Abstract
In this paper we prove a conjecture by P.-L. Lions on maximal regularity of \(L^q\)-type for periodic solutions to \(-\Delta u + |Du|^\gamma = f\) in \(\mathbb {R}^d\), under the (sharp) assumption that \(q > d \frac{\gamma -1}{\gamma }\).
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
We address here the so-called problem of maximal \(L^q\)-regularity for equations of the form
where \(\gamma > 1\), \(f : \mathbb {R}^d \rightarrow \mathbb {R}\) is 1-periodic (i.e. \(f(x+z) = f(x)\) for all \(x \in \mathbb {R}^d\), \(z \in \mathbb {Z}^d\)), \(d \geqq 1\); that is,
Q being the d-dimensional unit cube \((-1/2,1/2)^d\). This regularity problem has been proposed by P.-L. Lions in a series of seminars and lectures (e.g. [31, 32]), where he conjectured its general validity under the assumption that
Some special cases have been addressed in these seminars, but the general problem has remained so far unsolved, to the best of our knowledge. We present here a proof of (M) + (A), under the sole restriction \(q > 2\) (which is always realized when \(\gamma > d/(d-2)\)).
Equations of the form (1) are prototypes of semilinear uniformly elliptic equations with superlinear growth in the gradient, and arise for example in ergodic stochastic control [4] and in the theory of growth of surfaces [25]. The study of regularity of their solutions has recently received a renewed interest in the theory of Mean Field Games [11, 28]. There is a vast literature on such equations and more general quasilinear problems. While the existence of classical (or strong) solutions was investigated first (see for example [3, 26, 29, 38]), the attention has since been largely focused on the existence (and uniqueness) of solutions \(u \in W^{1, \gamma }(Q)\) satisfying (1) in the weak or generalized sense (typically with Dirichlet boundary conditions; see, for example, [1, 6, 8,9,10, 14, 18, 22, 35] and more recent works [2, 7, 16, 17]. It has been observed that due to the superlinear nature of the problem, its (weak) solvability requires \(f \in L^q\), where
Such a condition has been improved in the finer scale of Lorentz-Morrey spaces, and end-point situations typically require additional smallness assumptions [19, 23]. It is worth observing that many results in the literature cover the case \(1 < \gamma \leqq 2\); that is, when the gradient term has at most natural growth. General results in the full range \(\gamma > 1\), based on methods from nonlinear potential theory, appeared quite recently in [34, 36, 37].
Roughly speaking, properties (M)+(A) say that if f belongs to a sufficiently small Lebesgue space, then solutions should enjoy much better regularity than \(W^{1,\gamma }\), namely, be in \(W^{1, q \gamma }(Q)\) (and even in \(W^{2,q}(Q)\), by standard Calderón-Zygmund theory). Still, additional gradient regularity is typically achieved via methods that require much stronger hypotheses on the summability of f, being based on the classical or weak maximum principle: viscosity theory indeed requires f to be bounded [24], while the Aleksandrov-Bakel’man-Pucci estimate needs \(f \in L^d\), as in [33]. The situation is even worse when \(\gamma > 2\), as one observes that general weak solutions are just Hölder continuous [15], so one has to select u in a suitable class.
Here, we look at solutions to (1) that can be approximated by classical ones. Therefore, we will prove (M) in the form of an a priori estimate. It is known that in such a form, (M) cannot be expected in general if
as described in Remark 1. On the other hand, P.-L. Lions indicated that (M)+(A) can be obtained in some particular cases. First, when \(\gamma = 2\), the so-called Hopf-Cole transformation \(v= e^{-u}\) reduces (1) to a linear elliptic equation, and one has the result employing (maximal) elliptic regularity and the Harnack inequality. Special cases \(d=1\) and \(\gamma < d / (d-1)\) can be also treated. As a final suggestion, an integral version of the Bernstein method [30] could be implemented to prove (M) when q is close enough to d (see also [27], and [5] for further refinements of this technique), but the full regime (A) seems to be out of range using these sole arguments.
The Bernstein method is the starting point of our work. It consists in shifting the attention from the equation (1) for u to the equation for a suitable function of \(|Du|^2\), i.e. \(w=g(|Du|^2)\); if g is properly chosen, the equation for w enjoys a strong degree of coercivity with respect to w itself, which stems from uniform ellipticity and the coercivity of the gradient term in (1). By a delicate combination of these two regularising effects, it is possible to produce a crucial estimate on superlevel sets of |Du|, i.e.
for any \(k \geqq 0\), where \(\omega (t) \rightarrow 0\) as \(t \rightarrow 0\). This inequality again reflects the superlinear nature of the problem, being the exponents in the two sides unbalanced. Nevertheless, it is possible to control on \(\Vert |Du|^\gamma \Vert _{L^q}\) as follows: (2) guarantees that \(\int _{\{|Du| \geqq k\}} \Big (|Du| - k\Big )^{\gamma q}\) is either belonging to a neighborhood of zero, or to an unbounded interval (for k large enough, but independent of \(\Vert |Du|^\gamma \Vert _{L^q}\)). By the fact that \(k \mapsto \int _{\{|Du| \geqq k\}} \Big (|Du| - k\Big )^{\gamma q}\) is continuous and vanishes as \(k \rightarrow \infty \), the second case can be ruled out, and boundedness of \(\int _{\{|Du| \geqq k\}} \Big (|Du| - k\Big )^{\gamma q}\) can be then recovered up to \(k = 0\). This second key step has been inspired by an interesting argument that appeared in [20] (see also [21]), where \(W^{1,2}\) estimates of (powers of) u are obtained arguing similarly on superlevel sets of |u|.
Our result reads as follows:
Theorem 1.1
Let \(f \in C^1(Q)\), \(d \geqq 3\), \(\gamma > 1 \) and
For all \(M > 0\), there exists \(K = K(M, \gamma , q, d)> 0\) such that if \(u \in C^3(Q)\) is a classical solution to (1) and
then
We stress that our approach is not perturbative, in the sense that the gradient term is not treated as a perturbation of a uniformly elliptic operator (which would be natural under the growth condition \(\gamma < 2\)), nor vice-versa. It applies also to equations that have the gradient term with reversed sign (since there are no sign constraints on f, just reverse \(u \mapsto -u\)), and to solutions in a strong sense (Remark 3). As far as periodicity is concerned, it is common in applications to ergodic control and Mean Field Games. The study of (M) in cases where u satisfies boundary conditions, or a local version of the estimate, will be matter of future work. We also conjecture that (M) holds in the limiting case \(q = d \frac{\gamma -1}{\gamma }\) under an additional smallness assumption on M, which controls the norm of \(\Vert f\Vert _q\). This would be coherent with known results on the existence of weak solutions. Nevertheless, it does not seem evident how to adapt our proof to cover this end-point case.
Finally, our technique does not apply to the parabolic counterpart of (M). In this direction, some results based on rather different duality methods developed in [12] to get Lipschitz regularity, have been obtained in [13].
2 Proof of the Main Theorem
\(\partial _i\), D, \(D^2\) will denote the partial derivative in the i-th direction, the gradient, and the Hessian operator respectively. For the sake of brevity, we will often drop the x-dependence of \(u, Du, \ldots \), and the d-dimensional Lebsesgue measure \(\mathrm {d} x\) under the integral sign. \((x)^+ = \max \{x,0\}\) will denote the positive part of x, and for any \(p > 1\), \(p' = p/(p-1)\). For any measurable and 1-periodic set \(\Omega \subseteq \mathbb {R}^d\), \(|\Omega |\) will be the Lebesgue measure of its representative set, i.e. \(|\Omega | = \int _{\Omega \cap Q} \mathrm {d}x\).
