Peru Lima PMR

VII International Symposium
of Applied Mathematics
Lima (Perú) July 3–7, 2017
Robustness of time-dependent attractors in H 1 -norm for nonlocal

reaction-diffusion equations
Pedro Marı́n-Rubio
Dpto. Ecuaciones Diferenciales y Análisis Numérico
Universidad de Sevilla
http://personal.us.es/pmr pmr@us.es
In collaboration with Tomás Caraballo and Marta Herrera-Cobos

1 Introduction
2 Goals of our work
3 Statement of the problem
4 Existence result (of weak solutions)
5 Multi-valued process and pullback attractors
6 Minimal pullback attractors in L2 for (Pε )
7 On the extension of results to H 1 -norm
8 References and acknowledgments
Pedro Marı́n-Rubio, Universidad de Sevilla H 1 robust attractors nonlocal RD 4th July, 2017 3 / 45
In recent decades, nonlocal problems have arisen in modeling with great
interest by its usefulness in real applications
Billingham, NONLINEARITY 2004

Freitas, FIS 1997/AMS 1999
Garcı́a-Melián & Rossi, CPAA 2009
Szymańska, Morales-Rodrigo, Lachowicz, & Chaplain, M3AS 2009
Billingham, NONLINEARITY 2004

Freitas, FIS 1997/AMS 1999
Garcı́a-Melián & Rossi, CPAA 2009
Szymańska, Morales-Rodrigo, Lachowicz, & Chaplain, M3AS 2009
(Biology) the evolution of some species might be better represented by a

nonlocal equation
the migration of population of bacterias in a container depends on the
global population in a certain subdomain
Much attention to the parabolic PDE with nonlocal diffusion
du
− a(l(u))∆u = f in Ω
dt
a ∈ C (R; [m, M]), 0 < m < M
(to avoid extinction or blow-up [Lovat PhD-thesis])
l ∈ (L2 (Ω))0
f given, independent of u
du
dt
a ∈ C (R; [m, M]), 0 < m < M
l ∈ (L2 (Ω))0
Chipot & Lovat, Nonlinear Anal. 1999, Positivity 2001

Chipot & Molinet, Appl. Anal. 2001
Chipot & Siegwart, Nonlinear Anal. 2003
Chipot, Valente, & Caffarelli, Rend.Sem.Mat.Univ.Padova 2003
Chipot & Zheng, Asymp. Anal. 2005
du
dt
a ∈ C (R; [m, M]), 0 < m < M
l ∈ (L2 (Ω))0
du
dt
a ∈ C (R; [m, M]), 0 < m < M
l ∈ (L2 (Ω))0
Existence, uniqueness of global solutions
du
dt
a ∈ C (R; [m, M]), 0 < m < M
l ∈ (L2 (Ω))0

Stationary solutions, ordered interval and evol. sols
du
dt
a ∈ C (R; [m, M]), 0 < m < M
l ∈ (L2 (Ω))0

Some special cases with Lyapunov structure
du
dt
a ∈ C (R; [m, M]), 0 < m < M
l ∈ (L2 (Ω))0

Some special cases with Lyapunov structure
Nonlocal local diffussion a and radial solutions by Andami-Ovono, EJDE
2010, Andami-Ovono & Rougirel, AMPA (IV) 2010
Goals of our first work with f (u) f sub linear
Well-posedness in sense of Hadamard in L2 (Ω), global solutions

Regularization property up to H01 (Ω)
(Ω bounded domain, without smoothness assumptions on ∂Ω.)

Energy equalities

Energy equalities
Fixed point / stationary solutions, existence, and uniqueness

Energy equalities
Exponential decay toward the unique stationary solution

Energy equalities
Minimal pullback attractors in L2 (Ω), tempered, relationships

Energy equalities
Minimal pullback attractors in L2 (Ω), tempered, relationships
Minimal pullback attractors in H01 (Ω), tempered, relationships
Goals of a second work (L2 -framework):
Existence of global solutions L2 for nonlinearities RD-like
(Again Ω bounded domain without smoothness assump. on ∂Ω.)

a continuous. Lack of uniqueness. Multi-valued framework

a continuous. Lack of uniqueness. Multi-valued framework
Parametric family asymptotically autonomous. Robustness
Statement of the problem
du


 − (1 − ε)a(l(u))∆u = f (u) + εh(t) in Ω × (τ, +∞),
dt
 u = 0 on ∂Ω × (τ, +∞),

u(x, τ ) = uτ (x) in Ω,
Ω ⊂ RN a bounded open set a ∈ C (R; [m, M]),
ε ∈ [0, 1), l ∈ (L2 (Ω))0 ,
du


 − (1 − ε)a(l(u))∆u = f (u) + εh(t) in Ω × (τ, +∞),
dt
 u = 0 on ∂Ω × (τ, +∞),

u(x, τ ) = uτ (x) in Ω,
ε ∈ [0, 1), l ∈ (L2 (Ω))0 ,
f ∈ C (R) : −κ − α1 |s|p ≤ f (s)s ≤ κ − α2 |s|p ∀s ∈ R,
du


 − (1 − ε)a(l(u))∆u = f (u) + εh(t) in Ω × (τ, +∞),
dt
 u = 0 on ∂Ω × (τ, +∞),

u(x, τ ) = uτ (x) in Ω,
ε ∈ [0, 1), l ∈ (L2 (Ω))0 ,
τ ∈ R, uτ ∈ L2 (Ω), h ∈ L2loc (R; H −1 (Ω))
du


 − (1 − ε)a(l(u))∆u = f (u) + εh(t) in Ω × (τ, +∞),
dt
 u = 0 on ∂Ω × (τ, +∞),

u(x, τ ) = uτ (x) in Ω,
ε ∈ [0, 1), l ∈ (L2 (Ω))0 ,
τ ∈ R, uτ ∈ L2 (Ω), h ∈ L2loc (R; H −1 (Ω))
Riesz identification choice: H01 (Ω) ∩ Lp (Ω) ⊂ L2 (Ω) ⊂ H −1 (Ω) + Lq (Ω)
Definition A weak solution to (Pε ) is
u ∈ L2 (τ, T ; H01 (Ω)) ∩ Lp (τ, T ; Lp (Ω)) ∩ L∞ (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)) for all T > τ ,
with u(τ ) = uτ
d
(u(t), v )+(1−ε)a(l(u(t)))((u(t), v )) = (f (u(t)), v )+hh(t), v i ∀v ∈ H01 (Ω
dt
understood in the sense of D0 (τ, +∞).
with u(τ ) = uτ
d
dt
Remark from the assumptions, if u weak solution, then

u 0 ∈ L2 (τ, T ; H −1 (Ω)) + Lq (τ, T ; Lq (Ω)) for any T > τ, so
u ∈ C ([τ, ∞); L2 (Ω)).
with u(τ ) = uτ
d
dt

u ∈ C ([τ, ∞); L2 (Ω)). Initial datum makes sense.
with u(τ ) = uτ
d
dt

u ∈ C ([τ, ∞); L2 (Ω)). Initial datum makes sense.
Energy eq.:
Z t
2
|u(t)| + 2(1 − ε) a(l(u(r )))ku(r )k2 dr
s
Z t Z t
= |u(s)|2 + 2 (f (u(r )), u(r ))dr + 2ε hh(r ), u(r )idr .
s s
Existence theorem (of weak solutions)
Theorem Under the above assumptions, there exists at least one weak
solution u to (Pε ).
Sketch ofP proof: a priori estimates on Galerkin approx.
un (t) = nj=1 ϕnj (t)wj

d
(un (t), wj ) + (1 − ε)a(l(un (t)))((un (t), wj ))


dt


 = (f (un (t)), wj ) + εhh(t), wj i, a.e. t > τ,
 (u (τ ), w ) = (u , w ), j = 1, . . . , n,
n j τ j
where {wj : j ≥ 1} ⊂ H01 (Ω) ∩ Lp (Ω) is a Hilbert basis of L2 (Ω) such that
1 p
S
n∈N span{w1 , . . . , wn } is dense in H0 (Ω) ∩ L (Ω).
... we deduce that there exist
u ∈ L∞ (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)) ∩ L2 (τ, T ; H01 (Ω)) ∩ Lp (τ, T ; Lp (Ω)),
ξ1 ∈ Lq (τ, T ; Lq (Ω)) and ξ2 ∈ L2 (τ, T ; H −1 (Ω)), and a subsequence of
{un } (relabeled the same) such that
 ∗

 un * u weakly-star in L∞ (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),

un * u weakly in L2 (τ, T ; H01 (Ω)),




un * u weakly in Lp (τ, T ; Lp (Ω)), (1)

f (un ) * ξ1 weakly in Lq (τ, T ; Lq (Ω)),





−a(l(un ))∆un * ξ2 weakly in L2 (τ, T ; H −1 (Ω)).

GOAL: To prove that ξ1 = f (u) and ξ2 = −a(l(u))∆u
Translation compactness criterion
(un (t + b) − un (t), w )
Z t+b Z t+b
≤(1 − ε)M kun (s)kkw kds + kf (un (s))kLq (Ω) kw kLp (Ω) ds
t t
Z t+b
+ε kh(s)k∗ kw kds
t
≤(1 − ε)b 1/2 Mkw kkun kL2 (τ,T ;H 1 (Ω)) + b 1/p kw kLp (Ω) kf (un )kLq (τ,T ;Lq (Ω))
0
1/2
+b εkw kkhkL2 (τ,T ;H −1 (Ω)) .
Since {un } and {f (un )} are bounded in L2 (τ, T ; H01 (Ω)) and
Lq (τ, T ; Lq (Ω)) respectively, there exists a positive constant Cε such that
(un (t + b) − un (t), w ) ≤ Cε (b 1/2 + b 1/p )(kw k + kw kLp (Ω) ).
Then, it fulfils a.e. t ∈ (τ, T − b)
|un (t + b) − un (t)|2 ≤ Cε (b 1/2 + b 1/p )(kun (t + b) − un (t)k

+kun (t + b) − un (t)kLp (Ω) ).
Now, integrating between τ and T − b, we have

Z T −b
|un (t + b) − un (t)|2 dt ≤ 2Cε (b 1/2 + b 1/p )
τ
Z T
× (kun (r )k + kun (r )kLp (Ω) )dr .
τ
Therefore, Z T −b
lim sup |un (t + b) − un (t)|2 dt = 0.
b→0 n τ
... we have that the sequence {un } is relatively compact in
L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)).
From this and [Lions, Lemme 1.3, p. 12], we identify ξ1 and ξ2 in (1),
namely
f (un ) * f (u) weakly in Lq (τ, T ; Lq (Ω))

a(l(un ))un * a(l(u))u weakly in L2 (τ, T ; H01 (Ω)).
... we have that the sequence {un } is relatively compact in
L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)).
From this and [Lions, Lemme 1.3, p. 12], we identify ξ1 and ξ2 in (1),
namely
f (un ) * f (u) weakly in Lq (τ, T ; Lq (Ω))

a(l(un ))un * a(l(u))u weakly in L2 (τ, T ; H01 (Ω)).
Rest of steps are standard:

passing to the limit obtaining the equation
initial datum
concatenation in [T , T + 1], etc
Multi-valued process and pullback attractors
(X , dX ) a metric space and R2d = {(t, s) ∈ R2 : t ≥ s}. In what follows,

we denote by P(X ) the family of all nonempty subsets of X .
Definition A multi-valued process U on X is a family of mappings
U(t, τ ) : X 7→ P(X ) for any pair (t, τ ) ∈ R2d , such that
(i) U(τ, τ )x = {x} ∀τ ∈ R ∀x ∈ X .
(ii) U(t, τ )x ⊂ U(t,
S s)(U(s, τ )x) ∀τ ≤ s ≤ t ∀x ∈ X , where
U(t, τ )W := y ∈W U(t, τ )y ∀W ⊂ X .
If the relationship given in (ii) is an equality instead of an inclusion, the
multi-valued process U is called strict.
Definitions
A multi-valued process U on X is upper-semicontinuous if the mapping

