Abstract
We show results on propagation of anisotropic Gabor wave front sets for solutions to a class of evolution equations of Schrödinger type. The Hamiltonian is assumed to have a real-valued principal symbol with the anisotropic homogeneity \(a(\lambda x, \lambda ^\sigma \xi ) = \lambda ^{1+\sigma } a(x,\xi )\) for \(\lambda > 0\) where \(\sigma > 0\) is a rational anisotropy parameter. We prove that the propagator is continuous on anisotropic Shubin–Sobolev spaces. The main result says that the propagation of the anisotropic Gabor wave front set follows the Hamilton flow of the principal symbol.
Similar content being viewed by others
1 Introduction
We prove results on propagation of anisotropic phase space singularities for the initial value Cauchy problem for evolution equations of the form
Here \(T > 0\), \(a^w(x,D_x)\) is a Weyl pseudodifferential operator and \(u_0 \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) is a tempered distribution.
The Hamiltonian \(a^w(x,D_x)\) is assumed to have real-valued principal symbol \(a_0\). Following the fundamental idea of Hörmander we show that the singularities at time \(t \in [-T,T]\) are the singularities of the initial datum \(u_0\) transported by the Hamilton flow \(\chi _t \) of the principal symbol \(a_0\). The Hamilton flow \(( x(t), \xi (t) ) = \chi _t(x,\xi )\) is the solution to Hamilton’s equation with initial datum \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } \{ (0,0) \} \), that is the solution to the system of ordinary differential equations
The concept of phase space singularities that we use is the anisotropic Gabor wave front set, which is determined by an anisotropy parameter \(\sigma > 0\). For \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) the anisotropic Gabor wave front set \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}(u)\) is a \(\sigma \)-conic closed subset of \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\). A \(\sigma \)-conic subset of \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) contains anisotropic phase space curves of the form
if one point of the curve belongs to the subset.
The anisotropic Gabor wave front set \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}(u)\) is defined by means of the short-time Fourier transform \(V_\varphi u (x, \xi ) = \mathscr {F}\left( u \, \overline{\varphi (\cdot -x) }\right) (\xi )\) where \(\varphi \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) {\setminus } \{ 0 \}\) is a window function. To wit \(z_0 = (x_0,\xi _0) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) satisfies \(z_0 \notin \mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}( u )\) if there exists an open set \(U \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\) such that \(z_0 \in U\) and
This means that the short-time Fourier transform, which a priori is polynomially upper bounded, decays superpolynomially along curves of the form (1.2) in a neighborhood of \(z_0\). For \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) we have \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}(u) = \emptyset \) if and only if \(u \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) so \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}(u)\) measures globally singular behavior in the sense of lack of smoothness or decay at infinity comprehensively.
We impose the condition that the Hamiltonian \(a^w(x,D)\) has a real-valued principal symbol \(a_0\) which satisfies the anisotropic homogeneity
This condition turns out to have several beneficial consequences for the problem we study.
First it implies that the Hamilton flow \(\chi _t\) of \(a_0\) commutes with the anisotropic scaling map
for each \(\lambda > 0\). This is a natural requirement for propagation results of the form \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}(\mathscr {K}_t u_0) \subseteq \chi _t \mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}(u_0)\), where \(\mathscr {K}_t u_0 = e^{- i t a^w(x,D)} u_0\) denotes the solution operator (propagator) for (1.1), that we aim for, since \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}(u)\) is \(\sigma \)-conic for all \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\).
Secondly if \(\sigma > 0\) is rational then condition (1.3) on the principal symbol allows us to prove the main result of this paper, that is the propagation of singularities
where \(T > 0\).
The term “principal symbol” refers here to the pseudodifferential calculus of anisotropic Shubin symbols [7, 27, 32]. The symbols exhibit anisotropic behavior on phase space according to the assumed estimates
where again \(\sigma > 0\) is a given anisotropy parameter, and \(m \in \textbf{R}\) is the order. These symbol classes are denoted \(G^{m,\sigma }\).
In the main result Theorem 8.3, we show (1.4) under the following assumptions. Suppose \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\), and let \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma ,\sigma }\), \(a \sim \sum _{j = 0}^{\infty } a_j\), where \(a_0 \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0)\) is real-valued and satisfies (1.3), whereas the lower order terms satisfy \(a_j \in G^{(1+\sigma ) (1-2 j ), \sigma }\) for \(j \geqslant 1\). An example of a symbol that satisfies the criteria is
where \(c \in \textbf{R}\setminus 0\) and \(\psi \) is a smooth function vanishing in a small ball around the origin in \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\).
We show that the solution operator is continuous on anisotropic Shubin–Sobolev spaces. This is of independent interest but also a tool for the proof of Theorem 8.3. The proof of the main result is based on ideas from [16]. More precisely our result is an anisotropic version of [21, Theorem 4.2] which treats propagation of the (isotropic) Gabor wave front set when the principal symbol is real-valued and homogeneous of order two on \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\). With \(\sigma = 1\) our result implies a weaker form of [21, Theorem 4.2].
The proof ideas for Theorem 8.3 and [21, Theorem 4.2] are based on Hörmander’s proof of [16, Theorem 23.1.4]. This result concerns Hamiltonians with first-order Hörmander type symbols, the continuity concerns classical Sobolev spaces, and the singularities are the classical smooth wave front set. The proof techniques rely on energy estimates, functional analysis and pseudodifferential calculus. Our proofs in this paper are worked out in detail as opposed to the rather brief arguments in [16, Chapter 23.1] and [21].
We also prove the propagation (1.4) for a different type of Hamiltonian of the form \(a^w(x,D) = p(D) + \langle v,x \rangle \) where \(p \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{d})\) is a sum of polynomials of each variable in \(\textbf{R}^{d}\), with real coefficients, of order \(m \geqslant 2\), \(v \in \textbf{R}^{d}\) is a vector each of whose coordinate is nonzero, and \(\sigma = \frac{1}{m-1}\). Since this setup includes the Airy operator \(\frac{\textrm{d}^2}{\textrm{d}x^2} - x\) when \(d =1\) we say that the corresponding equation (1.1) is of Airy–Schrödinger type. Using results from [31] we also formulate a version of (1.4) in the Gelfand–Shilov space functional framework and corresponding anisotropic wave front sets [26].
