Telemedicine has been increasingly integrated into cardiac care, thus offering remote monitoring and consultation for patients with cardiovascular diseases. It promises to improve patient outcomes, especially in heart failure management, by enabling continuous monitoring of vital signs and facilitating remote patient-provider interactions. This technology has gained particular significance amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, thereby offering a safer alternative to in-person visits. This study assesses the effectiveness of telemedicine in the management of cardiac patients in Saudi Arabia, and reflects on its benefits, challenges, and overall impact on patient outcomes.
A retrospective cohort study was conducted to analyze patient records from Saudi healthcare facilities and compare health indicators before and after telemedicine implementation. The study involved cardiac patients who received telemedicine consultations and a control group who received traditional care. Statistical analyses, including the chi-square test, t-test, and ANOVA, were performed to identify differences between the groups while controlling for confounders.
There were no statistically significant differences between the telemedicine and control groups in terms of blood pressure (P = 0.72), heart rate (P = 0.65), readmission rate (P = 0.54), and medication adherence (P = 0.48). The patient satisfaction was slightly higher in the telemedicine group, although the difference was not statistically significant (mean satisfaction score of 3.01 vs. 2.83, P = 0.41).
The introduction of telemedicine did not significantly alter the cardiac patient outcomes compared with traditional in-person care in Saudi Arabia. Although telemedicine offers a promising alternative for patient management, its effectiveness may vary based on the individual patient's needs and specific health indicators. Further research is necessary to explore its full potential and to optimize its application in cardiac care.
Citation: Abdulah Saeed, Alhanouf AlQahtani, Abdullah AlShafea, Abdrahman Bin Saeed, Meteb Albraik. The impact of telemedicine on cardiac patient outcomes: A study in Saudi Arabian hospitals[J]. AIMS Medical Science, 2024, 11(4): 439-451. doi: 10.3934/medsci.2024030
[1] | Jean-Bernard Baillon, Guillaume Carlier . From discrete to continuous Wardrop equilibria. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2012, 7(2): 219-241. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2012.7.219 |
[2] | Raúl M. Falcón, Venkitachalam Aparna, Nagaraj Mohanapriya . Optimal secret share distribution in degree splitting communication networks. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2023, 18(4): 1713-1746. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2023075 |
[3] | Edward S. Canepa, Alexandre M. Bayen, Christian G. Claudel . Spoofing cyber attack detection in probe-based traffic monitoring systems using mixed integer linear programming. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2013, 8(3): 783-802. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2013.8.783 |
[4] | Matthieu Canaud, Lyudmila Mihaylova, Jacques Sau, Nour-Eddin El Faouzi . Probability hypothesis density filtering for real-time traffic state estimation and prediction. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2013, 8(3): 825-842. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2013.8.825 |
[5] | Samitha Samaranayake, Axel Parmentier, Ethan Xuan, Alexandre Bayen . A mathematical framework for delay analysis in single source networks. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2017, 12(1): 113-145. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2017005 |
[6] | Carlos F. Daganzo . On the variational theory of traffic flow: well-posedness, duality and applications. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2006, 1(4): 601-619. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2006.1.601 |
[7] | Leah Anderson, Thomas Pumir, Dimitrios Triantafyllos, Alexandre M. Bayen . Stability and implementation of a cycle-based max pressure controller for signalized traffic networks. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2018, 13(2): 241-260. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2018011 |
[8] | Félicien BOURDIN . Splitting scheme for a macroscopic crowd motion model with congestion for a two-typed population. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2022, 17(5): 783-801. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2022026 |
[9] | Anya Désilles . Viability approach to Hamilton-Jacobi-Moskowitz problem involving variable regulation parameters. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2013, 8(3): 707-726. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2013.8.707 |
[10] | Fethallah Benmansour, Guillaume Carlier, Gabriel Peyré, Filippo Santambrogio . Numerical approximation of continuous traffic congestion equilibria. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2009, 4(3): 605-623. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2009.4.605 |
Telemedicine has been increasingly integrated into cardiac care, thus offering remote monitoring and consultation for patients with cardiovascular diseases. It promises to improve patient outcomes, especially in heart failure management, by enabling continuous monitoring of vital signs and facilitating remote patient-provider interactions. This technology has gained particular significance amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, thereby offering a safer alternative to in-person visits. This study assesses the effectiveness of telemedicine in the management of cardiac patients in Saudi Arabia, and reflects on its benefits, challenges, and overall impact on patient outcomes.
A retrospective cohort study was conducted to analyze patient records from Saudi healthcare facilities and compare health indicators before and after telemedicine implementation. The study involved cardiac patients who received telemedicine consultations and a control group who received traditional care. Statistical analyses, including the chi-square test, t-test, and ANOVA, were performed to identify differences between the groups while controlling for confounders.
There were no statistically significant differences between the telemedicine and control groups in terms of blood pressure (P = 0.72), heart rate (P = 0.65), readmission rate (P = 0.54), and medication adherence (P = 0.48). The patient satisfaction was slightly higher in the telemedicine group, although the difference was not statistically significant (mean satisfaction score of 3.01 vs. 2.83, P = 0.41).
The introduction of telemedicine did not significantly alter the cardiac patient outcomes compared with traditional in-person care in Saudi Arabia. Although telemedicine offers a promising alternative for patient management, its effectiveness may vary based on the individual patient's needs and specific health indicators. Further research is necessary to explore its full potential and to optimize its application in cardiac care.
In this paper, we will are concerned with existence of quasi-periodic solutions for a two-dimensional (2D) quasi-periodically forced beam equation
utt+Δ2u+εϕ(t)(u+u3)=0,x∈T2,t∈R | (1.1) |
with periodic boundary conditions
u(t,x1,x2)=u(t,x1+2π,x2)=u(t,x1,x2+2π) | (1.2) |
where ε is a small positive parameter, ϕ(t) is a real analytic quasi-periodic function in t with frequency vector ω=(ω1,ω2…,ωm)⊂[ϱ,2ϱ]m for some constant ϱ>0. Such quasi-periodic functions can be written in the form
ϕ(t)=φ(ω1t,…,ωmt), |
where ω1,…,ωm are rationally independent real numbers, the "basic frequencies" of ϕ, and φ is a continuous function of period 2π in all arguments, called the hull of ϕ. Thus ϕ admits a Fourier series expansion
ϕ(t)=∑k∈Zmφkeik⋅ωt, |
where k⋅ω=∑mˆj=1kˆj⋅ωˆj. We think of this equation as an infinite dimensional Hamiltonian system and we study it through an infinite-dimensional KAM theory. The KAM method is a composite of Birkhoff normal form and KAM iterative techniques, and the pioneering works were given by Wayne [25], Kuksin [15] and Pöschel [19]. Over the last years the method has been well developed in one dimensional Hamiltonian PDEs. However, it is difficult to apply to higher dimensional Hamiltonian PDEs. Actually, it is difficult to draw a nice result because of complicated small divisor conditions and measure estimates between the corresponding eigenvalues when the space dimension is greater than one. In [11,12] the authors obtained quasi-periodic solutions for higher dimensional Hamiltonian PDEs by means of an infinite dimensional KAM theory, where Geng and You proved that the higher dimensional nonlinear beam equations and nonlocal Schrödinger equations possess small-amplitude linearly-stable quasi-periodic solutions. In this aspect, Eliasson-Kuksin[9], C.Procesi and M.Procesi[20], Eliasson-Grebert-Kuksin [5] made the breakthrough of obtaining quasi-periodic solutions for more interesting higher dimensional Schrödinger equations and beam equations. However, all of the work mentioned above require artificial parameters, and therefore it cannot be used for classical equations with physical background such as the higher dimensional cubic Schrödinger equation and the higher dimensional cubic beam equation. These equations with physical background have many special properties, readers can refer to [4,16,22,23,24] and references therein.
Fortunately, Geng-Xu-You[10], in 2011, used an infinite dimensional KAM theory to study the two dimensional nonlinear cubic Schrödinger equation on T2. The main approach they use is to pick the appropriate tangential frequencies, to make the non-integrable terms in normal form as sparse as possible such that the homological equations in KAM iteration is easy to solve. More recently, by the same approach, Geng and Zhou[13] looked at the two dimensional completely resonant beam equation with cubic nonlinearity
utt+Δ2u+u3=0,x∈T2,t∈R. | (1.3) |
All works mentioned above do not conclude the case with forced terms. The present paper study the problem of existence of quasi-periodic solutions of the equation (1.1)+(1.2). Let's look at this problem through the infinite-dimensional KAM theory as developed by Geng-Zhou [13]. So the main step is to convert the equation into a form that the KAM theory for PDE can be applied. This requires reducing the linear part of Hamiltonian system to constant coefficients. A large part of the present paper will be devoted to proving the reducibility of infinite-dimensional linear quasi-periodic systems. In fact, the question of reducibility of infinite-dimensional linear quasi-periodic systems is also interesting itself.
In 1960s, Bogoliubov-Mitropolsky-Samoilenko [3] found that KAM technique can be applied to study reducibility of non-autonomous finite-dimensional linear systems to constant coefficient equations. Subsequently, the technique is well developed for the reducibility of finite-dimensional systems, and we don't want to repeat describing these developments here. Comparing with the finite-dimensional systems, the reducibility results in infinite dimensional Hamiltonian systems are relatively few. Such kind of reducibility result for PDE using KAM technique was first obtained by Bambusi and Graffi [1] for Schrödinger equation on R. About the reducibility results in one dimensional PDEs and its applications, readers refer to [2,7,17,18,21] and references therein.
Recently there have been some interesting results in the case of systems in higher space dimensions. Eliasson and Kuksin [6] obtained the reducibility for the linear d-dimensional Schrödinger equation
˙u=−i(Δu−ϵV(ϕ0+tω,x;ω)u),x∈Td. |
Grébert and Paturel [14] proved that a linear d-dimensional Schrödinger equation on Rd with harmonic potential |x|2 and small t-quasiperiodic potential
i∂tu−Δu+|x|2u+εV(tω,x)u=0,x∈Rd |
reduced to an autonomous system for most values of the frequency vector ω∈Rn. For recent development for high dimensional wave equations, Eliasson-Grébert-Kuksin [8], in 2014, studied reducibility of linear quasi-periodic wave equation.
However, the reducibility results in higher dimension are still very few. The author Min Zhang of the present paper has studied the two dimensional Schrödinger equations with Quasi-periodic forcing in [27]. However, it would seem that the result cannot be directly applied to our problems because of the difference in the linear part of Hamiltonian systems and the Birkhoff normal forms. As far as we know, the reducibility for the linear part of the beam equation (1.1) is still open. In this paper, by utilizing the measure estimation of infinitely many small divisors, we construct a symplectic change of coordinates which can reduce the linear part of Hamiltonian system to constant coefficients. Subsequently, we construct a symplectic change of coordinates which can transform the Hamiltonian into some Birkhoff normal form depending sparse angle-dependent terms, which can be achieved by choosing the appropriate tangential sites. Lastly, we show that there are many quasi-periodic solutions for the equation (1.1) via KAM theory.