U(t, τ ) is upper-semicontinuous from X into P(X ) for all (t, τ ) ∈ R2d , i.e.
for any x ∈ X and for every neighborhood N in X of the set U(t, τ )x,
there exists a value ε > 0 such that U(t, τ )y ⊂ N provided that
dX (x, y ) < ε.
Definitions

dX (x, y ) < ε.
Consider a universe D, that is a nonempty class of families parameterized

in time Db = {D(t) : t ∈ R} ⊂ P(X ) and a family of nonempty sets
Db 0 = {D0 (t) : t ∈ R} ⊂ P(X ).
Definitions

dX (x, y ) < ε.
Consider a universe D, that is a nonempty class of families parameterized

in time Db = {D(t) : t ∈ R} ⊂ P(X ) and a family of nonempty sets
Db 0 = {D0 (t) : t ∈ R} ⊂ P(X ).
A universe D is inclusion-closed if given D∈

b D and
0 0 0
D = {D (t) : t ∈ R} ⊂ P(X ) with D (t) ⊂ D(t) for all t ∈ R, it fulfils
b
b 0 ∈ D.
that D
The family D b 0 = {D0 (t) : t ∈ R} is said to be pullback D-absorbing for
a multi-valued process U if for every t ∈ R and D b ∈ D, there exists
τ (D, t) ≤ t such that
b
U(t, τ )D(τ ) ⊂ D0 (t) ∀τ ≤ τ (D,

b t).
The family D b 0 = {D0 (t) : t ∈ R} is said to be pullback D-absorbing for
a multi-valued process U if for every t ∈ R and D b ∈ D, there exists
τ (D, t) ≤ t such that
b
U(t, τ )D(τ ) ⊂ D0 (t) ∀τ ≤ τ (D,

b t).
A multi-valued process U on X is pullback D-asymptotically compact if

for any t ∈ R, any D b ∈ D, and any sequences {τn } ⊂ (−∞, t] and
{xn } ⊂ X such that τn → −∞ and xn ∈ D(τn ), it fulfils that any sequence
{yn } is relatively compact in X , where yn ∈ U(t, τn )xn for all n.
A pullback D-attractor for a multi-valued process U on X is a family
AD = {AD (t) : t ∈ R} ⊂ P(X ) such that
1 for any t ∈ R, the set AD (t) is a nonempty compact subset of X ;
2 AD is pullback D-attracting, i.e.
lim distX (U(t, τ )D(τ ), AD (t)) = 0 ∀D

b ∈D ∀t ∈ R,
τ →−∞
where distX (·, ·) denotes the Hausdorff semi-distance in X between

two subsets of X ;
3 AD is negatively invariant, i.e.
AD (t) ⊂ U(t, τ )AD (τ ) ∀(t, τ ) ∈ R2d .
A pullback D-attractor AD is said to be minimal if it satisfies that if there

b = {C (t) : t ∈ R} such that it is
exists another family of closed sets C
pullback D-attracting, then AD (t) ⊂ C (t) for all t ∈ R.
Observe that pullback attractors are not unique in general; however, the
minimal pullback attractor is, therefore, in the sense of minimality, one
recovers uniqueness of pullback attractor.
Observe that pullback attractors are not unique in general; however, the
minimal pullback attractor is, therefore, in the sense of minimality, one
recovers uniqueness of pullback attractor.
In what follows, we denote by
\[ X
Λ(D
b 0 , t) = U(t, τ )D0 (τ ) ∀t ∈ R,
s≤t τ ≤s
X
where {. . . } denotes the closure in X .
Theorem
U is u.s.c. multi-valued process with closed values,

b 0 = {D0 (t) : t ∈ R} ⊂ P(X ) is a pullback D-absorbing family and U is
D
pullback Db 0 -asymptotically compact. Then, AD = {AD (t) : t ∈ R}
defined by
[ X
AD (t) = Λ(D,
b t) ∀t ∈ R
D∈D
b
X
is the minimal pullback D-attractor and AD (t) ⊂ D0 (t) for all t ∈ R.
If AD ∈ D, then it is the unique family of D that satisfies the properties
1-3 given above. In addition, if the multi-valued process U is strict, then
AD is strictly invariant under the process U, i.e.
AD (t) = U(t, τ )AD (τ ) ∀(t, τ ) ∈ R2d .
Minimal pullback attractors in L2 for (Pε )
Φε (τ, uτ ) the set of weak solutions to (Pε ) in [τ, ∞) with initial datum
uτ ∈ L2 (Ω).
uτ ∈ L2 (Ω).
Define a multi-valued map U ε : R2d × L2 (Ω) → P(L2 (Ω)) as
U ε (t, τ )uτ = {u(t) : u ∈ Φε (τ, uτ )}, τ ≤ t, uτ ∈ L2 (Ω).
uτ ∈ L2 (Ω).
U ε is a strict multi-valued process on L2 (Ω) for all ε ∈ [0, 1).
uτ ∈ L2 (Ω).
U ε is a strict multi-valued process on L2 (Ω) for all ε ∈ [0, 1).
For ε = 0, U 0 (t, τ ) = S(t − τ ) for all (t, τ ) ∈ R2d , where S is the

multi-valued semiflow associated to the weak solutions of (P0 ).
Puntually convergence of the processes with
converging initial data
Proposition If {uτn } ⊂ L2 (Ω) is a sequence such that uτn → uτ strongly in

L2 (Ω), then for any sequence {u n } with u n ∈ Φε (τ, uτn ) for each n ≥ 1,
there exist a subsequence of {u n } (relabeled the same) and u ∈ Φε (τ, uτ )
such that
u n (s) → u(s) strongly in L2 (Ω) ∀s ≥ τ .