Denoting by \(P_m\) the principal part of p, we show (1.4) where \(\chi _t\) is the Hamilton flow of \(P_m(\xi )\). This generalizes a particular case of [32, Theorem 5.1] where \(v = 0\). Since \(P_m(\xi )\) does not depend on x, the Hamiltonian flow for \(P_m\) is trivial in the sense that it is constant in time with respect to the dual coordinates as \(\chi _t (x, \xi ) = (x + t \nabla P_{m} (\xi ), \xi )\). This contrasts to the Hamilton flow in the main result Theorem 8.3 where both space and dual coordinates may depend on time. The techniques we use for Airy–Schrödinger equations are an explicit formula for the Schwartz kernel of the propagator and general results on propagation of singularities from [26, 27, 31, 32].
Our results in this paper fit in a project to investigate globally anisotropic pseudodifferential operators [3, 5, 7, 19, 26, 27] and propagation of global singularities for evolution equations [24, 31, 32]. The techniques are inspired from those of pseudodifferential operators defined by symbols that are anisotropic in the dual variables for fixed space coordinates. These ideas have been investigated e.g. in [11, 18, 22].
A major new feature of our main result Theorem 8.3 as opposed to earlier propagation results [32], is that it admits Hamiltonians that give rise to flows that are non-trivial in the sense that the dynamics involve all phase space coordinates.
Concerning the organization of the paper, Sect. 2 contains notations, background concepts and conventions, and Sect. 3 recalls material on anisotropic Shubin pseudodifferential calculus. Section 4 is devoted to Shubin–Sobolev modulation spaces in the anisotropic context, a recollection of localization operators, and an inequality of sharp Gårding type which is essential. In Sect. 5 we deduce propagation results for Airy–Schrödinger equations. Section 6 treats Hamiltonians that are anisotropically homogeneous as in (1.3) and their Hamilton flows, and in Sect. 7 we show existence and uniqueness of solutions to an inhomogeneous form of (1.1) in anisotropic Shubin–Sobolev spaces for Hamiltonian symbols in \(G^{1+\sigma ,\sigma }\) with bounded imaginary part and \(\sigma > 0\) rational. Then Sect. 8 is dedicated to the main result on propagation of singularities, and finally Sect. 9 consists of a very short discussion of examples.
2 Preliminaries
The unit sphere in \(\textbf{R}^{d}\) is denoted \(\textbf{S}^{d-1} \subseteq \textbf{R}^{d}\). An open ball of radius \(r > 0\) centered in \(x \in \textbf{R}^{d}\) is denoted \({\text {B}}_r (x)\), and \({\text {B}}_r(0) = {\text {B}}_r\). The transpose of a matrix \(A \in \textbf{R}^{d \times d}\) is denoted \(A^T\) and the inverse transpose of \(A \in {\text {GL}}(d,\textbf{R})\) is \(A^{-T}\). We write \(f (x) \lesssim g (x)\) provided there exists \(C>0\) such that \(f (x) \leqslant C \, g(x)\) for all x in the domain of f and of g. If \(f (x) \lesssim g (x) \lesssim f(x)\) then we write \(f \asymp g\). We use the partial derivative \(D_j = - i \partial _j\), \(1 \leqslant j \leqslant d\), acting on functions and distributions on \(\textbf{R}^{d}\), with extension to multi-indices. The bracket \(\langle x\rangle = (1 + |x|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}\) for \(x \in \textbf{R}^{d}\) satisfies Peetre’s inequality with optimal constant [26, Lemma 2.1], that is
We use the normalization of the Fourier transform
for \(f\in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) (the Schwartz space), where \(\langle \, \cdot \, ,\, \cdot \, \rangle \) denotes the scalar product on \(\textbf{R}^{d}\). The conjugate linear action of a distribution u on a test function \(\phi \) is written \((u,\phi )\), consistent with the \(L^2\) inner product \((\, \cdot \, ,\, \cdot \, ) = (\, \cdot \, ,\, \cdot \, )_{L^2}\) which is conjugate linear in the second argument.
Denote translation by \(T_x f(y) = f( y-x )\) and modulation by \(M_\xi f(y) = e^{i \langle y,\xi \rangle } f(y)\) for \(x,y,\xi \in \textbf{R}^{d}\) where f is a function or distribution defined on \(\textbf{R}^{d}\). If \(\varphi \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) {\setminus } \{0\}\) then the short-time Fourier transform (STFT) of a tempered distribution \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) is defined by
The function \(V_\varphi u\) is smooth and polynomially bounded [13, Theorem 11.2.3], that is there exists \(k \geqslant 0\) such that
We have \(u \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) if and only if
The transform inverse to the STFT is given by
provided \(\Vert \varphi \Vert _{L^2} = 1\), with action under the integral understood, that is
for \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) and \(f \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\), cf. [13, Theorem 11.2.5].
According to [13, Corollary 11.2.6] the topology for \(\mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) can be defined by the collection of seminorms
for any \(\varphi \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) \setminus 0\).
The Beurling type Gelfand–Shilov space \(\Sigma _\nu ^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d})\) is for \(\nu ,\mu ,h > 0\) is defined as the topological projective limit
where \({\mathcal {S}}_{\nu ,h}^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d})\) is the Banach space of smooth functions that have finite
norm [12]. The space \(\Sigma _\nu ^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d})\) is a Fréchet space with respect to the seminorms \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _{\mathcal S_{\nu ,h}^\mu }\) for \(h > 0\), and \(\Sigma _\nu ^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d})\ne \{ 0\}\) if and only if \(\nu + \mu > 1\) [23].
If \(\nu + \mu > 1\) the topological dual of \(\Sigma _\nu ^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d})\) is the space of (Beurling type) Gelfand–Shilov ultradistributions [12, Section I.4.3]
The space of ultradistributions \((\Sigma _\nu ^\mu )'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) may be equipped with several possibly different topologies [31]. In this paper we use exclusively the \(\hbox {weak}^*\) topology.
The Gelfand–Shilov (ultradistribution) spaces enjoy invariance properties, with respect to translation, dilation, tensorization, coordinate transformation and (partial) Fourier transformation. The Fourier transform extends uniquely to homeomorphisms on \(\mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\), from \((\Sigma _\nu ^\mu )'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) to \((\Sigma _\mu ^\nu )'(\textbf{R}^{d})\), and restricts to homeomorphisms on \(\mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\), from \(\Sigma _\nu ^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d})\) to \(\Sigma _\mu ^\nu (\textbf{R}^{d})\), and to a unitary operator on \(L^2(\textbf{R}^{d})\).
3 Anisotropic Shubin pseudodifferential calculus
In this section we retrieve some essential facts from pseudodifferential calculus of anisotropic Shubin symbols [27, 32].
Let \(\sigma > 0\). We use the weight function on \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\)
For this weight we have the following inequality of Peetre type [27]. If \(s \in \textbf{R}\) then
When \(\sigma \) is rational, \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\), \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), an alternative weight is
Note that
The motivation for using \(w_{k,m}\) instead of \(\theta _{\sigma }^{k}\) is that the former is smooth as opposed to the latter.
By [27, Eq. (3.4)] we have for \(\sigma > 0\)
and for \(k,m \in \textbf{N}\setminus 0\)
The anisotropic Shubin symbols are defined as follows.
Definition 3.1
Let \(\sigma > 0\) be real and \(m \in \textbf{R}\). The space of (\(\sigma \)-)anisotropic Shubin symbols \(G^{m,\sigma }\) of order m consists of functions \(a \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d})\) that satisfy the estimates
The space \(G^{m,\sigma }\) is a Fréchet space with respect to the seminorms on \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) indexed by \(j \in \textbf{N}\)
If \(\sigma = 1\) then \(G^{m,\sigma }\) is the space of isotropic Shubin symbols with parameter \(\rho = 1\) [20, 28]. Recall that the isotropic Shubin symbol of order m and parameter \(0 \leqslant \rho \leqslant 1\), denoted \(a\in G_\rho ^m\), satisfies
We have \(G^{m,\sigma } \subseteq G_\rho ^{m_0}\), where \(m_0 = \max (m, m/\sigma )\) and \(\rho = \min (\sigma , 1/\sigma )\), and
The following lemma is a tool for verification of membership in \(G^{m,\sigma }\).
Lemma 3.2
If \(m \in \textbf{R}\), \(\sigma ,r > 0\) and \(a \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d})\) satisfies
then \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\).
Proof
Let \((y,\eta ) \in \textbf{R}^{2d} \setminus {\text {B}}_{r}\). By [27, Section 3] \((y,\eta ) = (\lambda x, \lambda ^\sigma \xi )\) for a unique \((x,\xi ) \in \textbf{R}^{2d}\) such that \(|(x,\xi )| = r\) and \(\lambda \geqslant 1\). Combining
with (3.9) we obtain for any \(\alpha , \beta \in \textbf{N}^{d}\)
The same estimate is trivial for \((y,\eta ) \in {\text {B}}_{r}\) so referring to (3.7) we may conclude that \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\). \(\square \)
Corollary 3.3
If \(\sigma > 0\), \(m \geqslant 0\) and \(a \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d})\) is anisotropically homogeneous as
then \(a \in G^{m, \sigma }\).
For \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) and \(\tau \in \textbf{R}\) a pseudodifferential operator in the \(\tau \)-quantization is defined by
for \(f \in \mathscr {S}({\textbf {R}}^{d})\) when \(m < - d \sigma \). The definition extends to \(m \in \textbf{R}\) if the integral is viewed as an oscillatory integral. If \(\tau = 0\) we get the Kohn–Nirenberg quantization \(a_0(x,D) = a(x,D)\) and if \(\tau = \frac{1}{2}\) we have the Weyl quantization \(a_{1/2}(x,D) = a^w(x,D)\). The Weyl quantization enjoys a simple formal adjoint relation: \(a^w(x,D)^* = {\overline{a}}^w(x,D)\). We will use exclusively the Weyl quantization in this paper. By [27, Proposition 3.3 (i)] the symbol classes \(G^{m,\sigma }\) are homeomorphically invariant under change of quantization parameter \(\tau \in \textbf{R}\), for any \(\sigma > 0\) and \(m \in \textbf{R}\). If \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) then the operator \(a^w(x,D)\) acts continuously on \(\mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) and extends uniquely by duality to a continuous operator on \(\mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) [27, 28]. If \(a \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{2d})\) then \(a^w(x,D)\) extends to a continuous operator \(a^w(x,D): \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) \rightarrow \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\). If \(a \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{2d})\) then \(a^w(x,D)\) is regularizing, in the sense that it is continuous \(a^w(x,D): \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d}) \rightarrow \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) with \(\mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) equipped with the strong topology [6].
If \(a \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{2d})\) then
where the cross-Wigner distribution [10, 13] is defined as
If \(f,g \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) then \(W(g,f) \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{2d})\).
Given a sequence of symbols \(a_j \in G^{m_j,\sigma }\), \(j=1,2,\dots \), such that \(m_j \rightarrow - \infty \) as \(j \rightarrow \infty \) we write
provided that for any \(n \geqslant 2\)
where \(\mu _n = \max _{j \geqslant n} m_j\). By [27, Lemma 3.2] there exists a symbol \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) where \(m = \max _{j \geqslant 1} m_j\) such that \(a \sim \sum _{j = 1}^\infty a_j\) under the stated circumstances. The symbol a is unique modulo \(\mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{2d})\).
The bilinear Weyl product \(a {{\#}}b\) of two symbols \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) and \(b \in G^{n,\sigma }\) is defined as the product of symbols corresponding to operator composition: \(( a {{\#}}b)^w(x,D) = a^w(x,D) b^w (x,D)\). By [27, Proposition 3.3 (ii)] the Weyl product is continuous \({{\#}}: G^{m,\sigma } \times G^{n,\sigma } \rightarrow G^{m+n,\sigma }\). The asymptotic expansion formula for the Weyl product [16, 28] is
If \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) and \(b \in G^{n,\sigma }\) then each term in the sum belongs to \(G^{m+n -(1+\sigma )|\alpha +\beta |,\sigma }\).
For \(\sigma > 0\) a \(\sigma \)-conic subset \(\Gamma \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) is closed under the operation \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0 \ni (x,\xi ) \mapsto ( \lambda x, \lambda ^\sigma \xi )\) for all \(\lambda > 0\). By [27, Definition 3.4 and Lemma 3.5] (cf. also [32, Remark 3.4]) it is possible to construct \(\sigma \)-conic open subsets of given points in \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\), and corresponding cutoff functions.
A symbol \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) is said to be non-characteristic at \(z_0 \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\), if
for \(C,R > 0\), where \(\Gamma \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) is an open \(\sigma \)-conic subset containing \(z_0\). The complement in \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) of the non-characteristic points is called the characteristic set \({\text {char}}_\sigma (a) \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\). It is a closed and \(\sigma \)-conic subset of \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\). This is a particular case of [27, Definition 3.8].
In most respects the anisotropic Shubin pseudodifferential calculus for the symbol classes \(G^{m,\sigma }\) with \(m \in \textbf{R}\) and \(\sigma > 0\) works as the isotropic calculus in [20, 28]. In fact [27, Section 3] contains the basics of the anisotropic pseudodifferential calculus, and by [27, Lemma 6.3] and its proof it is possible to construct parametrices for elliptic symbols. Thus if \(\sigma > 0\) and \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) is elliptic in the sense of \({\text {char}}_\sigma (a) = \emptyset \), that is,
for \(C,R > 0\), then there exists an elliptic symbol \(b \in G^{-m,\sigma }\) such that
where \(r_1, r_2 \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{2d})\).
The following definition concerns the anisotropic Gabor wave front set \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}( u ) \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) of \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) [27, Definition 4.1] which is important in this paper. It is a closed and \(\sigma \)-conic subset of \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) well adapted to the anisotropic Shubin calculus.
Definition 3.4
Suppose \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\), \(\varphi \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) \setminus 0\), and \(\sigma > 0\). Then \(z_0 = (x_0,\xi _0) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) satisfies \(z_0 \notin \mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}( u )\) if there exists an open set \(U \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\) such that \(z_0 \in U\) and
If \(\sigma = 1\) then \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}( u ) = \mathrm {WF_\textrm{g}}(u)\) that denotes the usual Gabor wave front set [17, 25], which is isotropic in phase space. The \(\sigma \)-conic sets are then ordinary cones in \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\), that is sets closed under multiplication with a positive parameter.
The definition of \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}( u )\) does not depend on \(\varphi \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) {\setminus } 0\) [27, Proposition 4.2], and [27, Proposition 4.3 (i)] says that
where
is the matrix that defines the symplectic group [10].
By [32, Proposition 3.5] we may express the anisotropic Gabor wave front set of \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) as
for any \(m \in \textbf{R}\). For \(\sigma > 0\), \(m \in \textbf{R}\), \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) and \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) we have the microlocal and microelliptic inclusions
(cf. [27, Proposition 5.1 and Theorem 6.4] which are stated slightly more generally).
At a few occasions we will use anisotropic wave front sets in the Gelfand–Shilov functional framework. The Gelfand–Shilov wave front set of \(u \in (\Sigma _\nu ^\mu )' (\textbf{R}^{d})\) with \(\nu + \mu > 1\) is based on the following facts. If \(\varphi \in \Sigma _\nu ^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d}) {\setminus } 0\) then
for some \(r > 0\), and \(u \in \Sigma _\nu ^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d})\) if and only if
for all \(r > 0\). See e.g., [30, Theorems 2.4 and 2.5]. The \(\nu ,\mu \)-Gelfand–Shilov wave front set \(\textrm{WF}^{\nu ,\mu } (u) \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) is defined as follows.
Definition 3.5
Let \(\nu ,\mu > 0\) satisfy \(\nu + \mu > 1\), and suppose \(\varphi \in \Sigma _\nu ^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d}) {\setminus } 0\) and \(u \in (\Sigma _\nu ^\mu )'(\textbf{R}^{d})\). Then \((x_0,\xi _0) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) satisfies \((x_0,\xi _0) \notin \textrm{WF}^{\nu ,\mu } (u)\) if there exists an open set \(U \subseteq T^*\textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) containing \((x_0,\xi _0)\) such that
The requested decay is thus exponential rather than superpolynomial as for \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}\). The \(\nu ,\mu \)-Gelfand–Shilov wave front set is a closed and \(\mu /\nu \)-conic subset of \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) [26].
The next result identifies powers of the weight \(w_{k,m}\) defined in (3.3) as anisotropic Shubin symbols.
Lemma 3.6
Let \(k,m \in \textbf{N}\setminus 0\) and \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\). If \(n \in \textbf{R}\) then \(w_{k,m}^n \in G^{ n k, \sigma }\).
Proof
To simplify notation we write \(w = w_{k,m}\). It is clear that \(w \in C^{\infty } (\textbf{R}^{2d})\) and that w is positive everywhere. We claim that for \(\alpha , \beta \in \textbf{N}^{d}\) we can write
where \(p_{\alpha ,\beta }\) are polynomials of the form
with real coefficients \(c_{j,\gamma ,\kappa }\) for \((j,\gamma ,\kappa ) \in \textbf{N}\times \textbf{N}^{d} \times \textbf{N}^{d}\).
In fact the claim follows from an induction argument with respect to \(|\alpha + \beta |\), starting with
and
for \(1 \leqslant \ell \leqslant d\).
Next we estimate a generic monomial in (3.21), using \(2 j + \frac{|\gamma |}{k} + \frac{|\kappa |}{m} \leqslant \left( 2 - \frac{1}{k} \right) |\alpha | + \left( 2 - \frac{1}{m} \right) |\beta |\), as
Inserting into (3.20) and exploiting (3.4) finally give for any \(\alpha ,\beta \in \textbf{N}^{d}\) the estimate
\(\square \)
Suppose \(\sigma > 0\) is rational, that is \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\) with \(k,m \in \textbf{N}\setminus 0\). In [7, Proposition 4.2] the authors identify the symbol class \(a \in G^{n,\sigma }\) with \(n \in \textbf{R}\) as the Weyl–Hörmander symbol class [16, Chapter 18.4]
defined by the metric
and the weight \(h_g^{-\frac{n}{1 + \sigma }}\). Here \(h_g\) is the so called Planck function associated to g [7, 16]. The Planck function is according to [7, Remark 2.4]
From this two conclusions follows: First we observe that \(h_g\) satisfies the so-called uncertainty principle
and secondly by Lemma 3.6 we have \(h_g \in G^{-1-\sigma ,\sigma }\).
4 Globally anisotropic Shubin–Sobolev spaces, localization operators and a sharp Gårding inequality
In this paper we will often use the following parametrized family of Hilbert modulation spaces. These spaces also have an independent interest. Proposition 4.2 complements the anisotropic Shubin pseudodifferential calculus in [27].