This section is devoted to the proof of Theorem 1.1, which will be based on the following lemma:
Lemma 2.1
There exists \(\delta \in (0,1)\) (depending on \(\gamma , q, d\)) and \(\omega : [0,+\infty ) \rightarrow [0,+\infty )\) (depending on \(M, \gamma , q, d\)) such that
and for all \(k \geqq 1\),
We postpone the proof of the lemma, and show first how (3) yields the conclusion of Theorem 1.1. Setting \(Y_k := \int _Q \left( \Big ( (1 + |Du|^2)^{\frac{1+\delta }{2} } - k \Big )^+\right) ^{\frac{q\gamma }{1+\delta }}\), then (3) reads as
Note that the function \(F:Z\longmapsto Z^\frac{d-2}{d} - Z\) has a unique maximizer \(Z^*=\left( \frac{d-2}{d}\right) ^{\frac{d}{2}}\) whose corresponding value is \(F(Z^*)= F^* > 0\) (which depends on d only). For any \(0\leqq \omega < F^*\) the equation
has two roots \(0< Z^-(\omega )<Z^*<Z^+(\omega )\). Since \(\lim _{t \rightarrow 0} \ \omega (t) = 0\), pick \(t^* = t^*(M, \gamma , p, d)\) such that \(\omega (t) < F^*\) for all \(t < t^*\). By Chebyshev’s inequality,
hence (4) yields the alternative
Since \(u \in C^3(Q)\), the function \(k\longmapsto Y_k\) is continuous and tends to zero as \(k\rightarrow \infty \) (it eventually vanishes for k large). Hence we deduce that
and finally,
The estimate on \(\Vert \Delta u\Vert _{L^p(Q)}\) is then straightforward.
Having proven Theorem 1.1, we now come back to the main estimate (3).
Proof of Lemma 2.1
Let \(w(x):=g(|Du(x)|^2)\), where \(g(s) =g_\delta (s)= \frac{2}{1+\delta }(1+s)^{\frac{1+\delta }{2}}\), \(\delta \in (0,1)\) to be chosen later. Note that, for any \(\delta \in (0,1)\), g enjoys the following properties: for all \(s \geqq 0\),
Note also that
(\(g, g', g''\) below will be always evaluated at \(|Du(x)|^2\)).
Define \(w_k=(w-k)^+\in W^{1,\infty }(Q)\) and set \(\Omega _k:=\{w>k\}\). We now use \(\varphi = \varphi ^{(j)} = -2\partial _j(g' \, \partial _j u \, w_k^\beta )\), \(j = 1, \ldots , d\) and \(\beta > 1\) to be chosen later as test functions in the Hamilton–Jacobi equation. First, integrating by parts and substituting \(\partial _ i w=2g'Du\cdot D\partial _i u\),
Moreover, again integrating by parts,
Noting that \(w_k^{\beta -1} Dw = w_k^{\beta -1} Dw_k\) on Q, we end up with
Note also that in (7) integrating on Q and on \(\Omega _k\) is the same, by the fact that \(w_k\) vanishes on \(Q {\setminus } \Omega _k\). We use first Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, the equation (1) and the inequality \((a-b)^2\geqq \frac{a^2}{2}-2b^2\) for every \(a,b\in \mathbb {R}\) to get
Moreover, again by Cauchy–Schwarz inequality (be careful about \(g'' < 0\)) and (6),
The above inequalities then yield
Note that for \(\gamma >1\) it holds that
and hence, we are allowed to conclude
This gives, going back to (7) and substituting \((1+|Du|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}=\left( \frac{\delta +1}{2}w\right) ^{\frac{1}{1+\delta }}\),
where \(c_1 = c_1(\delta , d, \gamma ) > 0\).
We now estimate the five terms on the right hand side of the previous inequality. The first three terms are somehow similar: using Cauchy–Schwarz inequality and that \(2sg''\leqq g'\), we have for some \(c_2 = c_2(\delta ,d) > 0\) that
At this stage, we make some choices for the coefficients. Recalling that \( \frac{d}{\gamma '} < q\), we take
Note that \(\frac{d}{\gamma '}< p < q\). Assuming that \(p > 2\) (which is always true when \(\gamma >\frac{d}{d-2}\), otherwise see the remark at the end of the proof), we have \(\beta > 1\) whenever \(\delta \) is close enough to zero. Moreover,
Therefore, we apply Hölder’s inequality (with conjugate exponents p/2 and \(p/(p-2)\)) and Young’s inequality, and then \(w_k\leqq w\) together with (11) to obtain
where \(c_3 = c_3(\delta , d, \gamma , p) > 0\). Plugging the previous inequality into (9) yields
The fourth term in (8) is a bit more delicate. We first use that \(s^{\frac{1}{2}}g'(s)\leqq (1+s)^{\frac{\delta }{2}}\), in conjection with Hölder’s and Young’s inequality, to get
where \(c_4 = c_4(\delta ,d,\gamma ,\beta ) > 0\). Since \(k \geqq 1\), we have \(w \geqq 1\) on \(\Omega _k\). Hence, recalling also (11),
so
We now focus on the fifth term in (8). By Young’s inequality,
Furthermore, letting
we get (it holds that \(s^{\frac{1}{2}} \leqq g^{\frac{1}{1+\delta }}\))
Plugging the previous inequality into (15) and using Young’s inequality again leads to
for some \(c_5 = c_5(\delta , d, \gamma , p) > 0\).
Plug now (13), (14) and (16) into (8) to obtain
Sobolev’s inequality, related to the continuous embedding of \(W^{1,2}(Q)\) into \(L^{\frac{2d}{d-2}}(Q)\), gives (for \(c_6 = c_6 (d, \delta , \gamma , p)\))
hence
We finally choose \(\delta > 0\) small enough so that \(\delta \frac{p q}{q-p} < 1\). Recall that \(p < q\), so, using Hölder’s and Young’s inequalities repeatedly, we obtain
Recalling that \((\beta +1)\frac{d}{d-2} = \frac{q\gamma }{1+\delta }\) and \(\Vert f\Vert _{L^q(Q)} + \Vert Du\Vert _{L^1(Q)} \leqq M\), we obtain
Replacing \(w_k\) by its definition provides the assertion (up to an additional constant in front of \(\omega \)).
If the choice of p in (10) does not satisfy \(p > 2\), just pick \({\tilde{p}}\) so that \(p< {\tilde{p}} < q\) and \({\tilde{p}} > 2\), and proceed in the same way. Then, (12) becomes
so it suffices once again to apply Hölder’s and Young’s inequalities to get the same assertion (with an additional term in \( \omega \)). \(\square \)
3 Further Remarks
Remark. 1
General failure of (M) when \(q \leqq d \frac{\gamma -1}{\gamma }\). In the critical case \(q = d \frac{\gamma -1}{\gamma }\) one may consider the family of functions \(v_\varepsilon \) defined as follows for \(\varepsilon \in (0,1]\): let \(\chi \in C^\infty _0\big ((1,+\infty )\big )\) be a non-negative cutoff function, \(\chi \equiv 1\) on \([2,+\infty )\), and \(v_\varepsilon (x) = v_\varepsilon (|x|)\), where
Then, on \(B_{1/2} := \{|x| < 1/2\}\),
and \(v_\varepsilon = 0\) on \(\partial B_{1/2}\). Therefore, there exists \({\overline{M}} > 0\), depending on \(c, d, \gamma , \chi \) only, such that
Note that the example is meaningful only if \(\gamma > \frac{d}{d-1}\), that is when \(d \frac{\gamma -1}{\gamma }> 1\). Note also that though \(v_\varepsilon \) is not periodic, being smooth on \(B_{1/2}\) and vanishing on \(\partial B_{1/2}\), it is straightforward to produce similar examples in the periodic setting. Finally, different choices of the truncation \(\chi (|x|) = \chi _\varepsilon (|x|)\) lead to counterexamples in the regime \(q < d \frac{\gamma -1}{\gamma }\).
Note however that existence of weak solutions to the viscous Hamilton–Jacobi equation (1) can be obtained when \(f \in L^q(Q)\) and \(q = d \frac{\gamma -1}{\gamma }\) (at least for the Dirichlet problem), provided that \(\Vert f\Vert _{L^q}\) is small, see e.g. [18, 20]. Therefore, we do not exclude that (M) holds even when \(q = d \frac{\gamma -1}{\gamma }\), under extra smallness assumptions on \(\Vert f\Vert _{L^q}\).
Remark. 2
\(d=1,2\). Theorem 1.1 is stated in dimension \(d \geqq 3\), but the proof for \(d = 1,2\) follows identical lines. As it usually happens, the point is that in the latter case \(W^{1,2}(Q)\) is continuously embedded into \(L^p(Q)\) for all finite \(p \geqq 1\), and not only into \(L^{\frac{2d}{d-2}}(Q)\).