Remark 1.1. Similar to [13], we introduced a special subset of Z2
Z2odd={n=(n1,n2),n1∈2Z−1,n2∈2Z}, | (1.4) |
for the small divisor problem could be simplified. Then we define subspace U in L2(T2) as follows
U={u=∑j∈Z2oddujϕj,ϕj(x)=ei<j,x>}. |
We only prove the existence of quasi-periodic solutions of the equation (1.1) in U.
The following definition quantifies the conditions the tangential sites satisfy. It acquired from Geng-Xu-You[10].
Definition 1.1. A finite set S={i∗1=(˜x1,˜y1),⋯,i∗n=(˜xn,˜yn)}⊂Z2odd(n≥2) is called admissible if
(i). Any three different points of them are not vertices of a rectangle (if n>2) or n=2.
(ii). For any d∈Z2odd∖S, there exists at most one triplet {i,j,l} with i,j∈S,l∈Z2odd∖S such that d−l+i−j=0 and |i|2−|j|2+|d|2−|l|2=0. If such triplet exists, we say that d,l are resonant in the first type and denote all such d by L1.
(iii). For any d∈Z2odd∖S, there exists at most one triplet {i,j,l} with i,j∈S,l∈Z2odd∖S such that d+l−i−j=0 and |d|2+|l|2−|i|2−|j|2=0. If such triplet exists, we say that d,l are resonant in the second type and denote all such d by L2.
(iv). Any d∈Z2odd∖S should not be in L1 and L2 at the same time. It means that L1∩L2=∅.
Remark 1.2. We can give an example to show the admissible set S above is non-empty. For example, for any given positive integer n≥2, the first point (˜x1,˜y1)∈Z2odd is chosen as ˜x1>n2,˜y1=2˜x5n1, and the second one is chosen as ˜x2=˜x51,˜y2=2˜x5n2, the others are defined inductively by
˜xˆj+1=˜x5ˆj∏2≤ˆm≤ˆj,1≤ˆl<ˆm((˜xˆm−˜xˆl)2+(˜yˆm−˜yˆl)2+1),2≤ˆj≤n−1, |
˜yˆj+1=2˜x5nˆj+1,2≤ˆj≤n−1. |
The choice of the admissible set is same to that in [13], where the proof of such admissible set is given.
In this paper, we assume that
(H) ϕ(t) is a real analytic quasi-periodic function in t with frequency vector ω, and [ϕ]≠0 where [ϕ] denotes the time average of ϕ, coinciding with the space average.
The main result of this paper in the following. The proof is based on an infinite dimensional KAM theorem inspired by Geng-Zhou[13].
Theorem 1.1. (Main Theorem) Given ϱ, ϕ(t) as above. Then for arbitrary admissible set S⊂Z2odd and for any 0<γ<1,0<ρ<1 and γ′>0 be small enough, there exists ε∗(ρ,γ,γ′)>0 so that for all 0<ε<ε∗, there exists R⊂[ϱ,2ϱ]m with measR>(1−γ)ϱm and there exists Σγ′⊂Σ:=R×[0,1]n with meas(Σ∖Σγ′)=O(4√γ′), so that for (ω,˜ξi∗1,…,˜ξi∗n)∈Σ′γ, the beam equation (1.1)+(1.2) admits a quasi-periodic solution in the following
u(t,x)=∑j∈S(1+gj(ωt,ω,ε))√3˜ξj16|j|2π2(ei˜ωjtei<j,x>+e−i˜ωjte−i<j,x>)+O(|˜ξ|3/2), |
where gj(ϑ,ω,ε)=ερg∗j(ϑ,ω,ε) is of period 2π in each component of ϑ and for j∈S,ϑ∈Θ(σ0/2),ω∈Ω, we have |g∗j(ϑ,ω,ε)|≤C. And the solution u(t,x) is quasi-periodic in terms of t with the frequency vector ˜ω=(ω,(˜ωj)j∈S), and ˜ωj=ε−4|j|2+O(|˜ξ|)+O(ε).
Let's rewrite the beam equation (1.1) as follows
utt+Δ2u+εϕ(t)(u+u3)=0,x∈T2,t∈R. | (2.1) |
Introduce a variable v=ut, the equation (2.1) is transformed into
{ut=v,vt=−Δ2u−εϕ(t)(u+u3). | (2.2) |
Introducing q=1√2((−Δ)12u−i(−Δ)−12v) and (2.2) is transformed into
−iqt=−Δq+1√2εϕ(t)(−Δ)−12((−Δ)−12(q+ˉq√2)+((−Δ)−12(q+ˉq√2))3). | (2.3) |
The equation can be written as the Hamiltonian equation ˙q=i∂H∂ˉq and the corresponding Hamiltonian functions is
H=∫T2((−Δ)q)ˉqdx+12εϕ(t)∫T2((−Δ)−12(q+ˉq√2))2dx+14εϕ(t)∫T2((−Δ)−12(q+ˉq√2))4dx. | (2.4) |
The eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of the linear operator −Δ with the periodic boundary conditions are respectively λj=|j|2 and ϕj(x)=12πei<j,x>. Now let's expand q into a Fourier series
q=∑j∈Z2oddqjϕj, | (2.5) |
the coordinates belong to some Hilbert space la,s of sequences q=(⋯,qj,⋯)j∈Z2odd that has the finite norm
‖q‖a,s=∑j∈Z2odd|qj||j|se|j|a(a>0,s>0). |
The corresponding symplectic structure is i∑j∈Z2odddqj∧dˉqj. In the coordinates, the Hamiltonian equation (2.3) can be written as
˙qj=i∂H∂ˉqj,∀j∈Z2odd | (2.6) |
with
H=Λ+G |
where
Λ=∑j∈Z2odd(λj|qj|2+ε4λjϕ(t)(qjq−j+2|qj|2+ˉqjˉq−j)) |
G=164π2εϕ(t)∑i+j+d+l=0i,j,d,l∈Z2odd1√λiλjλdλl(qiqjqdql+ˉqiˉqjˉqdˉql)+332π2εϕ(t)∑i−j+d−l=0i,j,d,l∈Z2odd1√λiλjλdλlqiˉqjqdˉql+116π2εϕ(t)∑i+j+d−l=0i,j,d,l∈Z2odd1√λiλjλdλl(qiqjqdˉql+ˉqiˉqjˉqdql). |
Denote φ(ϑ) be the shell of ϕ(t), we introduce the action-angle variable (J,ϑ)∈Rm×Tm, then (2.6) can be written as follows
˙ϑ=ω,˙J=−∂H∂ϑ,˙qj=i∂H∂ˉqj,j∈Z2odd |
and the corresponding Hamiltonian function is
H=ˉH+εG4, | (2.7) |
where
ˉH=<ω,J>+∑j∈Z2odd(λj|qj|2+ε4λjφ(ϑ)(qjq−j+2|qj|2+ˉqjˉq−j)), | (2.8) |
G4=164π2∑i+j+d+l=0i,j,d,l∈Z2odd1√λiλjλdλl(G4,0ijdl(ϑ)qiqjqdql+G0,4ijdl(ϑ)ˉqiˉqjˉqdˉql)+332π2∑i−j+d−l=0i,j,d,l∈Z2odd1√λiλjλdλlG2,2ijdl(ϑ)qiˉqjqdˉql+116π2∑i+j+d−l=0i,j,d,l∈Z2odd1√λiλjλdλl(G3,1ijdl(ϑ)qiqjqdˉql+G1,3ijdl(ϑ)ˉqiˉqjˉqdql) | (2.9) |
and
G4,0ijdl(ϑ)=G0,4ijdl(ϑ)={φ(ϑ),i+j+d+l=0, 0,i+j+d+l≠0, | (2.10) |
G2,2ijdl(ϑ)={φ(ϑ),i−j+d−l=0, 0,i−j+d−l≠0, | (2.11) |
G3,1ijdl(ϑ)=G1,3ijdl(ϑ)={φ(ϑ),i+j+d−l=0, 0,i+j+d−l≠0. | (2.12) |
Now We are going to study the reducibility of the Hamiltonian (2.8). To make this reducibility, we introduce the notations and spaces as follows.
For given σ0>0,Γ>0,0<ρ<1, define
σν=σ0(1−∑νˆj=1ˆj−22∑∞ˆj=1ˆj−2),ν=1,2,… |
Γν=Γ(1+C+∞∑ˆj=νερˆj),ν=0,1,… |
where C is a constant. Let
ε0=ε,εν=ε(1+ρ)ν,ν=1,2,… |
Θ(σν)={ϑ=(ϑ1,…,ϑm)∈Cm/2πZm:|Imϑˆj|<σν,ˆj=1,2,…,m},ν=0,1,2,…. |
and denote
Da,sν={(ϑ,J,q,ˉq)∈Cm/2πZm×Cm×la,s×la,s:|Imϑ|<σν,|J|<Γ2ν,‖q‖a,s<Γν,‖ˉq‖a,s<Γν}ν=0,1,2,…, |
Da,s∞={(ϑ,J,q,ˉq)∈Cm/2πZm×Cm×la,s×la,s:|Imϑ|<σ0/2,|J|<Γ2,‖q‖a,s<Γ,‖ˉq‖a,s<Γ}, |
where |⋅| stands for the sup-norm of complex vectors and la,s stands for complex Hilbert space. For arbitrary four order Whitney smooth function F(ω) on closed bounded set R∗, let
‖F‖∗R∗=supω∈R∗∑0≤ˆj≤4|∂ˆjωF|. |
Let F(ω) is a vector function from R∗ to la,s(orRm1×m2) which is four order whitney smooth on R∗, we denote
‖F‖∗a,s,R∗=‖(‖Fi(ω)‖∗R∗)i‖a,s(or‖F‖∗R∗=max1≤i1≤m1∑1≤i2≤m2(‖Fi1i2(ω)‖∗R∗)). |
Given σDa,s>0,ΓDa,s>0, we define
Da,s={(ϑ,J,q,ˉq)∈Cm/2πZm×Cm×la,s×la,s:|Imϑ|<σDa,s,|J|<Γ2Da,s,‖q‖a,s<ΓDa,s,‖ˉq‖a,s<ΓDa,s}. |
If ˜w=(ϑ,J,q,ˉq)∈Da,s, we define the weighted norm for ˜w by
|˜w|a,s=|ϑ|+1Γ2Da,s|J|+1ΓDa,s‖q‖a,s+1ΓDa,s‖ˉq‖a,s. |
Let F(η;ω) is a function from Da,s×R∗ to la,s(orRm1×m2) which is four order whitney smooth on ω, we denote
‖F‖∗a,s,Da,s×R∗=supη∈Da,s‖F‖∗a,s,R∗(or‖F‖∗Da,s×R∗=supη∈Da,s‖F‖∗R∗). |
For given function F, associate a hamiltonian vector field denoted as XF={FJ,−Fϑ,iFˉq,−iFq}, we define the weighted norm for XF by
|XF|∗a,s,Da,s×R∗=‖FJ‖∗Da,s×R∗+1Γ2Da,s‖Fϑ‖∗Da,s×R∗+1ΓDa,s‖Fˉz‖∗a,s,Da,s×R∗+1ΓDa,s‖Fz‖∗a,s,Da,s×R∗. |
Assume w=(q,ˉq)∈la,s×la,s is a doubly infinite complex sequence, and A(η;ω) be an operator from la,s×la,s to la,s×la,s for (η;ω)∈Da,s×R∗, then we denote
‖w‖a,s=‖q‖a,s+‖ˉq‖a,s, |
‖A(η;ω)‖⋄a,s,Da,s×R∗=sup(η;ω)∈Da,s×R∗supw≠0‖A(η;ω)w‖a,s‖w‖a,s, |
‖A(η;ω)‖⋆a,s,Da,s×R∗=∑0≤ˆj≤4‖∂ˆjωA‖⋄a,s,Da,s×R∗. |
Assume B(η;ω) be an operator from Da,s to Da,s for (η;ω)∈Da,s×R∗, then we denote
|B(η;ω)|⋄a,s,Da,s×R∗=sup(η;ω)∈Da,s×R∗sup˜w≠0|B(η;ω)˜w|a,s|˜w|a,s, |
|B(η;ω)|⋆a,s,Da,s×R∗=∑0≤ˆj≤4|∂ˆjωB|⋄a,s,Da,s×R∗. |
Reducibility of the autonomous Hamiltonian equation corresponding to the Hamiltonian (2.8) will be proved by an KAM iteration which involves an infinite sequence of change of variables. By utilizing the measure estimation of infinitely many small divisors, we will prove that the composition of these infinite many change of variables converges to a symplectic change of coordinates, which can reduce the Hamiltonian equation corresponding to the Hamiltonian (2.8) to constant coefficients.
At the ν−step of the iteration, we consider Hamiltonian function of the form
Hν=H∗ν+Pν | (3.1) |
where
H∗ν:=<ω,J>+∑j∈Z2oddλj,νqj¯qj, |
Pν:=εν∑j∈Z2odd[ηj,ν,2,0(ϑ,ω)qjq−j+ηj,ν,1,1(ϑ,ω)qjˉqj+ηj,ν,0,2(ϑ,ω)ˉqjˉq−j] |
where ηj,ν,2,0=η−j,ν,2,0, ηj,ν,0,2=η−j,ν,0,2, ηj,ν,n1,n2(ϑ,ω)=∑k∈Zmηj,ν,k,n1,n2(ω)ei<k,ϑ> when n1,n2 ∈N,n1+n2=2,
ηj,ν,n1,n2=λ−1jη∗j,ν,n1,n2,‖η∗j,ν,n1,n2‖∗Θ(σν)×Rν≤C,n1,n2∈N,n1+n2=2, | (3.2) |
and
λj,0=λj,λj,ν=λj+ν−1∑ˆs=0μj,ν,ˆs, | (3.3) |
with
μj,ν,0=ε2λj[ϕ],μj,ν,ˆs=λ−1jεˆsμ∗j,ν,ˆs,‖μ∗j,ν,ˆs‖∗Rν≤C,ˆs=1,2,…,ν. | (3.4) |
We're going to construct a symplectic transformation
Tν:Da,sν+1×Rν+1⟼Da,sν×Rν |
and
Hν+1=Hν∘Tν=H∗ν+1+Pν+1 | (3.5) |
satisfies all the above iterative assumptions (3.1)–(3.4) marked ν+1 on Da,sν+1×Rν.
We assume that there is a constant C∗ and a closed set Rν satisfies
measRν≥ϱm(1−γ3−γ∑νˆi=0(δ(ˆi)+ˆi)−23∑+∞ˆi=0(δ(ˆi)+ˆi)−2) | (3.6) |
and for arbitrary k∈Zm,j∈Z2odd,ω∈Rν,
|<k,ω>±(λj,ν+λ−j,ν)|≥ϱC∗(δ(ν)+ν2)(|k|+δ(|k|))m+1, | (3.7) |
where δ(x)=1 as x=0 and δ(x)=0 as x≠0. We put its proof in the Lemma 4.1 below.
Next we will construct a parameter set Rν+1⊂Rν and a symplectic coordinate transformation Tν so that the transformed Hamiltonian Hν+1=H∗ν+1+Pν+1 satisfies the above iteration assumptions with new parameters εν+1,σν+1,Γν+1 and with ω∈Rν+1.
Let XΨν be the Hamiltonian vector field for a Hamiltonian Ψν:
Ψν=ενΥν=εν∑j∈Z2odd[ϖj,ν,2,0(ϑ;ω)qjq−j+ϖj,ν,1,1(ϑ;ω)qjˉqj+ϖj,ν,0,2(ϑ;ω)ˉqjˉq−j] |
where
ϖj,ν,2,0(ϑ;ω)=ϖ−j,ν,2,0(ϑ;ω),ϖj,ν,0,2(ϑ;ω)=ϖ−j,ν,0,2(ϑ;ω), |
ϖj,ν,n1,n2(ϑ;ω)=∑k∈Zmϖj,ν,k,n1,n2(ω)ei<k,ϑ>,n1,n2∈N,n1+n2=2 | (3.8) |
and [ϖj,ν,1,1]=0. Let XtΨν be its time-t map.
Let Tν=X1Ψν where X1Ψν denote the time-one map of the Hamiltonian vector field XΨν, then the system (3.1)(ν) is transformed into the form (3.1)(ν+1) and satisfies (3.2)(ν+1), (3.3)(ν+1) and (3.4)(ν+1). More precisely, the new Hamiltonian Hν+1 can be written as follows by second order Taylor formula
Hν+1:=Hν∘X1Ψν=H∗ν+Pν+{H∗ν,Ψν}+εν∫10(1−t){{H∗ν,Ψν},Υν}∘XtΨνdt+εν∫10{Pν,Υν}∘XtΨνdt. | (3.9) |
The Hamiltonian Ψν is satisfies the homological equation
Pν+{H∗ν,Ψν}=εν∑j∈Z2odd[ηj,ν,1,1]qjˉqj, |
which is equivalent to
{−<ω,∂ϑϖj,ν,1,1(ϑ;ω)>+ηj,ν,1,1(ϑ;ω)=[ηj,ν,1,1],i(λj,ν+λ−j,ν)ϖj,ν,0,2(ϑ;ω)−<ω,∂ϑϖj,ν,0,2(ϑ;ω)>+ηj,ν,0,2(ϑ;ω)=0,−i(λj,ν+λ−j,ν)ϖj,ν,2,0(ϑ;ω)−<ω,∂ϑϖj,ν,2,0(ϑ;ω)>+ηj,ν,2,0(ϑ;ω)=0. | (3.10) |
Let's inserting (3.8) into (3.10)
{i<k,ω>ϖj,ν,k,1,1(ω)=ηj,ν,k,1,1(ω),k≠0,i(<k,ω>+λj,ν+λ−j,ν)ϖj,ν,k,2,0(ω)=ηj,ν,k,2,0(ω),i(<k,ω>−λj,ν−λ−j,ν)ϖj,ν,k,0,2(ω)=ηj,ν,k,0,2(ω). |
Thus
{ϖj,ν,1,1(ϑ;ω)=∑0≠k∈Zmηj,ν,k,1,1(ω)i<k,ω>ei<k,ϑ>,ϖj,ν,2,0(ϑ;ω)=∑k∈Zmηj,ν,k,2,0(ω)i(<k,ω>+λj,ν+λ−j,ν)ei<k,ϑ>,ϖj,ν,0,2(ϑ;ω)=∑k∈Zmηj,ν,k,0,2(ω)i(<k,ω>−λj,ν−λ−j,ν)ei<k,ϑ>. | (3.11) |
Now we're going to estimate Ψν and X1Ψν. By Cauchy's estimate and (3.2)(ν)
|ηj,ν,k,n1,n2|≤‖ηj,ν,n1,n2‖∗Θ(σν)×Rνe−|k|σν≤Cλ−1je−|k|σν,n1,n2∈N,n1+n2=2 | (3.12) |
and
|∂ˆiωηj,ν,k,n1,n2|≤‖ηj,ν,n1,n2‖∗Θ(σν)×Rνe−|k|σν≤Cλ−1je−|k|σν,ˆi=1,2,3,4 | (3.13) |
can be obtained. By ω∈Rν and (3.7)(ν),
sup(ϑ;ω)∈Θ(σν+1)×Rν|ϖj,ν,1,1|≤CC∗λ−1jϱ−1∑0≠k∈Zm|k|m+1e−σν|k|eσν+1|k| |
and
sup(ϑ;ω)∈Θ(σν+1)×Rν|ϖj,ν,n1,n2|≤CC∗λ−1jϱ−1(δ(ν)+ν2)(1+∑0≠k∈Zm|k|m+1e−σν|k|eσν+1|k|) |
for n1=0,n2=2 or n1=2,n2=0. According to Lemma 3.3 in [26], for (ϑ;ω)∈Θ(σν+1)×Rν,
|ϖj,ν,1,1|,|ϖj,ν,2,0|,|ϖj,ν,0,2|≤CC∗λ−1jϱ−1(ν+1)4m+4≤Cλ−1j(ν+1)12m+28, | (3.14) |
where C:=CC∗ϱ−1. Moreover, in view of (3.3)(ν) and (3.4)(ν),
|∂ˆiωλj,ν|≤Cελ−1j,ˆi=1,2,3,4. | (3.15) |
Similarly
|∂ˆiωϖj,ν,n1,n2|≤Cλ−1j(ν+1)12m+28,ˆi=1,2,3,4,n1,n2∈N,n1+n2=2. | (3.16) |
By (3.14) and (3.16), we have
‖ϖj,ν,n1,n2‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤Cλ−1j(ν+1)12m+28. | (3.17) |
Similar to the above discussion, the following estimates can be obtained
‖∂ϑϖj,ν,n1,n2‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤Cλ−1j(ν+1)12m+30, | (3.18) |
‖∂ϑϑϖj,ν,n1,n2‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤Cλ−1j(ν+1)12m+32. | (3.19) |
Now let's estimate the flow XtΨν, denote
Mj,ν(ϑ;ω)=(ϖj,ν,2,0+ϖ−j,ν,2,0ϖ−j,ν,1,1ϖj,ν,1,1ϖj,ν,0,2+ϖ−j,ν,0,2),J2=i(01−10). |
By (3.17)–(3.19),
‖Mj,ν‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤Cλ−1j(ν+1)12m+28, |
‖∂ϑMj,ν‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤Cλ−1j(ν+1)12m+30, |
‖∂ϑϑMj,ν‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤Cλ−1j(ν+1)12m+32. |
The vector field XΨν is as follows
{˙ϑ=0ddt(qjˉq−j)=ενJ2Mj,ν(ϑ;ω)⋅(qjˉq−j),j∈Z2odd˙J=εν∑j∈Z2odd[∂ϑϖj,ν,2,0(ϑ;ω)qjq−j+∂ϑϖj,ν,1,1(ϑ;ω)qjˉqj+∂ϑϖj,ν,0,2(ϑ;ω)ˉqjˉq−j]. |
The integral from 0 to t of the above equation, we have XtΨν:
{ϑ=ϑCw(t)=exp(ενJMν(ϑC;ω)t)⋅w(0)J(t)=J(0)+∫t0εν∑j∈Z2odd∂ϑϖj,ν,2,0(ϑC;ω)qj(t)q−j(t)dt+∫t0εν∑j∈Z2odd[∂ϑϖj,ν,1,1(ϑC;ω)qj(t)ˉqj(t)+∂ϑϖj,ν,0,2(ϑC;ω)ˉqj(t)ˉq−j(t)]dt. | (3.20) |
where (ϑC,J(0),w(0)) is the initial value,
J=i(0˜E∞×∞−˜E∞×∞0), |
and Mν(ϑ;ω) are the corresponding matrices. According to εν=ε(1+ρ)ν, then
|ε1−ρν(ν+1)12m+32(C∗ϱ−1)5ν|≤C,ν=0,1,… | (3.21) |
as ε<1, where C is an absolute constant. In view of (3.17), for ϑ∈Θ(σν+1),
ενJ2Mj,ν(ϑ;ω)=λ−1jεν(ν+1)12m+28M∗1j,ν(ϑ;ω)=λ−1jερνM∗j,ν(ϑ;ω),‖M∗j,ν(ϑ;ω)‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤C, |
then
‖ενJMν(ϑ;ω)‖⋆a,s,Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤Cερν. | (3.22) |
In view of (3.18),
∂ϑ(ενJ2Mj,ν(ϑ;ω)⋅(qjˉq−j))=ερν⋅∂ϑ(M∗j,ν(ϑ;ω)⋅(qjˉq−j)) |
where
‖∂ϑ(M∗j,ν(ϑ;ω)⋅(qjˉq−j))‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤C(|qj|+|ˉq−j|) |
then
‖∂ϑ(ενJMν(ϑ;ω)⋅w)‖∗Da,sν+1×Rν≤CερνΓν+1. | (3.23) |
By (3.22) and (3.23),
exp(ενJMν(ϑ;ω)t)=Id+g∞ν(ϑ;ω,t) | (3.24) |
and for t∈[0,1],
‖g∞ν(ϑ;ω,t)‖⋆a,s,Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤Cερν,‖∂ϑ(g∞ν(ϑ;ω,t)⋅w)‖∗Da,sν+1×Rν≤CερνΓν+1. | (3.25) |
Let's define J(t) in (3.20) as
J(t)=J+gJ,ν(ϑ,w;ω,t). | (3.26) |
By (3.18), (3.25) and (3.21),
‖gJ,ν(ϑ,w;ω,t)‖∗Da,sν+1×Rν≤CερνΓ2ν,t∈[0,1], | (3.27) |
and for any w′∈la,s×la,s,
‖∂w(gJ,ν(ϑ,w;ω,t))⋅w′‖∗Da,sν+1×Rν≤CερνΓν⋅‖w′‖a,s,t∈[0,1]. | (3.28) |
By (3.19), (3.25) and (3.21),
‖∂ϑ(gJ,ν(ϑ,w;ω,t))‖∗Da,sν+1×Rν≤CερνΓ2ν,t∈[0,1]. | (3.29) |
Denote
XtΨν=ΠZ+gν(ω,t):Da,sν+1×Rν+1↦Da,sν | (3.30) |
from (3.20), (3.24) and (3.26),
{Πϑ∘XtΨν(ϑ,J,w)=ϑ:Da,sν+1×Rν+1↦Θ(σν),Πw∘XtΨν(ϑ,J,w)=(Id+g∞ν(ϑ;ω,t))⋅w:Da,sν+1×Rν+1↦la,s×la,sΠJ∘XtFν(ϑ,J,w)=J+gJ,ν(ϑ,w;ω,t):Da,sν+1×Rν+1↦Cm | (3.31) |
where ΠZ,Πω denote the projectors
ΠZ:Za,s×R0⟼Za,s,Πω:Za,s×R0⟼R0, |
and Πϑ,ΠJ,Πw denote the projectors of Za,s=Cm/2πZm×Cm×la,s×la,s on the first, second and third factor respectively. According to the first equation of (3.25), (3.27) and (3.31),
|XtΨν−ΠZ|∗a,s,Da,sν+1×Rν+1≤Cερν. | (3.32) |
By (3.31), we have
DXtΨν=(Idm×m00∂ϑ(g∞ν(ϑ;ω,t)w)Id∞×∞+g∞ν(ϑ;ω,t)0∂ϑ(gJ,ν(ϑ,w;ω,t))∂w(gJ,ν(ϑ,w;ω,t))Idm×m) |
where D is the differentiation operator with respect to (ϑ,w,J). In view of (3.25), (3.28) and (3.29), for ˜w=(ϑ′,w′,J′),(ϑ,w,J)∈Da,sν+1,
|(DXtΨν−Id)˜w|a,s≤Cερν|˜w|a,s. |
Thus
|DXtΨν−Id|⋄a,s,Da,sν+1×Rν+1<Cερν. |
Similarly
|∂ˆiω(DXtΨν−Id)|⋄a,s,Da,sν+1×Rν+1<Cερν,ˆi=1,2,3,4 |
and
|DXtΨν−Id|⋆a,s,Da,sν+1×Rν+1<Cερν. | (3.33) |
Let
λj,ν+1=λj,ν+εν[ηj,ν,1,1], |
then by (3.2)(ν), it is obvious that λj,ν+1 satisfies the conditions (3.3)(ν+1) and (3.4)(ν+1).
Now let's estimate the smaller terms of (3.9). Notice that those terms are polynomials of qjq−j, qjˉqj and ˉqjˉq−j. So we can write it
εν∫10(1−t){{H2ν,Ψν},Υν}∘XtΨνdt+εν∫10{Pν,Υν}∘XtΨνdt=ε2ν∑j∈Z2odd[˜ηj,ν+1,2,0(ϑ;ω)qjq−j+˜ηj,ν+1,1,1(ϑ;ω)qjˉqj+˜ηj,ν+1,0,2(ϑ;ω)ˉqjˉq−j], |
where from
{H∗ν,Ψν}=εν∑j∈Z2odd[ηj,ν,1,1]qjˉqj−Pν, |
we know that ˜ηj,ν+1,n1,n2(ϑ;ω) is a linear combination of the product of ϖj,ν,n1,n2 and ηj,ν,m1,m2. By (3.17) and (3.2)(ν),
ϖj,ν,n1,n2(ϑ;ω)=λ−1j(ν+1)12m+28ϖ∗j,ν,n1,n2(ϑ;ω),‖ϖ∗j,ν,n1,n2‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤C |
and
ηj,ν,n1,n2(ϑ;ω)=λ−1jη∗j,ν,n1,n2(ϑ;ω),‖η∗j,ν,n1,n2(ϑ;ω)‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤C |
respectively. Thereby, we have
˜ηj,ν+1,n1,n2(ϑ;ω)=λ−1j(ν+1)12m+28˜η∗j,ν+1,n1,n2(ϑ;ω),‖˜η∗j,ν+1,n1,n2‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤C. |
According to ε1−ρν(ν+1)12m+28≤1 as ε<1, then
ηj,ν+1,n1,n2:=ε1−ρν˜ηj,ν+1,n1,n2=λ−1jη∗j,ν+1,n1,n2,‖η∗j,ν+1,n1,n2‖∗Θ(σν+1)×Rν≤C. |
From ε2−(1−ρ)ν=εν+1, we have (3.1)(ν+1) is defined in Da,sν+1 and λj,ν+1 satisfies (3.3)(ν+1),(3.4)(ν+1) and ηj,ν+1,n1,n2 satisfies (3.2)(ν+1).
The reducibility of the linear Hamiltonian systems can be summarized as follows.
Theorem 3.1. Given σ0>0, 0<γ<1,0<ρ<1. Then there is a ε∗(γ)>0 such that for any 0<ε<ε∗(γ), there exists a set R_⊂[ϱ,2ϱ]m,ϱ>0 with measR_≥(1−2γ3)ϱm and a symplectic transformation Σ0∞ defined on Da∞×R_ changes the Hamiltonian (2.8) into
ˉH∘Σ0∞=<ω,J>+∑j∈Z2oddμj|qj|2, |
where
μj=λj+ε2λj[ϕ]+1λjε(1+ρ)μ∗j,‖μ∗j‖∗R_≤C,j∈Z2odd. |
Moreover, there exists a constant C>0 such that
|Σ0∞−id|∗a,s,Da,s∞×R_≤Cερ, |
where id is identity mapping.
Proof. Let ηj,0,2,0=ηj,0,0,2=14λjφ(ϑ), ηj,0,1,1=12λjφ(ϑ), we have that H0=ˉH and ηj,0,n1,n2=λ−1jη∗j,0,n1,n2,‖η∗j,0,n1,n2‖∗Θ(σ0)×R0≤C,n1,n2∈N,n1+n2=2 where C is an absolute constant. i.e., the assumptions (3.1), (3.2), (3.3), (3.4) of the iteration are satisfied when ν=0.
We obtain the following sequences:
R∞⊂⋯⊂Rν⊂⋯⊂R1⊂R0⊂[ϱ,2ϱ]m, |
Da,s0⊃Da,s1⊃⋯⊃Da,sν⊃⋯⊃Da,s∞. |
From (3.30), (3.32) and (3.33), denote
Tν=X1Fν=ΠZ+gν(ω,1):Da,sν+1×Rν+1⟼Da,sν | (3.34) |
then
|Tν−ΠZ|∗a,s,Da,sν+1×Rν+1≤Cερν,|DTν−Id|⋆a,s,Da,sν+1×Rν+1≤Cερν. | (3.35) |
Similar to [27], it can be seen that the limiting transformation T0∘T1∘⋯ converges to a symplectic coordinate transformation Σ0∞. And there exists an absolute constant C>0 independent of j such that
|Σ0∞−id|∗a,s,Da,s∞×R_≤Cερ, | (3.36) |
with id is identity mapping.
In view of the Hamiltonian (2.8) satisfies the conditions (3.1)−(3.4),(3.6),(3.7) with ν=0, the above iterative procedure can run repeatedly. Thus the transformation Σ0∞ changes the Hamiltonian (2.8) to
ˉH∘Σ0∞=<ω,J>+∑j∈Z2oddμj|qj|2, | (3.37) |
with
μj=λj+ε2λj[ϕ]+1λjε(1+ρ)μ∗j,‖μ∗j‖∗R_≤C,j∈Z2odd. | (3.38) |
We present the following lemma which has been used in the above iterative procedure. The proof is similar to Lemma 3.1 in [15].