Definition 4.1
Let \(\varphi \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) \setminus 0\). The anisotropic Shubin–Sobolev modulation space \(M_{\sigma ,s} (\textbf{R}^{d})\) with anisotropy parameter \(\sigma > 0\) and order \(s \in \textbf{R}\) is the Hilbert subspace of \(\mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) defined by the norm
For any \(\sigma > 0\) we have \(M_{\sigma ,0} (\textbf{R}^{d}) = L^2(\textbf{R}^{d})\) [13], and \(M_{\sigma ,s_1} (\textbf{R}^{d}) \subseteq M_{\sigma ,s_2}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) is a continuous inclusion when \(s_1 \geqslant s_2\). It holds
and \(\{ \Vert \cdot \Vert _{M_{\sigma ,s}}, s \geqslant 0\}\) is a family of seminorms that defines the Fréchet space topology on \(\mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) [13].
The next continuity result is a natural generalization of the isotropic Shubin calculus. More precisely it generalizes [20, Proposition 1.5.5] and [28, Theorem 25.2].
Proposition 4.2
Let \(\sigma > 0\) and \(m,s \in \textbf{R}\). If \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) then
is continuous.
Proof
By a small modification of the proof of [4, Proposition 3.2] it follows that \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) if and only if
where \(z = (z_1,z_2)\) with \(z_1, z_2 \in \textbf{R}^{d}\), \(g \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{2d}) {\setminus } 0\), and where \(\mathcal {T}_\varphi u\) is defined by
for \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) and \(\varphi \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) \setminus 0\). In fact in the original proof [4] we only have to replace the weight \(\langle \cdot \rangle \) used there by \(\theta _\sigma \), take into account the behavior with respect to derivatives of \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) with respect to \(z_1\) and \(z_2\) respectively, and use (3.2).
Let \(\varphi \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) \setminus 0\) and set \(\Phi = W(\varphi , \varphi ) \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{2d}) {\setminus } 0\). If \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) then by [27, Eq. (5.3)] we have
We obtain from (4.4), (3.2) and (3.5) the estimates
Combining this with (4.5), Minkowski’s inequality and again (3.2) yields
provided \(N \geqslant 0\) is sufficiently large. \(\square \)
Let \(\varphi \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) satisfy \(\Vert \varphi \Vert _{L^2} = 1\). A localization operator \(A_a\) with symbol \(a \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{2d})\) is defined as
that is \(A_a = V_\varphi ^* a V_\varphi \). Then \(A_a: \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) \rightarrow \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) is continuous. We will assume that \(\varphi \) is a Gaussian.
By [14, Theorem 1.1] we have for any \(\sigma > 0\) and \(s \in \textbf{R}\)
which means that \(A_{\theta _\sigma ^s}: M_{\sigma ,s}(\textbf{R}^{d}) \rightarrow L^2(\textbf{R}^{d})\) is an isometry.
If \(a \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{2d})\) and \(\varphi \) is a Gaussian on \(\textbf{R}^{d}\) we have \(A_a = b^w(x,D)\) where \(b = a * \psi \) with \(\psi \) a Gaussian on \(\textbf{R}^{2d}\) [20, Proposition 1.7.9]. If \(\sigma > 0\) and \(a \in G^{m, \sigma }\) then also \(b \in G^{m, \sigma }\), and a real-valued implies that also b is real-valued [20, Theorem 1.7.10].
In Sect. 7 we will need the following inequality of sharp Gårding type.
Lemma 4.3
Let \(k,m \in \textbf{N}\setminus 0\) and \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\). If \(a \in G^{2\left( 1 + \sigma \right) ,\sigma }\) and \(a \geqslant 0\) then there exists \(c > 0\) such that
Proof
By (3.22) we have \(G^{2\left( 1 + \sigma \right) ,\sigma } = S( h_g^{-2}, g)\), where the Planck function \(h_g\) is defined by (3.23) and satisfies the uncertainty principle (3.24). The conclusion is now a consequence of the Fefferman–Phong inequality [16, Theorem 18.6.8]. \(\square \)
5 Propagation of anisotropic Gabor wave front sets for evolution equations of Airy–Schrödinger type
In this section we consider the evolution equation
Here \(v = (v_1, \dots , v_d) \in \textbf{R}^{d}\) is a vector with nonzero entries: \(v_j \ne 0\), \(1 \leqslant j \leqslant d\), and \(p: \textbf{R}^{d} \rightarrow \textbf{R}\) is a polynomial with real coefficients of order \(m \geqslant 2\) which is a sum of one variable polynomials, that is
where
and \(\max _{j=1}^d \deg p_j = \max _{j=1}^d m_j = m\). The principal part of p is
We say that the equation (5.1) is of Airy–Schrödinger type, since when \(d = 1\) a particular case of the Hamiltonian is the operator
which defines the Airy equation \(a(x,D) f = 0\). This equation is satisfied by the Airy function [16, Chapter 7.6].
First we deduce the explicit solution \(u(t,x) = \mathscr {K}_t u_0 (x)\) to (5.1) defined by the propagator \(\mathscr {K}_t\), and in particular an expression for the Schwartz kernel \(K_t\) of \(\mathscr {K}_t\) for each \(t \in \textbf{R}\). Let \(q_j\) be primitive polynomials of \(p_j\):
If \(u_0 \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) then the solution to (5.1) is given by
where
This can be confirmed by insertion of (5.6) into (5.1).
The solution operator
is unitary on \(L^2(\textbf{R}^{d})\), and since \(\varphi _{-t}(\xi ) = - \varphi _t(\xi + t v )\) we obtain for \(f,g \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\)
so \(\mathscr {K}_t^* = \mathscr {K}_{-t} = \mathscr {K}_t^{-1}\). If \(t_1, t_2 \in \textbf{R}\) then
which gives
so the map \(\textbf{R}\ni t \mapsto \mathscr {K}_t\) is in fact a one-parameter group of unitary operators.
The Schwartz kernel of the solution operator \(\mathscr {K}_t\) is
where \(\kappa \in \textbf{R}^{2d \times {2d}}\) is the matrix defined by \(\kappa (x,y) = (x+\frac{y}{2}, x - \frac{y}{2})\) for \(x,y \in \textbf{R}^{d}\). We note that \(\mathscr {K}_t\) acts continuously on \(\mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) for any \(t \in \textbf{R}\), and extends uniquely to a continuous linear operator on \(\mathscr {S}' (\textbf{R}^{d})\) by
For each \(1 \leqslant j \leqslant d\) we have
Hence the phase function \(\varphi _t (\xi ) \) is a polynomial of order m with highest order term
We may now give a result which generalizes a particular case of [32, Theorem 5.1]. More precisely, in the quoted result the polynomial p is arbitrary with real coefficients, whereas here we assume the particular “separable” form (5.2). On the other hand, in Theorem 5.1 below we allow a vector \(v \in \textbf{R}^{d}\) with nonzero entries. The result uses the Hamilton flow corresponding to the principal part \(P_m(\xi )\) of the polynomial \(p(\xi )\), that is
Theorem 5.1
Let p be a polynomial with real coefficients defined by (5.2), (5.3), of order \(m = \max _{j=1}^d \deg p_j \geqslant 2\), with principal part \(P_m\) defined by (5.4). Denote the Hamilton flow of \(P_m(\xi )\) as in (5.10). Suppose \(\mathscr {K}_t: \mathscr {S}' (\textbf{R}^{d}) \rightarrow \mathscr {S}' (\textbf{R}^{d})\) is the solution operator for the evolution equation (5.1), with Schwartz kernel (5.9) where \(\varphi _t\) is defined by (5.5) and (5.7). Then
Proof
By [27, Theorems 7.1 and 7.2] we have
Combining (5.13) with [27, Eq. (4.6) and Proposition 4.3 (i)], cf. (3.17), gives
Now (5.9), [27, Corollary 5.2 and Proposition 4.3 (ii)], [32, Proposition 3.2], [27, Proposition 5.3 (iii)] and (5.14) yield if \(\sigma = \frac{1}{m-1}\)
Since \(m \geqslant 2\) we have \(\nabla P_{m} (0) = 0\). Hence \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}(K_t)\) does not contain points of the form \((x, 0, \xi , 0)\) nor of the form \((0, x, 0, -\xi )\) for any \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\). We may therefore apply [32, Theorem 4.4] which gives for \(u \in \mathscr {S}'({\textbf {R}}^d)\)
Since \(\mathscr {K}_t^{-1} = \mathscr {K}_{-t}\) and \(\chi _t^{-1} = \chi _{-t}\) we may strengthen (5.15) into
We have proved (5.11).
Likewise if \(\sigma < \frac{1}{m-1}\) then again (5.9), [27, Corollary 5.2 and Proposition 4.3 (ii)], [32, Proposition 3.2], [27, Proposition 5.3 (iii)] and (5.14) yield
Again [32, Theorem 4.4] gives
which proves (5.12). \(\square \)
Remark 5.2
The conclusion from (5.11) and (5.12) is that the propagation of singularities for the equation (5.1) works exactly as when \(v = 0\), as described in [32, Theorem 5.1]. The Hamiltonian in (5.1) is \(a(x,\xi ) = p(\xi ) + \langle v, x \rangle \), but the propagation of singularities follows the Hamiltonian flow of \(P_m(\xi )\). Note that \(a_0(x,\xi ) = P_m(\xi )\) satisfies the anisotropic homogeneity
if \(\sigma = \frac{1}{m-1}\), so \(a_0 \in G^{1 + \sigma ,\sigma }\) according to Corollary 3.3.
If we decompose the polynomial p as
where each term \(P_j (\xi )\) is homogeneous of degree j for \(0 \leqslant j \leqslant m\), then each term \(P_j\) satisfies
Thus \(a-a_0 = \sum _{j=0}^{m-1} P_j + \langle v, x \rangle = \sum _{j=0}^{m-1} b_j \) with terms \(b_j\), considered as functions on \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\), of homogeneities
The terms \(b_j\) have all smaller order \(\frac{j}{m-1} = j \sigma \) of anisotropic homogeneity than the principal part \(a_0 = P_m\) which has order \(1 + \sigma = m \sigma \), and which governs the propagation of singularities. Thus one may see \(a - a_0\) as lower order perturbations of the Hamiltonian that do not affect propagation of singularities. Note that the Hamiltonian term \(\langle v, x \rangle \) satisfies (5.16) with \(j = m-1\).
As a complementary result we formulate a version of Theorem 5.1 in the framework of Beurling type Gelfand–Shilov spaces \(\Sigma _\nu ^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d})\) for \(\nu + \mu > 1\) and their dual ultradistribution spaces \(\left( \Sigma _\nu ^\mu \right) '(\textbf{R}^{d})\).
Theorem 5.3
Let p be a polynomial with real coefficients defined by (5.2), (5.3), of order \(m = \max _{j=1}^d \deg p_j \geqslant 2\), with principal part \(P_m\) defined by (5.4). Denote the Hamilton flow of \(P_m(\xi )\) as in (5.10). Suppose \(\mathscr {K}_t: \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) \rightarrow \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) is the solution operator for the evolution equation (5.1), with Schwartz kernel (5.9) where \(\varphi _t\) is defined by (5.5) and (5.7).
If \(\nu \geqslant \mu (m-1) > 1\) then \(\mathscr {K}_t\) is continuous on \(\Sigma _\nu ^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d})\), extends uniquely to a continuous linear operator on \(\left( \Sigma _\nu ^\mu \right) '(\textbf{R}^{d})\), and
Proof
In the Gelfand–Shilov functional framework we have, similar to (5.13), by [31, Theorems 6.1 and 6.2] if \(\nu > \frac{1}{m-1}\)
As before [26, Eq. (3.8) and Proposition 3.6 (i)] give
From [31, Proposition 4.5] and [26, Proposition 3.6 (ii), Corollary 6.4 and Proposition 7.1 (iii)] we obtain if \(\nu = \mu (m-1) > 1\)
and if \(\nu> \mu (m-1) > 1\)
At this point [31, Theorem 5.5] yields the following two final conclusions: If \(\nu \geqslant \mu (m-1) > 1\) then \(\mathscr {K}_t\) is continuous on \(\Sigma _\nu ^\mu (\textbf{R}^{d})\) and extends uniquely to a continuous linear operator on \(\left( \Sigma _\nu ^\mu \right) '(\textbf{R}^{d})\), and the propagation of singularities follows (5.17) and (5.18). \(\square \)
Again the overall conclusion is that propagation of singularities works as if \(v = 0\).
5.1 Fourier transformation of the evolution equation
Next we take the Fourier transform \(\mathscr {F}u(t,\cdot )\). If we denote this Fourier transform for simplicity still by \(u(t,\cdot )\), then we obtain from (5.1) the evolution equation
where again \(v \in \textbf{R}^{d}\) is a vector with nonzero entries: \(v_j \ne 0\), \(1 \leqslant j \leqslant d\).
Referring to (5.7) and (5.8) the solution is now for \(u_0 \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\)
The solution operator \(\widetilde{\mathscr {K}}_t\) is continuous on \(\mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) and extends to a continuous operator on \(\mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\). Now (5.11) combined with [27, Proposition 4.3 (i)] give
where
and \(\chi _t\) is defined by (5.10). This is the Hamilton flow corresponding to the principal part \(P_m(x)\) of the polynomial p(x). We also obtain
These considerations, combined with a similar discussion in the Gelfand–Shilov framework, may be summarized as follows.
Theorem 5.4
Let p be a polynomial with real coefficients defined by (5.2), (5.3), of order \(m = \max _{j=1}^d \deg p_j \geqslant 2\), with principal part \(P_m\) defined by (5.4). Denote the Hamilton flow of \(P_m(x)\) as in (5.24). Suppose \({\widetilde{\mathscr {K}}}_t: \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}) \rightarrow \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) is the solution operator (5.22), where \(\varphi _t\) is defined by (5.5) and (5.7), for the evolution equation (5.21). Then
If \(\nu \geqslant \mu (m-1) > 1\) then \({\widetilde{\mathscr {K}}}_t\) is continuous on \(\Sigma _\mu ^\nu (\textbf{R}^{d})\), extends uniquely to a continuous linear operator on \(\left( \Sigma _\mu ^\nu \right) '(\textbf{R}^{d})\), and
The conclusion from Theorem 5.4 is that the propagation of singularities for (5.21) works again exactly as when \(v = 0\), in both the tempered Schwartz distribution and the Gelfand–Shilov ultradistribution frameworks, respectively.
Remark 5.5
Consider the Hamiltonian \(a(x,\xi ) = p(x) - \langle v, \xi \rangle \) in the equation (5.21), with \(\deg p = m\). The propagation of \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}\) with \(\sigma = m-1\) is governed by \(a_0(x,\xi ) = P_m(x)\) which satisfies
Thus \(a_0 \in G^{1 + \sigma ,\sigma } = G^{m,m-1}\) according to Corollary 3.3. This is similar to Remark 5.2. In Sect. 6 we will study more general Hamiltonians that satisfy this type of anisotropic homogeneity.
When the Hamiltonian Weyl symbol \(a(x,\xi ) = p(\xi )\) is a polynomial in \(\xi \) of the form (5.2) then the Hamilton flow is as in (5.10) that is
where \(P_m\) is the principal part of p. When instead the Weyl symbol depends on x, \(a(x,\xi ) = p(x)\), with the same assumptions on p, we obtain the Hamilton flow (5.24) that is
Define for \(\sigma > 0\) the anisotropic scaling map \(\Lambda _\sigma (\lambda ): T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \rightarrow T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\) as
For suitable \(\sigma > 0\) the Hamilton flows (5.26) and (5.27) commute with \(\Lambda _\sigma (\lambda )\) for all \(\lambda > 0\). In fact, if \(\chi _t\) is defined by (5.26) and \(\sigma = \frac{1}{m-1}\) then for \(\lambda > 0\)
Likewise if \(\chi _t\) is defined by (5.27) and \(\sigma = m-1\) then for \(\lambda > 0\)
Thus in both cases the Hamilton flow \(\chi _t\) commutes with anisotropic scaling \(\Lambda _\sigma \)
suppressing the variables \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\).
Remark 5.6
The commutativity (5.29) means that the considered Hamilton flows are consistent with the propagation inclusion that we aim for, namely
for the solution operator (propagator) \(\mathscr {K}_t\) of a Schrödinger type evolution equation.
Indeed the inclusion (5.30) requires that the image of \(\chi _t\) of any \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}(u) \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) for \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) contains a closed \(\sigma \)-conic subset of \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\). It is not known if for any closed \(\sigma \)-conic subset of \(\Gamma \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) there exists \(u \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) such that \(\mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}(u) = \Gamma \) except when \(\sigma = 1\). In fact if \(\sigma = 1\) then [29, Theorem 6.1] answers the question affirmatively. Nevertheless it seems reasonable to ask that the image of \(\chi _t\) of any closed \(\sigma \)-conic subset of \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) contains a closed \(\sigma \)-conic subset of \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\). Then in particular a \(\sigma \)-conic curve of the form
where \((x,\xi ) \in \textbf{S}^{2d-1}\), must be mapped into another such curve, that is, \(\chi _t R_{x,\xi } = R_{z}\) where \(z \in \textbf{S}^{2d-1}\).
6 Anisotropically homogeneous Hamiltonians and their flows
Given a Hamiltonian \(a: \textbf{R}^{2d} \setminus 0 \rightarrow \textbf{R}\) of class \(C^\infty \), Hamilton’s system of equations is
for initial datum \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) and \(t \in (-T,T)\) with \(T > 0\). By the Picard–Lindelöf theorem there is a unique solution \(( x(t), \xi (t) ) = \chi _t(x,\xi )\), \(\chi _t: \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0 \rightarrow \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0\), \(t \in (-T,T)\), for some \(T > 0\). It is called the Hamiltonian flow. In general the maximal T depends on \((x,\xi )\). The map \((-T,T) \ni t \rightarrow \chi _t\) satisfies \(\chi _{t_1+t_2} = \chi _{t_1} \chi _{t_2}\) and \(\chi _t^{-1} = \chi _{-t}\) [1]. The solution \(\chi _t\) is a symplectomorphism on \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\) for fixed \(t \in (-T,T)\) [8], \(C^1\) with respect to t, and hence a \(C^1\) diffeomorphism on \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\). If the level sets of a are compact then the solution \(\chi _t(x,\xi )\) extends to all \(t \in \textbf{R}\) [1]. Using the matrix (3.18) we may write the differential equation in (6.1) as
Suppose the solution \(\chi _t: \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0 \rightarrow \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0\) is well defined for \(t \in (-T,T)\) with the parameter \(T > 0\) valid for all initial data \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\). The assumption \(a \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0)\) and [15, Theorem V.4.1] imply that
and in particular \(\chi _t \in C^\infty ( \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0, \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0)\) for each \(t \in (-T,T)\).
