Processing math: 100%
Research article

Research on fault diagnosis technology of heat meter based on multi classifier fusion of pigeon swarm algorithm

  • Received: 29 September 2022 Revised: 03 January 2023 Accepted: 08 January 2023 Published: 31 January 2023
  • In order to improve the availability of fault data, the fault data of heat meters had been classified, and balances all kinds of fault data according to interpolation algorithms to meet the needs of fault diagnosis algorithms. Based on the voting mechanism, an integrated model of multi classifier fusion is established, and the weight of each classifier is optimally configured through pigeon swarm algorithm. In the experiment, three kinds of integration models are obtained according to the voting mechanism and pigeon swarm algorithm. The three integrated models are used to diagnose the fault of the heat meter, and the three indicators of precision, recall and F1 Core have achieved satisfactory results.

    Citation: Shuchun Yu, Jinjian Tao, Jun Liu, Yanshu Miao. Research on fault diagnosis technology of heat meter based on multi classifier fusion of pigeon swarm algorithm[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(4): 6312-6326. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023272

    Related Papers:

    [1] Antonio Iannizzotto, Giovanni Porru . Optimization problems in rearrangement classes for fractional p-Laplacian equations. Mathematics in Engineering, 2025, 7(1): 13-34. doi: 10.3934/mine.2025002
    [2] Catharine W. K. Lo, José Francisco Rodrigues . On an anisotropic fractional Stefan-type problem with Dirichlet boundary conditions. Mathematics in Engineering, 2023, 5(3): 1-38. doi: 10.3934/mine.2023047
    [3] Pier Domenico Lamberti, Michele Zaccaron . Spectral stability of the curlcurl operator via uniform Gaffney inequalities on perturbed electromagnetic cavities. Mathematics in Engineering, 2023, 5(1): 1-31. doi: 10.3934/mine.2023018
    [4] David Arcoya, Lucio Boccardo, Luigi Orsina . Hardy potential versus lower order terms in Dirichlet problems: regularizing effects. Mathematics in Engineering, 2023, 5(1): 1-14. doi: 10.3934/mine.2023004
    [5] Hugo Tavares, Alessandro Zilio . Regularity of all minimizers of a class of spectral partition problems. Mathematics in Engineering, 2021, 3(1): 1-31. doi: 10.3934/mine.2021002
    [6] Gennaro Ciampa, Gianluca Crippa, Stefano Spirito . Propagation of logarithmic regularity and inviscid limit for the 2D Euler equations. Mathematics in Engineering, 2024, 6(4): 494-509. doi: 10.3934/mine.2024020
    [7] Lorenzo Brasco . Convex duality for principal frequencies. Mathematics in Engineering, 2022, 4(4): 1-28. doi: 10.3934/mine.2022032
    [8] Youchan Kim, Seungjin Ryu, Pilsoo Shin . Approximation of elliptic and parabolic equations with Dirichlet boundary conditions. Mathematics in Engineering, 2023, 5(4): 1-43. doi: 10.3934/mine.2023079
    [9] Filippo Gazzola, Gianmarco Sperone . Remarks on radial symmetry and monotonicity for solutions of semilinear higher order elliptic equations. Mathematics in Engineering, 2022, 4(5): 1-24. doi: 10.3934/mine.2022040
    [10] Boumediene Abdellaoui, Pablo Ochoa, Ireneo Peral . A note on quasilinear equations with fractional diffusion. Mathematics in Engineering, 2021, 3(2): 1-28. doi: 10.3934/mine.2021018
  • In order to improve the availability of fault data, the fault data of heat meters had been classified, and balances all kinds of fault data according to interpolation algorithms to meet the needs of fault diagnosis algorithms. Based on the voting mechanism, an integrated model of multi classifier fusion is established, and the weight of each classifier is optimally configured through pigeon swarm algorithm. In the experiment, three kinds of integration models are obtained according to the voting mechanism and pigeon swarm algorithm. The three integrated models are used to diagnose the fault of the heat meter, and the three indicators of precision, recall and F1 Core have achieved satisfactory results.



    Boundary value problems for fractional-order pseudodifferential operators P, in particular where P is a generalization of the fractional Laplacian (Δ)a (0<a<1), have currently received much interest in applications, such as in financial theory and probability (but also in mathematical physics and differential geometry), and many methods have been used, most often probabilistic or potential-theoretic methods.

    The author has studied such problems by pseudodifferential methods in [8,9,10,11,12,13], under the assumption that the operators satisfy a μ-transmission condition at the boundary of the domain ΩRn, which allows to show regularity results for solutions of the Dirichlet problem in elliptic cases, to show integration by parts formulas, and much else.

    In the present paper we consider translation-invariant pseudodifferential operators (ψdo's) P=Op(p(ξ)) of order 2a>0 with homogeneous symbol p(ξ), which are only taken to satisfy the top-order equation in the μ-transmission condition (relative to the domain Ω=Rn+), we call this the principal μ-transmission condition. It is shown that they retain some of the features: The solution spaces for the homogeneous Dirichlet problem in the elliptic case equal the μ-transmission spaces from [8] (in a setting of low-order Sobolev spaces), having a factor xμn. The integration by parts formula holds (even when P is not elliptic):

    Rn+Punˉudx+Rn+nu¯Pudx=Γ(μ+1)Γ(μ+1)Rn1s0γ0(u/xμn)γ0(ˉu/xμn)dx,

    when u and u are in xμnC(¯Rn+) resp. xˉμnC(¯Rn+) (μ=2aμ) and compactly supported.

    We also treat nonhomogeneous local Dirichlet problems with Dirichlet trace γ0(u/xμ1n), and show how the above formula implies a "halfways" Green's formula where one factor has nonzero Dirichlet trace. P can be of any positive order, and μ can be complex.

    The results apply in particular to the operator L=Op(A(ξ)+iB(ξ)) with A real, positive and even in ξ, B real and odd in ξ, which satisfies the principal μ-transmission equation for a suitable real μ. Hereby we can compensate for an error made in the recent publication [13] (see also [14]), where it was overlooked that L may not satisfy the full μ-transmission condition when B0 (it does so for B=0). The general L are now covered by the present work. They were treated earlier by Dipierro, Ros-Oton, Serrra and Valdinoci [5] under some hypotheses on a and μ; they come up in applications as infinitesimal generators of α-stable n-dimensional Lévy processes, see [5]. (The calculations in [13] are valid when applied to operators satisfying the full μ-transmission condition.)

    The study of x-independent ψdo's P on the half-space Rn+ serves as a model case for operators on domains ΩRn with curved boundary and possible x-dependence, and can be expected to be a useful ingredient in the general treatment, as carried out for the operator L in [5].

    Plan of the paper: In Section 2 we give an overview of the aims and results of the paper with only few technicalities. Section 3 introduces the principal transmission condition in detail for homogeneous ψdo symbols. In Section 4, the Wiener-Hopf method is applied to derive basic decomposition and factorization formulas for such symbols. This is used in Section 5 to establish mapping properties for the operators, and regularity properties for solutions of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem in strongly elliptic cases; here μ-transmission spaces (known from [8]) defined in an L2-framework play an important role. Section 6 gives the proof of the above-mentioned integration by parts formula on Rn+. Section 7 treats nonhomogeneous local Dirichlet conditions, and a halfways Green's formula is established.

    The study is concerned with the so-called model case, where the pseudodifferential operators have x-independent symbols, hence act as simple multiplication operators in the Fourier transformed space (this frees us from using the deeper composition rules needed for x-dependent symbols), and the considered open subset Ω of Rn is simplest possible, namely Ω=Rn+={xRnxn>0}. We assume n2 and denote x=(x1,,xn)=(x,xn), x=(x1,,xn1). Recall the formulas for the Fourier transform F and the operator P=Op(p(ξ)):

    Fu=ˆu(ξ)=Rneixξu(x)dx,F1v=(2π)nRneixξv(ξ)dξ,Pu=Op(p(ξ))u=F1(p(ξ)(Fu)(ξ)). (2.1)

    We work in L2(Rn) and L2(Rn+) and their derived L2-Sobolev spaces (the reader is urged to consult (5.1) below for notation). On L2(Rn), the Plancherel theorem

    uL2(Rn)=cˆuL2(Rn),c=(2π)n/2, (2.2)

    makes norm estimates of operators easy. (There is more on Fourier transforms and distribution theory e.g., in [7].) The model case serves both as a simplified special case, and as a proof ingredient for more general cases of domains with curved boundaries, and possibly x-dependent symbols.

    The symbols p(ξ) we shall consider are scalar and homogeneous of degree m=2a>0 in ξ, i.e., p(tξ)=tmp(ξ) for t>0, and are C1 for ξ0, defining operators P=Op(p).

    A typical example is the squareroot Laplacian with drift:

    L1=(Δ)12+bb,withsymbolL1(ξ)=|ξ|+ibbξ, (2.3)

    where bb=(b1,,bn) is a real vector. Here m=1, a=12. It satisfies the condition for strong ellipticity, which is:

    Rep(ξ)c0|ξ|mwithc0>0,allξRn; (2.4)

    this is important in regularity discussions. Some results are obtained without the ellipticity hypothesis; as an example we can take the operator L2 with symbol

    L2(ξ)=|ξ1++ξn|+ibbξ, (2.5)

    whose real part is zero e.g., when ξ=(1,1,0,,0).

    The operators are well-defined on the Sobolev spaces over Rn: When p is homogeneous of degree m0, there is an inequality

    |p(ξ)|C|ξ|mCξm,ξ=(1+|ξ|2)12

    (we say that p is of order m); then

    PuL2(Rn)=cp(ξ)ˆu(ξ)L2(Rn)cCξmˆuL2(Rn)=CuHm(Rn), (2.6)

    so P maps Hm(Rn) continuously into L2(Rn). Similarly, it maps Hs+m(Rn) continuously into Hs(Rn) for all sR.

    But for these pseudodifferential operators it is not obvious how to define them relative to the subset Rn+, since they are not defined pointwise like differential operators, but by integrals (they are nonlocal). The convention is here to let them act on suitable linear subsets of L2(Rn+), where we identify L2(Rn+) with the set of uL2(Rn) that are zero on Rn, i.e., have their support suppu¯Rn+. (The support suppu of a function or distribution u is the complement of the largest open set where u=0. The operator that extends functions on Rn+ by zero on Rn is denoted e+.) Then we apply P and restrict to Rn+ afterwards; this is the operator r+P. (r+ stands for restriction from Rn to Rn+.)

    Aiming for the integration by parts formula mentioned in the start, we have to clarify for which functions u,u the integrals make sense. It can be expected from earlier studies ([5,10,20]) that the integral will be meaningful for solutions of the so-called homogeneous Dirichlet problem on Rn+, namely the problem

    r+Pu=fonRn+,u=0onRn (2.7)

    (where the latter condition can also be written suppu¯Rn+). This raises the question of where r+P lands; which f can be prescribed? Or, if f is given in certain space, where should u lie in order to hit the space where f lies?

    Altogether, we address the following three questions on P:

    (1) Forward mapping properties. From which spaces does r+P map into an Hs-space for f?

    (2) Regularity properties. If u solves (2.7) with f in an Hs-space for a high s, will u then belong to a space with a similar high regularity?

    (3) Integration by parts formula for functions in spaces where r+P is well-defined.

    It turns out that the answers to all three points depend profoundly on the introduction of so-called μ-transmission spaces. To explain their importance, we turn for a moment to the fractional Laplacian which has a well-established treatment:

    For the case of (Δ)a, 0<a<1, it was shown in [8] that the following space is relevant:

    Ea(¯Rn+)=e+xanC(¯Rn+). (2.8)

    It has the property that (Δ)a maps it to C(¯Rn+); more precisely,

    r+(Δ)amapsEa(¯Rn+)E(Rn)intoC(¯Rn+). (2.9)

    Here E(Rn) is the space of distributions with compact support, so the intersection with this space means that we consider functions in Ea that are zero outside a compact set.

    For Sobolev spaces, it was found in [8] that the good space for u is the so-called a-transmission space Ha(t)(¯Rn+); here

    r+(Δ)amapsHa(t)(¯Rn+)E(Rn)into¯Ht2a(Rn+), (2.10)

    for all ta (say). Ea(¯Rn+)E(Rn) is a dense subset of Ha(t)(¯Rn+). The definition of the space Ha(t)(¯Rn+) is recalled below in (2.15) and in more detail in Section 5.3; let us for the moment just mention that it is the sum of the space ˙Ht(¯Rn+) and a certain subspace of xan¯Hta(Rn+). This also holds when a is replaced by a more general μ.

    For (Δ)a, the a-transmission spaces provide the right answers to question (1), and they are likewise right for question (2) (both facts established in [8]), and there are integration by parts formulas for (Δ)a applied to elements of these spaces, [10,11].

    The key to the proofs is the so-called a-transmission condition that (Δ)a satisfies; it is an infinite list of equations for p(ξ) and its derivatives, linking the values on the interior normal to Rn+ with the values on the exterior normal. We formulate it below with a replaced by a general μ.

    Definition 2.1. Let μC, and let p(ξ) be homogeneous of degree m. Denote the interior resp. exterior normal to the boundary of Rn+ by (0,±1)={(ξ,ξn)ξ=0,ξn=±1}.

    1 p (and P=Op(p)) is said to satisfy the principal μ-transmission condition at Rn+ if

    p(0,1)=eiπ(m2μ)p(0,1). (2.11)

    2 p (and P=Op(p)) is said to satisfy the μ-transmission condition at Rn+ if

    αξp(0,1)=eiπ(m2μ|α|)αξp(0,1),forallαNn0. (2.12)

    Note that μ is determined from p in (2.11) up to addition of an integer, when p(0,1)0.

    The operators considered on smooth domains Ω in [8] were assumed to satisfy (2.12) (for the top-order term p0 in the symbol) at all boundary points x0Ω, with (0,1) replaced by the interior normal ν at x0, and (0,1) replaced by ν. The lower-order terms pj in the symbol, homogeneous of degree mj, should then satisfy analogous rules with mj instead of m.

    The principal μ-transmission condition (2.11) is of course much less demanding than the full μ-transmission condition (2.12). What we show in the present paper is that when (2.11) holds, the μ-transmission spaces are still relevant, and provide the appropriate answers to both questions (1) and (2), however just for t (the regularity parameter) in a limited range. This range is large enough that integration by parts formulas can be established, answering (3).

    By simple geometric considerations one finds:

    Proposition 2.2. 1 When p(ξ) is homogeneous of degree m, there is a μC, uniquely determined modulo Z if p(0,1)0, such that (2.11) holds.

    2 If moreover, p is strongly elliptic (2.4) and m=2a>0, μ can be chosen uniquely to satisfy μ=a+δ with |Reδ|<12.

    This is shown in Section 3. From here on we work under two slightly different assumptions. The symbol p(ξ) is in both cases taken homogeneous of degree m=2a>0 and C1 for ξ0. We pose Assumption 3.1 requiring that p is strongly elliptic and μ is chosen as in Proposition 2.2 2. We pose Assumption 3.2 just requiring that μ is defined according to Proposition 2.2 1. In all cases we write μ=a+δ, and define μ=aδ=2aμ.

    Example 2.3. Consider L1=|ξ|+ibbξ defined in (2.3). The order is 1=m=2a, so a=12. Here L1(0,1)=1+ibn and L1(0,1)=1ibn. The angle θ in C=R2 between the positive real axis and 1+ibn is θ=Arctanbn. Set δ=θ/π, then

    L1(0,1)=eiπδ|L1(0,1)|=eiπδ(1+|bb|2)12, similarly L1(0,1)=eiπδ|L1(0,1)|=eiπδ(1+|bb|2)12.

    Moreover,

    L1(0,1)/L1(0,1)=e2iπδ=eiπ(2a2(a+δ)), when a=12,

    so (2.11) holds with m=2a=1, μ=12+δ, where δ=1πArctanbn, and Assumption 3.1 is satisfied. Note that δ]12,12[.

    For L2 in (2.5), the values at (0,1) and (0,1) are the same as the values for L1, so (2.11) holds with the same values, and Assumption 3.2 is satisfied. But not Assumption 3.1 since L2 is not strongly elliptic.

    When bn0, hence δ0, neither of these symbols satisfy the full μ-transmission condition Definition 2.1 2, since second derivatives remove the (ibbξ)-term so that the resulting symbol is even (with μ=a+δ replaced by μ=a). $

    Our answer to (1) is now the following (achieved in Section 5.4):

    Theorem 2.4. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.2. For Reμ12<t<Reμ+32, r+P defines a continuous linear mapping

    r+P:Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)¯Ht2a(Rn+). (2.13)

    It is important to note that r+P then also makes good sense on subsets of Hμ(t)(¯Rn+). In particular, since Eμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn) is a subset of Hμ(t)(¯Rn+) for all t, the operator r+P is well-defined on Eμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), mapping it into t<Reμ+32¯Ht2a(Rn+)¯HReδ+32aε(Rn+), any ε>0, by (2.13). When Reδ>12 (always true under Assumption 3.1), this is assured to be contained in ¯H1a(Rn+).

    Our answer to (2) is (cf. Section 5.4):

    Theorem 2.5. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1. Then P=ˆP+P, where P is of order 2a1, and r+ˆP is a bijection from Hμ(t)(¯Rn+) to ¯Ht2a(Rn+) for Reμ12<t<Reμ+32. In other words, there is unique solvability of (2.7) with P replaced by ˆP, in the mentioned spaces.

    For r+P itself, there holds the regularity property: Let Reμ12<t<Reμ+32, let f¯Ht2a(Rn+), and let u˙Hσ(¯Rn+) (for some σ>Reμ12) solve the homogeneous Dirichlet problem (2.7). Then uHμ(t)(¯Rn+).

    The last statement shows a lifting of the regularity of u in the elliptic case, namely if it solves (2.7) lying in a low-order space ˙Hσ(¯Rn+), then it is in the best possible μ-transmission space according to Theorem 2.4, mapping into the given range space ¯Ht2a(¯Rn+). In other words, the domain of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem with range in ¯Ht2a(¯Rn+) equals Hμ(t)(¯Rn+).

    The strategy for both theorems is, briefly expressed, as follows: The first step is to replace P=Op(p(ξ)) by ˆP=Op(ˆp(ξ)), where ˆp(ξ) is better controlled at ξ=0 and p(ξ)=p(ξ)ˆp(ξ) is O(|ξ|2a1) for |ξ|. The second step is to reduce ˆP to order 0 by composition with "plus/minus order-reducing operators" Ξt±=Op((ξ±iξn)t) ((3.11), (5.2)) geared to the value μ (recall μ=2aμ):

    ˆQ=ΞμˆPΞμ+. (2.14)

    Then the homogeneous symbol q associated with ˆQ satisfies the principal 0-transmission condition. The third step is to decompose ˆQ into a sum (when Assumption 3.2 holds) or a product (when Assumption 3.1 holds) of operators whose action relative to the usual Sobolev spaces ˙Hs(¯Rn+) and ¯Hs(Rn+) can be well understood, so that we can show forward mapping properties and (in the strongly elliptic case) bijectiveness properties for ˆQ. The fourth step is to carry this over to forward mapping properties and (in the strongly elliptic case) bijectiveness properties for ˆP. The fifth and last step is to take P=PˆP back into the picture and deduce the forward mapping resp. regularity properties for the original operator P.

    It is the right-hand factor Ξμ+ in (2.14) that is the reason why the μ-transmission spaces, defined by

    Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)=Ξμ+e+¯HtReμ(Rn+), (2.15)

    enter. Here e+¯HtReμ(Rn+) has a jump at xn=0 when t>Reμ+12, and then the coefficient xμn appears.

    The analysis of ˆQ is based on a Wiener-Hopf technique (cf. Section 4) explained in Eskin's book [6], instead of the involvement of the extensive Boutet de Monvel calculus used in [8].

    An interesting feature of the results is that the μ-transmission spaces have a universal role, depending only on μ and not on the exact form of P.

    Finally, we answer (3) by showing an integration by parts formula, based just on Assumption 3.2.

    Theorem 2.6. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.2, and assume moreover that Reμ>1, Reμ>1. For uEμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), uEˉμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), there holds

    Rn+Punˉudx+Rn+nu¯Pudx=Γ(μ+1)Γ(μ+1)Rn1s0γ0(u/xμn)γ0(ˉu/xμn)dx, (2.16)

    where s0=eiπδp(0,1). The formula extends to uHμ(t)(¯Rn+), uHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+), for t>Reμ+12, t>Reμ+12.

    The integrals over Rn+ in (2.16) are interpreted as dualities when needed. The basic step in the proof is the treatment of one order-reducing operator in Proposition 6.1, by an argument shown in detail in [10,Th. 3.1,Rem. 3.2], and recalled in [13,Th. 4.1].

    In the proof of (2.16) in Section 6, the formula is first shown for the nicer operator ˆP, and thereafter extended to P. (The formula (2.16) for (Δ)a in Ros-Oton and Serra [20,Th. 1.9] should have a minus sign on the boundary contribution; this has been corrected by Ros-Oton in the survey [19,p. 350].)

    The theory will be carried further, to include "large" solutions of a nonhomogeneous local Dirichlet problem, and to show regularity results and a "halfways Green's formula", see Section 7, but we shall leave those aspects out of this preview.

    The example L1 in (2.3) is a special case of the operator L=Op(L(ξ)), where L(ξ)=A(ξ)+iB(ξ) with A(ξ) real, even in ξ and positive, and B(ξ) real and odd in ξ. There are more details below in (3.5)ff. (this stands for (3.5) and the near following text) and Examples 5.9, 6.5, 7.4. L was first studied in [5] (under certain restrictions on a and μ), and our results apply to it. Theorem 2.6 gives an alternative proof for the same integration by parts formula, established in [5,Prop. 1.4] by extensive real function-theoretic methods.

    The result on the integral over Rn+ is combined in [5] with localization techniques to get an interesting result for curved domains, and it is our hope that the present results for more general strongly elliptic operators can be used in a similar way.

    Let p(ξ) be a complex function on Rn that is homogeneous of degree m in ξ, and let νRn be a unit vector. For a complex number μ, we shall say that p satisfies the principal μ-transmission condition in the direction ν, when

    p(ν)=eiπ(m2μ)p(ν). (3.1)

    When p(ν)0, we can rewrite (3.1) as

    eiπ(m2μ)=p(ν)p(ν),i.e.,μ=m212πilogp(ν)p(ν),

    where log is a complex logaritm. This determines the possible μ up to addition of an integer.

    The (full) μ-transmission property defined in [8] demands much more, namely that

    αξp(ν)=eiπ(m2μ|α|)αξp(ν),allαNn0. (3.2)

    Besides assuming infinite differentiability, this is a stronger condition than (3.1) in particular because of the requirements it puts on derivatives of p transversal to ν.

    To analyse this we observe that when a (sufficiently smooth) function f(t) on R{0} is homogeneous of degree mR, then it has the form, for some c1,c2C,

    f(t)={c1tmfort>0,c2(t)mfort<0,

    and its derivative outside t=0 is a function homogeneous of degree m1 satisfying

    tf(t)={c1mtm1fort>0,c2m(t)m1fort<0.

    In particular, if c10, m0,

    f(1)/f(1)=c2/c1,tf(1)/tf(1)=c2/c1.

    In the case m=0, f is constant for t>0 and t<0, and the derivative is zero there.

    Thus, when p(ξ) is a (sufficiently smooth) function on Rn{0} that is homogeneous of degree m0, and we consider it on a two-sided ray {tνtR} where ν is a unit vector and p(ν)0, then

    p(ν)=c0p(ν)tp(tν)|t=1=c0tp(tν)|t=1. (3.3)

    So for example, when ν is the inward normal (0,1)={(ξ,ξn)ξ=0,ξn=1} to Rn+,

    p(0,1)=c0p(0,1)ξnp(0,1)=c0ξnp(0,1).

    For p(ξ) satisfying (3.1), this means that when p(ν)0, it will also satisfy

    tp(tν)|t=1=eiπ(m2μ1)tp(tν)|t=1,

    in view of (3.3). This argument can be repeated, showing that

    ktp(tν)|t=1=eiπ(m2μk)ktp(tν)|t=1, (3.4)

    as long as the derivatives at t=1 do not vanish. That can happen when m is a nonnegative integer (namely from the (m+1)'st step on); then (3.4) is trivially satisfied. On the other hand, we cannot infer that derivatives of αξp for arbitrary α have the property (3.2); this will be illustrated in examples below.

    In general, μ takes different values for different ν. When Ω is a sufficiently smooth subset of Rn with interior normal ν(x) at boundary points xΩ, we say that p satisfies the principal μ-transmission condition at Ω if μ(x) is a function on Ω such that (3.1) holds with this μ(x) at boundary points xΩ. For Ω=Rn+, the normal ν equals (0,1) at all boundary points and μ is a constant; this is the situation considered in the present paper.

    In [13] we have studied a special class of symbols first considered by Dipierro, Ros-Oton, Serra and Valdinoci in [5]:

    L(ξ)=A(ξ)+iB(ξ), (3.5)

    the functions being C for ξ0 and homogeneous in ξ of degree 2a>0 (a<1), and where A(ξ) is real and even in ξ (i.e., A(ξ)=A(ξ)), B(ξ) is real and odd in ξ (i.e., B(ξ)=B(ξ)), and L is strongly elliptic (i.e., A(ξ)>0 for ξ0). As shown in [13,Sect. 2], L satisfies (3.1) on each unit vector ν, for m=2a and

    μ(ν)=a+δ(ν),withδ(ν)=1πArctanb,b=B(ν)/A(ν); (3.6)

    this follows straightforwardly (as in Example 2.3) from the observation that L(ν)/L(ν)=(1ib)/(1+ib), b=B(ν)/A(ν). It then also satisfies (3.4) with this μ.

    But the full μ-transmission condition need not hold. For example, the symbol L1(ξ)=|ξ|+ibbξ in (2.3) (with bbRn) satisfies the principal μ-transmission condition for ν=(0,1) with μ=12+δ, δ0 if bn0, whereas

    2ξ1L1=(ξ22++ξ2n)/|ξ|3

    and its derivatives satisfy the conditions in (3.2) for ν=(0,1) with μ replaced by 12.

    The statement in [13,Th. 3.1] that solutions of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem have a structure with the factor xμn, was quoted from [8] based on the full μ-transmision condition, and therefore applies to L=Op(L) when B=0 (a case belonging to [8]), but not in general when B0. Likewise, the integration by parts formulas for L derived in [13] using details from the Boutet de Monvel calculus are justified when B=0 or when other operators P satisfying the full μ-transmission condition are inserted, but not in general when B0. Fortunately, there are cruder methods that do lead to such results, on the basis of the principal μ-transmission condition alone, and that is what we show in this paper.

    The treatment of L will be incorporated in a treatment of general strongly elliptic homogeneous symbols in the following. This requires that we allow complex values of μ.

    Let P=Op(p(ξ)) be defined by (2.1) from a symbol p(ξ) that is C1 for ξ0, homogeneous of order m=2a>0, and now also strongly elliptic (2.4). To fix the ideas, we shall consider the operator relative to the set Rn+, with interior normal ν=(0,1). Denote p(ξ)|ξ|2a=p1(ξ); it is homogeneous of degree 0. Both p and p1 take values in a closed subsector of {zCReξn>0}{0}. For any ξRn1, one has for +1 and 1 respectively,

    limξn±p1(ξ,ξn)=limξn±p1(ξ/|ξn|,±1)=p1(0,±1)=p(0,±1).

    With the logarithm logz defined to be positive for real z>1, with a cut along the negative real axis, denote logp(0,±1)=α±; here Reα±=log|p(0,±1)| and Imα± is the argument of p(0,±1). With this notation,

    p(0,1)/p(0,1)=eα/eα+=eαα+,

    so (3.1) for m=2a holds with ν=(0,1) when αα+=iπ(2a2μ), i.e.,

    μ=a+δwithδ=(α+α)/2πi; (3.7)

    this μ is the factorization index. These calculations were given in [8,Sect. 3] (with m=2a), and are in principle consistent with the determination of the factorization index by Eskin in [6,Ex. 6.1] (which has different plus/minus conventions because of a different definition of the Fourier transform).

    Since p(ξ) takes values in {Rez>0} for ξ0, both p(0,1) and p(0,1) lie there and the difference between their arguments is less than π, so |Im(α+α)/2π|<12; in other words

    |Reδ|<12. (3.8)

    Note that δ is real in the case (3.5).

    We collect the information on P in the following description:

    Assumption 3.1. The operator P=Op(p(ξ)) is defined from a symbol p(ξ) that is C1 for ξ0, homogeneous of order m=2a>0, and strongly elliptic (2.4). It satisfies the principal μ-transmission condition in the direction (0,1):

    p(0,1)=eiπ(m2μ)p(0,1),

    with μ equal to the factorization index μ=a+δ derived around (3.7), and |Reδ|<12. Denote μ=2aμ=aδ.

    In Eskin's book [6], the case of constant-coefficient pseudodifferential operators considered on Rn+ is studied in §§–17, and the calculations rely on the principal transmission condition up to and including §. From § on, additional conditions on transversal derivatives are required (the symbol class D(0)α+iβ seems to correspond to our full 0-transmission condition, giving operators preserving smoothness up to the boundary). In the following, we draw on some of the points made in §§–7 there.

    For an operator A defined from a homogeneous symbol a(ξ), the behavior at zero can be problematic to deal with. In [6,§7], there is introduced a technique that leads to a nicer operator, in the context of operators relative to Rn+: One eliminates the singularity at ξ=0 by replacing the homogeneous symbol a(ξ,ξn) by

    ˆa(ξ,ξn)=a(ξξ/|ξ|,ξn), (3.9)

    the corresponding operator denoted ˆA. (In comparison with [6] we have replaced the factor 1+|ξ| used there by ξ=(1+|ξ|2)12.) It is shown there that when a(ξ) is homogeneous of degree α+iβ, then

    a(ξ)=a(ξ)ˆa(ξ)isO(|ξ|α1)for|ξ|2, (3.10)

    hence is of lower order in a certain sense. Many results with Sobolev estimates are then shown primarily for the "hatted" version ˆA=Op(ˆa), and supplied afterwards with information on A=Op(a). Indeed, we shall see that the results we are after for our operators P=Op(p), can be obtained in a manageable way for ˆP=Op(ˆp), and then extended to P by a supplementing analysis of P. The important thing is that special properties with respect to ξn, such as holomorphic extendability into C+ or C, are not disturbed when a is replaced by ˆa.

    Some of the results that we shall show do not require ellipticity of P. We therefore introduce also a weaker assumption:

    Assumption 3.2. The operator P=Op(p(ξ)) is defined from a symbol p(ξ) that is C1 for ξ0, homogeneous of order m=2a>0, and satisfies the principal μ-transmission condition in the direction (0,1) with μ=a+δ for some δC. Denote aδ=μ.

    For the symbols p considered in the rest of the paper, we assume at least that Assumption 3.2 holds. As noted earlier, when P satisfies (3.1) for some μ, it also does so with μ replaced by μ+k, kZ. The precision in Assumption 3.1, that μ should equal the factorization index, is needed for elliptic solvability statements.

    Consider the symbols of "order-reducing" operators (more on them in Section 5):

    χt0,±(ξ)=(|ξ|±iξn)t;consequentlyˆχt0,±(ξ)=(|ξξ/|ξ||±iξn)t=(ξ±iξn)t=χt±(ξ); (3.11)

    the last entry is the usual notation. Together with our symbol p(ξ) of order 2a, we shall consider its reduction to a symbol q of order 0 defined by:

    q(ξ)=χμ0,p(ξ)χμ0,+,herebyp(ξ)=χμ0,q(ξ)χμ0,+. (3.12)

    The "hatted" version is:

    ˆq(ξ)=χμˆp(ξ)χμ+,herebyˆp(ξ)=χμˆq(ξ)χμ+. (3.13)

    Here q is continuous and homogeneous of degree 0 for ξ0; it is C1 in ξn there, and C1 in ξ for ξ0 with bounded first derivatives on |ξ|=1. Since i=eiπ/2,

    q(0,1)=(i)μ2ap(0,1)iμ=i2a2μp(0,1)=eiπ(aμ)p(0,1),q(0,1)=(+i)μ2ap(0,1)(i)μ=i2μ2aeiπ(2a2μ)p(0,1)=eiπ(aμ)p(0,1)=q(0,1),

    so q satisfies the principal 0-transmission condition in the direction ν=(0,1):

    q(0,1)=q(0,1). (3.14)

    In view of (3.1)–(3.4), we have moreover when p(0,1)0 that

    ξnq(0,1)=ξnq(0,1). (3.15)

    Note that since μa=δ, q(0,1)=eiπδp(0,1). We shall denote

    s0=q(0,1)=eiπδp(0,1). (3.16)

    In the case p=L in (3.5)–(3.6), L(0,1)=eiπδ|L(0,1)| with δ real, so

    s0=eiπδL(0,1)=|L(0,1)|=(A(0,1)2+B(0,1)2)12then. (3.17)

    Since p(ξ) is only assumed to satisfy the principal μ-transmission condition, q(ξ) will in general only satisfy the principal 0-transmission condition, not the full one, so the techniques of the Boutet de Monvel calculus brought forward in [8] are not available. Instead we go back to a more elementary application of the original Wiener-Hopf method [22].

    When b(ξn) is a function on R, denote

    b+(ξn+iτ)=i2πRb(ηn)ηnξniτdηnforτ<0,b(ξn+iτ)=i2πRb(ηn)ηnξniτdηnforτ>0, (4.1)

    when the integrals have a sense. When b is suitably nice, b+ is holomorphic in ξn+iτ for τ<0 and extends to a continuous function on ¯C (also denoted b+), b has these properties relative to ¯C+, and b(ξn)=b+(ξn)+b(ξn) on R. With the notation of spaces H, H± introduced by Boutet de Monvel in [4], denoted H, H± in our subsequent works, the decomposition holds for bH with b±H± on R. Since we are presently dealing with functions with cruder properties, we shall instead apply a useful lemma shown in [6,Lemma 6.1]:

    Lemma 4.1. Suppose that b(ξ,ξn) is homogeneous of degree 0 in ξ, is C1 for ξ0, and satisfies

    |b(ξ,ξn)|C|ξ||ξ|1,|jb(ξ,ξn)|C|ξ|1forjn1. (4.2)

    Then the function defined for τ<0 by

    b+(ξ,ξn+iτ)=i2πRb(ξ,ηn)ηnξniτdηn (4.3)

    is holomorphic with respect to ξn+iτ in C, is homogeneous of degree 0, extends by continuity with respect to (ξ,ξn+iτ)¯C for |ξ|+|τ|>0, τ0, and satisfies the estimate

    |b+(ξ,ξn+iτ)|Cε|ξ|1ε(|ξ|+|τ|)ε1,anyε>0. (4.4)

    There is an analogous statement for b with C replaced by C+.

    The symbol q derived from p by (3.12) satisfies

    q(ξ)=s0+f(ξ),

    where f is likewise homogeneous of degree 0, and has f(0,1)=f(0,1)=0. We make two applications of Lemma 4.1. One is, under Assumption 3.2, to apply it directly to f to get a sum decomposition f=f++f where the terms extend holomorphically to C resp. C+ with respect to ξn; this will be convenient in establishing the forward mapping properties and integration by parts formula for the present operators. The other is, under Assumption 3.1, to apply the lemma to the function b(ξ)=logq(ξ) to get a sum decomposition of b and hence a factorization of q; this is used to show that P has appropriate solvability properties (the solutions exhibiting a singularity xμn at the boundary).

    We show that f has the properties required for Lemma 4.1 as follows: To see that (4.2) is verified by f, note that the second inequality follows since jf is bounded on the unit sphere {|ξ|=1} and homogeneous of degree 1. For the first inequality we have, when ξn>|ξ| (hence |ξ/ξn|<1),

    |f(ξ,ξn)|=|q(ξξn,1)q(0,1)|j<n|ξjξn|sup|η|1|jq(η,1)|C|ξ||ξn|C|ξ||ξ|, (4.5)

    using the mean value theorem and the fact that |ξn||ξ| when |ξn||ξ|. A similar estimate is found for ξn<|ξ|. For |ξn||ξ|, we use that q is bounded, so that |q(ξ)s0||ξ|/|ξ|c|q(ξ)s0||ξ|/|ξ|c. We have obtained:

    Proposition 4.2. When p satisfies Assumption 3.2 and q is derived from p by (3.12), then there is a sum decomposition of f=qs0:

    q(ξ)s0=f+(ξ)+f(ξ),

    where f+(ξ,ξn) is holomorphic with respect to ξn+iτ in C, and continuous with respect to (ξ,ξn+iτ)¯C for |ξ|+|τ|>0, τ0, and satisfies estimates

    |f+(ξ,ξn+iτ)|Cε|ξ|1ε(|ξ|+|τ|)ε1,anyε>0, (4.6)

    and f has the analogous properties with C replaced by C+.

    For the corresponding hatted symbol, we then have ˆq=s0+ˆf++ˆf, with ˆf± defined from f±. They have similar holomorphy properties, and satisfy estimates as in (4.6) with |ξ| replaced by ξ.

    In order to obtain a factorization for symbols satisfying Assumption 3.1, we shall study logq. By the strong ellipticity, q(ξ)0 for ξ0. Moreover, p(ξ)|ξ|2a=χa0,p(ξ)χa0,+ takes values in a subsector of {zCRez>0} and the multiplication by χδ0, and χδ0,+ gives the function q taking values in the sector {zC|argz|π(12+|Reδ|)} disjoint from the negative real axis. So the logarithm is well-defined with inverse exp.

    Assume first that s0=1; this can simply be obtained by dividing out q(0,1). The function b(ξ)=logq(ξ) is homogeneous of degree 0 and has b(0,1)=b(0,1)=0 and the appropriate continuity properties, and bounds on first derivatives, so the same proof as for f applies to b to give the decomposition b=b++b. Then we define q±=exp(b±), they are homogeneous of degree 0. For example,

    q+=1+g+,whereg+=k1(b+)k.

    Here |b+(ξ)|Cε|ξ|1ε|ξ|1+ε, and there is a constant Cε such that Cε|ξ|1ε|ξ|1+ε12 for |ξn|Cε|ξ|. On this set the series for g+ converges with |g+||b+|, hence g+ satisfies an estimate of the form (4.4) there. It likewise does so on the set |ξn|Cε|ξ| since |ξ||ξ| there. There are similar results for q=exp(b)=1+g with C replaced by C+. This shows:

    Proposition 4.3. When p satisfies Assumption 3.1 and q is derived from p by (3.12) and satisfies s0=1, then there is a factorization of q:

    q(ξ)=q(ξ)q+(ξ),

    where q+(ξ,ξn) is holomorphic with respect to ξn+iτ in C, and continuous with respect to (ξ,ξn+iτ)¯C for |ξ|+|τ|>0, τ0. Moreover, g+=q+1 satisfies estimates

    |g+(ξ,ξn+iτ)|Cε|ξ|1ε(|ξ|+|τ|)ε1,allε>0, (4.7)

    and q, g=q1 have the analogous properties with C replaced by C+. The symbols are homogeneous of degree 0, and q+ and q are elliptic.

    For general s0, we apply the factorization to q0=s10q, so that q0=q0q+0; then q=qq+ with q=s0q0=s0(1+g) and q+=q+0=1+g+.

    The ellipticity follows from the construction as exp(b±), or one can observe that the product q+q=q is elliptic (i.e., nonzero for ξ0).

    The notation with upper index ± is chosen here to avoid confusion with the lower + used later to indicate truncation, P+=r+Pe+.

    Turning to the corresponding hatted symbols, we have obtained ˆq=ˆqˆq+, with ˆq±, ˆg± defined from q±, g±, respectively. They have similar holomorphy properties, the ˆq± are elliptic, and the ˆg± satisfy estimates as in (4.7) with |ξ| replaced by ξ:

    |ˆg+(ξ,ξn+iτ)|Cεξ1ε(ξ+|τ|)ε1,allε>0. (4.8)

    First recall some terminology: E(Rn) is the space of distributions on Rn with compact support, S(Rn) is the Schwartz space of C-functions f on Rn such that xβDαf is bounded for all α,β, and S(Rn) is its dual space of temperate distributions. ξ stands for (1+|ξ|2)12. We denote by r+ the operator restricting distributions on Rn to distributions on Rn+, and by e+ the operator extending functions on Rn+ by zero on RnRn+. Then r+S(Rn) is denoted S(¯Rn+). The following notation for L2-Sobolev spaces will be used, for sR:

    Hs(Rn)={uS(Rn)ξsFuL2(Rn)},¯Hs(Rn+)=r+Hs(Rn),therestrictedspace,˙Hs(¯Rn+)={uHs(Rn)suppu¯Rn+},thesupportedspace, (5.1)

    as in our earlier papers on fractional-order operators. An elaborate presentation of Lp-based spaces was given in [8]. (The notation with dots and overlines stems from Hörmander [17,App. B.2] and is practical in formulas where both types of spaces occur. There are other notations without the overline, and where the dot is replaced by a ring or twiddle.)

    Here ¯Hs(Rn+) identifies with the dual space of ˙Hs(¯Rn+) for all sR (the duality extending the L2(Rn+) scalar product). When |s|<12, there is an identification of ˙Hs(¯Rn+) with ¯Hs(Rn+) (more precisely with e+¯Hs(Rn+)). The trace operator γ0:ulimxn0+u(x,xn) extends to a continuous mapping γ0:¯Hs(Rn+)Hs12(Rn1) for s>12.

    The order-reducing operators Ξt± are defined for tC by Ξt±=Op(χt±), where χt±=(ξ±iξn)t, cf. (3.11). These operators have the homeomorphism properties:

    Ξt+:˙Hs(¯Rn+)˙HsRet(¯Rn+),r+Ξte+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯HsRet(Rn+),allsR,tC; (5.2)

    r+Ξte+ is often denoted Ξt,+ for short. For each tC, the operators Ξt+ and Ξ¯t,+ identify with each other's adjoints over ¯Rn+ (more comments on this in [8,Rem. 1.1]). Recall also the simple composition rules (as noted e.g., in [15,Th. 1.2]):

    Ξs+Ξt+=Ξs+t+,Ξs,+Ξt,+=Ξs+t,+fors,tC.

    We define

    Eμ(¯Rn+)=e+xμnC(¯Rn+)whenReμ>1, (5.3)

    and Eμ(¯Rn+) is defined successively as the linear hull of first-order derivatives of elements of Eμ+1(¯Rn+) when Reμ1 (then distributions supported in the boundary can occur). The spaces were introduced in Hörmander's unpublished lecture notes [16] and are presented in [8] (and with a different notation in [17,Sect. 18.2]), and they satisfy for all μ (cf. [8,Props. 1.7,4.1]):

    Eμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn)Ξμ+e+s¯Hs(¯Rn+). (5.4)

    A sharper statement follows from [13,Lemma 6.1] (when Reμ>1):

    e+xμnS(¯Rn+)=Ξμ+e+S(¯Rn+). (5.5)

    Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1, and consider ˆQ±=Op(ˆq±), defined from the symbols q±(ξ) introduced in Proposition 4.3. Since ˆq± are bounded symbols with bounded inverses, and extend holomorphically in ξn into C resp. C+,

    ˆQ+:˙Hs(¯Rn+)˙Hs(¯Rn+)andˆQ+=r+ˆQe+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+),forallsR; (5.6)

    the latter follows since r+ˆQe+ is the adjoint of Op(¯ˆq) over Rn+, where Op(¯ˆq) defines homeomorphisms in ˙Hs(¯Rn+) (since ¯ˆq has similar properties as ˆq+). The inverses (ˆQ±)1=Op((ˆq±)1) have similar homeomorphism properties. Since ¯Hs(Rn+)=˙Hs(¯Rn+) for |s|<12, it follows that we also have for |s|<12:

    ˆQ++=r+ˆQ+e+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+),ˆQ+ˆQ++:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+).

    If q satisfies the full 0-transmission condition, we are in the case studied in [8], and the bijectiveness in ¯Hs(Rn+) can be lifted to all higher s by use of elements of the Boutet de Monvel calculus, as accounted for in the proof of [8,Th. 4.4]. The symbol q presently considered is only known to satisfy the principal 0-transmission condition (and possibly a few more identities). We shall here show that a lifting is possible in general up to s<32.

    Proposition 5.1. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1, and consider ˆQ+=Op(ˆq+) derived from it in Section 4.

    For any 12<s<32, ˆQ++=r+ˆQ+e+ is continuous

    r+ˆQ+e+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+), (5.7)

    and the same holds for the operator ((ˆQ+)1)+ defined from its inverse (ˆQ+)1.

    In fact, (5.7) is a homeomorphism, and the inverse of ˆQ++ is ((ˆQ+)1)+.

    Proof. We already have the mapping property (5.7) for |s|<12, because ˆq+ is a bounded symbol, and e+¯Hs(Rn+) identifies with ˙Hs(¯Rn+) then. Now let s=32ε for a small ε>0. Here we need to show that when u¯H32ε(Rn+), then r+jˆQ+e+u¯H12ε(Rn+) for j=1,,n. For j<n, this follows simply because j can be commuted through r+, ˆQ+ and e+ so that we can use that ju¯H12ε(Rn+). For j=n, we proceed as follows:

    Since u¯H32ε(Rn+), the extension by zero e+u has a jump at xn=0, and a rule for distributions applies:

    ne+u=e+nu+(γ0u)(x)δ(xn),γ0uH1ε(Rn1). (5.8)

    (The rule is obvious when uC(¯Rn+), and extends by continuity to Sobolev spaces.) Therefore, since ˆQ+=I+ˆG+ where ˆG+=Op(ˆg+(ξ)) from Proposition 4.3,

    nˆQ+e+u=ˆQ+ne+u=ˆQ+e+nu+(I+ˆG+)(γ0uδ(xn)).

    In the restriction to Rn+, r+I(γ0uδ(xn)) drops out, so we are left with

    r+nˆQ+e+u=r+ˆQ+ne+u=r+ˆQ+e+nu+Kˆg+γ0u,Kˆg+φ=r+ˆG+(φ(x)δ(xn)).

    Here Kˆg+ is a potential operator (in the terminology of Eskin [6] and Rempel-Schulze [18], generalizing the concept of Poisson operator of Boutet de Monvel [3,4]), which acts as follows:

    Kˆg+φ=r+F1[ˆg+(ξ)ˆφ(ξ)].

    By (4.8),

    |ˆg+(ξ)|Cξ1ε/2ξε/21,

    hence

    Kˆg+φ2¯H12ε(Rn+)ˆG+(φδ)2H12ε(Rn)=cRn|ˆg(ξ)|2|ˆφ(ξ)|2ξ12εdξCRn|ˆφ(ξ)|2ξ12ε2+εξ2εdξ=CRn|ˆφ(ξ)|2ξ1εξ2εdξ=CRn1|ˆφ(ξ)|2ξ22εdξ=C"φ2H1ε(Rn1),

    since Rξ1εdξn=ξεRηn1εdηn. Inserting φ=γ0u, we thus have

    Kˆg+γ0u¯H12ε(Rn+)C1γ0uH1ε(Rn1)C2u¯H32ε(Rn+).

    Thus

    r+nˆQ+e+u¯H12εr+ˆQ+e+nu¯H12ε+Kˆg+γ0u¯H12εC3u¯H32ε.

    Altogether, this shows the desired mapping property for s=32ε, and the property for general 12s<32 follows by interpolation with the case s=0.

    The mapping property (5.7) holds for the inverse (ˆQ+)1, since its symbol (q+)1 equals 1+k1(b+)k with essentially the same structure.

    The identity ((ˆQ+)1)+ˆQ++=I=ˆQ++((ˆQ+)1)+ valid on L2(Rn+), holds a fortiori on ¯Hs(Rn+) for 0<s<32, and extends by continuity to ¯Hs(Rn+) for 12<s<0.

    When P merely satisfies Assumption 3.2, we can still show a useful forward mapping property of ˆQ, based on the decomposition in Proposition 4.2.

    Proposition 5.2. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.2, and consider ˆQ and ˆF±=Op(ˆf±) derived from it in Section 4.

    The operator ˆF+,+=r+ˆF+e+ is continuous

    r+ˆF+e+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+)forany12<s<32. (5.9)

    The operator ˆF,+=r+ˆFe+ is continuous from ¯Hs(Rn+) to ¯Hs(Rn+) for any sR.

    The operator ˆQ+=r+ˆQe+ is continuous

    r+ˆQe+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+)forany12<s<32. (5.10)

    Proof. Since ˆF+ has bounded symbol, it maps ˙Hs(¯Rn+) into Hs(Rn) for all s, so for |s|<12, (5.9) follows since ˙Hs(¯Rn+)=e+¯Hs(Rn+) then. For 12<s<32, we proceed as in the proof of Proposition 5.1, using that

    r+nˆF+e+u=r+ˆF+ne+u=r+ˆF+e+nu+Kˆf+γ0u,Kˆf+φ=r+ˆF+(φ(x)δ(xn)),

    where Kˆf+ satisfies similar estimates as Kˆg+ by Proposition 4.2.

    For r+ˆFe+, the statement follows since it is on Rn+ the adjoint of Op(¯ˆf), which preserves support in ¯Rn+ and therefore maps ˙Hs(¯Rn+) into itself for all sR. For ˆQ, the statement now follows since it equals s0+ˆF+ˆF+.

    This is as far as we get by applying Lemma 4.1 to f. To obtain the mapping property for higher s would require a control over the potential operators

    φr+Op(ξjnˆf+(ξ))(φ(x)δ(xn))

    for j1 as well. At any rate, the property shown in Proposition 5.2 will be sufficient for the integration by parts formulas we are aiming for.

    In the elliptic case, we conclude from Proposition 5.1 for the operator ˆQ:

    Corollary 5.3. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1, and consider the operators ˆQ, ˆQ+, ˆQ with symbols ˆq, ˆq+, ˆq derived from it in Section 4. The operator ˆQ+r+ˆQe+ acts like r+ˆQe+r+ˆQ+e+=ˆQ+ˆQ++, mapping continuously and bijectively

    ˆQ+=r+ˆQe+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+)for12<s<32, (5.11)

    and the inverse (continuous in the opposite direction) equals

    (r+ˆQe+)1=r+(ˆQ+)1e+r+(ˆQ)1e+. (5.12)

    Proof. We have for u˙Hs(¯Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+), |s|<12, that

    r+ˆQe+u=r+ˆQˆQ+e+u=r+ˆQ(e+r++er)ˆQ+e+u=r+ˆQe+r+ˆQ+e+u,

    since rˆQ+e+u=0; this identity is also valid on the subspaces ¯Hs(Rn+) with s12. Combining the homeomorphism property of r+ˆQ+e+ shown in Proposition 5.1 with the known homeomorphism property of r+ˆQe+ on ¯Hs(Rn+)-spaces (cf. (5.6)), we get (5.11). The inverse is pinned down by using that r+ˆQe+ has inverse r+(ˆQ)1e+ on ¯Hs(Rn+) for all s, and r+ˆQ+e+ has inverse r+(ˆQ+)1e+ on ¯Hs(Rn+) for 12<s<32 in view of Proposition 5.1.

    Now turn the attention to ˆP, which is related to ˆQ by

    ˆP=ΞμˆQΞμ+,ˆQ=ΞμˆPΞμ+, (5.13)

    cf. (3.12)–(3.13).

    We shall describe the solutions of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem (in the strongly elliptic case)

    r+ˆPu=f,suppu¯Rn+, (5.14)

    with f given in a space ¯Hs(Rn+), and u assumed a priori to lie in a space ˙Hσ(¯Ω) for low σ, e.g., with σ=a.

    First we observe for Ξμ,+=r+Ξμe+ that

    Ξμ,+r+ˆP=r+ΞμˆP, (5.15)

    since, as accounted for in [8,Rem. 1.1,(1.13)], the action of r+Ξμ is independent of how r+ˆP is extended into ¯Rn. Thus, in view of the mapping properties (5.2) of Ξμ,+,

    r+ˆPu¯Hs(Rn+)Ξμ,+r+ˆPu¯Hs+Reμ(Rn+)=r+ΞμˆPu¯Hs+Reμ(Rn+). (5.16)

    Composing the equation in (5.14) with Ξμ,+ to the left, we can therefore write it as

    r+ΞμPu=g,whereg=Ξμ,+f¯Hs+Reμ(Rn+). (5.17)

    Next, we shall also replace u. Because of the right-hand factor Ξμ+ in the expression for ˆQ in (5.13), we need to introduce the μ-transmission spaces

    Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)Ξμ+e+¯HtReμ(Rn+)fort>Reμ12, (5.18)

    defined in [8]; they are Hilbert spaces. (For tReμ12, the convention is to take Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)=˙Ht(¯Rn+), but this is rarely used.) The following properties were shown in [8]:

    Theorem 5.4. [8] Let t>Reμ12.

    1 The mapping r+Ξμ+ is a homeomorphism of Hμ(t)(¯Rn+) onto ¯HtReμ(Rn+) with inverse Ξμ+e+.

    2 For |tReμ|<12, Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)=˙Ht(¯Rn+).

    3 Assume Reμ>1 and t>Reμ+12. Then

    Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)˙Ht(¯Rn+)+xμne+¯HtReμ(Rn+), (5.19)

    where ˙Ht(¯Rn+) is replaced by ˙Htε(¯Rn+) if tReμ12N. Moreover, the trace of u/xμn is well-defined on Hμ(t)(¯Rn+) and satisfies

    Γ(1+μ)γ0(u/xμn)=γ0Ξμ+uHtReμ12(Rn1). (5.20)

    Rule 1 is shown in [8,Prop. 1.7]. Rule 2, shown in [8,(1.26)], holds because of the mapping property (5.2) for Ξμ+ and the identification of e+¯HtReμ(Rn+) with ˙HtReμ(¯Rn+) when tReμ]12,12[. Rule 3 is shown in [8,Th. 5.1,Cor. 5.3,Th. 5.4]; it deals with a higher t, where e+¯HtReμ(Rn+) has a jump at xn=0, and the coefficient xμn appears. Let us just mention the key formula

    F1ξnxn[(ξ+iξn)μ(ξ+iξn)1]=1Γ(μ+1)e+r+xμneξxn,

    which indicates how Ξμ+=Op((ξ+iξn)μ) is connected with the factor xμn. Besides in [8,Sect. 5], explicit calculations are carried out e.g., in [12,Lemma 3.3] (and [9,Appendix]).

    We note in passing that in the definition (5.18), one can equivalently replace the order-reducing operator family Ξt+=Op((ξ+iξn)t) by Op(([ξ]+iξn)t), or by Λt+, as defined in [8].

    Now continue the discussion of (5.17): In view of Theorem 5.4 1, we can set v=r+Ξμ+u, where u=Ξμ+e+v, and hereby

    r+ΞμˆPu=r+ΞμˆPΞμ+e+v=r+ˆQe+v=ˆQ+v.

    Then the Eq (5.17) reduces to an equivalent equation

    ˆQ+v=g,

    with g given in ¯Hs+Reμ(Rn+) and v a priori taken in ˙HσReμ(¯Rn+). We shall denote s=t2a, so s+Reμ=t2a+2aReμ=tReμ. The equation was solved in Corollary 5.3 and we find for r+ˆP:

    Theorem 5.5. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1. For Reμ12<t<Reμ+32, r+ˆP defines a homeomorphism (continuous bijective operator with continuous inverse)

    r+ˆP:Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)¯Ht2a(Rn+). (5.21)

    Furthermore, if u is in ˙Hσ(¯Rn+) for some σ>Reμ12 (this includes the value σ=a) and solves (5.14) with f¯Ht2a(Rn+), then uHμ(t)(¯Rn+).

    Here Reμ>12 since a>0 and |Reδ|<12, so the rules in Theorem 5.4 3 apply.

    Proof. In view of (5.15) and (5.16), and the mapping property of ˆQ established in Corollary 5.3, r+ˆP has the forward mapping property in (5.21).

    To solve (5.14), let σ=Reμ12+ε for a small ε, set g=Ξμ,+f¯Ht2a+Reμ(Rn+)=¯HtReμ(Rn+) and v=r+Ξμ+u˙H12+ε(¯Rn+). Then (5.14) reduces to solving

    ˆQ+v=g, (5.22)

    with g given in ¯HtReμ(Rn+) and v a priori lying in ˙H12+ε(¯Rn+). By Corollary 5.3, (5.22) has a unique solution v¯HtReμ(Rn+), so u must lie in Hμ(t)(¯Rn+), and the mapping (5.21) is bijective.

    Remark 5.6.This theorem differs from the strategy pursued in [6], and gives a new insight. The technique in [6,Th. 7.3] for showing solvability in a higher-order Sobolev space, say with 12<tReμ<32, f given in ¯Ht2a(Rn+), is to supplement ˆP with a potential operator KˆP constructed from ˆP such that the solutions are of the form u=u++KˆPφ with u+˙Ht(¯Rn+), φ a generalized trace derived from f. Our aim is to show that there is a universal description of the space of solutions u of (5.14) with right-hand side in ¯Ht2a(Rn+), that depends only on μ, and applies to any P of the given type. The μ-transmission spaces (5.18) serve this purpose. In [8], they are shown to have this role for arbitrarily high t when the full μ-transmission condition holds. $

    One more important property of μ-transmision spaces is that the spaces with C-ingredients Eμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn) and e+xμnS(¯Rn+) are dense subsets of Hμ(t)(¯Rn+) for all t>Reμ12, Reμ>1 (cf. [8,Prop. 4.1] and [13,Lemma 7.1]). Recall also (5.5), which makes the statement for e+xμnS(¯Rn+) rather evident, since S(¯Rn+) is dense in ¯Hs(Rn+) for all sR. Hence r+ˆP applies nicely to these spaces.

    When P merely satisfies Assumption 3.2, we have at least the forward mapping part of (5.21):

    Theorem 5.7. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.2. For Reμ12<t<Reμ+32, r+ˆP maps continuously

    r+ˆP:Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)¯Ht2a(Rn+). (5.23)

    Proof. This follows as in the preceding proof, now using the mapping property of r+ˆQe+ established in Proposition 5.2.

    The following consequences can be drawn for the original operator P:

    Theorem 5.8. 1 Let P satisfy Assumption 3.2. Then P=ˆP+P, where ˆP is defined by (3.9) and P is of order 2a1. For Reμ12<t<Reμ+32, r+P maps continuously

    r+P:Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)¯Ht2a(Rn+). (5.24)

    2 Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1. Then in the decomposition P=ˆP+P, r+ˆP is invertible, as described in Theorem 5.5.

    Let Reμ12<t<Reμ+32, let f¯Ht2a(Rn+), and let u˙Hσ(¯Rn+) (for some σ>Reμ12) solve the homogeneous Dirichlet problem

    r+Pu=fonRn+,suppu¯Rn+. (5.25)

    Then uHμ(t)(¯Rn+).

    Proof. The original operator P equals Op(p(ξ)) with p(ξ) homogeneous on Rn of degree 2a>0; in particular it is continuous at 0. It is decomposed into

    p(ξ)=ˆp(ξ)+p(ξ). (5.26)

    where p(ξ) is O(ξ2a1) for |ξ|2 by (3.10) and continuous, hence

    |p(ξ)|Cξ2a1forξRn.

    This implies that P=Op(p) maps Hs(Rn) continuously into Hs2a+1(Rn) for all sR, and hence

    r+P:˙Hs(¯Rn+)¯Hs2a+1(Rn+)forallsR. (5.27)

    1. The forward mapping property (5.23) holds for r+ˆP by Theorem 5.7. To show that it holds for r+P, let Reμ12<t<Reμ+32.

    If tReμ<12, then Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)=˙Ht(¯Rn+), and r+P˙Ht(¯Rn+)¯Ht2a+1(Rn+)¯Ht2a(Rn+) by (5.27), matching the mapping property of ˆP.

    If 12tReμ<32, we use the definition of Hμ(t)(¯Rn+) to see that for small ε>0,

    r+PHμ(t)(¯Rn+)=r+PΞμ+e+¯HtReμ(Rn+)r+PΞμ+˙H12ε(¯Rn+)=r+P˙H12ε+Reμ(¯Rn+)¯H32ε+Reμ2a(¯Rn+)¯Ht2a(Rn+),

    also matching the mapping property of ˆP.

    Now (5.24) follows by adding the statements for P and ˆP. This shows 1.

    2. The first statement registers what we already know about r+ˆP. Proof of the regularity statement: With u and f as defined there, denote σ=Reμ12+ε; here ε>0. Then

    r+ˆPu=r+Pur+Pu¯Ht2a(Rn+)+¯HReμ+12+ε2a(Rn+).

    If tReμ+12+ε, r+ˆPu¯Ht2a(Rn+), and we conclude from Theorem 5.5 that uHμ(t)(¯Rn+).

    If t>Reμ+12+ε, r+ˆPu¯HReμ+12+ε2a(Rn+); here Theorem 5.5 applies to give the intermediate information that uHμ(Reμ+12+ε)(¯Rn+). From this follows that

    uΞμ+e+¯H12+ε(Rn+)Ξμ+˙H12ε(¯Rn+)=˙HReμ+12ε(¯Rn+),

    for any ε>0. Then r+Pu¯HReμ+32ε2a(Rn+). Choosing ε so small that Reμ+32εt, we have that r+Pu¯Ht2a(¯Rn+); hence r+ˆPu¯Ht2a(¯Rn+), so it follows from Theorem 5.5 that uHμ(t)(¯Rn+). This ends the proof of 2.

    Example 5.9. Theorem 5.8 applies to the operator L=Op(L(ξ)) described in (3.5)ff., showing that it maps Hμ(t)(¯Rn+) to ¯Ht2a(Rn+) for 12<tμ<32, and that solutions of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem with f¯Ht2a(Rn+) are in Hμ(t)(¯Rn+) for these t. The appearance of the factor xμn (cf. (5.19)) is consistent with the regularity shown in terms of Hölder spaces in [5].

    In particular, the result provides a valid basis for applying r+L to Eμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn) or e+xμnS(¯Rn+), mapping these spaces into ε>0¯H32a+δε(Rn+). $

    Remark 5.10. The domain spaces Hμ(t)(¯Rn+) entering in Theorem 5.8 can be precisely described: For |tReμ|<12, we already know from Theorem 5.4 2 that Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)=˙Ht(¯Rn+). For 12<tReμ<32, we have by [12,Lemma 3.3] that uHμ(t)(¯Rn+) if and only if

    u=v+w, where w˙Ht(¯Rn+) and v=e+xμnK0γ0(u/xμn);

    here K0 is the Poisson operator K0:φz solving the Dirichlet problem for 1Δ,

    (1Δ)z=0 on Rn+,γ0z=φ at xn=0,

    with φHtReμ12(Rn1). For tReμ=12, we have the information uε>0˙Htε(¯Rn+). As a concrete example, the elements u of H12(32)(¯Rn+) are the functions u=v+w, where w˙H32(¯Rn+) and v=x12nK0φ for some φH12(Rn1); this φ equals γ0(u/x12n). $

    It will now be shown that the operators P satisfying merely the principal μ-transmission condition (Assumption 3.2) have an integration by parts formula over Rn+, involving traces γ0(u/xμn). The study will cover the special operator L in Example 5.9 (regardless of whether a full μ-transmission condition might hold, as assumed in [13]). It also covers more general strongly elliptic operators, and it covers operators that are not necessarily elliptic.

    The basic observation is:

    Proposition 6.1. Let μC. Let ws¯Hs(Rn+), and let uEˉμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn). Denote w=r+Ξˉμ+us¯Hs(Rn+); correspondingly u=Ξˉμ+e+w in view of Theorem 5.4 1. Then

    (I)Rn+Ξμe+wnˉudx=(γ0w,γ0w)L2(Rn1)+(w,nw)L2(Rn+). (6.1)

    The left-hand side is interpreted as in (6.2) below when Reμ0.

    The formula extends to w¯H12+ε(Rn+) and uHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+) with tReμ+12ε (for small ε>0), using the representation (6.2).

    Proof. This was proved in [10,Th. 3.1] for μ=a>0 (see also Remark 3.2 there with the elementary case a=1), and in [13,Th. 4.1] for real μ>12, so the main task is to check that the larger range of complex μ is allowed. We write ¯u as ˉu for short.

    Note that when Imμ0, Eμ(¯Rn+) is different from EReμ(¯Rn+), e.g., since xμn/xReμn=xiImμn=eiImμlogxn has absolute value 1 and is C for xn>0, but oscillates when xn0.

    By the mapping properties of Ξμ,+ (cf. (5.2)), r+Ξμe+ws¯Hs(Rn+), hence is integrable. When Reμ>0, the function nu is O(xReμ1n) and compactly supported, so the left-hand side of (6.1) makes sense as an integral of an L1-function. When μ is general, we observe that for any small ε>0,

    nuEˉμ1(¯Rn+)E(Rn)Ξ1ˉμ+e+s¯Hs(Rn+)Ξ1ˉμ+˙H12ε(¯Rn+)=˙H12+Reμε(¯Rn+),

    so the integral I makes sense as the duality

    I=r+Ξμe+w,nu¯H12Reμ+ε(Rn+),˙H12+Reμε(¯Rn+). (6.2)

    Since the adjoint of r+Ξμe+ equals Ξˉμ+, I is by transposition turned into

    I=w,Ξˉμ+nu¯H12+ε,˙H12ε=w,nΞˉμ+Ξˉμ+e+w¯H12+ε,˙H12ε=w,ne+w¯H12+ε,˙H12ε.

    Note that ne+w satisfies an equation like (5.8), which fits in here since the space ˙H12ε(¯Rn+) contains distributions of the form φ(x)δ(xn). The expression is analysed as in [10,Th. 3.1] (and [13,Th. 4.1]), leading to

    I=(γ0w,γ0w)L2(Rn1)+(w,e+nw)L2(Rn+), (6.3)

    which shows (6.1).

    For the whole analysis, it suffices that w¯Hs(Rn+) with s=12+ε, since Ξμ,+w¯H12Reμ+ε(Rn+) then. For u, it then suffices that uHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+)=Ξˉμ+e+¯HtReμ(Rn+) with tReμ+12ε (assuming 0<ε<1), since

    nuΞ1ˉμ+e+¯HtReμ(Rn+)Ξ1ˉμ+˙H12ε(¯Rn+)=˙H12+Reμε(¯Rn+)

    then, so that the duality in (6.2) is well-defined.

    We shall now show:

    Theorem 6.2. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.2; it is of order 2a and satisfies the principal μ-transmission condition in the direction (0,1) for some μ=a+δC, and we denote aδ=μ. Assume moreover that Reμ>1, Reμ>1. Consider ˆP=Op(ˆp(ξ)), as defined by (3.9). For uEμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), uEˉμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), there holds

    Rn+ˆPunˉudx+Rn+nu¯ˆPudx=Γ(μ+1)Γ(μ+1)Rn1s0γ0(u/xμn)γ0(ˉu/xμn)dx, (6.4)

    where s0=eiπδp(0,1). The formula extends to uHμ(t)(¯Rn+), uHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+), for t>Reμ+12, t>Reμ+12.

    The integrals over Rn+ are interpreted as dualities (as in Proposition 6.1) when Reμ or Reμ0, and when extended to general u,u.

    Proof. Since integration over Rn+ in itself indicates that the functions behind the integration sign are restricted to Rn+, we can leave out the explicit mention of r+. Recall that

    ˆp=χμˆqχμ+,ˆP=ΞμˆQΞμ+,

    cf. (3.13). The adjoint is ˆP=ΞˉμˆQΞˉμ+. Recall from Proposition 4.2 that

    q(ξ)=s0+f+(ξ)+f(ξ),henceˆQ=s0+ˆF++ˆF,

    where ˆf±(ξ) extend holomorphically in ξn+iτ into C resp. C+, estimated as in (4.8).

    Accordingly, ˆP splits up in three terms

    ˆP=ˆP1+ˆP2+ˆP3,whereˆP1=s0ΞμΞμ+,ˆP2=ΞμˆF+Ξμ+,ˆP3=ΞμˆFΞμ+. (6.5)

    Consider the contribution from ˆP1:

    Rn+ˆP1unˉudx+Rn+nu¯ˆP1udx=s0Rn+ΞμΞμ+unˉudx+s0Rn+nu¯ΞˉμΞˉμ+udx.

    Recall that s0=q(0,1)=eiπδp(0,1) by (3.16); this constant is left out of the next calculations.

    When uEμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), then w=r+Ξμ+us¯Hs(Rn+). Similarly as in (5.15), r+ΞμΞμ+u=r+Ξμe+r+Ξμ+u, which equals r+Ξμe+w, hence lies in s¯Hs(Rn+) by (5.2). An application of Proposition 6.1 with μ replaced by μ gives:

    Rn+ΞμΞμ+unˉudx=Rn+r+Ξμe+wnˉudx=(γ0w,γ0w)L2(Rn1)+(w,nw)L2(Rn+),

    where w=r+Ξˉμ+u.

    We can apply the analogous argument to show that the conjugate of Rn+nu¯ΞˉμΞˉμ+udx satisfies

    Rn+ΞˉμΞˉμ+unˉudx=(γ0w,γ0w)L2(Rn1)+(w,nw)L2(Rn+);

    here w=r+Ξˉμ+u and w=r+Ξμ+u are the same as the functions defined in the treatment of the first integral.

    It follows by addition that

    Rn+ΞμΞμ+unˉudx+Rn+nu¯ΞˉμΞˉμ+udx=2(γ0w,γ0w)L2(Rn1)+(w,nw)L2(Rn+)+(nw,w)L2(Rn+)=(γ0w,γ0w)L2(Rn1);

    in the last step we used that Rn+(wnˉw+nwˉw)dx=Rn1γ0wγ0ˉwdx. Insertion of γ0w=γ0Ξμ+u=Γ(1+μ)γ0(u/xμn) (cf. (5.20)), and similarly γ0w=γ0Ξˉμ+u=Γ(1+ˉμ)γ0(u/xˉμn), gives (6.4) with ˆP replaced by ˆP1 (using also that ¯Γ(1+ˉμ)=Γ(1+μ)).

    As for extension of the formula to larger spaces, we note that by Proposition 6.1, the calculations for the first integral allow w¯H12+ε(Rn+), corresponding to uHμ(t)(¯Rn+) with t=Reμ+12+ε, and uHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+) with tReμ+12ε. With the analogous conditions for the calculations of the second integral, we find altogether that t>Reμ+12, t>Reμ+12, is allowed.

    The contributions from ˆP2 and ˆP3 will be treated by variants of this proof, where we show that their boundary integrals give zero.

    Consider ˆP2. As in (5.15), we have:

    r+ˆP2u=r+ΞμˆF+Ξμ+u=r+Ξμe+r+(ˆF+Ξμ+u),r+ˆP2u=r+ΞˉμˆF+Ξˉμ+u=r+(ΞˉμˆF+)e+r+Ξˉμ+u,

    where ˆF+=Op(¯ˆf+). Set

    w=r+Ξμ+u,w1=r+ˆF+Ξμ+u,w=r+Ξˉμ+u. (6.6)

    Here when uHμ(t)(¯Rn+), w¯HtReμ(Rn+), and when uHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+), w¯HtReμ(Rn+). For w1 we have since u=Ξμ+e+w (by Theorem 5.4 1), that

    w1=r+ˆF+Ξμ+u=r+ˆF+Ξμ+Ξμ+e+w=r+ˆF+e+w¯HtReμ(Rn+),

    when 12<tReμ<32, by the mapping property for ˆF+ established in Proposition 5.2.

    We can then apply Proposition 6.1 to the first integral for ˆP2, with μ replaced by μ, giving when tReμ>12:

    Rn+ˆP2unˉudx=Rn+ΞμˆF+Ξμ+unˉudx=Rn+Ξμe+w1nˉudx=(γ0w1,γ0w)L2(Rn1)+(w1,nw)L2(Rn+). (6.7)

    There is a general formula for the trace, entering in Vishik and Eskin's calculus as well as that of Boutet de Monvel,

    γ0v=(2π)nRn1eixξRF(e+v)dξndξ,

    where the integral over R is read either as an ordinary integral or, if necessary, as the integral + defined e.g., in [7,(10.85)] (also recalled in [11,(A.1),(A.15)]). Applying this to w1, we find:

    γ0w1=γ0(ˆF+,+w)=(2π)nRn1eixξRˆf+(ξ,ξn)F(e+w)dξndξ. (6.8)

    This integral gives 0 for the following reason: It suffices to take w in the dense subspace of ¯HtReμ(Rn+) of compactly supported functions in C(¯Rn+). Both ˆf+ and F(e+w) are holomorphic in C as functions of ξn, f+ being O(ξn1+ε) and F(e+w) being O(ξn1) on ¯C, whereby the integrand is O(ξn2+ε) there (and is in L1 on R); then the integral over R can be transformed to a closed contour in C and gives 0.

    We can then conclude:

    Rn+ˆP2unˉudx=Rn+ΞμˆF+Ξμ+unˉudx=(w1,nw)L2(Rn+). (6.9)

    The other contribution from ˆP2 is, in conjugated form,

    Rn+ˆP2unˉudx=Rn+ΞˉμˆF+e+r+Ξˉμ+unˉudx=r+ΞˉμˆF+e+r+Ξˉμ+u,nu¯H12Reμ+ε,˙H12+Reμε=r+Ξˉμ+u,ˆF+Ξμ+nu¯H12+ε,˙H12ε=r+Ξˉμ+u,nˆF+Ξμ+u¯H12+ε,˙H12ε=r+Ξˉμ+u,nˆF+e+w¯H12+ε,˙H12ε=w,ne+w1¯H12+ε,˙H12ε=(γ0w,γ0w1)L2(Rn1)+(w,nw1)L2(Rn+)=(w,nw1)L2(Rn+),

    where we used Proposition 6.1 in a similar way, and at the end used that γ0w1=0, cf. (6.8)ff. Finally, taking the contributions from ˆP2 together, we get

    Rn+ˆP2unˉudx+Rn+nu¯ˆP2udx=(w1,nw)L2(Rn+)+(nw1,w)L2(Rn+)=(γ0w1,γ0w)L2(Rn1)=0,

    using again that γ0w1=0.

    It is found in a similar way, using that ˆF is of plus-type, that ˆP3 contributes with zero.

    To extend the formula to the original operator P, we shall show that P=PˆP (cf. Theorem 5.8 1) gives a zero boundary contribution.

    Lemma 6.3. Let a>0 and let S=Op(s(ξ)), where s(ξ) is O(ξ2a1). Then

    Rn+Sunˉudx+Rn+nu¯Sudx=0, (6.10)

    for any u,u˙Ha(¯Rn+).

    Proof. Since u˙Ha(¯Rn+), r+Su¯H1a(Rn+); moreover nu˙Ha1(¯Rn+), so we can write the first integral as

    r+Su,nu¯H1a(Rn+),˙Ha1(¯Rn+).

    Approximate u in ˙Ha(¯Rn+) by a sequence of functions φkC0(Rn+), kN; then

    r+Su,nφk¯H1a,˙Ha1=r+nSu,φk¯Ha,˙Har+nSu,u¯Ha,˙Ha.

    With a similar argument for the second integral, we have

    r+Su,nu¯H1a,˙Ha1+nu,r+Su˙Ha1,¯H1a=r+nSu,u¯Ha,˙Hau,r+nSu˙Ha,¯Ha=r+nSu,u¯Ha,˙Ha+u,r+(nS)u˙Ha,¯Ha=0,

    since nS=Sn=(nS), and it is well-known that the operator S1=nS of order 2a satisfies r+S1u,u=u,r+S1u for u,u˙Ha(¯Rn+).

    We can then conclude:

    Theorem 6.4. Let P, μ, μ be as in Theorem 6.2. For uEμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), uEˉμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), there holds

    Rn+Punˉudx+Rn+nu¯Pudx=Γ(μ+1)Γ(μ+1)Rn1s0γ0(u/xμn)γ0(ˉu/xμn)dx, (6.11)

    where s0=eiπδp(0,1). The formula extends to uHμ(t)(¯Rn+), uHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+), for t>Reμ+12, t>Reμ+12, with t,ta.

    The integrals over Rn+ are interpreted as dualities (as in Proposition 6.1 and Lemma 6.3) when Reμ or Reμ0, and when extended to general u,u.

    Proof. Recall that P=ˆP+P, where P=Op(p), |p(ξ)|Cξ2a1 (cf. Theorem 5.8 1). We have the identities (6.10) with S=P and (6.4) for uHμ(t)(¯Rn+), uHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+) with t,ta, t>Reμ+12, t>Reμ+12. Adding the identities for ˆP and P we obtain (6.11). It holds a fortiori for uEμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), uEˉμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn).

    Example 6.5. The theorem applies in particular to L=Op(L(ξ)) studied in (3.5)–(3.6) and Example 5.9, showing that

    Rn+Lunˉudx+Rn+nu¯Ludx=Γ(μ+1)Γ(μ+1)Rn1|L(0,1)|γ0(u/xμn)γ0(ˉu/xμn)dx, (6.12)

    The value s0=|L(0,1)|=(A(0,1)2+B(0,1)2)12 is found in (3.17).

    This result was proved in [5,Prop. 1.4] by completely different, real methods, for μ ]0,2a[]2a1,1[.

    The result is one of the key ingredients in the proof of integration by parts formulas for operators L on bounded domains ΩRn in [5], where μ(ν) varies as the normal ν varies along the boundary. It would be interesting to extend this knowledge to general strongly elliptic operators P on bounded domains by similar applications of Theorem 6.4.

    Example 6.6. Here is an example of an application to a nonelliptic operator satisfying Assumption 3.2. Let

    P=|1+2|m+|3|m13, with symbol p(ξ)=|ξ1+ξ2|m+isignξ3|ξ3|m

    on R3, for some 1<m<2. For R3+={x3>0} we have the normal ν=(0,0,1), where

    p(0,0,1)=i,p(0,0,1)=i, so (3.1) holds with m2μ=1,

    i.e., μ=(m1)/2, μ=(m+1)/2. Then by Theorem 6.4,

    x3>0(Puˉvu¯Pv)dx=Γ(m2+12)Γ(m2+32)x3=0γ0(ux(m1)/23)γ0(ˉvx(m+1)/23)dx,

    for functions ux(m1)/23S(¯R3+), vx(m+1)/23S(¯R3+).

    The halfspace {x2>0} has the normal ν=(0,1,0) and

    p(ν)=1,p(ν)=1, so (3.1) holds with m2μ=0,

    i.e., μ=m/2, μ=m/2. Here by Theorem 6.4,

    x2>0(Puˉvu¯Pv)dx=Γ(m2+1)2x2=0γ0(uxm/22)γ0(ˉvxm/22)dx1dx3,

    for functions with a factor xm/22. $

    Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1, and assume Reμ>0. Along with the homogeneous Dirichlet problem (5.25), one can consider a nonhomogeneous local Dirichlet problem if the scope is expanded to allow so-called "large solutions", behaving like xμ1n near the boundary of Rn+; such solutions blow up at the boundary when Reμ<1. Namely, one can pose the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem

    r+Pu=fonRn+,γ0(u/xμ1n)=φonRn1,suppu¯Rn+. (7.1)

    Problem (7.1) was studied earlier for operators satisfying the a-transmission property in [8,9] (including the fractional Laplacian (Δ)a), and a halfways Green's formula was shown in [11,Cor. 4.5]. The problem (7.1) for the fractional Laplacian, and the halfways Green's formula——with applications to solution formulas——were also studied in Abatangelo [1] (independently of [8]); the boundary condition there is given in a less explicit way except when Ω is a ball. There have been further studies of such problems, see e.g., Abatangelo, Gomez-Castro and Vazquez [2] and its references.

    Note that the boundary condition in (7.1) is local. There is a different problem which is also regarded as a nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem, namely to prescribe nonzero values of u in the exterior of Ω; it has somewhat different solution spaces (a link between this and the homogeneous Dirichlet problem is described in [9]).

    For the general operators P considered here, we shall now show that problem (7.1) has a good sense for uH(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+) with suitable t.

    More precisely, since P also satisfies the principal (μ1)-transmission condition (as remarked after Definition 2.1), Theorem 5.8 1 can be applied with μ replaced by μ1, implying that r+P maps

    r+P:H(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+)¯Ht2a(Rn+)forReμ32<t<Reμ+12. (7.2)

    This is also valid in the case where P is only assumed to satisfy Assumption 3.2.

    From Theorem 5.4 we have (note that Reμ1>1)

    H(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+){=˙Ht(¯Rn+)when32<tReμ<12,˙Ht(¯Rn+)+xμ1ne+¯HtReμ+1(Rn+)when12<tReμ<12. (7.3)

    When tReμ>12, the weighted boundary value is well-defined, cf. (5.20):

    γμ10uΓ(μ)γ0(u/xμ1n)=γ0(Ξμ1+u)HtReμ+12(Rn1). (7.4)

    The following regularity result holds for the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem:

    Theorem 7.1. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1 with Reμ>0, and let 12<tReμ<12. When f¯Ht2a(Rn+) and φHtReμ+12(Rn1) are given, and u solves the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem (7.1) with uH(μ1)(σ)(¯Rn+) for some 12<σReμ<12, then in fact uH(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+).

    Proof. It is known from [8,Th. 6.1] that Hμ(σ)(¯Rn+) is a closed subspace of H(μ1)(σ)(¯Rn+), equal to the set of vH(μ1)(σ)(¯Rn+) for which γ0(v/xμ1n)=0. From the given φ we define

    w=Γ(μ)Ξμ+1+e+K0φH(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+),

    where K0 is the standard Poisson operator φK0φ=F1ξx[ˆφ(ξ)eξxn], xn>0. Then in view of (7.4),

    γ0(w/xμ1n)=Γ(μ)1γ0(Ξμ1+w)=γ0(Ξμ1+Ξ1μ+e+K0φ)=γ0K0φ=φ,

    so that v=uw solves (7.1) with f replaced by fr+Pw¯Ht2a(Rn+), φ replaced by 0. This is a homogeneous Dirichlet problem as in (5.25). Since vH(μ1)(σ)(¯Rn+) with γ0(v/xμ1n)=0, it is in Hμ(σ)(¯Rn+). It then follows from Theorem 5.8 that vHμ(t)(¯Rn+), and hence u=v+wH(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+).

    For the hatted version ˆP there is even an existence and uniqueness result in these spaces.

    Theorem 7.2. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1 with Reμ>0, and let 12<tReμ<12. Then r+ˆP together with γμ10 defines a homeomorphism:

    {r+ˆP,γμ10}:H(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+)¯Ht2a(Rn+)×HtReμ+12(Rn1). (7.5)

    Proof. The forward mapping properties are accounted for above. The existence of a unique solution uH(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+) of

    r+ˆPu=fonRn+,γμ10u=φonRn1,suppu¯Rn+, (7.6)

    for given f¯Ht2a(Rn+), φHtReμ+12(Rn1), is shown as in Theorem 7.1, now referring to Theorem 5.5 instead of Theorem 5.8.

    These theorems show that H(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+) is the correct domain space for the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem, at least in the small range 12<tReμ<12. Recall that Eμ1(¯Rn+)E(Rn) and e+xμ1nS(¯Rn+) are dense subsets of H(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+) for all t>Reμ32.

    We now show a "halfways Green's formula", where one factor u is in the domain of the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem for P and the other factor v is in the domain of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem for P:

    Theorem 7.3. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.2, and assume moreover that 0<Reμ<a+12, Reμ>0.

    For uEμ1(¯Rn+)E(Rn) and vEˉμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), there holds

    Rn+PuˉvdxRn+u¯Pvdx=Γ(μ)Γ(μ+1)Rn1s0γ0(u/xμ1n)γ0(ˉv/xμn)dx, (7.7)

    where s0=eiπδp(0,1). The formula extends to uH(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+) with t>Reμ12, vHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+) with t>Reμ+12.

    The left-hand side is interpreted as follows, for small ε>0:

    r+Pu,v¯HReμ12+ε(Rn+),˙HReμ+12ε(¯Rn+)u,Pv˙HReμ12ε(¯Rn+),¯HReμ+12+ε(Rn+). (7.8)

    Proof. We shall show how the result can be derived from Theorem 6.4. Let uEμ1(¯Rn+)E(Rn) and vEˉμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn). As shown in [8,p. 494], there exist functions U and u1 in Eμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn) such that u=nU+u1.

    In terms of the Hilbert spaces: When uH(μ1)(t)(¯Rn+) with |tReμ|<12, let z=r+Ξμ1+u¯HtReμ+1(Rn+), then (denoting Op(ξ)=D)

    u=Ξμ+1+e+z=(D+n)Ξμ+e+z=u1+nU,withu1=DΞμ+e+zDHμ(t+1)(¯Rn+)Hμ(t)(¯Rn+),U=Ξμ+e+zHμ(t+1)(¯Rn+),nUHμ(t)(¯Rn+). (7.9)

    Here Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)=˙Ht(¯Rn+) since |tReμ|<12. Moreover, when t=Reμ12+ε for a small ε>0, then

    r+Pu=r+Pu1+r+PnU=r+Pu1+nr+PU (7.10)

    where both terms are in ¯Ht2a(Rn+)=¯HReμ12+ε2a(Rn+)=¯HReμ12+ε(Rn+); we here use Theorem 5.8 1.

    For v, we note that when vHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+) with t=Reμ+12+ε, then

    vHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+)=Ξˉμ+e+¯HtReμ(Rn+)Ξˉμ+˙H12ε(¯Rn+)=˙HReμ+12ε(¯Rn+),r+Pv¯Ht2a(Rn+)=¯HReμ+12+ε2a(Rn+)=¯HReμ+12+ε(Rn+).

    Then the dualities in (7.8) are well-defined and serve as an interpretation of the left-hand side in (7.7).

    The formula (7.7) will first be proved for uEμ1(¯Rn+)E(Rn) and vEˉμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), and afterwards be extended by continuity to general u,v. We use the decomposition (7.9), that leads to elements of Eμ(¯Rn+) for t. When u is supported in a ball {|ξ|R}, we can cut u1 and U down to have support in {|ξ|2R}.

    Consider the contribution from u1. Here there holds

    r+Pu1,v¯Ha,˙Hau1,r+Pv˙Ha,¯Ha=0, (7.11)

    when u1 and v are in ˙Ha(¯Rn+), since P is of order 2a. This gives the contribution 0 to (7.7) since t=a is allowed in the definition of u1 (recall that a>Reμ12 by hypothesis), and ta holds for the values of t allowed in the definition of v (where t>Reμ+12=2aReμ+12>2aa=a). Thus u1 contributes to the boundary integral with 0.

    For the contribution from nU, we note that, writing U=xμnw for xn>0, wC(¯Rn+),

    nU=n(xμnw)=μxμ1nw+xμnnwforxn>0,

    so the weighted boundary value for xn0+ satisfies (since xμnnw/xμ1n=xnnw0)

    γ0(nU/xμ1n)=μγ0w=μγ0(U/xμn). (7.12)

    Moreover, by a simple integration by parts,

    r+PnU,v=r+nPU,v=r+PU,nv,

    since γ0v=0 because of Reμ>0. Thus, by use of Theorem 6.4 and (7.12),

    r+PnU,vnU,r+Pv=r+PU,nvnU,r+Pv=Γ(μ+1)Γ(μ+1)s0Rn1γ0(U/xμn)γ0(ˉv/xμn)dx=Γ(μ)Γ(μ+1)s0Rn1γ0(nU/xμ1n)γ0(ˉv/xμn)dx.

    Since u1Eμ(¯Rn+), γ0(u1/xμ1n)=0, so u1 can be added to nU in the last integral. Adding also (7.11) to the left-hand side, we find (7.7).

    Since the expressions depend continuously on u,v in the presented norms, the formula extends to the indicated spaces.

    Example 7.4. Theorems 7.1 and 7.2 apply in particular to the operator L considered in (3.5)–(3.6) and Examples 5.9 and 6.5, when μ>0 (this holds automatically if a12, since |δ|<12). Theorem 7.3 applies to L when μ and μ>0 (again automatically satisfied when a12). $

    Remark 7.5. The transmission spaces can also be defined in terms of other scales of function spaces. The case of Bessel-potential spaces Hsp, 1<p<, is a main subject in our preceding papers. There is also the Hölder-Zygmund scale Cs(Rn), coinciding with the Hölder scale Cs(Rn) when sR+N, with spaces over Rn+ defined as in (5.1). Here since Cs+ε(Rn)Hs(Rn), also Cμ(s+ε)(¯Rn+)Hμ(s)(¯Rn+) for ε>0. (More details on such spaces in our earlier papers, e.g., in [12].) So the results dealing with forward mapping properties of r+P have useful consequences involving these spaces as well. Namely, Theorem 5.8 1 implies that r+P maps

    r+P:Cμ(t+ε)(¯Rn+)¯Ht2a(Rn+) for Reμ12<t<Reμ+32,

    and the integration by parts formulas in Sections 6 and 7 hold for functions in Cμ(t)-type spaces, for the same t.

    In the opposite direction, an inclusion of an Hs-space in a Hölder spaces loses n/2 in the regularity parameter, hence does not give very good results. For better regularity results, it would be interesting to extend the above theory to Hsp-spaces with general 1<p<, possibly under further hypotheses; this remains to be done. More smoothness than C1 is needed for a symbol q(ξ) to be a Fourier multiplier in Lp (some well-known conditions are recalled in [15,Sect. 1.3]). There is an extension of Vishik and Eskin's work to Lp-based spaces by Shargorodsky [21], which should be useful. It is there pointed out that [6,Lemma 17.1] shows how smoothness properties carry over to the factors in the Wiener-Hopf factorization. $

    The author declares no conflict of interest.



    [1] M. H. Abokersh, M Vallès, L. F. Cabeza, D. Boer, A framework for the optimal integration of solar assisted district heating in different urban sized communities: A robust machine learning approach incorporating global sensitivity analysis, Appl. Energy, 267 (2020), 114903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114903 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114903
    [2] I. Mitiche, A. Nesbitt, S. Conner, P. Boreham, G. Morison, 1D-CNN based real-time fault detection system for power asset diagnostics, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 14 (2020), 5766–5773. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-gtd.2020.0773 doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2020.0773
    [3] M. Biswal, S. Ghore, O. P. Malik, R. C. Bansal, Development of time-frequency based approach to detect high impedance fault in an inverter interfaced distribution system, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, 36 (2021), 3825–3833. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2021.3049572 doi: 10.1109/TPWRD.2021.3049572
    [4] K. Koziy, B. Gou, J. Aslakson, A low-cost power-quality meter with series arc-fault detection capability for smart grid, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, 28 (2013), 1584–1591. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2013.2251753 doi: 10.1109/TPWRD.2013.2251753
    [5] O. Namaki-Shoushtari, B. Huang, Bayesian control loop diagnosis by combining historical data and process knowledge of fault signatures, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 62 (2015), 3696–3704. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2014.2375253 doi: 10.1109/TIE.2014.2375253
    [6] O. Lyashevska, F. Malone, E. Maccarthy, J. Fiehler, J. Buhk, L. Morris, Class imbalance in gradient boosting classification algorithms: Application to experimental stroke data, Stat. Methods Med. Res., 30 (2021), 916–925. https://doi.org/10.1177/0962280220980484 doi: 10.1177/0962280220980484
    [7] A. Yagi, L. Nguyen, T. V. Ta, A sustainability condition for stochastic forest model, Commun. Pure Appl. Anal., 16 (2017), 699–718. https://doi.org/10.3934/cpaa.2017034 doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2017034
    [8] B. de Silva, J. Callaham, J. Jonker, N. Goebel, J. Klemisch, D. McDonald, et al., Hybrid learning approach to sensor fault detection with flight test data, AIAA J., 59 (2021), 3490–3503. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J059943 doi: 10.2514/1.J059943
    [9] J. Hage, P. Xu, P. Bonnifait, J. Ibanez-Guzman, Localization integrity for intelligent vehicles through fault detection and position error characterization, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 23 (2020), 2978–2990. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2020.3027433 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2020.3027433
    [10] M. Ma, P. He, Y. Li, H. Li, M. Jiang, Y. Wu, Fault diagnosis method based on multi-source information fusion for weak interturn short circuit in synchronous condensers, IET Electr. Power Appl., 15 (2021), 1245–1260. https://doi.org/10.1049/elp2.12094 doi: 10.1049/elp2.12094
    [11] J. Sonne, C. Seavey, J. Groshong, Rapid immunohistological measurement of tyrosine hydroxylase in rat midbrain by near-infrared instrument-based detection, arXiv preprint, (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchemneu.2021.101992 doi: 10.1016/j.jchemneu.2021.101992
    [12] Y. Yamazaki, S. Kanaji, T. Matsuda, T. Oshikiri, T. Nakamuraet, S. Suzuki, et al., Automated surgical instrument detection from laparoscopic gastrectomy video images using an open source convolutional neural network platform, J. Am. Coll. Surg., 230 (2020), 725–732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2020.01.037 doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2020.01.037
    [13] T. Zhou, T. Han, E. Droguett, Towards trustworthy machine fault diagnosis: A probabilistic Bayesian deep learning framework, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 224 (2022), 1065–1077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2022.108525 doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2022.108525
    [14] J. Gompel, D. Spina, C. Develder, Satellite based fault diagnosis of photovoltaic systems using recurrent neural networks, Appl. Energy, 305 (2022), 117874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117874 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117874
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Gerd Grubb, Resolvents for fractional-order operators with nonhomogeneous local boundary conditions, 2023, 284, 00221236, 109815, 10.1016/j.jfa.2022.109815
    2. B.-Wolfgang Schulze, Jörg Seiler, Truncation quantization in the edge calculus, 2023, 14, 1662-9981, 10.1007/s11868-023-00564-0
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

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

Metrics

Article views(1502) PDF downloads(72) Cited by(1)

Figures and Tables

Figures(4)  /  Tables(8)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog