
In this paper, we studied the stability of the Cauchy problem for a class of first-order linear quasi-periodically forced PDEs on the m-dimensional torus:
{∂tu+(ξ+f(x,ωt,ξ))⋅∂xu=0,u(x,0)=u0(x),
where ξ∈Rm,x∈Tm,ω∈Rd, in the case of multidimensional Liouvillean forced frequency. We proved that for each compact set O∈Rm there exists a Cantor subset Oγ of O with positive Lebesgue measure such that if ξ∈Oγ, then for a perturbation f being small in some analytic Sobolev norm, there exists a bounded and invertible quasi-periodic family of linear operator Ψ(ωt), such that the above PDEs are reduced by the transformation v:=Ψ(ωt)−1[u] into the following PDE:
∂tv+(ξ+m∞(ωt))⋅∂xv=0,
provided that the forced frequency ω∈Rd possesses finite uniform Diophantine exponent, which allows Liouvillean frequency. The reducibility can immediately cause the stability of the above Cauchy problem, that is, the analytic Sobolev norms of the Cauchy problem are controlled uniformly in time. The proof is based on a finite dimensional Kolmogorov-Arnold-Moser (KAM) theory for quasi-periodically forced linear vector fields with multidimensional Liouvillean forced frequency. As we know, the results on Liouvillean frequency existing in the literature deal with two-dimensional frequency and exploit the theory of continued fractions to control the small divisor problem. The results in this paper partially extend the analysis to higher-dimensional frequency and impose a weak nonresonance condition, i.e., the forced frequency ω possesses finite uniform Diophantine exponent. Our result can be regarded as a generalization of analytic cases in the work [R. Feola, F. Giuliani, R. Montalto and M, Procesi, Reducibility of first order linear operators on tori via Moser's theorem, J. Funct. Anal., 2019] from Diophantine frequency to Liouvillean frequency.
Citation: Xinyu Guan, Nan Kang. Stability for Cauchy problem of first order linear PDEs on Tm with forced frequency possessing finite uniform Diophantine exponent[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 17795-17826. doi: 10.3934/math.2024866
[1] | Jiali Yu, Yadong Shang, Huafei Di . Existence and nonexistence of global solutions to the Cauchy problem of thenonlinear hyperbolic equation with damping term. AIMS Mathematics, 2018, 3(2): 322-342. doi: 10.3934/Math.2018.2.322 |
[2] | Muhammad Naeem, Muhammad Qiyas, Lazim Abdullah, Neelam Khan . Sine hyperbolic fractional orthotriple linear Diophantine fuzzy aggregation operator and its application in decision making. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 11916-11942. doi: 10.3934/math.2023602 |
[3] | Bessem Samet . First and second critical exponents for an inhomogeneous damped wave equation with mixed nonlinearities. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 7055-7070. doi: 10.3934/math.2020452 |
[4] | Abdulghani R. Alharbi . Numerical solutions to two-dimensional fourth order parabolic thin film equations using the Parabolic Monge-Ampere method. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 16463-16478. doi: 10.3934/math.2023841 |
[5] | Ashraf Al-Quran . T-spherical linear Diophantine fuzzy aggregation operators for multiple attribute decision-making. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 12257-12286. doi: 10.3934/math.2023618 |
[6] | Xiaochun Sun, Yulian Wu, Gaoting Xu . Global well-posedness for the 3D rotating Boussinesq equations in variable exponent Fourier-Besov spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 27065-27079. doi: 10.3934/math.20231385 |
[7] | Mohammad Kafini, Jamilu Hashim Hassan, Mohammad M. Al-Gharabli . Decay result in a problem of a nonlinearly damped wave equation with variable exponent. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 3067-3082. doi: 10.3934/math.2022170 |
[8] | M. Syed Ali, M. Hymavathi, Bandana Priya, Syeda Asma Kauser, Ganesh Kumar Thakur . Stability analysis of stochastic fractional-order competitive neural networks with leakage delay. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(4): 3205-3241. doi: 10.3934/math.2021193 |
[9] | Jinliang Wang, Fang Wang, Songbo Hu . On asymptotic correlation coefficient for some order statistics. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 6763-6776. doi: 10.3934/math.2023344 |
[10] | Yan Wu, Chun-Gang Zhu . Generating bicubic B-spline surfaces by a sixth order PDE. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(2): 1677-1694. doi: 10.3934/math.2021099 |
In this paper, we studied the stability of the Cauchy problem for a class of first-order linear quasi-periodically forced PDEs on the m-dimensional torus:
{∂tu+(ξ+f(x,ωt,ξ))⋅∂xu=0,u(x,0)=u0(x),
where ξ∈Rm,x∈Tm,ω∈Rd, in the case of multidimensional Liouvillean forced frequency. We proved that for each compact set O∈Rm there exists a Cantor subset Oγ of O with positive Lebesgue measure such that if ξ∈Oγ, then for a perturbation f being small in some analytic Sobolev norm, there exists a bounded and invertible quasi-periodic family of linear operator Ψ(ωt), such that the above PDEs are reduced by the transformation v:=Ψ(ωt)−1[u] into the following PDE:
∂tv+(ξ+m∞(ωt))⋅∂xv=0,
provided that the forced frequency ω∈Rd possesses finite uniform Diophantine exponent, which allows Liouvillean frequency. The reducibility can immediately cause the stability of the above Cauchy problem, that is, the analytic Sobolev norms of the Cauchy problem are controlled uniformly in time. The proof is based on a finite dimensional Kolmogorov-Arnold-Moser (KAM) theory for quasi-periodically forced linear vector fields with multidimensional Liouvillean forced frequency. As we know, the results on Liouvillean frequency existing in the literature deal with two-dimensional frequency and exploit the theory of continued fractions to control the small divisor problem. The results in this paper partially extend the analysis to higher-dimensional frequency and impose a weak nonresonance condition, i.e., the forced frequency ω possesses finite uniform Diophantine exponent. Our result can be regarded as a generalization of analytic cases in the work [R. Feola, F. Giuliani, R. Montalto and M, Procesi, Reducibility of first order linear operators on tori via Moser's theorem, J. Funct. Anal., 2019] from Diophantine frequency to Liouvillean frequency.
It is well known that the problem of reducibility and stability of Sobolev norms for quasi-periodically forced linear operators on the torus is a classical one in the theory of infinite dimensional dynamical systems, which has received new attention in the past few years. Roughly speaking, given a linear operator with coefficients that depend on time in a quasi-periodic way, we say that it is reducible if there exists a bounded change of variables depending quasi-periodically on time (say mapping Hs→Hs for all times), which makes its coefficients constant. Actually, the notion of reducibility has been first introduced for ordinary differential equations (ODEs), going back to Bogolyubov [11] and Moser [32]. Also, there is a large literature around the reducibility of ODEs by means of the KAM tools. Regarding recent developments in this direction, we invite the reader to consult [4,16,22,25,26] and the references therein. Such kind of reducibility results for PDEs using KAM machinery have been well developed, see [7,8,9,10,13,18,21,30,31]. Due to the large amount of work in reducible KAM theory for non linear partial differential equations (PDEs), we do not list them, and refer to the introduction in [20] for more details.
Investigating the reducibility of linear operators is important when reducibility problems of nonlinear PDEs are considered. Very recently, Feola et al. [20] considered the reducibility of linear equations of the form
∂tu+(ζ+a(ω,ζ)(ωt,x))⋅∂xu=0, | (1.1) |
on the torus x∈Td where ω∈Rν and ζ∈Rd are parameters (and the dependence on these parameters is denoted by the corresponding subscripts) while a(ω,ζ)∈C∞(Tν+d,Rd). They proved that if for any s1∈Z+ large enough and ‖a‖s1=‖a(ω,ζ)‖Hs1(Tν+d,Rd) small enough, then there exists a Borl set O∞⊂O0 (a bounded domain in Rν+d) with positive Lebesgue measure such that for any (ω,ζ)∈O∞, there is a quasi-periodic family of bounded and invertible linear operators Ψ(ωt)=Ψω,ζ(ωt) and the equation (1.1) is reduced by v=Ψ(ωt)−1[u] into constant coefficients
∂tv+mω,ζ⋅∂xv=0, |
where |mω,ζ−ζ|=O(‖a‖s1) uniformly in (ω,ζ)∈O0, see Theorem 1 in [20]. As a direct consequence, the Sobolev norms of the solutions of the Cauchy problem associated to (1.1) are controlled uniformly in time. The main strategies in [20] are divided into two steps: Firstly, the problem of reducing equations (1.1) to constant coefficients, by the identification between first order operators and vector fields, can be formulated as the problem of finding a family of diffeomorphism Ψξ:θ↦θ+hξ(θ) that conjugates a weakly perturbed constant vector field
(ξ+fξ(θ))⋅∂θ |
on Tν+d to constant Diophantine vector fields αξ⋅∂θ. Here, ξ is a parameter ranging in a bounded domain O⊂Rν+d and fξ,hξ∈C∞(Tν+d,Rν+d). In other words, the authors obtained a new version of J. Moser's theorem on straightening vector fields on tori (called the tame Moser theorem), see Theorem 2 in [20]. Second, the tame Moser theorem is proven via an iterative KAM-type scheme in the Sobolev spaces Hs. Approximations by analytic functions are not used. Instead, the authors approached the problem in the spirit of the Nash-Moser theory, where one employs interpolation and smoothing estimates in order to control the loss of regularity due to the presence of small divisors.
Consider two classes of first order, linear quasi-periodically forced PDEs as the following:
{∂tu+(ξ+f(x,ωt,ξ))⋅∂xu=0,u(x,0)=u0(x), | (1.2) |
where x∈Tm,ω∈Rd,ξ∈O⊂Rm, f:Tm+d→Rm and u0:Tm→R are both Cω functions, and
{∂tu+(ρ+f(x,ωt))⋅∂xu=0,u(x,0)=u0(x), | (1.3) |
where x∈T,ω∈Rd,ρ∈R, f:T1+d→R and u0:T→R are both Cω functions. We say (1.2) and (1.3) satisfy the Cauchy problem with initial condition u(x,0)=u0(x) if u(x,t) is the solution of (1.2) and (1.3) and satisfies u(x,0)=u0(x). Furthermore, we say this Cauchy problem is stable if the norm of u(x,⋅) can be controlled by the norm of u0(x) for each t∈R. Inspired by the works in [20], we study the stability of the Cauchy problem of (1.2) and (1.3) in analytic Sobolev norm under multi-Liouvillean forced frequency. To this end, we have to discuss the rotations reducibility* of PDEs
*Equation (1.4) is said to be rotations reducible, if there exists a quasi-periodic transformation u=Φ(ωt)[v] such that system (1.4) is transformed into ∂tv+m(ωt,ξ))⋅∂xv=0 and m is close to constant.
∂tu+(ξ+f(x,ωt,ξ))⋅∂xu=0, | (1.4) |
and
∂tu+(ρ+f(x,ωt))⋅∂xu=0 | (1.5) |
since it is quite difficult to study the reducibility of PEDs in the case of Liouvillean forced frequency, and such rotations reducibility is able to ensure the stability of solutions of Cauchy problems (1.2) and (1.3). See Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 in Section 3 for more detail. As done in [20], we use the identification between derivation operators and vector fields in order to change rotations reducible for PDEs (1.4) and (1.5) into a corresponding rotations reducible for analytic vector field on Tm+d
ω⋅∂∂φ+(ξ+f(θ,φ,ξ))⋅∂∂θ | (1.6) |
and for analytic vector field on T1+d
ω⋅∂∂φ+(ρ+f(θ,φ))⋅∂∂θ. | (1.7) |
Under appropriate hypotheses on the size of f, rotations reducibility of vector field (1.6) or (1.7) follows a KAM-type iterative scheme with multidimensional Liouvillean forced frequency in the analytic Sobolev spaces Hs. See Propositions 1 and 2 in Section 3 for more detail; these results can be regarded as the generalization of V.I. Arnold's [1] Cω reducible result on analytic vector fields in the case of Diophantine frequency to C∞ rotations reducible in the case of multidimensional Liouvillean forced frequency.
