arXiv reader

Kernel bounds for parabolic operators having first-order degeneracy at the boundary

Luigi Negro and Chiara Spina

arXiv
2403.01959v1 · PDF · 4 March 2024
Categories
math.AP
Licence
CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

We study kernel estimates for parabolic problems governed by singular elliptic operators

\sum_{i,j=1}^{N+1}q_{ij}D_{ij}+c\frac{D_y}{y},\qquad c+1>0,

in the half-space \mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+=\{(x,y): x \in \mathbb{R}^N, y>0\} under Neumann boundary conditions at y=0.

Items 50

Notation

Notation

3WVP

For N \ge 0, \mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+=\{(x,y): x \in \mathbb{R}^N, y>0\}. We write \nabla u, D^2 u for the gradient and the Hessian matrix of a function u with respect to all x,y variables and \nabla_x u, D_y u, D_{x_ix_j }u, D_{x_i y} u and so on, to distinguish the role of x and y.

Proposition

Proposition 2.1

43Q6

The forms \mathfrak{a}, \mathfrak{a^*} are continuous, accretive and sectorial.

Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 2.1

We consider only the form \mathfrak{a} since the adjoint form can be handled similarly. If u\in H^1_{c}

\begin{aligned} \textrm{\emph{Re}\,} \mathfrak{a}(u,u)\geq \|\nabla_x u\|^2_{L^2_c}+\|D_y u\|^2_{L^2_c}-2|a| \|\nabla_x u\|_{L^2_c}\|D_y u\|_{L^2_c}\geq (1-|a|)(\|\nabla_x u\|^2_{L^2_c}+\|D_y u\|^2_{L^2_c}). \end{aligned}

By the ellipticity assumption |a|<1, the accretivity follows. Moreover

\begin{aligned} |\textrm{\emph{Im}\,} \mathfrak{a}(u,u)|\leq 2|a|\|\nabla_x u\|_{L^2_c}\|D_y u\|_{L^2_c}\leq |a|(\|\nabla_x u\|^2_{L^2_c}+\|D_y u\|^2_{L^2_c})\leq \frac{|a|}{(1-|a|)}\textrm{\emph{Re}\,} \mathfrak{a}(u,u). \end{aligned}

This proves the sectoriality and then the continuity of the form.  -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Proposition

Proposition 2.2

HCRT

\mathcal L and \mathcal L^* generate contractive analytic semigroups e^{z \mathcal L}, e^{z \mathcal L^*}, z\in\Sigma_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\arctan \frac{|a|}{1-|a|}}, in L^2_{c}. Moreover the semigroups (e^{t\mathcal L})_{t \geq 0}, (e^{t\mathcal L^*})_{t \geq 0} are positive and L^p_c-contractive for 1 \leq p \leq \infty.

Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 2.2

We argue only for \mathcal L. The generation result immediately follows from Proposition 2.1 and [Ouhabaz, Theorem 1.52]. The positivity follows by [Ouhabaz, Theorem 2.6] after observing that, if u\in H^1_{c}, u real, then u^+\in H^1_{c} and

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{a}(u^+,u^-) &:= \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+} \langle \nabla u^+, \nabla u^-\rangle\,y^{c} dx\,dy+2\int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}D_yu^+ a\cdot \nabla_xu^-\,y^{c} dx\,dy=0. \end{aligned}

Finally, the L^\infty-contractivity follows by [Ouhabaz, Corolary 2.17] after observing that if 0\leq u\in H^1_{c}, then 1\wedge u, (u-1)^+\in H^1_{c} and, since \nabla (1\wedge u)=\chi_{\{u<1\}}\nabla u and \nabla (u-1)^+=\chi_{\{u>1\}}\nabla u, one has

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{a}(1\wedge u,(u-1)^+)&=0. \end{aligned}

-.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Proposition 2.1
Proposition

Proposition 2.3

7ATM

The scale homogeneity of \mathcal L is 2:

\begin{aligned} s^2\mathcal L=I_s^{-1}\mathcal L I_s, \qquad I_su(x,y)=u(sx,sy), \qquad s>0. \end{aligned}

Moreover the semigroup e^{t\mathcal L} generated by \mathcal L in L^2_{c} satisfies

e^{s^2 z\mathcal L}=I_{s}^{-1}e^{-z\mathcal L}I_s, \qquad z\in\Sigma_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\arctan \frac{|a|}{1-|a|}},\quad s>0.

The same results hold for the adjoint operator \mathcal L^\ast and its generated semigroup.

Used by Proof
Lemma

Lemma 3.1

67E6

Let N\in\mathbb{N}. Then for every q\in (2,\infty) satisfying \frac{1}{q}\geq \frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{N+1}, there exists \widetilde{C}_q>0 such that for every u\in H^1(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+),

\begin{aligned} \|u\|_{L^q(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq \widetilde{C}_{q} \|\nabla v\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{(N+1)\left (\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q} \right )}\|v\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{1-(N+1)\left (\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q} \right )}. \end{aligned}
Used by Proof, Proof
Lemma

Lemma 3.2

DMQH

If \alpha\in\mathbb{R} and q\geq 1 satisfies

\begin{aligned} 1\leq q\leq (N+1)'=\frac{N+1}{N},\qquad \beta=\alpha-1+\frac{q-1}{q}(N+1)>-\frac{1}{q} \end{aligned}

(in particular \alpha+1>0) then there exists a positive constant C such that

\begin{aligned} \|y^{\beta} u\|_{L^q(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq C\|y^{\alpha}\nabla u\|_{L^1(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)},\quad \forall u\in C_c^\infty\left(\overline{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\right). \end{aligned}
Used by Proof, Proof
Proof of Lemma 3.2

See [mazya, Corollary 1, Section 2.1.7, page 138]  -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Lemma

Lemma 3.3

6G0S

Let q, \ \beta,\ \alpha\in \mathbb{R}, satisfying the following assumptions:

  • (i) 2\leq q\leq 2^{\ast}= 2\frac{N+1}{N-1} (2\leq q when N=1);

  • (ii) \beta+\frac 1 q>0;

  • (iii) \beta= \alpha-1+(N+1)\left(\frac 1 2 -\frac 1 q\right) i.e. \frac 1 q=\frac 1 2- \frac{\beta-\alpha+1}{N+1}.

Then one has for some positive constant C

\begin{aligned} \| y^\beta u\|_{L^q\left(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\right)} \leq C\|y^{ \alpha}\nabla u\|_{L^2\left(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\right)},\qquad \text{for all }\quad u\in C_c^\infty\left(\overline{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\right). \end{aligned}
Used by Proof, Proof
Proof of Lemma 3.3

The proof follows by applying Lemma 3.2 with q, \alpha, \beta replaced respectively by \frac{2q}{q+2}, \alpha+\frac{q\beta}2, \left(\frac q2+1\right)\beta to the function |u|^{\frac{q}2+1} which yields

\begin{aligned} \|y^{\beta} u\|^{\frac q 2+1}_{L^q(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq C\frac{q+2}{2}\|y^{\alpha}|\nabla u|y^{\frac{q\beta}2}|u|^{\frac q 2}\|_{L^1(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}. \end{aligned}

Applying then the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality to the right hand side yields

\begin{aligned} \|y^{\beta} u\|^{\frac q 2+1}_{L^q(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq C\frac{q+2}{2}\|y^\alpha\nabla u\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\|y^\beta u\|^{\frac q 2}_{L^q(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)} \end{aligned}

which is the required claim.