Remark. 3
Less regularity of u. Theorem 1.1 holds more in general for (strong) solutions \(u \in W^{2,q} \cap W^{1, \gamma q}(Q)\) of the equation. Indeed, consider a sequence \(\psi _\varepsilon \) of standard compactly supported regularizing kernels, and observe that \(u_\varepsilon = u \star \psi _\varepsilon \) satisfies
For \(0 < \varepsilon \leqq \varepsilon _0\),
so applying Theorem 1.1 to \(u_\varepsilon \) and passing to the limit \(\varepsilon \rightarrow 0\) yields
More generally, Theorem 1.1 continues to hold for solutions that can be obtained as limits of smooth approximations.
Remark. 4
More general Hamiltonians. Theorem 1.1 can be easily generalized to more general equations of the form
where \(H : \mathbb {R}^d \rightarrow \mathbb {R}\) satisfies, e.g.,
for some \(c_1, c_2 \in \mathbb {R}\) and \(\gamma > 1\). Indeed, any u solving (19) also solves
Since \(\Vert f + f_H\Vert _{L^q(Q)} \leqq \Vert f \Vert _{L^q(Q)} + c_2\), and \(c_2\) does not depend on u, it suffices to apply Theorem 1.1 (which is easily proven to hold for any \(c_1 \in \mathbb {R}\)) with \(f + f_H\).
References
Alaa, N.E., Pierre, M.: Weak solutions of some quasilinear elliptic equations with data measures. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 24(1), 23–35, 1993
Alvino, A., Ferone, V., Mercaldo, A.: Sharp a priori estimates for a class of nonlinear elliptic equations with lower order terms. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) 194(4), 1169–1201, 2015
Amann, H., Crandall, M.G.: On some existence theorems for semi-linear elliptic equations. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 27(5), 779–790, 1978
Arisawa, M., Lions, P.-L.: On ergodic stochastic control. Commun. Partial Differ. Equ. 23(11–12), 2187–2217, 1998
Bardi, M., Perthame, B.: Uniform estimates for some degenerating quasilinear elliptic equations and a bound on the Harnack constant for linear equations. Asymptotic Anal. 4(1), 1–16, 1991
Barles, G., Porretta, A.: Uniqueness for unbounded solutions to stationary viscous Hamilton–Jacobi equations. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5) 5(1), 107–136, 2006
Betta, M.F., Di Nardo, R., Mercaldo, A., Perrotta, A.: Gradient estimates and comparison principle for some nonlinear elliptic equations. Commun. Pure Appl. Anal. 14(3), 897–922, 2015
Boccardo, L., Murat, F., Puel, J.-P.: Résultats d’existence pour certains problèmes elliptiques quasilinéaires. Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (4) 11(2), 213–235, 1984
Boccardo, L., Murat, F., Puel, J.-P.: \(L^\infty \) estimate for some nonlinear elliptic partial differential equations and application to an existence result. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 23(2), 326–333, 1992
Cho, K., Choe, H.J.: Nonlinear degenerate elliptic partial differential equations with critical growth conditions on the gradient. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 123(12), 3789–3796, 1995
Cirant, M.: Stationary focusing mean-field games. Commun. Partial Differ. Equ. 41(8), 1324–1346, 2016
Cirant, M., Goffi, A.: Lipschitz regularity for viscous Hamilton–Jacobi equations with \(L^p\) terms. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire 37(4), 757–784, 2020
Cirant, M., Goffi, A.: Maximal \({L}^q\)-regularity for parabolic Hamilton–Jacobi equations and applications to Mean Field Games (2020). arXiv:2007.14873
Dall’Aglio, A., Giachetti, D., Puel, J.-P.: Nonlinear elliptic equations with natural growth in general domains. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) 181(4), 407–426, 2002
Dall’Aglio, A., Porretta, A.: Local and global regularity of weak solutions of elliptic equations with superquadratic Hamiltonian. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 367(5), 3017–3039, 2015
Della Pietra, F.: Existence results for non-uniformly elliptic equations with general growth in the gradient. Differ. Integral Equ. 21(9–10), 821–836, 2008
Della Pietra, F., Gavitone, N.: Sharp estimates and existence for anisotropic elliptic problems with general growth in the gradient. Z. Anal. Anwend. 35(1), 61–80, 2016
Ferone, V., Murat, F.: Nonlinear problems having natural growth in the gradient: an existence result when the source terms are small. Nonlinear Anal. 42(7, Ser. A: Theory Methods), 1309–1326 (2000)
Ferone, V., Murat, F.: Nonlinear elliptic equations with natural growth in the gradient and source terms in Lorentz spaces. J. Differ. Equ. 256(2), 577–608, 2014
Grenon, N., Murat, F., Porretta, A.: Existence and a priori estimate for elliptic problems with subquadratic gradient dependent terms. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 342(1), 23–28, 2006
Grenon, N., Murat, F., Porretta, A.: A priori estimates and existence for elliptic equations with gradient dependent terms. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5) 13(1), 137–205, 2014
Grenon, N., Trombetti, C.: Existence results for a class of nonlinear elliptic problems with \(p\)-growth in the gradient. Nonlinear Anal. 52(3), 931–942, 2003
Hansson, K., Maz’ya, V.G., Verbitsky, I.E.: Criteria of solvability for multidimensional Riccati equations. Ark. Mat. 37(1), 87–120, 1999
Ishii, H., Lions, P.-L.: Viscosity solutions of fully nonlinear second-order elliptic partial differential equations. J. Differ. Equ. 83(1), 26–78, 1990
Krug, J., Spohn, H.: Universality classes for deterministic surface growth. Phys. Rev. A 38, 4271–4283, 1988
Ladyzhenskaya, O.A., Ural’tseva, N.N.: Linear and Quasilinear Elliptic Equations. Academic Press, New York 1968
Lasry, J.-M., Lions, P.-L.: Nonlinear elliptic equations with singular boundary conditions and stochastic control with state constraints. I. The model problem. Math. Ann. 283(4), 583–630, 1989
Lasry, J.-M., Lions, P.-L.: Mean field games. Jpn. J. Math. 2(1), 229–260, 2007
Lions, P.-L.: Résolution de problèmes elliptiques quasilinéaires. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 74(4), 335–353, 1980
Lions, P.-L.: Quelques remarques sur les problèmes elliptiques quasilinéaires du second ordre. J. Anal. Math. 45, 234–254, 1985
Lions, P.-L.: Recorded video of Séminaire de Mathématiques appliquées at Collége de France. https://www.college-de-france.fr/site/pierre-louis-lions/seminar-2014-11-14-11h15.htm, 14 November 2014
Lions, P.-L.: On mean field games. In: Seminar at the conference “Topics in Elliptic and Parabolic PDEs", Napoli, 11–12 September 2014
Maugeri, A., Palagachev, D.K., Softova, L.G.: Elliptic and Parabolic Equations with Discontinuous Coefficients. Mathematical Research, vol. 109. Wiley-VCH Verlag Berlin GmbH, Berlin 2000
Mengesha, T., Phuc, N.C.: Quasilinear Riccati type equations with distributional data in Morrey space framework. J. Differ. Equ. 260(6), 5421–5449, 2016
Messano, B.: Symmetrization results for classes of nonlinear elliptic equations with \(q\)-growth in the gradient. Nonlinear Anal. 64(12), 2688–2703, 2006
Phuc, N.C.: Morrey global bounds and quasilinear Riccati type equations below the natural exponent. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 102(1), 99–123, 2014
Phuc, N.C.: Nonlinear Muckenhoupt-Wheeden type bounds on reifenberg flat domains, with applications to quasilinear Riccati type equations. Adv. Math. 250, 387–419, 2014
Serrin, J.: The problem of dirichlet for quasilinear elliptic differential equations with many independent variables. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Math. Phys. Sci. 264(1153), 413–496, 1969
Acknowledgements
The authors are members of the Gruppo Nazionale per l’Analisi Matematica, la Probabilità e le loro Applicazioni (GNAMPA) of the Istituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica (INdAM). This work has been partially supported by the Fondazione CaRiPaRo Project “Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations: Asymptotic Problems and Mean-Field Games”.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Universitá degli Studi di Padova within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by P.-L. Lions.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
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
Cirant, M., Goffi, A. On the Problem of Maximal \(L^q\)-regularity for Viscous Hamilton–Jacobi Equations. Arch Rational Mech Anal 240, 1521–1534 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00205-021-01641-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00205-021-01641-8