Abstract
We study asymptotic behaviour of positive ground state solutions of the nonlinear Schrödinger equation
where \(N\ge 3\) is an integer, \(2^{*}=\frac{2N}{N-2}\) is the Sobolev critical exponent, \(2<q<2^*\) and \(\lambda >0\) is a parameter. It is known that as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\), after a rescaling the ground state solutions of \((P_\lambda )\) converge to a particular solution of the critical Emden-Fowler equation \(-\Delta u=u^{2^*-1}\). We establish a novel sharp asymptotic characterisation of such a rescaling, which depends in a non-trivial way on the space dimension \(N=3\), \(N=4\) or \(N \ge 5\). We also discuss a connection of these results with a mass constrained problem associated to \((P_{\lambda })\). Unlike previous work of this type, our method is based on the Nehari-Pohožaev manifold minimization, which allows to control the \(L^{2}\) norm of the groundstates.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction and notations
We study standing–wave solutions of the nonlinear Schrödinger equation with attractive double–power nonlinearity
where \(N\ge 3\) is an integer and \(2<q<p\). A theory of NLS with combined power nonlinearities was developed by Tao, Visan and Zhang [27] and attracted a lot of attention during the past decade (cf. [3, 4, 11] and further references therein).
A standing–wave solutions of (1.1) with a frequency \(\omega >0\) is a finite energy solution in the form
After a rescaling
we obtain the equation for u in the form
where \(\lambda =\omega ^{-\frac{p-q}{p-2}}>0\).
When \(p\le 2^*\), where \(2^*=\frac{2N}{N-2}\) is the Sobolev critical exponent, weak solutions of (1.2) correspond to critical points of the associated energy functional \(I_\lambda : H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\), defined by
By a ground state solution of (1.2) we understand a solution \(u_\lambda \in H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) such that \(I_\lambda (u_\lambda )\le I_\lambda (u)\) for every nontrivial solution u of (1.2).
In the subcritical case \(p<2^*\), the existence of a positive radially symmetric exponentially decaying ground state solution of (1.2) is the result of Berestycki and Lions [9]. If \(2^*\le q<p\) there are no finite energy solutions of (1.2), which follows from Pohžaev identity.
In this paper we are interested in the critical case \(p=2^*\). We study the problem
![figure a](http://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00209-023-03271-0/MediaObjects/209_2023_3271_Figa_HTML.png)
where \(q\in (2,2^*)\) and \(\lambda >0\) is a parameter. The following result gives a characterisation of the existence of ground states for \((P_\lambda )\).
Theorem 1.1
Problem \((P_\lambda )\) admits a positive radially symmetric exponentially decreasing ground state solution \(u_\lambda \in H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\cap C^2({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)\) provided that:
-
\(N\ge 4\), \(q\in (2,2^*)\) and \(\lambda >0\);
-
\(N=3\), \(q\in (4,6)\) and \(\lambda >0\);
-
\(N=3\) and \(q\in (2,4]\) and \(\lambda \) is sufficiently large.
For \(N\ge 4\), Theorem 1.1 is established by Akahori, Ibrahim, Kikuchi and Nawa [2], Alves, Souto and Montenegro [8] and Liu, Liao and Tang [21]. In the case \(N=3\), Theorem 1.1 is proved in the above mentioned papers for \(q\in (2,6)\) and large \(\lambda >0\). Theorem 1.1 for \(N=3\), \(q\in (4,6)\) and every \(\lambda >0\) was proved in Zhang and Zou [30, Theorem 1.1] (see also Li and Ma [19] or Akahori et al. [4, Proposition 1.1]).
Very recently, Akahori, Ibrahim, Kikuchi and Nawa [5], and Wei and Wu [29] refined the results concerning the existence and non-existence of ground states to \((P_\lambda )\) when \(N=3\). Although their definition of the ground state is different from that in our paper, they established the existence of a \(\lambda _*>0\) such that \((P_\lambda )\) has a ground state if \(\lambda >\lambda _*\) and no ground state if \(\lambda <\lambda _*\) when \(N = 3\) and \(q \in (2, 4]\). Moreover, when \(N=3\) and \(\lambda =\lambda _*\), \((P_\lambda )\) has a ground state if \(q\in (2,4)\).
Concerning the uniqueness, Akahori et al. [1, 3, 4] and Coles and Gustafson [11] proved that the radial ground state \(u_\lambda \) is unique and nondegenerate for all small \(\lambda >0\) when \(N\ge 5\) and \(q\in (2,2^*)\) [4, Theorem 1.1] or \(N=3\) and \(q\in (4,2^*)\) [11, 1, Theorem 1.1]; and for all large \(\lambda \) when \(N\ge 3\) and \(2+4/N<q<2^*\) [3, Proposition 2.4]. Very recently, Akahori and Murata [6, 7] established the uniqueness and nondegeneracy of the ground state solutions for small \(\lambda >0\) in the case \(N = 4\).
In general, the uniqueness of positive radial solutions of \((P_\lambda )\) is not expected. Dávila, del Pino and Guerra [12] constructed multiple positive solutions of (1.2) for a sufficiently large \(\lambda \) and slightly subcritical \(p<2^*\). A numerical simulation in the same paper suggested nonuniqueness in the critical case \(p=2^*\). Wei and Wu [29] recently proved that there exist two positive solutions to \((P_\lambda )\) when \(N = 3\), \(q \in (2, 4)\) and \(\lambda > 0\) is sufficiently large, as [12] has suggested. Chen, Dávila and Guerra [10] proved the existence of arbitrary large number of bubble tower positive solutions of (1.2) in the slightly supercritical case when \(q<2^*<p=2^*+\varepsilon \), provided that \(\varepsilon >0\) is sufficiently small. However, if \(3\le N\le 6\) and \(\frac{N+2}{N-2}<q<2^*\) then Pucci and Serrin [25, Theorem 1] proved that \((P_\lambda )\) has at most one positive radial solution (see also [2, Theorem C.1]).
Existence of a positive radial solution to (1.2) in the supercritical case \(2<q<2^*\le p\) for sufficiently large \(\lambda \) was established earlier by Ferrero and Gazzola [13, Theorem 5] using ODE’s methods, however the variational characterisation of these solutions seems open. They also proved that for \(2<q<2^*<p\) and small \(\lambda >0\) Eq. (1.2) has no positive solutions.
Before we formulate the result in this paper we shall clarify the notations.
