In this post we are interested in optimal control problem of the mixed local-nonlocal elliptic problem. We prove well-posedness and regularity results of the associated elliptic with singular boundary-exterior data.
Secondly, we show the existence of optimal solutions of associated optimal control problem, and we characterize the optimality conditions.
1 Mixed local-nonlocal problem
Let Ω⊂RN (N≥1) be a bounded domain with a smooth boundary ∂Ω. We consider the following initial-boundary-exterior value problem:
⎩⎨⎧Lψ=0ψ=u1ψ=u2inΩ,on∂Ω,in(RN∖Ω),(1.1)
Here, the operator L is given by
L:=−Δ+(−Δ)s,0<s<1,(1.2)
In (1.2), Δ is the classical Laplacian and (−Δ)s (0<s<1) denotes the fractional Laplace operator given formally by the following singular integral:
(−Δ)sψ=P.V.CN,s∫RN∣x−y∣N+2sψ(x)−ψ(y)dy,
where CN,s is a normalization constant depending only on N and s and given by
CN,s:=π2NΓ(1−s)s22sΓ(22s+N).
Integro-differential equations of the form (1.1) arise naturally in the study of stochastic processes with jumps. The generator of an N-dimensional Lévy process has the following general structure:
where ν is the Lévy measure and satisfies ∫RNmin{1,∣ξ∣2}dν(ξ)<+∞, and χB1 is the usual characteristic function of the unit ball B1 of RN. The first term of (1.3) on the right-hand side corresponds to the diffusion, the second one to the drift, and the third one to the jump part.
For the above reasons, the study of the operator L with diffusion, drift and jump components appears quite intriguing. Here, we focus on the case L:=−αΔ+(−Δ)s, obtained from (1.3) by setting aij=α−1δij, γ=0 and ν given by the symmetric kernel β−1∣x−ξ∣−N−2s.
Indeed, the particular case when ν=0, namely when there are no jumps, L turns into a classical second-order differential operator. Foremost, for γ=0, the operator L reduced to the Laplace operator obtained from the brownian motion (see Figure 1). Here, ψ(x)=E(u1(Bτx0))=E( pay off )
solves:
{−Δψ=0ψ=u1inΩ,on∂Ω,
On the other hand, the case when the process has no diffusion and no drift has attracted a lot of attention recently. In particular, one of the most prominent operators belonging to this class is the fractional Laplacian (−Δ)s, which turns out to be the infinitesimal generator of isotropic s-stable Lévy processes. Here, ψ(x)=E(u2(Xτχ0))=E( pay off )
solves:
{(−Δ)sψ=0ψ=u2inΩ,in(RN∖Ω),
Figure 1. On the left, brownian motion leading by local operator and on the right we have Lévy process leading to nonlocal operator.
Btx0 is a brownian motion in RN starting at x0; Xtx0 a Lévy process with discontinuous sample paths, and τ the first time at which Xtx0 is in RN∖Ω.
Goal:
For non-smooth boundary-exterior data, we shall introduce the notion of solutions by transposition (or very-weak solutions) of (1.1), study their existence and regularity. Next, in this direction reads that if u1∈L2(∂Ω), u2∈L2(RN∖Ω) and 0<s≤3/4, then the associated very-weak solution ψ of (1.1) belongs to H1/2(Ω)∩L2(RN). Finally, study the existence of optimal solutions to optimal control problems involving the mixed operator L with singular Dirichlet boundary-exterior data, and to characterize the associated optimality conditions. More precisely, we shall consider the following two different optimal control problems:
min(u1,u2)∈ZadJ((u1,u2)),(1.4)
subject to the constraint that the state ψ:=ψ(u1,u2) solves the parabolic system (1.1). We recall that the control (u1,u2)∈Zad with Zad being a closed and convex subset of ZD:=L2(∂Ω)×L2(RΩ), which is endowed with the norm given by
is a Hilbert space. We let H−s(Ω):=(H0s(Ω))⋆ be the dual space of H0s(Ω) with respect to the pivot space L2(Ω), so that we have the following continuous and dense embeddings:
It is worthwhile noticing that the operator Ns maps Hs(RN) into Hlocs(RN∖Ω).
Furthermore, if u∈H01(Ω) and (−Δ)su∈L2(Ω), then Nsu∈L2(RN∖Ω), and there is a constant C>0 such that
∥Nsu∥L2(RN∖Ω)≤C∥u∥H01(Ω). (2.4)
To introduce the notion of solution of our problem (1.1), we need the following integration by parts formula.
Let φ∈Hs(RN) be such that (−Δ)sφ∈L2(Ω) and Nsφ∈L2(RN∖Ω). Then, for every ψ∈Hs(RN), the identity
Next, we introduce the classical first order Sobolev space
H1(Ω):={u∈L2(Ω):∫Ω∣∇u∣2dx<∞}
which is endowed with the norm defined by
∥u∥H1(Ω)=(∫Ω∣u∣2dx+∫Ω∣∇u∣2dx)21.
In order to study the solvability of (1.1), we shall also need the following function space
H01(Ω):={w∈H1(RN):w≡0inRN∖Ω},(2.6)
which is a (real) Hilbert space endowed with the scalar product
∫Ω∇w⋅∇φdx,
and associated norm
∥φ∥H01(Ω):=∥∇φ∥L2(Ω). (2.7)
Furthermore, the classical Poincar\'{e} inequality holds in H01(Ω). That is, there is a constant C>0 such that
∥φ∥L2(Ω)≤C∥φ∥H01(Ω)for allφ∈H01(Ω). (2.8)
We shall denote by H−1(Ω) the dual space of H01(Ω) with respect to the pivot space L2(Ω) so that we have the following continuous and dense embeddings:
Here also, if Ω is bounded and has a Lipschitz continuous boundary, then by [4, Chapter 1]
H01(Ω)=D(Ω)H1(Ω).
In addition, under the same assumption on Ω, every function u∈H1(Ω) has a trace u∣∂Ω that belongs to H1/2(∂Ω), and the mapping trace
H1(Ω)→H21(∂Ω),u↦u∣∂Ω(2.9)
is continuous and surjective.
Throughout the remainder of the paper, without any mention, we shall assume that Ω⊂RN is a bounded domain with a smooth boundary ∂Ω. Under this assumption, we have the following continuous and dense embedding for every 0<s<1 (see e.g. [4]):
H01(Ω)continuousembeddedinH0s(Ω). (2.10)
In view of (2.7) and (2.10), we can deduce that
(φ,ψ)H01(Ω):=F(φ,ψ)+∫Ω∇φ⋅∇ψdx(2.11)
defines a scalar product on H01(Ω) with associated norm
∥φ∥H01(Ω):=(F(φ,φ)+∫Ω∣∇φ∣2dx)21. (2.12)
The norm given in (2.12) is equivalent to the one given in (2.7).
3 Well-posedness
In the part of this post we are interested in establishing some existence, uniqueness and regularity results of the state equation (1.1)
that will be needed in the proof of the existence of minimizers to the optimal control problem (1.4). We start with the following non-homogeneous Dirichlet problem associated with the operator L, as defined in (1.2). That is,
⎩⎨⎧−Δw+(−Δ)sw=fw=g1w=g2inΩ,on∂Ω,inRN∖Ω.(3.1)
To introduce our notion of solutions to the system (3.1), we start with the simple case g1=0 on ∂Ω and g2=0 in RN∖Ω.
Definition 3.1.
Let f∈H−1(Ω), g2=0 in RN∖Ω and g1=0 on ∂Ω. A function w∈H01(Ω) is said to be a \emph{weak solution of} (3.1) if for every function φ∈H01(Ω), the identity
∫Ω∇w⋅∇φdx+F(w,φ)=⟨f,φ⟩H−1(Ω),H01(Ω)(3.2)
holds, where we recall that the bilinear form F has been defined in (2.5).
The following existence result can be established by using the notion of solution by transposition already discussed in [1, Theorem 1.1].
Definition 3.2.
Let f∈H−1(Ω), g1∈L2(∂Ω), and g2∈L2(RN∖Ω). A function w∈L2(RN) is called a very-weak solution of (3.1), if the identity
We notice that Definition 3.2 of very-weak solutions makes sense if every function φ∈V satisfies ∂νφ∈L2(∂Ω), and Nsφ∈L2(RN∖Ω). We have the following existence theorem.
Theorem 3.3 ([1])
Let 0<s≤3/4. Then, for every f∈H−1(Ω), g1∈L2(∂Ω) and g2∈L2(RN∖Ω), the system (3.1) has a unique very-weak solution w∈L2(RN) in the sense of Definition 3.2, and there is a constant C>0 such that
In addition, if g1 and g2 are as in Definition 3.2, then the following assertions hold.
• Every weak solution of (3.1) is also a very-weak solution.
• Every very-weak solution of (3.1) that belongs to H1(RN) is also a weak solution.
Remark 3.4.
We observe the following facts.
(a) We notice that in Definition 3.2 of very-weak solutions, we do not require that the function w has a well-defined trace on ∂Ω and that w∣∂Ω=g1, for that reason the regularity of w cannot be improved.
(b) But if w has a well-defined trace on ∂Ω and w∣∂Ω=g1∈L2(∂Ω), then the regularity of w can be improved. Indeed, using well-known trace theorems (see e.g. [3]) we can deduce that w∈L2(RN)∩H1/2(Ω).
(c) If 0<s≤3/4, then V⊂H2(Ω)∩H01(Ω). Indeed, let φ∈V. If 0<s<1/2, it follows from the proof of Theorem 3.3 Step 1 that φ∈H2(Ω)∩H01(Ω). If 1/2≤s≤3/4, then the proof of Theorem 3.3 Step 1 shows again that φ∈H3−2s∩H01(Ω). Using \cite{G-JFA}, we get that, in fact (−Δ)sφ∈L2(Ω). This implies that Δφ∈L2(Ω). Thus, φ∈H2(Ω)∩H01(Ω) by using elliptic regularity results for the Laplace operator.