-.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Lemma 3.2
Proposition

Proposition 3.4

CKO5

Let c>0 if N=1, c\geq 0 otherwise. Then for some positive constant C=C(c,N) one has

\begin{aligned} \| u\|_{L^{2^\ast_{c}}_{c}\left(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\right)} \leq C\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_{c}\left(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\right)},\qquad \text{for all }\quad u\in H^1_{c}\left(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\right). \end{aligned}
Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 3.4

Since the set \mathcal C defined in (?) is dense in H^1_c, we can assume without any loss of generality u\in\mathcal C. The proof then follows using Lemma 3.3 with \alpha=\frac{c}2, \beta=\frac {c} q.
 -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Lemma 3.3
Proposition

Proposition 3.5

HQNU

Let c\geq 0 and let us fix q\in (2,\infty) satisfying satisfying \frac{1}{q}\geq \frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{N+1+c} i.e.

  • (i) 2< q\leq 2^\ast_c if N>1 and c\geq 0, or N=1 and c>0;

  • (ii) q>2 if N=1 and c=0.

Then there exists a positive constant C, which may depends on c, N (and also on q in case (ii)), such that

\begin{aligned} \|u\|_{L^q_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq C \| \nabla u\|_{L^2_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)}\| u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{1-(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)},\qquad \text{for all }\quad u\in H^1_{c}\left(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\right). \end{aligned}
Proof of Proposition 3.5

Case (ii) is just Lemma 3.1. To prove (i) let us fix u\in H^1_{c}\left(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\right). Then, by Holder’s inequality and by Proposition 3.4, one has for some C(c,N)

\begin{aligned} \|u\|_{L^q_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}&\leq \| u\|_{L^{2_c^\ast}_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)}\| u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{1-(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)}\\[1ex] &\leq \Big[C\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2}_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\Big]^{(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)}\| u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{1-(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \end{aligned}

which is the required estimates.
 -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Lemma 3.1, Proposition 3.4
Lemma

Lemma 3.6

GLFQ

Let c+1>0. The following properties hold.

  • (i) If N>1 then one has for some positive constant C

    \begin{aligned} \|u\|_{L^{2^\ast}_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq C\, \|y^{-\frac{c}{N+1}}\nabla u\|_{L^2_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)},\qquad \text{for all }\quad u\in C_c^\infty\left(\overline{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\right). \end{aligned}

  • (ii) If N=1 then for every q\geq 2 there exists a positive constant C such that

    \begin{aligned} \|u\|_{L^{q}_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq C\, \|y^{\frac{c+2}q-\frac c 2}\nabla u\|_{L^2_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)},\qquad \text{for all }\quad u\in C_c^\infty\left(\overline{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\right). \end{aligned}
Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 3.6

The proof follows by using Lemma 3.3 with \beta=\frac {c} q and, for claim (i), by imposing also \frac 1 q=\frac 1 {2^\ast}.  -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Lemma 3.3
Proposition

Proposition 3.7

5Q7B

Let -1<c<0 and r>0. The following properties hold.

  • (i) If N>1 then one has for some positive constant C=C(r)

    \begin{aligned} \|u\|_{L^{2^\ast}_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq C\, \|\nabla u\|_{L^2_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)},\qquad \text{for all }\quad u\in H^1_c\left(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\right),\quad \mbox{supp}\,u\subseteq \mathbb{R}^N\times [0,r]. \end{aligned}

  • (ii) If N=1 then for every q\geq 2 there exists a positive constant C=C(r) such that

    \begin{aligned} \|u\|_{L^{q}_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq C\, \|\nabla u\|_{L^2_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)},\qquad \text{for all }\quad u\in H^1_c\left({\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\right),\quad \mbox{supp}\,u\subseteq \mathbb{R}^N\times [0,r]. \end{aligned}
Used by Proof, Proof
Proof of Proposition 3.7

For simplicity we can assume r=1. Using the density of \mathcal C, we can assume without any loss of generality u\in\mathcal C. The proof then follows by (i) and (ii) of Lemma 3.6 after noticing that if y\leq 1 then in (i) one has y^{-\frac c{N+1}}\leq 1 and in (ii), y^{\frac{c+2}q-\frac c 2}\leq 1.  -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Lemma 3.6
Proposition

Proposition 3.8

ZQTY

Let -1<c<0, r>0 and q\in (2,\infty) such that \frac{1}{q}\geq \frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{N+1}. Then for any u\in H^1_c\left(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\right) such that \mbox{supp}\,u\subseteq \mathbb{R}^N\times [0,r] one has

\begin{aligned} \|u\|_{L^q_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq C\, \|\nabla u\|_{L^2_{c}(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)}\| u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{1-(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)}. \end{aligned}
Used by Remark 4.16
Proof of Proposition 3.8

For simplicity we can assume r=1. The claim for N>1 follows from (i) of Proposition 3.7 using Holder’s inequality as in Proposition 3.5.

Let us prove the claim for N=1. Using Lemma 3.2 with q=2, \beta=\alpha=\frac {c} 2, we obtain

\begin{aligned} \| u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq C\|y^{-\frac c 2}\nabla u\|_{L^1_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)},\quad \forall u\in C_c^\infty\left(\overline{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\right). \end{aligned}

In particular since c<0, we get

\begin{aligned} \| u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq C\|\nabla u\|_{L^1_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)},\quad \forall u\in C_c^\infty\left(\overline{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\right),\quad \mbox{supp}\,u\subseteq \mathbb{R}^N\times [0,1]. \end{aligned}

Let m\in\mathbb{N}; applying the latter inequality to |u|^{m-1}u instead of u and using Holder’s inequality we obtain

\begin{aligned} \| u\|^m_{L^{2m}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}&\leq Cm\|\nabla u|u|^{m-1}\|_{L^1_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\leq Cm\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\|u\|^{m-1}_{L^{2m-2}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)} \end{aligned}

that is

\begin{aligned} \| u\|_{L^{2m}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}& \leq (Cm)^{\frac 1 m}\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{\frac 1 m}\|u\|^{1-\frac 1 m}_{L^{2(m-1)}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)} \end{aligned}

which is valid for any u\in C_c^\infty\left(\overline{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\right) with \mbox{supp}\,u\subseteq \mathbb{R}^N\times [0,1]. The inequality above and an easy inductive argument then proves that, for some positive constant C=C(m)>0, one has

\begin{aligned} \| u\|_{L^{2m}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}& \leq C \|\nabla u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{1-\frac 1 m}\|u\|^{\frac 1 m}_{L^{2}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)},\quad \forall u\in C_c^\infty\left(\overline{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\right),\quad \mbox{supp}\,u\subseteq \mathbb{R}^N\times [0,1] \end{aligned}

which is the required claim for q=2m. Indeed for m=1 the latter inequality is simply \| u\|_{L^{2}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)} \leq C \|u\|_{L^{2}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)} which is obviously true. Let us suppose (?) true for m=k; then applying (?) we get for any u\in C_c^\infty\left(\overline{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\right) with \mbox{supp}\,u\subseteq \mathbb{R}^N\times [0,1] and for some positive constant C depending on k

\begin{aligned} \| u\|_{L^{2(k+1)}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}& \leq C\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{\frac 1 {k+1}}\|u\|^{1-\frac 1 {k+1}}_{L^{2k}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\\[1ex] & \leq C\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{\frac 1 {k+1}}\left(C \|\nabla u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{1-\frac 1 k}\|u\|^{\frac 1 k}_{L^{2}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}\right)^{1-\frac 1 {k+1}}\\[1ex] &= C\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)}^{1-\frac 1 {k+1}}\|u\|^{\frac 1 {k+1}}_{L^{2}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)} \end{aligned}

which is the claim for m=k+1.