Let us briefly review recent developments in KAM theory with Liouvillean forced frequency. In 2011, Avila et al. [4] considered the following linear skew-products
(α,A):T×R2×T×R2(x,ω)→(x+α,A(x)⋅ω) | (1.8) |
where α∈R and A:T→SL(2;R) is analytic, and gave a KAM scheme for the rotations reducibility of SL(2;R) cocycles with Liouvillean frequency by using the technique of continued fractions. Subsequently, X. Hou and J. You [24] further proved that a quasi-periodic linear differential equation (1.8) in sl(2,R) with two frequencies (1,α) is almost reducible provided that the coefficients are analytic and close to a constant. In the case that α is Diophantine, they got the non-perturbative reducibility. Reducibility and the rotations reducibility for an arbitrary irrational α under some assumption on the rotation number were also obtained. For more references, see [38,39,40,41,42,43,44]. Starting from the works [4] and [24], the question of reducibility on quasi-periodically forced systems beyond Diophantine or Brjuno condition † has been one of the central themes of the subject---when can the dynamics of a given system be related to those of a linear model, as for example periodic or quasi-periodic motion on a torus? However, very little is known about reducibility (or linearization) of quasi-periodically forced nonlinear flows on a m-dimensional torus under a non-resonance condition on forced frequency weaker than the Diophantine or Brjuno condition.
†If there exist γ>0 and τ>d such that
|⟨k,ω⟩|≥γ|k|τ,k∈Zd∖{0}, |
then we say the frequency ω satisfies Diophantine conditions. Slightly weaker than Diophantine conditions can be often required as Brjuno conditions, which are defined by
∑n≥02−nmax0<|k|≤2n,k∈Zdln1|⟨k,ω⟩|<∞. |
If the frequency ω does not satisfy Brjuno condition, we call it Liouvillean.
An analytic quasi-periodically forced (qpf) m-torus flow is the flow
˙θ=f(θ,φ),˙φ=ω |
defined by an analytic vector field of the form
ω⋅∂∂φ+f(θ,φ)⋅∂∂θ, | (1.9) |
where f:Tm×Td→Rm is analytic, and ω∈Rd is rationally independent. We denote by (ω,f) the flow of the vector field (1.9) for simplicity. Recently, in the case of m=1, Krikorian et al. [27] proved that the flow (ω,ρ+f) with ω=(1,α), where f:T×T2→R is analytic, α satisfies not super-Liouvillean condition
β(α):=limsupn>0lnlnqn+1lnqn<∞ | (1.10) |
with {pnqn} being the continued fraction approximate to α and its rotation number ρf is Diophantine with respect to the basic frequency ω ‡, is C∞ rotations reducible provided that f is sufficiently small. Their inspiration comes from reducibility theory of quasi-periodic SL(2,R) cocycle [2,3,4,5,6,14,15,19,24] and their breakthrough is solving a homological equations of variable coefficient taking advantage of diagonally dominant operators. This work generalizes the linear result [4,24] to general nonlinear quasi-periodically forced circle flows. Subsequently, using the same Liouvillean non-resonant condition, i.e., ω=(1,α) satisfies not super-Liouvillean condition (1.10), J. Wang and J. You [35] proved the boundedness of solutions for non-linear quasi-periodic differential equations. In addition, there are many interesting works on the Stoker's problem (existence of response solutions) for nonlinear mechanical models with Liouvillean forced frequency. Since the Stoker's problem is different from that of the reducible problem, its Liouvillean forced frequency can be much weaker. Readers can consult [12,29,36,43] for related results.
‡that is
|⟨k,ω⟩+lρf|≥γ|k|τ,for all0≠(k,l)∈Zd×Z, |
with γ>0 and τ>2.
All the above reducible results about quasi-periodically forced (qpf) flows with Liouvillean forced frequency are mainly concerned with two-dimensional frequency. However, for multidimensional Liouvillean forced frequency, the theory of high-dimensional continued fractions is not completely satisfactory. Thus, we must look for more appropriate methods to deal with the case of multidimensional Liouvillean forced frequency. In this direction, there are some works on ODEs or PDEs, see [12,34,37,38]. In particular, Xu et al. [38] provided quasi-periodic solutions for Hamiltonian PDE with frequency vector ω=(¯ω1,¯ω2)∈R2×Rd−2, ¯ω1=(1,α), α∈R∖Q, which is called weak Liouvillean frequency, i.e., for γ>0,τ>d+1, there is
{β(α):=limsupn>0lnlnqn+1lnqn<∞,|⟨k1,¯ω1⟩+⟨k2,¯ω2⟩|≥γ(|k1|+|k2|)τ,fork1∈Z2,k2∈Zd−2∖{0}, | (1.11) |
where {pnqn} is the continued fraction approximate to α. We note that in (1.11) only ¯ω1 is allowed to be Liouvillean, not the entire frequency ω.
In the case of multidimensional Liouvillean forced frequency, a key step the stability of the Cauchy problem (1.2) or (1.3) is to study rotations reducibility of the qpf m-torus flow (ω,ρ+f). Even under Brjuno conditions, this problem becomes more complex in higher-dimensional tori (m≥2) because there is no conception of rotation number in higher-dimensional tori. The corresponding conception are rotation vectors, which are highly relying on the orbit of flow. In most cases, the rotation vector is not unique but a set. Thus, it is difficult to classify the quasi-periodically forced tori using the characters of rotation vector. In the case m≥1, d≥2, W. Si and J. Si[33] proved that the qpf flow (ω,ρ+f), where ρ∈Rm, f:Tm×Td→Tm is analytic and (ω,ρ) satisfies the Brjuno-Rüssmann's non-resonant condition
|⟨k,ω⟩+⟨l,ρ⟩|≥γΔ(|k|+|l|),for all0≠(k,l)∈Zd×Zm, |
is Cω reducible provided that f is sufficiently small and satisfies some non-degeneracy condition (see [33] for the definition of Δ).
In this paper, we will prove that, in the case m≥1 and d≥2, the analytic qpf m-torus flow (ω,ξ+f) can be C∞ rotations reducible when ω possesses finite uniform Diophantine exponent (see (2.3) below), f is sufficiently small and ξ∈Oγ, where Oγ⊂O is Cantor subset of compact set O in Rm with positive Lebesgue measure. In the case m=1 and d≥2, the analytic qpf circle flow (ω,ρ+f) can be C∞ rotations reducible when ω possesses finite uniform Diophantine exponent (see (2.3) below), its rotation number ρf is Diophantine with respect to the forced frequency ω, and f is sufficiently small.
Essentially, the Liouvillean property in multidimensional Liouvillean frequency (1.11) comes from 2-dimensional frequency ˉω1. In this paper, we introduce multidimensional Liouvillean frequency by using finite uniform Diophantine exponent, which can holistically describe the Liouvillean property of a frequency. We can also prove that our Liouvillean frequency set contains all the Liouvillean frequencies in (1.11). This is the main novelty of our paper.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we introduce some notations, definitions, and relevant concepts, which will be used subsequently. In Section 3, we first introduce the results of rotations reducibility for qpf m-torus flow (ω,ξ+f) in the case m≥1 and d≥2 and qpf circle flow (ω,ρ+f) in the case m=1 and d≥2, i.e., Proposition 3.1 and Proposition 3.2. Then we give the proof of the main result, Theorem 1. In Section 4, we give the proof of Propositions 3.1 and 3.2. In Section 5, we give an Appendix that introduces the definition of CD-bridge.
In this section, we first give some notations, definitions, and relevant concepts, which will be used subsequently..
Denote by Z and Z+ the sets of integers and positive integers, respectively. Let Tl=Rl/2πZl be the standard l-dimensional real torus. Given m∈Z+, we consider a real valued function f∈L2(Td,Rm)
f(φ)=∑k∈Zdfkei⟨k,φ⟩. |
We define the sets
Wr(Td):={φ∈(Td⊕iRd):|Imφ|<r},Ws,r(Tm×Td):={(θ,φ)∈(Tm⊕iRm)×(Td⊕iRd):|Imθ|<s,|Imφ|<r}. |
For an analytic function f(φ)=∑k∈Zdfkei⟨k,φ⟩ defined in Wr(Td), we define the spaces of analytic functions
Hr:=Hr(Wr(Td),Rm)={f:‖f‖2r=∑k∈Zd|fk|2e2|k|r<+∞}, |
where r>0. For any N>0, we define the truncation and projection operators TN, RN on Hr,a
TNf(φ)=∑|k|<Nfkei⟨k,φ⟩,RNf(φ)=∑|k|≥Nfkei⟨k,φ⟩. |
If we consider two variables (θ,φ)∈Tm+d, we may consider a real valued function f(θ,φ)∈L2(Tm+d,Rm) as a φ-dependent family of functions f(θ,⋅)∈L2(Tm,Rm) with the Fourier series expansion
f(θ,φ)=∑l∈Zmfl(φ)ei⟨l,θ⟩=∑(l,k)∈Zm+dfklei(⟨l,θ⟩+⟨k,φ⟩) |
In this case, we describe the spaces of analytic functions defined in Ws,r(Tm×Td)
Hs,r:=Hs,r(Ws,r(Tm×Td),Rm)={f:‖f‖2s,r=∑l∈Zm‖fl(φ)‖2re2|l|s=∑l∈Zm,k∈Zd|fkl|2e2|l|s+2|k|r<+∞,}, |
where s>0, r>0. It is clear that the spaces Hr and Hs,r are Banach algebra under their norms, see [28]. Fix m∈Z+ and let O be a compact subset of Rm. For a function f:O→Hr, we define the norm of f as
‖f‖2r,O=∑k∈Zd|fk|2Oe2|k|r, |
where
|fk|O=supξ∈O|fk(ξ)|+supξ∈O|dfk(ξ)dξ|. |
For a function f:O→Hs,r, we define the norm of f as
‖f‖2s,r,O=∑l∈Zm,k∈Zd|fkl|2Oe2|l|s+2|k|r, |
where
|fkl|O=supξ∈O|fkl(ξ)|+supξ∈O|dfkl(ξ)dξ|. |
Here, the derivative with respect to ξ is in the sense of Whitney.
For an analytic function f(θ,ϕ) defined in Ws,r(Tm×Td), its supremum norm is defined by
|f(θ,ϕ)|s,r=supImθ<s,Imφ<r|f(θ,ϕ)|. |
By the attenuation of Fourier coefficients fkl, i.e., |fkl|≤|f|s,re|l|s+|k|r, one can check that
‖f‖2s,r=∑l∈Zm,k∈Zd|fkl|2e2|l|s+2|k|r≤|f|2s,r. |
In addition, one can easily check that |f|2s,r≤‖f‖2s,r, which implies ‖f‖s,r=|f|s,r.
Consider a diffeomorphisms of the m-dimensional torus
Φ:Tm→Tm,θ↦θ+h(θ)=ˆθ, | (2.1) |
where h:Tm→Rm is an analytic function with ‖h‖s≤1/2. We denote the inverse of Φ by
Φ−1:Tm→Tm,Φ−1:θ↦θ+˜h(θ), |
with ˜h an analytic function. Using the same notation, we denote transformations like (2.1) with the corresponding linear operators acting on Hr as
Φ:Hr→Hr,f(θ)↦Φf(θ):=f(θ+h(θ)). |
Similarly, we consider the action of Φ on the vector fields on Tm by the pushforward. Explicitly, we denote by T(Tm) the tangent space of Tm.
Now given a vector field X:Tm→T(Tm)
X(θ)=m∑j=1Xj(θ)∂∂θj,X1,⋯,Xm∈Cω(Tm,R), |
its pushforward is
(Φ∗X)(θ)=dΦ(Φ−1(θ))[X(Φ−1(θ))]=m∑i=1Φ−1(Xi+m∑j=1∂Xi∂θjXj)∂∂ˆθi. |
A Cω vector field X(θ)=∑mj=1Xj(θ)∂∂θj induces a linear operator acting on the space of functions f:Tm→R, that we denote by X(θ)⋅∂θ=∑mj=1Xj(θ)∂∂θj. More precisely, the action of such a linear operator is given by
Hr→Hr,u(θ)↦X(θ)⋅∂θu(θ). |
We consider the case of m=1. Suppose (ω,f) is a qpf circle flow defined by
ω⋅∂φ+f(θ,φ)⋅∂θ. |
Let
˜ρ(ω,f)=limt→∞ˆΦtφ(ˆθ)t |
be the fibred rotation number associated with (ω,f), where ˆΦtφ(ˆθ):R1+×R1×Td→R1, via (t,ˆθ,φ)↦ˆΦtφ(ˆθ) denotes the lift of the flow (ω,f) of the first variable θ. The limit exists and is independent of (ˆθ,φ) [23]. As a direct consequence of the definition, we have the following well-known results:
Lemma 2.1. ([23]) Let ω∈Rd,ρ∈R and ‖f(θ,φ)‖C0≤ϵ, then
|˜ρ(ω,ρ+f)−˜ρ(ω,ρ)|≤ϵ. |
Lemma 2.2. ([23]) Suppose (ω,f) is a qpf circle flow and H∈C0(T×Td,T×Td) is a homeomorphism homotopic to the identity that projects to the identity on the second factor. Then the fibred rotation numbers of (ω,f) and H∘(ω,f)∘H−1 are the same.
In this subsection, we recall the definition of uniform Diophantine exponent of forced frequency ω0∈Rd introduced in [17].
• Recall the Diophantine exponent denoted by ω(ω0) that the supremum of all positive real numbers κ such that there exists k∈Zd∖{0} and |⟨k,ω0⟩|≤|k|−κ.
• Recall the uniform Diophantine exponent denoted by ˆω(ω0) that the supremum of all positive real numbers κ such that for any sufficiently large N, there exists k∈Zd∖{0} such that |k|≤N and |⟨k,ω0⟩|≤N−κ. In other words, if we define the set
S:={κ|forallNlargeenough,thereexistsk∈Rd∖{0},0<|k|≤Nsuchthat|⟨k,ω0⟩|≤N−κ}, | (2.2) |
then ˆω(ω0)=supS.
By the definitions of ˆω(ω0) and ω(ω0), one obtains that ˆω(ω0)≤ω(ω0), and while ω(ω0) measures how small linear forms with integer coefficients of a given size can become when evaluated at ω0. It is clear that if ω(ω0)<∞ then ω0 is Diophantine vector and if ω(ω0)=∞ then ω0 is not Diophantine vector. For uniform Diophantine exponent ˆω(ω0), if ˆω(ω0)=∞, then ω0 is not Diophantine vector. But if ˆω(ω0)<∞, then ω0 also contains Liouvillean frequency. For example, ˆω(ω0) is always finite if ω0=(1,α) with α∈R∖Q because |⟨k,ω0⟩|>1/2qn, for 0<|k|≤qn, where pnqn is the continued fraction approximated to α.
In this paper, we strengthen the condition ˆω(ω0)<∞ to exist a τ1 and an increasing sequence Kn such that
|⟨k,ω0⟩|≥1Kτ1n,∀0<|k|≤Kn, | (2.3) |
where the sequence {Kn}n≥0 satisfies
(1) For the given constant τ1>0, there exists a positive constant M>d/2 such that
Kn+1>KMn; | (2.4) |
(2) There exists a positive constant N such that
KNn≥lnKn+1. | (2.5) |
Remark 2.1. Assumptions (2.4) and (2.5) are really technical conditions summarized from not super-Liouvillean condition in [27]. This property can also be reflected in high dimensional Liouvillean frequencies. One of the purposes of this paper is an observation of this property in higher dimensions.
Definition 2.1 (Diophantine condition). Given a frequency ω∈Rd, we call ω Diophantine if there exists a sequence {Kn}n≥0 with Kn=Kˆβn−1 and 1<ˆβ<2 such that
|⟨k,ω⟩|≥γKτ1n,∀0<|k|<Kn, |
where γ∈(0,1), τ1>d−1.
Definition 2.2 (MNτ1-admissibility). For a given sequence {Kn}n≥0, N,τ1>0 and M>d/2, we call {Kn}n≥0 is (MNτ1)-admissible if it satisfies the inequalities (2.4) and (2.5). The set of all such sequences is denoted by
K(τ1,M,N)={K|K={Kn}n≥0andKis(MNτ1)−admissible}. |
Definition 2.3 (Liouvillean vectors set). For given K={Kn}n≥0∈K(τ1,M,N), we define the set
OK={ω∈D||⟨k,ω⟩|≥CKτ1n,∀0<|k|≤Kn}, | (2.6) |
where D∈Rd is compact and C is a positive number. Setting
L:=⋃τ1,M,N>0⋃K∈K(τ1,M,N)OK, |
we call L Liouvillean vectors set.
We will show that the set L allows many Liouvillean vectors. In the following discussions, we always assume C≡1 occurring in the frequency set (2.6) without loss of generality.
Remark 2.2. If frequency ω0 belongs to Liouvillean vectors set L, then convergence speed of small divisor tending to 0 can be much faster than Diophantine case that is because if ω0∈L, Kn+1=O(eKn) increases much faster than the Diophantine case Kn+1=O(Knˆβ).
Remark 2.3. We can prove that all the vectors in L have finite uniform Diophantine exponent. In fact, by definition of ω0, we have that if ω0∈L, then there exists K, which is (MNτ1)-admissible, such that ω0∈OK. For the set S defined in (2.2), it is clear that S is no-empty because 0∈S, and it has the following two characters:
1. If κ1∈S, then κ∈S for all κ≤κ1. That is because if κ1∈S, then for all N large enough, there exists k∈Rd∖{0}, 0<|k|≤N, such that |⟨k,ω0⟩|≤N−κ1, which implies |⟨k,ω0⟩|≤N−κ for all κ≤κ1. Thus, κ∈S.
2. If κ1∉S, then κ∉S for all κ≥κ1. That is because if κ1∉S, then there exists N large enough, for all k∈Rd∖{0}, 0<|k|≤N, such that |⟨k,ω0⟩|>N−κ1, which implies |⟨k,ω0⟩|>N−κ for all κ≥κ1. Thus, κ∉S.
Moreover, ω0∈OK, then τ1∉S. Thus 0≤ˆω(ω0)=supS≤τ1.
Remark 2.4. Now, we illustrate that the Liouvillean vectors set L allows many Liouvillean vectors.
In two-dimensional case, we consider ω=(1,α) in R2. Let A=8 and (Qn)n∈N be the selected subsequence in Lemma A.1 of Appendix. By Corollary 2.1 in [27], if β(α)<∞ we have the following claims:
(1) Qn>QAn−1. That is because for n=1, it is clear that Q1>QA0 since Q0=1. If n≥2 and ¯Qn−1≤QAn−1, then one has Qn≥¯Qn−1≥QAn−1. If n≥2 and ¯Qn−1>QAn−1, then (¯Qn−1,Qn) and (Qn,Qn+1) are both CD(A,A,A3) bridges. Thus, we get Qn>QAn−1.
(2) lnQn+1<QUn, where U=β(α)+4lnAln2. That is because
lnlnQn+1lnQn≤4lnA+lnln¯QnlnQn≤β(α)+4lnAln2, |
which implies lnQn+1<QUn.
We also have ⟨k,ω⟩≥12Qn for all 0<|k|<Qn, which implies ω∈∪K∈K(1,A,U)OK. Thus L includes some frequencies beyond Brjuno in two-dimensional case.
In multidimensional case, L includes all the frequency satisfying condition (1.11). That is because if ω=(¯ω1,¯ω2)∈R2×Rd−2 satisfies condition (1.11), then
|⟨k1,¯ω1⟩+⟨k2,¯ω2⟩|≥γQτn,forall|k1|+|k2|≤Qn,|k2|≠0 |
and
|⟨k1,¯ω1⟩+⟨k2,¯ω2⟩|≥12Qn,forall|k1|≤Qn,|k2|=0, |
where (Qn)n∈N is the selected subsequence in Lemma A.1 of Appendix. If τ1=max{1,τ}, then ω∈∪K∈K(τ1,A,U)OK, and so ω∈L.
For any integer m≥1 and d≥2, we have the following Proposition.
Proposition 3.1. Let O be a bounded closed set in Rm not containing zero, r>0, s>0, τ>m+d−1, γ>0, ω∈L and ξ∈O. Consider a C1-smooth family of vector fields on Tm+d
X:=ω⋅∂∂φ+(ξ+f(θ,φ,ξ))⋅∂∂θ |
where f(⋅;ξ)∈Hs,r(Ws,r(Tm×Td),Rm). Then, there exists a sufficiently small constant ϵ=ϵ(τ,τ1,γ,s,r, M,N,O) such that if
‖f(θ,φ)‖s,r,O≤ϵ, | (3.1) |
then there exists a set
O∞={ξ∈O:|⟨k,ω⟩|+⟨l,ρ∞(ξ)⟩≥γ∞(|k|+|l|)τ,∀(k,l)∈Zd+m,|l|≠0,}, | (3.2) |
where ρ∞(ξ):O∞→Rm is a C1 function and there exists a map
h(θ,φ,ξ):Tm+d×O∞→Rm,supφ∈Td‖h(θ,⋅)‖s2,O∞≤Cϵ, | (3.3) |
which is C∞-smooth in φ, analytic in θ and C1-smooth in ξ, so that for all ξ∈O∞ the pushforward of vector fields X by diffeomorphism Ψ:(φ,θ)↦(φ,θ+h(θ,φ))=(φ,ˆθ) is
Ψ∗X=ω⋅∂∂φ+Ψ−1(ω⋅∂φh+(ξ+f)+(ξ+f)⋅∂φh)⋅∂∂ˆθ=ω⋅∂∂φ+(ρ∞(ξ)+m∞(φ,ξ))⋅∂∂ˆθ. |
where m∞:Td×O∞→Rm, (φ,ξ)↦m∞(φ,ξ) is C1-smooth in ξ, analytic in φ and for each ξ∈O∞ satisfies
supφ∈Td|m∞(φ,ξ)|≤Cϵ. |
For m=1 and any integer d≥2, we have the following Proposition.
Proposition 3.2. Let ρ∈R, ω∈L, r>0, s>0, τ>d and γ>0. We consider a vector field on Td+1
X:=ω⋅∂∂φ+(ρ+f(θ,φ))⋅∂∂θ |
where f(θ,φ)∈Hs,r(Ws,r(T×Td),Rm). Assume that ˜ρ(ω,ρ+f(θ,φ))=ρf∈DCω(γ,τ) in the sense
|⟨k,ω⟩+lρf|≥γ(|k|+|l|)τ,∀(k,l)∈Zd×Z,l≠0. |
Then there exists a sufficiently small constant ϵ=ϵ(τ,τ1,γ,s,r,M,N) such that if ‖f(θ,φ)‖s,r≤ϵ, and there exists a map
h(θ,φ):T1+d→R,supφ∈Tm‖h(θ,⋅)‖s2≤Cϵ, | (3.4) |
which is C∞-smooth in φ, analytic in θ, so that the pushforward of vector fields X by diffeomorphism Ψ:(φ,θ)↦(φ,θ+h(θ,φ))=(φ,ˆθ) is
Ψ∗X=ω⋅∂∂φ+(ρf+m∞(φ))⋅∂∂ˆθ, |
where m∞(φ) is C∞-smooth in φ and satisfies
supφ∈Td|m∞(φ)|≤Cϵ. |
Remark 3.1. The proof of Proposition 3.1 or Proposition 3.2 is based on a KAM iterative scheme under the assumption that forced frequency has finite uniform Diophantine exponent. As we know, the results existing in the literature deal with two-dimensional frequency, and exploit the theory of continued fractions to control the small divisor problem. The results in this paper extend the analysis to higher dimensional frequency with finite uniform Diophantine exponent, allowing a class of Liouvillean frequencies. More specifically, Proposition 1 can be regarded as a generalization of the work in [20] from Diophantine frequency to Liouvillean frequency and work in [33] from Brjuno frequency to Liouvillean frequency, while Theorem 3.1 can be regarded as a generalization of the work in [27] from two-dimensional not super-Liouvillean forced frequency to high-dimensional forced frequency with finite uniform Diophantine exponent. The overall strategy of this paper comes from the literature [27,33], but the method is still in the spirit of [4,17,24], which, however, has to overcome essential obstructions in techniques for dealing with the questions considered here.
Remark 3.2. Compared with the results in [20], which reduce the variables (θ,φ), our results only reduce variable θ because of the difficulty from Liouvillean frequency. Even so, the analytic norms of the solutions of the Cauchy problem can also be controlled uniformly in time. This is the following Theorem 1.
Theorem 1. Let ω∈L and consider the transport equation
∂tu+(ξ+f(x,ωt,ξ))⋅∂xu=0. | (3.5) |
Then if f(⋅;ξ)∈Hs,r(Ws,r(Tm×Td),Rm) is C1-smooth with respect to ξ and (3.1) is fulfilled, for ξ∈O∞ (see (3.2)), under the change of variable u=Ψ(ωt)[v]=v(x+h(x,ωt)) defined in (3.3), the PDE (3.5) transforms into the equation with coefficients independent of spatial variable x
∂tv+(ξ+m∞(ωt,ξ))⋅∂xv=0. |
As a consequence, for u0∈Hs2, the only solution of the Cauchy problem
{∂tu+(ξ+f(x,ωt,ξ))⋅∂xu=0,u(x,0)=u0(x), |
satisfies ‖u(x,t)‖s4≤‖u0(x)‖s2 for any t∈R, i.e., this Cauchy problem is stable.