Lemma 3.1. For any given k∈Zm,j∈Z2odd,ˆl∈N, denote
I1k={ω∈[ϱ,2ϱ]m:|<k,ω>|≤ϱC∗|k|m+1},k≠0, |
I2,+k,j,ˆl={ω∈[ϱ,2ϱ]m:|<k,ω>+λj,ˆl+λ−j,ˆl|<ϱC∗(δ(ˆl)+ˆl2)(|k|+δ(|k|))m+1}, |
I2,−k,j,ˆl={ω∈[ϱ,2ϱ]m:|<k,ω>−λj,ˆl−λ−j,ˆl|<ϱC∗(δ(ˆl)+ˆl2)(|k|+δ(|k|))m+1}, |
R1=⋃0≠k∈ZmI1k,R2ˆl=⋃j∈Z2odd⋃k∈Zm(I2,+k,j,ˆl⋃I2,−k,j,ˆl) |
where δ(x)=1 as x=0 and δ(x)=0 as x≠0. Then the sets R1,R2ˆl is measurable and
measR1≤13γϱm,measR2ˆl≤γ(δ(ˆl)+ˆl)−23+∞∑ˆi=0(δ(ˆi)+ˆi)−2ϱm | (3.39) |
if C∗≫1 large enough.
Let
R00=[ϱ,2ϱ]m∖R1,R0=R00∖R20,Rˆl+1=Rˆl∖R2ˆl+1,ˆl=0,1,⋯. | (3.40) |
Then we have (3.6) and (3.7). Denote
R_=∞⋂ˆl=1Rˆl | (3.41) |
then by (3.6),
measR_>(1−2γ3)ϱm. | (3.42) |
In view of the symplectic coordinate transformation Σ0∞ is linear, and (3.36), then
qj∘Σ0∞=qj+λ−1jερ˜g∗j,1,∞(ϑ;ω)qj+λ−1jερ˜g∗j,2,∞(ϑ;ω)ˉq−j |
where
‖˜g∗j,ˆl,∞(ϑ;ω)‖∗Θ(σ0/2)×R_≤C,ˆl=1,2. |
Thus from (3.37), the Hamiltonian (2.8) is transformed into by Σ0∞
H00:=ˉH∘Σ0∞=<ω,J>+∑j∈Z2oddμjqjˉqj, | (3.43) |
and the Hamiltonian (2.9) is transformed into
˜G4=G4∘Σ0∞=332π2∑i−j+d−l=0i,j,d,l∈Z2odd1√λiλjλdλl˜G2,2ijdl(ϑ;ω)qiˉqjqdˉql+164π2∑i+j+d+l=0i,j,d,l∈Z2odd1√λiλjλdλl(˜G4,0ijdl(ϑ;ω)qiqjqdql+˜G0,4ijdl(ϑ;ω)ˉqiˉqjˉqdˉql)+116π2∑i+j+d−l=0i,j,d,l∈Z2odd1√λiλjλdλl(˜G3,1ijdl(ϑ;ω)qiqjqdˉql+˜G1,3ijdl(ϑ;ω)ˉqiˉqjˉqdql) | (3.44) |
where
˜Gn1,n2ijdl(ϑ;ω)=Gn1,n2ijdl(ϑ)(1+ερGn1,n2,∗ijdl(ϑ;ω)min(|i|2,|j|2,|d|2,|l|2)),‖Gn1,n2,∗ijdl(ϑ;ω)‖∗Θ(σ0/2)×R_≤C, | (3.45) |
with n1,n2∈N,n1+n2=4,n1,n2=0,1,2,3,4.
This means that the transformation Σ0∞ changes the Hamiltonian (2.7) into
H=H00+ε˜G4. | (3.46) |
The following Lemma gives a regularity result, the proof is similar to [13] and is omitted.
Lemma 3.2. For a≥0 and s>0, the gradients ˜G4q,˜G4ˉq are real analytic as maps from some neighborhood of origin in la,s×la,s into la,s with ‖˜G4q‖a,s=O(‖q‖3a,s), ‖˜G4ˉq‖a,s=O(‖q‖3a,s).
As in [13], Let S is an admissible set. We define Z2∗=Z2odd∖S. For simplicity, we define the following three sets:
S1={(i,j,d,l)∈(Z2odd)4:i−j+d−l=0,|i|2−|j|2+|d|2−|l|2≠0,#(S∩{i,j,d,l})≥2} | (4.1) |
and
S2={(i,j,d,l)∈(Z2odd)4:i+j+d+l=0,|i|2+|j|2+|d|2+|l|2≠0,#(S∩{i,j,d,l})≥2} | (4.2) |
S3={(i,j,d,l)∈(Z2odd)4:i+j+d−l=0,|i|2+|j|2+|d|2−|l|2≠0,#(S∩{i,j,d,l})≥2.}. | (4.3) |
Obviously, the set
{(i,j,d,l)∈(Z2odd)4:i+j+d+l=0,|i|2+|j|2+|d|2+|l|2=0,} |
is empty. Similar to [13], the set
{(i,j,d,l)∈(Z2odd)4:i+j+d−l=0,|i|2+|j|2+|d|2−|l|2=0,} |
is empty.
For Proposition 4.1, we give the following lemma that will be proved in the "Appendix".
Lemma 4.1. Given ϱ>0,0<γ<1, and C∗ large enough, ε small enough, then there is a subset ¯R⊂[ϱ,2ϱ]m with
meas¯R>(1−γ3)ϱm | (4.4) |
so that the following statements hold:
(i) If (i,j,d,l)∈S1 or i−j+d−l=0,|i|2−|j|2+|d|2−|l|2=0,#(S∩{i,j,d,l})=2 and k≠0, then for any ω∈¯R,
|μi−μj+μd−μl+<k,ω>|≥ϱC∗(|k|+δ(|k|))m+1,∀k∈Zm; | (4.5) |
(ii) If (i,j,d,l)∈S2, then for any ω∈¯R,
|μi+μj+μd+μl+<k,ω>|≥ϱC∗(|k|+δ(|k|))m+1,∀k∈Zm; | (4.6) |
(iii) If (i,j,d,l)∈S3, then for any ω∈¯R,
|μi+μj+μd−μl+<k,ω>|≥ϱC∗(|k|+δ(|k|))m+1,∀k∈Zm; | (4.7) |
where δ(x)=1 as x=0 and δ(x)=0 as x≠0.
Let
R=R_∩¯R, |
then
measR≥(1−γ)ϱm. |
Next we transform the Hamiltonian (3.46) into some partial Birkhoff form of order four.
Proposition 4.1. For each admissible set S there exists a symplectic change of coordinates X1F that changes the hamiltonian H=H00+ε˜G4 with nonlinearity (3.44) into
H∘X1F=N+A+B+ˉB+P, | (4.8) |
with
N=ε−4<ω,J>+ε−4∑j∈SμjIj+ε−4∑j∈Z2∗μj|zj|2+316π2∑i∈S1λ2i[˜G2,2iiii]˜ξiIi+38π2∑i,j∈S,i≠j1λiλj[˜G2,2iijj]˜ξiIj+38π2∑i∈S,j∈Z2∗1λiλj[˜G2,2iijj]˜ξi|zj|2 | (4.9) |
A=38π2∑d∈L11√λiλjλdλl[˜G2,2ijdl]√˜ξi˜ξjei(θi−θj)zdˉzl | (4.10) |
B=38π2∑d∈L21√λiλjλdλl[˜G2,2dilj]√˜ξi˜ξje−i(θi+θj)zdzl | (4.11) |
ˉB=38π2∑d∈L21√λiλjλdλl[˜G2,2idjl]√˜ξi˜ξjei(θi+θj)ˉzdˉzl. | (4.12) |
P=O(ε2|I|2+ε2|I|‖z‖2a,s+ε|˜ξ|12‖z‖3a,s+ε2‖z‖4a,s+ε2|˜ξ|3+ε3|˜ξ|52‖z‖a,s+ε4|˜ξ|2‖z‖2a,s+ε5|˜ξ|32‖z‖3a,s). | (4.13) |
Proof. Denote
˜Gn1,n2ijdl(ϑ,ω)=∑k∈ZmGn1,n2ijdl,k(ω)ei<k,ϑ>,n1,n2=0,1,2,3,4,n1+n2=4. | (4.14) |
We find a Hamiltonian
F=332π2∑i∈S∑k≠01λ2i⋅G2,2iiii,ki<k,ω>ei<k,ϑ>|qi|4+38π2∑i,j∈S,i≠j∑k≠01λiλj⋅G2,2iijj,ki<k,ω>ei<k,ϑ>|qi|2|qj|2+38π2∑i∈S,j∈Z2∗∑k≠01λiλj⋅G2,2iijj,ki<k,ω>ei<k,ϑ>|qi|2|qj|2+38π2∑d∈L1∑k≠01√λiλjλdλl⋅G2,2ijdl,ki(μi−μj+μd−μl+<k,ω>)ei<k,ϑ>qiˉqjqdˉql+38π2∑d∈L2∑k≠01√λiλjλdλl⋅G2,2dilj,ki(μd+μl−μi−μj+<k,ω>)ei<k,ϑ>ˉqiˉqjqdql+38π2∑d∈L2∑k≠01√λiλjλdλl⋅G2,2idjl,ki(μi−μd+μj−μl+<k,ω>)ei<k,ϑ>qiqjˉqdˉql+38π2∑(i,j,d,l)∈S1∑k∈Zm1√λiλjλdλl⋅G2,2ijdl,ki(μi−μj+μd−μl+<k,ω>)ei<k,ϑ>qiˉqjqdˉql+164π2∑(i,j,d,l)∈S2∑k∈Zm1√λiλjλdλl⋅G4,0ijdl,ki(μi+μj+μd+μl+<k,ω>)ei<k,ϑ>qiqjqdql+164π2∑(i,j,d,l)∈S2∑k∈Zm1√λiλjλdλl⋅G0,4ijdl,ki(−μi−μj−μd−μl+<k,ω>)ei<k,ϑ>ˉqiˉqjˉqdˉql+116π2∑(i,j,d,l)∈S3∑k∈Zm1√λiλjλdλl⋅G3,1ijdl,ki(μi+μj+μd−μl+<k,ω>)ei<k,ϑ>qiqjqdˉql+116π2∑(i,j,d,l)∈S3∑k∈Zm1√λiλjλdλl⋅G1,3ijdl,ki(−μi−μj−μd+μl+<k,ω>)ei<k,ϑ>ˉqiˉqjˉqdql. | (4.15) |
Let X1F be the time-1 map of the Hamiltonian vector field of εF and denote variables as follows
qj={qj,j∈S,zj,j∈Z2∗, |
then it satisfies
ˆH=H∘X1F=H00+ε˜G4+ε{H00,F}+ε2{˜G4,F}+ε2∫10(1−t){{H,F},F}∘XtFdt=<ω,J>+∑j∈Sμj|qj|2+∑j∈Z2∗μj|zj|2+3ε32π2∑i∈S1λ2i[˜G2,2iiii]|qi|4+3ε8π2∑i,j∈S,i≠j1λiλj[˜G2,2iijj]|qi|2|qj|2+3ε8π2∑i∈S,j∈Z2∗1λiλj[˜G2,2iijj]|qi|2|qj|2+3ε8π2∑d∈L11√λiλjλdλl[˜G2,2ijdl]qiˉqjqdˉql+3ε8π2∑d∈L21√λiλjλdλl[˜G2,2dilj]ˉqiˉqjqdql+3ε8π2∑d∈L21√λiλjλdλl[˜G2,2idjl]qiqjˉqdˉql+O(ε|q|‖z‖3a,s+ε‖z‖4a,s+ε2|q|6+ε2|q|5‖z‖a,s+ε2|q|4‖z‖2a,s+ε2|q|3‖z‖3a,s). |
Now we introduce the parameter vector ˜ξ=(˜ξj)j∈S and the action-angle variable by setting
qj=√Ij+˜ξjeiθj,ˉqj=√Ij+˜ξje−iθj,j∈S. | (4.16) |
From the symplectic transformation (4.16), the Hamiltonian ˆH is changed into
ˆH=<ω,J>+∑j∈SμjIj+∑j∈Z2∗μj|zj|2+3ε16π2∑i∈S1λ2i[˜G2,2iiii]˜ξiIi+3ε8π2∑i,j∈S,i≠j1λiλj[˜G2,2iijj]˜ξiIj+3ε8π2∑i∈S,j∈Z2∗1λiλj[˜G2,2iijj]˜ξi|zj|2+3ε8π2∑d∈L11√λiλjλdλl[˜G2,2ijdl]√˜ξi˜ξjei(θi−θj)zdˉzl+3ε8π2∑d∈L21√λiλjλdλl[˜G2,2dilj]√˜ξi˜ξje−i(θi+θj)zdzl+3ε8π2∑d∈L21√λiλjλdλl[˜G2,2idjl]√˜ξi˜ξjei(θi+θj)ˉzdˉzl+O(ε|I|2+ε|I|‖z‖2a,s+ε|˜ξ|12‖z‖3a,s+ε‖z‖4a,s+ε2|˜ξ|3+ε2|˜ξ|52‖z‖a,s+ε2|˜ξ|2‖z‖2a,s+ε2|˜ξ|32‖z‖3a,s) |
Through scaling variables
˜ξ→ε3˜ξ,J→ε5J,I→ε5I,ϑ→ε4ϑ,θ→θ,z→ε52z,ˉz→ε52ˉz, |
and scaling time t→ε9t, the rescaled Hamiltonian can be obtained
H=ε−9ˆH(ε3˜ξ;ε9J,ε5I,ϑ,θ,ε52z,ε52ˉz). |
Then H satisfies the equation (4.8)–(4.13).
Now let's give the estimates of the perturbation P. For this purpose, we need to introduce the notations which are taken from [13]. Let la,s is now the Hilbert space of all complex sequence w=(…,wj,…)j∈Z2∗ with
‖w‖a,s=∑j∈Z2∗|wj|ea|j|⋅|j|s<∞,a>0,s>0. |
Let x=ϑ⊕θ with θ=(θj)j∈S,y=J⊕I, z=(zj)j∈Z2∗ and ζ=ω⊕(˜ξj)j∈S, and let's introduce the phase space
Pa,s=ˆTm+n×Cm+n×la,s×la,s∋(x,y,z,ˉz) |
where ˆTm+n is the complexiation of the usual (m+n)-torus Tm+n. Let
Da,s(s′,r):={(x,y,z,ˉz)∈Pa,s:|Imx|<s′,|y|<r2,‖z‖a,s+‖ˉz‖a,s<r}, |
and
|W|r=|x|+1r2|y|+1r‖z‖a,s+1r‖ˉz‖a,s |
for W=(x,y,z,ˉz)∈Pa,s. Set α≡(…,αj,…)j∈Z2∗, β≡(…,βj,…)j∈Z2∗, αj and βj∈N with finitely many nonzero components of positive integers. The product zαˉzβ denotes ∏jzαjjˉzβjj. Let
P(x,y,z,ˉz)=∑α,βPαβ(x,y)zαˉzβ, |
where Pαβ=∑k,bPkbαβybei<k,x> are C4W functions in parameter ζ in the sense of Whitney. Let
‖P‖Da,s(s′,r),Σ_≡sup‖z‖a,s<r,‖ˉz‖a,s<r∑α,β‖Pαβ‖|zα||ˉzβ|, |
where, if Pα,β=∑k∈Zm+n,b∈Nm+nPkbαβ(ζ)ybei<k,x>, Pαβ is short for
‖Pαβ‖≡∑k,b|Pkbαβ|Σ_r2|b|e|k|s′,|Pkbαβ|Σ_≡supζ∈Σ_∑0≤s≤4|∂sζPkbαβ| |
the derivatives with respect to ζ are in the sense of Whitney. Denote by XP the vector field corresponding the Hamiltonian P with respect to the symplectic structure dx∧dy+idz∧dˉz, namely,
XP=(∂yP,−∂xP,i∇ˉzP,−i∇zP). |
Its weighted norm is defined by
‖XP‖Da,s(s′,r),Σ_≡‖Py‖Da,s(s′,r),Σ_+1r2‖Px‖Da,s(s′,r),Σ_+1r(∑j∈Z2∗‖Pzj‖Da,s(s′,r),Σ_e|j|a+∑j∈Z2∗‖Pˉzj‖Da,s(s′,r),Σ_e|j|a). |
The following Lemma can be obtained and the proof is similar to Lemma 3.2 in [27].
Lemma 4.2. For given s′,r>0, the perturbation P(x,y,z,ˉz;ζ) is real analytic for (x,y,z,ˉz)∈Da,s (s′,r) and Lipschitz in the parameters ζ∈Σ_, and for any ζ∈Σ_, its gradients with respect to z,ˉz satisfy
∂zP,∂ˉzP∈A(la,s,la,s), |
and
‖XP‖Da,s+1(s′,r),Σ_≤Cε, |
where s′=σ0/3 and r=√ε.
In order to prove our main result (Theorem 1.1), we need to state a KAM theorem which was proved by Geng-Zhou [13]. Here we recite the theorem from [13].
Let us consider the perturbations of a family of Hamiltonian
H00=N+A+B+ˉB, |
where
N=∑j∈Sˆωj(ξ)yj+∑j∈Z2∗ˆΩj(ξ)zjˉzj |
A=∑d∈L1ad(ξ)ei(xi−xj)zdˉzl |
B=∑d∈L2ad(ξ)e−i(xi+xj)zdzl |
ˉB=∑d∈L2ˉad(ξ)ei(xi+xj)ˉzdˉzl. |
in n-dimensional angle-action coordinates (x,y) and infinite-dimensional coordinates (z,ˉz) with symplectic structure
∑j∈Sdxj∧dyj+i∑j∈Z2∗dzj∧dˉzj. |
The tangent frequencies ˆω=(ˆωj)j∈S and normal ones ˆΩ=(ˆΩj)j∈Z2∗ depend on n parameters
ξ∈Π⊂Rn, |
with Π a closed bounded set of positive Lebesgue measure.
For each ξ there is an invariant n-torus Tn0=Tn×{0,0,0} with frequencies ˆω(ξ). The aim is to prove the persistence of a large portion of this family of rotational torus under small perturbations H=H00+P of H00. To this end the following assumptions are made.
Assumption A1. (Non-degeneracy): The map ξ↦ˆω(ξ) is a C4W diffeomorphism between Π and its image.
Assumption A2. (Asymptotics of normal frequencies):
ˆΩj=ε−ς|j|2+˜Ωj,ς>0 |
where ˜Ωj is a C4W functions of ξ and ˜Ωj=O(|j|−ι),ι>0.
Assumption A3. (Melnikov conditions): Let Bd=ˆΩd for d∈Z2∗∖(L1∪L2), and let
Bd=(ˆΩd+ˆωiadalˆΩl+ˆωj),d∈L1 |
Bd=(ˆΩd−ˆωiadˉalˆΩl−ˆωj),d∈L2 |
there exist γ′,τ>0 (here I2 is 2×2 identity matrix) such that
|<k,ˆω>|≥γ′|k|τ,k≠0, |
|det(<k,ˆω>I+Bd)|≥γ′|k|τ, |
|det(<k,ˆω>I±Bd⊗I2±I2⊗Bd′)|≥γ′|k|τ,k≠0, |
where I means the identity matrix.
Assumption A4. (Regularity): A+B+ˉB+P is real analytic in x,y,z,ˉz and Whitney smooth in ξ; and we have
‖XA‖Da,s(s′,r),Π+‖XB‖Da,s(s′,r),Π+‖XˉB‖Da,s(s′,r),Π<1,‖XP‖Da,s(s′,r),Π<ε. |
Assumption A5. (Zero-momentum condition): The normal form part A+B+ˉB+P satisfies the following condition
A+B+ˉB+P=∑k∈Zn,b∈Nn,α,β(A+B+ˉB+P)kbαβ(ξ)ybei<k,x>zαˉzβ |
and we have
(A+B+ˉB+P)kbαβ≠0⇒n∑ˆs=1kˆsiˆs+∑d∈Z2∗(αd−βd)d=0. |
Now we state the basic KAM theorem which is attributed to Geng-Zhou [13], and as a corollary, we get Theorem 1.1.
Theorem 5.1. ([13] Theorem 2) Assume that the Hamiltonian H=N+A+B+ˉB+P satisfies (A1)−(A5). Let γ′>0 be sufficiently small, then there exists ε>0 and a,s>0 such that if ‖XP‖Da,s(s′,r),Π<ε, the following holds: there exists a Cantor subset Πγ′⊂Π with meas(Π∖Πγ′)=O(γ′ς) (ς is a positive constant) and two maps which are analytic in x and C4W in ξ,
Ψ:Tn×Πγ′→Da,s(s′,r),˜ω:Πγ′→Rn, |
where Ψ is ε(γ′)16-close to the trivial embedding Ψ0:Tn×Π→Tn×{0,0,0} and ˜ω is ε-close to the unperturbed frequency ˆω, such that for any ξ∈Πγ′ and x∈Tn, the curve t→Ψ(x+˜ω(ξ)t,ξ) is a quasi-periodic solution of the Hamiltonian equations governed by H=N+A+B+ˉB+P.
In order to apply the above theorem to our problem, we need to introduce a new parameter ˉω below.
