Abstract
An equivalent expression of Orlicz modulars in terms of measure of level sets of difference quotients is established. The result in a sense complements the famous Maz’ya–Shaposhnikova formula for the fractional Gagliardo–Slobodeckij seminorm and its recent extension to the setting of Orlicz functions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
The fractional order Sobolev spaces \(W^{s,p}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\), \(p\in [1,\infty )\), \(s\in (0,1)\), endowed with the Gagliardo–Slobodeckij seminorm, which is defined for smooth compactly supported functions u as
have played an important role in the theory of partial differential equations and its applications for a long time (see the introductory section of [5]). Much as it is tempting to think that
or
the Gagliardo–Slobodeckij seminorm notoriously fails to capture these limiting cases—to that end, it is sufficient to consider any nonconstant \(u\in {\mathcal {C}}_0^\infty ({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) and observe that \(|u|_{s,p}^p\) converges to \(\infty \) as \(s\rightarrow 1^-\) or \(s\rightarrow 0^+\). Nevertheless, it was discovered around 20 years ago that these “defects” can be, in a sense, “fixed” by introducing certain compensatory factors. Namely, for every \(u\in \mathcal C_0^\infty ({\mathbb {R}}^N)\), a special case of what is now often called the Bourgain–Brezis–Mironescu formula [3] tells us that
Moreover, Maz’ya and Shaposhnikova proved in [8] that
Recently, a completely different approach, not involving integration of fractional difference quotients at all, to repairing (1) was taken by Brezis, Van Schaftingen and Yung. They proved in [4] that, instead of introducing a compensatory factor, the limit as \(s\rightarrow 1^-\) can be recovered if the strong \(L^p\) norm of fractional difference quotients is replaced by the weak \(L^{p,\infty }\) quasi-norm. More precisely, they obtained the following result. Let \(p\in [1,\infty )\) and \(u\in {\mathcal {C}}_0^\infty ({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) and define
where \(|\cdot |_{2N}\) stands for the Lebesgue measure on \({\mathbb {R}}^{2N}\). In [4] it was shown that
and
Following this innovatory approach, Gu and Yung established in [7] other, possibly even more unanticipated, formulae. They complement the Maz’ya–Shaposhnikova formula (3) in the same way the result of Brezis, Van Schaftingen and Yung complements the Bourgain–Brezis–Mironescu formula (2). Namely the result of [7] asserts that, for every \(u\in L^p({\mathbb {R}}^N)\), \(p\in [1, \infty )\),
and
where
The classical results (2) and (3) were recently considerably strengthened in [1, 2, 6] by replacing the p-th power in the integrals with Orlicz functions, thus allowing for non-polynomial growth.
The aim of this short paper is to similarly extend the new developments of [7]; i.e., (4) and (5), by replacing the p-th power with a general Orlicz function globally satisfying the \(\Delta _2\) condition. Therefore, we express the Orlicz modular in terms of measures of certain level sets, without using any integral. Our proof technique is based on the argument presented in [7], appropriately extended to the Orlicz framework.
In what follows, we introduce some basic notations and definitions, needed for understanding the setting we will be considering in our main result. A proper detailed treatment of Orlicz functions and classes may be found, e.g., in [9].
A Young function \(\Phi :[0,\infty )\rightarrow [0,\infty )\) is any continuous convex function vanishing at 0. Note that Young functions are nondecreasing. We say that a Young function \(\Phi \) (globally) satisfies the \(\Delta _2\) condition if there is \(k > 0\) such that \(\Phi (2t)\le k\Phi (t)\), for every \(t>0\). Then, necessarily \(k\ge 2\), which follows from the convexity of \(\Phi \). We denote by \(\Delta _2(\Phi )\) the infimum over all such k.
