A Variational Approach To Superlinear Semipositone

PROCEEDINGS OF THE
AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY

Volume 145, Number 6, June 2017, Pages 2661–2675
http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/proc/13426
Article electronically published on December 15, 2016
A VARIATIONAL APPROACH TO SUPERLINEAR

SEMIPOSITONE ELLIPTIC PROBLEMS
DAVID G. COSTA, HUMBERTO RAMOS QUOIRIN, AND HOSSEIN TEHRANI
(Communicated by Joachim Krieger)
Abstract. In this paper we present a variational approach to a class of el-

liptic problems with superlinear semipositone nonlinearities. We consider the
parametrized family of problems

−Δu = λa(x)(f (u) − l) in Ω,
u=0 on ∂Ω,
with l > 0, a continuous, and f subcritical and superlinear at infinity. We
obtain positive solutions of such problems for 0 < λ < λ0 by combining a
suitable rescaling with a continuity argument. In doing so, we require f to be
of regular variation at infinity, so that f does not need to be asymptotic to a
power. Furthermore, a may vanish in open parts of Ω or change sign.
Introduction
Let Ω be a bounded and smooth domain of RN with N ≥ 3. In this article we
are concerned with the problem

−Δu = λa(x)(f (u) − l) in Ω,
(Pλ )
u=0 on ∂Ω,
where λ, l > 0, a : Ω → R is a continuous function, and f : [0, ∞) → R is a subcriti-
cal and continuous function satisfying f (0) = 0. Hence in the case that a(x) > 0 in
Ω, this equation belongs to the class of semipositone problems. The main purpose
of this article is to prove the existence of a positive solution via variational meth-
ods for this problem in the superlinear case. In view of its semipositone structure,
the main difficulty in this class of problems is related to the positivity of solutions,
since the strong maximum principle does not apply.
Many authors have studied semipositone problems over the years since the ap-
pearance of the 1988 paper by Castro and Shivaji [11], who initially used the ter-
minology ‘nonpositone’ (currently termed ‘semipositone’) to contrast with that of
‘positone problems’, this latter terminology coined by Cohen and Keller in [16]
for problems with “positive and monotone nonlinearities.” We refer the reader to
[2–15, 17–19] and references therein for a (likely incomplete) list of papers on semi-
positone problems. The approach in the majority of these papers has been through
Received by the editors June 22, 2016 and, in revised form, August 1, 2016.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 35J15, 35J20, 35J61, 35J91.
Key words and phrases. Semipositone problem, superlinear problem, variational methods, in-
definite problem, regular variation.
The second author was supported by the FONDECYT project 1161635.
2016
c American Mathematical Society
2661
Licensed to New York Univ, Courant Inst. Prepared on Fri Mar 24 00:28:18 EDT 2017 for download from IP 128.122.230.148.
License or copyright restrictions may apply to redistribution; see http://www.ams.org/journal-terms-of-use
2662 DAVID G. COSTA, HUMBERTO RAMOS QUOIRIN, AND HOSSEIN TEHRANI
the use of sub-supersolutions, degree theory arguments, fixed point theory and bi-
furcation methods. However aside from a few papers (mostly dealing with special
nonlinearities or domains such as balls), variational methods have not been widely
used to deal with these types of problems in general (but cf. [6, 14, 17, 19]).
The novelty here, in addition to our approach which combines variational and
continuity arguments, is the class of nonlinearities that are considered in our study.
In fact, in order to briefly describe our approach and as motivation, let us first
N +2
consider the superlinear pure-power model f (s) = sp with 1 < p < N −2 , so that
the equation in (Pλ ) reads
−Δu = λa(x)up − λla(x).
1
Setting v = λ p−1 u, we reduce (Pλ ) to
p
−Δv = a(x)v p − λ p−1 la(x) in Ω,
v=0 on ∂Ω.
Considering the corresponding energy functional

1 1 p
I(v) = |∇v|2 − a(x)|v|p+1 + λ p−1 l a(x)v, v ∈ H01 (Ω),
2 Ω p+1 Ω Ω
it is easily seen that this problem has a mountain-pass critical point vλ for every λ
sufficiently small. Using a continuity argument from [21], one shows that vλ → v0
in H01 (Ω) as λ → 0, where v0 is a positive solution of −Δv = a(x)v p in Ω, with
v = 0 on ∂Ω. Moreover, elliptic regularity yields vλ → v0 in C 1 (Ω). Finally, by the
strong maximum principle, we have v0 > 0 in Ω and ∂ν v0 < 0 on ∂Ω, so that vλ
1
(and consequently uλ = λ 1−p vλ ) must also be positive for all λ small enough.
Next, to motivate the class of nonlinearities that are considered here, we point out
that the homogeneity of f (s) played an important role in the above situation, since
(i) it suggested an obvious rescaling to transform the problem into a new problem,
and (ii) the latter was in a form where a continuity argument, in the context of the
variational structure of the problem, could be readily applied. On the other hand,
in the context of semipositone superlinear problems in general bounded domains,
and mainly as a byproduct of the techniques employed, it is standard practice to
consider nonlinearities f (s) that are ‘equal/asymptotic’ to the power sp at infinity
f (s)
in the sense that lim = 1, or more generally Asp ≤ f (s) ≤ Bsp for some
s→∞ sp
A, B > 0 and s large; cf. [3, 4, 6, 14].
However, in this paper, we shall not restrict ourselves to the above pure-power
or power-like cases, but consider instead a larger class of nonlinearities which, as
we will see below, not only seems more natural but also allows an approach leading
to suitably rescaled problems where a combination of variational and continuity
arguments can again be applied. Namely, we will consider semipositone problems
(Pλ ) where the nonlinearity f belongs to the class of functions of regular variation
of index p > 1 (at infinity). Recall that a real valued continuous function f defined
on [A, ∞] (for some A ≥ 0) is said to be of regular variation of index p (at infinity)
if
f (μs)
(0.1) lim = μp for every μ > 0.
s→+∞ f (s)
This class of functions, with p = 1, has been recently considered in [20], where a
priori bounds for positive solutions of a superlinear problem were established via a
SUPERLINEAR SEMIPOSITONE ELLIPTIC PROBLEMS 2663
rescaling argument. We refer to [22,23] for various properties of functions of regular

