Advanced Nonlinear Studies 11 (2011), xxx–xxx

Multiplicity and Concentration of Positive Solutions

for a Class of Quasilinear Problems
∗
Claudianor O. Alves
Universidade Federal de Campina Grande
Departamento de Matemática e Estatı́stica
CEP: 58109-970, Campina Grande - Pb, Brazil
e-mail: coalves@dme.ufcg.edu.br

Giovany M. Figueiredo†
Universidade Federal do Pará
Faculdade de Matemática, CEP: 66075-110 Belém - Pa , Brazil
e-mail: giovany@ufpa.br

Received 28 June 2010

Communicated by Paul Rabinowitz

Abstract
In this work we study multiplicity and concentration of nontrivial solutions for
the following class of quasilinear problems:

−div(a(|∇u|p )|∇u|p−2 ∇u) + V (x)b(|u|p )|u|p−2 u = f (u),

where  is a positive parameter, a, b, f : R → R are C 1 functions and V : RN → R

is a continuous function.

2000 AMS Subject Classification. 35A15, 35H30, 35Q55.

Key words. Variational methods, Quasilinear equations, Nonlinear Schrodinger equations

∗ The author acknowledges the support by CNPq/Brazil 620150/2008-4, 303080/2009-4 and INCT
† The author acknowledges the support by CNPq/PQ 300705/2008-5

1
2 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

1 Introduction
In this paper, we are concerned with multiplicity and concentration of nontrivial solutions
for the following class of quasilinear problems:
−div(a(|∇u|p )|∇u|p−2 ∇u) + V (x)b(|u|p )|u|p−2 u = f (u) in RN (P )
N
where 2 ≤ p < N,  > 0 is a parameter, V : R → R is a continuous function and a, b, f are
C 1 functions defined in [0, +∞).
When a(t) = b(t) = 1 for all t ≥ 0, problem (P ) becomes

−div(|∇u|p−2 ∇u) + V (x)|u|p−2 u = f (u) in RN (Pb )

which is equivalent to the problem
−p div(|∇u|p−2 ∇u) + V (x)|u|p−2 u = f (u) in RN . (P̃ )
For the case p = 2, problem (P̃ ) appears in the study of standing-waves solution for
a class of nonlinear Schrödinger equation. The study of existence and concentration of
positive solutions for general semilinear elliptic equations (P̃ ) for the case N ≥ 3 have been
extensively considered, see for example, Bartsch and Wang [7], Floer & Weinstein [15], Oh
[22, 23], Rabinowitz [24], Wang [25], Alves and Souto [6], del Pino and Felmer [12] and their
references.
In [24], by a mountain pass argument, Rabinowitz proves the existence of positive solu-
tions of (P̃ ), for  > 0 small, whenever
V∞ := lim inf V (x) > V0 := inf V (x) > 0. (V0 )
|x|→+∞ RN

Later Wang [25] showed that these solutions concentrate at global minimum points of V as
 tends to 0. Cingolani and Lazzo [10] exploited the geometry of the function V to obtain
multiplicity of solutions for (P̃ ). By using Ljusternik-Schnirelmann theory and assuming
condition (V0 ), they related the number of positive solutions with the category of set
M = {x ∈ RN : V (x) = V0 }.
In [12], del Pino and Felmer find solutions which concentrate around local minimum of
V by introducing a penalization method. More precisely, they assume that there is an open
and bounded set Λ such that
0 < α = min V (x) < min V (x).
x∈Λ x∈∂Λ

In the works of Alves and Figueiredo [4, 5], the authors have considered the existence,
multiplicity and concentration of positive solution for (P̃ ), for the case 2 ≤ p < N . The
main results found in those works complete the study made in [10] and [12], in the sense
that, the same type of results are obtained considering the p-Laplacian operator.
q−p
For the case where  = 1, a(t) = b(t) = 1 + t p for all t ≥ 0 and V (x) = 1 for all
x ∈ RN , the problem (P ) becomes

−∆p u − ∆q u + |u|p−2 u + |u|q−2 u = f (u) in RN (Pb )

Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 3

which appears in a lot of applications, the reader can find in the papers of He and Li [17, 18],
and Cherfils and Il’yasov [9] more details about the applications. In [17] some results of
regularity have been proved, while in [9] and [18] some results involving existence of solution
have been established.
Motivated by works just described, more precisely by results found in [4], a natural
question is whether same phenomenon of existence, multiplicity and concentration hold, if
we consider a large class of quasilinear operator. Here, we show that the answer is positive
for operators like

L(u) = −div(a(|∇u|p )|∇u|p−2 ∇u) + V (x)b(|u|p )|u|p−2 u.

In the present paper, our hypotheses on the functions a, b and f are the following:
Hypotheses on a:

There exist constants ξ0 > 0, ξi ≥ 0, i = 1, 2, 3 and q ∈ (p, N ) such that

q−p q−p
ξ0 + H(ξ3 )ξ1 t p ≤ a(t) ≤ ξ2 + ξ3 t p for all t ≥ 0, (a1 )

where H : [0, +∞) → {0, 1} is the function given by

H(t) = 1 if t > 0 and H(t) = 0 if t = 0.

γ
There exists α ≥ p such that

1
A(t) ≥ a(t)t for all t ≥ 0, (a2 )
α
Z t
where A(t) = a(s)ds and γ = (1 − H(ξ3 ))p + H(ξ3 )q.
0

Moreover, we suppose that

a(tp )
t→ is nonincreasing for t > 0, (a3 )
tH(ξ3 )(γ−p)
t → a(tp )tp−2 is increasing for t > 0, (a4 )
and
(γ − p)
a0 (t)t ≤ a(t) for t > 0. (a5 )
p

Hypotheses on b:

There exist σi > 0 for i = 1, 2, 3 verifying

(q−p) (q−p)
σ0 + H(ξ3 )σ1 t p ≤ b(t) ≤ σ2 + H(ξ3 )σ3 t p for all t ≥ 0, (b1 )
4 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

1
B(t) ≥ b(t)t, ∀t ≥ 0 (b2 )
α
Z t
where B(t) = b(s)ds.
0
The function
b(tp )
t→ is nonincreasing for t > 0 (b3 )
tH(ξ3 )(γ−p)
and
(γ − p)
b0 (t)t ≤ b(t) for t > 0. (b4 )
p

Hypotheses on f :

Since we are looking for nonnegative solutions, we suppose that

f (t) = 0 for all t < 0. (f1 )
Moreover, we assume the following growth conditions in the origin and infinity:
|f (t)|
lim =0 (f2 )
|t|→0 |t|p−1
and there exists s ∈ (γ, γ ∗ ) verifying;
|f (t)|
lim = 0, (f3 )
|t|→∞ |t|s−1

where γ ∗ = (1 − H(ξ3 ))p∗ + H(ξ3 )q ∗ .

The function f satisfies the Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz condition with θ ∈ (αp, γ ∗ ), that is,
Z t
0 < θF (t) = f (r)dr ≤ tf (t) for all t > 0, (f4 )
0

There are constants C > 0 and υ ∈ (p, γ ∗ ) such that

f 0 (t)t2 − (γ − 1)f (t)t ≥ Ctυ ∀t ≥ 0. (f5 )

Our main result is the following:

Theorem 1.1 Suppose that the conditions (a1 ) − (a5 ), (b1 ) − (b4 ), (V0 ) and (f1 ) − (f5 ) hold.
Then, for any δ > 0, there exists δ > 0 such that (P ) has at least catMδ (M ) nonnegative
and nontrivial solutions, for any 0 <  < δ , where
Mδ = {x ∈ RN : d(x, M ) ≤ δ}.
Moreover, if u denotes one of these solutions and x ∈ RN its global maximum, we have
that
lim V (x ) = V0 .
→0
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 5

Next, we mention some quasilinear problems where the Theorem 1.1 can be applied.

Problem 1: Let a(t) = 1 and b(t) = 1.Then the conditions (a1 ) − (a5 ) and (b1 ) − (b4 ) hold.
Hence, the Theorem 1.1 is valid for the problem

−∆p u + V (x)|u|p−2 u = f (u) in RN

and it is related to the main result showed in [4].

q−p q−p
Problem 2: Let a(t) = 1 + t p and b(t) = 1 + t p . Then, a satisfies (a1 ) − (a5 ) and b
satisfies (b1 ) − (b4 ) with ξi = σi = 1, for i = 1, 2, 3. Hence, the Theorem 1.1 can be applied
for the problem

−∆p u − ∆q u + V (x)(|u|p−2 u + |u|q−2 u) = f (u) in RN .