The claim for a general q>2 then follows by interpolating L^q_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+) between L^{2m}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+) and L^{2m+2}_c(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+) for a suitable m\in \mathbb{N}.  -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Proposition 3.7, Lemma 3.2
Definition

Definition 4.1

SSOY

Let \eta\in C^\infty[0,\infty) satisfying 0\leq \eta\leq 1, \eta=1 on [0,1/2] and \eta=0 on [2,\infty) and let us define the function \phi\in C^\infty[0,+\infty) by

\phi(y):=\eta(y)+(1-\eta(y))y^{-\frac{c}{2}}.
Used by Proof
Definition

Definition 4.2

6KN8

We introduce the Hilbert space L^2_{\nu}:=L^2(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+,d\nu), and consider the isometry

\begin{aligned} \Phi :L^2(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+,d\nu)\to L^{2}_c\left(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\right), \qquad f\mapsto \phi\,f \end{aligned}

where by (?)

\begin{aligned} d\nu=\phi^2\,y^c dx\ dy\simeq (y\wedge 1)^c\,dxdy. \end{aligned}

The map \Phi defines a similar operator \tilde {\mathcal L}=\Phi^{-1} \mathcal L \Phi which acts on L^2(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+,d\nu).

Used by Proof
Lemma

Lemma 4.3

H3Q7

For any u,v \in D(\mathfrak{b}) one has

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{b}(u,v) &= \left\langle \nabla u, \nabla v\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle D_y u,a\cdot \nabla_x v\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} -\left\langle \frac{B\phi}{\phi}\,u, v\right\rangle_{L^2_{\nu}}+2\left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi}\,u, a\cdot \nabla_x v\right\rangle_{L^2_{\nu}} \end{aligned}
Used by Proof, Proof
Proof of Lemma 4.3

By density we can assume u,v\in\mathcal C; then by the definition of \mathfrak{a} we have

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{a}(\phi u,\phi v)=& \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+} \langle \nabla (\phi u), \nabla (\phi \overline{v})\rangle\,y^{c} dx\,dy+2\int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+} D_y(\phi u)\, a\cdot\nabla_x\overline{v}\phi \,y^{c} dx\,dy\\[1ex] =&\int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+} \langle \nabla u, \nabla \overline{v}\rangle\,\phi^2y^{c} dx\,dy+2\int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+} D_yu\, a\cdot\nabla_x\overline{v}\phi^2 \,y^{c} dx\,dy\\[1ex] &+ \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+} \Big[ D_y \phi D_y u\overline v\phi + D_y \phi D_y\overline vu\phi + D_y \phi D_y\phi u\overline v\Big]\,y^{c} dx\,dy\\[1ex] &+2\int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+} D_y \phi u\, a\cdot\nabla_x\overline{v}\phi \,y^{c} dx\,dy \end{aligned}

which is equivalent to

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{a}(\phi u,\phi v) &= \left\langle \nabla u, \nabla v\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle D_y u,a\cdot \nabla_x v\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}\\[1ex] &+ \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}D_y \phi D_y\left(u\overline v \phi\right) \,y^{c} dx\,dy+2\left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi}\,u, a\cdot \nabla_x v\right\rangle_{L^2_{\nu}}. \end{aligned}

The claim then follows after observing that using (?) and integrating by parts we get

\begin{aligned} \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}D_y \phi D_y\left(u\overline v \phi\right) \,y^{c} dx\,dy&=- \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}(B \phi) u\overline v \,\phi \,y^{c} dx\,dy+\Big[D_y\phi\, \phi\, u\overline v\,y^c\Big]_0^{+\infty}\\[1ex] &=- \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}(B \phi) u\overline v\, \phi \,y^{c} dx\,dy. \end{aligned}

-.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Proposition

Proposition 4.4

C6GJ

The following two norms are equivalent on \mathcal C:

\begin{aligned} \|u\|_{\mathfrak{b}}=\|\phi u\|_{\mathfrak{a}}=\sqrt{\textrm{\emph{Re}\,} \mathfrak{a}(\phi u,\phi u)+\|\phi u\|_{L^2_c}},\qquad \|u\|_{H^1_{\nu}}= \sqrt{\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2_{\nu}}+\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}} \end{aligned}

In particular D(\mathfrak{b})=H^1_\nu.

Proof of Proposition 4.4

We start by proving that for some positive constant C one has \|u\|_{\mathfrak{b}}\leq C \|u\|_{H^1_{\nu}} for any u\in\mathcal C. Since \|\phi u\|_{L^2_c}=\| u\|_{L^2_\nu}, it is enough to prove that

\begin{aligned} \textrm{\emph{Re}\,} \mathfrak{b}(u,u)= \textrm{\emph{Re}\,} \mathfrak{a}(\phi u,\phi u)\leq C \|u\|_{H^1_{\nu}}^2,\qquad u\in\mathcal C. \end{aligned}

Let C_0 be the constant in (?). Then using Lemma 4.3, the property of \phi in (?) and Young’s inequality, we have

\begin{aligned} \textrm{\emph{Re}\,} \mathfrak{b}(u,u)&= \left\langle \nabla u, \nabla u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle D_y u,a\cdot \nabla_x u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} -\left\langle \frac{B\phi}{\phi}\,u, u\right\rangle_{L^2_{\nu}}+2\left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi}\,u, a\cdot \nabla_x u\right\rangle_{L^2_{\nu}}\\[1.5ex] &\leq \|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}+|a|\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2_\nu} +C_0\|u\|^2_{L^2_{\nu}}+C_0 |a|\left(\|u\|^2_{L^2_{\nu}}+\|\nabla_x u\|^2_{L^2_{\nu}}\right)\\[1.5ex] &\leq \left(1+|a|(1+C_0)\right)\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}+C_0(1+|a|)\,\| u\|^2_{L^2_\nu} \end{aligned}

which is the required claim.
On the other hand, with C_0 as in (?) and using Lemma 4.3, the property of \phi in (?) and Young’s inequality again we have also, for every \varepsilon>0,

\begin{aligned} \textrm{\emph{Re}\,} \mathfrak{b}(u,u)&= \left\langle \nabla u, \nabla u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle D_y u,a\cdot \nabla_x u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} -\left\langle \frac{B\phi}{\phi}\,u, u\right\rangle_{L^2_{\nu}}+2\left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi}\,u, a\cdot \nabla_x u\right\rangle_{L^2_{\nu}}\\[1.5ex] &\geq (1-|a|)\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}-C_0\|u\|^2_{L^2_{\nu}}-\frac{C_0}{\varepsilon}|a|\|u\|^2_{L^2_{\nu}}-C_0|a|\varepsilon\|\nabla_x u\|^2_{L^2_{\nu}}.\\[1.5ex] \end{aligned}

Choosing \varepsilon small enough such that (1-|a|)-C_0|a|\epsilon>0, it follows that

\|\nabla u\|^2_{{L^2_\nu}}\leq C\left(\textrm{\emph{Re}\,}\mathfrak{b}(u,u)+\| u\|^2_{{L^2_\nu}}\right)

for some positive constant C.  -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Lemma 4.3
Definition

Definition 4.5

C72X

Let

\Psi:= \Big\{\psi\in C^\infty(\overline{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+})\cap L^\infty(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+)\;;|\nabla \psi|\leq 1;\quad |D^2\psi|\leq 1\Big\}.