Proof. Let ω∈L and ξ∈O∞. Under the change of coordinates u=Ψ(ωt)[v]=v(x+h(x,ωt)), the equation transforms (3.5) into the PDE
∂tv+Ψ(ωt)−1(ω⋅∂φh+ξ+f+(ξ+f)⋅∂xh)⋅∂xv=0. |
In view of Proposition 3.1, one obtains that
∂tv+(ξ+m∞(ωt,ξ))⋅∂xv=0, |
where
m∞(ωt,ξ)=Ψ(ωt)−1(ω⋅∂φh+f+(ξ+f)⋅∂xh). |
Let v=∑l∈Zmvl(t)ei⟨l,x⟩. Such a PDE with coefficients independent of a spatial variable can be integrated explicitly, implying that for any l∈Zm, vl(t)=vl(0)ei⟨ξ+∫t0m∞(ωs)ds,l⟩ and
‖v(x,t)‖2s=∑l∈Zm|vl(0)ei⟨ξt+∫t0m∞(ωs)ds,l⟩|2e2s|l|=∑l∈Zm|vl(0)|2e2s|l|=‖v(0)‖2s. |
By Proposition 3.1 and inverse mapping theorem, we get Ψ(ωt)−1[u]=u(x+˜h(x,ωt)), where
supφ∈Td‖˜h(x,⋅)‖s2−σ≤Cϵ |
with σ=s/12. Then, given u0(x)∈Hs(Tm,R), one gets that for each t∈R
‖u(x,t)‖s4=‖Ψ(ωt)[v]‖s4=‖v(x+h(x,ωt),t)‖s4≤‖v(x,t)‖s4+σ=‖v(0)‖2s4+σ=‖Ψ−1(ωt)[u0]‖s4+σ=‖u0(x+˜h(x,ωt))‖s4+σ≤‖u0(x)‖s4+2σ≤‖u0(x)‖s2. |
This completes the proof.
Similarly, we can prove the following theorem by using Proposition 3.2.
Theorem 2. Let ρ∈R and ω∈L and consider the transport equation
∂tu+(ρ+f(x,ωt))⋅∂xu=0. | (3.6) |
Then, if ˜ρ(ω,ρ+f(θ,φ))=ρf∈DCω(γ,τ), f∈Hs,r(Ws,r(T×Td),R) and ‖f(θ,φ)‖s,r≤ϵ, under the change of variable u=Ψ(ωt)[v]=v(x+h(x,ωt)) defined in (3.4), the PDE (3.6) transforms into the equation with coefficients independent of spatial variable x
∂tv+(ρf+m∞(ωt))⋅∂xv=0. |
As a consequence, for u0∈Hs2, the only solution of the Cauchy problem
{∂tu+(ρ+f(x,ωt))⋅∂xu=0,u(x,0)=u0(x), |
satisfies ‖u(x,t)‖s4≤‖u0(x)‖s2 for any t∈R, i.e., this Cauchy problem is stable.
In this section, we give the proofs of Propositions 3.1 and 3.2 by a modified KAM iterative scheme. To better understand this iterative scheme, we draw a block diagram as follows:
Since ω∈L, we assume that M,N,τ1 are defined as in (2.3). And we take c and α satisfying c>16α(3τ+2+d2)τN and max{M(2τ1−d−2)2M−d,1}<α<M. For r0, s0, γ>0, τ>m+d−1, we suppose K0>0 large enough such that
KM−α16M0lnK0>cτN, |
and ϵ0 is sufficiently small. We further define the following sequences for n≥1:
Δn=s010⋅2n−1,γn=γ0(1−n+1∑j=22−j),rn=r04Kαn,sn=sn−1−Δn,ϵn=ϵn−1K2n+1cτNn+1,˜ϵn=∑n−1i=0ϵi. | (4.1) |
Let
On−1={ξ∈On−2:|⟨k,ω⟩|+⟨l,ρn−1(ξ)⟩≥γn−1(|k|+|l|)τ,∀|l|≠0,|k|+|l|≤T(n−1)}, | (4.2) |
where T(n−1)=(γ332ϵ12n−1)13τ+2+d2 and O−1=O.
In (n−1)-th step, the vector fields Xn−1 can be written as
Xn−1=ω⋅∂φ+(ρn−1(ξ)+gn−1(φ,ξ)+fn−1(θ,φ,ξ))⋅∂θ, | (4.3) |
where ξ∈On−1, [gn−1]φ=0 and
‖gn−1(φ,ξ)‖rn−1,On−1≤4˜ϵn−1,‖fn−1(θ,φ,ξ)‖sn−1,rn−1,On−1≤ϵn−1. |
In what follows, we divide KAM step into three parts. In the proof, we do not write ξ explicit for simplicity if there is no confusion. First, we give a Lemma that is used to eliminate the lower-frequency terms.
Lemma 4.1. If we denote ˉsn=sn−1−Δn3, ˉrn=r0Kαn, then there exists hn−1(φ) with ‖hn−1(φ)‖ˉrn,On−1≤KMτ1+(d+1)αMn, such that the transformation Hn−1:θ=¯θ+hn−1(φ)(mod2π) conjugates the vector fields (4.3) into
¯Xn−1=(Hn−1)∗Xn−1=ω⋅∂φ+(ρn−1+ˉgn−1(φ)+ˉfn−1(ˉθ,φ))⋅∂ˉθ, | (4.4) |
where
‖ˉgn−1(φ)‖ˉrn,On−1≤ϵ12n−1,‖ˉfn−1(ˉθ,φ)‖ˉsn,ˉrn,On−1≤ϵn−1. |
Proof. Using transformation θ=ˉθ+hn−1(φ)(mod2π), the vector field (4.3) becomes
¯Xn−1=ω⋅∂φ+(ρn−1−∂ωhn−1(φ)+gn−1(φ)+fn−1(ˉθ+hn−1(φ),φ))⋅∂ˉθ. | (4.5) |
The vector field (4.5) becomes
¯Xn−1=ω⋅∂φ+˜fn−1(ˉθ,φ)⋅∂ˉθ, |
where ˜fn−1(ˉθ,φ)=ρn−1+RKngn−1(φ)+fn−1(ˉθ+hn−1(φ),φ), if homological equation ∂ωhn−1(φ)=TKngn−1(φ) is solvable. In view of |⟨k,ω⟩|>1Kτ1n for all |k|≤Kn, one can check that
‖hn−1(φ)‖2rn−12,On−1≤∑0<|k|≤Kn|hn−1,k|2On−1e2|k|rn−12≤∑0<|k|≤Kn|gn−1,k⟨k,ω⟩|2On−1e2|k|rn−12≤K2τ1n‖gn−1(φ)‖2rn−1,On−1∑0<|k|≤Kne−|k|rn−12≤K2τ1n‖gn−1(φ)‖2rn−1,On−1(2rn−1)d<K2Mτ1+dαMn, |
since Kn−1<K1Mn and ϵ0 sufficiently small. In order to control fn−1(ˉθ+hn−1(φ),φ), we should illustrate that Imhn−1(φ) can be well controlled. Let φ=φ1+iφ2 for φ1∈Td and φ2∈Rd and define
h1n−1(φ1)=∑0<|k|≤Kngn−1,ki⟨k,ω⟩ei⟨k,φ1⟩. |
Notice that gn−1(φ) is real analytic, which implies Imh1n−1(φ1)=0. Since 1Kα(2m−d)−M(2τ1−d−2)2Mj goes to zero much faster than Δj, we can assume 1Kα(2m−d)−M(2τ1−d−2)2Mj<Δj3 for all j≥0 without loss of generality. Thus, applying Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we can get
supφ∈Tdˉrn|Imhn−1(φ)|=supφ∈Tdˉrn|∑0<|k|≤Kngn−1,k⟨k,ω⟩(ei⟨k,φ1+iφ2⟩−ei⟨k,φ1⟩)|≤∑0<|k|≤Kn|gn−1,k⟨k,ω⟩|On−1supφ∈Tdˉrn|e−⟨k,φ2⟩−1|≤∑0<|k|≤Kn|gn−1,k⟨k,ω⟩|On−1|k|ˉrn≤Knr0Kαn√∑|k|>0|gn−1,k|2√∑0<|k|≤Kn⟨k,ω⟩−2≤CKτ1+d2+1−αnKαd2n‖gn−1(φ)‖rn−1,On−1≤Kτ1+d2+1−αnKαd2Mn≤C1Kα(2m−d)−M(2τ1−d−2)2Mn≤Δn3. |
Letting ˉgn−1(φ)=Rkngn−1(φ) and ˉfn−1(ˉθ,φ)=fn−1(ˉθ+hn−1(φ),φ), we have
‖ˉfn−1(ˉθ,φ)‖ˉsn,ˉrn,On−1=‖fn−1(ˉθ+hn−1(φ),φ)‖ˉsn,ˉrn,On−1≤‖fn−1(θ,φ)‖sn−1,rn−1,On−1≤ϵn−1,‖ˉgn−1(φ)‖2ˉsn,ˉrn,On−1=‖Rkngn−1(φ)‖2ˉrn,On−1≤ϵ0e−Kn(rn−1−ˉrn)≤ϵ0e−KM−α4Mn≤ϵ12n−1, |
if K0>(2cτNlnK0)2MM−α. The proof is completed.
In what follows, we should make the perturbation smaller taking advantage of diagonally dominant operators such that the order of perturbation reach that of the next KAM step. But we can not achieve this using one transformation. So we have to make several transformations. We give the following Lemma.
Lemma 4.2. Denote rn+=r02Kαn, sn+=ˉsn−Δ3. Under the assumptions of Lemma 4.1 and ξ∈On−1, there exists a transformation ¯Hn−1 with estimates
‖¯Hn−1−id‖sn+,rn+,On−1≤4ϵ34n−1,‖D(¯Hn−1−id)‖sn+,rn+,On−1≤4ϵ34n−1, |
such that ¯Hn−1 conjugates the vector field (4.4) to
¯Xn−1,+=ω⋅∂φ+(ρn−1+ˉgn−1,+(φ)+ˉfn−1,+(ˉθ+,φ))⋅∂ˉθ+ | (4.6) |
with
‖ˉgn−1,+(φ)‖rn+,On−1≤2ϵ12n−1,‖ˉfn−1,+(ˉθ+,φ)‖sn+,rn+,On−1≤ϵn,‖ˉgn−1,+(φ)−ˉgn−1(φ)‖rn+,On−1≤4ϵn−1. |
Proof. In order to find ¯Hn−1, we divide ¯Hn−1 into N transformations where N is determined later. Letting ˜r=ˉrn=r0Kαn, ˜s=ˉsn=sn−1−Δ3, ˜η=2ϵn−1, we define the following sequences
˜r0=˜r,˜s0=˜s,˜ην=˜η(32)ν,σ1=˜r4,σν+1=12νσ1,δ1=Δn6,δν+1=12νδ1,˜rν=˜rν−1−σν,˜sν=˜sν−1−δν,Tν=1σνln1˜ην−1. |
In the proof, we do not write n explicitly for simplicity. At (ν−1)-th step, we write vector field as
¯Xν−1=ω⋅∂φ+(ρ+ˉgν−1(φ)+ˉfν−1(ˉθν−1,φ))⋅∂ˉθν−1, | (4.7) |
where
‖ˉgν−1(φ)‖˜rν−1≤2ϵ1/2n−1,‖ˉfν−1(ˉθν−1,φ)‖˜sν−1,˜rν−1≤˜ην−1. |
Applying transformation ϕν−1:(ˉθν−1,φ)=(ˉθν+hν(ˉθν,φ),φ), the vector field (4.7) becomes
¯Xν=ω⋅∂φ+(ρ+ˉgν(φ)+(1+∂hν∂ˉθν)−1(ˉfν−1(ˉθν+hν(ˉθν,φ),φ)−ˉfν−1(ˉθν,φ))⋅∂ˉθν, | (4.8) |
where ˉgν(φ)=ˉgν−1(φ)+[ˉfν−1(ˉθν,φ)]ˉθν, if the homological equation
∂ωhiν+⟨∂hiν∂ˉθν,ρ+ˉgν(φ)⟩=ˉfiν−1(ˉθν,φ)−[ˉfiν−1(ˉθν,φ)]ˉθν,∀1≤i≤m, | (4.9) |
is solved. Since homological equation (4.9) may have no analytic solution, we solve its approximate equation for each 1≤i≤m.
∂ωhiν+⟨∂hiν∂ˉθν,ρ⟩+TTν⟨∂hiν∂ˉθν,ˉgν(φ)⟩=TTν(ˉfν−1(ˉθν,φ)−ˉ[fν−1(ˉθν,φ)]θν). | (4.10) |
Let
ˉfiν−1(ˉθν,φ)=∑l∈Zmˉfiν−1,l(φ)ei⟨l,ˉθν⟩,ˉfiν−1,l(φ)=∑k∈Zdˉfikν−1,lei⟨k,φ⟩,hiν(ˉθν,φ)=∑0<|l|≤Tνhiν,l(φ)ei⟨l,ˉθν⟩,hiν,l(φ)=∑|k|<Tν−|l|hikν,lei⟨k,φ⟩. |
In order to solve equation (4.10), it is equivalent to solve
∂ωhiν,l(φ)+i⟨l,ρ⟩hiν,l(φ)+TTν−|l|hiν,l(φ)⟨il,ˉgν(φ)⟩=TTν−|l|ˉfiν−1,l(φ), | (4.11) |
for 0<|l|<Tν.
For any fixed l, (4.11) can be written as a matrix equation
(Al+Gl)ˉhl=ˉfl, |
where
ˉhl=(hikν,l)T|k|<Tν−|l|,Al=diag(i⟨k,ω⟩+i⟨l,ρ⟩:|k|<Tν−|l|),ˉfl=(ˉfikν−1,l)T|k|<Tν−|l|,Gl=i⟨l,ˉgν,p−q⟩|p|,|q|<Tν−|l|, |
with ˉgν,k being the Fourier coefficients of Fourier expansion of ˉgν(φ). If we denote
Ωl,r′=diag(⋯,e|k|r′,⋯) |
for any r′≤ˉrn, then we have
(˜Al,r′+˜Gl,r′)˜hl,r′=˜fl,r′, |
where
˜Al,r′=Ωl,r′AlΩ−1l,r′,˜Gl,r′=Ωl,r′GlΩ−1l,r′,˜hl,r′=Ωl,r′ˉhl,˜fl,r′=Ωl,r′ˉfl. |
Letting N=[2nc1τNlnKn]+1 with c1=c16(3τ+2+d2)ln3−ατNln3, we have
Tν=1σνln1˜ην−1≤4Kαn3ν−1r0ln12ϵn−1≤4Kαn32nc1τNlnKnr0ln12ϵn−1≤4Kα+2nc1τNln3nr0ln12ϵn−1≤ϵ−116(3τ+2+d2)−116(3τ+2+d2)n−1≤(γ332ϵ12n−1)13τ+2+d2=T(n−1), | (4.12) |
since ϵ0 sufficiently small. In view of ξ∈On−1 and (4.12), we get
‖˜A−1l,r′‖≤maxk≤Tνsupξ∈On−1(1|⟨k,ω⟩+⟨l,ρ⟩|+|⟨l,dρdξ⟩||⟨k,ω⟩+⟨l,ρ⟩|2)≤8T3τ+1νγ3≤8(Tn−1)3τ+1γ3 |
for all 0<|k|+|l|<Tν, |l|≠0. Meanwhile, since the (k1,k2)-th variable of ˜Gl,r′ is ie(|k1|−|k2|)r′⟨l,ˉgν,k1−k2⟩, we obtain that
‖˜Gl,r′‖≤Tνmax|k2|≤Tν∑|k1|≤Tνe(|k1−k2|)r′|ˉgν,k1−k2|≤Tνmax|k2|≤Tν√∑|k1|>0e(2|k1−k2|)r′|ˉgν,k1−k2|2√∑|k1|≤Tν1≤T1+d2ν‖ˉgν−1‖r′,On−1, | (4.13) |
which implies the diagonally dominant operators ˜Al,r′+˜Gl,r′ have a bounded inverse and the following estimate
‖(˜Al,r′+˜Gl,r′)−1‖≤‖˜A−1l,r′‖‖(I+˜A−1l,r′˜Gl,r′)‖<2Tτν |
for r′=˜rν−1−σν. One can check that
‖hiν‖2˜sν−1−δν2,˜rν−1−σν2,On−1≤∑|l|<Tν∑|k|≤|l|−Tν|hikν,l|2On−1e2|k|(˜rν−1−σν2)e2|l|(˜sν−1−δν2)≤4T4aν∑|l|<Tν⟨˜hl,˜rν−1−σν2,˜hl,˜rν−1−σν2⟩e2|l|(˜sν−1−δν2)≤4T4aν∑|l|<Tν⟨(˜Al,r′+˜Gl,r′)−1˜fl,˜rν−1−σν2,(˜Al,r′+˜Gl,r′)−1˜fl,˜rν−1−σν2⟩××e2|l|(˜sν−1−δν2)≤8T4a+2τν∑|l|<Tν⟨˜fl,˜rν−1−σν2,˜fl,˜rν−1−σν2⟩e2|l|(˜sν−1−δν2)≤8T4a+2τν∑|l|<Tν∑|k|<Tν−|l||fkν−1,l|2On−1e2|k|(˜rν−1−σν2)e2|l|(˜sν−1−δν2)≤T4a+2τν2d+4+τ˜η2ν−1γσd+2+τν≤1m2˜η32ν−1 |
since ϵ0 sufficiently small. And the error
Pν=RTν(ˉgν(φ)∂hν∂ˉθν)−RTν(ˉfν−1(ˉθν,φ)−ˉ[fν−1(ˉθν,φ)]θν) |
satisfies
‖Pν‖˜sν−1−δν,˜rν−1−σν,On−1≤25η32ν−1. |
Now, the system (4.8) becomes
¯Xν=ω⋅∂φ+(ρ+ˉgν(φ)+ˉfν(ˉθν,φ))⋅∂ˉθν, |
where ˉgν(φ)=ˉgν−1(φ)+[ˉfν−1(ˉθν,φ)]ˉθν and
ˉfν(ˉθν,φ)=(1+∂hν∂ˉθν)−1(Pν+ˉfν−1(ˉθν+hν(ˉθν,φ),φ)−ˉfν−1(ˉθν,φ)). |
By the mean value theorem and Cauchy estimate, we have for each ξ∈On−1 that
‖ˉfν−1(ˉθν+hν(ˉθν,φ),φ)−ˉfν−1(ˉθν,φ)‖˜sν,˜rν,On−1=‖∂ˉfν−1(ˉθν+shν(ˉθν,φ),φ)∂θhν(ˉθν,φ)‖˜sν,˜rν,On−1≤2δν‖ˉfν−1‖˜sν−1−δν2,˜rν−1−σν2,On−1‖hν‖˜sν−1−δν2,˜rν−1−σν2,On−1≤2˜ην−1δν‖hν‖˜sν−1−δν2,˜rν−1−σν2,On−1≤η32ν−15 |
where s∈(0,1). This implies
‖ˉfν(ˉθν,φ)‖˜sν,˜rν,On−1≤(1+η34ν−1)(η32ν−15+2η32ν−15+η32ν−15)≤˜ην. |
Since 1≤ν≤N, we should estimate ˉfN(ˉθN,φ). First, we have the following estimate
(32)N−1≥(32)2nc1τNlnKn−1≥K2n−1c1τNln(3/2)n. |
By (2.5), we have
‖ˉfN(ˉθN,φ)‖˜sN,˜rN,On−1≤˜η32N=˜ηe−(32N−1)ln1˜η≤˜ηe−(K2n−1c1τNln(3/2)n)2n+1cτN≤˜η1K2n+1cτNn+1<ϵn, |
in view of ϵ0<e−2cτN. Let ˉθN=ˉθ+ and
¯Hν(ˉθν,φ)=ϕ1∘⋯∘ϕν−1∘ϕν(ˉθν,φ) |
for 1≤ν≤N. Then, ¯Hν(ˉθν,φ) is analytic in W˜sν,˜rν(Tm×Td) and
‖∂ˉθν(π∘¯Hν(ˉθν,φ))‖˜sν,˜rν,On−1≤ν∏j=1(1+˜η34j), |
where π:Tm×Td→Tm denotes the natural projection to the first variable. If we rewrite ¯HN(ˉθ+,φ)=(ˉθ++˜h(ˉθ+,φ)mod2π,φ), then we have
‖˜h(ˉθ+,φ)‖˜sN−1−δN2,˜rN−1−σN2,On−1≤N∑ν=1ν−1∏j=1‖hν‖˜sν,˜rν,On−1<2˜η34<4ϵ34n−1,‖∂˜h(ˉθ+,φ)∂ˉθ+‖˜sN,˜rN,On−1<4ϵ34n−1. | (4.14) |
In conclusion, let ˜sN=sn+, ˜rN=rn+, ˉgN(φ)=ˉgn−1,+(φ) and ˉfN(ˉθ+,φ)=ˉfn−1,+(ˉθ+,φ). Then ¯Hn−1=¯HN(ˉθ+,φ) conjugates (4.4) to
¯Xn−1,+=ω⋅∂φ+(ρn−1+ˉgn−1,+(φ)+ˉfn−1,+(ˉθ+,φ))⋅∂ˉθ+, |
with the estimates
‖ˉgn−1,+(φ)‖rn+,On−1≤2ϵ12n−1,‖ˉfn−1,+(ˉθ+,φ)‖sn+,rn+,On−1≤ϵn,‖ˉgn−1,+(φ)−ˉgn−1(φ)‖rn+,On−1≤∑ν‖ˉfν‖sn,rn,On−1≤∑ν˜ην≤4ϵn−1. |
The following Lemma is the end of one KAM step.
Lemma 4.3. Under the assumptions of Lemma 4.1 and Lemma 4.2, there exists ˜Hn−1 with estimates
‖˜Hn−1−id‖sn,rn,On−1≤4ϵ34n−1,‖D(˜Hn−1−id)‖sn,rn,On−1≤4ϵ34n−1, |
such that ˜Hn−1 conjugates vector field (4.3) to
Xn=ω⋅∂φ+(ρn+gn(φ)+fn(θ+,φ))⋅∂θ+, |
with the following estimates
‖gn(φ)‖rn,On≤4˜ϵn,‖fn(θ+,φ)‖sn,rn,On≤ϵn. |
Proof. In the Lemma 4.1, we eliminate the non-resonant terms of gn−1(φ) and, as a result, the transformation we obtain is not close to the identity. In order to get rotations reducibility results, we need to inverse the first step, which means conjugating back by the transformation of the first step. Applying the inverse transformation H−1n−1:
ˉθ+=θ+−hn−1(φ), |
the vector field (4.6) can be conjugated to
Xn=ω⋅∂φ+(ρn+gn(φ)+fn(θ+,φ))⋅∂θ+, |
where ρn=ρn−1+[ˉgn−1,+(φ)]φ and
gn(φ)=TKngn−1(φ)+ˉgn−1,+(φ)−[ˉgn−1,+(φ)]φ,fn(θ+,φ)=ˉfn−1,+(θ+−hn−1(φ),φ). |
We have
‖gn(φ)−gn−1(φ)‖rn,On−1≤‖ˉgn−1,+(φ)−ˉgn−1(φ)‖rn+,On−1≤4ϵn−1, |
which implies ‖gn(φ)‖rn,On−1≤4˜ϵn. And it is obvious that
‖fn(θ+,φ)‖sn,rn,On≤ϵn. |
Let ˜Hn−1=Hn−1∘¯Hn−1∘H−1n−1, then ˜Hn−1=θ++˜h(θ+−hn−1(φ),φ). By (4.14), we have
‖˜Hn−1−id‖sn,rn,On−1≤‖˜h‖sn+,rn+,On−1≤4ϵ34n−1,‖D(˜Hn−1−id)‖sn,rn,On−1≤‖D˜h‖sn+,rn+,On−1≤4ϵ34n−1. |
Lemmas 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 can be summarized as the following iterative lemma.
Lemma 4.4. Suppose ω∈L and γn, rn, sn, ϵn are defined in (4.1) for n≥0. Let ϵ0 sufficiently small. Then the following holds for all n≥1: If the vector field
Xn=ω⋅∂φ+(ρn(ξ)+gn(φ,ξ)+fn(θ,φ,ξ))⋅∂θ | (4.15) |
satisfies
‖gn(φ,ξ)‖rn,On≤4˜ϵn,‖fn(θ,φ,ξ)‖sn,rn,On≤ϵn,|ρn−ρn−1|On≤4ϵn−1, |
where [gn(φ,ξ)]φ=0 and
On={ξ∈On−1:|⟨k,ω⟩|+⟨l,ρn(ξ)⟩≥γn(|k|+|l|)τ,∀|l|≠0,|k|+|l|≤T(n)}. |
Then there exists a subset On+1⊂On, where
On+1=On∖⋃T(n)<|k|+|l|≤T(n+1)|l|≠0Γn+1kl(γn+1) | (4.16) |
with
Γn+1kl(γn+1)={ξ∈On:|⟨k,ω⟩|+⟨l,ρn+1(ξ)⟩<γn+1(|k|+|l|)τ}, |
and a change of variables ˜Hn:Tm×Td→Tm×Td with estimates
‖˜Hn−id‖sn+1,rn+1,On+1≤4ϵ34n,‖D(˜Hn−id)‖sn+1,rn+1,On+1≤4ϵ34n, |
such that it transforms the vector field (4.15) to
ω⋅∂φ+(ρn+1(ξ)+gn+1(φ,ξ)+fn+1(θ,φ,ξ))⋅∂θ, |
with
‖gn+1(φ,ξ)‖rn+1,On+1≤4˜ϵn+1,‖fn+1(θ,φ,ξ)‖sn+1,rn+1,On+1≤ϵn+1,|ρn+1−ρn|On+1≤4ϵn, |
and [gn+1(φ,ξ)]φ=0.
Proof. Actually, Lemma 4.4 is an immediate corollary of Lemmas 4.1-4.3. The only point we need to illustrate is the definition of On+1. If ξ∈On and 0<|k|+|l|≤T(n), then
|⟨k,ω⟩+⟨l,ρn+1(ξ)⟩|≥|⟨k,ω⟩+⟨l,ρn(ξ)⟩|−|l||ρn+1(ξ)−ρn(ξ)|≥γn(|k|+|l|)τ−4T(n)ϵn≥γn−ϵ12n(|k|+|l|)τ>γn+1(|k|+|l|)τ. |
Thus, by the definition of (4.16), we have
On+1={ξ∈On:|⟨k,ω⟩|+⟨l,ρn+1(ξ)⟩≥γn+1(|k|+|l|)τ,∀|l|≠0,0<|k|+|l|≤Tn+1}, |
which satisfies the definition (4.2).
By the definition of On, we get Oγ=⋂n≥0On.
By (4.16), we have
O∖Oγ=∞⋃n=0⋃T(n)<|k|+|l|≤T(n+1)|l|≠0Γn+1kl(γn+1). |
In what follows, we start to estimate the measure of set Γn+1kl(γn+1). In view of
dρn(ξ)dξ=dρ0(ξ)dξ+n∑i=1(dρi(ξ)dξ−dρi−1(ξ)dξ)=dρ0(ξ)dξ+n∑i=1(dgi(φ,ξ)dξ−dgi−1(φ,ξ)dξ) |
and dρ0(ξ)dξ=I, we have
rank{dρn(ξ)dξ}=m. |
It follows from Lemma 1.2 in [33] that
Γn+1kl(γn+1)≤Cγn|l|(|k|+|l|)τ. |
Then, we have the following estimation
meas(O∖Oγ)≤C∑n≥0∑T(n)<|k|+|l|≤T(n+1)Cγn|l|(|k|+|l|)τ≤Cγ∞∑i=1lniiτ−(m+d−2)≤O(γ) |
provided τ>m+d−1.
Select ϵ0 sufficiently small and r0=r, s0=s. If ρ∈O=⋂n≥0On and ‖f‖s,r,Oγ<ϵ0, then the vector field
X=ω⋅∂φ+(ξ+f(θ,φ))⋅∂θ, | (4.17) |
is C∞ rotations linearizable. We can use Lemma 4.2 to system (4.17). Thus we can get H0∈Hs1,r1,a which conjugates (4.17) to
X1=ω⋅∂φ+(ρ1(ξ)+g1(φ,ξ)+f1(θ,φ,ξ))⋅∂θ, |
with
‖g1(φ,ξ)‖r1,O1≤2˜ϵ1,‖f1(θ,φ,ξ)‖s1,r1,O1≤ϵ1, |
Then we apply Lemma 6 inductively, we can get ˜Hi∈Hsi+1,ri+1,a, i=1,⋯,n, such that H(n)=˜H0∘˜H1∘⋯∘˜Hn conjugates (4.17) to
Xn+1=ω⋅∂φ+(ρn+1(ξ)+gn+1(φ,ξ)+fn+1(θ,φ,ξ))⋅∂θ, |
with
‖gn+1(φ,ξ)‖rn+1,On+1≤2˜ϵn+1,‖fn+1(θ,φ,ξ)‖sn+1,rn+1,On+1≤ϵn+1. |
And we have
‖DH(n)‖sn+1,rn+1,On+1≤‖D˜H0‖s1,r1,O1‖D˜H1‖s2,r2,O2⋯‖D˜Hn‖sn+1,rn+1,On+1≤n∏i=0(1+4ϵ34i), |
which implies
‖H(n+1)−H(n)‖sn+1,rn+1,On+1≤‖DH(n)‖sn,rn,On‖Hn−id‖sn+1,rn+1,On+1≤8ϵ34n. |
By the definition of (ϵn)N, we know that for any j∈Zm+d+, there exists N∈N, such that for any n≥N, we have 8(4Kαn+1r0)|j|ϵ34n≤ϵ12n. By the Cauchy estimates, if we denote x:=(θ,φ)∈Tm+d, we have
|∂|j|∂xj(H(n+1)−H(n))|≤1r|j|n+1‖H(n+1)−H(n)‖sn+1,rn+1,On+1≤8(4Kαn+1r0)|j|ϵ34n≤ϵ12n. |
for any n>N−1. This guarantees the limit limn→∞H(n) belongs to C∞.
Finally, let ρ∞(ξ)=limn→∞ρn(ξ), m∞(φ,ξ)=limn→∞gn(φ,ξ) and Ψ=(limn→∞H(n))−1, the proof of Proposition 3.1 is completed.
In this section, we give the proof of Proposition 3.2. Since the proof process is very similar to [27], we only write the relevant lemma and the key points of proof that are different from Proposition 3.1. Readers can combine Proposition 3.2 with [27] for more detailed analysis.
Let N r0, s0, γ>0, M>d/2 τ>d. Suppose K0>0 large enough such that
KM−α16M0lnK0>cτN, |
where c > \frac{16\alpha (3\tau+2+\frac{d}{2})}{\tau N} and \max\{\frac{M(2\tau_1-d-2)}{2M-d}, 1\} < \alpha < M. \epsilon_0 is sufficiently small. For given r_0 , s_0 , \epsilon_0 , we define some sequences depending on r_0 , s_0 , \epsilon_0 for n\geq 1 :
\begin{eqnarray} \begin{array}{ll} \Delta_n = \frac{s_0}{10\cdot2^{n-1}}, & r_n = \frac{r_0}{4k_n^{\alpha}}, \\ s_n = s_{n-1}-\Delta_n, & \epsilon_{n} = \frac{\epsilon_{n-1}}{K_{n+1}^{2^{n+1}c\tau {N}}}, \\ \widetilde{ \epsilon}_n = \sum\nolimits_{i = 0}^{n-1}{\epsilon_i}, & T^{(n-1)} = ({\gamma^3}/{32\epsilon_{n-1}^{\frac{1}{2}}})^{\frac{1}{3\tau+2}}, \\ \end{array} \end{eqnarray} | (4.18) |
where \max\{\frac{M\tau_1}{M-d-1}, 1\} < \alpha < M .
In (n-1) -th step, vector field can be written as
\begin{eqnarray} X_{n-1} = \omega\cdot \partial\varphi+(\rho_{f}+g_{n-1}(\varphi)+f_{n-1}(\theta, \varphi))\cdot \partial_\theta, \end{eqnarray} | (4.19) |
where
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\|g_{n-1}(\varphi)\|_{r_{n-1}}\leq 4\tilde\epsilon_{n-1}, \\ &&\| f_{n-1}(\theta, \varphi)\|_{s_{n-1}, r_{n-1}}\leq \epsilon_{n-1}. \end{eqnarray*} |
Similar to Proposition 3.1, we can get the following Lemmas.
Lemma 4.5. Denote \bar s_n = s_{n-1}-\frac{\Delta_n}{3} , \bar r_n = \frac{r_0}{K_n^\alpha} , then there exists h_{n-1}(\varphi) with \|h_{n-1}(\varphi)\|_{\bar r_n}\leq K_n^{\frac{M\tau_1+(d+1)\alpha}{M}} , such that transformation H_{n-1}:\theta = \overline\theta+h_{n-1}(\varphi)(\mod 2\pi) conjugates the vector field (4.19) into
\begin{eqnarray} \overline X_{n-1} = \omega\cdot \partial_\varphi+(\rho_{f}+\bar g_{n-1}(\varphi)+\bar f_{n-1}(\bar\theta, \varphi))\cdot \partial_{\bar\theta}, \end{eqnarray} | (4.20) |
where
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\|g_{n-1}(\varphi)\|_{\bar r_{n}}\leq \epsilon^{\frac{1}{2}}_{n-1}, \\ &&\| f_{n-1}(\theta, \varphi)\|_{\bar s_{n}, \bar r_{n}}\leq \epsilon_{n-1}. \end{eqnarray*} |
Proof. Using transformation \theta = \bar\theta+h_{n-1}(\varphi)(\mod 2\pi) , system (4.19) becomes
\begin{eqnarray*} \overline X_{n-1} = \omega\cdot \partial\varphi+\tilde f_{n-1}(\bar\theta, \varphi)\cdot \partial_{\bar\theta}, \end{eqnarray*} |
where \tilde f_{n-1}(\bar\theta, \varphi) = \rho_{f}+[g_{n-1}(\varphi)]+\mathcal{R}_{k_n}g_{n-1}(\varphi)+f_{n-1}(\bar\theta+h_{n-1}(\varphi), \varphi) , if homological equation \partial_\omega h_{n-1}(\varphi) = \mathcal{T}_{K_n}g_{n-1}(\varphi)-[g_{n-1}(\varphi)] is solvable. Then, we have
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\|f_{n-1}(\bar\theta+h_{n-1}(\varphi), \varphi)\|_{\bar s_n, \bar r_n}\leq \|f_{n-1}(\theta, \varphi)\|_{ s_{n-1}, r_{n-1}}\leq \epsilon_{n-1}, \\ &&\|\mathcal{R}_{k_n}g_{n-1}(\varphi)\|_{\bar r_n}\leq\epsilon_0e^{-K_n(r_{n-1}-\bar r_n)}\leq \epsilon_0e^{-K_n^{\frac{M-\alpha}{4M}}}\leq \frac{1}{3} \epsilon^{\frac{1}{2}}_{n-1}. \end{eqnarray*} |
By Lemma 2.2, we know \rho(\omega, \tilde f_{n-1}(\bar\theta, \varphi)) = \rho_f . By Lemma 2.1, we know that
|[g_{n-1}(\varphi)]_{\varphi}|\leq \|\mathcal{R}_{k_n}g_{n-1}(\varphi)+f_{n-1}(\bar\theta+h_{n-1}(\varphi), \varphi)\|_{\bar s_n, \bar r_n}\leq \frac{2}{3} \epsilon^{\frac{1}{2}}_{n-1}. |
Letting \bar g_{n-1}(\varphi) = [g_{n-1}(\varphi)]_{\varphi}+\mathcal{R}_{k_n}g_{n-1}(\varphi) and \bar f_{n-1}(\bar\theta, \varphi) = f_{n-1}(\bar\theta+h_{n-1}(\varphi), \varphi) , we have
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\|\bar f_{n-1}(\bar\theta, \varphi)\|_{\bar s_n, \bar r_n} = \|f_{n-1}(\bar\theta+h_{n-1}(\varphi), \varphi)\|_{\bar s_n, \bar r_n}\leq \|f_{n-1}(\theta, \varphi)\|_{ s_{n-1}, r_{n-1}, O_{n-1}}\leq \epsilon_{n-1}, \\ &&\|\bar g_{n-1}(\varphi)\|_{\bar s_n, \bar r_n} = \|[g_{n-1}(\varphi)]+\mathcal{R}_{k_n}g_{n-1}(\varphi)\|_{\bar r_n}\leq\epsilon_0e^{-K_n(r_{n-1}-\bar r_n)}\leq \epsilon_0e^{-K_n^{\frac{M-\alpha}{4M}}}\leq \epsilon^{\frac{1}{2}}_{n-1}. \end{eqnarray*} |
Lemma 4.6. Denote r_{n+} = \frac{r_0}{2K_n^\alpha} , s_{n+} = \bar s_n-\frac{\Delta}{3} . Under the assumptions of Lemma 4.5, there exists \overline {H}_{n-1} with estimates
\begin{eqnarray} &&\|\overline H_{n-1}-id\|_{s_{n+}, r_{n+}}\leq 4\epsilon_{n-1}^{\frac{3}{4}}, \end{eqnarray} | (4.21) |
\begin{eqnarray} &&\|D(\overline H_{n-1}-id)\|_{s_{n+}, r_{n+}}\leq 4\epsilon_{n-1}^{\frac{3}{4}}, \end{eqnarray} | (4.22) |
such that \overline H_{n-1} conjugates (4.20) to
\begin{eqnarray} X_{n-1, +} = \omega\cdot \partial_\varphi+(\rho_{f}+\bar g_{n-1, +}(\varphi)+\bar f_{n-1, +}(\bar\theta_+, \varphi))\cdot \partial_{\bar\theta_+} \end{eqnarray} | (4.23) |
with
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\|\bar f_{n-1, +}(\bar\theta_+, \varphi)\|_{s_{n+}, r_{n+}} = \leq 2\epsilon^{\frac{1}{2}}_{n-1}, \\ &&\|\bar g_{n-1, +}(\varphi)\|_{r_{n+}}\leq \epsilon_{n}, \\ &&\|\bar g_{n-1, +}(\varphi)-\bar g_{n-1}(\varphi)\|_{r_{n+}}\leq 4\epsilon_{n-1}. \end{eqnarray*} |
Proof. Taking advantage of (\omega, \rho_f) being Diophantine, we can obtain this Lemma immediately using the same process of Lemma 4.2. The detail proof is omitted here.
Lemma 4.7. Under the assumptions of Lemma 4.5 and Lemma 4.6, there exists \widetilde{H}_{n-1} with estimates
\begin{eqnarray} &&\|\widetilde H_{n-1}-id\|_{s_{n}, r_{n}}\leq 4\epsilon_{n-1}^{\frac{3}{4}}, \end{eqnarray} | (4.24) |
\begin{eqnarray} &&\|D( \widetilde H_{n-1}-id)\|_{s_{n}, r_{n}}\leq 4\epsilon_{n-1}^{\frac{3}{4}}, \end{eqnarray} | (4.25) |
such that \widetilde H_{n-1} conjugates (4.20) to
\begin{eqnarray*} X_{n} = \omega\cdot \partial_\varphi+(\rho_{f}+ g_{n}(\varphi)+ f_{n}(\theta_+, \varphi))\cdot \partial_{\theta_+} \end{eqnarray*} |
with
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\|f_{n}(\theta_+, \varphi)\|_{s_{n}, r_{n}}\leq\epsilon_{n}, \\ &&\|g_{n}(\varphi)\|_{r_{n}}\leq 4\tilde\epsilon_{n}. \end{eqnarray*} |
Proof. Applying the inverse transformation H_{n-1}^{-1} :
\bar\theta_+ = \theta_+-h_{n-1}(\varphi), |
the system (4.23) can be conjugated to
\begin{eqnarray*} X_{n} = \omega\cdot \partial_\varphi+(\rho_{f}+ g_{n}(\varphi)+ f_{n}(\theta_+, \varphi))\cdot \partial_{\theta_+} \end{eqnarray*} |
where
g_n(\varphi) = \mathcal{T}_{K_n}g_{n-1}(\varphi)+\bar g_{n-1, +}(\varphi), \; f_{n}(\theta_+, \varphi) = \bar f_{n-1, +}(\theta_+-h_{n-1}(\varphi), \varphi). |
We have
\|g_n(\varphi)-g_{n-1}(\varphi)\|_{r_n, O_{n-1}}\leq \|\bar g_{n-1, +}(\varphi)-\bar g_{n-1}(\varphi)\|_{r_{n+}, O_{n-1}}\leq 4\epsilon_{n-1}, |
which implies \|g_n(\varphi)\|_{r_n, O_{n-1}}\leq 4\tilde\epsilon_n . Thus
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\|f_{n}(\theta_+, \varphi)\|_{s_{n}, r_{n}}\leq\epsilon_{n}, \\ &&\|g_{n}(\varphi)\|_{r_{n}}\leq 4\tilde\epsilon_{n}. \end{eqnarray*} |
Let \widetilde H_{n-1} = H_{n-1}\circ\overline H_{n-1}\circ H_{n-1}^{-1}. By (4.21) and (4.22), we get (4.24) and (4.25) hold.
Lemmas 4.5, 4.6, and 4.7 can be summarized as the following iterative lemma. We do not give the proof because it can be seen in [27].
Lemma 4.8. Suppose \omega\in \mathcal{L} , \tilde\rho(\omega, \rho+f(\theta, \varphi)) = \rho_f\in DC_\omega(\gamma, \tau) and r_n , s_n , \epsilon_n are defined in (4.18) for n\geq 0 . Let \epsilon_0 be sufficiently small. Then the following holds for all n\geq 1 : If the system
\begin{eqnarray} X_{n} = \omega\cdot \partial_\varphi+(\rho_{f}+ g_{n}(\varphi)+ f_{n}(\theta, \varphi))\cdot \partial_{\theta} \end{eqnarray} | (4.26) |
satisfies
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\|f_{n}(\theta, \varphi)\|_{s_{n}, r_{n}}\leq\epsilon_{n}, \\ &&\|g_{n}(\varphi)\|_{r_{n}}\leq 4\tilde\epsilon_{n}. \end{eqnarray*} |
then there exists a change of variables \widetilde H_n:\mathbb{T}\times\mathbb{T}^d\rightarrow \mathbb{T}\times\mathbb{T}^d with estimates
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\| \widetilde H_{n}-id\|_{s_{n+1}, r_{n+1}}\leq 4\epsilon_{n}^{\frac{3}{4}}, \\ &&\|D( \widetilde H_{n}-id)\|_{s_{n+1}, r_{n+1}}\leq 4\epsilon_{n}^{\frac{3}{4}}, \end{eqnarray*} |
such that it transforms the system (4.26) to
\begin{eqnarray*} X_{n+1} = \omega\cdot \partial_\varphi+(\rho_{f}+ g_{n+1}(\varphi)+ f_{n+1}(\theta, \varphi))\cdot \partial_{\theta} \end{eqnarray*} |
with
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\|f_{n+1}(\theta, \varphi)\|_{s_{n+1}, r_{n+1}}\leq\epsilon_{n+1}, \\ &&\|g_{n+1}(\varphi)\|_{r_{n+1}}\leq 4\tilde\epsilon_{n+1}. \end{eqnarray*} |
Let \epsilon_0 be sufficiently small and r_0 = r , s_0 = s . If \tilde\rho(\omega, \rho+f) = \rho_f\in DC_\omega(\gamma, \tau) and \|f\|_{s, r, \mathcal{O}_{\gamma}} < \epsilon_0/2 , then the vector field
\begin{eqnarray*} X = \omega\cdot \partial_\varphi+(\rho+ f(\theta, \varphi))\cdot \partial_{\theta} \end{eqnarray*} |
can be written as
\begin{eqnarray} X = \omega\cdot \partial_\varphi+(\rho_f+ \tilde f(\theta, \varphi))\cdot \partial_{\theta} \end{eqnarray} | (4.27) |
where \tilde f(\theta, \varphi) = \rho-\rho_f+f(\theta, \varphi) . We can use Lemma 4.6 to system (4.27). Thus we can get \widetilde H_0\in H^{s_1, r_1, a}, which conjugates (4.27) to
\begin{eqnarray*} X_1 = \omega\cdot \partial_\varphi+(\rho+ g_1(\varphi) +f_1(\theta, \varphi))\cdot \partial_{\theta} \end{eqnarray*} |
with
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\|f_{1}(\theta, \varphi)\|_{s_{1}, r_{1}}\leq \epsilon_{1}, \\ &&\|g_{1}(\varphi)\|_{r_{1}}\leq 2\tilde \epsilon_{1}. \end{eqnarray*} |
Then we apply Lemma 4.8 inductively, we can get \widetilde H_i\in H^{s_{i+1}, r_{i+1}, a} , i = 1, \cdots, n, such that H^{(n)} = \widetilde H_0\circ \widetilde H_1\circ\cdots\circ \widetilde H_n conjugates (4.27) to
\begin{eqnarray*} X_{n+1} = \omega\cdot \partial_\varphi+(\rho_{f}+ g_{n+1}(\varphi)+ f_{n+1}(\theta, \varphi))\cdot \partial_{\theta} \end{eqnarray*} |
with
\begin{eqnarray*} &&\|f_{n+1}(\theta, \varphi)\|_{s_{n+1}, r_{n+1}}\leq\epsilon_{n+1}, \\ &&\|g_{n+1}(\varphi)\|_{r_{n+1}}\leq 4\tilde\epsilon_{n+1}. \end{eqnarray*} |
And we have
\begin{eqnarray*} \|DH^{(n)}\|_{s_{n+1}, r_{n+1}}\leq \|D\widetilde H_{0}\|_{s_1, r_1}\|D\widetilde H_{1}\|_{s_2, r_2}\cdots\|D \widetilde H_n\|_{s_{n+1}, r_{n+1}}\leq \prod\limits_{i = 0}^{n}(1+4\epsilon_i^{\frac{3}{4}}), \end{eqnarray*} |
which implies
\begin{eqnarray*} \|H^{(n+1)}-H^{(n)}\|_{s_{n+1}, r_{n+1}}\leq \|DH^{(n)}\|_{s_n, r_n}\|\widetilde H_n-id\|_{s_{n+1}, r_{n+1}}\leq 8\epsilon_n^{\frac{3}{4}}. \end{eqnarray*} |
By the definition of (\epsilon_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}} , we know that for any j\in \mathbb{Z}_+^{1+d}, there exists N\in \mathbb{N} , such that for any n\geq N , we have 8(\frac{4K_{n+1}^\alpha}{r_0})^{|j|}\epsilon_n^{\frac{3}{4}}\leq \epsilon_n^{\frac{1}{2}} . By the Cauchy estimates, if we denote x: = (\theta, \varphi)\in \mathbb{T}^{1+d} , we have
\begin{eqnarray*} |\frac{\partial^{|j|}}{\partial x^j}(H^{(n+1)}-H^{(n)})|\leq \frac{1}{r^{|j|}_{n+1}}\|H^{(n+1)}-H^{(n)}\|_{s_{n+1}, r_{n+1}}\leq 8(\frac{4K_{n+1}^\alpha}{r_0})^{|j|}\epsilon_n^{\frac{3}{4}}\leq \epsilon_n^{\frac{1}{2}}. \end{eqnarray*} |
for any n > N-1 . This guarantees the limit \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}H^{(n)} belongs to C^\infty .
Finally, let m({\varphi}) = \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}g_{n}(\varphi) and \Psi = (\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}H^{(n)})^{-1} , the proof of Proposition 3.1 completed.
Xinyu Guan: Methodology, Writing-original draft; Nan Kang: Validation(equal), Writing-review & editing (equal). All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript for publication.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
Xinyu Guan was partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 12301201) and the Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation, China (Grant No. ZR2023QA055).
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest in this paper.
We give the conception of continued fraction expansion and CD -bridge. Let \alpha\in (0, 1) be irrational and {\rm int}(\bullet) denote the integer part of \bullet . Define that a_0 = 0 , \alpha_0 = \alpha , and inductively for k\geq 1 ,
a_k = {\rm int}(\alpha_k^{-1}), \; \; \alpha_k = \alpha_{k-1}^{-1}-a_k. |
We also define that p_0 = 0 , p_1 = 1 , q_0 = 1 , q_1 = a_1 , and recursively,
\begin{eqnarray*} \begin{array}{l} p_k = a_kp_{k-1}+p_{k-2}\\ q_k = a_kq_{k-1}+q_{k-2}. \end{array} \end{eqnarray*} |
Then (q_n) is the sequence of denominators of the best rational approximation for \alpha . It satisfies
\|k\alpha\|_{\mathbb{T}}\geq \|q_{n-1}\alpha\|_{\mathbb{T}}, \; \; \forall 1\leq k < q_n |
and
\frac{1}{q_n+q_{n+1}} < \|q_n\alpha\|_{\mathbb{T}}\leq \frac{1}{q_{n+1}}, |
where \|x\|_{\mathbb{T}} is defined by \|x\|_{\mathbb{T}} = \inf_{p\in\mathbb{Z}}|x-p|.
For each \alpha\in \mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Q} , in the sequel we will fix a particular subsequence (q_{n_k}) of the denominators of the best rational approximations for \alpha , which for simplicity will be denote by (Q_k) . Denote the sequences (q_{n_{k}+1}) and (p_{n_k}) by (\overline{Q}_{k}) and (P_k) respectively. Now, we introduce the concept of a CD -bridge which first appeared in [4].
Definition A.1. Let 0 < \mathcal{A}\leq \mathcal{B}\leq \mathcal{C}. We say that the pair of denominators (q_l, q_n) forms a CD(\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B}, \mathcal{C}) bridge if
• q_{i+1}\leq q_i^{\mathcal{A}}, \; \forall i = l, \ldots, n-1 ,
• q_l^{\mathcal{C}}\geq q_n\geq q_{l}^{\mathcal{B}} .
Lemma A.1. For each \mathcal{A}\geq 1 , there exists a subsequence (Q_k) such that Q_0 = 1 , and for each k\geq 0 , Q_{k+1}\leq \overline Q_{k}^{\mathcal{A}^4} , and either \overline Q_k\geq Q_k^{\mathcal{A}}, or the pairs (\overline Q_{k-1}, Q_k) and (Q_k, Q_{k+1}) are both CD(\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{A}, \mathcal{A}^3) bridges.
The proof can be seen in [4].
[1] | V. I. Arnold, Small denominators I. On the mapping of a circle into itself, Akad. Nauk. Math., 25 (1961), 21–86. |
[2] |
A. Avila, Global theory of one-frequency Schrödinger operators, Acta Math., 215 (2015), 1–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11511-015-0128-7 doi: 10.1007/s11511-015-0128-7
![]() |
[3] | A. Avila, Almost reducibility and absolute continuity, arXiv preprint arXiv: 1006.0704, 2010. |
[4] |
A. Avila, B. Fayad, R. Krikorian, A KAM scheme for SL(2, \mathbb{R}) cocycles with frequencies, Geom. Funct. Anal., 21 (2011), 1001–1009. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00039-011-0135-6 doi: 10.1007/s00039-011-0135-6
![]() |
[5] |
A. Avila, S. Jitomirskaya, The ten martini problem, Ann. Math., 170 (2009), 303–342. https://doi.org/10.4007/annals.2009.170.303 doi: 10.4007/annals.2009.170.303
![]() |
[6] |
A. Avila, R. Krikorian, Reducibility or non-uniform hyperbolicity for quasiperiodic Schrödinger cocycles, Ann. Math., 164 (2006), 911–940. https://doi.org/10.4007/annals.2006.164.911 doi: 10.4007/annals.2006.164.911
![]() |
[7] |
D. Bambusi, Reducibility of 1-d Schrödinger equation with time quasiperiodic unbounded perturbations, Ⅰ, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 370 (2018), 1823–1865. https://doi.org/10.1090/tran/7135 doi: 10.1090/tran/7135
![]() |
[8] |
D. Bambusi, Reducibility of 1-d Schrödinger equation with time quasiperiodic unbounded perturbations, Ⅱ, Comm. Math. Phys., 353 (2017), 353–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-016-2825-2 doi: 10.1007/s00220-016-2825-2
![]() |
[9] |
D. Bambusi, S. Graffi, Time quasi-periodic unbounded perturbations of Schrödinger operators and KAM methods, Commun. Math. Phys., 219 (2001), 465–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002200100426 doi: 10.1007/s002200100426
![]() |
[10] |
D. Bambusi, B. Grébert, A. Maspero, D. Robert, Reducibility of the quantum harmonic oscillator in d-dimensions with polynomial time-dependent perturbation, Anal. PDE, 11 (2018), 775–799. https://doi.org/10.2140/apde.2018.11.775 doi: 10.2140/apde.2018.11.775
![]() |
[11] | N. N. Bogoljubov, Ju. A. Mitropoliskii, A. M. Samoilenko, Methods of accelerated convergence in nonlinear mechanics, Springer, New York, 1976 (Russian original: Naukova Dumka, Kiev, 1960). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-61900-7 |
[12] |
H. Cheng, W. Si, J. Si, Whiskered tori for forced beam equations with multi-dimensional liouvillean frequency, J. Dynam. Differential Equations, 32 (2020), 705–739. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10884-019-09754-1 doi: 10.1007/s10884-019-09754-1
![]() |
[13] | M. Combescure, The quantum stability problem for time-periodic perturbations of the harmonic oscillator, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Phys. Théor., 47 (1987), 63–83. |
[14] |
E. Dinaburg, Y. Sinai, The one-dimensional Schrödinger equation with a quasi-periodic potential, Funct. Anal. Appl., 9 (1975), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01075873 doi: 10.1007/BF01075873
![]() |
[15] |
L. H. Eliasson, Floquet solutions for the one-dimensional quasiperiodic Schrödinger equation, Commun. Math. Phys., 146 (1992), 447–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02097013 doi: 10.1007/BF02097013
![]() |
[16] |
L. H. Eliasson, Almost reducibility of linear quasi-periodic systems, Proceedings of symposia in pure mathematics, 69 (2001), 679–706. https://doi.org/10.1090/pspum/069/1858550 doi: 10.1090/pspum/069/1858550
![]() |
[17] |
L. H. Eliasson, B. Fayad, R. Krikorian, Around the stability of KAM-tori, Duke Math. J., 164 (2015), 1733–1775. https://doi.org/10.1215/00127094-3120060 doi: 10.1215/00127094-3120060
![]() |
[18] |
L. H. Eliasson, S. B. Kuksin, On reducibility of Schrödinger equations with quasiperiodic in time potentials, Comm. Math. Phys., 286 (2009), 125–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-008-0683-2 doi: 10.1007/s00220-008-0683-2
![]() |
[19] |
B. Fayad, R. Krikorian, Rigidity results for quasiperiodic SL(2, \mathbb{R})-cocycles, J. Mod. Dyn., 3 (2009), 479–510. https://doi.org/10.3934/jmd.2009.3.479 doi: 10.3934/jmd.2009.3.479
![]() |
[20] |
R. Feola, F. Giuliani, R. Montalto, M. Procesi, Reducibility of first order linear operators on tori via Moser's theorem, J. Funct. Anal., 276 (2019), 932–970. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2018.10.009 doi: 10.1016/j.jfa.2018.10.009
![]() |
[21] |
B. Grébert, E. Paturel, KAM for the Klein-Gordon equation on \mathbb{S}^d, Boll. Unione Mat Ital., 9 (2016), 237–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40574-016-0072-2 doi: 10.1007/s40574-016-0072-2
![]() |
[22] |
H. Her, J. You, Full measure reducibility for generic one-parameter family of quasi-periodic linear systems, J. Dynam. Differential Equations, 20 (2008), 831–866. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10884-008-9113-6 doi: 10.1007/s10884-008-9113-6
![]() |
[23] |
M. Herman, Une méthode pour minorer les exposants de Lyapunov et quelques exemples montrant le caractère local d'un théorème d'Arnold et de Moser sur le tore de dimension 2, Comment. Math. Helv., 58 (1983), 453–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02564647 doi: 10.1007/BF02564647
![]() |
[24] |
X. Hou, J. You, Almost reducibility and non-perturbative reducibility of quasi-periodic linear systems, Invent. Math., 190 (2012), 209–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00222-012-0379-2 doi: 10.1007/s00222-012-0379-2
![]() |
[25] |
À. Jorba, C. Simó, On the reducibility of linear differential equations with quasiperiodic coefficients, J. Differential Equations, 98 (1992), 111–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0396(92)90107-X doi: 10.1016/0022-0396(92)90107-X
![]() |
[26] | R. Krikorian, Réductibilité des systèmes produits-croisés à valeurs dans des groupes compacts, Astérisque, 256 SMF, 1999. |
[27] |
R. Krikorian, J. Wang, J. You, Q. Zhou, Linearization of quasiperiodically forced circle flows beyond brjuno condition, Commun. Math. Phys., 358 (2018), 81–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-017-3021-8 doi: 10.1007/s00220-017-3021-8
![]() |
[28] |
R. Kuksin, J. Pöschel, Invariant cantor manifolds of quasi-periodic oscillations for a nonlinear Schrödinger equation, Ann. Math., 143 (1996), 149–179. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118656 doi: 10.2307/2118656
![]() |
[29] |
Z. Lou, J. Geng, Quasi-periodic response solutions in forced revesible systems with Liouvillean frequencies, J. Differential Equations, 263 (2017), 3894–3927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2017.05.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2017.05.007
![]() |
[30] |
A. Maspero, D. Robert, On time dependent Schrödinger equations: global well-posedness and growth of Sobolev norms, J. Funct. Anal., 273 (2017), 721–781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2017.02.029 doi: 10.1016/j.jfa.2017.02.029
![]() |
[31] | R. Montalto, A Reducibility result for a class of Linear Wave Equations on \mathbb{T}^d, International Mathematics Research Notices, 2019 (2017), 1788–1862. |
[32] |
J. Moser, Convergent series expansions for quasiperiodic motions, Math. Ann., 169 (1967), 136–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01399536 doi: 10.1007/BF01399536
![]() |
[33] |
W. Si, J. Si, Linearization of a quasi-periodically forced flow on \mathbb{T}^m under Brjuno-Rüssmann non-resonant condition, Appl. Anal, 97 (2018), 2001–2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036811.2017.1350847 doi: 10.1080/00036811.2017.1350847
![]() |
[34] |
F. Wang, H. Cheng, J. Si, Response Solution to Ill-Posed Boussinesq Equation with Quasi-Periodic Forcing of Liouvillean Frequency, J. Nonlinear Sci., 30 (2020), 657–710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00332-019-09587-8 doi: 10.1007/s00332-019-09587-8
![]() |
[35] |
J. Wang, J. You, Boundedness of solutions for non-linear quasi-periodic differential equations with Liouvillean frequency, J. Differential Equations, 261 (2016), 1068–1098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2016.03.038 doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2016.03.038
![]() |
[36] |
J. Wang, J. You, Q. Zhou, Response solutions for quasi-periodically forced harmonic oscillators, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 369 (2017), 4251–4274. https://doi.org/10.1090/tran/6800 doi: 10.1090/tran/6800
![]() |
[37] |
X. Xu, W. Si, J. Si, Stoker's Problem for Quasi-periodically Forced Reversible Systems with Multidimensional Liouvillean Frequency, SIAM. J. Appl. Dyn. Syst., 19 (2020), 2286–2321. https://doi.org/10.1137/19M1270033 doi: 10.1137/19M1270033
![]() |
[38] |
X. Xu, J. You, Q. Zhou, Quasi-periodic solutions of NLS with Liouvillean Frequency, Anal. PDE, 14 (2021), 2327–2362. https://doi.org/10.2140/apde.2021.14.2327 doi: 10.2140/apde.2021.14.2327
![]() |
[39] |
J. You, Q. Zhou, Embedding of analytic quasi-periodic cocycles into analytic quasi-periodic linear systems and its applications, Comm. Math. Phys., 323 (2013), 975–1005. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-013-1800-4 doi: 10.1007/s00220-013-1800-4
![]() |
[40] |
J. You, Q. Zhou, Phase transition and semi-global reducibility, Comm. Math. Phys., 330 (2014), 1095–1113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-014-2012-2 doi: 10.1007/s00220-014-2012-2
![]() |
[41] |
J. You, Q. Zhou, Simple counter-examples to Kotani–Last conjecture via reducibility, Int. Math. Res. Not., 19 (2015), 9450–9455. https://doi.org/10.1093/imrn/rnu240 doi: 10.1093/imrn/rnu240
![]() |
[42] |
J. You, S. Zhang, Q. Zhou, Point spectrum for quasi-periodic long range operators, J. Spectr. Theory, 4 (2014), 769–781. https://doi.org/10.4171/jst/85 doi: 10.4171/jst/85
![]() |
[43] |
D. Zhang, J. Xu, Reducibility of a class of nonlinear quasi-periodic systems with Liouvillean basic frequencies, Ergod. Th. Dynam. Sys., 41 (2021), 1883–1920. https://doi.org/10.1017/etds.2020.23 doi: 10.1017/etds.2020.23
![]() |
[44] |
Q. Zhou, J. Wang, Reducibility results for quasiperiodic cocycles with Liouvillean frequency, J. Dynam. Differential Equations, 24 (2012), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10884-011-9235-0 doi: 10.1007/s10884-011-9235-0
![]() |