Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js

Irrigable measures for weighted irrigation plans

  • Received: 01 January 2020 Revised: 01 April 2021 Published: 01 July 2021
  • Primary: 34A05, 34A36; Secondary: 92B05

  • A model of irrigation network, where lower branches must be thicker in order to support the weight of the higher ones, was recently introduced in [7]. This leads to a countable family of ODEs, describing the thickness of every branch, solved by backward induction. The present paper determines what kind of measures can be irrigated with a finite weighted cost. Indeed, the boundedness of the cost depends on the dimension of the support of the irrigated measure, and also on the asymptotic properties of the ODE which determines the thickness of branches.

    Citation: Qing Sun. Irrigable measures for weighted irrigation plans[J]. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2021, 16(3): 493-511. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2021014

    Related Papers:

    [1] Qing Sun . Irrigable measures for weighted irrigation plans. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2021, 16(3): 493-511. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2021014
    [2] Xin Yang Lu . Regularity of densities in relaxed and penalized average distance problem. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2015, 10(4): 837-855. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2015.10.837
    [3] Rudy R. Negenborn, Peter-Jules van Overloop, Tamás Keviczky, Bart De Schutter . Distributed model predictive control of irrigation canals. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2009, 4(2): 359-380. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2009.4.359
    [4] Didier Georges . Infinite-dimensional nonlinear predictive control design for open-channel hydraulic systems. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2009, 4(2): 267-285. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2009.4.267
    [5] Thibault Liard, Raphael Stern, Maria Laura Delle Monache . A PDE-ODE model for traffic control with autonomous vehicles. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2023, 18(3): 1190-1206. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2023051
    [6] Ling Zhang, Xuewen Tan, Jia Li, Fan Yang . Dynamic analysis and optimal control of leptospirosis based on Caputo fractional derivative. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2024, 19(3): 1262-1285. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2024054
    [7] Vincent Renault, Michèle Thieullen, Emmanuel Trélat . Optimal control of infinite-dimensional piecewise deterministic Markov processes and application to the control of neuronal dynamics via Optogenetics. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2017, 12(3): 417-459. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2017019
    [8] Xiaoqian Gong, Benedetto Piccoli . A measure model for the spread of viral infections with mutations. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2022, 17(3): 427-442. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2022015
    [9] João M. Lemos, Fernando Machado, Nuno Nogueira, Luís Rato, Manuel Rijo . Adaptive and non-adaptive model predictive control of an irrigation channel. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2009, 4(2): 303-324. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2009.4.303
    [10] Wen Dong, Dongling Wang . Mittag-Leffler stability of numerical solutions to linear homogeneous time fractional parabolic equations. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2023, 18(3): 946-956. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2023041
  • A model of irrigation network, where lower branches must be thicker in order to support the weight of the higher ones, was recently introduced in [7]. This leads to a countable family of ODEs, describing the thickness of every branch, solved by backward induction. The present paper determines what kind of measures can be irrigated with a finite weighted cost. Indeed, the boundedness of the cost depends on the dimension of the support of the irrigated measure, and also on the asymptotic properties of the ODE which determines the thickness of branches.



    In a ramified transport network [1, 2, 14, 15, 16, 17], the Gilbert transport cost along each arc is computed by

    [length]×[flux]α (1)

    for some given α[0,1]. When α<1, this accounts for an economy of scale: transporting the same amount of particles is cheaper if these particles travel together along the same arc.

    In the recent paper [7], the authors considered an irrigation plan where the cost per unit length is determined by a weight function W. The main motivation behind this model is that, for a free standing structure like a tree, the lower portion of each branch needs to bear the weight of the upper part. Hence, even if the flux of water and nutrients is constant along a branch, the thickness (and hence the cost per unit length) grows as one moves from the tip toward the root. In the variational problems of optimal tree roots and branches[4, 6], this 'weighted irrigation cost" is more suitable to model the associated cost for transporting water and nutrients from the roots to the leaves.

    In this model, the weights are constructed inductively, starting from the outermost branches and proceeding toward the root. Along each branch, the weight W is determined by solving a suitable ODE, possibly with measure-valued right hand side. This is more conveniently written in the integral form

    W(s)=sf(W(σ))dσ+m(s), (2)

    where s[0,] is the arc-length parameter along the branch, sm(s) is a non-increasing function describing the flux, and f is a non-negative, continuous function. A natural set of assumptions on f is

    (A1) The function f:R+R+ is continuous on [0,+[, twice continuously differentiable for z>0, and satisfies

    f(0)=0,f(z)>0,f(z)0z>0. (3)

    The main result in [7] established the lower semicontinuity of the weighted irrigation cost, w.r.t. the pointwise convergence of irrigation plans. In particular, for any positive, bounded Radon measure μ, if there is an admissible irrigation plan whose weighted cost is finite, then there exists an irrigation plan for μ with minimum cost.

    The goal of the present paper is to understand whether a given Radon measure μ irrigable or not, with respect to the weighted irrigation cost. That is, whether there exists an irrigation plan for μ whose weighted irrigation cost is finite. In the case without weights, i.e., with the classical Gilbert cost (1), this problem has been studied in [8], and further investigated in [3, 9, 10]. The authors in [8] proved that if a measure μ is α-irrigable, then it must be concentrated on a set with Hausdorff dimension 11α. On the other hand, if α>11d, every bounded Radon measure with bounded support in Rd has finite irrigation cost [1, 8].

    As shown by our analysis, in the presence of weights the irrigability of a measure μ depends on the dimension of the set where μ is concentrated, on the exponent α, and also on the asymptotic behavior of the function f(z) as z0+.

    The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the construction of the weight functions on the various branches of an irrigation plan. In Section 3 we prove our main results on the irrigability of Radon measures.

    To illustrate the basic idea of the weighted irrigation model, we first consider a network with finitely many branches. As shown on the left of Fig. 1, each directed branch will be denoted by γi:[ai,bi]Rd,i=1,,N, oriented from the root toward the tip and parameterized by arc-length. Call Pi=γi(bi) the ending node of the branch γi.

    Figure 1. 

    Left: A free standing tree with 5 branches. In this example, O(1)={2,3},O(3)={4,5},O(2)=O(4)=O(5)=. Right: On each branch, the weight decreases as one moves from the lower portion to the tip

    .

    On each branch γi, we first prescribe a left-continuous, non-increasing function mi:[ai,bi]R+, which can be interpreted as the 'flux" along the branch. Roughly speaking, mi(t) is the amount of mass transported through the point γi(t).

    Call O(i) the set of index labelling the branches that originate from the node Pi=γi(bi), that is

    O(i)={j{1,,N};γj(aj)=Pi}. (4)

    Moreover, consider the sets of indices inductively defined by

    I1{i{1,,N};O(i)=},Ik+1{i{1,,N};O(i)I1Ik}(I1Ik). (5)

    From [7] the weight function Wi() on each branch γi is defined inductively on Ik,k1.

    (i) For k=1, on each branch γi:[ai,bi]Rd with iI1, the weight Wi:[ai,bi]R+ is defined to be the solution of

    ω(t)=bitf(ω(s))ds+mi(t),t]ai,bi], (6)

    where f is a given function, satisfying (A1), and mi is the flux along the branch.

    (ii) Assume the weight functions Wi(t) have already been constructed along all branches γj:[aj,bj]Rd with jI1Ik1.

    For iIk, the weight Wi(t) along the i-th branch is defined to be the solution of

    ω(t)=bitf(ω(s))ds+mi(t)+¯ωi,t]ai,bi], (7)

    where

    ¯ωijO(i)Wj(a+j)jO(i)mj(a+j). (8)

    Following Maddalena, Morel, and Solimini [15], the transport network for general Radon measure can be described in a Lagrangian way. Let μ be a fixed Radon measure on Rd with μ(Rd)=M and let Θ=[0,M]. We think of θΘ as a Lagrangian variable, labelling a water particle. An irrigation plan for μ is a function

    χ:Θ×R+Rd,

    measurable w.r.t. θ and continuous w.r.t. t, which satisfies the following conditions:

    ● All particles initially lie at the origin: χ(θ,0)=0,θΘ.

    ● For a.e. θΘ the map tχ(θ,t) is 1-Lipschitz and constant for t large. Namely, there exists τ(θ)0 such that

    {|χ(θ,t)χ(θ,s)||ts|for allt,s0,χ(θ,t)=χ(θ,τ(θ))for everytτ(θ).

    Throughout the following, τ(θ) will denote the smallest time τ such that χ(θ,) is constant for tτ.

    χ irrigates the measure μ. That is, for each Borel set VRd,

    μ(V)=meas({θΘ;χ(θ,τ(θ))V}).

    One can think of χ(θ,t) as the position of particle θ at time t.

    To define the flux on χ, which measures the total amount of particles travelling along the same path, we first need an equivalence relation between two Lipschitz maps.

    Definition 2.1. We say that two 1-Lipschitz maps γ:[0,t]Rd and ˜γ:[0,˜t]Rd are equivalent if they are parametrizations of the same curve, and write it as γ˜γ. When we use the arc-length re-parametrization

    σγ(s(σ)),wheres(σ)0|˙γ(t)|dt=σ,

    then two 1-Lipschitz maps are equivalent means their arc-length re-parametrizations coincide.

    Throughout the following, we denote by γ|[0,t] the restriction of a map γ to the interval [0,t].

    Definition 2.2. Let χ:Θ×R+Rd be an irrigation plan for the measure μ. On the set Θ×R+, we write (θ,t)(θ,t) whenever χ(θ,)|[0,t]χ(θ,)|[0,t]. This means that the maps

    sχ(θ,s),s[0,t]andsχ(θ,s),s[0,t]

    are equivalent in the sense of Definition 2.1.

    The multiplicity at (θ,t) is then defined as

    m(θ,t)meas({θΘ;(θ,t)(θ,t)for somet>0}). (9)

    Given an irrigation plan χ:Θ×R+Rd, in order to have finite weighted irrigation cost constructed in the next section, we should always assume the following conditon.

    (A2) For a.e. θΘ, one has m(θ,t)>0 for every 0t<τ(θ).

    Given a bounded Radon measure μ in Rd and an irrigation plan χ:Θ×R+Rd for μ, in this section we review the construction of the weight function W=W(θ,t) on the irrigation plan. Notice that for an irrigation plan χ of a general Radon measure, for each particle θΘ, the map χ(θ,):R+Rd describes a continuous curve in Rd. Thus χ may contain infinitely many branches. To construct the weight function on each branch, the idea is to first compute the weights Wε on χε, which is the truncation of χ on the branches with multiplicity ε. It turns out that χε only consists of finitely many branches, so that we can compute Wε as in Section 2.1. The weight W is then constructed by taking the limit of Wε, as ε0+.

    Definition 2.3. Given an irrigation plan χ, a path γ:[0,]Rd, parameterized by arc-length, is ε-good if and only if

    meas({θΘ;χ(θ,)|[0,t]γfor somet=t(θ)>0})ε, (10)

    where the equivalence relation is given in Definition 2.1.

    In other words, γ is ε-good if there is an amount ε of particles whose trajectory contains γ as initial portion.

    For any given ε>0, following [7] we define the ε-stopping time τε:ΘR+ by setting

    τε(θ)max{t0;m(θ,t)ε}. (11)

    Define the ε-truncation χε of irrigation plan χ as

    χε(θ,t){χ(θ,t) if t<τε(θ)χ(θ,τε(θ)) if tτε(θ) (12)

    In other words, in the ε-truncation χε, only those paths in χ with multiplicity ε are kept. For any θΘ, if τε(θ)>0, the ε-good portion χ(θ,)|[0,τε(θ)] of the path tχ(θ,) is included in χε.

    Notice that the family of all curves parameterized by arc-length comes with a natural partial order. Namely, given two maps γ:[0,]Rd, ˜γ:[0,˜]Rd, we write γ˜γ if ˜ and γ(s)=˜γ(s) for all s[0,]. In the family of all ε-good paths in the irrigation plan χ, we can thus find the maximal ε-good paths, w.r.t the above partial order. As shown in [7], the total number of maximal ε-good paths in the irrigation plan χ is bounded by Mε, where M is the total mass of μ. Therefore, the ε-truncation χε is a network with finitely many branches, consisting of all maximal ε-good paths in χ.

    For a fixed ε>0, to compute the weight functions on the ε-truncation χε, we now let {ˆγ1,,ˆγν} be the set of all maximal ε-good paths. Along each path ˆγi:[0,ˆi]Rd we define the multiplicity ˆmi:[0,ˆi]R+ by setting

    ˆmi(s)meas({θΘ;thereexistst0suchthatχ(θ,)|[0,t]ˆγi|[0,s]}). (13)

    Since two maximal paths may coincide on the initial portion and bifurcate later, we consider the bifurcation times

    τij=τjimax{t0;ˆγi(s)=ˆγj(s)s[0,t]}. (14)

    For each maximal path ˆγi, we split it into several elementary branches γk, by the following Path Splitting Algorithm(PSA), which is first introduced in [7].

    (PSA) For each i{1,,ν}, consider the set

    {τi1,,τiν}={ti,1,,ti,N(i)},

    where the times

    0=ti,0<ti,1<ti,2<<ti,N(i)<ˆi (15)

    provide an increasing arrangement of the set of times τij where the path ˆγi splits apart from other maximal paths. For each k=1,,N(i), let γi,k be the restriction of the maximal path ˆγi to the subinterval [ti,k1,ti,k]. The multiplicity function mi,k along this path is defined simply as

    mi,k(t)=ˆmi(t),t[ti,k1,ti,k]. (16)

    If τij>0, i.e. if the two maximal paths ˆγi and ˆγj partially overlap, it is clear that some of the elementary branches γi,k will coincide with some γj,l. To avoid listing multiple times the same branch, we thus remove from our list all branches γj,l:[tj,l1,tj,l]Rd such that tj,lτij for some i<j. After relabeling all the remaining branches, the algorithm yields a family of elementary branches and corresponding multiplicities

    γi:[ai,bi]Rd,mi:[ai,bi]R+,i=1,,N (17)

    where N is the total number of elementary branches.

    Figure 2. 

    Left: Two finite truncation plans, showing three maximal ε-good paths (thick lines) and six maximal ε-good paths (thin lines), for 0<ε<ε. Right: The three maximal ε-good paths can be partitioned into five elementary branches, by the Path Splitting Algorithm

    .

    On these elementary branches γi,i1, we can compute the weight function Wi on each γi inductively, as in Section 2.1.

    On each maximal ε-good path ˆγi with 1iν, the above construction yields a weight ˆWi,k on the restriction of ˆγi to each subinterval [ti,k1,ti,k]. Along the maximal path ˆγi, the weight ˆWi:[0,ˆi]R+ is then defined simply by setting

    ˆWi(t)=ˆWi,k(t)ift[ti,k1,ti,k]. (18)

    Next, on the ε-truncation χε we define the weight function Wε:Θ×R+R+ by setting

    Wε(θ,t){ˆWi(s)iftτε(θ),χ(θ,)|[0,t]ˆγi|[0,s],0ift>τε(θ). (19)

    As proved in [7], the map εWε(θ,t) is nondecreasing for each (θ,t). This leads to:

    Definition 2.4. Let χ:Θ×R+Rd be an irrigation plan satisfying (A2). The weight function W=W(θ,t) for χ is defined as

    W(θ,t)supε>0Wε(θ,t). (20)

    Once we computed the weight functions on the irrigation plan χ, its weighted irrigation cost EW,α is defined as follows:

    Definition 2.5. Let f:R+R+ be a continuous function, satisfying all the assumptions in (A1). Let χ be an irrigation plan satisfying (A2) and let WW(θ,t) be the corresponding weight function, as in (20). The weighted cost EW,α for some α[0,1] is

    EW,α(χ)M0τ(θ)0(W(θ,t))αm(θ,t)|˙χ(θ,t)|dtdθ. (21)

    In the special case where χ consists of only finitely many branches, let Wi be the corresponding weight functions on the branch γi:[ai,bi]R+, by applying the change of variable formula, we have the following identity for the weighted irrigation costs[7]:

    EW,α(χ)=Ni=1biai[Wi(s)]αds, (22)

    where N is the total number of branches.

    In this section we recall the main theorems on the lower semicontinuity of weighted irrigation cost, proved in [7]. Given a sequence of irrigation plans χn:Θ×R+Rd, we say that χn converges to χ pointwise if, for every κ>0 and a.e. θΘ,

    limnχn(θ,)χ(θ,)L([0,κ])=0. (23)

    Theorem 2.6. Let (χn)n1 be a sequence of irrigation plans, all satisfying (A2), pointwise converging to an irrigation plan χ. Assume that the function f satisfies (A1). Then

    EW,α(χ)lim infnEW,α(χn). (24)

    Given a positive, bounded Radon measure μ on Rd, we define the weighted irrigation cost IW,α(μ) of μ as

    IW,α(μ)infχEW,α(χ), (25)

    where the infimum is taken over all irrigation plans for the measure μ, and EW,α is defined as in (21). By Theorem 2.6, if there is an irrigation plan for μ with finite weighted irrigation cost, then the infimum in (25) is actually a minimum. That is, there exists an optimal irrigation plan χ of μ, such that the weighted irrigation cost EW,α(χ) is minimum among all admissible irrigation plans, and IW,α(μ)=EW,α(χ).