We introduce the quadratic forms \{\mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}\}_{\alpha\in\mathbb{R},\psi\in\Psi} in L^2_{\nu} defined by

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(u,v) =\mathfrak{a}(e^{\alpha\psi}\phi u,e^{-\alpha\psi}\phi v), \qquad D(\mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi})=D(\mathfrak{b}). \end{aligned}
Used by Proof
Remark

Remark 4.6

1HVU

By standard computation one can recognize that

\begin{aligned} d(z_1,z_2)\stackrel{def}=\sup_{\psi\in\Psi} \{\psi(z_1)-\psi(z_2)\},\qquad \forall z_1,z_2\in\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+ \end{aligned}

defines a distance in \mathbb{R}^{N+1} which is actually equivalent to the euclidean one i.e.

\begin{aligned} |z_1-z_2|\simeq\sup_{\psi\in\Psi} \{\psi(z_1)-\psi(z_2)\},\qquad \forall z_1,z_2\in\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+. \end{aligned}

We refer the reader to [Robinson-elliptic, pages 200-203] or to [davies, Corollary 3.2.8] for the proof of this classic result.

Used by Proof
Proposition

Proposition 4.7

QXBE

For every \alpha\in\mathbb{R} and \psi\in \Psi the operator

\mathcal B_{\alpha, \psi}u=\phi^{-1}e^{-\alpha\psi}\mathcal L(\phi e^{\alpha\psi}u)

with domain D(\mathcal B_{\alpha\psi})=\phi^{-1}e^{-\alpha\psi}(D(\mathcal L)) is associated to the form \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}. Moreover \mathcal B_{\alpha, \psi} generates a bounded analytic semigroups e^{z \mathcal B_{\alpha, \psi}},\;z\in\Sigma_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\arctan \frac{|a|}{1-|a|}} in L^2_{\nu} which satisfies

\begin{aligned} e^{z\mathcal B_{\alpha\psi}}f= \phi^{-1}e^{-\alpha\psi}e^{z\mathcal L} \left(\phi e^{\alpha\psi}f\right), \quad f \in L^2_\nu. \end{aligned}
Proposition

Proposition 4.8

UCY1

For every \alpha\in\mathbb{R} and \psi\in\Psi, \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi} is quasi-accretive in L^2_{\nu} and for any 0<\epsilon<1 there exists some positive constant C_\epsilon>0 dependent only on \epsilon, a, c such that

\begin{aligned} {\textrm{\emph{Re}\,} \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}}(u,u) \geq& \,\epsilon(1-|a|)\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}-C_\epsilon\left(\alpha^2+1\right)\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}. \end{aligned}

Moreover, e^{t\mathcal B_{\alpha\psi}} is positive and one has

\begin{aligned} \|e^{t\mathcal B_{\alpha\psi}}f\|_{\infty} \leq e^{C_\epsilon(1+\alpha^2)t}\|f\|_{\infty}, \quad f\in L^2_{\nu}\cap L^\infty (\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+). \end{aligned}
Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 4.8

Since the form is real (i.e. \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(u,v)\in \mathbb{R} if u,\ v\in\mathbb{R}), one has \textrm{\emph{Re}\,}\mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(u,u)=\mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(\textrm{\emph{Re}\,} u,\textrm{\emph{Re}\,} u)+\mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(\textrm{\emph{Im}\,} u,\textrm{\emph{Im}\,} u) so we can restrict the analysis, without any loss of generality, to real u\in D(\mathfrak{b}). Using Lemma 4.3 and a straightforward calculation we get

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(u,u) =& \left\langle \nabla (e^{\alpha\psi}u), \nabla (e^{-\alpha\psi}u)\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle D_y (e^{\alpha\psi}u),a\cdot \nabla_x (e^{-\alpha\psi}u)\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} \\[1ex] &-\left\langle \frac{B\phi}{\phi}\,e^{\alpha\psi}u, e^{-\alpha\psi}u\right\rangle_{L^2_{\nu}}+2\left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi}\,e^{\alpha\psi}u, a\cdot \nabla_x (e^{-\alpha\psi}u)\right\rangle_{L^2_{\nu}} \\[1ex] =& \left\|\nabla u\right\|^2_{L^2_\nu}-\alpha^2 \left\langle \nabla \psi u,\nabla \psi u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}-2\alpha^2 \left\langle D_y \psi u,a\cdot\nabla_x \psi u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle D_y u,a\cdot\nabla_x u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} \\[1ex] &-2\alpha \left\langle D_y u,a\cdot\nabla_x\psi u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\alpha \left\langle D_y \psi u,a\cdot\nabla_x u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} \\[1ex]& -\left\langle \frac{B\phi}{\phi} u,u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}-2\alpha \left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi} u,a\cdot\nabla_x\psi u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi} u,a\cdot\nabla_x u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} \end{aligned}

Using the properties of \phi in (?) we obtain

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(u,u) \geq & \left\|\nabla u\right\|^2_{L^2_\nu}-\alpha^2\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}-2\alpha^2|a|\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}-2|a|\|D_yu\|_{L^2_\nu}\|\nabla_xu\|_{L^2_\nu}\\[1ex] &-2|\alpha||a|\|u\|_{L^2_\nu}\|D_yu\|_{L^2_\nu}-2|\alpha||a|\|u\|_{L^2_\nu}\|\nabla_xu\|_{L^2_\nu}\\[1ex] &-C_0\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}-2|\alpha||a|C_0\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}-2C_0|a|\|u\|_{L^2_\nu}\|\nabla_xu\|_{L^2_\nu}. \end{aligned}

Using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality we get for any \epsilon_1>0

\begin{aligned} 2|\alpha|\|u\|_{L^2_\nu}\|D_yu\|_{L^2_\nu}=2\left(\frac{|\alpha|}{\sqrt{\epsilon_1}}\|u\|_{L^2_\nu}\right)\left(\sqrt{\epsilon_1}\|D_yu\|_{L^2_\nu}\right)\leq \frac{\alpha^2}{\epsilon_1}\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}+\epsilon_1\|D_yu\|^2_{L^2_\nu} \end{aligned}

and similarly 2|\alpha|\|u\|_{L^2_\nu}\|\nabla_xu\|_{L^2_\nu}\leq \frac{\alpha^2}{\epsilon_1}\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}+\epsilon_1\|\nabla_xu\|^2_{L^2_\nu} which implies

\begin{aligned} 2|\alpha|\|u\|_{L^2_\nu}\|D_yu\|_{L^2_\nu}+2|\alpha|\|u\|_{L^2_\nu}\|\nabla_xu\|_{L^2_\nu}\leq 2\frac{\alpha^2}{\epsilon_1}\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}+\epsilon_1\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}. \end{aligned}

Analogously we get 2|a|\|D_yu\|_{L^2_\nu}\|\nabla_xu\|_{L^2_\nu}\leq |a|\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2_\nu} and for any \epsilon_2>0

\begin{aligned} 2\|u\|_{L^2_\nu}\|\nabla_xu\|_{L^2_\nu}\leq\frac{1}{\epsilon_2}\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}+\epsilon_2\|\nabla_xu\|^2_{L^2_\nu} \end{aligned}

Inserting the latter estimates into (Proof) yields

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(u,u) \geq& \Big[1-|a|(1+\epsilon_1+C_0\epsilon_2)\Big]\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}\\[1ex] &-\Big[\alpha^2\left(1+2|a|+\frac 2 {\epsilon_1}|a|+\frac{C_0}{\epsilon_2}\right)+2|\alpha||a|C_0+C_0+\frac{C_0|a|}{\epsilon_2}\Big]\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}. \end{aligned}

Let us fix now 0<\epsilon<1. Since |a|<1 we can choose \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2 sufficiently small such that

1-|a|(1+\epsilon_1+C_0\epsilon_2)\geq \epsilon\left(1-|a|\right).

Consequently, using the elementary inequality \alpha^2+c_1|\alpha|+c_2 \le 2\alpha^2+c_3 for a suitable c_3>0, we get for some positive constant C_1>0 dependent only on \epsilon, a

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(u,u) \geq& \epsilon(1-|a|)\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}-C_1\left(\alpha^2+1\right)\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}. \end{aligned}

The proof of the remaining claim follows similarly as in the proof of Proposition 2.2. Indeed the positivity follows by [Ouhabaz, Theorem 2.6] after observing that, if u\in H^1_{\nu}, u real, then u^+\in H^1_{\nu} and, by Proposition 2.2,

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(u^+,u^-) &=\mathfrak{a}(e^{\alpha\psi}\phi u^+,e^{-\alpha\psi}\phi u^-)=\mathfrak{a}((e^{\alpha\psi}\phi u)^+,(e^{-\alpha\psi}\phi u)^-) =0. \end{aligned}

Finally, the quasi-L^\infty-contractivity follows by [Ouhabaz, Corollary 2.17] after proving that if 0\leq u\in H^1_{\nu} then, observing that 1\wedge u, (u-1)^+\in H^1_{\nu}, one has

\mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(1\wedge u,(u-1)^+)+C_2 (1\wedge u,(u-1)^+)\geq 0

for some positive constant C_2>0 independent of \alpha, \psi. After this the required claim of the Proposition follows after taking C_\epsilon=\max\{C_1,C_2\}. Indeed, let 0\leq u\in H^1_{\nu} and, using the density of \mathcal C in (?), let us assume, without any loss of generality, u\in \mathcal C. Then

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{b}&_{\alpha\psi}(1\wedge u,(u-1)^+)\\[1ex] =& \left\langle \nabla (e^{\alpha\psi}(1\wedge u)), \nabla (e^{-\alpha\psi}(u-1)^+)\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle D_y (e^{\alpha\psi}(1\wedge u)),a\cdot \nabla_x (e^{-\alpha\psi}(u-1)^+)\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} \\[1ex] &-\left\langle \frac{B\phi}{\phi}\,e^{\alpha\psi}(1\wedge u), e^{-\alpha\psi}(u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_{\nu}}+2\left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi}\,e^{\alpha\psi}(1\wedge u), a\cdot \nabla_x (e^{-\alpha\psi}(u-1)^+)\right\rangle_{L^2_{\nu}} \\[1ex] =& \left\langle \nabla(1\wedge u),\nabla (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}-\alpha^2 \left\langle \nabla \psi (1\wedge u),\nabla \psi (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} \\[1ex] &+\alpha \left\langle\nabla\psi (1\wedge u),\nabla(u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}-\alpha \left\langle\nabla (1\wedge u),\nabla\psi (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} \\[1ex] &-2\alpha^2 \left\langle D_y \psi (1\wedge u),a\cdot\nabla_x \psi (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle D_y (1\wedge u),a\cdot\nabla_x (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} \\[1ex] &-2\alpha \left\langle D_y (1\wedge u),a\cdot\nabla_x\psi (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\alpha \left\langle D_y \psi (1\wedge u),a\cdot\nabla_x (1-u)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} \\[1ex]& -\left\langle \frac{B\phi}{\phi} (1\wedge u),(u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}-2\alpha \left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi} (1\wedge u),a\cdot\nabla_x\psi u\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi} (1\wedge u),a\cdot\nabla_x (1-u)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}. \end{aligned}

Since \nabla (1\wedge u)=\chi_{\{u<1\}}\nabla u and \nabla (u-1)^+=\chi_{\{u>1\}}\nabla u, one has

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(1\wedge u,(u-1)^+) = &-\alpha^2 \left\langle \nabla \psi ,\nabla \psi (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+\alpha \left\langle\nabla\psi ,\nabla (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}\\[1ex] &-2\alpha^2 \left\langle D_y \psi ,a\cdot\nabla_x \psi (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} +2\alpha \left\langle D_y \psi ,a\cdot\nabla_x (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} \\[1ex]& -\left\langle \frac{B\phi}{\phi} ,(u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}-2\alpha \left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi} ,a\cdot\nabla_x\psi (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi},a\cdot\nabla_x (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}. \end{aligned}

Using the properties of \psi in (4.5) and of \phi in (?) we get

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(1\wedge u,(u-1)^+) \geq &\left(-\alpha^2-2|a|\alpha^2-C_0-2|\alpha|C_0|a|\right) \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+} (u-1)^+d\nu\\[1ex] &+\alpha \left\langle\nabla\psi ,\nabla (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} +2\alpha \left\langle D_y \psi ,a\cdot\nabla_x (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}+2\left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi},a\cdot\nabla_x (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}. \end{aligned}

To estimate the second term we integrate by parts and we use again the properties of \psi and of \phi (which implies in particular the estimate \frac{|D_y\left(\phi^2 y^c\right)|}{\phi^2y^c}\leq C, for some C>0) obtaining

\begin{aligned} \left|\alpha \left\langle\nabla\psi ,\nabla (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}\right|&=\left|\alpha \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\nabla\psi \cdot\nabla (u-1)^+d\nu\right|\\[1ex] &=\left|-\alpha \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}\left(\Delta\psi+\frac{D_y\psi D_y (\phi^2 y^c)}{\phi^2 y^c} \right) (u-1)^+d\nu\right|\\[1ex] &\leq |\alpha|(N+1+C) \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+} (u-1)^+d\nu. \end{aligned}

Similarly we get

\begin{aligned} \left|2\alpha \left\langle D_y \psi ,a\cdot\nabla_x (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu}\right| &\leq 2|\alpha||a| \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+} (u-1)^+d\nu\\[1ex] 2\left\langle \frac{D_y\phi}{\phi},a\cdot\nabla_x (u-1)^+\right\rangle_{L^2_\nu} &=0. \end{aligned}

Putting together all the above estimates and using again the elementary inequality \alpha^2+c_1|\alpha|+c_2 \le 2\alpha^2+c_3, we finally get, for some positive constant C>0,

\begin{aligned} \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}(1\wedge u,(u-1)^+) & \geq -C\left(\alpha^2 +1 \right)\int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+} (u-1)^+d\nu. \end{aligned}

-.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Lemma 4.3, Proposition 2.2, Definition 4.5
Proposition

Proposition 4.9

DCRH

For every \alpha\in\mathbb{R} and \psi\in \Psi the operator

\mathcal B^*_{\alpha, \psi}u=\phi^{-1}e^{\alpha\psi}\mathcal L^*(\phi e^{-\alpha\psi}u)

with domain D(\mathcal B^*_{\alpha\psi})=\phi^{-1}e^{\alpha\psi}(D(\mathcal L^*)) is associated to the form \mathfrak{b}^\ast_{\alpha\psi}. Moreover \mathcal B^*_{\alpha, \psi} generates a bounded analytic semigroups e^{z \mathcal B^*_{\alpha, \psi}},\;z\in\Sigma_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\arctan \frac{|a|}{1-|a|}} in L^2_{\nu} which satisfies

\begin{aligned} e^{z\mathcal B^*_{\alpha\psi}}f= \phi^{-1}e^{\alpha\psi}e^{z\mathcal L^*} \left(\phi e^{-\alpha\psi}f\right), \quad f \in L^2_\nu. \end{aligned}
Proposition