1
Problem 3: Let a(t) = 1 + p−2 and b(t) = 1. Note that, a satisfies (a1 ) − (a5 ) and b
(1+t) p

satisfies (b1 ) − (b4 ) with ξ0 = 1, ξ3 = ξ1 = 0, ξ2 = 2, σ0 = σ2 = 1 and σ1 = σ3 = 0. In this

case, the Theorem 1.1 is valid for the problem

|∇u|p−2 ∇u
− div (|∇u|p−2 ∇u + p−2 ) + V (x)|u|p−2 u = f (u) in RN .
(1 + |∇u|p ) p

q−p q−p
1
Problem 4: Let a(t) = 1 + t p + p−2 and b(t) = 1 + t p . In this case, a satisfies
(1+t) p
(a1 )−(a5 ) and b satisfies (b1 )−(b4 ) with ξ0 = 1, ξ1 = ξ3 = 1, ξ2 = 2 and σi = 1 for i = 1, 2, 3.
Hence, the Theorem 1.1 also can be used for the problem

|∇u|p−2 ∇u
−∆p u − ∆q u − div ( p−2 ) + V (x)(|u|p−2 u + |u|q−2 u) = f (u) in RN .
(1 + |∇u|p ) p

Before concluding this introduction, we would like to detach that Theorem 1.1 completes
the study made in [4] and [18], in the sense that, in the present paper we are considering a
class of quasilinear problems that was not considered in those papers.

2 Autonomous case
In this section, our goal is to prove the existence of nonnegative ground-state solution for
the problem:

−div(a(|∇u|p )|∇u|p−2 ∇u) + τ b(|u|p )|u|p−2 u = f (u) in RN (Pτ )

for all τ > 0.
Hereafter Y denotes the Sobolev space W 1,p (RN ) ∩ W 1,γ (RN ) endowed with the norm

kuk = kuk1,p + H(ξ3 )kuk1,q

6 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

where Z  m1
Z
m m
kuk1,m = |∇u| + |u| , for m ≥ 1.
RN RN

A direct computation shows that Y is continuously embedding in Lt (RN ) for t ∈ [p, γ ∗ ].

The functional associated to (Pτ ) is given by
Z Z Z
1 τ
Eτ (u) = A(|∇u|p ) + B(|u|p ) − F (u)
p RN p RN RN

which is well defined on Y . Furthermore, by using standard arguments, it follows that Eτ

is C 1 on Y with
Z Z Z
0 p p−2 p p−2
Eτ (u)φ = a(|∇u| )|∇u| ∇u∇φ + τ b(|u| )|u| uφ − f (u)φ,
RN RN RN

for all φ ∈ Y . Consequently, critical points of Eτ are precisely the weak solutions of problem
(Pτ ).
In this paper, Mτ denotes the Nehari manifold related to Eτ , that is,
n o
Mτ = u ∈ Y \ {0} : Eτ0 (u)u = 0 .

The next result concerns the Mountain Pass Geometry of Eτ .

Lemma 2.1 The functional Eτ satisfies the following conditions:
(i) There exist r, ρ > 0 such that:
Eτ (u) ≥ ρ with kuk = r,
(ii) there exists e ∈ Brc (0) verifying Eτ (e) < 0.
Proof. i) By (f2 ) and (f3 ), given η > 0, there is Cη > 0 such that
Z Z Z Z
1 τ η Cη
Eτ (u) ≥ A(|∇u|p ) + B(|u|p ) − |u|p − |u|s .
p RN p RN p RN s RN
Now, by (a1 ) and (b1 )
Z Z Z
ξ0 ξ1 τ σ0
Eτ (u) ≥ |∇u|p + H(ξ3 ) |∇u|q + |u|p
p
RN q RN p RN
Z Z Z
τ q η p Cη
+ H(ξ3 )σ1 |u| − |u| − |u|s ,
q RN p RN s RN
which implies
Z
Cη
Eτ (u) ≥ C1 (kukp1,p + H(ξ3 )kukq1,q ) − |u|s .
s RN

Choosing 0 < r = kuk < 1, we get

Z
Cη
Eτ (u) ≥ C1 (kukq1,p + H(ξ3 )kukq1,q ) − |u|s ,
s RN
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 7

and so,
Z
Cη
Eτ (u) ≥ C2 kukq − |u|s .
s RN

By Sobolev embedding,

Eτ (u) ≥ C2 kukq − C3 kuks

and, since that q < s, there is ρ > 0 such that Eτ (u) ≥ ρ for kuk = r, showing i).

ii) From (f4 ), there exist C3 , C4 > 0 such that

F (t) ≥ C3 tθ − C4 , ∀t > 1.

Thus, fixing φ ∈ C0∞ (RN ) \ {0} with φ ≥ 0 in RN , we derive

Z Z Z
1 τ
Eτ (tφ) ≤ A(tp |∇φ|p ) + B(tp |φ|p ) − C3 tθ φθ + C4 |suppφ|.
p RN p RN R N

From (a1 ) and (b1 ),

ξ2 tp ξ3 t q τ tp σ2
Z Z Z
Eτ (tφ) ≤ |∇φ|p + |∇φ|q + |φ|p
p RN q RN p RN
τ tq H(ξ3 )σ3
Z Z
q θ
+ |φ| − C3 t φθ + C4 |suppφ|.
q RN RN

Since θ > αp, there exists t̄ > 1 such that e = t̄φ satisfies Eτ (e) < 0 and kek > ρ.

Now, in view of last lemma, we can apply a version of Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz Mountain

Pass Theorem without the Palais-Smale condition found in [28], which assures the existence
of a (P S)dτ sequence (un ) ⊂ X, that is, a sequence satisfying

Eτ (un ) → dτ and Eτ0 (un ) → 0,

where dτ is the minimax level of the Mountain Pass Theorem applied to Eτ , that is,

dτ = inf max Eτ (η(t)),

η∈Γ t∈[0,1]

where Γ = {η ∈ C([0, 1], Y ) : η(0) = 0 and Eτ (η(1)) < 0}.

Lemma 2.2 If the conditions (a1 )-(a5 ), (b1 )-(b4 ), and (f1 )- (f5 ) hold, then, for each u ∈ Y
with u 6= 0, there exists a unique t0 = t0 (u) > 0 such that t0 u ∈ Mτ and Eτ (t0 u) =
max Eτ (tu). Moreover dτ = dτ = dcτ , where dτ = inf max Eτ (tu) and dbτ = inf Eτ .
t≥0 u∈Y \{0} t≥0 Mτ
8 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

Proof. Let u ∈ Y \ {0} and consider g(t) = Eτ (tu). By Lemma 2.1, there exists t0 > 0 such
that
g(t0 ) = max g(t) = max Eτ (tu).
t≥0 t≥0

Hence Z Z Z
tp0 a(tp0 |∇u|p )|∇u|p + τ tp0 b(tp0 |u|p )|u|p = f (t0 u)t0 u
RN RN RN
and t0 u Mτ .
Note also that from (f1 ), if u ∈ Mτ , we have u+ = max{u, 0} 6= 0. Now, suppose that
there exist t, m > 0 such that tu , mu ∈ Mτ . Then
Z Z Z
p p p p p p f (tu) p
a(t |∇u| )|∇u| + τ b(t |u| )|u| = p−1
u
R N RN [u>0] (tu)

and Z Z Z
f (mu) p
a(mp |∇u|p )|∇u|p + τ b(mp |u|p )|u|p = u .
RN RN [u>0] (mu)p−1
Hence
a(tp |∇u|p ) b(tp |u|p )
Z Z Z
f (tu) γ
|∇u|γ + τ |u|γ = u
RN |t∇u|H(ξ3 )(γ−p) RN |tu|H(ξ3 )(γ−p) [u>0] (tu)γ−1

and
a(mp |∇u|p ) b(mp |u|p )
Z Z Z
f (mu) γ
|∇u|γ + τ |u|γ = u .
RN |m∇u|H(ξ3 )(γ−p) RN |mu|H(ξ3 )(γ−p) [u>0] (mu)γ−1

Thus
a(tp |∇u|p ) a(mp |∇u|p )
Z  
H(ξ3 )(γ−p)
− |∇u|γ
RN |t∇u| |m∇u|H(ξ3 )(γ−p)
b(tp |u|p ) b(mp |u|p )
Z   Z  
γ f (tu) f (mu)
+ τ −τ |u| = γ−1
− uγ .
RN |tu|
H(ξ3 )(γ−p) |mu|H(ξ3 )(γ−p) [u>0] (tu) (mu)γ−1

From (a3 ), (b3 ) and (f4 ), it follows that t = m.

Now, the proof follows using similar arguments found in Willem [28].

