Stability of intrinsic localized modes on the lattice with competing power nonlinearities

If 0<\gamma<\gamma_{{p,q}}, then there are two positive roots of f at a and A. It is obvious that f(u) > 0 for u \in (0,a) \cup (A,+\infty) and f(u) < 0 for u \in (a,A). This implies that

To show that f'(a) \neq 0, we check that the system of equations

has a solution on (0,\infty) if and only if \gamma=\gamma_{{p,q}} (in which case a=A). The same argument applies to show that f'(A) \neq 0. Hence, we have f'(a) < 0 and f'(A) > 0.

Given that the zero symbol is not used in the codes, each symbol must be one of four types: A_+, A_-, a_+, or a_-, and there exists no vector \tilde{\bf u} satisfying \tilde{\bf u} = - \tilde{\bf u}. We say that the vector \tilde{\bf u} is {\bf R}-symmetric if {\bf R \tilde{u}}= \tilde{\bf u}. Also we say that \tilde{\bf u} is -{\bf R}-symmetric if -{\bf R \tilde{u}} = \tilde{\bf u}. No vectors can be both {\bf R}-symmetric and -{\bf R}-symmetric.

Let N = 2k+1, k \in \mathbb{N}. Consider the set {\mathcal G}_+ that consists of 2\cdot 4^{2k} codes with positive center symbol, (i.e. A_+ or a_+). Note, that {\mathcal G}_+ does not contain any -{\bf R}-symmetric element. For any triple (\tilde{\bf u},-\tilde{\bf u}, -{\bf R \tilde{u}}) exactly one element belongs to {\mathcal G}_+. However, the set {\mathcal G}_+ contains 2\cdot 4^k {\bf R}-symmetric elements. Nonsymmetric 2\cdot 4^{2k}-2\cdot 4^{k} elements of {\mathcal G}_+ can be split into pairs (\tilde{\bf u},{\bf R \tilde{u}}). Taking only one representative from each pair (\tilde{\bf u},{\bf R \tilde{u}}) and returning 2\cdot 4^k {\bf R}-symmetric codes one concludes that the number of irreducible codes is

Let N=2k, k \in \mathbb{N}. Consider the set {\mathcal F}_+ that consists of codes with positive first symbol. Evidently, {\mathcal F}_+ consists of 2\cdot 4^{2k-1} elements and for any pair (\tilde{\bf u},-\tilde{\bf u}) exactly one element belongs to {\mathcal F}_+. The set {\mathcal F}_+ includes 2\cdot 4^{k-1} {\bf R}-symmetric codes and 2\cdot 4^{k-1} -{\bf R}-symmetric codes. Each vector \tilde{\bf u}\in {\mathcal F}_+ that is neither {\bf R}-symmetric nor -{\bf R}-symmetric has exactly one counterpart in {\mathcal F}_+ that is either {\bf R}-symmetric or -{\bf R}-symmetric. This means that the number of irreducible codes is

This completes the proof.

By writing {\bf u} = {\bf u}^{(0)} + {\bf v} with real-valued {\bf v} \in \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}), we rewrite the difference equation (?) in the equivalent form:

where f(u) = u - |u|^{p-1} u + \gamma |u|^{q-1} u and g(u,v) = f(u + v) - f(u) - f'(u) v. Since p,q \in \mathbb{N} and 2 \leq p < q, the mapping v \to g(u,v) is C^1 for a given u \in \mathbb{C} and there is C > 0 such that

as long as \|{\bf v} \|_{\ell^2} \leq 1. We can rewrite (Proof) in the abstract form:

with

The mapping \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}) \ni {\bf v} \to {\bf H}({\bf v}) \in \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}) is C^1 since \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}) is a Banach algebra with respect to multiplication and

On the other hand, we have f'(0) = 1, f'(\pm a) < 0, f'(\pm A) > 0 by Lemma 1. Hence, \mathcal{L} is an invertible operator in \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}) for sufficiently small \varepsilon > 0 with a bounded inverse. By the implicit function theorem in \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}), there exist \varepsilon_0 > 0 and C_0 > 0 such that there exists a unique solution to (Proof) satisfying \| {\bf v} \|_{\ell^2} \leq C_0 \varepsilon for every \varepsilon \in (0,\varepsilon_0). This yields the first assertion and results in the bound (1).

It remains to prove preservation of the sign alternation in {\bf u} from {\bf u}^{(0)}. To do so, we introduce \Delta_2^- on \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}_-) with \mathbb{Z}_- = \{ \dots, -2,-1,0\} subject to the Dirichlet condition for n = 1. The difference equations (?) for n \in \mathbb{Z}_- can be rewritten in the form

where \delta_{n,0} = 1 for n = 0 and \delta_{n,0} = 0 for n \leq -1, whereas h(u) = |u|^{p-1} - \gamma |u|^{q-1}. Since p,q \in \mathbb{N} and 2 \leq p < q, there is C > 0 such that

as long as \|{\bf u} \|_{\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}_-)} \leq 1. Since \|{\bf u} \|_{\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}_-)} = \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon) and u_1 = \mathcal{O}(1) as \varepsilon \to 0 by the bound (1), it follows from (?) that

so that the sign of u_n for every n \in \mathbb{Z}_- is the same as the sign of u_1^{(0)} since \varepsilon > 0. Similarly, we get

Hence, the sign of u_n for every n \in \mathbb{Z}_+ is the same as the sign of u_N^{(0)} since \varepsilon > 0. This yields the equality between the number of sign alternations in {\bf u} and that in \tilde{\bf u}.

We have

where \Pi_{N \times N} is the truncation of the matrix operator defined in \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}) to the matrix in \mathbb{M}^{N \times N} by using the rows and columns between n = 1 and n = N. In the limit \varepsilon \to 0, we obtain by Proposition 1 that

where {\bf I}_{\leq 0} and {\bf I}_{\geq N+1} are identity operators for n \in \mathbb{Z}_- and n \in \mathbb{Z}_+ defined in the proof of Proposition 1, whereas {\bf 0}_{N \times N} is the zero matrix for 1 \leq n \leq N. It is clear that the spectrum of the generalized eigenvalue problem (?) consists of only two eigenvalues: \lambda = 0 of multiplicity N in the subspace U_N = {\rm span}({\bf e}_1,{\bf e}_2,\dots,{\bf e}_N) \subset \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}) and \lambda = 1 of infinite multiplicity in the subspaces \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}_-) and \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}_+). Since

we can proceed with the perturbation theory for the zero eigenvalue and use the decomposition

where {\bf w}_- \in \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}_-) and {\bf w}_+ \in \ell(\mathbb{Z}_+). By the implicit function theorem (similar to the one used in the proof of Proposition 1), there exist \varepsilon_0 > 0, C_0 > 0, and \lambda_0 > 0 such that for every \varepsilon \in (0,\varepsilon_0) and |\lambda| < \lambda_0, there exists a unique mapping \mathbb{C}^N \ni {\bf c}=(c_1,c_2,\dots,c_N) \to ({\bf w}_-,{\bf w}_+) \in \ell(\mathbb{Z}_-) \oplus \ell(\mathbb{Z}_+) satisfying

Rescaling the eigenvalues as \lambda = \varepsilon \tilde{\lambda}(\varepsilon) and using the unique mapping above, we get the matrix eigenvalue problem in the form

The truncated version of the matrix eigenvalue problem (Proof) coincides with (?) and admits eigenvalues \{\tilde{\lambda}_1, \dots, \tilde{\lambda}_N \}. Simple roots of the characteristic polynomial for the matrix eigenvalue problem (Proof) persist with respect to \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon) perturbation terms and yield the expansion (3). This is again proven with the implicit function theorem for roots of the characteristic polynomial. Furthermore, since complex eigenvalues are symmetric about real axis, that is, both \lambda and \bar{\lambda} are eigenvalues, then if \tilde{\lambda}_k is simple and real, then \lambda_k is simple and real for small \varepsilon > 0, as \lambda_k cannot split into a pair of two complex eigenvalues due to preservation of multiplicity in the roots of the characteristic polynomial with respect to \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon) perturbation terms.

The spectral problems for both \tilde{\bf L}^- and {\bf L}^-_{\varepsilon} belong to the class of discrete Schrödinger equations:

and

where \lambda is the spectral parameter. It follows from (?) that \tilde{\bf L}^-\tilde{\bf u}={\bf 0}. Furthermore, it follows from (?) that {\bf L}^-_{\varepsilon} {\bf u}={\bf 0}. By Proposition 1, we have N_0({\bf u})= N_0(\tilde{\bf u}). Sturm’s comparison theorem for the discrete Schrödinger equations [LL] states that the number of negative eigenvalues of either \tilde{\bf L}^- or {\bf L}^-_{\varepsilon} is equal to the number of sign alternation in the eigenvector for the zero eigenvalue, either \tilde{\bf u} or {\bf u}. This yields the result for n(\tilde{\bf L}^-) = n({\bf L}^-_{\varepsilon}) for small \varepsilon > 0. Since \tilde{\bf L}^- is the N\times N matrix with a simple zero eigenvalue, we have p(\tilde{\bf L}^-)= N - 1 - n(\tilde{\bf L}^-). Since {\bf L}^-_{\varepsilon} is a linear operator in \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}) satisfying {\bf L}_{\varepsilon = 0}^- = {\rm diag}({\bf I}_{\leq 0},{\bf 0}_{N \times N},{\bf I}_{\geq N+1}), its spectrum consists of n({\bf L}^-_{\varepsilon}) negative eigenvalues, a simple zero eigenvalue, and N-1-n({\bf L}^-_{\varepsilon}) positive eigenvalues of the \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon) order, as well as the rest of the spectrum which is located near 1 for small \varepsilon > 0. Hence, the strictly positive spectrum is bounded away from zero for \varepsilon > 0 by C_0 \varepsilon with C_0 > 0.

It follows from (?) with K = 0 that the matrix \tilde{\bf L}^+ is positive-definite. In this case, the generalized eigenvalue problem (?) only admits real eigenvalues and Sylvester’s inertial theorem counts the number of negative, zero, and positive eigenvalues \tilde{\lambda} from those of \tilde{\bf L}^- [Gelfand]. This yields the result by the count (4) in Lemma 4.

It follows from (?) with K = N that the matrix \tilde{\bf L}^+ is negative-definite. In this case, the generalized eigenvalue problem (?) only admits real eigenvalues and Sylvester’s inertial theorem counts the number of negative, zero, and positive eigenvalues \tilde{\lambda} from those for -\tilde{\bf L}^- [Gelfand]. This yields the result by the count (4) in Lemma 4.

By Lemma 4, the matrix \tilde{\bf L}^- has a simple zero eigenvalue with the eigenvector \tilde{\bf u} and (N-1) positive eigenvalues since N_0(\tilde{\bf u}) = 0. By Fredholm’s theorem, the zero eigenvalue in the generalized eigenvalue problem (?) is simple if

Consider the orthogonal complement of \tilde{\bf u} in \mathbb{R}^N with the orthogonal projection operator \Pi_0 : \mathbb{R}^N \to \mathbb{R}^N |_{\tilde{\bf u}^{\perp}}. The generalized eigenvalue problem (?) can be reduced on \mathbb{R}^N |_{\tilde{\bf u}^{\perp}} by using

Since \Pi_0 \tilde{\bf L}^- \Pi_0 is strictly positive, Sylvester’s inertial theorem counts the number of remaining (N-1) negative and positive eigenvalues \tilde{\lambda} in (Proof) from those for \Pi_0 (\tilde{\bf L}^+)^{-1} \Pi_0. It follows from (?) that (\tilde{\bf L}^+)^{-1} has K negative and N-K positive eigenvalues. If (\tilde{\bf L}^+)^{-1} \tilde{\bf u} \cdot \tilde{\bf u} < 0, then \Pi_0 (\tilde{\bf L}^+)^{-1} \Pi_0 has K-1 negative and N-K positive eigenvalues. If (\tilde{\bf L}^+)^{-1} \tilde{\bf u} \cdot \tilde{\bf u} > 0, then \Pi_0 (\tilde{\bf L}^+)^{-1} \Pi_0 has K negative and N-K-1 positive eigenvalues. This yields the result.

By Lemma 4, the matrix \tilde{\bf L}^- has a simple zero eigenvalue with the eigenvector \tilde{\bf u} and (N-1) negative eigenvalues since N_0(\tilde{\bf u}) = N-1. By Fredholm’s theorem, the zero eigenvalue in the generalized eigenvalue problem (?) is simple if

By using the same reduction to (Proof), we obtain a strictly negative \Pi_0 \tilde{\bf L}^- \Pi_0 so that Sylvester’s inertial theorem counts the number of remaining (N-1) negative and positive eigenvalues \tilde{\lambda} in (Proof) from those of -\Pi_0 (\tilde{\bf L}^+)^{-1} \Pi_0. By using the same argument as in the proof of Proposition 4, this yields the result.

We use (?) and write it explicitly as

Since a^2 - \gamma a^4 = 1, A^2 - \gamma A^4 = 1, we have (a^2 - A^2) (1 - \gamma(a^2 + A^4)) = 0 and since a \neq A, we must have 1 = \gamma (a^2 + A^2) which implies (\tilde{\bf L}^+)^{-1} \tilde{\bf u} \cdot \tilde{\bf u} = 0 in this case.