(d) Consider the following Dirichlet problem: Find u∈H01(Ω) satisfying
Lu=finΩ.
Due to the presence of the fractional Laplace operator (−Δ)s, even if f is smooth, classical bootstrap argument cannot be used to improve the regularity of the solution u. This follows from the fact that even if f is smooth enough, if 1/2≤s<1, then a function v∈H0s(Ω) satisfying (−Δ)sv=f in Ω only belongs to ∩ε>0H2s−ε(Ω) and does not belong to H2s(Ω).
(e) In the case 3/4<s<1, if the function g1 is smooth, says, g1∈H2s−3/2(∂Ω), then we may replace (3.3) in the definition of very-weak solutions by the expression:
holds, for every φ∈V. In that case, Theorem 3.3 will be valid for every 0<s<1. But recall that the main objective of the paper is to study the minimization problem (1.4) and our control function u1 does not enjoy such a regularity.
4 Optimal control problems of mixed local-nonlocal elliptic PDE
The aim of this section is to study the optimal control problem (1.4). Recall that ZD:=L2(∂Ω)×L2(RN∖Ω) is endowed with the norm given by
where β>0 is a real number, zd1∈L2(Ω), zd2∈H−1(Ω), ψ:=ψ(u1,u2) is the unique very-weak solution of (4.2),
and
∥ϕ∥H−1(Ω)2=⟨(−ΔD)−1ϕ,ϕ⟩H01(Ω),H−1(Ω).
Here, (−ΔD)−1ϕ=ϱ with ϱ the unique solution of the Dirichlet problem
−Δϱ=ϕinΩandϱ=0on∂Ω.
4.1 The optimal control problem
In this section we consider the minimization problem (4.3) with the functional J. We have the following existence result of optimal solutions.
Proposition 4.1
Let 0<s≤3/4, u1∈L2(∂Ω), and u2∈L2(RN∖Ω). Let Zad be a closed and convex subset of ZD, and let ψ=ψ(u1,u2) satisfy (4.2) in the very-weak sense. Then there exists a unique control (u1,u2)∈Zad solution of
inf(v1,v2)∈ZDJ1((v1,v2)). (4.4)
Proof
Firstly, observe that if (u1,u2)=(0,0), then (4.2) has the unique solution ψ(0,0)=0.
It is clear that π((⋅,⋅),(⋅,⋅)) is a bilinear and symmetric functional. It is continuous and coercive on Zad. Thus, using the abstract results in [6, Chapter II, Section 1.2], we can then deduce that there exists a unique (u1,u2)∈Zad solution to (4.4). □
Next, we characterize the optimality conditions.
Theorem 4.2.
Let 0<s≤3/4 and U=H01(Ω)∩H−1(Ω). Let also Zad be a closed convex subspace of ZD, and (u1,u2) be the minimizer (4.4) over Zad. Then, there exist p⋆ and ψ⋆ such that the triplet (ψ⋆,p⋆,(u1,u2))∈L2(RN)×U×Zad satisfies the following optimality systems:
Let (u1,u2)∈Zad be the unique solution of the minimization problem (4.4). We denote by ψ⋆:=ψ⋆(u1,u2) the associated state so that, ψ⋆ solves the system (4.5) in the very-weak sense.
Using classical duality arguments we have that (4.6) is the dual system associated with (4.5). Since zd1−ψ⋆∈L2(Q), it follows that (4.6) has a unique weak solution p⋆∈U.
To prove the last assertion (4.7), we write the Euler Lagrange first order optimality condition that characterizes the optimal control (u1,u2) as follows:
Combining (4.15)-(4.16), we get (4.7). The justification of (4.8) is classical and the proof is finished. □
References
[1] J-D. Djida, G. Mophou, and M. Warma. Optimal control of mixed local-nonlocal parabolic PDE with singular boundary-exterior data. Evolution Equations and Control Theory, doi:10.3934/eect.2022015.
[2] H. Antil, R. Khatri, and M. Warma. External optimal control of nonlocal PDEs. Inverse Problems 35 (2019), no. 8, 084003, 35 pp.
[3] F. Gesztesy and M. Mitrea. A description of all self-adjoint extensions of the Laplacian and Kre˘ıntype resolvent formulas on non-smooth domains. J. Anal. Math. 113 (2011), 53–172.
[4] P. Grisvard. Elliptic problems in nonsmooth domains. Reprint of the 1985 original [MR0775683]. With a foreword by Susanne C. Brenner. Classics in Applied Mathematics, 69. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA, 2011.
[5] G. Grubb. Regularity in Lp Sobolev spaces of solutions to fractional heat equations. J. Funct. Anal. 274 (2018), no. 9, 2634–2660.
[6] J.-L. Lions. Optimal control of systems governed by partial differential equations. Translated from the French by S. K. Mitter Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 170 SpringerVerlag, New York-Berlin 1971.
WE USE COOKIES ON THIS SITE TO ENHANCE USER EXPERIENCE. We also use analytics. By navigating any page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies.
more information