Lemma 2.3 Let (un ) be a sequence in Y such that Eτ (un ) → c and Eτ0 (un ) → 0 as n → ∞.
Then

i) un (x) → u(x) a.e in RN

∂un ∂u
ii) (x) → (x) a.e in RN
∂xi ∂xi
iii) Eτ0 (u) = 0
iv) u−
n = max{−un , 0} → 0 in Y . Then, we can assume that un ≥ 0 for n ∈ N.
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 9

Proof. i) We shall prove firstly that (un ) is bounded in Y . Since (un ) is a (P S)c sequence,
there is C > 0 such that
1
C(1 + kun k) ≥ Eτ (un ) − Eτ0 (un )un , ∀n ∈ N.
θ
From (f3 ),
Z Z
1 p 1
C(1 + kun k) ≥ A(|∇un | ) − a(|∇un |p )|∇un |p
p RN θ RN
Z Z
τ τ
+ B(|un |p ) − b(|un |p )|un |p .
p RN θ RN

By (a2 ) and (b2 ),

 Z Z 
1 1 p p p p
C(1 + kun k) ≥ − a(|∇un | )|∇un | + τ b(|un | )|un | .
pα θ RN RN

From (a1 ) and (b1 ),

  Z   Z
1 1 p 1 1
C(1 + kun k) ≥ − ξ0 |∇un | + − H(ξ3 )ξ1 |∇un |q
pα θ RN pα θ RN
  Z   Z
1 1 p 1 1
+ − τ |un | + − H(ξ3 )σ3 |un |q ,
pα θ RN pα θ RN

from where it follows that

C(1 + kun k) ≥ C1 kun kp1,p + C2 H(ξ3 )kun kq1,q . (2.1)

Thus, if ξ3 = 0, (un ) is bounded in Y . If ξ3 > 0, suppose for contradiction that, up to a

subsequence, kun k → +∞. This way, we need to study the following situations:
a) kun k1,p → +∞ and kun k1,q → +∞
b) kun k1,p → +∞ and kun k1,q is bounded
c) kun k1,p is bounded and kun k1,q → +∞.
q−p
In the first case, for n sufficiently large, kun k1,q ≥ 1 and kun kq1,q ≥ kun kp1,q . Thus, from
(2.1),

C(1 + kun k) ≥ C1 kun kp1,p + C2 kun kp1,q ≥ C3 (kun k1,p + kun k1,q )p = C3 kun kp ,

which is an absurd.
In case b), by (f4 ),
1 1
C(1 + kun k1,p + kun k1,q ) = C(1 + kun k) ≥ ( − )kun kp1,p ,
p θ
and thus,
1 1 kun k1,q 1 1
C( p + p−1 + p ) ≥ ( − ).
kun k1,p kun k1,p kun k1,p p θ
10 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

Since p − 1 > 0, passing to limit as n → ∞, we obtain 0 < ( p1 − θ1 ) ≤ 0, which is an absurd.

The last case is similar to the case b).
∗
Thus un * u in Y and, up to a subsequence, un → u in Lm N
loc (R ) for 1 ≤ m < γ .
N
Therefore, un (x) → u(x) a.e in R .

∂un ∂u
ii) To prove (x) → (x) a.e in RN , we will use the inequality
∂xi ∂xi

ξ0
|x − y|p ≤ a(|x|p )|x|p−2 x − a(|y|p )|y|p−2 y, x − y , for all x, y ∈ RN


4
whose proof follows combining (a4 ) with arguments found in [27, 13]. Now, setting

PN = a(|∇un |p )|∇un |p−2 ∇un − a(|∇u|p )|∇u|p−2 ∇u, ∇un − ∇u



and ψ ∈ C0∞ (RN ) such that ψ ≡ 1 in BR (0) and ψ ≡ 0 in RN \ B2R (0), we have
Z Z Z
ξ0
0≤ |∇un − ∇u|p ≤ PN ≤ PN ψ.
4 BR (0) BR (0) RN

Consequently
Z Z
ξ0
0≤ |∇un − ∇u|p ≤ a(|∇un |p )|∇un |p ψ
4 BR (0) RN
Z
− a(|∇un |p )|∇un |p−2 ∇un ∇uψ + o1 (1).
RN

Once b and f have subcritical growth, it follows that

Z Z
τ b(|un |p )|un |p ψ − τ b(|un |p )|un |p−2 un uψ
RN RN
Z Z
− f (un )un ψ + f (un )uψ = on (1).
RN RN

Thereby
Z
ξ0
0≤ |∇un − ∇u|p ≤ Eτ0 (un )(un ψ) − Eτ0 (un )(uψ) = on (1),
4 BR (0)

and so,
∂un ∂u
→ in Lp (BR (0)) for all R > 0.
∂xi ∂xi
From this, up to a subsequence,

∂un ∂u
(x) → (x) a.e in RN .
∂xi ∂xi
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 11

iii) Now, we show that Eτ0 (u) = 0. Indeed, recalling a result due to Brezis-Lieb [8] (see too
[20, Lemma 4.6])
Z Z
|un |p−2 un ψ → |u|p−2 uψ,
RN RN
Z Z
γ−2
H(ξ3 ) |un | un ψ → H(ξ3 ) |u|γ−2 uψ,
RN RN
Z Z
s−2
|un | un ψ → |u|s−2 uψ,
RN RN
Z Z
b(|un |p )|un |p−2 un ψ → b(|u|p )|u|p−2 uψ,
RN RN
Z Z
f (un )ψ → f (u)ψ,
RN RN

and
Z Z
a(|∇un |p )|∇un |p−2 ∇un ∇ψ = a(|∇u|p )|∇u|p−2 ∇u∇ψ + on (1),
RN RN

for all ψ ∈ Y . Hence, Eτ0 (u)ψ = 0 for all ψ ∈ Y .

iv) Now, we show the last case. In view of (f1 ) and (a1 ), we have
Z Z
on (1) = Eτ0 (un )u−n = − a(|∇u− p
n | )|∇u − p
n | − τ b(|u− p − p
n | )|un |
R N N
Z Z ZR
− p − q
≤ −ξ0 |∇un | − H(ξ3 )ξ1 |∇un | − τ |u−n|
p
RN RN RN
Z
p q
− H(ξ3 )σ1 τ |u− q
n | = −kun k1,p − H(ξ3 )σ1 kun k1,q .
RN

Hence, ku− − −
n k1,p = H(ξ3 )kun k1,q = on (1) which implies kun k = on (1). Thus, we can easily
compute
Eτ (un ) = Eτ (u+
n ) + on (1)
and
Eτ0 (un ) = Eτ0 (u+
n ) + on (1).
This way, hereafter (un ) is a nonnegative sequence.

Proposition 2.1 Let (un ) ⊂ Y be a (P S)c sequence for Eτ with un * 0 in Y . Then we

have either:
a) un → 0 in Y or
b) there exist a sequence (yn ) ⊂ RN and constants R, β > 0 such that
Z
lim inf |un |γ ≥ β > 0.
n→+∞ BR (yn )
12 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

Z
Proof. Suppose that b) does not occur. Thus, lim inf sup |un |γ = 0. Using Lemma
n→+∞ y∈R BR (y)
∗
8.4 in [19], we get un → 0 in Lm (R), for all m ∈ (γ, γ ) . This fact imply that
Z
f (un )un → 0.
RN

From this,
Z Z
C(kun kp1,p + H(ξ3 )kun kq1,q ) ≤ a(|∇un |p )|∇un |p + τ b(|un |p )|un |p = on (1)
RN RN

and therefore
kun k → 0.

Proposition 2.2 Suppose that (a1 ) − (a5 ),(b1 ) − (b4 ) and (f1 ) − (f5 ) occur. Then, problem
(Pτ ) has a nonnegative ground-state solution.

Proof. By Lemma 2.3, there exists u ∈ Y such that Eτ0 (u) = 0 and u ≥ 0. If u ≡ 0, then
un 9 0 in Y , because dτ > 0. Thus, from Proposition 2.1, there is a sequence (yn ) ⊂ RN
and Rα > 0 such that
Z
lim inf |un |γ > a. (2.2)
n→+∞ BR (yn )

en (x) = un (x + yn ), using the invariance of RN for translation, by a routine

Now, letting u
calculus we obtain ke
un k = kun k, Eτ (eun ) = Eτ (un ) and Eτ0 (e
un ) = 0. Then, there exists u
e
such that u
e*u e weakly in X and as before it follows that Eτ0 (eu) = 0. Now, by (2.2), taking
a subsequence and R large enough, we conclude that u e is nontrivial and the proposition is
proved.

Note that, for V∞ < ∞, the above results are valid for the problem

−div(a(|∇u|p )|∇u|p−2 ∇u) + V∞ b(|u|p )|u|p−2 u = f (u) in RN (P∞ )

whose the functional associated is

Z Z Z
1 p p
E∞ (u) = A(|∇u| ) + V∞ B(|u| ) − F (u) ∀u ∈ Y.
p RN RN RN

In what follows, let us denote by d∞ and M∞ the mountain level and Nehari manifold
related to E∞ , respectively.

3 The nonautonomous problem

The main tool employed to prove Theorem 1.1 is the variational method, once that weak
solutions of (P ) are critical points of the functional
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 13

Z Z Z
1 1
I (u) = A(|∇u|p ) + V (x)B(|u|p ) − F (u).
p R p RN RN

A direct computation shows that I is well defined on the Banach space X given by
 Z 
1,p N 1,γ N p q
X = u ∈ W (R ) ∩ W (R ) : V (x)(|u| + H(ξ3 )|u| ) dx < ∞ ,
RN

endowed with the norm

kuk = kukV,p + H(ξ3 )kukV,q ,
where Z Z
kukm
V,m = |∇u|m + V (x)|u|m for m ≥ 1.
RN RN

Moreover, I belongs to C 1 (X , R) with

Z Z Z
I0 (u)φ = a(|∇u|p )|∇u|p−2 ∇u∇φ + V (x)b(|u|p )|u|p−2 uφ − f (u)φ,
RN RN RN

for all φ ∈ X .
Arguing as in Lemma 2.1, we can prove that I satisfies the Mountain Pass Geometry,
that is,

(i) There exist α, ρ > 0 such that:

I (u) ≥ η for all u ∈ X with kuk = ρ.

(ii) There exists e ∈ Bρc (0) with I (e) < 0.

By using again the Mountain Pass Theorem due to Ambrosetti and Rabinowitz without
(P S), there exists a (P S)c sequence (un ) ⊂ X for I , that is, a sequence satisfying

I (un ) → c and I0 (un ) → 0,

where c is the minimax level of Mountain Pass Theorem associated with I . By (f1 ) and
Lemma 2.3, we can assume that (un ) is bounded, and that for each n, un is nonnegative.
This way, up to a subsequence, if necessary, there is u ∈ X such that

un * u in X and un (x) → u(x) a.e in RN .

Arguing as in Lemma 2.2, it is easy to see that c verifies the below equality

c = inf sup I (tu) = inf I (u),

u∈X \{0} t≥0 u∈N

where N denotes the Nehari manifold related to I , that is,

n o
N = u ∈ X \ {0} : I0 (u)u = 0 .
14 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

Lemma 3.1 For all u ∈ N , there exists κ > 0, which is independent of , such that

kuk ≥ κ.

Proof. Once that f (t) ≥ 0 for all t ≥ 0, it follows that

Z Z
1 1
c ≤ I (u) ≤ A(|∇u|p ) + V (x)B(|u|p ).
p RN p RN

From (a1 ) and (b1 ),

Z Z Z Z
1 p 1 q σ2 p 1
c ≤ ξ2 |∇u| + ξ3 |∇u| + V (x)|u| + H(ξ3 )σ3 V (x)|u|q .
p RN q RN p RN q RN

Thus,

c ≤ C(kukpV,p + H(ξ3 )kukqV,q ) ≤ C(kukp + kukq ). (3.1)

If kuk ≥ 1 for all u ∈ N , then result follows. If there exists u ∈ N such that kuk ≤ 1,
from (3.1)

c ≤ 2Ckukp .

On the other hand, since EV0 (tu) ≤ I (tu) for all u ∈ X , we deduce dV0 ≤ c , from where
dV0 1/p
it follows that ( 2C ) ≤ kuk .

3.1 A compactness condition

The first lemma in this section is a version of Lemma 2.1 for I .

Lemma 3.2 Let (un ) ⊂ X be a (P S)c sequence for I with un * 0 in X . Then,

a) un → 0 in X or
b) There exist (yn ) ⊂ RN and R, β > 0 such that
Z
lim inf |un |γ ≥ β > 0.
n→+∞ BR (yn )

Proof. Arguing as in Proposition 2.1,

Z
f (un )un = on (1).
RN

Consequently
Z Z
p p
a(|∇un | )|∇un | + V (x)b(|un |p )|un |p = on (1).
RN RN

From (a1 ) and (b1 ), Z

|∇un |p = on (1),
RN
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 15

Z
H(ξ3 ) |∇un |q = on (1),
RN
Z
V (x)|un |p = on (1)
RN
and Z
H(ξ3 ) V (x)|un |q = on (1),
RN
showing that kun k = on (1), or equivalently, un → 0 in X .

Lemma 3.3 Assume that V∞ < +∞ and let (vn ) ⊂ X be a (P S)c sequence for I with
vn * 0 in X . If vn 6→ 0 in X , then c ≥ d∞ .

Proof. Let (tn ) ⊂ (0, +∞) be a sequence such that (tn vn ) ⊂ M∞ . We start showing the
following claim
Claim 1. The sequence {tn } satisfies lim sup tn ≤ 1.
n→∞

In fact, supposing by contradiction that the above claim does not hold, there exist δ > 0
and a subsequence still denoted by (tn ), such that

tn ≥ 1 + δ for all n ∈ N. (3.2)

Since (vn ) is bounded in X , the limit I0 (vn )vn = on (1) leads to
Z Z Z
p p p p
a(| ∇vn | ) | ∇vn | + V (x)b(|vn | )|vn | = f (vn )vn + on (1).
RN RN RN

Using the fact that (tn vn ) ⊂ M∞ , we get

Z Z Z
tpn a(|∇(tn vn )|p )|∇vn |p + tpn V∞ b(|vn |p )|vn |p = f (tn vn )tn vn .
RN RN RN

The last two equalities yield

a(| tn ∇vn |p ) a(| ∇vn |p )
Z  
H(ξ3 )(γ−p)
− | ∇vn |γ
RN |tn ∇vn | |∇vn |H(ξ3 )(γ−p)
V∞ (b(|tn vn |p ) V (x)b(|vn |p )
Z  
+ H(ξ3 )(γ−p)
− | vn |γ
RN |tn vn | |vn |H(ξ3 )(γ−p)
Z  
f (tn vn ) f (vn )
= γ−1
− | vn |γ .
RN |tn vn | |vn |γ−1
By (a3 ) and (b3 ),
Z   Z
f (tn vn ) f (vn ) γ
γ−1
− | v n | ≤ (V∞ − V (x))b(|vn |p )|vn |p .
RN |tn vn | |vn |γ−1 RN

For each τ > 0, from condition (b4 ), there exists R = R(τ, ) > 0 such that

V (x) ≥ V∞ − τ for any |x| ≥ R.

16 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

Since, up to a subsequence, vn → 0 in Lγ (BR (0)), we conclude that

Z  
f (tn vn ) f (vn )
γ−1
− | vn |γ ≤ τ C1 (kvn kp + H(ξ3 )kvn kq ) + on (1). (3.3)
RN |tn vn | |vn |γ−1

From the boundedness of (vn ) in X , there is M > 0 such that

Z  
f (tn vn ) f (vn )
γ−1
− γ−1
| vn |γ ≤ τ M + on (1). (3.4)
RN |t v
n n | |v n |

Since vn 6→ 0 in X , from Lemma 3.2, there are (yn ) ⊂ RN and Ř, β > 0 verifying
Z
| vn |γ ≥ β. (3.5)
|yn |≤Ř

Setting v̌n (x) = vn (x + yn ), we can suppose that, up to a subsequence,

v̌n * v̌ in X .

In view of (3.5), there exists a subset Ω ⊂ RN with positive measure such that v̌ > 0 in Ω.
From (f4 ), we can use (3.2) to rewrite (3.4) as
Z  
f ((1 + δ)v̌n ) f (v̌n ) γ
0< γ−1
− s−1 v̌n ≤ τ C + on (1), for any τ > 0.
Ω ((1 + δ)v̌n ) v̌n
Letting n → ∞ in the last inequality and applying Fatou’s Lemma, it follows that
Z  
f ((1 + δ)v̌) f (v̌) γ
0< γ−1
− γ−1 v̌ ≤ τ C, for any τ > 0
Ω ((1 + δ)v̌) v̌
which is an absurd, and the claim is proved.
Now, the proof follows from the same steps found in [4].

Lemma 3.4 If V∞ = ∞, the embedding X ,→ Lm (RN ) for p < m < γ ∗ is compact.