Given a Young function \(\Phi \), we say that a measurable function \(u:{\mathbb {R}}^N\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) belongs to the Orlicz class \({\mathscr {L}}^\Phi \), and write \(u\in {\mathscr {L}}^\Phi \), if
If \(\Phi \) satisfies the \(\Delta _2\) condition, \(u\in {\mathscr {L}}^\Phi \) implies
As usual, \(\omega _N\) denotes the volume of the unit ball in \({\mathbb {R}}^N\).
2 Main Result
Theorem 2.1
Let \(\Phi \) be a Young function satisfying the \(\Delta _2\) condition. Let \(u\in {\mathscr {L}}^\Phi \) and for every \(t>0\) define
Then,
Furthermore,
Proof
For every \(t>0\), define the set
and observe that, thanks to symmetry, it satisfies \(\left| {H_t}\right| _{2N}=\frac{1}{2} \left| {E_t}\right| _{2N}\).
At first, we are going to suppose that u has compact support; i.e., there exists \(R>0\) such that
Notice that, if \((x,y)\in H_t\), then necessarily \(x\in B_R\), otherwise we would have \(x,y\in {\mathbb {R}}^N{\setminus } B_R\) and thus \(u(x)=u(y)=0\), which would imply \((x,y)\notin H_t\).
For a fixed \(x\in B_R\), define the sets
and
Obviously, we have
The first inclusion together with the definition of \(H_{t,x,R}\) implies
while the second inclusion in (8) implies
Since \(x\in B_R\) was arbitrarily chosen, we may integrate (9) and (10) over \(B_R\) with respect to x and multiply by \(\Phi (t)\) to get
Recalling that u is supported in \(B_R\) and \(\left| {H_t}\right| _{2N}=\frac{1}{2} \left| {E_t}\right| _{2N}\), we may further rewrite this as
Letting \(t\rightarrow 0^+\), we obtain (6).
Now we are going to extend the result beyond compactly supported functions. Suppose that \(u:{\mathbb {R}}^N\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) is measurable. For any fixed \(t>0\), the set \(E_t\) satisfies
Indeed, if \((x,y)\in {\mathbb {R}}^N\) is not contained in either of the two sets on the right-hand side, then, by monotonicity and convexity of \(\Phi \),
hence \((x,y)\notin E_t\). This shows (12).
Using the symmetry of the two sets on the right-hand side of (12), we obtain
hence
Notice that neither the assumption nor the \(\Delta _2\) condition of \(\Phi \) has been used yet, so this estimate in fact holds for any measurable u and any Young function \(\Phi \). If \(\Phi \) satisfies the \(\Delta _2\) condition, (13) readily implies the second inequality in (7).
Assume that \(u\in {\mathscr {L}}^\Phi \). Choose \(R>0\) and define
Furthermore, choose \(t>0\), \(\lambda \in (0,1)\) and define
and
Then, \(E_t\subset A_1 \cup A_2\). Similarly as before, this can be seen using monotonicity and convexity of \(\Phi \) to get
from which the inclusion follows.
Observe that the set \(A_1\) is obtained by replacing u with \(\frac{u_R}{\lambda }\) in the definition of \(E_t\). Since \(\frac{u_R}{\lambda }\) is compactly supported and belongs to \({\mathscr {L}}^\Phi \) (since \(\Phi \) satisfies the \(\Delta _2\) condition), we may use the previously obtained estimate (11) with \(A_1\) and \(\frac{u_R}{\lambda }\) in place of \(E_t\) and u, respectively, to get
Analogously, applying (13) to the function \(\frac{v_R}{1-\lambda }\) in place of u (\(A_2\) plays the role of \(E_t\) for this function), we get
As \(E_t\subset A_1 \cup A_2\), this gives
Since \(|u_R|\le |u|\), \(|v_R|\le |u|\), \(u\in {\mathscr {L}}^\Phi \) and \(\Phi \) satisfies the \(\Delta _2\) condition, both integrals above are finite regardless the choice of \(\lambda \), and the second integral (with a fixed \(\lambda \)) vanishes as \(R\rightarrow \infty \) by the dominated convergence theorem. Hence, consecutively letting \(t\rightarrow 0^+\), \(R\rightarrow \infty \) and \(\lambda \rightarrow 1^-\), we finally obtain
It remains to show the opposite inequality for the lower limit. Fix \(R>0\), \(\lambda \in (0,1)\) and define \(u_R\), \(v_R\) as in (14). Then \(|u|-|v_R|=|u_R|\) and, by convexity of \(\Phi \), for any \((x,y)\in {\mathbb {R}}^{2N}\) we have
For any \(t>0\) define
and
Whenever \((x,y)\in A_3{\setminus } A_4\), we have
where the last inequality follows from (16). This shows that \((x,y)\in E_t\). Thus, we have \(E_t \supset A_3{\setminus } A_4\).
We proceed analogously as before, realizing that \(A_3\) plays the role of \(E_t\) for the compactly supported function \(\lambda u_R\), we use (11) to obtain
Similarly, an appropriate interpretation of (13) yields
Hence,
Letting \(t\rightarrow 0^+\), \(R\rightarrow \infty \) and \(\lambda \rightarrow 1^-\), in this order, now yields
Once again, the \(\Delta _2\) condition of \(\Phi \) as well as the assumption \(u\in {\mathscr {L}}^\Phi \) are both required in this step. This clearly implies the first inequality in (7). Finally, combining (17) with (15), we arrive at (6), and so the proof is complete. \(\square \)
Remark 2.2
Applying the theorem to \(\Phi (t)=t^p\), \(p\in [1,\infty )\), we recover [7, Theorem 1] with the same multiplicative constants.
Data Availability
The manuscript has no associated data.
References
Alberico, A., Cianchi, A., Pick, L., Slavíková, L.: On the limit as \(s\rightarrow 0^+\) of fractional Orlicz–Sobolev spaces. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 26(6), 80 (2020)
Alberico, A., Cianchi, A., Pick, L., Slavíková, L.: On the limit as \(s \rightarrow 1^-\) of possibly non-separable fractional Orlicz–Sobolev spaces. Atti. Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl. 31(4), 879–899 (2020)
Bourgain, J., Brezis, H., Mironescu, P.: Another look at Sobolev spaces. In: Optimal Control and Partial Differential Equations, IOS, Amsterdam, 439–455 (2001)
Brezis, H., Van Schaftingen, J., Yung, P.-L.: A surprising formula for Sobolev norms. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 118(8), e2025254118-6 (2021)
Di Nezza, E., Palatucci, G., Valdinoci, E.: Hitchhiker’s guide to the fractional Sobolev spaces. Bull. Sci. Math. 136(5), 521–573 (2012)
Fernández Bonder, J., Salort, A.M.: Fractional order Orlicz–Sobolev spaces. J. Funct. Anal. 277(2), 333–367 (2019)
Gu, Q., Yung, P.-L.: A new formula for the \(L^p\) norm. J. Funct. Anal. 281, 109075–19 (2021)
Maz’ya, V. G., Shaposhnikova, T.: On the Bourgain, Brezis, and Mironescu theorem concerning limiting embeddings of fractional Sobolev spaces. J. Funct. Anal. 195(2), 230–238 (2002)
Rao, M. M., Ren, Z. D.: Theory of Orlicz spaces. Monographs and Textbooks in Pure and Applied Mathematics 146, xii-449 pp. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York (1991)
Funding
Open access publishing supported by the National Technical Library in Prague.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
M. Křepela was supported by the project OPVVV CAAS CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000778.
Z. Mihula was supported by the project OPVVV CAAS CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000778 and by the Grant GAČR P201/21-01976S.
J. Soria was partially supported by Grants PID2020-113048GB-I00 funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033, and Grupo UCM-970966.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Křepela, M., Mihula, Z. & Soria, J. A Weak-Type Expression of the Orlicz Modular. Mediterr. J. Math. 20, 113 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00009-023-02315-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00009-023-02315-3