    The next result states the lower semicontinuity of the weighted irrigation cost, w.r.t. weak convergence of measures. For a proof, see Theorem 6.2 in [7].

    Theorem 2.7. Let f satisfies (A1). Let (μn)n1 be a sequence of bounded positive Radon measures, with uniformly bounded supports, such that weakly converges to some μ. Then

    IW,α(μ)lim infnIW,α(μn). (26)

    When f=0, α>11d, it is well known that all measures with bounded support and finite mass in Rd are α-irrigable [1, 8].

    Here is a formal computation in this direction. It is obtained by modifying the estimates at p. 113 of [1].

    Let μ be a probability measure that supported in B(0,1)Rd. For each j=1,,n, let Pj be the set of centers of balls of radius rj=2j that cover Supp(μ). In dimension d, we can assume that the cardinality of this set is

    #PjC2jd

    We can define a map γj:PjPj1 such that

    |xγj(x)|32j

    for every xPj, with P0{0}.

    Consider a probability measure μn, supported on Pn. The cost of transporting this measure from Pn to another measure supported on Pn1 is

    Eα(Pn,Pn1)[number of arcs]×[flow]α×[length]C2nd(1C2nd)α32n=3C1α(2αdd+1)n. (27)

    Notice that we are here considering the worst possible case, where we have the largest number of arcs and all arcs carry equal flow.

    Summing over j=1,2,,n we obtain that the total transportation cost is bounded by

    Eα3C1αnj=1(2αdd+1)j3C1α2αdd+11. (28)

    The series k2[(d1)αd](k+1) converges provided that

    (d1)αd<0,henceα>11d

    To understand what happens in the case where weights are present, we first make an explicit computation in the case of a dyadic irrigation plan [1, 16]. More precisely, as shown in Fig. 3, we now assume

    Figure 3. 

    Left: The dyadic approxmiated measure μ1 is supported on the four centers x11,,x14 of small cubes. Right: Dyadic approximated measures corresponding to a family of partitions into dyadic cubes in R2

    .

    μ = Radon measure with total mass M, concentrated on a cube Q in Rd. Q is centered at the origin and with edge size L>0.

    For each n1, we divide Q into 2nd smaller cubes of equal size, with edge size L/2n. Take {Qni}2ndi=1 the set of all these closed smaller cubes, call Pn{xni}2ndi=1 the set of centers of these smaller cubes of edge size L/2n. For each n1, define the dyadic approximated measure μn

    μnxniPnmniδxni, (29)

    where δxni is the Dirac measure at xni, and mni is determined as

    ˆQniQnij<iQnj,mniμ(ˆQni),1i2nd.

    It is not hard to show that μn weakly converges to μ, see for example [1, 16]. That is, for any bounded continuous function ϕ:RdR, one has ϕdμnϕdμ. For each μn, we construct an irrigation plan χn as follows:

    ● First, move the particles from the origin (center of Q) to the centers in P1, with 2d straight paths connecting the origin and the centers in P1={x11,x12,,x12d}. Each path has length dL4, on the path that connecting x1i,1i2d, the multiplicity is constant m1i.

    ● By induction, at the level k,1<kn, for the particles arriving at each center xk1i in Pk1, where xk1i is the center of the cube Qk1i, we transport them to the 2d neighboring centers in Pk, which are all contained in the cube Qk1i. Without loss of generality, fixed xk1i in Pk1, let {xk1,,xk2d} be the 2d neighboring centers around xk1i. For each xkj,1j2d, we build a straight path connecting xk1i to xkj, with length dL2k+1 and constant multiplicity mkj.

    Since the dyadic measure μn is supported on the centers in Pn, after n steps we build an irrigation plan for μn, which we call the dyadic irrigation plan χn.

    For example, in the case R2, Fig. 4 shows two dyadic irrigation plans constructed by the preceding procedure.

    Figure 4. 

    The dyadic irrigation plans in R2. Left: The dyadic irrigation plan χ1. The multiplicity on each branch equals to the mass on the terminal point. Right: The dyadic irrigation plan χ2. The particles are first transported to the 4 centers in P1, then on each center in P1, the particles are transported to the neighboring 4 centers in P2

    .

    Given an irrigation plan with finite branches as in Section 2.1, consider the case f(z)czβ, with some constant c>0,0<β<1. It is readily to check that f satisfies (A1). With the notions in Section 2.1, consider a measure μ consisting of finitely many point masses mi0 located at points Pi, where Pi is the ending node of branch γi(s):[0,i]Rd. In this case, the multiplicity function on each branch is constant. Then the computation of weights (6)-(8) becomes

    Wi(s)=(¯W1βi+c(1β)(is))11β,¯Wi=mi+jO(i)(¯W1βj+c(1β)j)11β. (30)

    If O(i)=, that is iI1, from (30) we have ¯Wi=mi.

    The following two lemmas proved that under suitable conditions, the weighted irrigation costs of the dyadic irrigation plans {χn}n1 are uniformly bounded. Utilizing this fact and Theorem 2.7, since the dyadic approximated measures μn weakly converges to μ, we can conclude the irrigability of μ with weighted cost.

    To fix the ideas, we first consider the case that μ is the Lebesgue measure on the unit cube Q.

    Lemma 3.1. Suppose 1>β>11d, 1α>11d, while μ is the Lebesgue measure on the unit cube Q in Rd. Then, in the dyadic irrigation plans χn, the weight function Wn remains uniformly bounded on all branches. Moreover, the irrigation cost EW,α(χn) is uniformly bounded. That is, there exists an uniform constant C>0, such that for all dyadic irrigation plan χn,

    WnC,EW,α(χn)C. (31)

    Proof. For the dyadic irrigation plan χn, since each dyadic irrigation plan has finite branches and μn is supported on the centers in Pn, we can use formula (30) to compute the weights Wn. We start from the centers in Pn.