variation.
We note that a function of regular variation of index p > 1 at infinity satisfies
the property

f (s) f (s)
p = sup p1 > 0 | lim = +∞ = inf p2 > 0 | lim =0 ,
s→+∞ sp1 s→+∞ sp2
and, hence,
f (s) f (s)
p−ε
= +∞ and
lim lim p+ε = 0,
s→+∞ s s→+∞ s
for every ε > 0. In particular, if f is asymptotic to the power sp at infinity in the
f (s)
sense that lim = 1, then f clearly satisfies (0.1). On the other hand, there
s→∞ sp
are functions which satisfy (0.1) but are not asymptotic to the power sp at infinity
in the above sense, e.g. f (s) = sp (ln(s + 1))q , where p > 1 and q > 0.
In order to state our main result and locate it in the context of the existing
literature on semipositone problems, we recall here the result in [4] in the superlinear
case which is typical of the kind of results obtained in this area. In fact, in [4] the
authors applied bifurcation and degree theoretic arguments to the problem

−Δu = λf (x, u) in Ω,
(0.2)
u=0 on ∂Ω
and proved
Theorem 0.1 ([4]). Let f : Ω × [0, ∞) → R be a continuous function such that:
(1) f (x, 0) < 0 for all x ∈ Ω.
f (x, s)
(2) There exists a continuous function b : Ω → (0, ∞) such that lim =
s→∞ sp
∗ ∗
b(x) uniformly in x ∈ Ω, with 1 < p < 2 − 1, where 2 = N −2 if N ≥ 3
2N
and 2∗ = ∞ if N = 1, 2.
Then there exists λ0 > 0 such that (0.2) has a positive solution for 0 < λ ≤ λ0 .
More precisely, there exists a connected set of positive solutions of (0.2) bifurcating
from infinity at λ∞ = 0.
Let us make a couple of comments at this point. Firstly we note that the existence
result in Theorem 0.1 has also been proved in [3], where, furthermore, the authors
also proved a non-existence result for λ large. This result, in particular, implies the
existence of λ1 > λ0 such that for f (x, u) = up − l and Ω strictly convex, problem
(0.2) does not have any positive solutions for λ > λ1 . Secondly, all of these results
are of bifurcation nature (i.e., the optimal value of λ0 is not known), and to the
best of our knowledge, even in the case of f (x, u) = up − l and Ω strictly convex,
the existence question for λ0 < λ < λ1 is still open.
In the present paper we are only concerned with the existence of positive solutions
of (Pλ ). Even though our nonlinearity is not as general as f (x, u), we do not require
f to be asymptotic to a power at infinity, unlike condition (2) in Theorem 0.1.
N +2
Instead we assume that f satisfies (0.1), with 1 < p < N −2 . Moreover, contrary to
Theorem 0.1, we allow a to vanish in open parts of Ω.
Lastly, to emphasize the utility of our variational and continuity approach in a
more general setting, we also consider the case of sign-changing weight a(x), still
proving the existence of a positive solution for λ > 0 small, but under further
restriction on the zero set of a(x) and on the nonlinearity f (s). More precisely, in
the latter case, we assume that
Ω+ = {x ∈ Ω : a(x) > 0} and Ω− = {x ∈ Ω : a(x) < 0}
are non-empty and satisfy
(AT ) (Ω+ ) ∩ (Ω− ) = ∅;
i.e., a has a thick zero set. This condition is used to prove that the functional
associated to (Pλ ) satisfies the Palais-Smale condition; cf. [1]. In addition, setting
h(s) = fs(s)
p , we assume that
(0.3) there exist h∞ := lim h(s) (possibly being ∞) and s0 ≥ 0

s→∞
such that h(s) ≤ h∞ for s ≥ s0 .
q
This condition is satisfied, for instance, by f (s) = sp (log(s + 1)) , with q > 0.
We are now in position to state our main result:
Theorem 0.2. Let a ∈ C(Ω) with Ω+
= ∅ and f : [0, ∞) → R be a continuous
N +2
function satisfying f (0) = 0 and (0.1), with 1 < p < N −2 . Assume either of the
following conditions:
(1) a ≥ 0.
(2) a changes sign and satisfies (AT ), and f satisfies (0.3).
Then there exists λ0 > 0 such that (Pλ ) has a positive solution uλ for every 0 <
λ < λ0 . Moreover uλ (x) → ∞ as λ → 0+ for every x ∈ Ω.
Finally we should note that the definition of regularly varying functions at in-
finity makes sense for any p ∈ R (cf. [23]), and our approach could also be easily
applied through minimization in the simpler case 0 < p < 1 of ‘sublinear’ problems
(with a ≥ 0) leading to an existence result in this case in the spirit of Theorem
0.2 for all λ large. At the same time, we observe that the borderline case p = 1 is
an exception due to the fact that it does not properly describe the ‘asymptotically
f (s)
linear case’ (usually defined as lim = 1) since, for example, it would include
s→+∞ s
superlinear functions such as f (s) = s(log(s + 1))q with q > 0.
0.1. Notation.
1
• The usual norm of X = H01 (Ω) is denoted by · , i.e., u = Ω |∇u|2 2 .
• The weak convergence is denoted by .
• The positive and negative parts of a function u are defined by u± :=
max{±u, 0}.
1. Preliminary results
We shall be assuming throughout that f is continuous and satisfies (0.1) with
N +2
1<p< N −2 . It follows from (0.1) that
f (s) f (s)
(1.1) lim
= +∞ and lim =0
sp−ε s→+∞ s→+∞ sp+ε
for every ε > 0. In particular, it follows that f is subcritical; i.e., it satisfies

(1.2) |f (s)| ≤ C(1 + sp0 ), ∀s ≥ 0,
N +2
for some C > 0 and 0 < p0 < N −2 . Also, as a consequence of (0.1), one can show
that the following representation holds:
s
σ(τ )
(1.3) f (s) = sp h(s) exp dτ , ∀s ≥ A, for some A ≥ 0.
1 τ
Here h is a positive and continuous function such that lim h(s) = h∞ > 0 and σ
s→∞
is a continuous function such that lim σ(s) = 0 (see [23]).
s→∞
Now, if we rescale problem (Pλ ) by setting v = δu with δ > 0, we obtain the
problem

−Δv = λδa(x) f (δ −1 v) − l in Ω,
(Qδ )
v=0 on ∂Ω.
We then choose δ > 0 satisfying δf (δ −1 ) = λ−1 , so that the problem above is
written as

−1
−Δv = f a(x)
(δ −1 ) f (δ v) − l in Ω,
(Qδ )
v=0 on ∂Ω.
Indeed, since p > 1, note that δf (δ −1 ) → ∞ as δ → 0, so for any λ > 0 sufficiently

small we can find δ > 0 such that δf (δ −1 ) = λ−1 . Moreover, if λn → 0+ , then
there exists δn → 0+ such that δn f (δn−1 ) = λ−1
n .
Next, we extend f to R by setting f (s) = 0 for s < 0, and our goal then is to
solve (Qδ ). The energy functional associated to (Qδ ) is defined for v ∈ X := H01 (Ω)
by

1 1 −1
Iδ (v) = |∇v|2 − δ a(x)F (δ v) − l a(x)v ,
2 Ω f (δ −1 ) Ω Ω
s s δ−1 s
where F (s) = 0 f (t)dt, hence 0 f (δ −1 s)ds = δ 0 f (t)dt = δF (δ −1 s). More-
over, in view of (1.2), Iδ is a C functional on X and its critical points are weak
1
solutions of (Qδ ).
Remark 1.1. By (1.2) andthe compact Sobolev embedding X ⊂ Lq (Ω), 1 < q <
2∗ := N2N−2 , the maps v → Ω F (δ
−1
v) and v → Ω f (δ −1 v)v are weakly continuous
on X for any δ > 0, i.e.,

F (δ −1 vn ) → F (δ −1 v) and f (δ −1 vn )vn → f (δ −1 v)v if vn v in X.
Ω Ω Ω Ω
The following two lemmas will be used extensively in the rest of this paper. In
what follows, we let C > 0 or some subscripted version of it denote a constant
whose exact value is irrelevant and which may be different in each situation.
Lemma 1.2. Given ε0 > 0 sufficiently small there exists δ0 = δ0 (ε0 ) > 0 such that,
for δ ≤ δ0 and s > 0, there holds

f (δ −1 s) C1 p−ε0

f (δ −1 ) ≤ f (δ −1 ) + C2 |s| + |s|p+ε0
where C1 and C2 are independent of δ. In particular

f (δ −1 s)

f (δ −1 ) ≤ C 1 + |s|
p+ε0
.
Proof. We fix ε0 ∈ (0, 1) and K = K(ε0 ) ≥ A such that

N +2
(1.4) p + ε0 <and |σ(τ )| < ε0 if τ ≥ K.
N −2
We set M = max |f (t)| and assume δ ≤ 1. Obviously f (δ −1 ) > 0, and in order to
−1
t∈[0,K]
f (δ s)
estimate f (δ−1 ) we consider two cases:
−1

Case 1. δ −1 s ≤ K: Then, since |f (δ −1 s)| ≤ M , we have ff(δ(δ−1s)
) ≤ f (δ −1 ) .
M
Case 2. δ −1 s > K: In this case, it follows from the representation (1.3) that
−1
f (δ −1 s) h(δ −1
s) δ s
σ(τ )
= sp exp dτ .
f (δ −1 ) h(δ −1 ) δ −1 τ
−1
s)
And, since lim h(s) = h∞ > 0 and h is continuous, we have h(δ h(δ −1 ) ≤ C = C(K).
s→∞
Also
−1
δ s max{δ −1 ,δ −1 s}
σ(τ ) σ(τ )
exp dτ ≤ exp τ dτ
δ −1 τ −1 −1
min{δ ,δ s}

max{δ −1 , δ −1 s}
≤ exp ε0 ln
min{δ −1 , δ −1 s}
≤ max{sε0 , s−ε0 }.
Thus
f (δ −1 s)

f (δ −1 ) ≤ C max{s }.
p+ε0 p−ε0
,s
Hence, in both cases we obtain that

f (δ −1 s) C1 p−ε0

f (δ −1 ) ≤ f (δ −1 ) + C2 |s| + |s|p+ε0
for all s > 0 and δ ≤ δ0 = 1.