Proposition 4.10

C2RV

For every \alpha\in\mathbb{R} and \psi\in\Psi, \mathfrak{b^*}_{\alpha\psi} is quasi-accretive in L^2_{\nu} and for any 0<\epsilon<1 there exist some positive constant C_\epsilon>0 dependent only on \epsilon, a such that

\begin{aligned} {\textrm{\emph{Re}\,}\mathfrak{b}}_{\alpha\psi}^*(u,u) \geq& \,\epsilon(1-|a|)\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}-C_\epsilon\left(\alpha^2+1\right)\|u\|^2_{L^2_\nu}. \end{aligned}

Moreover, e^{t\mathcal B^*_{\alpha\psi}} is positive and one has

\begin{aligned} \|e^{t\mathcal B^*_{\alpha\psi}}f\|_{\infty} \leq e^{C_\epsilon(1+\alpha^2)t}\|f\|_{\infty}, \quad f\in L^2_{\nu}\cap L^\infty (\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+). \end{aligned}
Used by Proof
Proposition

Proposition 4.11

AXK3

Assume c+1>0. Then for every q\in(2,\infty) such that \frac{1}{q}\geq\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{N+1+c^+} one has

\|u\|_{L^q_{\nu}} \leq C_q \|u\|_{H^1_\nu}^\theta \|u\|_{\nu}^{1-\theta},\qquad \text{for all}\quad u\in H^1_{\nu}.

where C_q is a positive constant independent of u and \theta=\left (N+1+c^+\right )\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right ) \in (0,1] (\theta<1 if N=1 and c\leq 0).

Proof of Proposition 4.11

Let \eta\in C^\infty[0,\infty) satisfying \eta=1 on [0,1/2] and \eta=0 on [2,\infty) and \phi as defined in (4.1). We note preliminarily that by (4.2) we have

\begin{aligned} d\nu\simeq y^cdxdy,\quad \text{if \;} y\in {\rm supp}\,\eta,\qquad d\nu\simeq dxdy,\quad \text{if \;} y\in {\rm supp}\,(1-\eta). \end{aligned}

We treat separately the case c<0 and c\geq 0.

We start by the case c<0. From Lemmas 3.7 and 3.1, respectively, we deduce, for some positive constant C=C_q>0 which may depend on q and which may vary in each occurrence, that

\begin{aligned} \|\eta u\|_{L^q_{\nu}}&\leq C\|\eta u\|_{L^q_{c}}\leq C_q \|\nabla(\eta u)\|_{L^2_{c}}^{(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \|\eta u\|_{L^2_{c}}^{1-(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)}\\[1ex] &\leq C_q\|\eta\|^{(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)}_{W^{1,\infty}} \Big(\|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}\Big)^{(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}^{1-(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \end{aligned}

and

\begin{aligned} \|(1-\eta)u\|_{L^q_{\nu}} &\leq C\|(1-\eta)u\|_{q} \\ &\leq {C}_q\left\|\nabla((1-\eta)u)\right\|_{2}^{(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \|(1-\eta)u\|_2^{1-(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \\ &\leq {C}_q\|\eta\|^{(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)}_{W^{1,\infty}} \Big(\|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_{d\nu}}\Big)^{(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}^{1-(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)}. \end{aligned}

Combining the above estimates, we deduce

\|u\|_{L^q_{\nu}}\leq C \Big(\|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}\Big)^{(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}^{1-(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)}

which is the required claim.

We treat now, similarly, the case c\geq 0. Observing that \frac{1}{q}> \frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{N+1+c}> \frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{N+1}, and applying Lemmas 3.7 and 3.1, respectively, we get proceeding as before that

\begin{aligned} \|\eta u\|_{L^q_{\nu}} &\leq C_q \Big(\|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}\Big)^{(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}^{1-(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \end{aligned}

and

\begin{aligned} \|(1-\eta)u\|_{L^q_{\nu}} &\leq C_q \Big(\|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}\Big)^{(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}^{1-(N+1)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \\[1ex] &\leq C_q \Big(\|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}\Big)^{(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}^{1-(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \end{aligned}

where in the last inequality we used the fact that (A+B)^{r}A^{1-r} is increasing in r \in [0,1], for A,B \ge 0. Combining the above estimates, we deduce

\begin{aligned} \|u\|_{L^q_{\nu}}\leq C_q \Big(\|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}\Big)^{(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \|u\|_{L^2_{\nu}}^{1-(N+1+c)\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right)} \end{aligned}

which is the required claim.  -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Definition 4.1, Definition 4.2, Proposition 3.7, Lemma 3.1
Corollary

Corollary 4.12

XQL3

Assume c+1>0. Then for every q\in(2,\infty) such that \frac{1}{q}\geq\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{N+1+c^+} one has for all u\in H^1_{\nu}=D(\mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi})=D(\mathfrak{b}^\ast_{\alpha\psi})

\|u\|_{L^q_{\nu}} \leq C\Big( (1+\alpha^2)\|u\|_{\nu}^2 +{\textrm{\emph{Re}\,} \mathfrak{b}_{\alpha\psi}}(u,u) \Big)^{\frac{\theta}{2}} \|u\|_{\nu}^{1-\theta}

and

\|u\|_{L^q_{\nu}} \leq C\Big( (1+\alpha^2)\|u\|_{\nu}^2 +{\textrm{\emph{Re}\,}\mathfrak{b}}_{\alpha\psi}^*(u,u) \Big)^{\frac{\theta}{2}} \|u\|_{\nu}^{1-\theta}

where \theta=\left (N+1+c^+\right )\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}\right ) \in (0,1] (\theta<1 if N=1 and c\leq 0) and C>0 is a positive constant which may depend only on q,a,c.

Used by Proof
Lemma

Lemma 4.13

0AEW

Let c+1>0, |a|<1. The semigroup (e^{t\tilde{\mathcal L}})_{t> 0} consists of integral operators i.e. there exists p_{\tilde{\mathcal L}}(t,\cdot,\cdot)\in L^\infty(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\times\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+) such that for t>0, z_1,\ z_2\in\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+

\begin{aligned} e^{t\tilde{\mathcal L}}f(z_1)= \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}p_{\tilde{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2)f(z_2)\,d\nu,\quad f\in L^2_{\nu}. \end{aligned}

Its heat kernel p_{\tilde{\mathcal L}}, written with respect the measure d\nu, satisfies for some C, \kappa>0,

\begin{aligned} 0\leq p_{\tilde{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2) \leq C t^{-\frac{N+1+c^+}{2}}\exp\left(C t-\dfrac{|z_1-z_2|^2}{kt}\right). \end{aligned}
Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 4.13

We use Propositions 4.8 and 4.10 with \epsilon=\frac 1 2 and correspondingly we consider the forms

\mathfrak{b}_{\alpha,\psi}+C(1+\alpha^2)\langle\, \, , \,\, \rangle_{L^2_\nu},\quad \mathfrak{b}^*_{\alpha,\psi}+C(1+\alpha^2)\langle\, \, , \,\, \rangle_{L^2_\nu}

which are accretive in L^2_\nu and L^\infty-contractive. By Corollary 4.12 we can apply [Ouhabaz, Theorem 6.2] to get that

\begin{aligned} \|e^{t\mathcal B_{\alpha,\psi}}\|_{L^2_{\nu}\to L^\infty}\leq Ct^{-\frac{N+1+c^+}{4}}e^{C(1+\alpha^2)t},\quad \|e^{t\mathcal B^*_{\alpha,\psi}}\|_{L^2_{\nu}\to L^\infty}\leq Ct^{-\frac{N+1+c^+}{4}}e^{C(1+\alpha^2)t}, \end{aligned}

(note that [Ouhabaz, Theorem 6.2] apply also to non-symmetric forms, see [Ouhabaz, Remark (ii), page 159]). By duality the latter inequality imply also

\begin{aligned} \|e^{t\mathcal B_{\alpha,\psi}}\|_{L^1_{\nu}\to L^2_\nu}\leq Ct^{-\frac{N+1+c^+}{4}}e^{C(1+\alpha^2)t},\quad \|e^{t\mathcal B^*_{\alpha,\psi}}\|_{L^1_{\nu}\to L^2_\nu}\leq Ct^{-\frac{N+1+c^+}{4}}e^{C(1+\alpha^2)t}. \end{aligned}

Then combining the latter estimates we obtain, for some possibly different constants C>0,

\begin{aligned} \|e^{t\mathcal B_{\alpha,\psi}}\|_{L^1_{\nu}\to L^\infty}\leq Ct^{-\frac{N+1+c^+}{2}}e^{C(1+\alpha^2)t},\quad \|e^{t\mathcal B^*_{\alpha,\psi}}\|_{L^1_{\nu}\to L^\infty}\leq Ct^{-\frac{N+1+c^+}{2}}e^{C(1+\alpha^2)t}. \end{aligned}

The Dunford-Pettis criterion yields then the existence of a positive kernel p_{\alpha,\psi,\nu} such that

\begin{aligned} e^{t\mathcal B_{\alpha\psi}}f(z_1)= \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}p_{\alpha,\psi,\nu}(t,z_1,z_2)f(z_2)\,d\nu,\quad f\in L^2_{\nu} \end{aligned}

and 0 \le p_{\alpha,\psi,\nu}(t,z_1,z_2) \le Ct^{-\frac{N+1+c^+}{2}}e^{C(1+\alpha^2)t} with C>0 independent of \alpha, \psi. Using the equivalence e^{t\mathcal B_{\alpha, \psi}}=e^{-\alpha\psi}e^{t\tilde{\mathcal L}} e^{\alpha\psi} of equation (?), the heat kernel p_{\tilde{\mathcal L}} of \tilde{\mathcal L} satisfies

\begin{aligned} 0\leq e^{-\alpha \psi(z_1)}p_{\tilde{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2)e^{\alpha \psi(z_2)}=p_{\alpha,\psi,\nu}(t,z_1,z_2) \leq Ct^{-\frac{N+1+c^+}{2}}e^{C(1+\alpha^2)t}. \end{aligned}

Optimizing on \alpha \in \mathbb{R} we get

\begin{aligned} 0\leq p_{\tilde{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2) \leq Ct^{-\frac{N+1+c^+}{2}}e^{Ct}\exp{\left(-\frac{(\psi(z_1)-\psi(z_2)^2}{4Ct}\right)}. \end{aligned}

Optimizing finally on \psi \in \Psi and recalling Remark 4.6 we get the required assertion.  -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Proposition 4.8, Proposition 4.10, Corollary 4.12, Remark 4.6
Theorem

Theorem 4.14

KD3E

Let c+1>0, |a|<1. The semigroup (e^{t{\mathcal L}})_{t> 0} consists of integral operators i.e. there exists p_{{\mathcal L}}(t,\cdot,\cdot)\in L^\infty(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\times\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+) such that for t>0, z_1=(x_1,y_1),\ z_2=(x_2,y_2)\in\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+

\begin{aligned} e^{t{\mathcal L}}f(z_1)= \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}p_{{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2)f(z_2)\,y_2^c\,dz_2,\quad f\in L^2_{c}. \end{aligned}

Its heat kernel p_{{\mathcal L}}, written with respect the measure y^cdz, satisfies for some C,k>0,

\begin{aligned} 0\leq p_{{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2) \leq C t^{-\frac{N+1}{2}} y_1^{-\frac{c}{2}} \left(1\wedge \frac {y_1}{\sqrt t}\right)^{\frac{c}{2}} y_2^{-\frac{c}{2}} \left(1\wedge \frac{y_2}{\sqrt t}\right)^{\frac{c}{2}}\,\exp\left(-\dfrac{|z_1-z_2|^2}{kt}\right). \end{aligned}

The last estimate can be written equivalently as

\begin{aligned} 0\leq p_{{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2) \leq C t^{-\frac{N+1}{2}} y_2^{-c} \left(1\wedge \frac{y_2}{\sqrt t}\right)^{c}\,\exp\left(-\dfrac{|z_1-z_2|^2}{kt}\right). \end{aligned}
Used by Proof
Proof of Theorem 4.14

The existence of the heat kernel follows from Lemma 4.13 and (?). To prove the required estimate we use (4.13) for t=1 and (?) and (?) to get

\begin{aligned} p_{\mathcal{L}}(1,z_1,z_2)&\leq C y_1^{-\frac{c}{2}}(1\wedge y_1)^{\frac{c}{2}}y_2^{-\frac{c}{2}}(1\wedge y_2)^{\frac{c}{2}}y_2^c\, \exp\left(\frac{-|z_1-z_2|^2}{k}\right) \end{aligned}

for any (z_1,z_2)\in \mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\times \mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+. On the other hand using the scaling property (2.3) of Proposition 2.3 we get

\begin{aligned} p_{\mathcal{L}}(s^2t,z_1,z_2)=s^{-(N+1+c)}p_{\mathcal{L}}(t,s^{-1}z_1,s^{-1}{z_2}),\qquad s,t>0, \quad {z_1}, {z_2}\in \mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+. \end{aligned}

In particular

\begin{aligned} p_{\mathcal{L}}(t,z_1,z_2)=t^{-\frac{N+1+c}2}p_{\mathcal{L}}\left(1,\frac{z_1}{\sqrt t},\frac{z_2}{\sqrt t}\right) \end{aligned}

which combined with the above inequality for t=1 gives the first required estimate.

The second equivalent estimate, up to a possibly different constants C, k, follows by applying [MNS-Caffarelli, Lemma 10.2].  -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Lemma 4.13, Proposition 2.3
Remark

Remark 4.15

9UUH

We remark that the above estimates seem to be optimal since in the case N=0 and a=0 coincide with the optimal estimate proved in [MNS-Sharp]. Moreover, in the case \mathcal{L}=\Delta_x+B_y, our upper bounds coincide with those of [MNS-Caffarelli] which are optimal.

Remark

Remark 4.16

CFRP

When c\geq 0, with the same proof of Lemma 4.13, one could have obtained directly kernel estimates for e^{t\mathcal L} (without relying on the weight \phi and on the equivalent operator \tilde{\mathcal L}) by using the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequalities of Proposition 3.8 in place of Corollary 4.12. This approach leads to the Gaussian estimate

\begin{aligned} 0\leq p_{{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2) \leq C t^{-\frac{N+1+c}{2}}\exp\left(-\dfrac{|z_1-z_2|^2}{kt}\right) \end{aligned}

which is weaker then the estimate proved in Theorem 4.14.

Uses Proposition 3.8
Theorem

Theorem 4.17

IT2X

Let c+1>0, |a|<1. The semigroup (e^{t{\mathcal L^*}})_{t> 0} consists of integral operators i.e. there exists p_{{\mathcal L^*}}(t,\cdot,\cdot)\in L^\infty(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\times\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+) such that for t>0, z_1=(x_1,y_1),\ z_2=(x_2,y_2)\in\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+

\begin{aligned} e^{t{\mathcal L^\ast}}f(z_1)= \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}p_{{\mathcal L^\ast}}(t,z_1,z_2)f(z_2)\,y_2^c\,dz_2,\quad f\in L^2_{c}. \end{aligned}

Its heat kernel p_{{\mathcal L}^\ast}, written with respect the measure y^cdz, satisfies for some C,k>0,

\begin{aligned} 0\leq p_{{\mathcal L}^\ast}(t,z_1,z_2) \leq C t^{-\frac{N+1}{2}} y_1^{-\frac{c}{2}} \left(1\wedge \frac {y_1}{\sqrt t}\right)^{\frac{c}{2}} y_2^{-\frac{c}{2}} \left(1\wedge \frac{y_2}{\sqrt t}\right)^{\frac{c}{2}}\,\exp\left(-\dfrac{|z_1-z_2|^2}{kt}\right). \end{aligned}

The last estimate can be written equivalently as

\begin{aligned} 0\leq p_{{\mathcal L}^\ast}(t,z_1,z_2) \leq C t^{-\frac{N+1}{2}} y_2^{-c} \left(1\wedge \frac{y_2}{\sqrt t}\right)^{c}\,\exp\left(-\dfrac{|z_1-z_2|^2}{kt}\right). \end{aligned}
Theorem

Theorem 4.18

BKHP

Let c+1>0, |a|<1. The semigroup (e^{t{\mathcal L}}), t\in\Sigma_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\arctan\frac{|a|}{1-|a|}} consists of integral operators i.e. there exists p_{{\mathcal L}}(t,\cdot,\cdot)\in L^\infty(\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+\times\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+) such that for t\in\Sigma_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\arctan\frac{|a|}{1-|a|}}, z_1=(x_1,y_1),\ z_2=(x_2,y_2)\in\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+

\begin{aligned} e^{t{\mathcal L}}f(z_1)= \int_{\mathbb{R}^{N+1}_+}p_{{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2)f(z_2)\,y_2^c\,dz_2,\quad f\in L^2_{c}. \end{aligned}

Moreover for every \varepsilon>0 there exist constants C_{\varepsilon}, k_\varepsilon>0 such that if t\in\Sigma_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\arctan\frac{|a|}{1-|a|}-\varepsilon} then

\begin{aligned} |p_{{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2)| \leq C_\epsilon |t|^{-\frac{N+1}{2}} y_2^{-c} \left(1\wedge \frac{y_2}{\sqrt{ |t|}}\right)^{c}\,\exp\left(-\dfrac{|z_1-z_2|^2}{k_\epsilon|t|}\right). \end{aligned}
Lemma

Lemma 5.1

5ORU

Let 1< p< \infty, v=(b,c)\in\mathbb{R}^{N+1}, c\neq 0. Then for u\in W^{2,1}_{loc}\left(\mathbb{R}_+^{N+1}\right)

  • (i) \displaystyle T^{-1}\,\left(v\cdot \nabla \right) T\,u=cD_yu;

  • (ii) \displaystyle T^{-1}\,\left(\mbox{Tr }\left(QD^2\right)+\frac{ v\cdot \nabla }{y}\right) T\,u=\mbox{Tr }\left(\tilde QD^2u\right)+\frac{c}{y}D_y u.

Here \tilde Q is a uniformly elliptic symmetric matrix defined by

\begin{aligned} \tilde Q= \left( \begin{array}{c|c} Q_N-\frac{2}c b\otimes q{+\frac \gamma{c^2} b\otimes b} & q^t- \frac{\gamma}c b^t \\[1ex] \hline q- \frac{\gamma}c b & \gamma \end{array}\right) \end{aligned}

and \gamma= q_{N+1,N+1}.

Lemma

Lemma 5.2

E1ZR

For any k\in\mathbb{R}^N\setminus\{0\} one has, for some positive constant C>0,

\begin{aligned} |x-ky|^2+y^2\geq C\left(|x|^2+y^2\right),\qquad \forall x\in\mathbb{R}^n,\, y\in\mathbb{R}. \end{aligned}
Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 5.2

Using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality we get for \epsilon>0

\begin{aligned} |x-ky|^2+y^2&=|x|^2+(1+|k|^2)y^2-2x\cdot k y\geq|x|^2+(1+|k|^2)y^2-2|x||k| |y|\\[1ex] &\geq|x|^2+(1+|k|^2)y^2-\frac 1 \epsilon |x|^2-\epsilon {|k|^2} y^2\\[1ex] &=(1-\frac{1}\epsilon)|x|^2+(1+(1-\epsilon)|k|^2)y^2. \end{aligned}

The required claim then follows by choosing 1<\epsilon<1+\frac{1}{|k|^2}.  -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Theorem

Theorem 5.3

GEEP

Let v=(b,c)\in\mathbb{R}^{N+1} with b=0 if c =0, \left( \begin{array}{c|c} Q & { q}^t \\[1ex] \hline q& \gamma \end{array}\right) an elliptic matrix. If \frac{c}{\gamma}+1>0 then the operator

\begin{aligned} \mathcal L =\mbox{Tr }\left(QD^2u\right)+\frac{ v\cdot \nabla }{y} \end{aligned}

endowed with the boundary conditions

\begin{aligned} &\lim_{y \to 0} y^{\frac c \gamma}\, v \cdot \nabla u=0,\qquad \text{(if $c\neq 0$)},\qquad \qquad \lim_{y \to 0} y^{\frac c \gamma}\, D_y u=0,\qquad \hspace{2ex}\text{(if $c=0$)}, \end{aligned}

generates a contractive analytic semigroup in L^2_{\frac c\gamma}. The semigroup (e^{t{\mathcal L}})_{t> 0} consists of integral operators and its heat kernel p_{{\mathcal L}}, written with respect the measure y^\frac{c}{\gamma}dz, satisfies for some C,k>0,

\begin{aligned} 0\leq p_{{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2) \leq C t^{-\frac{N+1}{2}} y_1^{-\frac{c}{2\gamma}} \left(1\wedge \frac {y_1}{\sqrt t}\right)^{\frac{c}{2\gamma}} y_2^{-\frac{c}{2\gamma}} \left(1\wedge \frac{y_2}{\sqrt t}\right)^{\frac{c}{2\gamma}}\,\exp\left(-\dfrac{|z_1-z_2|^2}{kt}\right). \end{aligned}
Proof of Theorem 5.3

The generation property follows by similarity using the equality (?). To prove the kernel estimates we use (?) and Theorem 4.14 getting

\begin{aligned} 0\leq p_{{\mathcal L}}(t,z_1,z_2) \leq C t^{-\frac{N+1}{2}} y_1^{-\frac{c}{2\gamma}} &\left(1\wedge \frac {y_1}{\sqrt t}\right)^{\frac{c}{2\gamma}} y_2^{-\frac{c}{2\gamma}} \left(1\wedge \frac{y_2}{\sqrt t}\right)^{\frac{c}{2\gamma}} \\[1ex] &\times\exp\left(-\dfrac{|x_1-x_2-\frac{b}{c}(y_1-y_2)|^2+|y_1-y_2|^2}{kt}\right). \end{aligned}

The required claim then follows using Lemma 5.2.  -.2pt height.2pt depth.2pt-.2pt-.2pt to2.5mm-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt2.5mmto.2pt0pt to.2pt-.2pt width.4pt -.2pt-.2pt-.2ptheight.2pt depth.2pt -.2pt

Uses Theorem 4.14, Lemma 5.2

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2403.01959v1 by Luigi Negro and Chiara Spina, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2403/2403.01959.jsonl.