Given ω−∈R, for ω∈ˉˉR:={ω∈R∣|ω−ω−|≤ε}, we introduce new parameter ˉω by
ω=ω−+εˉω,ˉω∈[0,1]m. | (5.1) |
Then the Hamiltonian (4.8) is changed into
H=<ˆω(ξ),ˆy>+<ˆΩ(ξ),ˆz>+A+B+ˉB+P | (5.2) |
where ˆω(ξ)=(ε−4ω)⊕˘ω,ξ=ˉω⊕˜ξ,ˆz=(|zj|2)j∈Z2∗,ˆx=ϑ⊕θ,ˆy=J⊕I with
˘ωi=ε−4μi+316π21λ2i[˜G2,2iiii]˜ξi+38π2∑j∈S1λiλj[˜G2,2iijj]˜ξj,i∈S, | (5.3) |
ˆΩd=ε−4μd+38π2∑j∈S1λjλd[˜G2,2jjdd]˜ξj,d∈Z2∗. | (5.4) |
Denote ˘ω(ξ)=ε−4˜α+A˜ξ, ˆΩ(ξ)=ε−4˜β+B˜ξ, where
˜α=(…,μi,…)i∈S,˜β=(…,μd,…)d∈Z2∗, |
A=(˜Gij)i,j∈S,B=(˜Gij)i∈Z2∗,j∈S, | (5.5) |
with
˜Gij=3⋅(2−δij)16π2λiλj[˜G2,2iijj],δij={1,i=j,0,i≠j. | (5.6) |
Lemma 5.1. Let Π=[0,1]m+n, for any ε>0 sufficiently small, r=√ε, then we have
‖XP‖Da,s+1(s′,r)×Π≤Cε. |
The proof of the above lemma is the same as one of Lemma 4.2.
In this section, we prove that the Hamiltonian (5.2) satisfies the assumptions (A1)−(A5). In view of (5.5), (5.6), (2.10) and (3.45),
limε→0A=3[ϕ]16π2(1λ212λ1λ2⋯2λ1λn2λ2λ11λ22⋯2λ2λn⋯⋯⋯⋯2λnλ12λnλ2⋯1λ2n)n×n:=˜A=:[ϕ]ˆA, |
Verifying (A1): From (5.3),
∂ˆω∂ξ=(ε−3Im0ε−3⋅∂˜α∂ω+ε⋅∂(A˜ξ)∂ωA),forξ∈Π, |
where Im denotes the unit m×m-matrix. It is obvious that det˜A≠0. So detA≠0 can be obtained by assuming 0<ε≪1. Thus assumption (A1) is verified.
Verifying (A2): Take ς=4,ι=4, the proof is obvious.
Verifying (A3): For (5.2), Bd is defined as follows,
Bd=ˆΩdd∈Z2∗∖(L1∪L2), |
and
Bd=(ˆΩd+˘ωi3[˜G2,2ijdl]√˜ξi˜ξj8π2√λiλjλdλl3[˜G2,2ijdl]√˜ξi˜ξj8π2√λiλjλdλlˆΩl+˘ωj),d∈L1 |
Bd=(ˆΩd−˘ωi3[˜G2,2dilj]√˜ξi˜ξj8π2√λiλjλdλl3[˜G2,2idjl]√˜ξi˜ξj8π2√λiλjλdλlˆΩl−˘ωj),d∈L2 |
where (i,j,l) is uniquely determined by d. In the following, we only prove (A3) for det[<k,ˆω(ξ)>I±Bd⊗I2±I2⊗Bd′] which is the most complicated case. For k∈Zm+n,b∈Nm+n, denote
k=(k1,k2),b=(b1,b2),k1∈Zm,k2∈Zn,b1∈Nm,b2∈Nn. |
Let
Z(ξ)=<k,ˆω(ξ)>I±Bd⊗I2±I2⊗Bd′=(ε−4<k1,ω>+ε−4<k2,˜α>+<k2,A˜ξ>)I±Bd⊗I2±I2⊗Bd′. |
We need to prove that |Z(ξ)|≥γ′|k|τ,(k≠0). For this purpose, we need to divide into the following two cases.
Case 1. When k1≠0, notice that
∂((ε−4<k2,˜α>+<k2,A˜ξ>)I±Bd⊗I2±I2⊗Bd′)∂ˉω=ε−3⋅O(ε1+ρ), |
and from
∂<k1,ε−4ω>∂ˉω+ε−3⋅O(ε1+ρ)=ε−3(k1+O(ε1+ρ))≠0,0<ε≪1 |
then all the eigenvalues of Z(ξ) are not identically zero.
Case 2. When k1=0, then
Z(ξ)=(ε−4<k1,ω>+ε−4<k2,˜α>+<k2,A˜ξ>)I±Bd⊗I2±I2⊗Bd′=(ε−4<k2,˜α>+<k2,A˜ξ>)I±Bd⊗I2±I2⊗Bd′, |
We assert that all the eigenvalues of Z(ξ) are not identically zero. Here we're just proving it for d,d′∈L1, and everything else is similar. Let
Bd=ε−4B1d+B2d,∀d∈L1 |
where
B1d=(μd+μi00μl+μj), |
B2d=(−3[˜G2,2iiii]˜ξi16π2λ2i+3∑κ∈S([˜G2,2κκii]λiλκ+[˜G2,2κκdd]λκλd)˜ξκ8π23[˜G2,2ijdl]√˜ξi˜ξj8π2√λiλjλdλl3[˜G2,2ijdl]√˜ξi˜ξj8π2√λiλjλdλl−3[˜G2,2jjjj]˜ξj16π2λ2j+3∑κ∈S([˜G2,2κκjj]λκλj+[˜G2,2κκll]λκλl)˜ξκ8π2). |
Then
Z(ξ)=ε−4(<k2,˜α>I±B1d⊗I2±I2⊗B1d′)+(<k2,A˜ξ>I±B2d⊗I2±I2⊗B2d′). |
In view of |i|2+|d|2=|j|2+|l|2 and (2.10), (3.45),
limε→0B1d=(|i|2+|d|200|i|2+|d|2):=^B1d, |
limε→0B2d=(−3[ϕ]˜ξi16π2λ2i+3[ϕ]∑κ∈S(1λκλi+1λκλd)˜ξκ8π23[ϕ]√˜ξi˜ξj8π2√λiλjλdλl3[ϕ]√˜ξi˜ξj8π2√λiλjλdλl−3[ϕ]˜ξj16π2λ2j+3[ϕ]∑κ∈S(1λκλj+1λκλl)˜ξκ8π2):=~B2d:=[ϕ]^B2d, |
Thus,
limε→0Z(ξ)=ε−4(<k2,ˆα>I±^B1d⊗I2±I2⊗^B1d′)+[ϕ](<k2,ˆA˜ξ>I±^B2d⊗I2±I2⊗^B2d′)=ε−4(<k2,ˆα>±(|i|2+|d|2)±(|i′|2+|d′|2))I+[ϕ]<ˆAk2±(1λi+1λd)ˆβ±(1λj+1λl)ˆβ,˜ξ>I±(−3[ϕ]˜ξi16π2λ2i3[ϕ]√˜ξi˜ξj8π2λiλj3[ϕ]√˜ξi˜ξj8π2λiλj−3[ϕ]˜ξj16π2λ2j)⊗I2±I2⊗(−3[ϕ]˜ξi′16π2λ2i′3[ϕ]√˜ξi′˜ξj′8π2λi′λj′3[ϕ]√˜ξi′˜ξj′8π2λi′λj′−3[ϕ]˜ξj′16π2λ2j′):=ˆZ(ξ) |
with ˆα=(λi1,λi2,…,λin), ˆβ=(38π2λi1,38π2λi2,…,38π2λin) and ˜ξ=(˜ξi1,˜ξi2,…,˜ξin). The eigenvalues of ˆZ(ξ) are
ε−4(<k2,ˆα>±(|i|2+|d|2)±(|i′|2+|d′|2))+[ϕ]<ˆAk2±(1λi+1λd)ˆβ±(1λj+1λl)ˆβ,˜ξ>±3[ϕ]32π2[(−˜ξiλ2i−˜ξjλ2j±√˜ξi2λ4i+14˜ξi˜ξjλ2iλ2j+˜ξj2λ4j)±(−˜ξi′λ2i′−˜ξj′λ2j′±√˜ξi′2λ4i′+14˜ξi′˜ξj′λ2i′λ2j′+˜ξj′2λ4j′)]. |
Similar to [10], we know that all the eigenvalues are not identically zero. Thus all the eigenvalues of Z(ξ) are not identically zero as 0<ε≪1. Moreover, they are similar to d∈L1,d′∈L2 or d∈L2,d′∈L2, and omit them here.
Hence all eigenvalues of Z(ξ) are not identically zero for k≠0. According to Lemma 3.1 in [10], det(Z(ξ)) is polynomial function in ξ of order at most four. Thus
|∂4ξ(det(Z(ξ)))|≥12|k|≠0. |
By excluding some parameter set with measure O(4√γ′), we get
|det(Z(ξ))|≥γ′|k|τ,k≠0. |
(A3) is verified.
Verifying (A4): Assumption (A4) can be verified easily fulfilled by Lemma 5.1.
Verifying (A5): The proof is similar to [27].
By applying Theorem 5.1([13] Theorem 2), we get Theorem 1.1.
Proof of Lemma 4.1. Case 1. Similar to Lemma 3.1 in [27], there exists a set R3,1 so that ∀ω∈[ϱ,2ϱ]m∖R3,1, Lemma 4.1(i) is true, and measR3,1≤γ9ϱm. We omit the proof.
Case 2. Assume i+j+d+l=0,|i|2+|j|2+|d|2+|l|2≠0 and #(S∩{i,j,d,l})≥2. First of all, we have ||i|2+|j|2+|d|2+|l|2|≥1. Denote f(ε)=μi+μj+μd+μl, then by μj=λj+ε2λj[ϕ]+1λjε(1+ρ)μ∗j we have
f(ε)=|i|2+|j|2+|d|2+|l|2+ε[ϕ](12λi+12λj+12λd+12λl)+ε(1+ρ)(μ∗iλi+μ∗jλj+μ∗dλd+μ∗lλl). |
Case 1.1. For k=0, then
|f(ε)+<k,ω>|=|f(ε)|≥1−Cε≥ϱC∗ |
when ε small enough and C∗ large enough.
Case 1.2. For k≠0, denote
I3,2ijdl,k={ω∈[ϱ,2ϱ]m:|f(ε)+<k,ω>|<ϱC∗|k|m+1}, |
and
R3,2=⋃0≠k∈Zm⋃i,j,d,lI3,2ijdl,k. |
Case 1.2.1. When #(S∩{i,j,d,l})=4. Denote
I3,2,1ijdl,k={ω∈[ϱ,2ϱ]m:|f(ε)+<k,ω>|<ϱC∗|k|m}, |
R3,2,1=⋃0≠k∈Zm⋃i∈S,j∈S,d∈S,l∈SI3,2,1ijdl,k, |
we have
measI3,2,1ijdl,k≤2ϱmC∗|k|m+1. |
Let
|k|∞=max{|k1|,|k2|,…,|km|}, |
in view of
∑|k|∞=p1≤2m(2p+1)m−1, |
|k|∞≤|k|≤m|k|∞, |
we have
measR3,2,1=meas⋃0≠k∈Zm⋃i∈S,j∈S,d∈S,l∈SI3,2,1ijdl,k≤∑0≠k∈Zmn42ϱmC∗|k|m+1≤C″1C∗ϱm∑0≠k∈Zm1|k|m+1≤C′1C∗ϱm∞∑p=1(2p+1)m−1p−(m+1)≤C1C∗ϱm |
where the constant C1 depends on n,m. Thus
measR3,2,1≤γ27ϱm |
provided C∗ large enough.
