Abstract
The minimum problem we mentioned in the introduction to Chapter 2 can be generalized as follows:
[with f ∈ L 2 (Ω), Γ of class C 1]. If u is a solution to this problem, for any choice of v in 𝕂 the function ℱ(u + λ(v — u)) of λ ∈ [0, 1] must attain its minimum at λ = 0; hence, u must satisfy the condition
which amounts to
[where a(u, v) denotes the symmetric bilinear form (math)]. Vice versa, a solution of (4.1) necessarily minimizes ℱ(v) over 𝕂 (see Lemma 4.1 below). These simple observations are sufficient to introduce the content of the present chapter.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliographical Notes
The theory of v.i.’s originated in Italy from the independent works of G. Fichera [48] and G. Stampacchia [140] in the early 1960s. The intense research that flourished internationally since can be roughly viewed as consisting of three strands: • abstract existence results (culminating in the unifying approach of H. Brézis [18] to pseudomonotone operators); • regularity results in more “concrete” cases involving partial differential operators, still the main source of difficulties; • applications of v.i.’s in such diverse fields as elasticity theory, control theory, hydraulics, etc.
Existing monographs on v.i.’s usually find their motivations in the third strand above: e.g., see J. L. Lions [104], G. Duvaut and J. L. Lions [47], C. Baiocchi and A. Capelo [8], A. Bensoussan and J. L. Lions [12]. More attention to regularity questions is devoted by D. Kinderlehrer and G. Stampacchia [87], A. Friedman [56], and M. Chipot [43].
For the material of our Sections 4.1–4.3 the main reference is J. L. Lions [103]. The proof of Stampacchia’s Theorem 4.4 is taken from J. L. Lions and G. Stampacchia [105], that of Fichera’s Theorem 4.7 from P. Hess [75]. Theorem 4.21 is a fundamental result of J. Leray and J. L. Lions [99], generalized slightly by dint of a device, due to R. Landes [97], in the proof of Lemma 4.22; the second part of Lemma 4.22 is taken from L. Boccardo, F. Murat, and J. P. Puel [16].
The results of Section 4.4 are due to the present author; in more particular cases Theorem 4.27 was previously proven by M. Chicco [39] and P. L. Lions [107] with completely different methods.
Lewy-Stampacchia inequalities are named after the paper by H. Lewy and G. Stampacchia [102], dealing with a potential-theoretic approach to a minimum problem of the type illustrated in the Introduction. The passage to a variational setting with applications to regularity of solutions is due to U. Mosco and G. M. Troianiello [121]. For more general results see B. Hanouzet and J. L. Joly [72], O. Nakoulima [125], and U. Mosco [120]; the latter article provides the simple arguments of the proof of Theorem 4.32. Regularity results of the same type as Lemma 4.34 were first obtained, with different techniques, by H. Lewy and G. Stampacchia [101] and H. Brézis and G. Stampacchia [22].
Interior H 2, ∞ regularity was proved by H. Brézis and D. Kinderlehrer [20] and C. Gerhardt [62]. Global H 2, ∞ regularity was first proved by R. Jensen [80] who, however, used a norm estimate (Lemma 4.4 in A. Friedman [56]) that is not quite correct: compare with M. Chipot [43]. The proof of Theorem 4.38 is based on C. Gerhardt [63]. The example of Section 4.6.2 is attributed to E. Shamir by H. Brézis and G. Stampacchia [22]; the proof of Theorem 4.39 is basically due to J. L. Lions [103] (see also D. Kinderlehrer [86]).
The techniques of Section 4.7 were introduced (for the study of interior regularity) by M. Giaquinta [64]; the proof of Theorem 4.45, however, is essentially that of M. Biroli [15]. For a different approach see J. Frehse [52].
Theorem 4.46 is due to M. Chipot [41].
Except for some minor changes, the proof of Theorem 4.47 comes from L. Boccardo, F. Murat, and J. P. Puel [16]. The proof of Theorem 4.48 is ours (but see the remark following it); the idea of reducing a nonlinear equation to a v.i. was first utilized by J. P. Puel [131].
By no means does our treatment of (elliptic) v.i.’s do justice to the richness of existing results. Among our omissions we could mention numerical aspects (see R. Glowinski, J. L. Lions, and R. Trémolières [69]), regularity of the free boundary (see A. Friedman [56]), and v.i.’s that are not of the obstacle type (see H. Brézis and M. Sibony [21] and P. L. Lions [108] for what concerns the convex set (4.31)).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1987 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Troianiello, G.M. (1987). Variational Inequalities. In: Elliptic Differential Equations and Obstacle Problems. University Series in Mathematics. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-3614-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-3614-1_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4899-3616-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4899-3614-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive