Abstract
Given a smooth manifold M (with or without boundary), in this paper we establish a global functional calculus, without the standard assumption that the operators are classical pseudo-differential operators, and the Gårding inequality for global pseudo-differential operators associated with boundary value problems. The analysis that we follow is free of local coordinate systems. Applications of the Gårding inequality to the global solvability for a class of evolution problems are also considered.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Let \(M=\overline{\Omega }\) be a smooth manifold (with or without boundary). This work deals with the \(L^2\)-theory for the pseudo-differential calculus associated with a boundary-value problem \(L_{\Omega },\) determined by a pseudo-differential operator L on \(\Omega \) with discrete spectrum, having suitable boundary conditions, in the framework of the non-harmonic analysis developed by the last two authors in [21, 32, 33]. To be precise,
-
we will formulate a (Dunford–Riesz) global functional calculus for the \((\rho ,\delta )\)-Hörmander classes associated with \(L_{\Omega }.\)
-
Once established, the functional calculus will be applied to the proof of a global Gårding inequality on M, and in establishing the \(L^2\)-boundedness for the \((\rho ,\delta )\)-class of order zero of this calculus. With the exception of the borderline case \(\rho =\delta ,\) our \(L^2\)-boundedness result is an analogue of the Calderón–Vaillancourt theorem [14, 15].
-
Finally, we will use the \(L^2\)-theory developed, applying it to the global solvability for a class of evolution problems on \(\Omega ,\) associated with (possibly time-dependent) L-strongly elliptic pseudo-differential operators on M, (which is the class of elliptic operators in the calculus determined by \(L_\Omega \)).
The discreteness of the spectrum of \(L_{\Omega }\) becomes a natural setting to study eigenfunctions expansions of \(L^2\)-functions, or equivalently, in terms of its spectral decomposition and its associated Fourier analysis, is inspired by the harmonic analysis techniques for elliptic operators on closed manifolds (or even on manifolds with boundary, taking care of the required conditions such as the transmission property [12]), which serve as a predominant class of operators with discrete spectrum studied in spectral geometry, see [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9].
Before presenting our contributions, we give a historical overview to the functional calculus on \({\mathbb {R}}^n,\) its localisation by Seeley in [50], and the classical Gårding type inequalities. In view of the standard conditions \(1-\rho<\delta <\rho \leqslant 1\) for the \((\rho ,\delta )\)-Hörmander class on compact manifolds [25], the main novelty of the present work is the validity of our results (complex functional calculus, \(L^2\)-boundedness, Gårding inequality, etc.) in the whole range \(1\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1,\) for the \((\rho ,\delta )\)-Hörmander classes in [21, 32, 33]. While the restriction \(1-\rho<\delta <\rho \leqslant 1\) in Hörmander’s calculus implies that \(\rho >1/2,\) we provide a global analysis for any \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1,\) for the pseudo-differential calculus developed in [21, 32, 33].
1.1 Historical overview
In their seminal work [26], Kohn and Nirenberg introduced a calculus of pseudo-differential operators for the classes \(S^{m}_{1,0}({\mathbb {R}}^n\times {\mathbb {R}}^n),\)Footnote 1 which was applied by Friedrichs and Lax in their classical work [22] to study boundary value problems of first order. The appearance of both works, [22, 26], in the same volume of Comm. Pure Appl. Math. shows an immediate profound impact of the Kohn–Nirenberg calculus of pseudo-differential operators in the development of the solvability theory of partial differential operators. Nevertheless, the pseudo-differential technique (which means, to solve problems in mathematics using microlocal methods), appeared before 1959 in the classical works of Mihlin, and in the theory of singular integrals developed by Calderón and Zygmund approximating inverses of elliptic operators, and in 1959 in Calderon’s proof of Cauchy uniqueness for a wide class of principal type operators, using a pseudo-differential factorisation to prove a Carleman estimates [19].
Generalising the Kohn–Nirenberg classes \(S^m({\mathbb {R}}^n\times {\mathbb {R}}^n),\) L. Hörmander introduced in 1967, the classes \(S^m_{\rho ,\delta }({\mathbb {R}}^n\times {\mathbb {R}}^n),\)Footnote 2\(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1,\) motivated by construction of the parametrix P of the heat operator
which has symbol \(\sigma _P\) in the class \(S^{-1}_{\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}}({\mathbb {R}}^n\times {\mathbb {R}}^n).\) At the same time, in [50] Seeley, developed the asymptotic expansions for the symbols of the complex powers of elliptic operators. Therefore, Seeley tackled one of the fundamental problems of the functional calculus of pseudo-differential operators. This can be regarded as the first model for a functional calculus of pseudo-differential operators. The theory of pseudo-differential operators got a major breakthrough when they proved to be worthwhile in the proof of the seminal work of Atiyah and Singer on the index theory of elliptic operators on compact manifolds [7]. The ideas developed by Seeley for functional calculus [50] have been carried forward by several researchers. We cite [11, 13, 20, 27, 29,30,31, 39, 47, 48, 52, 53] to mention a very few of them. In particular, in [53], the author has investigated only the case of complex powers of differential operators, and in [11] the structure of the inverse of an elliptic operator, which is also considered as the second fundamental problem of the functional calculus, has been examined by using different techniques of Seeley. In [27], the formal theory of complex powers was developed by Kumano-go and Tsutsumi using similar methods to those in [50], and in [31] they developed functional calculus on connected unimodular Lie groups. On the other hand, the functional calculus for pseudo-differential operators on the manifolds with certain geometry (on the boundary or on the manifold itself) was studied in [20, 29, 30, 47, 48]. For example, Coriasco et al. [20] looked over the bounded imaginary powers of differential operators on manifolds with conical singularities, Schrohe [48] analysed the complex powers on noncompact manifolds and manifolds with fibered boundaries, and Loya [29] explored the manifolds with canonical singularity, where the author used the heat kernels techniques [30] in [29].
In 2014, the third author with Wirth [39] developed the global functional calculus for the elliptic pseudo-differential operators on compact Lie groups using the globally defined matrix symbols instead of representations in local coordinates, which is the version of the analysis well adopted to the operator theory on compact Lie groups. The global theory of symbols and their calculus was introduced and investigated in detail by the third author and Turunen in [34, 36]. Hörmander classes on compact Lie groups were investigated by Ruzhansky et al. [37] providing the characterisation of operators in Hörmander’s classes \(S^m_{1,0}\) on the compact Lie group viewed as a manifold was given in terms of these matrix symbols, thus providing a link between local and global symbolic calculi. Matrix-valued symbols also proved to be important in the study of the \(L^p\)-multipliers problems on general compact Lie groups [38]. The functional calculus (complex powers of elliptic operators) has several important applications to index theory, evolution equations, \(\zeta \)-functions of an operator, Wodzicki-type (non-commutative) residues, and Gårding inequalities [35]. We refer to [13, 52] for several aspects of the functional calculus and extensive reviews of the above topics and to [18] for the functional calculus of subelliptic pseudo-differential operators on compact Lie groups.
1.2 Main results
In this paper, we work in the setting of the Fourier analysis arising from the spectral decomposition of a model operator \(L_{\Omega }\) on a smooth manifold \(\overline{\Omega }\) (with or without boundary) [32, 33].
1.2.1 The functional calculus for the non-harmonic analysis and its applications
To address the problem of the functional calculus from the view of Hörmander symbolic calculus developed by the last two authors [32] in this setting, we first introduce in Sect. 3 the concept of parameter dependent L-ellipticity with respect to a sector in the complex plane in the setting of nonharmonic analysis and examine its properties. In general, for the pseudo-differential operators on manifolds one puts some restrictions on the Hörmander symbol classes \(S^m_{\rho , \delta }\) [53, Section 4]; usually one requires \(1-\rho<\delta <\rho ,\) which in turn gives \(\rho >\frac{1}{2}.\) It is worth noting that, in this paper, we allow \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) This freedom on the condition on \(\rho \) and \(\delta \) enables us to handle some specific classes of operator, for example the resolvent of an L-elliptic symbol, or its complex powers which cannot be handled by the standard theory due the restriction \(\rho >\frac{1}{2}.\) The following is our first, and main result. Here, we establish the complex-functional calculus for the Hörmander classes developed in [21, 32, 33]. All the preliminaries notions, assumptions, and notations to be used in our main results are presented in Sect. 2.
Theorem 1.1
Let \(m>0,\) and let \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) Let \(a\in S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) be a parameter L-elliptic symbol with respect to \(\Lambda .\) Let us assume that F satisfies the estimate \(|F(\lambda )|\leqslant C|\lambda |^s\) uniformly in \(\lambda ,\) for some \(s<0.\) Then the symbol of F(A), \(\sigma _{F(A)}\in S^{ms}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}) \) admits an asymptotic expansion of the form
where \(\sigma _{{B}_{N}}(x,\xi )\in {S}^{ms-(\rho -\delta )N}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) and
Moreover,
where \(a^{-\#}(x,\xi ,\lambda )\) is the symbol of the parametrix to \(A-\lambda I,\) in Corollary 3.3.
After developing the global functional calculus for pseudo-differential operators in the nonharmonic analysis setting on manifolds, we present applications of functional calculus to the Gårding inequality, \(L^2\)-boundedness of pseudo-differential operators and global solvability of evolution problems of hyperbolic/parabolic type on compact manifolds. We will now discuss each application separately in detail.
First, we will establish a fundamental estimate first proved by Gårding [23] for differential operators. This inequality proved to be a powerful tool to study nonlinear equations. This was further improved and generalised by several researchers including Agmon [1], Smith [44] and Schechter [45, 46]. The proofs given in aforementioned papers, e.g. in [1] make use of the usual reduction of the problem to the constant coefficient case in a special domain and then apply Fourier transform techniques. The Gårding inequality for pseudo-differential operators on \({\mathbb {R}}^n\) is also now a well-known and important inequality with \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1\) and on manifolds with the restriction \(1-\rho<\delta <\rho \) (see [54, Chapter 2]). The Gårding inequality for pseudo-differential operators on the Euclidean space or manifolds is proved using pseudo-differential calculus techniques [54]. For Lie groups, this was proved for the operators in the Hörmander class (1, 0) type using the results developed by Langlands [28] for the semigroups of Lie groups. The third author and Wirth [39] have obtained it for operators on compact Lie groups with matrix-valued symbols under the condition \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1,\) using the global functional calculus developed by them.
In this paper, we carry forward the ideas of [39] to establish the Gårding inequality for operators with the global Hörmander symbols [34] under the same condition \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1,\) using the global functional calculus developed for pseudo-differential operator in Sect. 4.
Theorem 1.2
For \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1,\) let \(a(x,D):C^\infty _L(M)\rightarrow {\mathcal {D}}'_L(M)\) be an operator with symbol \(a\in {S}^{m}_{\rho ,\delta }( M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) \(m\in {\mathbb {R}}.\) Let us assume that
satisfies
Then, there exist \(C_{1},C_{2}>0,\) such that the lower bound
holds true for every \(u\in C^\infty _L(M).\)
The second application of the functional calculus is to prove the \(L^2\)-boundedness of global operators associated with the symbol class \(S^0_{\rho , \delta }(\overline{\Omega } \times {\mathcal {I}})\) with \(0 \leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1,\) which is presented in Sect. 5. With the exception of the borderline case \(\rho =\delta ,\) the following result is, indeed, an analogue of the well-known Calderón–Vaillancourt theorem [14, 15].
Theorem 1.3
Let \(a(x,D):C^\infty _L(M)\rightarrow {\mathcal {D}}'_L(M)\) be a pseudo-differential operator with symbol \(a\in {S}^{0}_{\rho ,\delta }( M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) with \(0 \leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) Then, a(x, D) extends to a bounded operator on \(L^2({M}).\)
In Sect. 6, we present an application of the Gårding inequality and, consequently, an application of the functional calculus to study the existence and uniqueness of the solution of the following Cauchy problem:
where the initial data \(u_0\in L^2(M),\) \(K(t):=K(t,x,D)\) with a symbol in \(S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) \(f\in L^2([0,T]\times M) \simeq L^2([0,T],L^2(M)),\) \(m>0,\) and a suitable positivity condition is imposed on K.