Case 1.2.2. When #(S∩{i,j,d,l})=3. Assume i,j,d∈S,l∈Z2∗ without loss of generality. Then l=−i−j−d is at most n3 different values. Denote
I3,2,2ijdl,k={ω∈[ϱ,2ϱ]m:|f(ε)+<k,ω>|<ϱC∗|k|m}, |
R3,2,2=⋃0≠k∈Zm⋃i∈S,j∈S,d∈S,l=−i−j−dI3,2,2ijdl,k, |
then
measI3,2,2ijdl,k≤2ϱmC∗|k|m+1. |
We obtain
measR3,2,2=meas⋃0≠k∈Zm⋃i∈S,j∈S,d∈S,l=−i−j−dI3,2,2ijdl,k≤∑0≠k∈Zmn62ϱmC∗|k|m+1≤C2C∗ϱm |
where the constant C2 depends on n,m. Thus
measR3,2,2≤γ27ϱm |
provided C∗ large enough.
Case 1.2.3. When #(S∩{i,j,d,l})=2. Assume i,j∈S,d,l∈Z2∗ without loss of generality. Then we have l=−i−j−d and
f(ε)=|i|2+|j|2+|d|2+|i+j+d|2+ε[ϕ](12λi+12λj+12λd+12λl)+ε(1+ρ)(μ∗iλi+μ∗jλj+μ∗dλd+μ∗lλl)=g+ε[ϕ](12λi+12λj+12λd+12λl)+ε(1+ρ)(μ∗iλi+μ∗jλj+μ∗dλd+μ∗lλl) |
where g=|i|2+|j|2+|d|2+|i+j+d|2∈Z+. Denote
I3,2,3ijdl,k={ω∈[ϱ,2ϱ]m:|f(ε)+<k,ω>|<ϱC∗|k|m+1}, |
R3,2,3=⋃0≠k∈Zm⋃i∈S,j∈S,d∈Z2∗,l=−i−j−dI3,2,3ijdl,k. |
For given i,j,g, denote
d∗ijg={d∈Z2∗:g=|i|2+|j|2+|d|2+|i+j+d|2} |
μ∗ijg,1=supd∈d∗ijg{μ∗dλd+μ∗−i−j−dλ−i−j−d},μ∗ijg,2=infd∈d∗ijg{μ∗dλd+μ∗−i−j−dλ−i−j−d} |
g∗=g+ε[ϕ](12λi+12λj+12λd+12λl) |
I3,2,3,1ijg,k={ω∈[ϱ,2ϱ]m:|<k,ω>+g∗+ε(1+ρ)(μ∗iλi+μ∗jλj+μ∗ijg,1)|<ϱC∗|k|m+1}, |
I3,2,3,2ijg,k={ω∈[ϱ,2ϱ]m:|<k,ω>+g∗+ε(1+ρ)(μ∗iλi+μ∗jλj+μ∗ijg,2)|<ϱC∗|k|m+1}, |
then for l=−i−j−d,d∈d∗ijg, from ε(1+ρ)(μ∗dλd+μ∗−i−j−dλ−i−j−d) is sufficiently small,
I3,2,3ijdl,k⊂I3,2,3,1ijg,k⋃I3,2,3,2ijg,k. |
Thus
⋃l=−i−j−d⋃d∈d∗ijgI3,2,3ijdl,k⊂(I3,2,3,1ijg,k⋃I3,2,3,2ijg,k). |
We get
measI3,2,3,1ijg,k≤2ϱmC∗|k|m+2,measI3,2,3,2ijg,k≤2ϱmC∗|k|m+2. |
When |g|>|k|ϱ+4, the sets I3,2,3,1ijg,k,I3,2,3,2ijg,k are empty. So let
R3,2,3=⋃0≠k∈Zm⋃i∈S,j∈S⋃d∈Z2∗⋃l=−i−j−dI3,2,3ijdl,k⊂⋃0≠k∈Zm⋃i∈S,j∈S⋃g∈Z(I3,2,3,1ijg,k⋃I3,2,3,2ijg,k), |
then
measR3,2,3≤meas⋃0≠k∈Zm⋃i∈S,j∈S⋃g∈Z(I3,2,3,1ijg,k⋃I3,2,3,2ijg,k)=meas⋃0≠k∈Zm⋃i∈S,j∈S⋃1≤|g|≤|k|ϱ+4(I2,3,1ijg,k⋃I2,3,2ijg,k)≤∑0≠k∈Zm4n2(|k|ϱ+4)2ϱmC∗|k|m+2≤C3C∗ϱm, |
where the constant C3 depends on n,m. Thus
measR3,2,3≤γ27ϱm |
provided C∗ large enough. Denote
R3,2=R3,2,1∪R3,2,2∪R3,2,3, |
then we have measR3,2≤γ9ϱm.
Case 3. Similar to Case 2, there exists a set R3,3 so that ∀ω∈[ϱ,2ϱ]m∖R3,3, Lemma 4.1(iii) is true, and measR3,3≤γ9ϱm. We omit the proof.
Denote
¯R=[ϱ,2ϱ]m∖(R3,1∪R3,2∪R3,3), |
then it satisfies as required and
meas¯R≥(1−γ3)ϱm. |
N is the set of natural Numbers, Z is the set of integers, Zn is an n-dimensional integer space, R is the set of real Numbers, Rn is an n-dimensional Euclidean space, Tn is an n-dimensional torus.
We would like to thank the referees for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve our paper. This paper is partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos.11701567, 11601270) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities(Grant Nos.19CX02048A, 17CX02048).
The authors declare that they have no competing interests in this paper.
[1] |
Imberti JF, Tosetti A, Mei DA, et al. (2021) Remote monitoring and telemedicine in heart failure: implementation and benefits. Curr Cardiol Rep 23: 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-021-01487-2 ![]() |
[2] |
Kuan PX, Chan WK, Ying DKF, et al. (2022) Efficacy of telemedicine for the management of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Digit Health 4: e676-e691. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(22)00124-8 ![]() |
[3] |
Ghilencea LN, Chiru MR, Stolcova M, et al. (2022) Telemedicine: benefits for cardiovascular patients in the COVID-19 era. Front Cardiovasc Med 9: 868635. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.868635 ![]() |
[4] |
Takahashi EA, Schwamm LH, Adeoye OM, et al. (2022) An overview of Telehealth in the management of cardiovascular disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 146: e558-e568. https://doi.org/10.1161/cir.0000000000001107 ![]() |
[5] | Hawayek J, Postal S, Rissmiller S (2022) How health plan providers and telehealth partnerships advance care & scaled adoption: panel session. Telehealth Med Today . https://doi.org/10.30953/tmt.v7.352 |
[6] | National Diagnostic Imaging, Telecardiology, Remote Cardiology, Mobile EKG, Cardiac Imaging Reporting, ECG (EKG) Interpretations And Echo Reading Services. Beachwood National Diagnostic Imaging, 2022. Available from: https://www.ndximaging.com/subspeciality-interpretations/telecardiology-and-remote-cardiology-services |
[7] |
Soliman AM (2020) Telemedicine in the cardiovascular world: ready for the future?. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J 16: 283-290. https://doi.org/10.14797/mdcj-16-4-283 ![]() |
[8] | Dimitri DS, Pourriahi M, Sharma S, et al. (2021) Remote patient monitoring to improve outcomes in heart failure. J Cardiol Clin Res 9: 1171. |
[9] | Morris G (2023) Pros and Cons of cardiac remote monitoring. NurseJournal . Available from: https://nursejournal.org/articles/pros-and-cons-of-cardiac-remote-monitoring. |
[10] | American Heart Association, Telehealth is a valuable option in cardiovascular care, though challenges remain. Dallas American Heart Association, 2022. Available from: https://newsroom.heart.org/news/telehealth-is-a-valuable-option-in-cardiovascular-care-though-challenges-remain |
[11] |
Raju PK, Sistla PG (2022) Challenges in the implementation of telemedicine. J Indian Coll Cardiol 12: 178-183. https://doi.org/10.4103/jicc.jicc_22_21 ![]() |
[12] |
Singhal A, Riley JP, Cowie MR (2023) Benefits and challenges of telemedicine for heart failure consultations: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res 23: 847. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09872-z ![]() |
[13] |
Perk J, Graham I, De Backer G (2014) Prevention of cardiovascular disease: new guidelines, new tools, but challenges remain. Heart 100: 675-677. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2014-305650 ![]() |
[14] |
Schwamm LH, Chumbler N, Brown E, et al. (2017) Recommendations for the implementation of telehealth in cardiovascular and stroke care: a policy statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 135: e24-e44. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000475 ![]() |
[15] |
Mermelstein HT, Wallack JJ (2008) Confidentiality in the age of HIPAA: a challenge for psychosomatic medicine. Psychosomatics 49: 97-103. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psy.49.2.97 ![]() |
[16] | Shah R (2023) 5 must-follow best practices for Telemedicine implementation in your care facility, . Available from: https://www.osplabs.com/insights/5-must-follow-best-practices-for-telemedicine-implementation-in-your-care-facility/ |
[17] |
Patel P, Dhindsa D, Eapen DJ, et al. (2021) Optimizing the potential for telehealth in cardiovascular care (in the era of COVID-19): time will tell. Am J Med 134: 945-951. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2021.03.007 ![]() |
[18] |
Albulushi A, Al Kindi DI, Moawwad N, et al. (2024) Digital health technologies in enhancing patient and caregiver engagement in heart failure management: opportunities and challenges. Int J Cardiol 408: 132116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2024.132116 ![]() |
1. | Nguyen Thi Thu Thuy, Tran Thanh Tung, Strong convergence of one-step inertial algorithm for a class of bilevel variational inequalities, 2025, 0233-1934, 1, 10.1080/02331934.2024.2448737 | |
2. | Nguyen Thi Thu Thuy, Tran Thanh Tung, Le Xuan Ly, Strongly convergent two-step inertial algorithm for a class of bilevel variational inequalities, 2025, 44, 2238-3603, 10.1007/s40314-024-03078-7 | |
3. | Le Xuan Ly, Nguyen Thi Thu Thuy, Nguyen Quoc Anh, Relaxed two-step inertial method for solving a class of split variational inequality problems with application to traffic analysis, 2025, 0233-1934, 1, 10.1080/02331934.2025.2459191 |