such that
Idea of the proof: compactness arguments and energy method

such that
Idea of the proof: compactness arguments and energy method
Proposition U ε is u.s.c. with closed values for all ε ∈ [0, 1)
Uniform estimate and universes
Proposition uτ ∈ L2 (Ω). Then, for any µε ∈ (0, 2(1 − ε)λ1 m), a solution
u to (Pε ) fulfils
ε2 e −µε t
Z t
2κ|Ω|
|u(t)|2 ≤ e −µε (t−τ ) |uτ |2 + + e µε s kh(s)k2∗ ds
µε 2(1 − ε)m − λ−1 1 µ ε τ
u to (Pε ) fulfils
ε2 e −µε t
Z t
2κ|Ω|
µε 2(1 − ε)m − λ−1 1 µ ε τ
2
Definition Denote by DµL for all µ > 0 the class of all families of
b = {D(t) : t ∈ R} ⊂ P(L2 (Ω)) such that
nonempty subsets D
!
lim e µτ sup |v |2 =0
τ →−∞ v ∈D(τ )
u to (Pε ) fulfils
ε2 e −µε t
Z t
2κ|Ω|
µε 2(1 − ε)m − λ−1 1 µ ε τ
2
nonempty subsets D
!
τ →−∞ v ∈D(τ )
Assumption there exist a couple of values ε0 ∈ (0, 1) and

µε0 ∈ (0, 2(1 − ε0 )λ1 m) such that the function h satisfies
Z 0
e µε0 s kh(s)k2∗ ds < ∞. (2)
−∞
u to (Pε ) fulfils
ε2 e −µε t
Z t
2κ|Ω|
µε 2(1 − ε)m − λ−1 1 µ ε τ
2
nonempty subsets D
!
τ →−∞ v ∈D(τ )
Assumption there exist a couple of values ε0 ∈ (0, 1) and

µε0 ∈ (0, 2(1 − ε0 )λ1 m) such that the function h satisfies
Z 0
e µε0 s kh(s)k2∗ ds < ∞. (2)
−∞
Remark Then, for any ε ∈ [0, ε0 ) one can take µε = µε0

Absorbing family
Proposition If the function h also satisfies (36), then, for any ε ∈ [0, ε0 ]
b ε = {D ε (t) : t ∈ R} defined by D ε (t) = B L2 (0, (R ε2 (t))1/2 ),
the family D 0 0 0 L
the closed ball in L2 (Ω) of center zero and radius (RLε2 (t))1/2 , where
ε2 e −µε t t
Z
2κ|Ω|
RLε2 (t) =1+ + e µε s kh(s)k2∗ ds,
µε 2(1 − ε)m − λ−1 1 µε −∞
2
is pullback DµLε -absorbing for the multi-valued process
b ε ∈ DL2 .
U ε : R2d × L2 (Ω) → L2 (Ω). Besides, D 0 µε
Asymptotic compactness
Lemma for any ε ∈ [0, ε0 ], t ∈ R, and D b ∈ DL2 , there exists
µε
τ1 (D, t) < t − 2, such that for any τ ≤ τ1 (D, t) and any uτ ∈ D(τ ), the
b b
solutions to (Pε ) satisfy


 |u(r ; τ, uτ )|2 ≤ ρε1 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 2, t],



 Z r
ku(s; τ, uτ )k2 ds ≤ ρε2 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 1, t],


 r −1
 Z r
(1 − ε)m ε


ku(s; τ, uτ )kpLp (Ω) ds ≤


 ρ2 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 1, t],
2α2

r −1
Asymptotic compactness
Lemma for any ε ∈ [0, ε0 ], t ∈ R, and D b ∈ DL2 , there exists
µε
τ1 (D, t) < t − 2, such that for any τ ≤ τ1 (D, t) and any uτ ∈ D(τ ), the
b b
solutions to (Pε ) satisfy


 |u(r ; τ, uτ )|2 ≤ ρε1 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 2, t],



 Z r


 r −1
 Z r
(1 − ε)m ε


ku(s; τ, uτ )kpLp (Ω) ds ≤


 ρ2 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 1, t],
2α2

r −1
where
ε2 e −µε (t−2) t
Z
2κ|Ω|
ρε1 (t) =1+ + e µε s kh(s)k2∗ ds,
µε 2(1 − ε)m − λ−1 1 µε −∞
r
ε2
Z
1
ρε2 (t) = ρε1 (t) + 2κ|Ω| + max kh(s)k2∗ ds .
(1 − ε)m (1 − ε)m r ∈[t−1,t] r −1
Proposition For any ε ∈ [0, ε0 ], the multi-valued process U ε is pullback
2
DµLε -asymptotically compact.
2
Theorem For all processes U ε with ε ∈ (0, ε0 ], there exist the minimal
2
pullback DFL -attractor Aε L2 = {Aε L2 (t) : t ∈ R}, and the minimal
DF DF
2
pullback DµLε -attractor Aε L2 = {Aε L2 (t) : t ∈ R}, which is strictly
Dµε Dµε
2
U ε -invariant, belongs to DµLε and
Aε L2 (t) ⊂ AεDL2 (t) ⊂ B L2 (0, (RLε2 (t))1/2 ) ∀t ∈ R ∀ε ∈ [0, ε0 ].

DF µε
2
2
DF DF
2
Dµε Dµε
2

DF µε
If there exists some µεe0 for some εe0 ∈ (0, ε0 ] such that h fulfils
Z s
sup e −µεe0 s e µεe0 θ kh(θ)k2∗ dθ < ∞, (3)
s≤0 −∞
2
2
DF DF
2
Dµε Dµε
2

DF µε
If there exists some µεe0 for some εe0 ∈ (0, ε0 ] such that h fulfils
Z s
sup e −µεe0 s e µεe0 θ kh(θ)k2∗ dθ < ∞, (3)
s≤0 −∞
then Aε L2 (t) = Aε L2 (t) for all t ∈ R and for all ε ∈ (0, εe0 ].
DF Dµε
Remark
The case ε = 0 can be deduced from above, but treated more easily since
there is no h term in (P0 ).
The solution operator gives a multi-valued semiflow S and

S(t − τ ) = U 0 (t, τ ).
There exists a global compact attractor A0 in L2 (Ω),
2
and it can be seen as pullback attractor not only for the universe DFL but
2
also for the tempered universe DµL0 where µ0 = 2λ1 m. Namely,
A0 L2 (t) = A0 for all t ∈ R.
Dµ0
L2 -robustness of attractors w.r.t. the parameter
Theorem [A continuous dependence result] Consider sequences
{εn } ⊂ (0, 1) with limn εn = 0 and {uτn } ⊂ L2 (Ω) such that uτn * uτ
weakly in L2 (Ω). Then, there exist a subsequence of {uτn } (relabeled the
same), u εn ∈ Φεn (τ, uτn ), and u 0 ∈ Φ0 (τ, uτ ) such that for all T > τ the
following convergences hold:
 ∗

 u εn * u 0 weakly-star in L∞ (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),

u εn * u 0 weakly in L2 (τ, T ; H01 (Ω)),





u εn * u 0 weakly in Lp (τ, T ; Lp (Ω)),






u εn → u 0 strongly in L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),




 f (u εn ) * f (u 0 ) weakly in Lq (τ, T ; Lq (Ω)),

−a(l(u εn ))∆u εn * −a(l(u 0 ))∆u 0 weakly in L2 (τ, T ; H −1 (Ω)),





(u εn )0 * (u 0 )0 weakly in L2 (τ, T ; H −1 (Ω)) + Lq (τ, T ; Lq (Ω)),






u εn (t) → u 0 (t) strongly in L2 (Ω) for all t > τ.

L2 -u.s.c. convergence of Aε toward A0
Theorem Assume that there exist a couple of values ε0 ∈ (0, 1) and
µε0 ∈ (0, 2(1 − ε0 )λ1 m) such that h ∈ L2loc (R; H −1 (Ω)) fufils (36), and
l ∈ L2 (Ω). Then, the family {Aε L2 (t)}ε∈(0,ε0 ] converges upper semi
Dµε
continuously as ε → 0 to A0 , the global compact attractor of S, the
multivalued semiflow associated to problem (P0 ), i.e.
lim distL2 (AεDL2 (t), A0 ) = 0 ∀t ∈ R.

ε→0 µε
Dµε

ε→0 µε
Proof By contradiction, using the previous theorem of convergence
Dµε

ε→0 µε
du
− g1 (ε)a(l(u))∆u = g̃1 (ε)f (u) + g0 (ε)h(t),
dt
g0 , g1 , g̃1 continuous, lim g0 (ε) = 0, lim g1 (ε) = lim g̃1 (ε) = 1.
ε→0 ε→0 ε→0
Dµε

ε→0 µε
du
− g1 (ε)a(l(u))∆u = g̃1 (ε)f (u) + g0 (ε)h(t),
dt
g0 , g1 , g̃1 continuous, lim g0 (ε) = 0, lim g1 (ε) = lim g̃1 (ε) = 1.
ε→0 ε→0 ε→0
Other possible generalizations: replacing the continuity assumption on g0 ,
g1 , and g̃1 by monotonicity.
On the extension of results to H 1 -norm
Assume that h ∈ L2loc (R; L2 (Ω)).
Should all similar results for H 1 -norm follow by multiplying by Aun and
Au ?
Au ? Yes... but carefully. Two considerations.
Au ? Yes... but carefully. Two considerations.
1) Regularity:
Suppose f ∈ C 1 and there exists η ≥ 0 s.t. f 0 (s) ≤ η for all s ∈ R.
Integration by parts in Galerkin approx. f (un )... converging ... where ?

(no uniqueness)
’A posteriori regularity’ argument
Consider the problem (’frozen viscosity’, u a given weak solution)
dy


 − g1 (ε)a(l(u))∆y = g̃1 (ε)f (y ) + g0 (ε)h(t) in Ω × (τ, ∞),
(Pε,u ) dt
 y = 0 on ∂Ω × (τ, ∞),

y (x, τ ) = uτ (x) in Ω.
For uτ ∈ L2 (Ω), each weak solution u belongs to

L∞ (τ + , T ; H01 (Ω)) ∩ L2 (τ + , T ; D(−∆)) for every > 0 and
T > τ + .
dy


(Pε,u ) dt
 y = 0 on ∂Ω × (τ, ∞),

y (x, τ ) = uτ (x) in Ω.

T > τ + .
In addition, if uτ ∈ H01 (Ω), then the weak solutions to (Pε ) belongs to

L2 (τ, T ; D(−∆)) ∩L∞ (τ, T ; H01 (Ω)) for all T > τ .
dy


(Pε,u ) dt
 y = 0 on ∂Ω × (τ, ∞),

y (x, τ ) = uτ (x) in Ω.

T > τ + .

(Galerkin ’frozen’ approxs) f (un ) ∈ L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)).
dy


(Pε,u ) dt
 y = 0 on ∂Ω × (τ, ∞),

y (x, τ ) = uτ (x) in Ω.

T > τ + .

(Galerkin ’frozen’ approxs) f (un ) ∈ L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)).
2) What about f (u)? Does it belongs to L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω))?
On the extension of results to H 1 -norm (II)
Assume e.g. ∂Ω ∈ C 1,1 , so D(−∆) = H 2 (Ω) ∩ H01 (Ω)
|f (s)| ≤ C (1 + |s|γ+1 ) ∀s ∈ R,
|f (s)| ≤ C (1 + |s|γ+1 ) ∀s ∈ R,
where γ = 4 when N = 3,
|f (s)| ≤ C (1 + |s|γ+1 ) ∀s ∈ R,
where γ = 4 when N = 3,γ = 2 when N = 4,
|f (s)| ≤ C (1 + |s|γ+1 ) ∀s ∈ R,
where γ = 4 when N = 3,γ = 2 when N = 4, and γ = 4/(N − 2) when
N ≥ 5.
|f (s)| ≤ C (1 + |s|γ+1 ) ∀s ∈ R,
where γ = 4 when N = 3,γ = 2 when N = 4, and γ = 4/(N − 2) when
N ≥ 5.
Given u ∈ L∞ (τ, T ; H01 (Ω))∩ L2 (τ, T ; H 2 (Ω) ∩ H01 (Ω)), by interpolation

Z TZ
|f (u(x, t))|2 dxdt
τ Ω
Z TZ
C 2 1 + |u(x, t)|2γ+2 dxdt

≤2
τ Ω
≤2C |Ω|(T − τ ) + 2C 2 kuk2b̂∞

2
1 kuk 2
2b̃
L (τ,T ;Lp(N,H ) )
2
L (τ,T ;Lp(N,H0 ) )
h
≤2C 2 |Ω|(T −τ )+(CH 1 (N))2b̂ (CH 2 (N))2b̃ kuk2Lb̂∞ (τ,T ;H 1 (Ω)) kuk2Lb̃2 (τ,T ;H 2 (Ω)∩H 1 (
0 0 0
Conseq. u ∈ L∞ (τ, T ; H01 (Ω)) ∩ L2 (τ, T ; H 2 (Ω) ∩ H01 (Ω))
• f (u) ∈ L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),
• f (u) ∈ L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),
• u 0 ∈ L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),
• f (u) ∈ L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),
• u 0 ∈ L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),
• u ∈ C ([τ, T ]; H01 (Ω)),
• f (u) ∈ L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),
• u 0 ∈ L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),
• u ∈ C ([τ, T ]; H01 (Ω)),
• A second energy equality for whole solutions:

Z t
2
ku(t)k + 2g1 (ε) a(l(u(r )))| − ∆u(r )|2 dr
Z st Z t
2
=ku(s)k + 2g̃1 (ε) (f (u(r )), −∆u(r ))dr + 2g0 (ε) (h(r ), −∆u(r ))dr .
s s
• f (u) ∈ L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),
• u 0 ∈ L2 (τ, T ; L2 (Ω)),
• u ∈ C ([τ, T ]; H01 (Ω)),
• A second energy equality for whole solutions:

Z t
2
ku(t)k + 2g1 (ε) a(l(u(r )))| − ∆u(r )|2 dr
Z st Z t
2
=ku(s)k + 2g̃1 (ε) (f (u(r )), −∆u(r ))dr + 2g0 (ε) (h(r ), −∆u(r ))dr .
s s
• The restriction of U ε to R2d × H01 (Ω) defines a strict multi-valued

process into H01 (Ω).
Continuity properties of U ε in H01 and new universe
• If {uτn } ⊂ H01 (Ω) is such that uτn → uτ strongly in H01 (Ω), for any
sequence {u n } with u n ∈ Φε (τ, uτn ) for all n ≥ 1, there exist a subsequence
of {u n } (relabeled the same) and u ∈ Φε (τ, uτ ) such that
u n (t) → u(t) strongly in H01 (Ω) ∀t ≥ τ .
Idea: Compactness arguments (Aubin-Lions) and (2nd) energy functionals.
• Then, U ε is upper-semicontinuous with closed values in H01 (Ω) for all

ε ∈ [0, 1].
• Then, U ε is upper-semicontinuous with closed values in H01 (Ω) for all

ε ∈ [0, 1].
L2 ,H 1
Definition For each µ > 0, Dµ 0 denotes the class of all families of
nonempty subsets Db 1 = {D(t) ∩ H 1 (Ω) : t ∈ R}, where
H0 0
b = {D(t) : t ∈ R} ∈ DL2 .
D µ
Absorbing condition/property (2) rewritten after g1
Assume that there exists µ̄ ∈ (0, 2λ1 m) such that
Z 0
e µ̄s kh(s)k2∗ ds < ∞.
−∞
Then, there exists ε̄ ∈ (0, 1] s.t. for any ε ∈ [0, ε̄] and any
µε ∈ [µ̄, 2g1 (ε)λ1 m), the family
b ε 1 = {B L2 (0, (R ε2 (t))1/2 ) ∩ H 1 (Ω) : t ∈ R},
D 0,H 0
L 0
where
(g0 (ε))2 e −µε t t
Z
2g̃1 (ε)κ|Ω|
RLε2 (t) =1+ + e µε s kh(s)k2∗ ds,
µε 2g1 (ε)m − λ−1 1 µε −∞
L2 ,H01 b ∈ DL2 , there exists

belongs to D , and for any t ∈ R and any D
µε µε
τ2 (D, t) < t such that
b
U ε (t, τ )D(τ ) ⊂ D0,H

ε
1 (t) ∀τ ≤ τ2 (D,
b t).
0
(Rewritten) asymptotic estimates leading to L2 -att.
There exists ε̄ ∈ (0, 1] such that for any ε ∈ [0, ε̄], t ∈ R,
µε ∈ [µ̄, 2g1 (ε)λ1 m) and D b ∈ DL2 , there exists τ1 (D,b t) < t − 2, such that
µε
for any τ ≤ τ1 (D,b t) and any uτ ∈ D(τ ), the solutions to (Pε ) satisfy


 |u(r ; τ, uτ )|2 ≤ ρε1 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 2, t],



 Z r


 r −1

 Z r
 g1 (ε)m ε
|u(s; τ, uτ )|pp ds ≤

 ρ (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 1, t],
2α2 g̃1 (ε) 2


r −1
where
2g̃1 (ε)κ|Ω| (g0 (ε))2 e −µε (t−2) t
Z
ρε1 (t) =1+ + e µε s kh(s)k2∗ ds,
µε 2g1 (ε)m − λ−11 µε −∞
r
(g0 (ε))2
Z
1
ρε2 (t) = ρε1 (t) + 2g̃1 (ε)κ|Ω| + max kh(s)k2∗ ds .
g1 (ε)m g1 (ε)m r ∈[t−1,t] r −1
Asymptotic estimates (II): strong case
There exists ε̄ ∈ (0, 1] such that for any ε ∈ [0, ε̄], µε ∈ [µ̄, 2g1 (ε)λ1 m),
t ∈ R and Db ∈ DL2 , there exists τ3 (D,
b t) < t − 3 such that for any
µε
τ ≤ τ3 (D,
b t) and any uτ ∈ D(τ ), the following estimates hold
ku(r ; τ, uτ )k2 ≤ ρ̃ε1 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 2, t],







r

Z
| − ∆u(s; τ, uτ )|2 ds ≤ ρ̃ε2 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 1, t],


 r −1


r

 Z
|u 0 (s; τ, uτ )|2 ds ≤ ρ̃ε3 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 1, t],




r −1
for certain positive functions ρ̃εj , j = 1, 2, 3.
Asymptotic estimates (II): strong case
There exists ε̄ ∈ (0, 1] such that for any ε ∈ [0, ε̄], µε ∈ [µ̄, 2g1 (ε)λ1 m),
t ∈ R and Db ∈ DL2 , there exists τ3 (D,
b t) < t − 3 such that for any
µε
τ ≤ τ3 (D,
b t) and any uτ ∈ D(τ ), the following estimates hold
ku(r ; τ, uτ )k2 ≤ ρ̃ε1 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 2, t],







r

Z
| − ∆u(s; τ, uτ )|2 ds ≤ ρ̃ε2 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 1, t],


 r −1


r

 Z
|u 0 (s; τ, uτ )|2 ds ≤ ρ̃ε3 (t) ∀r ∈ [t − 1, t],




r −1
for certain positive functions ρ̃εj , j = 1, 2, 3.
L2 ,H01
(2nd) energy method gives Dµε -asymptotic compactness in H01 .
L2 ,H01
Attractors in Dµε
There exists ε̄ ∈ (0, 1] such that for any ε ∈ [0, ε̄] and
H1
µε ∈ [µ̄, 2g1 (ε)λ1 m), there exist the minimal pullback DF 0 -attractor Aε H 1
DF 0
L2 ,H01
and the minimal pullback D µε -attractor Aε L2 ,H 1 for the multi-valued
Dµε 0
process Uε : R2d × H01 (Ω) → P(H01 (Ω)). Furthermore, it fulfils
Aε H 1 (t) ⊂ Aε L2 (t) ⊂ AεDL2 (t) = Aε L2 ,H 1 (t) ∀t ∈ R ∀ε ∈ [0, ε̄].

DF 0 DF µε Dµε 0
L2 ,H01
Attractors in Dµε
There exists ε̄ ∈ (0, 1] such that for any ε ∈ [0, ε̄] and
H1
µε ∈ [µ̄, 2g1 (ε)λ1 m), there exist the minimal pullback DF 0 -attractor Aε H 1
DF 0
L2 ,H01
and the minimal pullback D µε -attractor Aε L2 ,H 1 for the multi-valued
Dµε 0
process Uε : R2d × H01 (Ω) → P(H01 (Ω)). Furthermore, it fulfils
Aε H 1 (t) ⊂ Aε L2 (t) ⊂ AεDL2 (t) = Aε L2 ,H 1 (t) ∀t ∈ R ∀ε ∈ [0, ε̄].

DF 0 DF µε Dµε 0
Finally, if there exists some µ̃ ∈ (0, 2λ1 m) such that

Z s
sup e −µ̃s e µ̃r |h(r )|2 dr < ∞,
s≤0 −∞
then there exists ε̃ ∈ (0, 1] such that
Aε H 1 (t) = Aε L2 (t) = AεDL2 (t) = Aε L2 ,H 1 (t) ∀t ∈ R ∀ε ∈ [0, ε̃].

DF 0 DF µ Dµ 0
Strong continuity to the limit problem
Assume that g0 (0) = 0.
∂u


 − a(l(u))∆u = f (u) in Ω × (τ, ∞),
(P0 ) ∂t
 u = 0 on ∂Ω × (τ, ∞),

u(x, τ ) = uτ (x) in Ω.
Theorem Consider sequences {εn } with limn εn = 0 and {uτn } ⊂ L2 (Ω)
such that uτn * uτ weakly in L2 (Ω). Then, there exist a subsequence of
{uτn } (relabeled the same), a sequence {u εn }, with u εn ∈ Φεn (τ, uτn ), and
u 0 ∈ Φ0 (τ, uτ ) such that
u εn (t) → u 0 (t) strongly in H01 (Ω) for all t > τ.
Robustness in H 1 -norm
Related to the radii of the absorbing families, assume
(g0 (ε))2
lim sup < ∞,
ε→0 2g1 (ε)m − λ−11 µε
where µε are chosen in [µ̄, 2g1 (ε)λ1 m).
Robustness in H 1 -norm
Related to the radii of the absorbing families, assume
(g0 (ε))2
lim sup < ∞,
ε→0 2g1 (ε)m − λ−11 µε
where µε are chosen in [µ̄, 2g1 (ε)λ1 m).
Theorem There exists ε̄ ∈ (0, 1] such that for any ε ∈ [0, ε̄] and any
µε ∈ [µ̄, 2g1 (ε)λ1 m), the family {Aε L2 (t)}ε∈(0,ε̄] converges upper
Dµε
semicontinuously to A0 L2 in H01 (Ω) as ε goes to 0, i.e.
DF
lim distH 1 (AεDL2 (t), A0 L2 ) = 0 ∀t ∈ R.

ε→0 0 µε DF
References
A. Andami Ovono, Asymptotic behaviour for a diffusion equation
governed by nonlocal interactions, Electron. J. Differential Equations
134 (2010), 01–16.
A. Andami Ovono and A. Rougirel, Elliptic equations with diffusion
parameterized by the range of nonlocal interactions, Ann. Mat. Pura
Appl. (4) 189 (2010), 163–183.
T. Caraballo, M. Herrera-Cobos, and P. Marı́n-Rubio, Long-time
behaviour of a non-autonomous parabolic equation with nonlocal
diffusion and sublinear terms, Nonlinear Anal. 121 (2015), 3–18.
T. Caraballo, M. Herrera-Cobos, and P. Marı́n-Rubio, Robustness of
nonautonomous attractors for a family of nonlocal reaction–diffusion
equations without uniqueness, Nonlinear Dyn 84 (2016), 35–50.
T. Caraballo, M. Herrera-Cobos, and P. Marı́n-Rubio, Robustness of
time-dependent attractors in H 1 -norm for nonlocal problems, Discrete
Contin. Dyn. Sys. B To appear.
N. H. Chang and M. Chipot, Nonlinear nonlocal evolution problems,
RACSAM. Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fı́s. Nat. Ser. A Mat. 97
(2003), 423–445.
N. H. Chang and M. Chipot, On some model diffusion problems with
a nonlocal lower order term, Chinese Ann. Math. Ser. B 24 (2003),
147–166.
M. Chipot and B. Lovat, Some remarks on non local elliptic and
parabolic problems, Nonlinear Anal. 30 (1997), 4619–4627.
M. Chipot and B. Lovat, On the asymptotic behaviour of some
nonlocal problem, Positivity 3 (1999), 65–81.
M. Chipot and B. Lovat, Existence and uniqueness results for a class
of nonlocal elliptic and parabolic problems, Dyn. Contin. Discrete
Impuls. Syst. 8 (2001), 35–51.
M. Chipot and L. Molinet, Asymptotic behavior of some nonlocal
diffusion problems, Appl. Anal. 80 (2001), 273–315.
M. Chipot, V. Valente, and G. V. Caffarelli, Remarks on a nonlocal
problem involving the Dirichlet energy, Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 110 (2003), 199–220.
M. Chipot and S. Zheng, Asymptotic behavior of solutions to
nonlinear parabolic equations with nonlocal terms, Asymptot. Anal.
45 (2005), 301–312.
B. Lovat, Etudes de quelques problèmes paraboliques non locaux,
Thèse, Université de Metz, 1995.
S. B. de Menezes, Remarks on weak solutions for a nonlocal parabolic
problem, Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 2006 (2006), 01-10.
J. Simsen and J. Ferreira, A global attractor for a nonlocal parabolic
problem, Nonlinear Stud. 21 (2014), 405–416.
45 (2005), 301–312.
Thanks to several colleagues for comments, suggestions and
improvements: Prof. Shmarev, Prof. Simsen and Prof. Morales-Rodrigo.
45 (2005), 301–312.
Thanks to several colleagues for comments, suggestions and
improvements: Prof. Shmarev, Prof. Simsen and Prof. Morales-Rodrigo.
This work has been partially supported by Ministerio de Economı́a y

Competitividad (Spain), grant MTM2011-22411, Junta de Andalucı́a grant
P12-FQM-1492. M.H.-C. is a fellow of Programa de FPI del Ministerio de
Economı́a y Competitividad (SPAIN).
MUCHAS GRACIAS POR SU ATENCIÓN
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ATTENTION
MUITO OBRIGADO PELA SUA ATENÇÃO

Peru Lima PMR

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Peru Lima PMR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

VII International Symposium

Lima (Perú) July 3–7, 2017

Robustness of time-dependent attractors in H 1 -norm for nonlocal

In collaboration with Tomás Caraballo and Marta Herrera-Cobos

2 Goals of our work

3 Statement of the problem

4 Existence result (of weak solutions)

5 Multi-valued process and pullback attractors

6 Minimal pullback attractors in L2 for (Pε )

7 On the extension of results to H 1 -norm

8 References and acknowledgments

Billingham, NONLINEARITY 2004

Billingham, NONLINEARITY 2004

(Biology) the evolution of some species might be better represented by a

Chipot & Lovat, Nonlinear Anal. 1999, Positivity 2001

Existence, uniqueness of global solutions

Existence, uniqueness of global solutions

Existence, uniqueness of global solutions

Existence, uniqueness of global solutions

Well-posedness in sense of Hadamard in L2 (Ω), global solutions

Well-posedness in sense of Hadamard in L2 (Ω), global solutions

(Ω bounded domain, without smoothness assumptions on ∂Ω.)

Well-posedness in sense of Hadamard in L2 (Ω), global solutions

(Ω bounded domain, without smoothness assumptions on ∂Ω.)

Well-posedness in sense of Hadamard in L2 (Ω), global solutions

(Ω bounded domain, without smoothness assumptions on ∂Ω.)

Well-posedness in sense of Hadamard in L2 (Ω), global solutions

(Ω bounded domain, without smoothness assumptions on ∂Ω.)

Well-posedness in sense of Hadamard in L2 (Ω), global solutions

(Ω bounded domain, without smoothness assumptions on ∂Ω.)

Well-posedness in sense of Hadamard in L2 (Ω), global solutions

(Ω bounded domain, without smoothness assumptions on ∂Ω.)

Existence of global solutions L2 for nonlinearities RD-like

(Again Ω bounded domain without smoothness assump. on ∂Ω.)

Existence of global solutions L2 for nonlinearities RD-like

(Again Ω bounded domain without smoothness assump. on ∂Ω.)

Existence of global solutions L2 for nonlinearities RD-like

(Again Ω bounded domain without smoothness assump. on ∂Ω.)

f ∈ C (R) : −κ − α1 |s|p ≤ f (s)s ≤ κ − α2 |s|p ∀s ∈ R,

f ∈ C (R) : −κ − α1 |s|p ≤ f (s)s ≤ κ − α2 |s|p ∀s ∈ R,

τ ∈ R, uτ ∈ L2 (Ω), h ∈ L2loc (R; H −1 (Ω))

f ∈ C (R) : −κ − α1 |s|p ≤ f (s)s ≤ κ − α2 |s|p ∀s ∈ R,

τ ∈ R, uτ ∈ L2 (Ω), h ∈ L2loc (R; H −1 (Ω))

Riesz identification choice: H01 (Ω) ∩ Lp (Ω) ⊂ L2 (Ω) ⊂ H −1 (Ω) + Lq (Ω)

Remark from the assumptions, if u weak solution, then

Remark from the assumptions, if u weak solution, then

Remark from the assumptions, if u weak solution, then

GOAL: To prove that ξ1 = f (u) and ξ2 = −a(l(u))∆u

(un (t + b) − un (t), w ) ≤ Cε (b 1/2 + b 1/p )(kw k + kw kLp (Ω) ).

|un (t + b) − un (t)|2 ≤ Cε (b 1/2 + b 1/p )(kun (t + b) − un (t)k

Now, integrating between τ and T − b, we have

f (un ) * f (u) weakly in Lq (τ, T ; Lq (Ω))

f (un ) * f (u) weakly in Lq (τ, T ; Lq (Ω))

Rest of steps are standard:

(X , dX ) a metric space and R2d = {(t, s) ∈ R2 : t ≥ s}. In what follows,

A multi-valued process U on X is upper-semicontinuous if the mapping

A multi-valued process U on X is upper-semicontinuous if the mapping

Consider a universe D, that is a nonempty class of families parameterized

A multi-valued process U on X is upper-semicontinuous if the mapping

Consider a universe D, that is a nonempty class of families parameterized

A universe D is inclusion-closed if given D∈

U(t, τ )D(τ ) ⊂ D0 (t) ∀τ ≤ τ (D,

U(t, τ )D(τ ) ⊂ D0 (t) ∀τ ≤ τ (D,