# Subelliptic Operators

## Summary

If *P* is an elliptic operator of order *m* in a *C*∞ manifold *X* then *Pu*∈*H* _{(s)} ^{loc} ; implies *u*∈*H* _{(s+m)} ^{loc} (Theorem 18.1.29). This result can be microlocalized (Theorem 18.1.31): If *Pu*∈*H* _{(s)} ^{loc} at a point in the cotangent bundle where *P* is non-characteristic then *u*∈*H* _{(s+m)} ^{loc} there. This is the strongest possible result on (micro-)hypoellipticity.

The purpose of this chapter is to give a complete study of the next simplest case where *Pu*∈*H* _{(s)} ^{loc} ; implies *u* _{(s+m-δ)} ^{loc} for some fixed *δ*∈(0,1). One calls *P* subelliptic with loss of *δ* derivatives then. The condition δ< 1 guarantees that subellipticity is only a condition on the principal symbol.

In Section 26.4 we have already seen that condition(*Ψ*) is necessary for hypoellipticity. In Section 27.1 another necessary condition on the principal symbol of a subelliptic operator is obtained by a scaling argument. These results together suggest the necessary and sufficient condition for sub-ellipticity stated as Theorem 27.1.11. However, to prove the necessity completely we also need a symplectic study of the Taylor expansion of the symbol given in Section 27.2. The general proof of sufficiency is long so we give a short proof for operators satisfying condition (*P*) in Section 27.3. Section 27.4 is devoted to a detailed discussion of the local properties of a general subelliptic symbol. The proof of Theorem 27.1.11 is then completed in Sections 27.5 and 27.6 by means of a localization argument in several steps.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## Notes

- [17]Hörmander, L.: Pseudo-differential operators and non-elliptic boundary problems. Ann. of Math. 83, 129–209 (1966).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [2]Nirenberg, L. and F. Treves: On local solvability of linear partial differential equations. I. Necessary conditions. II. Sufficient conditions. Correction. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 23, 1–38 and 459–509 (1970); 24, 279–288 (1971).MATHGoogle Scholar
- [2]Egorov, Ju.V.: Subelliptic pseudo-differential operators. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 188, 20–22 (1969); also in Soviet Math. Doklady 10, 1056–1059 (1969).MATHGoogle Scholar
- [8]Treves, F.: A new method of proof of the subelliptic estimates. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 24, 71–115 (1971).MATHGoogle Scholar
- [3]Egorov, Ju.V.: Subelliptic operators. Uspehi Mat. Nauk 30:2, 57–114 and 30:3, 57–104 (1975); also in Russian Math. Surveys 30:2, 59–118 and 30: 3, 55–105 (1975).Google Scholar
- [38]Hörmander, L.: Subelliptic operators. Seminar on sing. of sol. of diff. eq. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ., 127–208 (1979).Google Scholar
- [39]Hörmander, L.: The Weyl calculus of pseudo-differential operators. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 32, 359–443 (1979).MATHGoogle Scholar
- [1]Fefferman, C. and D.H. Phong: On positivity of pseudo-differential operators. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 75, 4673–4674 (1978).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [17]Hörmander, L.: Pseudo-differential operators and non-elliptic boundary problems. Ann. of Math. 83, 129–209 (1966).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [44]Hörmander, L.: On the subelliptic test estimates. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 33, 339–363 (1980).MATHGoogle Scholar
- [1]Catlin, D.: Necessary conditions for subellipticity and hypoellipticity for the
*JNeumann*problem on pseudoconvex domains. In Recent developments in several complex variables. Ann. of Math. Studies 100, 93–100 (1981).Google Scholar