    1. From Pn to Pn1, for each xn1iPn1, by the construction of the dyadic irrigation plan χn, there are straight paths connecting xn1i to the 2d neighboring centers in Pn. Since μ is the Lebesgue measure on unit cube Q, mass on each center in Pn is 12nd. The branches connecting xn1i to centers in Pn are identical, with branch length d/2n+1 and constant multiplicity 1/2nd. We only need to compute the weight on one such branch, and write it as Wnn, where the superindex n means it is the weight for irrigation plan χn, and the subindex n means from Pn to Pn1.

    By formula (30), for s[0,d2n+1],

    Wnn(s)=((12nd)1β+c(1β)(d2n+1s))11β, (32)
    Wnn(0)=((12nd)1β+c(1β)d2n+1)11β. (33)

    2. From Pn1 to Pn2, using formula (30), on each branch we need to first compute the weights ¯Wnn1 at the tip. For the dyadic approximated measure μn, it is supported on Pn, thus the mass on each center in Pk,kn is 0. Since each center in Pn2 connects 2d identical centers in Pn1, we therefore have

    ¯Wnn1=2dWnn(0)=2d((12nd)1β+c(1β)d2n+1)11β. (34)

    Each branch between Pn2 and Pn1 has length d2n. By formula (30), for s[0,d2n],

    Wnn1(s)=(2d(1β)[(12nd)1β+c(1β)d2n+1]+c(1β)(d2ns))11β, (35)
    Wnn1(0)=((12(n1)d)1β+c(1β)[d2n+1d(1β)+d2n])11β. (36)

    3. From Pnk to Pnk1, each branch has length d2n+1k. Similarly for s[0,d2n+1k],

    Wnnk(s)=((12(nk)d)1β+c(1β)d2n+1kj=12(kj)+jd(1β)+c(1β)(d2n+1ks))11β, (37)
    Wnnk(0)=((12(nk)d)1β+c(1β)d2n+1kj=02(kj)+jd(1β))11β=((12(nk)d)1β+c(1β)d2n+1kkj=012[1d(1β)]j)11β. (38)

    4. Since Wnnk(s)Wnnk(0), to have an uniform bound on the weight function, we only need to estimate Wnnk(0), for each 0kn1. Indeed, When β>11/d, one has 1d(1β)>0, then for each k, from (38),

    Wnnk(0)((12(nk)d)1β+c(1β)d2n+1k11(12)1d(1β))11β. (39)

    Therefore, we have an uniform bound for the weight function

    Wn(1+c(1β)d1(12)1d(1β))11β, (40)

    which is independent of n.

    5. We now estimate the irrigation cost EW,α(χn) by the formula (22). Fixed the dyadic irrigation plan χn, call Enn the cost from Pn to Pn1. There are 2nd branches from centers in Pn to centers in Pn1. On each branch, the weight Wnn is given by (32). Therefore,

    Enn=2ndd2n+10((12nd)1β+c(1β)(d2n+1s))α1βds=2ndc(1+αβ)([(12nd)1β+c(1β)d2n+1]1+αβ1β[(12nd)1β]1+αβ1β). (41)

    Similarly, denote Ennk the cost from Pnk to Pnk1. There are 2(nk)d branches from centers in Pnk to centers in Pnk1.

    Ennk=2(nk)dd2n+1k0((¯Wnnk)1β+c(1β)(d2n+1ks))α1βds (42)

    In the following, we use the same C to denote different constants which only depend on c,α,β and the dimension d. From (39) and the fact that (1β)d<1, for each n and k,

    (¯Wnnk)1β+c(1β)d2n+1kC2(nk)(1β)d. (43)

    Consider x,y0,

    g(x,y)(x+y)1+αβ1βx1+αβ1β,x+yC2(nk)(1β)d (44)

    then, by a first order Taylor expansion,

    g(x,y)1+αβ1β(C2(nk)(1β)d)α1βyCy2(nk)αd (45)

    Applying (43) and (45) in (42), we obtain

    Ennk2(nk)dC2(nk)(αd+1)=C2(nk)[(α1)d+1]. (46)

    When α>11/d, one has (α1)d+1>0. Then by (46),

    EW,α(χn)=n1k=0Ennkn1k=0C2(nk)[(α1)d+1]C1(12)(α1)d+1, (47)

    where C is some constant independent of n. Combining the estimates (40) and (47), we obtain the existence of a constant C, independent of n, such that (31) holds.

    Under the same conditions on α,β, this uniform boundedness result holds for general positive, finite Radon measures.

    Lemma 3.2. Suppose 11d<β<1, 11d<α1. μ is a finite measure on the cube Q with edge size L in Rd, denote M the total mass of μ. Then in the dyadic irrigation plan χn, the weight function Wn on each branch remains uniformly bounded,

    WnC(M1β+L)11β, (48)

    Moreover, the irrigation cost EW,α(χn) is uniformly bounded, namely

    EW,α(χn)C(MαL+L1+α1β) (49)

    where C is some constant independent of n.

    Proof. For the dyadic irrigation plan χn, to compute the weights Wn, we start from the centers in Pn.

    1. From Pn to Pn1. Let mni be the mass of μn on the center xni in Pn. On the branch from xni to any center in Pn1, the arc-length of the branch is dL2n+1 and the multiplicity is constant mni. Let Wnn,i be the corresponding weights, where the superindex n means we consider the weight function on irrigation plan χn, the subindex (n,i) means we consider the weight on the i-th branch from Pn to Pn1. Then by formula (30), for s[0,dL2n+1],

    Wnn,i(s)=((mni)1β+c(1β)(dL2n+1s))11β, (50)
    Wnn,i(0)=((mni)1β+c(1β)dL2n+1)11β. (51)

    2. From Pn1 to Pn2. For each center xn1i in Pn1, to compute the weight Wnn1,i from xn1i to any center in Pn2, we first estimate ¯Wnn1,i. Each xn1i in Pn1 connects 2d nearby centers in Pn. By (30) and (51) one has,

    ¯Wnn1,i=jO(i)Wnn,j(0)=jO(i)((mnj)1β+c(1β)dL2n+1)11β. (52)

    Notice for fixed b0, g(x)(x1β+b)11β is a concave function of x on R+. Thus for any N,

    1NNj=1(x1βj+b)11β((Nj=1xjN)1β+b)11β. (53)

    For each i, the cardinality of the set O(i) in (52) is 2d. From (52)-(53),

    ¯Wnn1,i2d[(jO(i)mnj2d)1β+c(1β)dL2n+1]11β. (54)

    Each branch from xn1i to Pn2 has length dL2n. By the formula (30), for s[0,dL2n],

    Wnn1,i(s)=((¯Wnn1,i)1β+c(1β)(dL2ns))11β((jO(i)mnj)1β+c(1β)[dL2n+1d(1β)+(dL2ns)])11β, (55)
    Wnn1,i(0)((jO(i)mnj)1β+c(1β)[dL2n+1d(1β)+dL2n])11β. (56)

    3. From Pn2 to Pn3. For each center xn2i in Pn2, according to (56),

    ¯Wnn2,i=kO(i)Wnn1,k(0)kO(i)((jO(k)mnj)1β+c(1β)[dL2n+1d(1β)+dL2n])11β. (57)

    Using the concavity inequality (53),

    ¯Wnn2,i2d[(kO(i),jO(k)mnj2d)1β+c(1β)[dL2n+1d(1β)+dL2n]]11β

    In the following, for each center xki in Pk, if there is a concatenated path from xki to center xnjPn in the dyadic irrigation plan χn, we say ij. With this notation, the above estimate can be written as

    ¯Wnn2,i2d[(ijmnj2d)1β+c(1β)[dL2n+1d(1β)+dL2n]]11β. (58)

    Each branch from xn2i to Pn3 has length dL2n1. By the formula (30), for s[0,dL2n1],

    Wnn2,i(s)=((¯Wnn2,i)1β+c(1β)(dL2n1s))11β((ijmnj)1β+c(1β)[dL2n+12d(1β)+dL2nd(1β)+(dL2n1s)])11β
    Wnn2,i(0)((ijmnj)1β+c(1β)[dL2n+12d(1β)+dL2nd(1β)+dL2n1])11β

    4. From Pnk to Pnk1. Similarly we have,

    ¯Wnnk,i2d((ijmnj2d)1β+c(1β)dL2n+2kk1l=012[1d(1β)]l)11β, (59)
    Wnnk,i(s)((ijmnj)1β+c(1β)dL2n+1kkl=112[1d(1β)]l+c(1β)(dL2n+1ks))11β, (60)
    Wnnk,i(0)((ijmnj)1β+c(1β)dL2n+1kkl=012[1d(1β)]l)11β. (61)

    5. Since Wnnk,i(s)Wnnk,i(0), to have an uniform bound on the weight function, we only need to estimate Wnnk,i(0), for each 0kn1,1i2d(nk). When β>11/d, one has 1d(1β)>0. From formula (61),

    Wnnk,i(0)((ijmnj)1β+c(1β)dL2n+1k11121d(1β))11β. (62)

    Since ijmnjM, if denote Wn the weights on dyadic irrigation plan χn, from (62) there is an uniform bound for the weight function

    Wn(M1β+c(1β)dL1121d(1β))11βC(M1β+L)11β (63)

    where we use the same C to denote all constants independent of n. This completes the proof of (48).

    6. We now estimate the irrigation cost EW,α(χn) by formula (22). In the dyadic irrigation plan χn, let Enn be the cost from Pn to Pn1, by (50),

    Enn=xniPndL2n+10(Wnn,i(s))αds=xniPndL2n+10((mni)1β+c(1β)(dL2n+1s))α1βds. (64)

    Similarly, denote Ennk the cost from Pnk to Pnk1,

    Ennk=xnkiPnkdL2n+1k0(Wnnk,i(s))αds (65)

    From (61) and the non-decreasing of Wnnk,i(s),

    EnnkxnkiPnkdL2n+1k((ijmnj)1β+c(1β)dL2n+1k(1121d(1β)))α1βxnkiPnk[CL(ijmnj)α2n+1k+CL1+α1β2(n+1k)(α1β+1)]Ink+Jnk (66)

    where C is some constant that only depends on α,β,c and on the dimension d. The cardinality of Pnk is 2(nk)d. Therefore

    JnkxnkiPnkCL1+α1β2(n+1k)(α1β+1)CL1+α1β2(nk)(1+α1βd). (67)

    On the other hand, 1α>0, by elementary concavity inequality,

    InkxnkiPnkCL(ijmnj)α2n+1k2(nk)d(xnkiPnkijmnj2(nk)d)αCL2n+1kCMαL2(nk)[1d(1α)]. (68)

    When 1α>11/d and 1>β>11/d, one has

    1d(1α)>0,1+α1βd>0. (69)

    Therefore, using (66)-(68),

    EW,α(χn)=n1k=0Ennkn1k=0[Ink+Jnk]Cnj=0[LMα2[1d(1α)]j+L1+α1β2(1+α1βd)j]C(LMα+L1+α1β) (70)

    where C is some constant independent of n. This completes the proof of (49).

    By the previous results, when f(z)czβ in (6)-(8), with the conditions in Lemma 3.2, we have the uniform bounds (49) for the dyadic irrigation plan sequence {χn}n1. Since each χn is an admissible irrigation plan for μn, by the definition (25), we have a uniform bound on all the irrigation costs IW,α(μn), n1. By the weak convergence μnμ and the lower semicontinuity of the irrigation cost, stated in Theorem 2.7, we conclude IW,α(μ)<+.

    By a comparison argument we can now prove the irrigability for a wide class of functions f and measures μ, with the weighted irrigation cost IW,α in (25).

    Theorem 3.3. Let μ be a positive, bounded Radon measure in Rd, with total mass M>0 and supported in the cube Q of edge size L>0. Assume α>11d, f satisfies (A1) and

    lim supz0+zβf(z)<+ (71)

    for some 1>β>11d. Then IW,α(μ)<+.

    Proof. The assumptions (71) and (A1) together imply that

    f(z)czβz[0,211βz0],f(z)czz[z0,), (72)

    with some constants c,z0>0. We will prove that the weighted irrigation costs of the dyadic approximated measures μn, defined as in (29), are uniformly bounded. Since μn weakly converges to μ, by Theorem 2.7, this uniform bound implies the boundedness of IW,α(μ).

    It suffices to prove the uniform bound for dyadic approximated measures μn=xniPnmniδxni with nn0, where n0 is some fixed integer. Choose n0 large enough such that in (62),

    c(1β)dL2n0(1121d(1β))<z1β0. (73)

    In the following, we construct the irrigation plan for μn with uniformly bounded weighted cost.

    1. Consider first from Pn to Pn1. For those xni such that mniz0, we transport the particles at xni along a straight path directly to the origin. Let Sn be the set of all such paths. For each path in Sn, the multiplicity is larger than z0 and bounded by M. The length of path is bounded by dL. Let W(t) be the weight function on these paths, then clearly W(t)z0. By formula (6)-(8) and (72) the weight satisfies

    W(t)dLtf(W(s))ds+MdLtcW(s)ds+MecdLM. (74)

    On the other hand, for the remaining centers xni, we transport the particles from Pn to Pn1, using the branches of the dyadic irrigation plan χn, defined as in Lemma 3.2. Notice on each such branch, mni<z0. Then from (51) and (73), the weight Wnn,i:[0,dL2n+1]R+ on the branch γi from Pn to Pn1 satisfies

    Wnn,i(s)=((mni)1β+c(1β)dL2n+1)11β(z1β0+z1β0)11β=211βz0, (75)

    where we compute the weight Wnn,i as solution to ˙Wnn,i=c(Wnn,i)β. Let Wi be the corresponding solution of (6) with mi(t) replaced by constant multiplicity mni, by (72) and comparision principle from ODE theory,

    Wi(s)Wnn,i(s). (76)

    Then clearly the total cost on these dyadic branches from Pn to Pn1 is bounded by Enn, given in (64).

    2. From Pn1 to Pn2. After removing the point masses transported by branches in Sn, we still denote the remaining measure as μn, and transport μn to the centers in Pn1, using the branches from Pn to Pn1 of the dyadic irrigation plan χn. Notice that after removing the masses transported by branches in Sn, mniz0 for each 1i2nd, with some mni=0.

    For each center xn1i in Pn1, when

    jO(i)mnjz0 (77)

    we then connect xn1i to the origin directly by a straight branch. Let Sn1 be the set of all such branches. Similarly as in (74), the weight on each branch in Sn1 is bounded by ecdLM. For the remaining xn1i, we transport the flux from Pn1 to Pn2, by the branches of dyadic irrigation plan χn. From (62) and (72)-(73), on each dyadic branch γi from Pn1 to Pn2,

    Wi(s)Wnn1,i(s)<211βz0,s[0,dL2n]. (78)

    Then clearly the total cost on these dyadic branches from Pn1 to Pn2 is bounded by Enn1, defined by (65).

    3. By backward induction we construct the irrigation plan until to the level Pn0. For each k>n0, from Pk to Pk1, there are two types of paths, one is the branches in Sk, and the other one is the dyadic branches of χn. Clearly we have

    #(nk>n0Sk)Mz0 (79)

    where M is the total mass of μ. Indeed, from our construction, each branch in nk>n0Sk will transport distinct groups of particles with mass z0, the total mass of μn is M, thus we have the upper bound in (79). For each branch in Sk, there is an uniform bound (74) on the weight W(t), and the length of each branch is bounded by dL, thus the total cost J on branches in Sk,k>n0 is bounded by

    JMz0(ecdLM)αdLκ0 (80)

    On the other hand, the total cost I on the dyadic branches is bounded by

    Ink>n0EnkC(MαL+L1+α1β)κ1 (81)

    where the last inequality comes from (49).

    Notice the bounds in (80)-(81) are independent of n, therefore, there exists a uniform constant C>0, such that for each dyadic approximation μn, we have IW,α(μn)C. Thanks to Theorem 2.7, we conclude that IW,α(μ)C.

    In the following we show some cases for measures μ with infinite weighted irrigation cost IW,α.

    Definition 3.4. Let μ be a positive, bounded measure in Rd. If there exists γ>0 and a constant C1 such that

    1Crγμ(B(x,r))Crγ,xsupp(μ),r[0,1], (82)

    then we say μ is Ahlfors regular in dimension γ. Here supp(μ) is the support of μ, B(x,r) is the ball of radius r that centered at x.

    Remark 1. If a measure μ is Ahlfors regular in dimension γ, then one can prove supp(μ) has Hausdorff dimension γ. Indeed, consider any covering i=1B(xi,ri) of supp(μ), consists of closed balls with radius less than 1. From the second inequality in (82) one has

    i1(ri)γi1μ(B(xi,ri))CMC>0,

    which implies supp(μ) has Hausdorff dimension γ. On the other hand, by the Vitali's Convering Theorem[11], there exists a countable subcollection of disjoint B(xi,ri), which we still denote as i=1B(xi,ri), such that supp(μ)i=1B(xi,5ri). Then from the first inequality in (82), since B(xi,ri) are disjoint,

    i1(5ri)γ=5γi1rγi5γCi1μ(B(xi,ri))5βCM,

    and it implies the Hausdorff dimension of supp(μ) γ.

    For the irrigation cost Iα() without weights that defined in [15], we recall the following theorem. For a proof, see Theorem 1.2 in [15].

    Theorem 3.5. Let μ be a finite α-irrigable measure, with α(0,1). That is, Iα(μ)<. Then there is a Borel set ERd,μ(RdE)=0, such that for any s>11α,

    Hs(E)=0,

    where Hs(E) is the s-Hausdorff measure of the set E. In other words, if μ is α-irrigable, then μ is concentrated on a set E with Hausdorff dimension 11α.

    Remark 2. As mentioned in [7], for any bounded Radon measure μ, we always have IW,α(μ)Iα(μ). Therefore, if IW,α(μ)<+, from Theorem 3.5, μ is concentrated on a set E with Hausdorff dimension 11α.

    Lemma 3.6. If μ is a bounded Radon measure as in Theorem 3.3 and let χ be an irrigation plan of μ with finite weighted irrigation cost EW,α(χ)<. Then for any r>0,

    μ(RdB(0,r))(EW,α(χ)r)1α. (83)

    Proof. The function

    x(x1β+c(1β)(rt))11β,xR+

    is concave. Let mrμ(RdB(0,r)), then by definition (21) and (30) we have

    r0(m1βr+c(1β)(rt))α1βdtEW,α(χ). (84)

    Since rt0, it implies that

    (m1βr)α1βr=mαrrEW,α(χ),

    which completes the proof of (83).

    Theorem 3.7. Let μ be a positive, bounded Radon measure in Rd and Ahlfors regular in dimension d. Let f satisfy (A1).

    If either α<11d or

    lim infz0+zβf(z)>0 (85)

    for some β<11d1, then IW,α(μ)=+.

    Proof. Case 1: If α<11d, then 11α<d. Suppose IW,α(μ)<+, by Remark 2, μ is concentrated on a set E with Hausdorff dimension 11α<d, which is a contradiction to the assumption that μ is Ahlfors regular in dimension d (see Remark 3.5). Thus, we have IW,α(μ)=+.

    Case 2: The assumption (85) implies that, for some constants c,z0>0,

    f(z)czβz[0,z0]. (86)

    Since μ is Ahlfors regular in dimension d, then for each irrigation plan χ and any δ>0, there are O(1δd) disjoint cubes with diameter δ and each of them has measure δd. In each cube, the lower bound for the cost is

    δ0(δd(1β)+c(1β)(δt))α1βdt (87)

    and the total number of such disjoint cubes is 1δd.

    EW,α(χ)1δdδ0(δd(1β)+c(1β)(δt))α1βdt1δdδ0(c(1β)(δt))α1βdtCδ1+αβ1βd (88)

    where C is some constant independent of δ. Since 1α>11d,11d1>β>0, we have 1+αβ1β<d. Sending δ to 0+, the right hand side in (88) goes to +. Thus, for any irrigation plan χ of μ, EW,α(χ)=+ and we conclude IW,α(μ)=+.

    This research was partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1714237, "Models of controlled biological growth". The author wants to thank his thesis advisor Professor Alberto Bressan for his many useful comments and suggestions. The author also thanks the anonymous referees for their time and helpful suggestions.



    [1]

    M. Bernot, V. Caselles and J. -M. Morel, Optimal Transportation Networks. Models and Theory, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 1955, Springer, Berlin, 2009.

    [2] Traffic plans. Publicacions Matemàtiques (2005) 49: 417-451.
    [3] Fractal regularity results on optimal irrigation patterns. J. Math. Pures Appl. (2014) 102: 854-890.
    [4]

    A. Bressan, M. Palladino and Q. Sun, Variational problems for tree roots and branches, Calc. Var. & Part. Diff. Equat., 59 (2020), Paper No. 7, 31 pp.

    [5] On differential systems with vector-valued impulsive controls. Boll. Un. Matematica Italiana B (1988) 2: 641-656.
    [6] On the optimal shape of tree roots and branches. Math. Models & Methods Appl. Sci. (2018) 28: 2763-2801.
    [7]

    A. Bressan and Q. Sun, Weighted irrigation plans, submitted, arXiv: 1906.02232.

    [8] On the dimension of an irrigable measure. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova. (2007) 117: 1-49.
    [9] Elementary properties of optimal irrigation patterns. Calc. Var. & Part. Diff. Equat. (2007) 28: 317-349.
    [10] Some remarks on the fractal structure of irrigation balls. Advanced Nonlinear Studies (2019) 19: 55-68.
    [11] (2015) Measure Theory and Fine Properties of Functions.Revised Edition. CRC Press.
    [12] Minimum cost communication networks. Bell System Tech. J. (1967) 46: 2209-2227.
    [13]

    P. Hartman, Ordinary Differential Equations, , Second Edition, Birkhäuser, Boston, Mass., 1982.

    [14] Synchronic and asynchronic descriptions of irrigation problems. Adv. Nonlinear Stud. (2013) 13: 583-623.
    [15] A variational model of irrigation patterns. Interfaces Free Bound. (2003) 5: 391-415.
    [16] Optimal paths related to transport problems. Comm. Contemp. Math. (2003) 5: 251-279.
    [17] Motivations, ideas and applications of ramified optimal transportation. ESAIM Math. Model. Numer. Anal. (2015) 49: 1791-1832.
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2021 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(1599) PDF downloads(113) Cited by(0)

Figures and Tables

Figures(4)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog