Journal of Mathematical Sciences

, Volume 132, Issue 3, pp 359–370 | Cite as

Young Measures as Measurable Functions and Their Applications to Variational Problems

  • M. A. Sychev
Article
Received:

Abstract

In this paper, we give a systematic exposition of our approach to the Young measure theory. This approach is based on characterzation of these objects as measurable functions into a compact metric space with a metric of integral form. We explain advantages of this approach in the study of the behavior of integral functionals on weakly convergent sequences. Bibliography: 38 titles.

Keywords

Measurable Function Variational Problem Integral Form Measure Theory Integral Functional 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    E. Acerbi and N. Fusco, “Semicontinuity problems in the calculus of variations,” Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal., 86, 125–145 (1984).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. M. Ball, “Convexity conditions and existence theorems in nonlinear elasticity,” Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal., 63, 337–403 (1978).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. M. Ball, Some Open Problems in Elasticity. Geometry, Mechanics, and Dynamics, Springer-Verlag, New York (2002).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. M. Ball, “A version of the fundamental theorem for Young measures,” in: PDE's and Continuum Models of Phase Transitions, M. Rascle, D. Serre, and M. Slemrod (eds.), Lect. Notes in Physics, 344, Springer-Verlag (1989), pp. 207–215.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    E. J. Balder, “A general approach to lower semicontinuity and lower closure in optimal control theory,” SIAM J. Control and Optimization, 22, 570–598 (1984).MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. Berliocchi and J. M. Lasry, “Integrandes normales et mesures parametrees en calcul des variations,” Bull. Soc. Math. France, 101, 129–184 (1993).MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    G. Bouchitte, I. Fonseca, and J. Maly, “The effective bulk energy of the relaxed energy of multiple integrals below the growth exponent,” Proc. Royal Soc. Edinb., Sect A, 128, 463–497 (1998).MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. M. Ball and R. D. James, “Fine mixtures as minimizers of energy,” Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 100, 13–52 (1987).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. M. Ball and F. Murat, “W 1,p-quasiconvexity and variational problems for multiple integrals,” J. Funct. Anal., 58, 225–253 (1984).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    N. N. Bogolubov, “Sur quelques methods novelles dans le calculus des variations,” Ann. Math. Pura Appl., 7, 149–271 (1930).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. Cardaliaquet and R. Tahraoui, “Sur l'equaivalence de la 1-rang convexite et de la polyconvexite des ensembles isotropiques de R 2×2,” C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Ser. I, 331, 851–856 (2000).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    L. Carbone and R. De Arcangelis, “On a nonstandard convex regularization and the relaxation of unbounded integral functionals of the calculus of variations,” J. Conv. Anal., 6, 141–162 (1999).MATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    C. Castaing and M. Valadier, “Convex analysis and measurable multifunctions,” Lect. Notes Math., 580, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York (1977).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    B. Dacorogna, Direct Methods in the Calculus of Variations, Springer-Verlag (1989).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    I. Ekeland and R. Temam, Convex Analysis and Variational Problems, North-Holland (1976).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    T. Iwaniec, “Nonlinear analysis and quasiconformal mappings from the perspective of PDEs,” in: Quasiconformal Geometry and Dynamics (Lublin, 1996), pp. 119–140.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    T. Iwaniec and C. Sbordone, “Quasiharmonic fields,” Ann. Inst. H. Poincare Anal. Non Lineaire, 18, 519–572 (2001).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    T. Iwaniec, G. Verchota, and A. Vogel, “The failure of rank-one connections,” Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 163, 125–169 (2002).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    R. James and S. Spector, “Remarks on W 1,p-quasiconvexity, interpenetration of matter, and function spaces for elasticity,” Ann. Inst. H. Poincare Anal. Non Lineaire, 9, 263–280 (1992).MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. Kinderlehrer and P. Pedregal, “Characterization of Young measures generated by gradients,” Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal., 115, 329–365 (1999).MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    D. Kinderlehrer and P. Padregal, “Weak convergence of sequences and the Young measure representation,” SIAM J. Math. Anal., 23, 1–19 (1992).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    D. Kinderlehrer and P. Pedregal, “Gradient Young measures generated by sequences in Sobolev spaces,” J. Geom. Anal., 4, 59–90 (1994).MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    K. Kuratowski and C. Ryll-Nardzewski, “A general theorem of selectors,” Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci., XIII, 397–403 (1966).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    J. Maly, “Weak lower semicontinuity of polyconvex integrals,” Proc. Royal Soc. Edinb., 123A, 681–691 (1993).MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    C. Morrey, Multiple Integrals in the Calculus of Variations, Springer-Verlag (1966).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    P. Pedregal, Parametrized Measures and Variational Principles, Progress in Nonlinear Differential Equations and Their Applications, 30, Birkhauser, Basel (1997).MATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Y. G. Reshetnyak, “General theorems on semicontinuity and on convergence with a functional,” Sib. Mat. J., 8, 1052–1071 (1967).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    M. Sychev, “Necessary and sufficient conditions in theorems of lower semicontinuity and on convergence with a functional,” Mat. Sb., 186, 847–878 (1995).MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    M. Sychev, “A new approach to the Young measure theory, relaxation, and convergence in energy,” Preprint 43/97/M, SISSA (Triest, Italy) (1997).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    M. Sychev, “Characterization of homogeneous gradient Young measures in the case of arbitrary integrands,” Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa, XXIX, 531–548 (2000).MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    M. Sychev, “Attainment and relaxation results in special classes of deformations,” Calc. Var., 19, 183–210 (2004).MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    M. Sychev, “Young measures as measurable functions,” Preprint N 119, Institute of Mathematics, Novosibirsk (2003).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    M. Silhavy, “Rotationally invariant rank-1 convex functions,” Appl. Math. Optim., 44, 1–15 (2001).MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    M. Silhavy, “Monotonicity of rotationally invariant convex and rank 1 convex functions,” Proc. Royal Soc. Edinb., 132A, 419–435 (2002).MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    M. Silhavy, “An O(n) invariant rank 1 convex function that is not polyconvex,” Theor. Appl. Mech. Belgrade, 28–29, 325–336 (2002).MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    L. Tartar, “Compensated compactness and applications to partial differential equations,” in: Nonlinear Analysis and Mechanics: Heriot-Watt Symposium, IV, Pitman Research Notes in Math., 39 (1979), pp. 136–212.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    L. C. Young, “Generalized curves and the existence of an attained absolute minimum in the calculus of variations,” Comptes Rendus de la Societe des Sciences et des Lettres de Varsovie, 30, 212–234 (1937).MATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    L. C. Young, Lectures on the Calculus of Variations and Optimal Control Theory, Saunders (1969) (reprinted by Chelsea (1980)).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. A. Sychev
    • 1
  1. 1.Mathematical Institute, Siberian DepartmentRussian Academy of SciencesNovosibirskRussia

Personalised recommendations