1.2.2 The philosophy of the non-harmonic analysis and its state of the art with respect to the existing quantisation theories
We end the introduction with this short section explaining the philosophy of the non-harmonic analysis in [21, 32, 33], and also the motivations for considering global symbols in the setting of smooth manifolds. As both of the reviewers of this work have remarked, there are deep difficulties when considering a pseudo-differential calculus on manifolds with boundary. Indeed, an almost sharp condition is required (the Hörmander transmission property, see Boutet de Monvel [12]). However, there are specific situations where differential (or pseudo-differential) operators on compact or non-compact manifolds have discrete spectrum (e.g. any elliptic operator on a closed manifold, or the case of the harmonic oscillator on \({\mathbb {R}}^n\)) and the Fourier analysis associated to them can provide a global notion of symbol. There are several Dirichlet type problems on domains of \({\mathbb {R}}^n\) with a discrete set of eigenvalues associated with differential operators (for example, the Laplacian), and in that case, it is not necessary to put on perspective the transmission property.
Before presenting the preliminaries and the proofs of our main results, we clarify our motivation to work with such a global notion of symbol and the origin of this notion. Indeed, the main tool of our work is the following quantisation formula (see Theorem 2.21):
and due to the extensive list of preliminaries for its understanding, we postpone its analysis in Sect. 2.
Fundamentally, as in the case of the torus, pseudo-differential operators are just transformations of the Fourier inversion formula when the discrete spectrum of an operator is available. For instance, on the torus \({\mathbb {T}}^n,\) the Fourier inversion formula is given by
and any pseudo-differential operator in the sense of Hörmander [25] has the form
Here, the Fourier coefficients \(\widehat{f}(\xi )=\int _{{\mathbb {T}}^n}e_{-\xi }(x)f(x){\textrm{d}}x,\,\, \xi \in {\mathbb {Z}}^n\) are defined using the eigenfunctions \(e_\xi (x)={\textrm{e}}^{i2\pi x\cdot \xi }\) of the Laplacian \(\Delta _{{\mathbb {T}}^n}\) on \({\mathbb {T}}^n.\) Compare the similitude of (1.2) with (1.1), where the sequence of functions \(u_{\xi }\) determines the eigenfunction system of \(L_{\Omega }.\)
In terms of the standard differences operators,
it was proved in [34], with previous contributions by Vainikko and McLean, that a pseudo-differential operator A is in the \((\rho ,\delta )\)-Hörmander class of order \(m\in {\mathbb {R}},\) if the function \(\sigma _A:{\mathbb {T}}^{n}\times {\mathbb {Z}}^n\rightarrow {\mathbb {C}}\) in (1.2) satisfies the following symbol inequality:
Note that the aforementioned approach replaces the symbol \(\sigma _{\text {Hor},A},\) which is a function on \(T^{*}{\mathbb {T}}^n\cong {\mathbb {T}}^n\times {\mathbb {R}}^n,\) of A, defined by local coordinates system and the Fourier analysis under changes of coordinates by a function \(\sigma _A\) on \({\mathbb {T}}^{n}\times {\mathbb {Z}}^n,\) which, among other things, is a much simpler object. It is easy to show that
The torus is a good prototype to extend the global quantisation to any compact Lie group G. In this case, the Fourier analysis is presented using unitary representation of the group G, and the equivalence classes of such a unitary and irreducible representations are usually denoted by \(\widehat{G},\) see [34] for more details. The group Fourier inversion formula on G is given by
and any pseudo-differential operator in the sense of Hörmander [25] has the form
It is worth noting in (1.3) that the matrix-valued functions \(e_{\xi }:G\rightarrow {\mathbb {C}}^{d_\xi \times d_\xi }\) have entries \(e_{\xi }^{ij},\) which are eigenfunctions of the Laplacian \(\Delta _{G}\) on G. We have used \(\text {dim}(e_\xi )=d_\xi \) for the dimension of the representation space of \(e_\xi ,\) that is, \({\mathbb {C}}^{d_\xi }.\) Therefore, by writing explicitly the trace \(\text {Tr}[\cdot ]\) in (1.3), we obtain
in terms of the matrix entries of the Fourier coefficients \(\widehat{f}(\xi )^{ki}=\int _{G}f(x)e_{\xi }^{ij}{\textrm{d}}x.\) Again, compare the similitude of (1.1) with (1.4) having in mind that the functions \(e_{\xi }^{ij}\) are eigenfunctions of the Laplacian \(\Delta _{G}\) and its corresponding eigenvalue \(\lambda _{e_\xi }\) has geometric multiplicity equal to \(\text {dim}(e_\xi )^2.\) Now, it is a relevant fact in the theory of pseudo-differential operators that the Hörmander classes on G can be again (as in the case of the torus, that is, \(G={\mathbb {T}}^n,\) \(\widehat{G}\cong {\mathbb {Z}}^n\)) characterised in terms of a family of differences operators \(\Delta _{e_\xi }^{\alpha }\) (that generalises the difference operators on \({\mathbb {Z}}^n,\) re-obtaining this class in the case of the torus) on \(\widehat{G}.\) By utilising these difference operators on \(\widehat{G},\) it was proved in [37] that a pseudo-differential operator A is in the \((\rho ,\delta )\)-Hörmander class of order \(m\in {\mathbb {R}}\) on G, if its symbol \(\sigma _A\) in (1.3) satisfies inequalities of the type
Again, the symbol identity
remains valid.
The pseudo-differential calculus based on the quantisation formula (1.1) in [32, 33] and the further developments of these works make use of the symbol classes \(S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) (see Definition 2.20), defined by the functions a on the global phase space \(M\times {\mathcal {I}}\) such that
By following the spirit of the symbol formulas in (1.5), we have assumed that the system of eigenfunctions \(u_\xi \) in (1.1) satisfies the WZ-condition stated in Definition 2.1. The theory in [32, 33] is still a source of many open problems, among them, to remove the WZ-condition with partial results in [33] and its relation with the Boutet de Monvel calculus in the case of manifolds with boundary, with partial results in [16, Pages 135-139]. Examples satisfying the WZ-conditions are presented in Sect. 2. In particular, Example 2.2 for \(h=(1,\ldots , 1)\) shows that the classes \(S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) recover the standard Hörmander classes on the torus.
In Fig. 1, we illustrate the different constructions of the pseudo-differential calculus on smooth manifolds. For manifolds without boundary (when \(\partial M=\emptyset \)), the construction by Hörmander of the principal symbol is done by local coordinate systems. In the case of manifolds with boundary \((\partial M\ne \emptyset ),\) the construction by Boutet de Monvel [12] was inspired by the abstract consideration of two copies of the manifold \(M=M^{+}\) and \(M\cong M^{-},\) with a suitable orientation of their boundaries and glued them by using the identification \(\partial M^+\sim \partial M^- \) to get a new closed manifold \(\dot{M}=M^{+}\cup M^{-}.\) Then, he used restriction and extension operators to recover an algebra of pseudo-differential operators on the original manifold M from the ones defined in the sense of Hörmander on \(\dot{M}.\) In [32, 33], it was proposed to follow the Fourier analysis approach instead of the geometric construction as in the calculus by Boutet de Monvel, and then to consider transformations of the Fourier inversion formula as in the case of the torus \({\mathbb {T}}^n\) or \(\text {SU}(2)\cong \mathbb {S}^3\) or even any arbitrary compact Lie group, where these techniques have shown to be useful and effective (see [34]). Then, the analysis of the quantisation formula (1.1) is the main goal of the theory developed in [21, 32, 33] and also in this work.
In contrast to the case of the torus as well as compact Lie groups, it is still an open problem to construct a model operator \(L_\Omega \) in such a way that its Hörmander classes \(S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) could re-obtain a known pseudo-differential calculus, as the one by Boutet de Monvel. Indeed, the absence of symmetries in this case makes the understanding of the classes \(S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) much more difficult than that in the case of the torus or compact Lie groups and, consequently, it leaves several open research questions. Just to mention a few, one of the more recent developments on the subject was done in [24], where the author links the Fourier analysis on fundamental domains of \({\mathbb {R}}^{d},\) and the construction of a WZ-system with the Fuglede conjecture, which was outside of the perspective of the authors of this manuscript.
2 Preliminaries: global pseudo-differential calculus associated with boundary value problems
Let \(M=\overline{\Omega }\) be a \(C^\infty \)-manifold with (possibly empty) boundary \(\partial \Omega .\) Let us formulate some basics of the non-harmonic analysis and the pseudo-differential calculus developed by the third and the fourth author in [32] (see also [17, 21]):
-
Consider a pseudo-differential operator \(L:=L_{\Omega }\) of order m on a smooth manifold \({\Omega }\) (in the sense of Hörmander [25]) equipped with some boundary conditions (BC) defining a space of functions endowed with a complex structure of vector space. We assume that L equipped with these boundary conditions (BC) admits a closed extension on \(L^2(\Omega ).\) We will also assume the condition (BC+), which states that the boundary conditions define a closed topological space.Footnote 3
-
The pseudo-differential operator \({L}_\Omega \) is assumed to have a discrete spectrum \(\{\lambda _{\xi }\in {{\mathbb {C}}}: \, \xi \in {\mathcal I}\}\) on \(L^{2}(\Omega ),\) and we order the eigenvalues with the occurring multiplicities in the ascending order: \( |\lambda _{j}|\leqslant |\lambda _{k}| \quad \text { for } |j|\leqslant |k|.\)Footnote 4
-
The eigenfunctions \(u_\xi \) of L (associated with \(\lambda _\xi \)) and \(v_\xi \) of \({L}^*\) are considered to be \(L^2\)-normalised. Also, they satisfy the condition of biorthogonality, i.e.
$$\begin{aligned} (u_{\xi },v_{\eta })_{L^2}=\delta _{\xi ,\eta }, \end{aligned}$$where \(\delta _{\xi ,\eta }\) is the Kronecker-Delta and \((\cdot , \cdot )_{L^{2}}\) is the usual \(L^{2}\)-inner product given by \((f, g)_{L^{2}}:=\int _{\Omega }f(x)\overline{g(x)}{\textrm{d}}x, f, g\in L^{2}(\Omega ).\)
From [10], it follows that the system \(\{u_{\xi }: \,\,\, \xi \in {\mathcal I}\}\) is a basis in \(L^{2}(\Omega )\) if and only if the system \(\{v_{\xi }: \,\,\, \xi \in {\mathcal I}\}\) is a basis in \(L^{2}(\Omega ).\) So, from now, we assume the following:
-
The system \(\{u_{\xi }: \xi \in {\mathcal I}\}\) is a basis in \(L^{2}(\Omega ),\) i.e. for every \(f\in L^{2}(\Omega )\) there exists a unique series \(\sum _{\xi \in {\mathcal I}} a_\xi u_\xi (x)\) that converges to f in \(L^{2}(\Omega ).\)
Let us define the following notation (L-Japanese bracket)
which will be used later in measuring the growth/decay of Fourier coefficients of the distributions in our context. Define the operator \({L}^{\circ }\) by setting its values on the basis \(u_{\xi }\) by
we can informally think of \(\langle \xi \rangle ,\) \(\xi \in {\mathcal {I}},\) as the eigenvalues of the positive (first order) pseudo-differential operator \((\textrm{I}+{L^\circ \, L})^{\frac{1}{2\,m}}.\)
The following technical definition will be useful to single out the case when the eigenfunctions of both L and \({L}^{*}\) do not have zeros (WZ stands for ‘without zeros’):
Definition 2.1
The system \(\{u_{\xi }: \,\,\, \xi \in {\mathcal I}\}\) is called a \(\textrm{WZ}\)-system if the functions \(u_{\xi }(x), \, v_{\xi }(x)\) do not have zeros on the domain \(\overline{\Omega }\) for all \(\xi \in {\mathcal I},\) and if there exist \(C>0\) and \(N\geqslant 0\) such that
as \(\langle \xi \rangle \rightarrow \infty .\) Here, WZ stands for ‘without zeros’.
One can find examples and a discussion of WZ-systems in [32, Section 2]. There are plenty of problems where this conditions holds, and a few of them are described below.
Example 2.2
For this example, we set \(M=\overline{\Omega }\) with \(\Omega :=(0,1)^n\) and \( h>0 \text { i.e. } h=(h_1,\dots ,h_n)\in {\mathbb {R}}^{n}: h_j>0 \text{ for } \text{ every } j=1,\dots ,n.\) The operator \(L_\Omega =:\textrm{O}_h^{(n)}\) on \(\Omega \) is defined by the differential operator
together with the boundary conditions (BC):
and the domain
To describe the corresponding biorthogonal system, we first note that since \(b^0=1\) for all \(b>0,\) we can define \(0^0=1.\) In particular, we write
for \(x\in [0,1]^n.\) Then, with \({\mathcal I}={\mathbb {Z}}^{n},\) the system of eigenfunctions of the operator \(L_h\) is
and the conjugate system is
where \(x\cdot \xi =x_{1}\xi _{1}+ \cdots + x_{n}\xi _{n}.\) Note that \(u_{\xi }(x)=\otimes _{j=1}^{n}u_{\xi _{j}}(x_{j}),\) where \(u_{\xi _{j}}(x_{j})=h_{j}^{x_{j}}{\textrm{e}}^{{ 2\pi i x_{j}\xi _{j} }}.\)
It is easy to see that the system of eigenfunctions of the operator \(L_\Omega =\textrm{O}_{h}^{(n)}\) is a Riesz basis in \(L^{2}(\Omega ).\) These families also form WZ-systems
Example 2.3
We briefly give another example of a non-local boundary condition, see [32, Example 2.4] for details. We now consider \(M=[0,1]\) and the operator \(L_\Omega =-i\frac{{\textrm{d}}}{{\textrm{d}}x}\) on \(\Omega =(0,1)\) with the domain
where \(a\not =0,\) \(b\not =0,\) and \(q\in C^1[0,1].\) We assume that \(a+b+\int _0^1 q(x) {\textrm{d}}x=1,\) so that the inverse \({L}_\Omega ^{-1}\) exists and is bounded. The operator \(L_\Omega \) has a discrete spectrum and its eigenvalues can be enumerated so that
and for any \(\epsilon >0\) we have \(\sum _{j\in {\mathbb {Z}}} |\alpha _j|^{1+\epsilon }<\infty .\) If \(m_j\) denotes the multiplicity of the eigenvalue \(\lambda _j,\) then \(m_j=1\) for sufficiently large |j|. The system of extended eigenfunctions
of the operator \(L_\Omega \) is a Riesz basis in \(L^{2}(0,1),\) and its biorthogonal system is given by
\(0\leqslant k\leqslant m_j-1, j\in {\mathbb {Z}},\) where \(\Delta (\lambda )=a+b {\textrm{e}}^{i\lambda }+\int _0^1 {\textrm{e}}^{i\lambda x} q(x) {\textrm{d}}x.\) It can be shown that eigenfunctions \({\textrm{e}}^{i\lambda _j x}\) satisfy
In particular, this implies modulo finitely many elements, and the system (2.4) is a WZ-system.
In the sequel, unless stated otherwise, whenever we use inverses \(u_{\xi }^{-1}\) of the functions \(u_{\xi },\) we will suppose that the system \(\{u_{\xi }: \, \xi \in {\mathcal I}\}\) is a \(\textrm{WZ}\)-system. However, we will also try to mention explicitly when we make such an additional assumption.
2.1 Global distributions generated by the boundary value problem
Now, we will present the spaces of distributions generated by the boundary value problem \({L}_\Omega \) and by its adjoint \({L}_\Omega ^*\) and the related global Fourier analysis. We first define the space \(C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) of test functions.
Definition 2.4
The space \(C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }):=\textrm{Dom}({L}_\Omega ^{\infty })\) is called the space of test functions for \({L}_\Omega .\) Here, we define
where \(\textrm{Dom}({L}_\Omega ^{k}),\) or just \(\textrm{Dom}({L}^{k})\) for simplicity, is the domain of the operator \({L}^{k},\) in turn defined as
The operators \({L}^{k},\) \(k\in {{\mathbb {N}}},\) are endowed with the same boundary conditions (BC). The Fréchet topology of \(C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) is given by the family of norms:
Analogously, we introduce the space \(C_{{ L^{*}}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) corresponding to the adjoint operator \({L}_\Omega ^*\) by
where \(\textrm{Dom}(({L^{*}})^{k})\) is the domain of the operator \(({L^{*}})^{k},\)
which satisfy the adjoint boundary conditions corresponding to the operator \({L}_\Omega ^*.\) The Fréchet topology of \(C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) is given by the family of norms:
Remark 2.5
If \({L}_\Omega \) is self-adjoint, i.e. if \({L}_\Omega ^*={L}_\Omega \) with the equality of domains, then \(C_{{L^{*}}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })=C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }).\) On the other hand, since we have \(u_\xi \in C^\infty _{{L}}(\overline{\Omega })\) and \(v_\xi \in C^\infty _{{L}^*}(\overline{\Omega })\) for all \(\xi \in {\mathcal I},\) we observe that the biorthogonality condition of the systems \(\{u_\xi \}_{\xi \in {\mathcal {I}}},\) and \(\{v_\xi \}_{\xi \in {\mathcal {I}}}\) implies that the spaces \(C^\infty _{{L}}(\overline{\Omega })\) and \(C^\infty _{{L}^*}(\overline{\Omega })\) are dense in \(L^2(\Omega ).\)
In general, for functions \(f\in C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) and \(g\in C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) the \(L^2\)-duality makes sense in view of the formula
Therefore, in view of the formula (2.7), it makes sense to define the distributions \({\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega )\) as the space which is dual to \(C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }).\) Note that the respective boundary conditions of \({L}_\Omega \) and \({L}_\Omega ^*\) are satisfied by the choice of f and g in the corresponding domains.
Definition 2.6
The space
of linear continuous functionals on \(C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) is called the space of L-distributions.Footnote 5 For \(w\in {\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega )\) and \(\varphi \in C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) we shall write
Observe that, for any \(\psi \in C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\)
is an L-distribution, which gives an embedding \(\psi \in C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\hookrightarrow {\mathcal {D}}'_{{ L}}(\Omega ).\) We note that the distributional notation formula (2.7) becomes
With the topology on \(C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) defined by (2.5), the space
of linear continuous functionals on \(C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) is called the space of \({L^{*}}\)-distributions.
Proposition 2.7
A linear functional w on \(C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) belongs to \({\mathcal {D}}'_{{ L}}(\Omega )\) if and only if there exists a constant \(c>0\) and a number \(k\in {{\mathbb {N}}}_0\) with the property
The space \({\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega )\)Footnote 6 has many similarities with the usual spaces of distributions. For example, suppose that for a linear continuous operator \(D:C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\rightarrow C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) its adjoint \(D^*\) preserves the adjoint boundary conditions (domain) of \({L}_\Omega ^*\) and is continuous on the space \(C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) i.e. that the operator \(D^*:C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\rightarrow C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) is continuous. Then we can extend D to \({\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega )\) by
This extends (2.8) from L to other operators.
The following principle of uniform boundedness is based on the Banach–Steinhaus Theorem applied to the Fréchet space \(C_{{ L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }).\)
Lemma 2.8
Let \(\{w_{j}\}_{j\in {{\mathbb {N}}}}\) be a sequence in \({\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega )\) with the property that for every \(\varphi \in C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) the sequence \(\{w_{j}(\varphi )\}_{j\in {{\mathbb {N}}}}\) in \({{\mathbb {C}}}\) is bounded. Then there exist constants \(c>0\) and \(k\in {{\mathbb {N}}}_0\) such that
The lemma above leads to the following property of completeness of the space of L-distributions.
Theorem 2.9
Let \(\{w_{j}\}_{j\in {{\mathbb {N}}}}\) be a sequence in \({\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega )\) with the property that for every \(\varphi \in C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) the sequence \(\{w_{j}(\varphi )\}_{j\in {{\mathbb {N}}}}\) converges in \({{\mathbb {C}}}\) as \(j\rightarrow \infty .\) Denote the limit by \(w(\varphi ).\)
-
(i)
Then \(w:\varphi \mapsto w(\varphi )\) defines an L-distribution on \(\Omega .\) Furthermore,
$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{j\rightarrow \infty }w_{j}=w \quad \hbox {in} \ {\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega ). \end{aligned}$$ -
(ii)
If \(\varphi _{j}\rightarrow \varphi \) in \(\in C_{{ L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) then
$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{j\rightarrow \infty }w_{j}(\varphi _{j})=w(\varphi ) \quad \hbox {in}\ {{\mathbb {C}}}. \end{aligned}$$
Similarly to the previous case, we have analogues of Proposition 2.7 and Theorem 2.9 for \({L^{*}}\)-distributions.
2.2 L-Fourier transform, L-convolution, Plancherel formula, Sobolev spaces and their Fourier images
Let us start by defining the L-Fourier transform introduced in [32], which is generated by the boundary value problem \({L}_\Omega \) and its main properties. Here, we record that:
(BC+) assume that, with \({L}_0\) denoting L or \({L}^*,\) if \(f_j\in C_{{L}_0}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\)
satisfies \(f_j\rightarrow f\) in \(C_{{L}_0}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) then \(f\in C_{{L}_0}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }).\)
Let us denote by \({\mathcal {S}}({\mathcal I})\) the space of rapidly decaying functions \(\varphi :{\mathcal I}\rightarrow {{\mathbb {C}}}.\)Footnote 7 In this space, the continuous linear functionals are of the form
where the functions \(u:{\mathcal I}\rightarrow {{\mathbb {C}}}\) grow at most polynomially at infinity, i.e. there exist constants \(M<\infty \) and \(C_{u, M}\) such that \( |u(\xi )|\leqslant C_{u, M}\langle \xi \rangle ^{M} \) holds for all \(\xi \in {\mathcal I}.\) Such distributions \(u:{\mathcal I}\rightarrow {{\mathbb {C}}}\) form the space of distributions which we denote by \({\mathcal {S}}'({\mathcal I}).\) We now define the L-Fourier transform on \(C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }).\)
Definition 2.10
We define the L-Fourier transform
by
Analogously, we define the \({L}^{*}\)-Fourier transform
by
The expressions (2.9) and (2.10) are well defined. Moreover, we have:
Proposition 2.11
The L-Fourier transform \({\mathcal {F}}_{{L}}\) is a bijective homeomorphism from \(C_{{ L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) to \({\mathcal {S}}({\mathcal I}).\) Its inverse
is given by
so that the Fourier inversion formula becomes
Similarly, \({\mathcal {F}}_{{L}^{*}}:C_{{L}^{*}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\rightarrow {\mathcal {S}}({\mathcal I})\) is a bijective homeomorphism and its inverse
is given by
so that the conjugate Fourier inversion formula becomes
By dualising the inverse L-Fourier transform \({\mathcal {F}}_{{L}}^{-1}: {\mathcal {S}}({\mathcal I}) \rightarrow C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) the L-Fourier transform extends uniquely to the mapping
by the formula
It can be readily seen that if \(w\in {\mathcal {D}}'_{{ L}}(\Omega ),\) then \(\widehat{w}\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathcal I}).\) The reason for taking complex conjugates in (2.11) is that, if \(w\in C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) we have the equality
Analogously, we have the mapping
defined by the formula
It can be also seen that if \(w\in {\mathcal {D}}'_{{ L}^*}(\Omega ),\) then \(\widehat{w}\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathcal I}).\) The following statement follows from the work of Bari [10, Theorem 9]:
Lemma 2.12
There exist constants \(K,m,M>0\) such that for every \(f\in L^{2}(\Omega ),\) we have
However, we note that the Plancherel identity can be also achieved in suitably defined \(l^2\)-spaces of Fourier coefficients, see Proposition 2.15.
Let us introduce a notion of the L-convolution, an analogue of the convolution adapted to the boundary problem \({L}_\Omega .\)
Definition 2.13
(L-Convolution) For \(f, g\in C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) define their L-convolution by
By Proposition 2.11, it is well defined and we have \(f{\star _{L}}g\in C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }).\)Footnote 8
Analogously to the L-convolution, we can introduce the \({L}^*\)-convolution. Thus, for \(f, g\in C_{{ L^{*}}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) we define the \({ L^{*}}\)-convolution using the \({L}^*\)-Fourier transform by
Its properties are similar to those of the L-convolution, so we may formulate only the latter. We would like to mention here that the L-convolution depends on the biorthonormal system, and therefore the symbol classes, considered later in this section, will also be depending on the chosen basis.
Proposition 2.14
For any \(f, g\in C_{{ L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) we have
The convolution is commutative and associative. If \(g \in C_{{ L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) then for all \(f\in {\mathcal {D}}^\prime _{L}(\Omega ),\) we have
In addition, if \(\Omega \subset {\mathbb {R}}^n\) is bounded, and \(f,g\in L^{2}(\Omega ),\) then \(f{\star _{L}}g\in L^{1}(\Omega )\) with
where \(|\Omega |\in (0,\infty ]\) is the volume of \(\Omega ,\) with C independent of \(f,g,\Omega .\)
Let us denote by \( l^{2}_{{L}}=l^2({L})\) the linear space of complex-valued functions a on \({\mathcal I}\) such that \({\mathcal {F}}^{-1}_{{L}}a\in L^{2}(\Omega ),\) i.e. if there exists \(f\in L^{2}(\Omega )\) such that \({\mathcal {F}}_{{L}}f=a,\) then the space of sequences \(l^{2}_{{L}}\) is a Hilbert space with the inner product
for arbitrary \(a,\,b\in l^{2}_{{L}}.\) The norm of \(l^{2}_{{L}}\) is then given by the formula
Analogously, we introduce the Hilbert space \( l^{2}_{{L^{*}}}=l^{2}({L^{*}})\) as the space of functions a on \({\mathcal I}\) such that \({\mathcal {F}}^{-1}_{{L^{*}}}a\in L^{2}(\Omega ),\) with the inner product
for arbitrary \(a,\,b\in l^{2}_{{L^{*}}}.\) The norm of \(l^{2}_{{L^{*}}}\) is given by the formula
for all \(a\in l^{2}_{{L^{*}}}.\) The spaces of sequences \(l^{2}_{{L}}\) and \(l^{2}_{{L^{*}}}\) are thus generated by biorthogonal systems \(\{u_{\xi }\}_{\xi \in {\mathcal I}}\) and \(\{v_{\xi }\}_{\xi \in {\mathcal I}}.\) The reason for their definition in the above forms becomes clear again in view of the following Plancherel identity:
Proposition 2.15
(Plancherel’s identity) If \(f,\,g\in L^{2}(\Omega ),\) then \(\widehat{f},\,\widehat{g}\in l^{2}_{{L}}, \,\,\, \widehat{f}_{*},\, \widehat{g}_{*}\in l^{2}_{\mathrm{L^{*}}},\) and the inner products (2.13), (2.14) take the form
In particular, we have
The Parseval identity takes the form:
Furthermore, for any \(f\in L^{2}(\Omega ),\) we have \(\widehat{f}\in l^{2}_{{L}},\) \(\widehat{f}_{*}\in l^{2}_{{ L^{*}}},\) and \( \Vert f\Vert _{L^{2}}=\Vert \widehat{f}\Vert _{l^{2}_{{ L}}}=\Vert \widehat{f}_{*}\Vert _{l^{2}_{{L^{*}}}}. \)
Now, we introduce Sobolev spaces generated by the operator \({L}_{\Omega }\):
Definition 2.16
(Sobolev spaces \({H}^{s}_{{L}}(\Omega )\)) For \(f\in {\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega )\cap {\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}^{*}}(\Omega )\) and \(s\in {\mathbb {R}},\) we say that
We define the norm on \({H}^{s}_{{L}}(\Omega )\) by
The Sobolev space \({H}^{s}_{{L}}(\Omega )\) is then the space of L-distributions f for which we have \(\Vert f\Vert _{{H}^{s}_{{L}}(\Omega )}<\infty .\) Similarly, we can define the space \({H}^{s}_{{L^{*}}}(\Omega )\) by the condition
We note that the expressions in (2.15) and (2.16) are well defined, since the sum
is real and non-negative. Consequently, since we can write the sum in (2.16) as the complex conjugate of that in (2.15), and with both being real, we see that the spaces \({H}^{s}_{{L}}(\Omega )\) and \({H}^{s}_{{L^{*}}}(\Omega )\) coincide as sets. Moreover, we have
Proposition 2.17
For every \(s\in {\mathbb {R}},\) the Sobolev space \({H}^{s}_{{L}}(\Omega )\) is a Hilbert space with the inner product
Similarly, the Sobolev space \({H}^{s}_{{L^{*}}}(\Omega )\) is a Hilbert space with the inner product
For every \(s\in {\mathbb {R}},\) the Sobolev spaces \({H}^{s}_{{L}}(\Omega ),\) and \({H}^{s}_{{L}^*}(\Omega )\) are isometrically isomorphic.
2.3 L-Schwartz kernel theorem
This subsection is devoted to discuss the Schwartz kernel theorem in the space of distributions \({\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega ).\) In this analysis, we will need the following assumption which may be also regarded as the definition of the number \(s_{0}.\) So, from now on we will make the following:
Assumption 2.18
Assume that the number \(s_0\in {\mathbb {R}}\) is such that we have
Recalling the operator \({L}^{\circ }\) in (2.2), the assumption (2.18) is equivalent to assuming that the operator \((\textrm{I}+{L^\circ L})^{-\frac{s_0}{4m}}\) is Hilbert–Schmidt on \(L^2(\Omega ).\)
Indeed, recalling the definition of \(\langle \xi \rangle \) in (2.1), namely that \(\langle \xi \rangle \) are the eigenvalues of \((\textrm{I}+{L^\circ L})^{-\frac{s_0}{2m}},\) and that the operator \((\textrm{I}+{L^\circ L})^{-\frac{s_0}{4m}}\) is Hilbert–Schmidt on \(L^2(\Omega )\) is equivalent to the condition that
Remark 2.19
If L is elliptic, we may expect that we can take any \(s_0>n:=\text {dim}(\Omega ),\) but this depends on the boundary conditions in general. The order \(s_0\) will enter the regularity properties of the Schwartz kernels.
We will use the notation:
and for the corresponding dual space we write \( {\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega \times \Omega ):= \left( C^{\infty }_{{L}}(\overline{\Omega }\times \overline{\Omega })\right) ^\prime .\) By following [32], to any continuous linear operator \(A:C^{\infty }_{{ L}}(\overline{\Omega })\rightarrow {\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega ),\) we can associate a kernel \(K\in {\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega \times \Omega )\) such that
and, using the notion of the L-convolution, also a convolution kernel \(k_{A}(x)\in {\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega ),\) such that
provided that \(\{u_{\xi }: \,\,\, \xi \in {\mathcal I}\}\) is a \(\textrm{WZ}\)-system in the sense of Definition 2.1. As usual, \(K_{A}\) is called the Schwartz kernel of A. Note that, by using the Fourier series formula for \(f\in C^{\infty }_{{L}}(\overline{\Omega }),\)
we can also write
and the L-distribution \(k_{A}\in {\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega \times \Omega )\) is determined by the formula
Since for some \(C>0\) and \(N\geqslant 0,\) we have, by Definition 2.1,
the series in (2.18) converges in the sense of L-distributions. Formula (2.18) means that the Fourier transform of \(k_A\) in the second variable satisfies
Combining this and (2.17), we get
where in the last equality we used the notion of the L-convolution in Definition 2.13.
2.4 L-Quantisation and full symbols
In this subsection, we describe the L-quantisation induced by the boundary value problem \({L}_\Omega .\) From now on, we will assume that the system of functions \(\{u_{\xi }:\, \xi \in {\mathcal I}\}\) is a \(\textrm{WZ}\)-system in the sense of Definition 2.1. Later, we will make some remarks on what happens when this assumption is not satisfied.
Definition 2.20
(L-Symbols of operators on \(\Omega )\) The L-symbol of a linear continuous operator
at \(x\in \Omega \) and \(\xi \in {\mathcal I}\) is defined by
Hence, we can also write
By the L-Fourier inversion formula, the convolution kernel can be recovered from the symbol:
all in the sense of L-distributions. We now show that an operator A can be represented by its symbol [32].
Theorem 2.21
(L-quantisation) Let \( A:C^{\infty }_{{L}}(\overline{\Omega })\rightarrow C^{\infty }_{{L}}(\overline{\Omega })\) be a continuous linear operator with L-symbol \(\sigma _{A}.\) Then,
for every \(f\in C^{\infty }_{{L}}(\overline{\Omega })\) and \(x\in \Omega .\) The L-symbol \(\sigma _{A}\) satisfies
for all \(x\in \Omega \) and \(\xi \in {\mathcal I}.\)
Now, we collect several formulae for the symbol under the assumption that the biorthogonal system \(u_\xi \) is a WZ-systemFootnote 9
Corollary 2.22
We have the following equivalent formulae for L-symbols :
Here and in the sequel, we write \(u_{\xi }^{-1}(x)=u_{\xi }(x)^{-1}.\) Formula (iii) also implies
Similarly, we can introduce an analogous notion of the \({L^{*}}\)-quantisation.
Definition 2.23
\(({L^{*}}\)-Symbols of operators on \(\Omega )\) The \({L^{*}}\)-symbol of a linear continuous operator
at \(x\in {\Omega }\) and \(\xi \in {\mathcal I}\) is defined by
We can also write
By the \({L^{*}}\)-Fourier inversion formula, the convolution kernel can be regained from the symbol:
in the sense of \({L^{*}}\)-distributions. Analogously to the L-quantisation, we have:
Corollary 2.24
\(({L^{*}}\)-quantisation) Let \(\tau _{A}\) be the \({L}^*\)-symbol of a continuous linear operator \( A:C^{\infty }_{{ L^{*}}}(\overline{\Omega })\rightarrow C^{\infty }_{{ L^{*}}}(\overline{\Omega }).\) Then,
for every \(f\in C^{\infty }_{{L^{*}}}(\overline{\Omega })\) and \(x\in \Omega .\) For all \(x\in \Omega \) and \(\xi \in {\mathcal I},\) we have
We also have the following equivalent formulae for the \({L^{*}}\)-symbol :
2.5 Difference operators and symbolic calculus
In this subsection, we discuss difference operators that will be instrumental in defining symbol classes for the symbolic calculus of operators.
Let \(q_{j}\in C^{\infty }({\Omega }\times {\Omega }),\) \(j=1,\ldots ,l,\) be a given family of smooth functions. We will call the collection of \(q_j\)’s L-strongly admissible if the following properties hold:
-
For every \(x\in \Omega ,\) the multiplication by \(q_{j}(x,\cdot )\) is a continuous linear mapping on \(C^{\infty }_{{L}}(\overline{\Omega }),\) for all \(j=1,\ldots ,l\);
-
\(q_{j}(x,x)=0\) for all \(j=1,\ldots ,l\);
-
\(\textrm{rank}(\nabla _{y}q_{1}(x,y), \ldots , \nabla _{y}q_{l}(x,y))|_{y=x}=n; \)
-
the diagonal in \(\Omega \times \Omega \) is the only set when all of \(q_j\)’s vanish:
$$\begin{aligned} \bigcap _{j=1}^l \left\{ (x,y)\in \Omega \times \Omega : \, q_j(x,y)=0\right\} =\{(x,x):\, x\in \Omega \}. \end{aligned}$$
We note that the first property above implies that for every \(x\in \Omega ,\) the multiplication by \(q_{j}(x,\cdot )\) is also well defined and extends to a continuous linear mapping on \({\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega ).\) Also, the last property above contains the second one but we chose to still give it explicitly for the clarity of the exposition.
The collection of \(q_j\)s with the above properties generalises the notion of a strongly admissible collection of functions for difference operators introduced in [37] in the context of compact Lie groups. We will use the multi-index notation
Analogously, the notion of an \({L}^{*}\)-strongly admissible collection suitable for the conjugate problem is that of a family \(\widetilde{q}_{j}\in C^{\infty }({\Omega }\times {\Omega }),\) \(j=1,\ldots ,l,\) satisfying the properties:
-
For every \(x\in \Omega ,\) the multiplication by \(\widetilde{q}_{j}(x,\cdot )\) is a continuous linear mapping on \(C^{\infty }_{{L}^{*}}(\overline{\Omega }),\) for all \(j=1,\ldots ,l\);
-
\(\widetilde{q}_{j}(x,x)=0\) for all \(j=1,\ldots ,l\);
-
\( \textrm{rank}(\nabla _{y}\widetilde{q}_{1}(x,y), \ldots , \nabla _{y}\widetilde{q}_{l}(x,y))|_{y=x}=n; \)
-
the diagonal in \(\Omega \times \Omega \) is the only set when all of \(\widetilde{q}_j\)s vanish:
$$\begin{aligned} \bigcap _{j=1}^l \left\{ (x,y)\in \Omega \times \Omega : \, \widetilde{q}_j(x,y)=0\right\} =\{(x,x):\, x\in \Omega \}. \end{aligned}$$
We also write
We now record the Taylor expansion formula with respect to a family of \(q_j\)s, which follows from expansions of functions g and \(q^{\alpha }(e,\cdot )\) by the common Taylor series [32]:
Proposition 2.25
Any smooth function \(g\in C^{\infty }({\Omega })\) can be approximated by Taylor polynomial-type expansions, i.e. for \(e\in \Omega ,\) we have
in a neighbourhood of \(e\in \Omega ,\) where \(g_{N}\in C^{\infty }({\Omega })\) and \(D^{(\alpha )}_{x}g(x)|_{x=e}\) can be found from the recurrent formulae : \(D^{(0,\ldots ,0)}_{x}:=I\) and for \(\alpha \in {{\mathbb {N}}}_0^l,\)
where \(\beta =(\beta _1, \ldots , \beta _n)\) and \( \partial ^{\beta }_{x}=\frac{\partial ^{\beta _{1}}}{\partial x_{1}^{\beta _{1}}}\cdots \frac{\partial ^{\beta _{n}}}{\partial x_{n}^{\beta _{n}}}. \)
Analogously, any function \(g\in C^{\infty }({\Omega })\) can be approximated by Taylor polynomial-type expansions corresponding to the adjoint problem, i.e. we have
in a neighbourhood of \(e\in \Omega ,\) where \(g_{N}\in C^{\infty }({\Omega })\) and \(\widetilde{D}^{(\alpha )}_{x}g(x)|_{x=e}\) are found from the recurrent formula: \(\widetilde{D}^{(0,\ldots ,0)}:=I\) and for \(\alpha \in {{\mathbb {N}}}_{0}^{l},\)
where \(\beta =(\beta _1, \ldots , \beta _n),\) and \(\partial ^{\beta }\) is defined as in Proposition 2.25.
It can be seen that operators \(D^{(\alpha )}\) and \(\widetilde{D}^{(\alpha )}\) are differential operators of order \(|\alpha |.\) We now define difference operators acting on Fourier coefficients. Since the problem in general may lack any invariance or symmetry structure, the introduced difference operators will depend on a point x where they will be taken when applied to symbols.
Definition 2.26
For WZ-systems, we define difference operator \(\Delta _{q,(x)}^{\alpha }\) acting on Fourier coefficients by any of the following equal expressions:
Analogously, we define the difference operator \(\widetilde{\Delta }_{q,(x)}^{\alpha }\) acting on adjoint Fourier coefficients by
For simplicity, if there is no confusion, for a fixed collection of \(q_j\)’s, instead of \(\Delta _{q,(x)}\) and \(\widetilde{\Delta }_{\widetilde{q},(x)},\) we will often simply write \(\Delta _{(x)}\) and \(\widetilde{\Delta }_{(x)}.\)
Remark 2.27
Applying difference operators to a symbol and using formulae from Sect. 2.4, we obtain
In view of the first property of the strongly admissible collections, for each \(x\in \Omega ,\) the multiplication by \(q^{\alpha }(x,\cdot )\) is well defined on \({\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega ).\) Therefore, we can write (2.19) also in the distributional form
Plugging the expression (v) from Corollary 2.22 for the kernel in terms of the symbol into (2.19), namely, using
we record another useful form of (2.19) to be used later as
with the usual distributional interpretation of all the steps. In the sequel, we will also require the \({L^*}\)-version of this formula, which we record now as
Using such difference operators and derivatives \(D^{(\alpha )}\) from Proposition 2.25, we can now define classes of symbols.
Definition 2.28
(Symbol class \(S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I}))\) Let \(m\in {\mathbb {R}}\) and \(0\leqslant \delta ,\rho \leqslant 1.\) The L-symbol class \(S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) consists of those functions \(a(x,\xi )\) which are smooth in x for all \(\xi \in {\mathcal I},\) and which satisfy
for all \(x\in \overline{\Omega },\) for all \(\alpha ,\beta \geqslant 0,\) and for all \(\xi \in {\mathcal I}.\) Here, the operators \(D^{(\beta )}_{x}\) are defined in Proposition 2.25. We will often denote them simply by \(D^{(\beta )}.\)
The class \(S^m_{1,0}(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) will be often denoted by writing simply \(S^m(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I}).\) In (2.20), we assume that the inequality is satisfied for \(x\in \Omega \) and it extends to the closure \(\overline{\Omega }.\) Furthermore, we define
and
When we have two L-strongly admissible collections, expressing one in terms of the other similarly to Proposition 2.25 and arguing similarly to [37], we can convince ourselves that for \(\rho >\delta \) the definition of the symbol class does not depend on the choice of an L-strongly admissible collection.
Analogously, we define the \({L^{*}}\)-symbol class \(\widetilde{S}^m_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) as the space of those functions \(a(x,\xi )\) which are smooth in x for all \(\xi \in {\mathcal I},\) and satisfy
for all \(x\in \overline{\Omega },\) for all \(\alpha ,\beta \geqslant 0,\) and for all \(\xi \in {\mathcal I}.\) Similarly, we can define classes \(\widetilde{S}^{\infty }_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) and \(\widetilde{S}^{-\infty }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I}).\)
If \(a\in S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I}),\) it is convenient to denote by \(a(X,D)= \textrm{Op}_L (a)\) the corresponding L-pseudo-differential operator defined by
The set of operators \( \textrm{Op}_L (a)\) of the form (2.21) with \(a\in S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) will be denoted by \( \textrm{Op}_L (S^m_{\rho ,\delta } (\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})),\) or by \(\Psi ^m_{\rho ,\delta } (\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I}).\) If an operator A satisfies \(A\in \mathrm{Op_L}(S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})),\) we denote its L-symbol by \(\sigma _{A}=\sigma _{A}(x, \xi ), \,\, x\in \overline{\Omega }, \, \xi \in {\mathcal I}.\)
Remark 2.29
(Topology on \(S^{m}_{\rho , \delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) (\(\widetilde{S}^{m}_{\rho , \delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\))). The set \(S^{m}_{\rho , \delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) (\(\widetilde{S}^{m}_{\rho , \delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\)) of symbols has a natural topology. Let us consider the functions \(p_{\alpha \beta }^{l}: S^{m}_{\rho , \delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) (\(\widetilde{p}_{\alpha \beta }^{l}: \widetilde{S}^{m}_{\rho , \delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\)) defined by
Now, \(\{p_{\alpha \beta }^{l}\}\) (\(\{\widetilde{p}_{\alpha \beta }^{l}\}\)) is a countable family of seminorms, and they define a Fréchet topology on \(S^{m}_{\rho , \delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) (\(\widetilde{S}^{m}_{\rho , \delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathbb {Z}})\)).
The next theorem is a prelude to asymptotic expansions, which are the main tools in the symbolic analysis of L-pseudo-differential operators.
Theorem 2.30
(Asymptotic sums of symbols) Let \((m_{j})_{j=0}^{\infty }\subset {\mathbb {R}}\) be a sequence such that \(m_{j}>m_{j+1},\) and \(m_{j}\rightarrow -\infty \) as \(j\rightarrow \infty ,\) and \(\sigma _{j}\in S^{m_{j}}_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) for all \(j\in {\mathcal I}.\) Then there exists an L-symbol \(\sigma \in S^{m_{0}}_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) such that for all \(N\in {\mathcal I},\)
We will now look at the formulae in [32] for the symbol of the adjoint operator and for the composition of pseudo-differential operators, which establish the pseudo-differential calculus for boundary value problems from the non-harmonic point of view.
Theorem 2.31
(Adjoint operators) Let \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) Let \(A\in \textrm{Op}_L (S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})).\) Assume that the conjugate symbol class \(\widetilde{S}^{m}_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) is defined with strongly admissible functions \(\widetilde{q}_{j}(x,y):=\overline{q_{j}(x,y)},\) which are \({L}^{*}\)-strongly admissible. Then the adjoint of A satisfies \(A^{*}\in \textrm{Op}_{L^*}(\widetilde{S}^{m}_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})),\) with its \({L}^*\)-symbol \(\tau _{A^*}\in \widetilde{S}^{m}_{\rho ,\delta }(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I})\) having the asymptotic expansion
We now formulate the composition formula given [32].
Theorem 2.32
Let \(m_{1}, m_{2}\in {\mathbb {R}}\) and \(\rho >\delta \geqslant 0.\) Let \(A, B:C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\rightarrow C_{{ L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) be continuous and linear, and assume that their L-symbols satisfy
for all \(\alpha ,\beta \geqslant 0,\) uniformly in \(x\in \overline{\Omega }\) and \(\xi \in {\mathcal I}.\) Then,
where the asymptotic expansion means that for every \(N\in {{\mathbb {N}}},\) we have
2.6 Construction of parametrices
Now, we will present a technical result about the existence of parametrices for L-elliptic operators in the global pseudo-differential calculus from [32]. We denote \( {S}^{-\infty }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})=\cap _{m\in {\mathbb {R}}}{S}^{m}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})=\cap _{m\in {\mathbb {R}}}{S}^{m}_{1,0}(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\)
Proposition 2.33
Let \(m\in {\mathbb {R}},\) and let \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) Let \(a=a(x,\xi )\in {S}^{m}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) Assume also that \(a(x,\xi )\) is invertible for every \((x,\xi )\in M\times {\mathcal {I}}\) and satisfies
Then, there exists \(B\in {S}^{-m}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) such that \(AB-I,BA-I\in {S}^{-\infty }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}). \) Moreover, the symbol of B satisfies the following asymptotic expansion:
where \(\widehat{B}_{N}(x,\xi )\in {S}^{-m-(\rho -\delta )N}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) obeys the inductive formula:
with \( \widehat{B}_{0}(x,\xi )=a(x,\xi )^{-1}.\)
3 Parameter L-ellipticity
We start our contributions to the pseudo-differential calculus in the context of non-harmonic analysis developed by the last two authors in [32], by developing the functional calculus for Hörmander classes \(\text {Op}(S^{m}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})).\) For this, we need a more wide notion of ellipticity, which we introduce as follows.
Definition 3.1
Let \(m>0,\) and let \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) Let \(m>0,\) and let \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) Let \(\Lambda \) be a sector in the complex plane \({\mathbb {C}}.\) Let \(a=a(x,\xi )\in {S}^{m}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) Assume also that \(R_{\lambda }(x,\xi )^{-1}:=a(x,\xi )-\lambda \ne 0\) for every \((x,\xi )\in M\times {\mathcal {I}},\) and \(\lambda \in \Lambda .\) We say that a is parameter L-elliptic with respect to \(\Lambda ,\) if
The following theorem classifies the resolvent \(R_{\lambda }(x,\xi )\) of a parameter L-elliptic symbol a.
Theorem 3.2
Let \(m>0,\) and let \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) If a is parameter L-elliptic with respect to \(\Lambda ,\) the following estimate
holds true for all \(\alpha ,\beta \in {\mathbb {N}}_0^n\) and \(k\in {\mathbb {N}}_0.\)
Proof
We will split the proof in the cases \(|\lambda |\leqslant 1,\) and \(|\lambda |> 1,\) where \(\lambda \in \Lambda .\) It is possible, however, that one of these two cases could be trivial in the sense that \(\Lambda _{1}:=\{\lambda \in \Lambda :|\lambda |\leqslant 1\}\) or \(\Lambda _{1}^{c}:=\{\lambda \in \Lambda :|\lambda |> 1\}\) could be an empty set. In such a case, the proof is self-contained in the situation that we will consider where we assume that \(\Lambda _{1}\) and \(\Lambda _{1}^c\) are not trivial sets. For \(|\lambda |\leqslant 1,\) observe that
We note that
On the other hand, we can prove that
For \(k=1,\) \(\partial _{\lambda }R_{\lambda }(x,\xi )= R_{\lambda }(x,\xi )^{2}.\) This can be deduced from the Leibniz rule; indeed,
implies that
Because \((a(x,\xi )-\lambda )=R_{\lambda }(x,\xi )^{-1},\) the identity for the first derivative of \(R_\lambda ,\) \(\partial _{\lambda }R_{\lambda }\) follows. So, from the chain rule, we obtain that the term of higher-order expanding the derivative \( \partial _{\lambda }^kR_{\lambda } \) is a multiple of \( R_{\lambda }^{k+1}.\) So, \(R_{\lambda }\in S^{-m}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) The global pseudo-differential calculus implies that \(R_{\lambda }^{k+1}\in S^{-m(k+1)}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) This fact and the compactness of \(\Lambda _1\subset {\mathbb {C}}\) provide us the uniform estimate
Now, we will analyse the situation for \(\lambda \in \Lambda _1^c.\) We will use induction over k to prove that
For \(k=0,\) notice that
and denoting \(\theta =\frac{1}{|\lambda |},\) \(\omega =\frac{\lambda }{|\lambda |},\) we have
Observe that \( (1+\theta ^{\frac{1}{m}}\langle \xi \rangle )^{m}\langle \xi \rangle ^{-m} \in S^{0}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) is uniformly bounded in \(\theta \in [0,1].\) Similarly, observe that
Indeed, \((\theta \times a(x,\xi )-\omega )^{-1}\in S^{-m}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}), \) with \(\theta \in [0,1]\) and \(\omega \) being an element of the complex circle. The case \(k\geqslant 1\) for \(\lambda \in \Lambda _1^c\) can be proved in an analogous way. \(\square \)
Combining Proposition 2.33 and Theorem 3.2 we obtain the following corollaries.
Corollary 3.3
Let \(m>0,\) and let \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) Let a be a parameter L-elliptic symbol with respect to \(\Lambda .\) Then there exists a parameter-dependent parametrix of \(A-\lambda I,\) with symbol \(a^{-\#}(x,\xi ,\lambda )\) satisfying the estimates
for all \(\alpha ,\beta \in {\mathbb {N}}_0^n\) and \(k\in {\mathbb {N}}_0.\)
Corollary 3.4
Let \(m>0,\) and let \(a\in S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}) \) where \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) Let us assume that \(\Lambda \) is a subset of the \(L^2\)-resolvent set of A, \(\text {Resolv}(A):={\mathbb {C}}{\setminus } \text {Spec}(A).\) Then \(A-\lambda I\) is invertible on \({\mathcal {D}}'_L(M)\) and the symbol of the resolvent operator \({\mathcal {R}}_{\lambda }:=(A-\lambda I)^{-1},\) \(\widehat{{\mathcal {R}}}_{\lambda }(x,\xi )\) belongs to \(S^{-m}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\)
4 Global functional calculus
In this section, we develop the global functional calculus for the classes \(S^{m}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) The global pseudo-differential calculus will be applied to obtain a global Gårding inequality.
4.1 Symbols defined by functions of pseudo-differential operators
Let \(a\in S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) be a parameter L-elliptic symbol of order \(m>0\) with respect to the sector \(\Lambda \subset {\mathbb {C}}.\) For \(A=\text {Op}(a),\) let us define the operator F(A) by the (Dunford–Riesz) complex functional calculus
where
- (CI):
-
\(\Lambda _{\varepsilon }:=\Lambda \cup \{z:|z|\leqslant \varepsilon \},\) \(\varepsilon >0,\) and \(\Gamma =\partial \Lambda _\varepsilon \subset \text {Resolv}(A)\) is a positively oriented curve in the complex plane \({\mathbb {C}}.\)
- (CII):
-
F is a holomorphic function in \({\mathbb {C}}{\setminus } \Lambda _{\varepsilon },\) and continuous on its closure.
- (CIII):
-
We will assume decay of F along \(\partial \Lambda _\varepsilon \) in order that the operator (4.1) will be densely defined on \(C^\infty _L(M)\) in the strong sense of the topology on \(L^2(M).\)
Now, we will compute the global symbols for operators defined by this complex functional calculus. So, we will assume the \(\text {WZ}\) condition.
Lemma 4.1
Let \(a\in S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) be a parameter L-elliptic symbol of order \(m>0\) with respect to the sector \(\Lambda \subset {\mathbb {C}}.\) Let \(F(A):C^\infty _L(M)\rightarrow {\mathcal {D}}'_L(M)\) be the operator defined by the analytical functional calculus as in (4.1). Under the assumptions \(\text {(CI)},\) \(\text {(CII)},\) and \(\text {(CIII)},\) the global symbol of F(A), \(\sigma _{F(A)}(x,\xi )\) is given by :
where \({\mathcal {R}}_z=(A-zI)^{-1}\) denotes the resolvent of A, and \(\widehat{{\mathcal {R}}}_z(x,\xi )\in S^{-m}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}) \) its symbol.
Proof
From Corollary 3.4, we have that \(\widehat{{\mathcal {R}}}_z(x,\xi )\in S^{-m}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) Now, observe that
We finish the proof by observing that \(\widehat{{\mathcal {R}}}_z(x,\xi )=u_\xi (x)^{-1}(A-zI)^{-1}u_\xi (x),\) for every \(z\in \text {Resolv}(A).\) \(\square \)
Assumption (CIII) will be clarified in the following theorem where we show that the global pseudo-differential calculus is stable under the action of the complex functional calculus.
Theorem 4.2
Let \(m>0,\) and let \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) Let \(a\in S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) be a parameter L-elliptic symbol with respect to \(\Lambda .\) Let us assume that F satisfies the estimate \(|F(\lambda )|\leqslant C|\lambda |^s\) uniformly in \(\lambda ,\) for some \(s<0.\) Then the symbol of F(A), \(\sigma _{F(A)}\in S^{ms}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}) \) admits an asymptotic expansion of the form
where \(\sigma _{{B}_{N}}(x,\xi )\in {S}^{ms-(\rho -\delta )N}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) and
Moreover,
where \(a^{-\#}(x,\xi ,\lambda )\) is the symbol of the parametrix to \(A-\lambda I,\) in Corollary 3.3.
Proof
First, we need to prove that the condition \(|F(\lambda )|\leqslant C|\lambda |^s\) uniformly in \(\lambda ,\) for some \(s<0,\) is enough to guarantee that
is a well-defined global symbol. From Theorem 3.2, we deduce that \((a(x,\xi )-z)^{-1}\) satisfies the estimate
Observe that
and the condition \(s<0\) implies that
uniformly in \((x,\xi )\in M\times {\mathcal {I}}.\) To check that \(\sigma _{B_0}\in {S}^{ms}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) let us analyse the cases \(-1<s<0\) and \(s\leqslant -1\) separately:
Case 1: Let us analyse first the situation of \(-1<s<0.\) We observe that
Now, we will estimate the operator norm inside of the integral. Indeed, the identity
implies that
where we have used that
Consequently, by using that \(s<0,\) we deduce
To study the convergence of the last contour integral, we only need to check the convergence of \(\int _{1}^{\infty }r^s(r^{\frac{1}{m}}+\varkappa )^{-m}\varkappa ^{-ms}{\textrm{d}}r,\) where \(\varkappa >1\) is a parameter. The change of variable \(r=\varkappa ^{m}t\) implies that
Indeed, for \(t\rightarrow \infty ,\) \(t^s(t^{\frac{1}{m}}+1)^{-m}\lesssim t^{-1+s},\) and we conclude the estimate because \(\int _{1}^{\infty } t^{-1+s'}{\textrm{d}}t<\infty ,\) for all \(s'<0.\) On the other hand, the condition \(-1<s<0\) implies that
Case 2. In the case where \(s\leqslant -1,\) we can find an analytic function \(\tilde{G}(z)\) such that it is a holomorphic function in \({\mathbb {C}}{\setminus } \Lambda _{\varepsilon },\) and continuous on its closure and additionally satisfying that \(F(\lambda )=\tilde{G}(\lambda )^{1+[-s]}.\)Footnote 10 In this case, \(\tilde{G}(A),\) defined by the complex functional calculus
has symbol belonging to \({S}^{\frac{sm}{1+[-s]}}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) this in view of Case 1, because \(\tilde{G}\) satisfies the estimate \(|\tilde{G}(\lambda )|\leqslant C|\lambda |^{\frac{s}{1+[-s]}},\) with \(-1<\frac{s}{1+[-s]}<0.\) By observing that
and computing the symbol \(\sigma _{\tilde{G}(A)^{1+[-s]}}(x,\xi )\) by iterating \(1+[-s]\)-times the asymptotic formula for the composition in the global pseudo-differential calculus, we can see that the term with higher order in such expansion is \(\sigma _{\tilde{G}(A)}(x,\xi )^{1+[-s]}\in {S}^{ms}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) Consequently, we have proved that \(\sigma _{F(A)}(x,\xi )\in {S}^{ms}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) This completes the proof for the first part of the theorem. For the second part of the proof, let us denote by \(a^{-\#}(x,\xi ,\lambda )\) the symbol of the parametrix to \(A-\lambda I,\) in Corollary 3.3. Let \(P_{\lambda }=\text {Op}(a^{-\#}(\cdot ,\cdot ,\lambda )).\) Because \(\lambda \in \text {Resolv}(A)\) for \(\lambda \in \partial \Lambda _\varepsilon ,\) \((A-\lambda )^{-1}-P_{\lambda }\) is a smoothing operator. Consequently, from Lemma 4.1, we deduce that
The asymptotic expansion (4.2) came from the construction of the parametrix in the global pseudo-differential calculus (see Proposition 2.33). \(\square \)
4.2 Gårding inequality
In this subsection, we prove the Gårding inequality for the global pseudo-differential calculus. To do so, we need some preliminaries.
Proposition 4.3
Let \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) Let \(a\in S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) be an L-elliptic global symbol where \(m\geqslant 0\) and let us assume that \(a>0.\) Then, a is parameter elliptic with respect to \({\mathbb {R}}_{-}:=\{z=x+i0:x<0\}\subset {\mathbb {C}}.\) Furthermore, for any number \(s\in {\mathbb {C}},\)
defines a symbol \(\widehat{B}(x,\xi )\in S^{m\times \text {Re}(s)}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\)
Proof
From the estimates,
we deduce that
where \(c,C>0\) are positive real numbers. Now, for every \(\lambda \in {\mathbb {R}}_{-},\) we have
By fixing again \(\lambda \in {\mathbb {R}}_{-},\) we observe that from the compactness of [0, 1/2] we deduce that
On the other hand,
So, we have proved that a is parameter elliptic with respect to \({\mathbb {R}}_{-}.\) To prove that \(\widehat{B}(x,\xi )\in S^{m\times \text {Re}(s)}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) we observe that for \(\text {Re}(s)<0,\) Theorem 4.2 can be applied. If \(\text {Re}(s)\geqslant 0,\) then there exists \(k\in {\mathbb {N}}\) such that \(\text {Re}(s)-k<0.\) Consequently, from the spectral calculus of matrices, we deduce that \(a(x,\xi )^{\text {Re}(s)-k}\in S^{m\times (\text {Re}(s)-k)}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) So, from the global pseudo-differential calculus, we conclude that
Thus, the proof is complete. \(\square \)
Corollary 4.4
Let \(0\leqslant \delta ,\rho \leqslant 1.\) Let \(a\in S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) be an L-elliptic symbol where \(m\geqslant 0\) and let us assume that \(a>0.\) Then, \(\widehat{B}(x,\xi )\equiv a(x,\xi )^\frac{1}{2}:=\exp (\frac{1}{2}\log (a(x,\xi )))\in S^{\frac{m}{2}}_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\)
Now, we prove the following lower bound.
Theorem 4.5
(Gårding inequality) For \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1,\) let \(a(x,D):C^\infty _L(M)\rightarrow {\mathcal {D}}'_L(M)\) be an operator with symbol \(a\in {S}^{m}_{\rho ,\delta }( M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) \(m\in {\mathbb {R}}.\) Let us assume that
satisfies
Then, there exist \(C_{1},C_{2}>0,\) such that the lower bound
holds true for every \(u\in C^\infty _L(M).\)
Proof
In view of that,
satisfies
and we get
This implies that
and for \(C_1\in (0, \frac{1}{C_0})\) we have that
If \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1,\) from Corollary 4.4, we have
From the symbolic calculus, we obtain
Now, let us assume that \(u\in C^\infty _L(M).\) Denoting \({\mathcal {M}}_{s}:=(1+L^{\circ }L)^{\frac{s}{2\text {ord}(L)}}=\text {Op}(\langle \xi \rangle ^s),\) \(s\in {\mathbb {R}},\) we have
Observe that
where in the last line we have used the Sobolev boundedness of r(x, D) from \({\mathcal {H}}^{\frac{m-(\rho -\delta )}{2}}(M)\) into \({\mathcal {H}}^{-\frac{m-(\rho -\delta )}{2}}(M).\) Consequently, we deduce the lower bound
If we assume for a moment that for every \(\varepsilon >0,\) there exists \(C_{\varepsilon }>0,\) such that
for \(0<\varepsilon <C_{1}\) we have
So, with the exception of the proof of (4.3) in view of the analysis above, for the proof of Theorem 4.5 we only need to prove (4.3). However, we will deduce it from the following more general lemma. \(\square \)
Lemma 4.6
Let us assume that \(s\geqslant t\geqslant 0\) or that \(s,t<0.\) Then, for every \(\varepsilon >0,\) there exists \(C_\varepsilon >0\) such that
holds true for every \(u\in C^\infty _L(M).\)
Proof
Let \(\varepsilon >0.\) Then, there exists \(C_{\varepsilon }>0\) such that
uniformly in \(\xi \in {\mathcal {I}}.\) Then, (4.4) follows from the Plancherel theorem. Indeed,
completing the proof. \(\square \)
Corollary 4.7
Let \(a(x,D):C^\infty _L(M)\rightarrow {\mathcal {D}}'_L(M)\) be an operator with symbol \(a\in {S}^{m}_{\rho ,\delta }( M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) \(m\in {\mathbb {R}}.\) Let us assume that
satisfies
Then, there exist \(C_{1},C_{2}>0,\) such that the lower bound
holds true for every \(u\in C^\infty _L(M).\)
5 \(L^2\)-estimates for pseudo-differential operators
In this section, we prove the following analogue of the Calderón–Vaillancourt theorem, see [14, 15].
Theorem 5.1
Let \(a(x,D):C^\infty _L(M)\rightarrow {\mathcal {D}}'_L(M)\) be a pseudo-differential operator with symbol \(a\in {S}^{0}_{\rho ,\delta }( M\times {\mathcal {I}})\) with \(0 \leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1.\) Then a(x, D) extends to a bounded operator on \(L^2({M}).\)
Proof
Assume first that \(a(x,\xi )\in {S}^{-m_0}_{\rho ',\delta '}(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) where \(m_0>0.\) The kernel of \(a(x,D)=\text {Op}(a),\) \(K_{a}(x,y),\) belongs to \(L^\infty (M\times M)\) for \(m_0\) large enough. Indeed, by using
let us identify for which \(m_0,\) a(x, D) is Hilbert–Schmidt. Since, a(x, D) is Hilbert–Schmidt if and only if \(K_a\in L^{2}(M\times M).\) By simple calculations, we obtain
Thus, for \(m_0\geqslant s_{0},\) a(x, D) is Hilbert–Schmidt on \(L^2(M)\) and, consequently, a bounded operator on \(L^2(M).\)
Next by induction, we prove that a(x, D) is \(L^2\)-bounded if \(p(x,\xi )\in {S}^{-m_0,{\mathcal {L}}}_{\rho ',\delta '}(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) for \(m_0< m\leqslant -(\rho '-\delta ').\) To do so, for \(u\in C^{\infty }(M)\) we form
where \(b(x,D)=a^{*}(x,D)a(x,D)\) has a symbol in \({S}^{2m,{\mathcal {L}}}_{\rho ',\delta '}(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) for \(0\leqslant \delta '<\rho '\leqslant 1.\) From the induction hypothesis, the continuity of a(x, D) for all \(a\in S^{2\,m,{\mathcal {L}}}_{\rho ',\delta '}\) follows successively for \(m\leqslant -\frac{m_0}{2},-\frac{m_0}{4},\ldots , -\frac{m_0}{2^{\ell _0}},\ldots ,\) \(\ell _0\in {\mathbb {N}},\) and hence for \(m\leqslant -\frac{m_0}{2^{\ell _0}},\) where \(\frac{m_0}{2^{\ell _0}}<\rho '-\delta ',\) after a finite number of steps.
Assume that \(a(x,\xi )\in S^{0,{\mathcal {L}}}_{\rho ',\delta '}(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) and choose
then \(c(x,\xi )=(M-a(x,\xi )a(x,\xi )^* )^{1/2}\in S^{0,{\mathcal {L}}}_{\rho ',\delta '}(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) Now, we have
where \(r\in {S}^{-(\rho '-\delta ')}_{{\rho ',\delta '}}(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) Hence, \(\Vert a(x,D) \Vert _{{\mathscr {B}}(L^2)}\leqslant M+\Vert r(x,D)\Vert _{{\mathscr {B}}(L^2)}. \) \(\square \)
Remark 5.2
For the \(L^{p}\)-\(L^q\)-boundedness of pseudo-differential operators in the setting of non-harmonic analysis, we refer the reader to [17].
6 Global solvability for evolution problems
In this section, we apply the Gårding inequality to some problems of PDEs, the global solvability of parabolic and hyperbolic type of problems associated with the non-harmonic pseudo-differential calculus. More precisely, we study the existence and uniqueness of the solution of the Cauchy problem:
where the initial data \(u_0\in L^2(M),\) \(K(t):=K(t,x,D)\) with a symbol in \(S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) \(f\in L^2([0,T]\times M) \simeq L^2([0,T],L^2(M)),\) \(m>0,\) and a suitable positivity condition is imposed on K.
We say that the problem (6.1) has a solution if there exists \(v\in {\mathscr {D}}'((0,T)\times M)\) which satisfies the equation in (6.1) with the initial condition \(v(0)=u_0\in L^2(M)\) such that \(v\in C^1([0,T],L^2(M))\bigcap C([0,T],{\mathcal {H}}^{m,L}(M)).\)
In what follows, we assume thatFootnote 11
is L-elliptic. Under such assumption, we prove the existence and uniqueness of the solution \(v\in C^1([0,T],L^2(M))\bigcap C([0,T],{\mathcal {H}}^{m,L}(M)).\) We start with the following energy estimate.
Theorem 6.1
Let \(K(t)=K(t,x,D),\) \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1,\) be a pseudo-differential operator of order \(m>0\) with a symbol in \(S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}).\) Assume that \(\text {Re}(K(t))\) is an L-elliptic operator, for every \(t\in [0,T]\) with \(T>0.\) If
is a solution of the problem (6.1), then there exist \(C, C'(T)>0\) such that
holds for every \(0\leqslant t\leqslant T.\)
Moreover, we also have the estimate
Proof
Let \(v\in C^1([0,T], L^2(M) ) \cap C([0,T],{\mathcal {H}}^{m,L}(M)).\) Let us start by observing that \(v\in C([0,T],{\mathcal {H}}^{\frac{m}{2},L}(M))\) because of the embedding \({\mathcal {H}}^{m,L}\hookrightarrow {\mathcal {H}}^{\frac{m}{2},L}.\) This fact will be useful later because we will use the Gårding inequality applied to the operator \(\text {Re}(K(t)).\) So, \(v\in \text {Dom}(\partial _{\tau }-K(\tau ))\) for every \(0\leqslant \tau \leqslant T.\) In view of the embedding \({\mathcal {H}}^{m,L}\hookrightarrow L^2(M),\) we also have that \(v\in C([0,T], L^2(M) ).\) Let us define \(f(\tau ):=Q(\tau )v(\tau ),\) \(Q(\tau ):=(\partial _{\tau }-K(\tau )),\) for every \(0\leqslant \tau \leqslant T.\) Observe that
Now, from the Gårding inequality,
and from the parallelogram law, we have
Thus, we obtain
So, we have proved that
By using Gronwall’s Lemma, we obtain the energy estimate
for every \(0\leqslant t\leqslant T,\) and \(T>0.\) To finish the proof, we can change the calculations above with \(v(T-\cdot )\) instead of \(v(\cdot ),\) \(f(T-\cdot )\) instead of \(f(\cdot )\) and \(Q^{*}=-\partial _{t}-K(t)^{*}\) (or equivalently, \(Q=\partial _{t}-K(t)\)) instead of \(Q^{*}=-\partial _{t}+K(t)^{*}\) (or equivalently, \(Q=\partial _{t}-K(t)\)) using that \(\text {Re}(K(T-t)^*)=\text {Re}(K(T-t))\) to deduce that
So, we conclude the proof. \(\square \)
Theorem 6.2
Let \(K(t)=K(t,x,D)\in S^m_{\rho ,\delta }(M\times {\mathcal {I}}),\) \(0\leqslant \delta <\rho \leqslant 1,\) be a pseudo-differential operator of order \(m>0,\) and let us assume that \(\text {Re}(K(t))\) is L-elliptic, for every \(t\in [0,T]\) with \(T>0.\) Let \(f\in L^2(M).\) Then there exists a unique solution \(v\in C^1([0,T], L^2(M) ) \bigcap C([0,T],{\mathcal {H}}^{m,L}(M))\) of the problem (6.1). Moreover, v satisfies the energy estimate
for every \(0\leqslant t\leqslant T.\)
Proof
The energy estimate (6.2) and the classical Picard iteration theorem imply the existence result. Now, to show the uniqueness of v, let us assume that \(u\in C^1([0,T], L^2(M) ) \bigcap C([0,T],{\mathcal {H}}^{m,L}(M))\) is also a solution of the problem
Then, \(\omega :=v-u\in C^1([0,T], L^2(M) ) \bigcap C([0,T],{\mathcal {H}}^{m,L}(M))\) solves the problem
From Theorem 6.1 it follows that \(\Vert \omega (t)\Vert _{L^2(M)}=0,\) for all \(0\leqslant t\leqslant T.\) Hence, from the continuity in t of the functions we have that \(v(t,x)=u(t,x)\) for all \(t\in [0,T]\) and a.e. \(x\in M.\) \(\square \)
Notes
Which consists of all smooth functions a satisfying \(|\partial _{x}^\beta \partial _{\xi }^\alpha a(x,\xi )|=O(1+|\xi |)^{m-|\alpha |},\) when \(|\xi |\rightarrow \infty .\)
Which consists of all smooth functions a satisfying \(|\partial _{x}^\beta \partial _{\xi }^\alpha a(x,\xi )|=O(1+|\xi |)^{m-\rho |\alpha |+\delta |\beta |},\) when \(|\xi |\rightarrow \infty .\)
The assumption (BC) may be reformulated by saying that the domain \(\textrm{Dom}(L)\) of the operator L is linear, and the condition (BC+) by saying that \(\textrm{Dom}(L)\) and \(\textrm{Dom}(L^*)\) are closed in the topologies of \(C_{L}^\infty (\overline{\Omega })\) and \(C_{{L}^*}^\infty (\overline{\Omega }),\) respectively, with the latter spaces and their topologies introduced in Definition 2.4.
Let us denote by \(u_{\xi }\) the eigenfunction of L corresponding to the eigenvalue \(\lambda _{\xi }\) for each \(\xi \in {\mathcal I},\) so that \( {L}u_{\xi }=\lambda _{\xi }u_{\xi },\) in \( \Omega ,\) for all \( \xi \in {\mathcal I}. \) Here, the system of eigenfunctions \(u_\xi \) satisfy the boundary conditions (BC) discussed earlier. The conjugate spectral problem is \( L^{*}v_{\xi }=\overline{\lambda }_{\xi }v_{\xi },\) in \( \Omega \) for all \( \xi \in {\mathcal I},\) which we equip with the conjugate boundary conditions denoted by (BC)\(^*.\) This adjoint problem is associated with the adjoint \(L^{*}:={L}_{\Omega ^{*}}\) of L.
The convergence in the linear space \({\mathcal {D}}'_{{L}}(\Omega )\) is the usual weak convergence with respect to the space \(C_{{L}^*}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }).\)
That is, \(\varphi \in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathcal I})\) if for any \(M<\infty \) there exists a constant \(C_{\varphi , M}\) such that \( |\varphi (\xi )|\leqslant C_{\varphi , M}\langle \xi \rangle ^{-M} \) holds for all \(\xi \in {\mathcal I}.\) The topology on \({\mathcal {S}}({\mathcal I})\) is given by the seminorms \(p_{k},\) where \(k\in {{\mathbb {N}}}_{0}\) and \( p_{k}(\varphi ):=\sup _{\xi \in {\mathcal I}}\langle \xi \rangle ^{k}|\varphi (\xi )|.\)
Due to the rapid decay of L-Fourier coefficients of functions in \(C_{{L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega })\) compared to a fixed polynomial growth of elements of \({\mathcal {S}}'({\mathcal I}),\) the definition (2.12) still makes sense if \(f\in {\mathcal {D}}^\prime _{L}(\Omega )\) and \(g\in C_{{ L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }),\) with \(f{\star _{L}}g\in C_{{ L}}^{\infty }(\overline{\Omega }).\)
In the case when \(\{u_{\xi }: \, \xi \in {\mathcal I}\}\) is not a WZ-system, we can still understand the L-symbol \(\sigma _{A}\) of the operator A as a function on \(\overline{\Omega }\times {\mathcal I},\) for which the equality \( u_{\xi }:(x)\sigma _{A}(x,\xi )=\int _{\Omega }K_{A}(x,y)u_{\xi }(y){\textrm{d}}y \) holds for all \(\xi \) in \({\mathcal I}\) and for \(x\in \overline{\Omega }.\) Of course, this implies certain restrictions on the zeros of the Schwartz kernel \(K_A.\) Such restrictions may be considered natural from the point of view of the scope of problems that can be treated by our approach in the case when the eigenfunctions \(u_\xi (x)\) may vanish at some points x. We refer to [33] for the calculus without the WZ-condition.
\([-s]\) denotes the integer part of \(-s.\)
This means that \(A=K(t)\) is strongly L-elliptic.
References
Agmon, S.: The coerciveness problem for integro-differential forms. J. Anal. Math. 6, 183–223 (1958)
Atiyah, M.F., Bott, R.: The index problem for manifolds with boundary. In: Differential Analysis, Bombay Colloquium, pp. 175–186. Oxford University Press, London (1964)
Atiyah, M.F., Bott, R., Patodi, V.K.: On the heat equation and the index theorem. Invent. Math. 19, 279–330 (1973)
Atiyah, M.F., Singer, I.M.: The index of elliptic operators on compact manifolds. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 69, 422–433 (1963)
Atiyah, M.F., Singer, I.M.: The index of elliptic operators. I. Ann. Math. 2(87), 484–530 (1968)
Atiyah, M.F., Segal, G.: The index of elliptic operators. II. Ann. Math. 2(87), 531–545 (1968)
Atiyah, M.F., Singer, I.M.: The index of elliptic operators. III. Ann. Math. 2(87), 546–604 (1968)
Atiyah, M.F., Singer, I.M.: The index of elliptic operators. IV. Ann. Math. 2(93), 119–138 (1971)
Atiyah, M.F., Singer, I.M.: The index of elliptic operators. V. Ann. Math. (2) 93, 139–149 (1971)
Bari, N.K.: Biorthogonal systems and bases in Hilbert space. Moskov. Gos. Univ. Učenye Zapiski Matematika 148(4), 69–107 (1951)
Beals, R.: Characterization of pseudodifferential operators and applications. Duke Math. J. 44(1), 45–57 (1977)
Boutet de Monvel, L.: Boundary problems for pseudo-differential operators. Acta Math. 126(1–2), 11–51 (1971)
Buzano, E., Nicola, F.: Complex powers of hypoelliptic pseudodifferential operators. J. Funct. Anal. 245(2), 353–378 (2007)
Calderón, A.P., Vaillancourt, R.: On the boundedness of pseudo-differential operators. J. Math. Soc. Jpn. 23, 374–378 (1971)
Calderón, A.P., Vaillancourt, R.: A class of bounded pseudo-differential operators. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 69, 1185–1187 (1972)
Cardona, D., Del Corral, C.: The Dixmier trace and the non-commutative residue for multipliers on compact manifolds. In: Georgiev, V., Ozawa, T., Ruzhansky, M., Wirth, J. (eds.) Advances in Harmonic Analysis and Partial Differential Equations. Trends in Mathematics, Birkhäuser, Cham (2020)
Cardona, D., Kumar, V., Ruzhansky, M., Tokmagambetov, N.: \(L^p\)-\(L^q\) boundedness of pseudo-differential operators on smooth manifolds and its applications to nonlinear equations. arXiv:2005.04936
Cardona, D., Ruzhansky, M.: Subelliptic pseudo-differential operators and Fourier integral operators on compact Lie groups. To appear in MSJ Memoirs, arXiv:2008.09651
Carleman, T.: Proprietés asymptotiques des fonctions fondamentales des membranes vibrantes. In: C. R. sieme Congr. Math. Scand. (Stockholm, 1934), pp. 33–44. Hakan Ohlsson, Lund (1935)
Coriasco, S., Schrohe, E., Seiler, J.: Bounded imaginary powers of differential operators on manifolds with conical singularities. Math. Z. 244(2), 235–269 (2003)
Delgado, J., Ruzhansky, M., Tokmagambetov, N.: Schatten classes, nuclearity and nonharmonic analysis on compact manifolds with boundary. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 107(6), 758–783 (2017)
Friedrichs, K.O., Lax, P.D.: Boundary value problems for first order operators. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 18, 355–388 (1965)
Gårding, L.: Dirichlet’s problem for linear elliptic partial differential equations. Math. Scand. 1, 55–72 (1953)
Hendrickx, A.: \(L^p-L^q\) boundedness of Fourier multipliers on Fundamental domains of lattices in \({\mathbb{R}}^d\). arXiv:2202.04211
Hörmander, L.: The Analysis of the Linear Partial Differential Operators, vol. III. Springer, Berlin (1985)
Kohn, J.J., Nirenberg, L.: An algebra of pseudo-differential operators. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 18, 269–305 (1965)
Kumano-go, H., Tsutsumi, C.: Complex powers of hypoelliptic pseudo-differential operators with applications. Osaka J. Math. 10(i), 147–174 (1973)
Langlands, R.P.: Some holomorphic semi-groups. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 46, 361–363 (1960)
Loya, P.: Asymptotic properties of the heat kernel on conic manifolds. Isr. J. Math. 136, 285–306 (2003)
Loya, P.: Complex powers of differential operators on manifolds with conical singularities. J. Anal. Math. 89, 31–56 (2003)
Meladze, G.A., Shubin, M.A.: A functional calculus of pseudodifferential operators on unimodular Lie groups. J. Math. Sci. 47, 2607–2638 (1989)
Ruzhansky, M., Tokmagambetov, N.: Nonharmonic analysis of boundary value problems. Int. Math. Res. Not. 12, 3548–3615 (2016)
Ruzhansky, M., Tokmagambetov, N.: Nonharmonic analysis of boundary value problems without WZ condition. Math. Model. Nat. Phenom. 12(1), 115–140 (2017)
Ruzhansky, M., Turunen, V.: Pseudo-Differential Operators and Symmetries. Background Analysis and Advanced Topics. Pseudo-Differential Operators. Theory and Applications, vol. 2. Birkhäuser, Basel (2010)
Ruzhansky, M., Turunen, V.: Sharp Gårding inequality on compact Lie groups. J. Funct. Anal. 260(10), 2881–2901 (2011)
Ruzhansky, M., Turunen, V.: Global quantization of pseudo-differential operators on compact Lie groups, \({\rm SU}(2)\), 3-sphere, and homogeneous spaces. Int. Math. Res. Not. 11, 2439–2496 (2013)
Ruzhansky, M., Turunen, V., Wirth, J.: Hörmander class of pseudo-differential operators on compact Lie groups and global hypoellipticity. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 20(3), 476–499 (2014)
Ruzhansky, M., Wirth, J.: On multipliers on compact Lie groups. Funct. Anal. Appl. 47, 72–75 (2013)
Ruzhansky, M., Wirth, J.: Global functional calculus for operators on compact Lie groups. J. Funct. Anal. 267(1), 144–172 (2014)
Schwartz, L.: Espaces de fonctions différentiables à valeurs vectorielles. J. Anal. Math. 4, 88–148 (1954/1955)
Sedletskiĭ, A.M.: Biorthogonal expansions of functions in exponential series on intervals of the real axis. Usp. Mat. Nauk 37(5(227)), 51–95, 248 (1982)
Sedletskii, A.M.: Nonharmonic analysis. J. Math. Sci. N. Y. 116(5), 3551–3619 (2003). Functional analysis
Sedletskii, A.M.: Nonharmonic Analysis. Itogi Nauki i Tekhniki. Ser. Sovrem. Mat. Pril. Temat. Obz., vol. 96, pp. 106–211 (2006)
Smith, K.T.: Inequalities for formally positive integro-differential forms. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 67, 368–370 (1961)
Schechter, M.: Integral inequalities for partial differential operators and functions satisfying general boundary conditions. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 12, 37–66 (1959)
Schechter, M.: Coerciveness in \(L^p\). Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 107, 10–29 (1963)
Schrohe, E.: Complex powers of elliptic pseudodifferential operators. Integral Equ. Oper. Theory 9(3), 337–354 (1986)
Schrohe, E.: Complex powers on noncompact manifolds and manifolds with singularities. Math. Ann. 281(3), 393–409 (1988)
Seeley, R.T.: Integro-differential operators on vector bundles. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 117, 167–204 (1965)
Seeley, R.T.: Complex powers of an elliptic operator. In: Singular Integrals (Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, Chicago, Ill., 1966), pp. 288–307. American Mathematical Society, Providence (1967)
Seeley, R.T.: Eigenfunction expansions of analytic functions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 21, 734–738 (1969)
Shubin, M.A.: Pseudodifferential almost-periodic operators and von Neumann algebras. Trudy Mosk. Mat. Obshch. 35, 103–164 (1976)
Shubin, M.A.: Pseudodifferential Operators and Spectral Theory. Springer, Berlin (2001). Translated from the Russian by Stig I. Andersson
Taylor, M.E.: Pseudodifferential Operators. Princeton Mathematical Series, vol. 34. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1981)
Titchmarsh, E.C.: The zeros of certain integral functions. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 25, 283–302 (1926)
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees for several useful suggestions and comments, which greatly improved the presentation of this manuscript. The authors were supported by the FWO Odysseus 1 Grant G.0H94.18N: Analysis and Partial Differential Equations. M. Ruzhansky was also supported in parts by EPSRC Grant EP/R003025/2. NT was partly funded by the Committee of Science of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Grant no. AP14872042).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by M. S. Moslehian.
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
Sánchez, D.C., Kumar, V., Ruzhansky, M. et al. Global functional calculus, lower/upper bounds and evolution equations on manifolds with boundary. Adv. Oper. Theory 8, 50 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43036-023-00254-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43036-023-00254-0