Proof. If ξ3 = 0, it follows from (f3 ) that γ ∗ = p∗ and

 Z 
1,p N p
X := u ∈ W (R ) : V (x)|u| < ∞ .
RN

In this case, by using a result found in [11], the embedding X ,→ Lm (RN ) is compact for
all m ∈ (p, p∗ ).
If a3 > 0, from (f3 ), γ ∗ = q ∗ . Arguing as above, the space
 Z 
G := u ∈ W 1,q (RN ) : V (x)|u|q < ∞
RN

endowed with Z Z
q q
kuk = |∇u| + V (x)|u|q ,
RN RN
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 17

is compactly immersed in Ls (RN ) for q < s < q ∗ . Once the embedding X ,→ G is

continuous, by interpolation, the embedding X ,→ Lm (RN ) for p < m < q ∗ is compact.
The next result is a technical lemma, which will use in this section for to show the local
Palais-Smale condition. The particular case a(t) = b(t) = 1 for all t ≥ 0 has been proved in
[1].

Lemma 3.5 Assume that a and b satisfy (a1 ) − (a5 ) and (b1 ) − (b4 ), respectively. Suppose
also that (un ) ⊂ X is a (P S)c sequence for I with un * u in X . Then
Z Z Z
p p
A(|∇vn | ) = A(|∇un | ) − A(|∇u|p ) + on (1), (3.6)
RN RN RN

Z Z Z
V (x)B(|vn |p ) = V (x)B(|un |p ) − V (x)B(|u|p ) + on (1), (3.7)
RN RN RN

Z

sup  hHn , ∇φi | = on (1), (3.8)
kφk ≤1 RN

and
Z
sup | V (x)Tn φ| = on (1), (3.9)
kφk ≤1 RN

where
Hn = a(|∇vn |p)|∇vn|p−2∇vn−a(|∇un |p)|∇un|p−2∇un−a(|∇u|p)|∇u|p−2∇u,

Tn = b(|vn |p )|vn |p−2 vn − b(|un |p−2 )|un |p−2 un − b(|u|p )|u|p−2 u

and vn = un − u.

Proof. As mentioned above , the proof of the case ξ3 = 0 can be found in Alves [1]; thus
we will consider only the case ξ3 > 0. Moreover, we will prove only (3.6) and (3.8), because
the same arguments can be used to prove (3.7) and (3.9).
Note that
A(|∇un |p ) − A(|∇vn |p ) = A(|∇(vn + u)|p ) − A(|∇vn |p )
and defining Ã(η) = A(|η|p ), for all η ∈ RN , we get
Z 1
d
Ã(∇(vn + u)) − Ã(∇vn ) = Ã(∇(vn + tu))dt.
0 dt

Then
Z 1
|Ã(∇(vn + u)) − Ã(∇vn )| ≤ C a(|∇(vn + tu)|p )|∇(vn + tu)|p−1 |∇u|dt.
0
18 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

By (a1 )
Z 1
|Ã(∇(vn + u)) − Ã(∇vn )| ≤ C|∇u| ξ0 |∇(vn + tu)|p−1 dt
0
Z 1
+ C|∇u| ξ3 |∇(vn + tu)|q−1 dt,
0

which implies

|Ã(∇(vn + u)) − Ã(∇vn )| ≤ C|∇u||∇vn |p−1 + C|∇u|p

+ C|∇u||∇vn |q−1 + C|∇u|q .

Using Young’s inequality, for each η, there is Cη > 0 such that

|Ã(∇(vn + u)) − Ã(∇vn )| ≤ η(|∇vn |p + |∇vn |p ) + Cη (|∇u|q + |∇u|q ).

For each η > 0, let us consider the function Gη,n given by

  
p q
 
Gη,n (x) = max Ã(∇(vn + u)) − Ã(∇vn ) − Ã(∇u)(x) − η(|∇vn | (x) + |∇vn | (x)), 0
 

which satisfies
Gη,n (x) → 0 a.e in RN
and

|Gη,n | ≤ C̃η (|∇u|p + |∇u|q ) ∈ L1 (RN ),

and so, Gη,n → 0 in L1 (RN ).

From definition of Gη,n , it follows that
 
Ã(∇(vn + u)) − Ã(∇vn ) − Ã(∇u)≤ η|∇u|p (x) + η|∇u|q (x) + |Gη,n (x)|.
 
 

Consequently
Z  
 
lim sup Ã(∇(vn + u)) − Ã(∇vn ) − Ã(∇u)≤ Cη, for all η > 0,
n→∞ N
 
R

which implies
Z Z Z
A(|∇vn |p ) = A(|∇un |p ) − A(|∇u|p ) + on (1).
RN RN RN

Now, setting Ai (η) = a(|η|p )|η|p−2 ηi , for all η ∈ RN , we have

Z 1
d
Ai (∇(vn + u)) − Ai (∇vn ) = Ai (∇(vn + tu))dt.
0 dt
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 19

Then, by a direct computation,

|Ai (∇(vn + u)) − Ai (∇vn )|
Z 1
≤ C|∇u| a0 (|∇(vn + tu)|p )|∇(vn + tu)|p |∇(vn + tu)|p−2 dt
0
Z 1
+ C|∇u| a(|∇(vn + tu)|p )|∇(vn + tu)|p−2 dt.
0

By (a1 ) and (a5 ),

|Ai (∇(vn + u)) − Ai (∇vn )| ≤ C|∇u||∇vn |p−2 + C|∇u|p−1
+ C|∇u||∇vn |q−2 + C|∇u|q−1 .
From Young’s inequality, given η > 0, there exists Cη > such that
|Ai (∇(vn + u)) − Ai (∇vn )| ≤ η(|∇vn |p−1 + |∇vn |p−1 )
+ Cη (|∇u|q−1 + η|∇u|q−1 ).
From the above informations, the function Gη,n given by

Gη,n = max a(|∇vn + ∇u|p )|∇vn + ∇u|p−2 (∇vn + ∇u)



− a(|∇vn |p )|∇vn |p−2 ∇vn − a(|∇u|p )|∇u|p−2 ∇u



− η|∇vn |p−1 − η|∇u|q−1 , 0

satisfies
Gη,n (x) → 0 a.e in RN and |Gη,n | ≤ C̃η (|∇u|p−1 + |∇u|q−1 ).
Thus, Z 
sup Gη,n |∇φ| = on (1).
kφk ≤1 RN

From definition of Gη,n , it follows that

| hHn , φi | ≤ η(|∇vn |p−1 |∇φ| + |∇vn |q−1 |∇φ|) + |Gη,n ||∇φ|
which yields Z 
 
sup  hHn , φi ≤ Cη ∀ η > 0,
kφk ≤1 RN

finishing the proof of (3.8).

Lemma 3.6 Let (un ) ⊂ X be a (P S)c sequence for I such that un * u in X . Then
I (vn ) = I (un ) − I (u) + on (1)
and
I0 (vn ) + on (1),
20 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

where vn = un − u.
Proof. This result follows by (3.6), (3.7), (3.8), (3.9) and [3, Lemma 3.1].

Proposition 3.1 The functional I satisfies the (P S)c condition at any level c < d∞ if
V∞ < ∞, and at any level c ∈ R if V∞ = ∞.

Proof. Let (un ) ⊂ X be such that I (un ) → c and I0 (un ) → 0. Arguing as Lemma 2.3,
(un ) is bounded in X and there is u ∈ X such that, up to a subsequence, un * u in X
and I0 (u) = 0.
Setting vn = un − u, by Lemma 3.6, I0 (vn ) → 0 and

I (vn ) = I (un ) − I (u) + on (1) = c − I (u) + on (1) = c∗ + on (1).

From (f4 ), (a1 ), (a2 ), (b1 ) and (b2 )

Z
1 1 1
I (u) = I (u) − I0 (u)(u) ≥ ( − ) a(|∇u|p )|∇u|p
θ pα θ RN
Z
1 1
+ ( − ) V (x)b(|u|p )|u|p ≥ 0.
pα θ RN
If V∞ < ∞, the above analysis leads to

c∗ ≤ c < d∞ .

Thereby, by Lemma 3.3, vn → 0 in X , or equivalently, un → u in X .

If V∞ = ∞, by Lemma 3.4 the embedding X ,→ Lt (RN ) is compact for p ≤ t < γ ∗ .
Hence, up to a subsequence, vn → 0 in Ls (R) and by (f2 ) − (f3 )
Z
f (vn )vn = on (1).
RN

Therefore, Z Z
a(|∇vn |p )|∇vn |p + V (x)b(|vn |p )|vn |p = on (1).
RN RN
Arguing as Lemma 3.2, we deduce that vn → 0 in X , and so, un → u in X .

Proposition 3.2 The functional I restricted to N satisfies the (P S)c condition at any
level c with 0 < c < d∞ if V∞ < ∞ and at any level c ∈ R if V∞ = ∞.

Proof. Let (un ) ⊂ N be such that I (un ) → c and kI0 (un )k∗ = on (1). Then there exists
(λn ) ⊂ R such that

I0 (un ) = λn J0 (un ) + on (1), (3.10)

where J : X → R is given by
Z Z Z
p p p p
J (u) = a(|∇u| )|∇u| + V (x)b(|u| )|u| − f (u)u.
RN RN RN
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 21

Note that by (a5 ), (b5 ) and (f5 ),

Z Z
J0 (un )un = p a0 (|∇un |p )|∇un |2p + p a(|∇un |p )|∇un |p
RN RN
Z Z
0 p 2p
+ p V (x)b (|un | )|un | + p V (x)b(|un |p )|un |p
RN RN
Z Z
− f (un )un − f 0 (un )(un )2
N N
ZR R
Z
≤ (γ − 1)f (un )un − f 0 (un )(un )2 ≤ 0,
RN RN

from where it follows that lim sup J0 (un )un = l ≤ 0.

n→+∞
Repeating the same arguments found in [4], let us observe that (f5 ) yields l 6= 0, leading
to λn = on (1). From (3.10), I0 (un ) = on (1), and so, (un ) is a (P S)c sequence for I and the
result follows from Proposition 3.1.

Corollary 3.1 The critical points of functional I on N are critical points of I in X

Proof. The proof follows by using similar arguments used in the last proposition.

4 Existence of ground state solution

In this section, we prove the existence of a nonnegative ground state solution to (P ), that
is, a nonnegative solution u of (P ) satisfying I(u ) = c and I0 (u ) = 0. To this end, we
adapt some ideas found in [6].

Theorem 4.1 Suppose that a, b and f verifies (a1 ) − (a5 ), (b1 ) − (b4 ), (V0 ) and (f1 ) − (f5 ),
respectively. Then, there exist ¯ > 0 such that (Pe ) has a nonnegative ground state solution
u for all 0 <  < ¯.

Proof. Arguing as Lemma 2.1, I verifies the Mountain Pass Geometry. Then, there exists
a bounded sequence (un ) ⊂ X satisfying

I (un ) → c and I0 (un ) → 0.

If V∞ = ∞, by Lemma 3.4, to a up a subsequence, it follows that un → u in Ls (RN ),

where u ∈ X is the weak limit of {un } in X . From Lebesgue’s theorem,
Z Z
f (un )un → f (u)u.
RN RN

Arguing as Lemma 3.2, un → u in X , leading to

I (u) = c and I0 (u) = 0,

22 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

If V∞ < ∞, let us consider without loss of generality that

V (0) = V0 = inf V (x).

x∈RN

Let µ ∈ R such that V0 < µ < V∞ . Since dV0 < dµ < d∞ , there exists a nonnegative
function w ∈ Y with compact support such that Eµ (w) = max Eµ (tw) and Eµ (w) < d∞ .
t≥0
The condition (b4 ) implies that for some  > 0

V (x) ≤ µ, for all x ∈ supp w and  ≤ ,

so
Z Z
V (x)B(|tw|p ) ≤ µB(|tw|p ) for all  ≤  and t > 0.
RN RN

Consequently
I (tw) ≤ Eµ (tw) ≤ Eµ (w) for all t > 0
from where it follows that
max I (tw) ≤ Eµ (w),
t>0

showing that c < d∞ .Therefore, the theorem follows from Proposition 3.1.

5 Multiplicity of solutions to (P )

In this section, our main goal is to show the existence of multiple solutions and study the
behavior of its maximum points in relation to the set M .

5.1 Preliminary results

Let δ > 0 be fixed and w be a ground state solution of problem (PV0 ), that is, EV0 (w) = dV0
and EV0 0 (w) = 0. Let η be a smooth nonincreasing cut-off function defined in [0, ∞) such
that η(s) = 1 if 0 ≤ s ≤ 2δ and η(s) = 0 if s ≥ δ.
For any y ∈ M , let us define
 
x − y
Ψ,y (x) = η(| x − y |)w .

and Φ : M → N by
Φ (y) = t Ψ,y .
where t > 0 verifies

max I (tΨ,y ) = I (t Ψ,y ).

t≥0

By construction, Φ (y) has compact support for any y ∈ M .

Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 23

Lemma 5.1 The function Φ verifies the following limit

lim I (Φ (y)) = dV0 , unif ormly in y ∈ M.

→0

Proof. Suppose by contradiction that the lemma is false. Then there exist δ0 > 0, (yn ) ⊂ M
and n → 0 such that

|In (Φn (yn )) − dV0 | ≥ δ0 . (5.1)

Repeating the same arguments explored in [14], it is possible to check that tn → 1. From
Lebesgue’s Theorem,
Z  p1 Z  q1
lim k Ψn ,yn kn = (|∇w|p + V0 |w|p ) + H(ξ3 ) (|∇w|q + V0 |w|q )
n→∞ Rn Rn

and
Z Z
lim F (Ψn ,yn ) = F (w).
n→∞ RN RN

From the above limits,

lim In (Φn (yn )) = EV0 (w) = dV0 ,
n→∞

which contradicts (5.1), and the proof of the lemma is finished.

For any δ > 0, let ρ = ρ(δ) > 0 be such that Mδ ⊂ Bρ (0). Let χ : RN → RN be defined
as χ(x) = x for | x |≤ ρ and χ(x) = ρx/|x| for |x| ≥ ρ. Finally, let us consider β : N → RN
given by Z
χ(x)|u(x)|p
RN
β(u) = Z .
|u(x)|p
RN

The next three lemmas follow by using the same arguments found in [4], this way, we
will omit their proofs.

Lemma 5.2 The function Φ verifies the following limit

lim β(Φ (y)) = y, unif ormly in y ∈ M.

→0

Lemma 5.3 (A Compactness Lemma) Let (un ) ⊂ MV0 be a sequence satisfying EV0 (un ) →
dV0 . Then,
a) (un ) has a subsequence strongly convergent in Y
or
b) there exists a sequence (ỹn ) ⊂ RN such that, up to a subsequence, vn (x) = un (x + ỹn )
converges strongly in Y .
In particular, there exists a minimizer for dV0 .
24 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

Proposition 5.1 Let n → 0 and (un ) ⊂ Nn be such that In (un ) → c0 . Then there exists
a sequence (ỹn ) ⊂ RN such that vn (x) = un (x + ỹn ) has a convergent subsequence in Y .
Moreover, up to a subsequence, yn → y ∈ M , where yn = n ỹn .

Corollary 5.1 Given ξ > 0, there exists R > 0 and n0 ∈ N such that

kun kXV0 (RN \BR (ỹn )) < ξ for all n ≥ n0 .

Proof. From Proposition 5.1, there is v ∈ Y such that vn → v in Y , that is,

Z 1/p Z 1/q
p q
|∇(un (x + ỹn ) − v)| +H(ξ3 ) |∇(un (x + ỹn ) − v)|
RN RN
Z 1/p Z 1/q
+ |un (x + ỹn ) − v|p +H(ξ3 ) |un (x + ỹn ) − v|q → 0.
RN N

Consequently Z
|un (x + ỹn ) − v|p → 0
N \B (0)
R

and Z
H(ξ3 ) |un (x + ỹn ) − v|q → 0.
N \B (0)
R

Considering the change of variable z = x + ỹn , we obtain

Z
|un (z) − v(z − ỹn )|p → 0 (5.2)
RN \BR (ỹn )

and
Z
H(ξ3 ) |un (z) − v(z − ỹn )|q → 0. (5.3)
RN \BR (ỹn )

On the other hand, given ξ > 0, there exists R > 0 such that
Z Z
p ξ
|v(x − ỹn )| = |v|p <
N \B (ỹ )
R n
N \B (0)
R
2

and Z Z
q ξ
H(ξ3 ) |v(x − ỹn )| = |v|q <
N \B
R (ỹn )
N \B
R (0)
2
for all n ∈ N. Hence, by (5.2) and (5.3), there exists n0 ∈ N such that

|un |Lp (RN \BR (ỹn )) < ξ for all n ≥ n0

and
H(ξ3 )|un |Lq (RN \BR (ỹn )) < ξ for all n ≥ n0 .
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 25

Similar argument shows that

|∇un |Lp (RN \BR (ỹn )) < ξ for all n ≥ n0 ,

and
H(ξ3 )|∇un |Lq (RN \BR (ỹn )) < ξ for all n ≥ n0
which completes the proof.

Let h : R+ → R+ be a positive function tending to 0 such that h() → 0 as  → 0 and

let
N
e = {u ∈ N : I (u) ≤ dV + h()}.
0

Lemma 5.4 Let δ > 0 and Mδ = {x ∈ RN : dist(x, M ) ≤ δ}. Then

 
 
lim sup inf  β(u) − y  = 0.

→0 y∈Mδ
u∈N
e

Proof. The proof follows by using the same arguments found in [4].

5.2 Proof of Theorem 1.1

We will divide the proof in two parts:
Part I: Multiplicity of solutions
In the sequel,  > 0 is small enough. Then, by Lemmas 5.1 and 5.4, we have β ◦ Φ is
homotopic to inclusion map id : M → Mδ , this fact implies

catNe (N
e ) ≥ catM (M ).
δ

Since that functional I satisfies the (P S)c condition for c ∈ (c0 , c0 +h()), by the Lusternik-
Schnirelman theory of critical points ( see [28] ), we can conclude that I has at least
catMδ (M ) critical points on N . Consequently by Corollary 3.1, I has at least catMδ (M )
critical points in X .

Part II: The behavior of maximum points

The next two lemmas play role in the study of the behavior of the maximum points of
the solutions. In the proof of the next lemma, we adapted some arguments found in [16]
and [17], which are related to the Moser iteration method [21].

Lemma 5.5 For each n, let un be a solution of the following problem


 −div(a(|∇un |p )|∇un |p−2 ∇un ) + V (n x)b(|un |p )|un |p−2 un = f (un ) in RN
un ∈ Xn , 2 ≤ p < N,
un (z) > 0, ∀ z ∈ RN .

26 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

Then, for each n, un ∈ L∞ (RN ) and there exists C > 0 such that |un |L∞ (RN ) ≤ C for all
n ∈ N. Furthermore, given ξ > 0, there exists R > 0 and n0 ∈ N such that

|un |L∞ (RN \BR (ỹn )) < ξ for all n ≥ n0 ,

where {ỹn } was given in Proposition 5.1.

Proof. Fix R > 0 and consider η ∈ C ∞ (RN ) with 0 ≤ η ≤ 1, η(x) = 1 if |x| ≥ R and
η(x) = 0 if |x| ≤ R/2 and |∇η| ≤ R4 . Defining ηn (x) = η(x − ỹn ), we derive 0 ≤ ηn ≤ 1 and
|∇ηn | ≤ R4 .
Note that by (f2 ) an (f3 ), we obtain the following growth condition for f :
∗
−1
f (t) ≤ ξtp−1 + Cξ tγ , ∀t ≥ 0. (5.4)

For each n ∈ N and for L > 0, let



 un (x) , un (x) ≤ L

uL,n (x) =

 L , un (x) ≥ L,


γ(β−1)
zL,n = ηnγ uL,n un

with β > 1 to be determined later.

Taking zL,n as a test function, we obtain I0n (un )zL,n = 0, that is,
Z Z
I0 (un )zL,n = a(|∇un |p )|∇un |p−2 ∇un ∇zL,n + V (x)b(|un |p )|u|p−2 un zL,n
N N
ZR R

− f (un )zL,n = 0.
RN

So, by (a1 ), (b1 ), (5.4) and for a ξ sufficiently small, we have the following the inequality.
Z Z Z
γ γ(β−1) γ γ ∗ γ γ(β−1) γ(β−1)
a0 ηn uL,n |∇un | ≤ Cξ un η uL,n −γ ηnγ−1 uL,n un |∇un |γ−2 ∇un ∇ηn .
RN RN RN

For each ξ > 0, using the Young’s inequality we get

Z Z Z
γ(β−1) ∗ γ(β−1) γ(β−1)
a0 ηnγ uL,n |∇un |γ ≤ Cξ uγn η γ uL,n + γξ ηnγ uL,n |∇un |γ
R N R N RN
Z
γ γ(β−1) γ
+ γCξ un uL,n |∇ηn | .
RN

Choosing ξ > 0 sufficiently small,

Z Z Z
∗
γ γ γ(β−1) γ(β−1) γ(β−1)
|∇un | ηn uL,n ≤C |∇ηn |γ uγn uL,n +C ηnγ uγn uL,n . (5.5)
RN RN RN
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 27

β−1
Now, we will work with the function u bL,n = ηn un uL,n . Note that, from Sobolev imbed-
ding and Holder inequalities
Z Z 
γ(β−1) γ(β−1)
uL,n |γγ ∗ ≤ β γ SC
|b uγn uL,n |∇ηn |γ + ηnγ uL,n |∇un |γ , (5.6)
RN RN

∗
where S is the best Sobolev constant of the imbedding W 1,γ (RN ) ,→ Lγ (RN ). Using (5.5)
in (5.6), we have
Z Z 
γ γ γ γ(β−1) γ γ ∗ γ γ(β−1)
|b
uL,n |γ ∗ ≤ Cβ un uL,n |∇ηn | + un ηn uL,n , (5.7)
RN RN

for all β > 1. We claim that there exists K > 0 and n0 ∈ N such that
2
γ∗
un ∈ L γ (|x − ỹn | ≥ R)

and
|un | γ∗
2 ≤ K for all n ≥ n0 .
L γ (|x−ỹn |≥R)

γ∗
In fact, let β = γ . From (5.7), we have
Z Z 
(γ ∗ −γ) ∗ (γ ∗ −γ)
uL,n |γγ ∗ ≤ Cβ γ
|b uγn uL,n |∇ηn |γ + uγn ηnγ uL,n
RN |x−ỹn |≥R/2

or equivalently
Z Z 
(γ ∗ −γ) (γ ∗ −γ) (γ ∗ −γ)
uL,n |γγ ∗ ≤ Cβ γ
|b uγn uL,n |∇ηn |γ + uγn ηnγ uL,n un .
RN |x−ỹn |≥R/2

γ∗ γ∗
Using the Hölder inequality with exponent γ and γ ∗ −γ , we obtain
Z
(γ ∗ −γ)
uL,n |γγ ∗
|b ≤ Cβ γ
uγn uL,n |∇ηn |γ
RN
Z   ∗  γγ∗ Z
(γ ∗ −γ) γ
 γ ∗γ−γ
∗
∗
+ Cβ γ un ηn uL,n γ
uγn .
|x−ỹn |≥R/2 |x−ỹn |≥R/2

From Corollary 5.1, there exists n0 ∈ N and R > 0 such that

Z
∗ 1 γ∗
uγn ≤ ( ) γ ∗ −γ ,

|x−ỹn |≥R/2 2Cβ γ

for all n ≥ n0 . Hence

Z Z   ∗  γγ∗
(γ ∗ −γ) γ
(γ ∗ −γ) 1
uL,n |γγ ∗
|b ≤ Cβ γ
uγn uL,n |∇ηn |γ + un ηn uL,n γ
,
RN 2 RN
28 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

or equivalently
Z Z
(γ ∗ −γ) ∗
uL,n |γγ ∗
|b ≤ Cβ γ
uγn uL,n ≤ Cβ γ
uγn ≤ K.
RN RN

for all n ≥ n0 . Using the Fatou’s lemma in the variable L, we have

2
γ∗
Z
unγ ≤ K,
|x−ỹn |≥R

and therefore the claim hold. 2

∗ (t − 1) γ∗ γt
Next, choosing β = γ with t = , we have β > 1, < γ ∗ and
γt γ(γ ∗ − γ) t−1
un ∈ L(βγt)/t−1 (|x − ỹn | ≥ R/2).
Returning to inequality (5.7), we obtain
Z Z 
γ(β−1) ∗ γ(β−1)
uL,n |γγ ∗ ≤ Cβ γ
|b |∇ηn |γ uγn uL,n + uγn uL,n
R≥|x−ỹn |≥R/2 |x−ỹn |≥R/2

or equivalently
Z Z 
∗
uL,n |γγ ∗ ≤ Cβ γ
|b |∇ηn |γ uγβ
n + unγ −γ γβ
un .
R≥|x−ỹn |≥R/2 |x−ỹn |≥R/2

Using the Hölder’s inequality with exponent t/(t − 1) and t,

Z (t−1)/t Z 1/t
uL,n |γγ ∗
|b ≤ Cβ γ uγβt/(t−1)
n |∇ηn |γt
R≥|x−ỹn |≥R/2 R≥|x−ỹn |≥R/2
Z 1/t Z t/(t−1) 
∗
−γ)t
+ u(γ
n uγβt/(t−1)
n .
|x−ỹn |≥R/2 |x−ỹn |≥R/2

2
γ∗
Since that (γ ∗ − γ)t = ,
γ
Z (t−1)/t
uL,n |γγ ∗ ≤ Cβ γ
|b uγβt/(t−1)
n = Cβ γ |un |γβγβt .
|x−ỹn |≥R/2 L t−1 (|x−ỹn |≥R/2)

Note that
Z γ/γ ∗ Z γ/γ ∗
∗ ∗ γ ∗ (β−1)
|uL,n |γβ
Lγ ∗ β (|x−ỹn |≥R/2)
≤ uγL,nβ ≤ ηnγ uγn uL,n
|x−ỹn |≥R/2 RN
Z (t−1)/t
uL,n |γγ ∗ ≤ Cβ γ
= |b uγβt/(t−1)
n
|x−ỹn |≥R/2

= Cβ γ |un |γβγβt .
L t−1 (|x−ỹn |≥R/2)
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 29

Applying Fatou’s lemma in the variable L,

|un |γβ
Lγ ∗ β (|x−ỹn |≥R)
≤ Cβ γ |un |γβγβt .
L t−1 (|x−ỹn |≥R/2)

γ ∗ (t − 1) γt
Considering χ = ,s= and the last inequality, it is easy to see that
γt t−1
m
X m
X
χ−i iχ−i
|un |Lχm+1 s (|x−ỹn |≥R) ≤ C i=1 χ i=1 |un |Lγ ∗ (|x−ỹn |≥R/2) ,

which implies

|un |L∞ (|x−ỹn |≥R) ≤ C|un |Lγ ∗ (|x−ỹn |≥R/2) .

Considering the change of variable z = x − ỹn , we derive

Z ! γ1∗ Z ! γ1∗
∗ ∗
|un |L∞ (|x−ỹn |≥R) ≤ C |un |γ (z + ỹn ) ≤C |vn |γ .
RN \BR/2 (0) RN \BR/2 (0)

Using the Proposition 5.1, {vn } converges to v in Y , and so, there are R > 0 and n0 ∈ N
such that

|un |L∞ (|x−ỹn |≥R) < ξ for all n ≥ n0 .

This finishes the proof.

Lemma 5.6 There exists δ > 0 such that |un |L∞ (|x−ỹn |<R) ≥ δ ∀n ≥ n0 .

V0
Proof. If |un |L∞ (|x−ỹn |<R) → 0, by Lemma 5.5, we have |un |L∞ (RN ) → 0. Fixed 0 = 2 , it
follows from (f5 ) that there exists n0 ∈ N such that,

f (un )
< 0 , for n ≥ n0 .
|un |γ−1

Thus, Z Z
p p
a(|∇un | )|∇un | + V (n x)b(|un |p )|un |p ≤ 0,
RN RN

that is,
kun kXn = 0 for all n ≥ n0 ,
which is a absurd, because un 6= 0 ∀n ∈ N . Then there exists δ > 0, with |un |L∞ (|x−ỹn |<R) ≥
δ ∀n ≥ n0 .
Considering vn (x) = un (x + ỹn ), by Lemmas 5.5 and 5.6, we have that

|vn |L∞ (|x|≥R) < ξ for all n ≥ n0

30 C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo

and

|vn |L∞ (|x|≤R) ≥ δ for all n ≥ n0 .

Thus, there exists qn ∈ BR (0) such that v(qn ) = max vn (z) and v(qn ) = un (qn + ỹn ). Hence,
z∈RN
xn = qn + ỹn is a maximum point of {un } and lim n xn = lim n ỹn = y ∈ M . Since V is
n→∞ n→∞
a continuous functions, we get

lim V (n xn ) = V (y) = V0 .

n→∞

References
[1] C. O. Alves, Existence of positive solutions for a problem with lack of compactness involving
the p-Laplacian, Non. Anal. 51 (2002), 1187-1206.
[2] C. O. Alves, Existence and multiplicity of solution for a class of quasilinear equations, Adv.
Nonlinear Studies 5 (2005), 73-86.
[3] C. O. Alves, P.C. Carrião and E. S. Medeiros, Multiplicity of solutions for a class of quasilinear
problem in exterior domains with Newmann conditions, Abstract and Applied Analisys 03
(2004), 251-268.
[4] C.O. Alves and G.M. Figueiredo, Existence and multiplicity of positive solutions to a p-
Laplacian equation in RN . Diff. Int. Eq., v. 19, n. 2, p. 143-162, 2006.
[5] C. O. Alves and G. M. Figueiredo, Multiplicity of positive solutions for a quasilinear problem
in RN via penalization method, Advanced Nonlinear Studies 5 (2005), 551-572.
[6] C. O. Alves and M. A. S. Souto, On existence and concentration behavior of ground state
solutions for a class of problems with critical growth, Comm. Pure and Applied Analysis, 1
(2002), 417-431.
[7] T. Bartsch and Z. Q. Wang, Existence and multiplicity results for some superlinear elliptic
problems on RN , Comm. Partial Differential Equations 20 (1995), 1725-1741.
[8] H. Brezis and E. H. Lieb, A relation between pointwise convergence of functions and conver-
gence functionals, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 8 (1983)486-490.
[9] L. Cherfils L. and Y. Il’yasov. On the stacionary solutions of generalized reaction difusion
equations with p&q-Laplacian. CPAA vol 1, n. 4(2004).
[10] S. Cingolani and M. Lazzo, Multiple semiclassical standing waves for a class of nonlinear
Schrödinger equations, Topol. Methods. Nonl. Analysis 10 (1997), 1-13.
[11] D. G. Costa. On a class of elliptic systems in RN , Eletr. J. Diff. Equations. 7 (1994), 1-14.
[12] M. Del Pino and P. L. Felmer, Local Mountain Pass for semilinear elliptic problems in un-
bounded domains, Calc. Var. 4 (1996), 121-137.
[13] E. DiBenedetto C 1+α local regularity of weak solutions of degenerate results elliptic equations,
Nonl. Analysis TMA 7 (1983), 827-850.
[14] G. M. Figueiredo, Multiplicidade de soluções positivas para uma classe de problemas quasi-
lineares. Doct. dissertation, Unicamp, 2004.
Multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions 31

[15] A. Floer and A. Weinstein, Nonspreading wave packets for the cubic Schridinger equation with
a bounded potential, Journal of Functional Analysis, 69 (1986), 397-408.
[16] Li Gongbao, Some properties of weak solutions of nonlinear scalar field equations, Annales
Acad. Sci. Fenincae, series A. 14 (1989), 27-36.
[17] C. He and G. Li , The regularity of weak solutions to nonlinear scalar field elliptic equations
containing p&q- Laplacians. Annales Acad. Sci. Fennicae, Mathematica Volumen 33, 2008,
337-371
[18] C. He and G. Li , The existence of a nontrivial solution to the p&q-Laplacian
problem with nonlinearity asymptotic to up−1 at infinity in RN . Nonlinear Analy-
sis(2007),doi:10.1016/j.na.2006.12.2008.
[19] P. L. Lions, The concentration-compactness principle in the calculus of variations. The locally
compact case, part II, Ann. Inst. H. Poincare Anal. Non Lineéaire 1 (1984), 223-283.
[20] O. Kavian , Introduction a la Theorie des Points Critiques et Applicatons aux Problemes
Elliptiques. Springer, Heidelberg (1983).
[21] J. Moser, A new proof de Giorgi’s theorem concerning the regularity problem for elliptic
differential equations, Comm. Pure Apll. Math. 13 (1960), 457-468.
[22] J. Y. Oh, Existence of semi-classical bound state of nonlinear Schrödinger equations with
potencial on the class (V )a , Comm. Partial Diff. Eq. v 13 (1988), 1499-1519.
[23] J. Y. Oh, Corrections to existence of semi-classical bound state of nonlinear Schrödinger
equations with potencial on the class (V )a , Comm. Partial Diff. Eq. v 14 (1989), 833-834.
[24] P. H. Rabinowitz, On a class of nonlinear Schrödinger equations, Z. Angew Math. Phys. 43
(1992), 27-42.
[25] X. Wang, On concentration of positive bound states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations,
Comm. Math. Phys. 53 (1993), 229-244
[26] N. S. Trudinger, On Harnack type inequalities and their applications to quasilinear elliptic
equations, Comm. Pure and Appl. Math. XX (1967), 721-747
[27] P. Tolksdorf, Regularity for a more general class of quasilinear elliptic equations, JDE 51
(1984), 126-150
[28] M. Willem, Minimax Theorems, Birkhauser, 1996.