische Annalen, v. 190, 1970, p. 45–92.
Vainikko, G., Approximative methods for nonlinear
equations (Two approaches to the convergence
problem). Nonlinear Analysis, Theory, Melhods and
Applications. v. 2, n. 6, p. 647–687.

Vainikko G., Multidimensional weakly singular integral
equations, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1993.
Vainikko G. Funktionalanalysis der
Diskretisierungsmethoden, Teubner-Texte zur Mathematik,
Verlagsgesellschaft, Leipzig, 1976.
Vainikko, G., Regular convergence of operators and
approximate solution of equations. Translated from Itogi
Nauki i Tekhniki, Seriya Matematicheskii Analiz, Vol. 16,
1979, pp. 5-53.
Wolf-Jürgen, B.; Piskarev, S., Shadowing for discrete
approximations of abstract parabolic equations. Discrete
Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. B 10 (2008), n. 1, pp. 19-42.
Zheng, S. Nonlinear evolution equations. Florida: Chapman
and Hall/CRC, 2004.

Beamer Rodiak UFPB2019

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Beamer Rodiak UFPB2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López

DM–USFCar, São Carlos, SP, Brasil

Colóquio Departamental do DM-UFPB

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

In this work we study topological structural stability for a family of

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Let Z be a metric space together with a metric d : Z × Z → R+ ,

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

where Ξ`k+1 := Ξ`1 and, if k = 1, the orbit γ(ξ1 ) is not contained

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

We are now ready to define gradient-like or dynamically gradient

lim distZ (ξ(t), Ξi ) = 0 and lim distZ (ξ(t), Ξj ) = 0.

(G2) The collection S contains no homoclinic structures.

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Let {T (t) : t > 0} be a semigroup with a global attractor A, and

As an immediate consequence of this theorem we obtain the

Let {T (t) : t > 0} be a dynamically gradient semigroup with

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Let {Xh }h∈[0,1] a family of Banach spaces and P = {Ph }h∈(0,1] a

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

(ii) We say that the family of sets {Ah }h∈(0,1] is P−lower

(ii) We say that the family of sets {Ah }h∈(0,1] is P−continuous

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

lim sup sup kTh (t)Ph u0 − Ph T0 (t)u0 kXh = 0.

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Let {Th (t) : t > 0}h∈[0,1] be a family of nonlinear semigroups

distXh (Ξi,h , Ph Ξi,0 ) + distXh (Ph Ξi,0 , Ξi,h ) → 0 as h → 0;

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

distXh (Whu,ρ (Ξi,h ), Ph W0u,ρ (Ξi,0 ))

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

• We consider the evolution equation of parabolic type of the form

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

equation (4) has an attractor A ⊂ H 1 (Ω ), for  ∈ (0, 1].

Figura: Dumbbell domain

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Figura: Limit “domain”

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

and U0p = Lp (Ω) ⊕ Lp (R0 ) with norm

k(w , v )kU0p := kw kLp (Ω) + kv kLpg (0,1) ,

where Lpg (0, 1) is the space Lp (0, 1) with the norm

For  ∈ (0, 1], E : U0p → Up is a bounded linear operator and

kE (w , v )kUp = k(w , v )kU0p for all (w , v ) ∈ U0p .

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

for family of spaces Up , where A : D(A ) ⊂ Up → Up , for  ∈

in space U0p , where A0 : D(A0 ) ⊂ U0p → U0p . The nonlinearity

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

for each p > N, θ ∈ (1/2, 2p/(N + 2p)), for all t > 0.

where dist X (A, B) := supa∈A inf b∈B ka − bkX is the Hausdorff

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Rodiak Figueroa López Some examples of Topological Structural Stability

Thus, given the sequences k → 0, tk → ∞ as k → ∞ and

equation (4) has an attractor A ⊂ H 1 (Ω ), for ∈ (0, 1].

For ∈ (0, 1], E : U0p → Up is a bounded linear operator and

kE (w , v )kUp = k(w , v )kU0p for all (w , v ) ∈ U0p .

for family of spaces Up , where A : D(A ) ⊂ Up → Up , for ∈

Thus, given the sequences k → 0, tk → ∞ as k → ∞ and