Lemma 1.3. For any v ∈ X there holds

δ −1 1
lim a(x)F (δ v) = a(x)(v + )p+1 .
δ→0 f (δ −1 ) Ω p+1 Ω
Proof. Let
f (δ −1 s) s
fδ (s) := and Fδ (s) := fδ (t) dt
f (δ −1 ) 0
so that
δ
F (δ −1 s).
Fδ (s) =
f (δ −1 )
By Lemma 1.2 we have, for ε > 0 small,
|fδ (s)| ≤ C(1 + |s|p+ε ) and |Fδ (s)| ≤ C(1 + |s|p+1+ε )
uniformly for all δ sufficiently small. Since lim fδ (s) = sp for all s > 0, Lebesgue’s
δ→0
Dominated Convergence Theorem yields
sp+1
lim Fδ (s) = , for all s > 0 .
δ→0 p+1
Now, for v ∈ X, we have

(v(x)+ )p+1
lim Fδ (v(x)) = a.e. in Ω.
δ→0 p+1
Since
|Fδ (v(x))| ≤ C(1 + |v(x)|p+1+ε )
and v ∈ Lp+1+ε (Ω), applying Lebesgue’s Dominated Convergence Theorem one
more time we get the result.
2. Proof of Theorem 0.2

The proof of Theorem 0.2 is based on the Mountain-Pass Theorem. Recall that
f is assumed to satisfy
f (μs)
(2.1) lim = μp for every μ > 0,
s→+∞ f (s)
N +2
with 1 < p < N −2 .
r02
Lemma 2.1. There exist 0 < r0 < 1 and δ0 > 0 such that Iδ (v) ≥ 8 if δ ≤ δ0 and
v = r0 .
Proof. By Lemma 1.2, for ε0 sufficiently small we have, for s > 0,

f (δ −1 s) C1 p−ε0

f (δ −1 ) ≤ f (δ −1 ) + C2 |s| + |s|p+ε0 ,
so that
δF (δ −1 s) C1 p+1−ε0

f (δ −1 ) ≤ f (δ −1 ) |s| + C2 |s| + |s|p+1+ε0
for some C1 , C2 > 0 if δ ≤ δ0 . It follows that

δ
(2.2) a(x)F (δ −1 v) ≤ C1 v + C2 vp+1+ε0 + vp+1−ε0 .
−1
f (δ ) Ω −1
f (δ )
Hence, if v = r, then
1 C1
Iδ (v) ≥ v2 − −1
v − C2 vp+1+ε0 + vp+1−ε0
2 f (δ )
1 2 C1
= r − −1
r − C2 r p+1+ε0 + r p+1−ε0 .
2 f (δ )
We first choose 0 < r0 < 1 such that
1 2 r2
r0 − C2 r0p+1+ε0 + r0p+1−ε0 ≥ 0 ,
2 4
and then choose δ0 > 0 such that, for δ ≤ δ0 , we have
C 3 r0 r2
−1
≤ 0,
f (δ ) 8
which yields the desired conclusion.
Lemma 2.2. There exists w0 ∈ X such that ||w0 || > 1 and Iδ (w0 ) < 0 for every
δ > 0 sufficiently small.
Proof. Define, for v ∈ X,

1 1
J(v) = ||v||2 − a(x)(v + )p+1
2 p+1 Ω
and note that, for t > 0,

t2 tp+1
J(tv) = ||v||2 − a(x)(v + )p+1 .
2 p+1 Ω
As p > 1, given 0 < v ∈ C01 (Ω+ ) we have

lim J(tv) = −∞ .
t→∞
Hence we first choose 0 < w0 ∈ C01 (Ω+ ) such that

(2.3) J(w0 ) < −1 and ||w0 || > 1 .
Next, using Lemma 1.3 we get

||w0 ||2 δ −1 l
lim Iδ (w0 ) = lim − a(x)F (δ w 0 ) + a(x)w 0
δ→0 δ→0 2 f (δ −1 ) Ω f (δ −1 ) Ω
= J(w0 ) < −1 .
Therefore Iδ (w0 ) < 0 for all δ sufficiently small. The proof is now complete.
Let us recall that f is said to satisfy the Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz condition ((AR)

for short) if there exist θ > 2 and s0 > 0 such that
θF (s) ≤ sf (s) for s ≥ s0 .
Lemma 2.3. If f is regularly varying of index p > 1 at infinity, then f satisfies
the (AR) condition.
Proof. We use the representation
s
σ(τ )
(2.4) p
f (s) = s h(s) exp dτ , ∀s ≥ A,
1 τ
1
with lim h(s) = h∞ > 0 and lim σ(s) = 0. Given 0 < ε < 2 there exists
s→∞ s→∞
M = M (ε) > A such that
(1 − ε)h∞ < h(s) < (1 + ε)h∞ and |σ(s)| ≤ ε ∀s ≥ M.
Thus, for s ≥ M , we have
s M s s t σ(τ )
F (s) = f (t)dt = f (t)dt+ f (t)dt ≤ M max |f (t)|+(1+ε)h∞ tp exp dτ dt
0 0 M t∈[0,M ] M 1 τ

sp+1 s M p+1
σ(τ ) M σ(τ )
= M max |f (t)| + (1 + ε)h∞ exp dτ
exp − dτ −
t∈[0,M ] p+1 1 τ
p+1 1 τ
s t
1 σ(τ ) σ(t)
tp+1 exp dτ dt
p+1 M 1 τ t
s s t
1+ε σ(τ ) 1+ε σ(τ )
≤ K(M ) + h∞ sp+1 exp dτ − h∞ tp exp dτ σ(t)dt,
p+1 1 τ p+1 M 1 τ
where K(M ) = M max |f (t)|.