Notations. Throughout the paper, we assume \(N\ge 3\). The standard norm on the Lebesgue space \(L^p({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)\) is denoted by \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _p\). The space \(H^1({{\mathbb {R}}}^{N})\) is the usual Sobolev space with the norm \(\Vert u\Vert _{H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)}=\Vert \nabla u\Vert _2+\Vert u\Vert _2\), while \(H_r^1({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)=\{u\in H^1({{\mathbb {R}}}^N): u\;\text {is radially symmetric}\}\). The homogeneous Sobolev space \(D^1({\mathbb {R}}^{N})\) is defined as the completion of \(C^\infty _c({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)\) with respect to the norm \(\Vert \nabla u\Vert _2\).
For any small \(\lambda >0\), any \(q\in (2,2^*)\), and two nonnegative functions \(f(\lambda , q)\) and \(g(\lambda , q)\), throughout the paper we write:
-
\(f(\lambda ,q)\lesssim g(\lambda ,q)\) or \(g(\lambda ,q)\gtrsim f(\lambda ,q)\) if there exists a positive constant C independent of \(\lambda \) and q such that \(f(\lambda ,q)\le Cg(\lambda ,q)\),
-
\(f(\lambda ,q)\sim g(\lambda ,q)\) if \(f(\lambda ,q)\lesssim g(\lambda ,q)\) and \(f(\lambda ,q)\gtrsim g(\lambda ,q)\).
\(B_R\) denotes the open ball in \({{\mathbb {R}}}^N\) with radius \(R>0\) and centred at the origin, \(|B_R|\) and \(B_R^c\) denote its Lebesgue measure and its complement in \({{\mathbb {R}}}^N\), respectively. As usual, \(c,c_1\) etc., denote positive constants which are independent of \(\lambda \) and whose exact values are irrelevant.
2 Main result
In this paper we are interested in the limit asymptotic profile of the ground states \(u_\lambda \) of the critical problem \((P_\lambda )\), and in the asymptotic behaviour of different norms of \(u_\lambda \), as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\) and \(\lambda \rightarrow \infty \). Of particular importance is the \(L^2\)–mass of the ground state
which plays a key role in the analysis of stability of the corresponding standing–wave solution of the time–dependent NLS (1.1), and in the study of the mass constrained problems associated to \((P_\lambda )\), cf. Lewin and Nodari [17, Sect. 3.2] and Sect. 3 below for a discussion.
In the subcritical case \(p<2^*\), it is intuitively clear and not difficult to show (using e.g. Lyapunov–Schmidt type arguments) that as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\), ground states of (1.2) converge to the unique radial positive ground state of the limit equation
In the critical case \(p=2^*\), by Pohožaev identity, the formal limit Eq. (2.1) has no nontrvial finite energy solutions. In fact, we will see later that \(u_\lambda \) converges as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\) to a multiple of the delta-function at the origin.
Recently Akahori et al. [4, Proposition 2.1] proved that after a rescaling, the correct limit equation for \((P_\lambda )\) as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\) is given by the critical Emden-Fowler equation
Recall that all radial solutions of (2.2) are given by the Talenti function
and the family of its rescalings
Note that while \((P_\lambda )\) and the associated energy \(I_\lambda \) are well–posed in \(H^1({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)\), the limit critical Emden-Fowler Eq. (2.2) is well–posed in \(D^1({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)\not \subset H^1({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)\). Moreover, in the dimensions \(N=3,4\) the ground states \(U_\rho \not \in H^1({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)\), so small perturbation arguments are not (easily) available for the study of limit behaviour of \(u_\lambda \).
Akahori et al. [4, Proposition 2.1] proved, using variational methods, that the rescaled family of ground state solutions of \((P_\lambda )\), defined as
converges as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\) in \(D^1({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)\) to the \(U_{\rho _*}\), where \(\Vert U_{\rho _*}\Vert _\infty =1\). This result was used in the proof of the uniqueness and nondegenaracy of the ground states of \((P_\lambda )\) for \(N\ge 5\) in [4], and for \(N=3\) in [1]. Very recently, Akahori and Murata [6, 7] obtained the uniqueness and nondegeneracy of the ground state solutions in the case \(N = 4\). The rescaling \(\mu _\lambda \) in (2.5) is implicit.
Our main result in this work is an explicit asymptotic characterisation of a rescaling which ensures the convergence of ground states of \((P_\lambda )\) to a ground state of the critical Emden–Fowler Eq. (2.2). More precisely, we prove the following.
Theorem 2.1
Let \(\{u_\lambda \}\) be a family of ground states of \((P_\lambda )\).
- (a):
-
If \(N\ge 5\) and \(q\in (2,2^*)\), then for small \(\lambda >0\)
$$\begin{aligned}{} & {} u_\lambda (0)\sim \lambda ^{-\frac{1}{q-2}}, \end{aligned}$$(2.6)$$\begin{aligned}{} & {} \Vert \nabla u_\lambda \Vert ^2_2\sim \Vert u_\lambda \Vert _{2^*}^{2^*}\sim 1, \quad \Vert u_\lambda \Vert _2^2\sim (2^*-q)\lambda ^{\frac{2^*-2}{q-2}}, \quad \Vert u_\lambda \Vert ^q_q\sim \lambda ^{\frac{2^*-q}{q-2}}. \end{aligned}$$(2.7)Moreover, as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\), the rescaled family of ground states
$$\begin{aligned} v_\lambda (x)=\lambda ^\frac{1}{q-2}u_\lambda \big (\lambda ^\frac{2^*-2}{2(q-2)}x\big ), \end{aligned}$$(2.8)converges to \(U_{\rho _0}\) in \(H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) with
$$\begin{aligned} \rho _0=\left( \frac{2(2^*-q)\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_1|^q}{q(2^*-2) \int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_1|^2}\right) ^{\frac{2^*-2}{2(q-2)}}, \end{aligned}$$(2.9)and the convergence rate is described by the relation
$$\begin{aligned} \Vert \nabla U_{\rho _0}\Vert _2^2-\Vert \nabla v_\lambda \Vert _2^2\sim (q-2)\lambda ^{\frac{2^*-2}{q-2}}. \end{aligned}$$(2.10) - (b):
-
If \(N=4\) and \(q\in (2,4)\) or \(N=3\) and \(q\in (4,6)\), then for small \(\lambda >0\)
$$\begin{aligned} u_\lambda (0)\sim \left\{ \begin{array}{lcl} \lambda ^{-\frac{N-2}{2(q-2)}}(\ln \frac{1}{\lambda })^{\frac{N-2}{2(q-2)}}&{}\text {if}&{}N=4, \\ \lambda ^{-\frac{N-2}{q-4}}&{}\text {if}&{}N=3, \end{array}\right. \end{aligned}$$(2.11)$$\begin{aligned} \Vert \nabla u_\lambda \Vert ^2_2\sim \Vert u_\lambda \Vert _{2^*}^{2^*} \sim 1, \end{aligned}$$(2.12)$$\begin{aligned} \Vert u_\lambda \Vert _2^2\sim \left\{ \begin{array}{lcl} \lambda ^{\frac{2}{q-2}}(\ln \frac{1}{\lambda })^{-\frac{4-q}{q-2}}&{}\text {if}&{}N=4,\\ \lambda ^{\frac{2}{q-4}}&{}\text {if}&{}N=3, \end{array}\right. \end{aligned}$$(2.13)$$\begin{aligned} \Vert u_\lambda \Vert _q^q\sim \left\{ \begin{array}{lcl} \lambda ^{\frac{4-q}{q-2}}(\ln \frac{1}{\lambda })^{-\frac{4-q}{q-2}}&{}\text {if}&{}N=4,\\ \lambda ^{\frac{6-q}{q-4}}&{}\text {if}&{}N=3. \end{array}\right. \end{aligned}$$(2.14)Moreover, there exists \(\xi _\lambda \in (0,+\infty )\) verifying
$$\begin{aligned} \xi _\lambda \sim \left\{ \begin{array}{lcl} \lambda ^{\frac{1}{q-2}}(\ln \frac{1}{\lambda })^{-\frac{1}{q-2}}&{}\text {if}&{}N=4,\\ \lambda ^{\frac{2}{q-4}}&{}\text {if}&{}N=3, \end{array}\right. \end{aligned}$$(2.15)such that as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\), the rescaled family of ground states
$$\begin{aligned} w_\lambda (x)=\xi _\lambda ^{\frac{N-2}{2}}u_\lambda (\xi _\lambda x), \end{aligned}$$(2.16)converges to \(U_1\) in \(D^{1}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\cap L^q({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) , and the convergence rate is described by the relation
$$\begin{aligned} \Vert \nabla U_1\Vert _2^2-\Vert \nabla w_\lambda \Vert _2^2\sim \left\{ \begin{array}{lcl} \lambda ^{\frac{2}{q-2}}\left( \ln \frac{1}{\lambda }\right) ^{-\frac{4-q}{q-2}} &{}\text {if}&{}N=4,\\ \lambda ^{\frac{2}{q-4}}&{}\text {if}&{}N=3. \end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$(2.17)
Similar type of results were recently obtained by Wei and Wu [28, 29]. In [29] the authors study solutions of \((P_\lambda )\) in the case \(N=3\) and \(q\in (2,4)\). In particular, [29, Theorem 1.2 and Propostion 2.4] proves that for sufficiently large \(\mu \) there exist a ground state and a blow-up positive radial solution of \((P_\lambda )\), and derives asymptotic estimates of type (2.112.122.132.14) on these two solutions. These results complement Theorem 2.1 above. In [28] the authors study normalised solutions of \((P_\lambda )\) for \(N\ge 3\) and general range \(q\in (2,2^*)\). In [28, Theorem 1.2 and Propostion 2.4] they show convergence up to a rescaling of the mountain–pass type normalised solution of \((P_\lambda )\) with a fixed mass to a normalised solution of the Emden–Fowler Eq. (2.2) and derive asymptotic estimates of the rescaling similar to the results in Theorem 2.1. It is not known in general (cf. Sect. 2) whether or not normalised solutions in [28] are (rescalings of) ground states in Theorem 2.1. In fact, comparison of estimates in [28] and Theorem 2.1 could potentially help to study this question. The techniques in our work and in [28, 29] are different.
Asymptotic characterisation of ground states of the equation with a double–well nonlinearity in the form
with \(\omega >0\) and \(2<q<p<+\infty \) was obtained by Moroz and Muratov [24], and by Lewin and Nodari [17]. Our proof of Theorem 2.1 is inspired by [24] yet the techniques in the present work are different. While the arguments in [24] are based on the Berestycki–Lions variational approach [9], the proofs in this work use minimization over Nehari manifold combined with Pohozaev’s identity estimates, and the Concentration Compactness Principle. The advantage of the Nehari–Pohožaev approach is that it allows to include the control the \(L^2\)–norm of the ground states, which is essential in the study of the mass constrained problems associated to \((P_\lambda )\). Our method could be extended to nonlinear Hartree type equations with nonlocal convolution terms which include competing scaling symmetries [23] and nonlocal Kirchhoff equations [22], while the Berestycki–Lions approach seems to be limited to local equations only.
In the case \(\lambda \rightarrow \infty \), the explicit rescaling
becomes relevant. Clearly, (2.19) transforms \((P_\lambda )\) into the equivalent equation
![figure b](http://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00209-023-03271-0/MediaObjects/209_2023_3271_Figb_HTML.png)
This suggests that as \(\lambda \rightarrow \infty \) the limit equation for \((R_\lambda )\) is given by the equation
which has the unique positive radial solution \(v_\infty \in H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\cap C^2({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)\). For completeness, we formulate the following result, which was proved by Fukuizumi [14, Lemma 4.2] (see also [3, Proposition 2.3]).
Theorem 2.2
Let \(N\ge 3\), \(q\in (2,2^*)\) and \(\{u_\lambda \}\) be a family of ground states of \((P_\lambda )\). Then as \(\lambda \rightarrow +\infty \), the rescaled family of ground states
converges in \(H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) to \(v_\infty \). Moreover, the convergence rate is described by the relation
The Nehari–Pohožaev variational arguments developed in this work can be adapted to show that the statement of Theorem 2.2 remains valid also for the Eq. (1.2) in whole range case of admissible exponents \(2<q<p\le 2^*\). We omit the details, as these mostly repeat (in simplified form) the arguments in our proof of Theorem 2.1 in the case \(N\ge 5\).
In the rest of the paper we concentrate on the case \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\). In Sect. 4 we obtain several preliminary estimates. In Sect. 5 we prove Theorem 2.1. However, before we proceed with the proof of Theorem 2.1, in the next section section we discuss a connection with the mass constrained problem.
3 A connection with the mass constrained problem
Consider the energy
constrained on
For \(2<q<p\le 2^*\), critical points of J on \(S_\rho \) satisfy
where \(\omega _\rho \in {{\mathbb {R}}}\) is an unknown Lagrange multiplier. A ground state of J on \(S_\rho \) is a minimal energy critical point of J on \(S_\rho \).
According to [26, Theorem 1.1] (see also [18, Theorem 1.4]), for all \(N\ge 3\), \(2<q<2^*\), and for all sufficiently small \(\rho >0\), the energy J admits a ground state \(v_\rho \) on \(S_\rho \). The ground state \(v_\rho \) is positive, radially symmetric and satisfies (3.1) with an \(\omega _\rho >0\). When \(2<q<2+4/N\) the ground state \(v_\rho \) is a local minimum of J on \(S_\rho \), while for \(2+4/N\le q<2^*\) the ground state \(v_\rho \) is a mountain–pass type critical point of J on \(S_\rho \).
Recall that (3.1) is equivalent to \((P_\lambda )\) after a rescaling
and thus the results of Theorem 2.1 in principle could be applicable to (3.1). Caution however is needed as it is a-priori unknown (and generally speaking isn’t always true [16, 17]) if a ground state of J on \(S_\rho \) corresponds, after the rescaling (3.2), to a ground state of the unconstrained problem \((P_{\lambda _\rho })\). Recall however that when \(3\le N\le 6\) and \(q\in (2^*-1,2^*)\), equation \((P_\lambda )\) has at most one positive radial solution [25, Theorem 1] (see also [2, Theorem C.1]). Hence a positive ground state of J on \(S_\rho \), when it exists, must coincide after the rescaling (3.2) with the unique positive solution of \((P_{\lambda _\rho })\). Even in this uniqueness scenario, the relation \(\rho \rightarrow \omega _\rho \) (and hence \(\rho \rightarrow \lambda _\rho \)) is apriori unknown. It turns out however that the asymptotic of \(\lambda _\rho \) as \(\rho \rightarrow 0\) can be recovered via the Pohožaev-Nehari identities and the estimates of the \(L^q\)-norm of \(u_{\lambda _\rho }\) from Theorem 2.1. The following result links Theorem 2.1 with the mass constrained problem.
Theorem 3.1
Assume that \(3\le N\le 6\) and \(q\in (2^*-1,2^*)\). Let \(\rho \rightarrow 0\), and \(v_\rho \in S_\rho \) be the the ground state of J on \(S_\rho \). Then
where \(u_{\lambda _\rho }\) is the ground state of \((P_{\lambda _\rho })\) and
here \(W_0(\cdot )\) is the principal branch of the Lambert W–function.Footnote 1 In particular, as \(\rho \rightarrow 0\), the ground states \(v_\rho \) converge to a ground state of the critical Emden–Fowler Eq. (2.2), after the rescalings described in Theorem 2.1.
Proof
Given \(\rho >0\), assume that \(v_\rho \in H^1({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)\) is a critical point of J on \(S_\rho \) with a critical level \(m_\rho =J(v_\rho )\) and with a Lagrange multiplier \(\omega _\rho \in {{\mathbb {R}}}\). Denote
Applying Nehari and Pohožaev identities (cf. [9]), we obtain the system
This is a linear system and the determinant is zero when \(q=2^*\). We solve the system explicitly to obtain
From the first relation we can deduce
Taking into account the rescaling (3.2), we obtain
and from (3.6) we have
or
Recall that according to Theorem 2.1, for small \(\lambda >0\) the \(L^q\)–norm of ground states of \((P_\lambda )\) satisfies
Substituting into (3.9) we obtain
and then (3.3) follows after the inversion. \(\square \)
Remark 3.2
We conjecture that the estimates (3.3) remain valid beyond the uniqueness scenario of [25, Theorem 1]. The proof of this would require a direct analysis of the ground states of J on \(S_\rho \) adapting the techniques in this paper, and thus bypassing the unconstrained problem \((P_\lambda )\). Note that the estimate (3.3) is different from the estimates in [28, Proposition 4.1, 4.2], where \(\rho \) is fixed.
4 Rescalings and preliminary estimates as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\)
The formal limit equation for \((P_\lambda )\) as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\) is given by
![figure c](http://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00209-023-03271-0/MediaObjects/209_2023_3271_Figc_HTML.png)
Recall that \((P_0)\) has no nontrivial solutions in \(H^1({{\mathbb {R}}}^N)\), this follows from Pohožaev’s identity. We denote the Nehari manifolds for \((P_\lambda )\) and \((P_0)\) as follows:
Denote
the limiting energy functional \(I_0: H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\). It is easy to see that
are well defined and positive. Let \(u_\lambda \) be the ground state for \((P_\lambda )\) constructed in Theorem 1.1. Then we have the following
Lemma 4.1
The family of solutions \(\{u_\lambda \}_{\lambda >0}\) is bounded in \(H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\).
Proof
It is not hard to show that \(m_\lambda ^*\le m_0^*\). Moreover, we have
Therefore, \(\{u_\lambda \}\) is bounded in \(H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\). \(\square \)
For \(\lambda >0\), define the rescaling
Rescaling (4.1) transforms \((P_\lambda )\) into the equivalent equaition
![figure d](http://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00209-023-03271-0/MediaObjects/209_2023_3271_Figd_HTML.png)
where
The corresponding energy functional is given by
The formal limit equation for \((Q_\lambda )\) as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\) is given by the critical Emden–Fowler equation
![figure e](http://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00209-023-03271-0/MediaObjects/209_2023_3271_Fige_HTML.png)
We denote their corresponding Nehari manifolds as follows:
Then
are well-defined. It is well known that \(m_0\) is attained on \({\mathcal {N}}_0\) by the Talenti function
and the family of its rescalings
For \(v\in H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\setminus \{0\}\), we set
Then \((\tau (v))^{\frac{N-2}{4}}v\in {\mathcal {N}}_0\) for any \(v\in H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\setminus \{0\}\), and \(v\in {\mathcal {N}}_0\) if and only if \(\tau (v)=1\).
It is standard to verify the following.
Lemma 4.2
Let \(\lambda >0\), \(u\in H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) and v is the rescaling (4.1) of u. Then:
- (a):
-
\(\Vert \nabla v\Vert _{2}^{2}=\Vert \nabla u\Vert _{2}^{2}\), \(\Vert v\Vert _{2^*}^{2^*}=\Vert u\Vert _{2^*}^{2^*}\),
- (b):
-
\(\lambda ^{\sigma } \Vert v\Vert _2^2=\Vert u\Vert _2^2\), \(\lambda ^\sigma \Vert v\Vert _q^q=\lambda \Vert u\Vert _q^q\),
- (c):
-
\(J_\lambda (v)=I_\lambda (u)\), \(m_\lambda =m_\lambda ^*\).
In particular, if \(v_\lambda \) is the rescaling (4.1) of the ground state \(u_\lambda \), then \(J_\lambda (v_\lambda )=I_\lambda (u_\lambda )\) and hence \(v_\lambda \) is the ground state of \((Q_\lambda )\). Moreover, \(v_\lambda \) satisfies the Pohožaev’s identity [9]:
Define the Pohožaev manifold
where
Clearly, \(v_\lambda \in {\mathcal {P}}_\lambda \). Moreover, we have the following minimax characterizations for the least energy level \(m_\lambda \).
Lemma 4.3
Let \(\lambda \ge 0\). Set
Then
In particular, we have \(m_\lambda =J_\lambda (v_\lambda )=\sup _{t>0}J_\lambda (tv_\lambda )=\sup _{t>0}J_\lambda ((v_\lambda )_t)\).
Proof
The proof is standard and thus omitted. We refer the reader to [19, Theorem 1.1], or to [15]. \(\square \)
Lemma 4.4
Let \(\lambda >0\). The rescaled family of ground states \(\{v_\lambda \}\) is bounded in \(H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\). In particular, \(\{v_\lambda \}\) is bounded in \(L^p({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) uniformly for all \(p\in [2,2^*]\).
Proof
Since \(\Vert \nabla v_\lambda \Vert _2=\Vert \nabla u_\lambda \Vert _2\) is bounded by Lemma 4.1 and Lemma 4.2, we need only to show that \(v_\lambda \) is bounded in \(L^2({\mathbb {R}}^N)\). Since \(v_\lambda \in {\mathcal {N}}_\lambda \cap {\mathcal {P}}_\lambda \), we have
and
It then follows that
Thus, we obtain
By the Sobolev embedding theorem and the interpolation inequality, we obtain
where S is the best Sobolev constant. Therefore, we have
It then follows from Lemma 4.2 that
which together with the boundedness of \(u_\lambda \) in \(H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) implies that \(v_\lambda \) is bounded in \(L^2({\mathbb {R}}^N)\).
Finally, for any \(p\in [2,2^*]\), by (4.9) and the interpolation inequality, we have
and
Therefore, by Lemma 4.1, \(\{v_\lambda \}\) is bounded in \(L^p({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) uniformly for \(p\in [2,2^*]\). \(\square \)
Remark 4.5
A straightforward computation shows that
and
Therefore, we have
Next we obtain an estimation of the least energy.
Lemma 4.6
Let
Then \(Q(q)\sim 1\), \(G(q)\sim q-2\) and for all \(\lambda >0\):
- (i):
-
\(1<\tau (v_\lambda )\le 1+G(q)\lambda ^\sigma \),
- (ii):
-
\(m_0>m_\lambda > m_0\left( 1-\lambda ^\sigma NG(q)(1+G(q)\lambda ^\sigma )^{\frac{N-2}{2}}\right) \).
Proof
For \(\theta \in (0,1)\), consider the function
It is easy to see that
Using the interpolation inequality,
we see that
where
Since \(v_\lambda \in {\mathcal {N}}_\lambda \), by (4.8) and (4.11), we have
This proves (i). To prove (ii), we first note that by (4.8) and (4.11) the following inequality holds
Since \(v_\lambda \in {\mathcal {N}}_\lambda \), by (4.8), we also have
Therefore, by Lemma 4.3 and the definition of \(\tau (v_\lambda )\), we find
Hence, we obtain
which completes the proof. \(\square \)
Lemma 4.7
Assume \(N\ge 5\). Then there exists a constant \(c_0>0\), which is independent of q, \(\lambda \), and such that for all small \(\lambda >0\),
Proof
For each \(\rho >0\), the family \(\{U_\rho \}\) of radial ground states of \((Q_0)\) defined in (4.4) verifies
Let \(g_0(\rho )=\frac{1}{q}\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_\rho |^q-\frac{1}{2}\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_\rho |^2\). Then there exists a unique \(\rho _0=\rho _0(q)\in (0,+\infty )\) given by
such that
Since \(N\ge 5\), by using the Lebesgue Dominated Convergence Theorem, it is not hard to show that
where \(\kappa (r)=(1+r^2)^{2-N}r^{N-1}\). Therefore, we conclude that
Thus, we get
Put \(U_0(x):=U_{\rho _0}(x)\), then by Lemma 4.3, we have
It follows from \(\frac{d}{dt}J_\lambda (tU_0)\big |_{t=t_\lambda }=0\) and \(\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|\nabla U_0|^2=\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_0|^{2^*}=Nm_0\) that
Recall that \(g_0(\rho _0)=\frac{1}{q}\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_0|^q-\frac{1}{2}\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_0|^2>0\), it follows that \(\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_0|^q>\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_0|^2.\) If \(t_\lambda \ge 1\), then
and hence
a contradiction. Therefore, \(t_\lambda <1\) and hence
from which it follows that
Let
Then \(A_\lambda \le \frac{1}{Nm_0}[\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_0|^q-\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N} |U_0|^2]\) and
Let \(g(t):=\frac{t^2}{2}\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_0|^2-\frac{t^q}{q}\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_0|^q\), and \(h(x):=g([1-x]^{\frac{1}{q-2}})\) for \(x\in [0,1]\). Then g(t) has an unique miximum point at \(t_0=\left( \frac{\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_0|^2}{\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|U_0|^q}\right) ^{\frac{1}{q-2}}\) and is strictly decreasing in \((t_0,1)\), and for small \(x>0\), we have
Therefore, for small \(\lambda >0\), it follows from (4.18) and the monotonicity of g(t) in \((t_0,1)\) that
for some \(\xi \in (0, \lambda ^\sigma A_\lambda )\). Since for small \(\lambda >0\), we have
and similar to (4.11), we have
thus, by the definition of \(A_\lambda \), we obtain that
from which the conclusion follows. \(\square \)
Lemma 4.8
There exists a constant \(\varpi =\varpi (q)>0\) such that for all small \(\lambda >0\),
Proof
Let \(\rho >0\), \(R\gg 1\) be a large parameter and \(\eta _R\in C_0^\infty ({\mathbb {R}})\) is a cut-off function such that \(\eta _R(r)=1\) for \(|r|<R\), \(0<\eta _R(r)<1\) for \(R<|r|<2R\), \(\eta _R(r)=0\) for \(|r|>2R\) and \(|\eta '_R(r)\le 2/R\).
For \(\ell \gg 1\), a straightforward computation shows that
By Lemma 4.3, we find
where
Set \(\ell =R/\rho \), then
Since
takes its maximum value \(\varphi (\rho _0)\) at the unique point \(\rho _0>0\), and
where we have used the interpolation inequality
Then we obtain
Therefore, we have
For the rest of the proof, we consider separately the cases \(N=4\) and \(N=3\).
Case \(N=4\). Since
by (4.21), we have
Take \(\ell =(1/\lambda )^M\). Then
If \(M>\frac{1}{q-2}\), then \(2M>\sigma \), and hence
Thus, if \(N=4\), the result of Lemma 4.8 is proved by choosing
Case \(N=3\). In this case, we always assume that \(q\in (4,6)\). Since
we have
Take \(\ell =\delta ^{-1}\lambda ^{-\frac{2}{q-4}}\). Then
Since \(\frac{6-q}{q-2}<1\), we can choose a small \(\delta >0\) such that
and take
which finished the proof in the case \(N=3\). \(\square \)
Corollary 4.9
Let \(\delta _\lambda :=m_0-m_\lambda \), then
Lemma 4.10
Assume \(N\ge 5\). Then for small \(\lambda >0\),
where \(c_0>0\) is given in Lemma 4.7. In particular,
Proof
Since
then by Lemma 4.6, we get
and hence
On the other hand, by (4.8) and (4.12), we have
Therefore, it follows from Lemma 4.7 that
from which the conclusion follows.
A straightforward computation shows that
which together with \(\Vert v_\lambda \Vert _2^2=\frac{2(2^*-q)}{q(2^*-2)}\Vert v_\lambda \Vert _q^q\) yield the last relation. \(\square \)
Recall that \(m_\lambda =m_\lambda ^*\) for \(\lambda >0\) by Lemma 4.2. Moreover, the following result holds.
Lemma 4.11
\(m_0=m_0^*\).
Proof
Clearly, we have
To prove the opposite inequality, we argue as in the proof of Lemma 4.6 and Lemma 4.8, but easier. \(\square \)
Clearly, Lemma 4.11 implies that \(m^*_0\) is not attained on \({\mathcal {M}}_0\). In fact, it is also well known that \((P_0)\) has no nontrivial solution by the Pohozaev’s identity. Observe that
and
That is, the family \(\{u_\lambda \}\) of ground states of \((P_\lambda )\) is a (PS) sequence of \(I_0\) at level \(m_0^*\) (otherwise \(u_0\) should be a nontrivial solution of \((P_0)\), which is a contradiction).
5 Proof of Theorem 2.1
We recall the P.-L. Lions’ concentration–compactness lemma, which is at the core of our proof of Theorem 2.1.
Lemma 5.1
(P.-L. Lions [20]) Let \(r>0\) and \(2\le q\le 2^{*}\). If \((u_{n})\) is bounded in \(H^{1}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) and if
then \(u_{n}\rightarrow 0\) in \(L^{p}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) for \(2<p<2^*\). Moreover, if \(q=2^*\), then \(u_{n}\rightarrow 0\) in \(L^{2^{*}}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\).
Using Lemma 5.1, we establish the following.
Lemma 5.2
If \(N\ge 5\), then \(v_\lambda \rightarrow U_{\rho _0}\) in \(H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\), where \(U_{\rho _0}\) is a positive ground state of \((Q_0)\) with
If \(N=4\) and \(N=3\), then there exists \(\xi _\lambda \in (0,+\infty )\) such that \(\xi _\lambda \rightarrow 0\) and
in \(D^{1}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) and \(L^{2^*}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\).
Proof
Note that \(v_\lambda \) is a positive radially symmetric function, and by Lemma 4.4, \(\{v_\lambda \}\) is bounded in \(H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\). Then there exists \(v_0\in H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) verifying \(-\Delta v=v^{2^*-1}\) such that
and
Observe that
and
Therefore, \(\{v_\lambda \}\) is a (PS) sequence for \(J_0\).
By Lemma 5.1, it is standard to show that there exists \(\zeta ^{(j)}_\lambda \in (0,+\infty )\), \(v^{(j)}\in D^{1,2}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) with \(j=1,2,\dots , k\) where k is a non-negative integer, such that
where \({{\tilde{v}}}_\lambda \rightarrow 0\) in \(L^{2^*}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\), \(v^{(j)}\) are nontrivial solutions of the limit equation \(-\Delta v=v^{2^*-1}\) and \(\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^N}|\nabla v^{(j)}|^2\ge S^{\frac{N}{2}}\) with S being the best Sobolev constant. Moreover, we have
and
Moreover, \(J_0(v_0)\ge 0\) and \(J_0(v^{(j)})\ge m_0\) for all \(j=1,2,\cdots , k.\)
If \(N\ge 5\), then by Lemma 4.10, we have \(v_0\not =0\) and hence \(J_0(v_0)=m_0\) and \(k=0\). Thus \(v_\lambda \rightarrow v_0\) in \(L^{2^*}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\). Since \(J_0'(v_\lambda )\rightarrow 0\), it follows that \(v_\lambda \rightarrow v_0\) in \(D^{1}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\).
Observe that by the Strauss’ \(H^1\)–radial lemma [9, Lemma A.II] we have
Hence we obtain
for some constant \(C>0\) which is independent of \(\lambda \). We also have
which is positive for |x| large enough. By the maximum principle on \({\mathbb {R}}^N\setminus B_R\), we deduce that
When \(\varepsilon _0>0\) is small enough, the right hand side is in \(L^2(B_R^c)\) for \(N\ge 5\) and by the dominated convergence theorem we conclude that \(v_\lambda \rightarrow v_0\) in \(L^2({\mathbb {R}}^N)\), and hence in \(H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\). Moreover, by (4.8) we obtain
from which it follows that \(v_0=U_{\rho _0}\) with
If \(N=4\) or 3, then by Fatou’s lemma we have \(\Vert v_0\Vert ^2_2\le \liminf _{\lambda \rightarrow 0}\Vert v_\lambda \Vert _2^2<\infty \). Therefore, \(v_0=0\) and hence \(k=1\). Thus, we obtain \(J_0(v^{(1)})=m_0\) and hence \(v^{(1)}=U_\rho \) for some \(\rho \in (0,+\infty )\). Therefore, we conclude that
in \(L^{2^*}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\), where \(\xi _\lambda :=\rho \zeta _\lambda ^{(1)}\in (0,+\infty )\) satisfying \(\xi _\lambda \rightarrow 0\) as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\). Since
as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\), it follows that \(v_\lambda -\xi _\lambda ^{-\frac{N-2}{2}}U_1(\xi _\lambda ^{-1}\cdot )\rightarrow 0\) in \(D^{1}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) \(\square \)
In the lower dimension cases \(N=4\) and \(N=3\), we perform an additional rescaling
where \(\xi _\lambda \in (0,+\infty )\) is given in Lemma 5.2. This rescaling transforms \((Q_\lambda )\) into an equivalent equation
![figure f](http://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00209-023-03271-0/MediaObjects/209_2023_3271_Figf_HTML.png)
here and in what follows, we set for brevity
The corresponding energy functional is given by
It is straightforward to verify the following.
Lemma 5.3
Let \(\lambda >0\), \(u\in H^1({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) and v and w are the rescalings (4.1) and (5.7) of u respectively. Then:
- (a):
-
\(\Vert \nabla w\Vert _2^2= \Vert \nabla v\Vert _{2}^{2}=\Vert \nabla u\Vert _{2}^{2}\), \(\Vert w\Vert ^{2^*}_{2^*}=\Vert v\Vert _{2^*}^{2^*}=\Vert u\Vert _{2^*}^{2^*}\),
- (b):
-
\(\xi _\lambda ^{(2^*-2)s}\Vert w\Vert ^2_2=\Vert v\Vert _2^2=\lambda ^{-\sigma }\Vert u\Vert _2^2\), \(\xi _\lambda ^{(2^*-q)s}\Vert w\Vert ^q_q=\Vert v\Vert _q^q=\lambda ^{1-\sigma } \Vert u\Vert _q^q\),
- (c):
-
\({{\tilde{J}}}_\lambda (w)=J_\lambda (v)=I_\lambda (u)\).
Let \(w_\lambda (x)=\xi _\lambda ^{\frac{N-2}{2}} v_\lambda (\xi _\lambda x)\) where the \(v_\lambda \) is a ground state of \((Q_\lambda )\). Then by Lemma 5.2 we conclude that
Note that the corresponding Nehari and Pohozaev’s identities read as follows
and
We conclude that
Thus, we obtain
To control the norm \(\Vert w_\lambda \Vert _2\), we note that for any \(\lambda >0\), \(w_\lambda >0\) satisfies the linear inequality
Lemma 5.4
There exists a constant \(c>0\) such that
Proof
The same as [24, Lemma 4.8]. \(\square \)
As consequences, we have the following two lemmas.
Lemma 5.5
If \(N=3\), then \(\Vert w_\lambda \Vert _2^2\gtrsim \lambda ^{-\frac{\sigma }{2}}\xi _\lambda ^{-\frac{(2^*-2)s}{2}}\).
Lemma 5.6
If \(N=4\), then \(\Vert w_\lambda \Vert _2^2\gtrsim - \ln (\lambda ^{\sigma }\xi _\lambda ^{(2^*-2)s})\).
To prove our main result, the key point is to show the boundedness of \(\Vert w_\lambda \Vert _q\).
Lemma 5.7
If \(N=3,4\) and \(\frac{N}{N-2}<r<2^*\), then \(\Vert w_\lambda \Vert _r^r\sim 1\) as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\). Furthermore, \(w_\lambda \rightarrow U_1\) in \(L^r({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\).
Proof
By (5.9), we have \(w_\lambda \rightarrow U_1\) in \(L^{2^*}({\mathbb {R}}^N)\). Then, as in [24, Lemma 4.6], using the embeddings \(L^{2^*}(B_1)\hookrightarrow L^r(B_1)\) we prove that \(\liminf _{\lambda \rightarrow 0}\Vert w_\lambda \Vert _r^r>0\).
On the other hand, arguing as in [4, Propositon 3.1], we show that there exists a constant \(C>0\) such that for all small \(\lambda >0\),
which together with the fact that \(r>\frac{N}{N-2}\) implies that \(w_\lambda \) is bounded in \(L^r({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) uniformly for small \(\lambda >0\), and by the dominated convergence theorem \(w_\lambda \rightarrow U_1\) in \(L^r({\mathbb {R}}^N)\) as \(\lambda \rightarrow 0\). \(\square \)
Proof
(Proof of Theorem 2.1) We only give the proof for \(N=3, 4\). The case \(N\ge 5\) is easier. We first note that for a result similar to Lemma 4.4 holds for \(w_\lambda \) and \({{\tilde{J}}}_\lambda \). By (5.10), (4.5) and Lemma 5.3, we also have \(\tau (w_\lambda )=\tau (v_\lambda )\). Therefore, by (5.10) we obtain
which implies that
where \(\delta _\lambda =m_0-m_\lambda \). Hence, by Corollary 4.9, we obtain
Therefore, by Lemma 5.7, we have
On the other hand, if \( N=3\), then by (5.10), Lemma 5.5 and Lemma 5.7, we have
Then
Hence, observing that \(s=\frac{N-2}{2}=\frac{1}{2}\), \(\sigma =\frac{2^*-2}{q-2}=\frac{4}{q-2}\), for \(q\in (4,6)\) we obtain
If \(N=4\), then by (5.10), Lemma 5.6 and Lemma 5.7, we have
Note that
it follows that
Since \(s=\frac{N-2}{2}=1\), we then obtain
Thus, it follows from (5.14), (5.17), (5.18) and Lemma 5.7 that
which together with Corollary 4.9 implies that
Finally, by (5.10), Lemma 5.5 and Lemma 5.6, we obtain
Statements on \(u_\lambda \) follow from the corresponding results on \(v_\lambda \) and \(w_\lambda \). This completes the proof of Theorem 2.1. \(\square \)
Data availability
No data were used in this paper.
Notes
\(W_0(x)\) is defined as the the unique real solution of the equation \(ye^y=x\), \(x\ge 0\).
References
Akahori, T., Ibrahim, S., Kikuchi, H.: Linear instability and nondegeneracy of ground state for combined power-type nonlinear scalar field equations with the Sobolev critical exponent and large frequency parameter. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 150, 2417–2441 (2020)
Akahori, T., Ibrahim, S., Kikuchi, H., Nawa, H.: Existence of a ground state and blow-up problem for a nonlinear Schrödinger equation with critical growth. Differ. Integral Equ. 25, 383–402 (2012)
Akahori, T., Ibrahim, S., Kikuchi, H., Nawa, H.: Global dynamics above the ground state energy for the combined power type nonlinear Schrodinger equations with energy critical growth at low frequencies. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 272(1331), v+130 (2021)
Akahori, T., Ibrahim, S., Ikoma, N., Kikuchi, H., Nawa, H.: Uniqueness and nondegeneracy of ground states to nonlinear scalar field equations involving the Sobolev critical exponent in their nonlinearities for high frequencies. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 58(120), 32 (2019)
Akahori, T., Ibrahim, S., Ikoma, N., Kikuchi, H., Nawa, H.: Non-existence of ground states and gap of variational values for 3D Sobolev critical nonlinear scalar field equations. J. Differ. Equ. 334, 25–86 (2022)
Akahori, T., Murata, M.: Uniqueness of ground states for combined power-type nonlinear scalar field equations involving the Sobolev critical exponent at high frequencies in three and four dimensions. NoDEA Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl. 29(71), 54 (2022)
Akahori, T., Murata, M.: Nondegeneracy of ground states for nonlinear scalar field equations involving the Sobolev-critical exponent at high frequencies in three and four dimensions. Preprint, arXiv:2203.13473 (2023)
Alves, C., Souto, M., Montenegro, M.: Existence of a ground state solution for a nonlinear scalar field equation with critical growth. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 43, 537–554 (2012)
Berestycki, H., Lions, P.-L.: Nonlinear scalar field equations. I. Existence of a ground state. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 82, 313–345 (1983)
Chen, W., Dávila, J., Guerra, I.: Bubble tower solutions for a supercritical elliptic problem in\({R}^N\). Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. 15, 85–116 (2016)
Coles, M., Gustafson, S.: Solitary waves and dynamics for subcritical perturbations of energy critical NLS. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 56, 647–699 (2020)
Dávila, J., del Pino, M., Guerra, I.: Non-uniqueness of positive ground states of non-linear Schrödinger equations. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 106(2), 318–344 (2013)
Ferrero, A., Gazzola, F.: On subcriticality assumptions for the existence of ground states of quasilinear elliptic equations. Adv. Differ. Equ. 8, 1081–1106 (2003)
Fukuizumi, R.: Stability and instability of standing waves for nonlinear Schrödinger equations. Dissertation, Tohoku University, Sendai, 2003. Tohoku Math. Publ. 25, 68 (2003)
Jeanjean, L., Tanaka, K.: A remark on least energy solutions in \({\mathbb{R} }^N\). Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 131, 2399–2408 (2002)
Killip, R., Oh, T., Pocovnicu, O., Vişan, M.: Solitons and scattering for the cubic-quintic nonlinear Schrödinger equation on \(\mathbb{R} ^3\). Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 225, 469–548 (2017)
Lewin, M., Nodari, S.R.: The double-power nonlinear Schrödingger equation and its generalizations: uniqueness, non-degeneracy and applications. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 59(197), 49 (2020)
Li, X.: Existence of normalized ground states for the Sobolev critical Schrödinger equation with combined nonlinearities. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 60(169), 14 (2021)
Li, X., Ma, S.: Choquard equations with critical nonlinearities. Commun. Contemp. Math. 22, 1950023 (2019)
Lions, P.-L.: The concentration-compactness principle in the calculus of variations: the locally compact cases, Part I and Part II. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire 1, 109-145-223–283 (1984)
Liu, J., Liao, J.-F., Tang, C.-L.: Ground state solution for a class of Schrödinger equations involving general critical growth term. Nonlinearity 30, 899–911 (2017)
Ma, S., Moroz, V.: Asymptotic profiles for a nonlinear Kirchhoff equation with combined powers nonlinearity.arXiv:2211.14895 (2023)
Ma, S., Moroz, V.: Asymptotic profiles for Choquard equations with combined attractive nonlinearities.arXiv:2302.13727 (2023)
Moroz, V., Muratov, C.B.: Asymptotic properties of ground states of scalar field equations with a vanishing parameter. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 16, 1081–1109 (2014)
Pucci, P., Serrin, J.: Uniqueness of ground states for quasilinear elliptic operators. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 47(2), 501–528 (1998)
Soave, N.: Normalized ground states for the NLS equation with combined nonlinearities: the Sobolev critical case. J. Funct. Anal. 279(108610), 43 (2020)
Tao, T., Visan, M., Zhang, X.: The nonlinear Schrödinger equation with combined power-type nonlinearities. Commun. Partial Differ. Equ. 32, 1281–1343 (2007)
Wei, J., Wu, Y.: Normalized solutions for Schrödinger equations with critical Soblev exponent and mixed nonlinearities. J. Funct. Anal. 283, 109574 (2022)
Wei, J., Wu, Y.: On some nonlinear Schrödinger equations in \(\mathbb{R} ^N\). Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A (2022). https://doi.org/10.1017/prm.2022.56
Zhang, J.J., Zou, W.M.: A Berestycki-Lions theorem revisited. Commun. Contemp. Math. 14, 1250033 (2012)
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to the anonymous referee for their multiple helpful suggestions. Part of this research was carried out while S.M. was visiting Swansea University. S.M. thanks the Department of Mathematics for its hospitality. S.M. was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos.11571187, 11771182)
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.
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
Ma, S., Moroz, V. Asymptotic profiles for a nonlinear Schrödinger equation with critical combined powers nonlinearity. Math. Z. 304, 13 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00209-023-03271-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00209-023-03271-0
Keywords
- Nonlinear Schrödinger equation
- Critical Sobolev exponent
- Concentration compactness
- Normalized solutions
- Asymptotic behaviour.