t∈[0,M ]
Now, on the one hand, we have

s s
1+ε σ(τ ) 1+ε h(s) σ(τ )
h∞ sp+1 exp dτ ≤ h∞ sp+1 exp dτ
p+1 1 τ p+1 (1 − ε)h∞ 1 τ
1 + ε sf (s)
= .
1 − ε p+1
On the other hand, we have
s t
1+ε σ(τ )
− h∞ tp exp dτ σ(t)dt
p+1 M 1 τ
s t
1+ε σ(τ )
≤ h∞ tp exp dτ |σ(t)|dt
p+1 M 1 τ
s t
1+ε σ(τ )
≤ε h∞ p
t exp dτ dt
p+1 M 1 τ
s t
1+ε σ(τ ) h(t)
≤ε h∞ p
t exp dτ dt
p+1 M 1 τ (1 − ε)h∞
s
ε(1 + ε)
≤ f (t)dt
(p + 1)(1 − ε) M
M
s
ε(1 + ε)
≤ f (t)dt − f (t)dt .
(p + 1)(1 − ε) 0 0
Hence we have
1+ε 1
F (s) ≤ K(M ) + (sf (s) + εF (s)) ,
1−εp+1
so that
ε(1 + ε) 1 + ε sf (s)
1− F (s) ≤ K(M ) + ,
(p + 1)(1 − ε) 1−ε p+1
i.e.,

1−ε 1−ε
(p + 1) − ε F (s) ≤ (p + 1)K(M ) + sf (s)
1+ε 1+ε
for s ≥ M . Taking ε > 0 sufficiently small we obtain, for s ≥ M ,
θ̃F (s) ≤ 4K(M ) + sf (s)
for some θ̃ > 2.
Since lim F (s) = ∞, we have
s→∞
θF (s) ≤ sf (s)
for some θ > 2 and all s sufficiently large. The proof is now complete.
Lemma 2.4. Assume either of the following conditions:

(1) a ≥ 0, a
≡ 0.
(2) a changes sign and satisfies (AT ), and f satisfies (0.3).
If (vn ) ⊂ X is a sequence such that Iδn (vn ) → c and Iδ n (vn ) → 0 in X , with either
δn ≡ δ > 0 or δn → 0, then (vn ) is a bounded sequence. In particular, Iδ satisfies
the Palais-Smale property for any δ > 0.
Proof. First we assume that a ≥ 0, a

≡ 0. We have
1
c + o(1)vn ≥ Iδn (vn ) − Iδ n (vn )vn
θ
1 1 1 1 −1 −1
= − vn 2 + a(x) f (δ v n )v n − δF (δ v n )
f (δn−1 ) Ω
n n
2 θ θ

l 1
+ 1− a(x)vn
f (δn−1 ) θ Ω

1 1 1 1 −1 −1 −1
≥ − vn 2 + −1 a(x) f (δ v n )δ v n − F (δ v n )
δn f (δn−1 ) Ω
n n n
2 θ θ
C
− vn
f (δn−1 )

1 1 C C
≥ − vn 2 − −1 − vn
2 θ δn f (δn−1 ) f (δn−1 )
for some C > 0, where we used the fact that f satisfies (AR), by Lemma 2.3. Since
lim f (δ −1 ) = ∞, we infer that (vn ) is bounded.
δ→0
Let us assume now that a changes sign and satisfies (AT ), and f satisfies (0.3).
We assume by contradiction that (vn ) is unbounded in X and set wn = vvnn . Up
to a subsequence, we have wn w0 in X, wn → w0 in Lr (Ω) for 1 ≤ r < 2∗ and
wn → w0 a.e. in Ω.
We claim that aw0+ ≡ 0. Indeed, in view of (AT ) we may choose some ψ ∈
∞
C0 (RN ) such that 0 ≤ ψ ≤ 1, ψ = 1 in Ω+ and ψ = 0 in Ω− . Then aw0+ = aw0+ ψ −
aw0+ (ψ −1) with aw0+ ψ, aw0+ (ψ −1) ≥ 0 and supp aw0+ ψ ∩supp aw0+ (ψ −1) = ∅. So,
if aw0+
≡ 0, then either aw0+ ψ
≡ 0 or aw0+ (ψ − 1)
≡ 0. We may assume aw0+ ψ
≡ 0,
the argument being similar for the other case. From Iδ n (vn ) → 0 in X we have

1 −1

(2.5) ∇vn ∇φ − a(x)f (δ vn ) + l a (x) φ → 0, ∀φ ∈ X.
f (δn−1 )
n
Ω
In particular,

1 f (δn−1 vn )
(2.6) lim a(x) φ = 0.
vn p Ω f (δn−1 )
Taking φ = w0+ ψ we get

1 f (δn−1 vn ) +
(2.7) lim a(x) w ψ = 0.
vn p Ω f (δn−1 ) 0
We claim that
f (δn−1 vn )
(2.8) lim inf a(x) w+ (x)ψ(x) ≥ a(x)(w0+ (x))p+1 ψ(x)
vn p f (δn−1 ) 0
for every x ∈ Ω. Indeed, we may assume that w0+ (x) > 0, since otherwise both
sides in (2.8) vanish. Thus vn+ (x) → ∞ and
(2.9) h(δn−1 vn (x)) ≥ h(δn−1 ) > 0
for n large enough. It follows that
h(δn−1 vn (x))
lim inf ≥ 1.
h(δn−1 )
From
f (δn−1 vn ) + +
−1
p h(δn vn (x)) +
a(x) −1 w (x)ψ(x) = a(x)(w (x)) w0 (x)ψ(x)
h(δn−1 )
0 n
vn p f (δn )
we obtain then
f (δn−1 vn (x)) +
(2.10) lim inf a(x) w (x)ψ(x) ≥ a(x)(w0+ (x))p+1 ψ(x),
vn p f (δn−1 ) 0
which proves the claim. Hence, since a(x) (w0+ )p+1 ψ ≥ 0 and a(x) (w0+ )p+1 ψ
≡ 0,
we have

0< a(x) (w0+ )p+1 ψ
Ω

f (δn−1 vn ) 1 f (δn−1 vn ) +
≤ lim inf a(x) −1 w +
ψ ≤ lim inf a(x) w ψ,
Ω vn f (δn )
p 0
vn Ω
p
f (δn−1 ) 0
which contradicts (2.7).
Therefore a(x) w0+ ≡ 0. Taking φ = w0+ in (2.5) and dividing by vn we obtain

|∇w0 | = lim
+ 2
∇wn ∇w0+ = 0,
Ω Ω
i.e., w0+ = 0. Now, from Iδn (vn ) = c + o(1) we have

δn F (δn−1 vn ) 1
a(x) −1 = + o(1) .
vn Ω
2
f (δn ) 2
Taking φ = vn+ ψ in (2.5) and again dividing (2.5) by vn 2 we obtain

1 f (δn−1 vn ) +
a(x) v ψ = |∇w |
+ 2
ψ + ∇wn ∇ψ wn+ + o(1)wn+ ψ.
vn 2 Ω f (δn−1 )
n n
Ω Ω
Since wn+ ψ is bounded and w0+ ≡ 0, we get

1 f (δn−1 vn ) +
a(x) vn ψ = |∇wn+ |2 ψ + o(1).
vn 2 Ω f (δn−1 ) Ω
Therefore, since F (s) ≤ θ1 f (s)s for s large and θ > 2 (cf. Lemma 2.3), we have

1 δn F (δn−1 vn ) δn F (δn−1 vn )
= a(x) ≤ a +
(x)
2 vn 2 Ω f (δn−1 ) vn 2 Ω f (δn−1 )

1 f (δn−1 vn ) +
≤ a+ (x) vn + o(1)
θvn Ω
2
f (δn−1 )

1 f (δn−1 vn ) +
= a+ (x) vn ψ + o(1)
θvn Ω
2
f (δn−1 )

1 1
= |∇wn+ |2 ψ + o(1) ≤ + o(1),
θ Ω θ
which provides us with a contradiction. Therefore (vn ) is bounded, and the proof
is now complete.
We set
Γ := {γ ∈ C([0, 1], X); γ(0) = 0, γ(1) = w0 } and cδ = inf max Iδ (γ(t))
γ∈Γ t∈[0,1]
where w0 is given by Lemma 2.
From the results above we deduce that cδ is a critical value of Iδ which satisfies
cδ ≥ c0 > 0 for every δ > 0 sufficiently small. We denote by vδ a critical point of
Iδ such that Iδ (vδ ) = cδ . Thus vδ is a solution of (Qδ ). We shall prove now that vδ
is positive if δ > 0 is sufficiently small.
Lemma 2.5. If δn → 0+ , then, up to a subsequence, vδn → v0 in C 1 (Ω), where v0
is a positive solution of

−Δv = a(x)v p in Ω,
(Pl )
v=0 on ∂Ω.
Proof. Let us write vn = vδn . By Lemma 2.4, we know that (vn ) is bounded in X.
Thus, up to a subsequence, we have vn v0 in X. Furthermore, we may assume
that vn → v0 in Lq (Ω) for 1 ≤ q < 2∗ and vn → v0 a.e. in Ω. Since vn is a solution
of (Qδn ), we have, for every n,

f (δn−1 vn ) l
∇vn ∇φ − a(x) φ+ a(x)φ = 0, ∀φ ∈ X.
Ω Ω f (δn−1 ) f (δn−1 ) Ω
In particular,

f (δn−1 vn ) l
∇vn ∇(vn − v0 ) − a(x) (vn − v0 ) + a(x)(vn − v0 ) = 0.
Ω Ω f (δn−1 ) f (δn−1 ) Ω
We claim that
f (δn−1 vn )
(vn − v0 ) → 0,
a(x)
Ω f (δn−1 )

so that Ω |∇vn |2 → Ω |∇v0 |2 , and consequently vn → v0 in X. Indeed, by Lemma
1.2 we have
f (δn−1 vn )

f (δ −1 ) (vn − v0 ) ≤ C 1 + |vn | |vn − v0 |.
p+ε0
n
By the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem, we get the desired conclusion.
It remains to show that v0 solves (Pl ). In view of Lemma 1.2 and the fact that
vn → v0 in X, it is enough to show that
f (δn−1 vn )
(2.11) → (v0+ )p , a.e. in Ω.
f (δn−1 )
In this case, we deduce that v0 is a non-negative solution of (Pl ). Moreover, since
cδn ≥ c0 > 0 for every n, we have v0
≡ 0, so that, by the strong maximum principle,
v0 is a positive solution of (Pl ). To show (2.11) we again consider two cases:
Case 1. v0+ (x) > 0: Then δn−1 , δn−1 vn (x) → ∞ and so
h(δn−1 vn )
→ 1.
h(δn−1 )
Furthermore, for any ε > 0 we have, for n sufficiently large,
−1 max{δn−1 ,δn−1 vn (x)}
δn vn (x) σ(τ ) σ(τ )

dτ ≤ τ dτ
δn−1 τ −1 −1
min{δn ,δn vn (x)}
max{δn−1 , δn−1 vn (x)}

≤ ε ln
min{δn−1 , δn−1 vn (x)}
≤ ln max{vn (x)ε , vn (x)−ε }.
Since ε > 0 is arbitrary, we obtain

δn−1 vn (x)
σ(τ )
dτ → 0,
−1
δn τ
so that −1

δn vn (x)
σ(τ )
exp dτ → 1.
−1
δn τ
Thus
−1

f (δn−1 vn (x)) h(δn−1 vn (x)) δn vn (x)
σ(τ )
−1 = vn (x)p exp dτ → v0 (x)p .
f (δn ) h(δn−1 ) −1
δn τ
Case 2. v0+ (x) = 0: In this case vn (x) < 1 for n large enough and so
−1 −1
δn vn (x)
σ(τ ) δn σ(τ )
exp dτ ≤ exp
−1 τ −1 τ dτ .
δn δn vn (x)
Let M = max |f (t)|. If δn−1 vn (x) ≤ K, then

t∈[0,K]

f (δn−1 vn (x)) M

f (δ −1 ) ≤ f (δ −1 ) .
n n
h(δ −1 v (x))
On the other hand, if δn−1 vn (x) > K, then h(δ n n
−1 is bounded and
n )
−1
δn σ(τ )
−ε
exp
−1 τ dτ ≤ |vn (x)| .
δn vn (x)
Therefore
f (δn−1 vn (x))

f (δ −1 ) ≤ C(vn (x)) .
+ p−ε
n
So, in both cases, we have
f (δn−1 vn (x))
→ 0 = v0+ (x)p .
f (δn−1 )
Therefore (2.11) is proved, and, as a consequence, v0 is a positive solution of
(Pl ). Finally, by elliptic regularity, we have vn → v0 in C 1 (Ω).
Corollary 2.6. There exists δ0 > 0 such that (Qδ ) has a positive solution for
δ ≤ δ0 .
Proof. Assume by contradiction that the assertion is false. Then we obtain δn → 0+
such that, for every n, (Qδn ) has a solution vn which is not positive in Ω. But, by
Lemma 2.5, we have, up to a subsequence, vn → v0 in C 1 (Ω) where v0 is a positive
solution of (Pl ). Moreover, by the Hopf Lemma, we have ∂v ∂ν < 0 on ∂Ω, where ν
0
is the unit outer normal to ∂Ω. This provides us with a contradiction.

Proof of Theorem 0.2. By Corollary 2.6, (Qδ ) has a positive solution vδ for δ ≤ δ0 .
Thus, for δ ≤ δ0 , uλ = δ −1 vδ is a positive solution of (Pλ ) with λ−1 = δf (δ −1 ).
Since δf (δ −1 ) → ∞ as δ → 0 we see that λ → 0 as δ → 0. Hence (Pλ ) has a
positive solution for λ > 0 sufficiently small. Finally, given any sequence λn → 0+
we have δn → 0+ , where δn f (δn−1 ) = λ−1 n . By Lemma 2.5 we have, up to a
subsequence, vn → v0 in C 1 (Ω) and v0 is a positive solution of (Pl ). It follows
that un (x) = δn−1 vn (x) → ∞ for every x ∈ Ω. Since this holds for any sequence
λn → 0+ , we infer that uλ (x) → ∞ as λ → 0+ for every x ∈ Ω.
References
[1] Stanley Alama and Gabriella Tarantello, On semilinear elliptic equations with indefinite
nonlinearities, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 1 (1993), no. 4, 439–475, DOI
10.1007/BF01206962. MR1383913
[2] Ismael Ali, Alfonso Castro, and R. Shivaji, Uniqueness and stability of nonnegative solutions
for semipositone problems in a ball, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 117 (1993), no. 3, 775–782, DOI
10.2307/2159143. MR1116249
[3] W. Allegretto, P. Nistri, and P. Zecca, Positive solutions of elliptic nonpositone problems,
Differential Integral Equations 5 (1992), no. 1, 95–101. MR1141729
[4] A. Ambrosetti, D. Arcoya, and B. Buffoni, Positive solutions for some semi-positone problems
via bifurcation theory, Differential Integral Equations 7 (1994), no. 3-4, 655–663. MR1270096
[5] V. Anuradha, D. D. Hai, and R. Shivaji, Existence results for superlinear semipositone BVP’s,
Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 124 (1996), no. 3, 757–763, DOI 10.1090/S0002-9939-96-03256-X.
MR1317029
[6] Scott Caldwell, Alfonso Castro, Ratnasingham Shivaji, and Sumalee Unsurangsie, Positive
solutions for classes of multiparameter elliptic semipositone problems, Electron. J. Differen-
tial Equations (2007), No. 96, 10 pp. (electronic). MR2328697
[7] Alfonso Castro, C. Maya, and R. Shivaji, Nonlinear eigenvalue problems with semipositone
structure, Proceedings of the Conference on Nonlinear Differential Equations (Coral Gables,
FL, 1999), Electron. J. Differ. Equ. Conf., vol. 5, Southwest Texas State Univ., San Marcos,
TX, 2000, pp. 33–49. MR1799043
[8] Alfonso Castro, Sudhasree Gadam, and R. Shivaji, Positive solution curves of semipositone
problems with concave nonlinearities, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 127 (1997), no. 5,
921–934, DOI 10.1017/S0308210500026809. MR1475637
[9] Alfonso Castro, J. B. Garner, and R. Shivaji, Existence results for classes of sublinear semi-
positone problems, Results Math. 23 (1993), no. 3-4, 214–220, DOI 10.1007/BF03322297.
MR1215210
[10] Alfonso Castro, M. Hassanpour, and R. Shivaji, Uniqueness of non-negative solutions for a
semipositone problem with concave nonlinearity, Comm. Partial Differential Equations 20
(1995), no. 11-12, 1927–1936, DOI 10.1080/03605309508821157. MR1361725
[11] Alfonso Castro and R. Shivaji, Nonnegative solutions for a class of nonpositone
problems, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 108 (1988), no. 3-4, 291–302, DOI
10.1017/S0308210500014670. MR943804
[12] Alfonso Castro and R. Shivaji, Nonnegative solutions for a class of radially symmetric non-
positone problems, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 106 (1989), no. 3, 735–740, DOI 10.2307/2047429.
MR949875
[13] Alfonso Castro and R. Shivaji, Positive solutions for a concave semipositone Dirichlet
problem, Nonlinear Anal. 31 (1998), no. 1-2, 91–98, DOI 10.1016/S0362-546X(96)00189-7.
MR1487532
[14] M. Chhetri, P. Drábek, and R. Shivaji, Existence of positive solutions for a class of p-
Laplacian superlinear semipositone problems, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 145 (2015),
no. 5, 925–936, DOI 10.1017/S0308210515000220. MR3406455
[15] Philippe Clément and Guido Sweers, Existence and multiplicity results for a semilinear el-
liptic eigenvalue problem, Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (4) 14 (1987), no. 1, 97–121.
MR937538
[16] Herbert B. Keller and Donald S. Cohen, Some positone problems suggested by nonlinear heat
generation, J. Math. Mech. 16 (1967), 1361–1376. MR0213694
[17] David G. Costa, Hossein Tehrani, and Jianfu Yang, On a variational approach to existence
and multiplicity results for semipositone problems, Electron. J. Differential Equations (2006),
No. 11, 10 pp. MR2198924
[18] E. Norman Dancer and Junping Shi, Uniqueness and nonexistence of positive solutions
to semipositone problems, Bull. London Math. Soc. 38 (2006), no. 6, 1033–1044, DOI
10.1112/S0024609306018984. MR2285257
[19] Abdou K. Drame and David G. Costa, On positive solutions of one-dimensional semipositone
equations with nonlinear boundary conditions, Appl. Math. Lett. 25 (2012), no. 12, 2411–
2416, DOI 10.1016/j.aml.2012.07.015. MR2967854
[20] J. Garcı́a-Melián, L. Iturriaga, and H. Ramos Quoirin, A priori bounds and existence of
solutions for slightly superlinear elliptic problems, Adv. Nonlinear Stud. 15 (2015), no. 4,
923–938. MR3405822
[21] Louis Jeanjean, Some continuation properties via minimax arguments, Electron. J. Differen-
tial Equations (2011), No. 48, 10 pp. MR2788667
[22] Sidney I. Resnick, Extreme values, regular variation, and point processes, Applied Probability,
A Series of the Applied Probability Trust, vol. 4, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1987. MR900810
[23] Eugene Seneta, Regularly varying functions, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 508,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1976. MR0453936
Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas,

Nevada 89154-4020
E-mail address: costa@unlv.nevada.edu
Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Casilla 307, Correo 2, Santiago, Chile

E-mail address: humberto.ramos@usach.cl
Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas,

Nevada 89154-4020
E-mail address: tehranih@unlv.nevada.edu

A Variational Approach To Superlinear Semipositone

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

A Variational Approach To Superlinear Semipositone

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PROCEEDINGS OF THE

AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY

A VARIATIONAL APPROACH TO SUPERLINEAR

DAVID G. COSTA, HUMBERTO RAMOS QUOIRIN, AND HOSSEIN TEHRANI

(Communicated by Joachim Krieger)

Abstract. In this paper we present a variational approach to a class of el-

rescaling argument. We refer to [22,23] for various properties of functions of regular

(0.3) there exist h∞ := lim h(s) (possibly being ∞) and s0 ≥ 0

for every ε > 0. In particular, it follows that f is subcritical; i.e., it satisﬁes

Indeed, since p > 1, note that δf (δ −1 ) → ∞ as δ → 0, so for any λ > 0 suﬃciently

where C1 and C2 are independent of δ. In particular

Proof. We ﬁx ε0 ∈ (0, 1) and K = K(ε0 ) ≥ A such that

Hence, in both cases we obtain that

for all s > 0 and δ ≤ δ0 = 1.

Now, for v ∈ X, we have

2. Proof of Theorem 0.2

for some C1 , C2 > 0 if δ ≤ δ0 . It follows that

Proof. Deﬁne, for v ∈ X,

and note that, for t > 0,

As p > 1, given 0 < v ∈ C01 (Ω+ ) we have

Hence we ﬁrst choose 0 < w0 ∈ C01 (Ω+ ) such that

Let us recall that f is said to satisfy the Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz condition ((AR)

where K(M ) = M max |f (t)|.

Now, on the one hand, we have

Lemma 2.4. Assume either of the following conditions:

Proof. First we assume that a ≥ 0, a

i.e., w0+ = 0. Now, from Iδn (vn ) = c + o(1) we have

Since wn+ ψ is bounded and w0+ ≡ 0, we get

where w0 is given by Lemma 2.

max{δn−1 , δn−1 vn (x)}

Since ε > 0 is arbitrary, we obtain

Let M = max |f (t)|. If δn−1 vn (x) ≤ K, then

is the unit outer normal to ∂Ω. This provides us with a contradiction.

Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas,

Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Casilla 307, Correo 2, Santiago, Chile

Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas,

You might also like