The next lemma will be used in the proofs of Proposition 6.2 and its converse Proposition 6.4.
Lemma 6.1
If \(\sigma > 0\) and \(a \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d} \setminus 0)\) is real-valued then
holds if and only if
hold.
Proof
It is immediate to see that (6.4) implies (6.6) and (6.7). Since any \((y,\eta ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) can be written as \((y,\eta ) = (\lambda x, \lambda ^\sigma \xi )\) for a unique \(\lambda > 0\) and a unique \((x,\xi ) \in \textbf{S}^{2d-1}\) [27, Section 3], also (6.5) follows from (6.4).
Assume on the other hand (6.5), (6.6) and (6.7). Let \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) and define the function \(f(t) = a (t x, t \xi )\) for \(t > 0\). Then we have for \(0< \varepsilon < 1\)
which gives for \(\lambda > 0\), using (6.6) and (6.7),
The claim (6.4) now follows from the limit as \(\varepsilon \rightarrow 0^+\) using the assumption (6.5). \(\square \)
In the following result we show that the Hamilton flow commutes with anisotropic scaling for Hamiltonians with the anisotropic homogeneity (6.4).
Proposition 6.2
Let \(\sigma > 0\), and suppose \(a \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d} \setminus 0)\) is real-valued and satisfies
Then there exists \(T > 0\) such that the Hamilton flow \(\chi _t(x,\xi )\) defined by the function a is well defined for \(t \in [-T,T]\) uniformly for all \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\), and \(\chi _t\) satisfies
where \(\Lambda _\sigma (\lambda ): T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \rightarrow T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\) is defined in (5.28).
Proof
The assumption (6.8) and Lemma 6.1 give the anisotropic homogeneities
which can be written as
This gives \(\lim _{(x,\xi ) \rightarrow (0,0)} \nabla _{x,\xi } a(x,\xi ) = 0\). Set
If \((x,\xi ) \in \textbf{S}^{2d-1}\) then by the Picard–Lindelöf theorem [15, Theorem II.1.1] the Hamilton flow stays in the ball \(\chi _t(x,\xi ) \in \overline{{\text {B}}_{\frac{1}{2}}(x,\xi )}\) if \(-T \leqslant t \leqslant T\) and \(T = \frac{1}{2\,M}\). Thus there exists \(T > 0\) such that the Hamilton flow \(\chi _t: \textbf{S}^{2d-1} \rightarrow \textbf{R}^{2d} \setminus 0\) is well defined for \(-T \leqslant t \leqslant T\) uniformly over \(\textbf{S}^{2d-1}\).
Let \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) and set \((x(t), \xi (t) ) = \chi _t(x,\xi )\). For \(T_0 > 0\) sufficiently small we have \(( x(t), \xi (t) ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) for \(t \in [-T_0,T_0]\). From (6.2), (6.10) and
we obtain
which may be written
Thus \(( \lambda x(t), \lambda ^\sigma \xi (t) )\) solves (6.1) for \(t \in [-T_0,T_0]\) with initial datum \((\lambda x, \lambda ^\sigma \xi )\), for any \(\lambda > 0\). If we choose \(\lambda > 0\) such that \(|(\lambda x, \lambda ^\sigma \xi )| = 1\) then the solution is well defined for \(t \in [-T,T]\) by the first part of the proof. The solution \(( \lambda x(t), \lambda ^\sigma \xi (t) )\) hence extends to \(t \in [-T,T]\) for all \(\lambda > 0\). By the uniqueness of the solution we have \(\chi _t (\lambda x, \lambda ^\sigma \xi ) = ( \lambda x(t), \lambda ^\sigma \xi (t) )\). It follows that the Hamilton flow \(\chi _t: \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0 \rightarrow \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0\) is well defined in the interval \(t \in [-T,T]\) uniformly over the phase space \(\textbf{R}^{2d} \setminus 0\). In conclusion we have
for \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\), \(\lambda > 0\) and \(t \in [-T,T]\). \(\square \)
Remark 6.3
With the assumptions of Proposition 6.2, for any \(t \in [-T,T]\) we have
In fact this is an immediate consequence of (6.9). So defining \(\chi _t(0,0) = (0,0)\) we could extend the Hamilton flow as a continuous bijection \(\chi _t: \textbf{R}^{2d} \rightarrow \textbf{R}^{2d}\) for \(t \in [-T,T]\). By [15, Theorem V.4.1] we know that \(\chi _t \in C^\infty ( \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0, \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0)\) but we cannot extend the smoothness to the new domain point (0, 0).
Next we show a converse of Proposition 6.2.
Proposition 6.4
Let \(a \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d} \setminus 0)\) be real-valued and suppose
Suppose the solution \(\chi _t(x,\xi )\) to (6.1) is well defined for \(t \in [-T,T]\) for some \(T > 0\) for all \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\). If \(\sigma > 0\) and (6.9) holds true then a satisfies the homogeneity
Proof
For \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) we denote \(( x(t), \xi (t) ) = \chi _t(x,\xi )\). Formula (6.9) means that the solution to (6.1) with \((x,\xi )\) replaced by \((\lambda x, \lambda ^\sigma \xi )\) for \(\lambda > 0\) is \(\Lambda _\sigma (\lambda ) \chi _t( x, \xi ) = (\lambda x(t), \lambda ^\sigma \xi (t) )\).
Let \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\). From (6.2) and (6.9) we obtain for any \(\lambda > 0\)
With aid of (6.11) and \(\mathcal {J}^{-1} = -\mathcal {J}\) this gives
For \(t=0\) we get
which together with the assumption \(\lim _{(x,\xi ) \rightarrow (0,0)} a(x,\xi ) = 0\) is equivalent to (6.12) by Lemma 6.1. \(\square \)
We note that a function a that satisfies (6.12) is determined by its values on the unit sphere \(\textbf{S}^{2d-1}\), and
where \(\lambda _\sigma : \textbf{R}^{2d} \setminus 0 \rightarrow \textbf{R}_+\) and \(p_\sigma : \textbf{R}^{2d} \setminus 0 \rightarrow \textbf{S}^{2d-1}\) are smooth functions defined in [27, Section 3].
Examples of Hamiltonians that satisfy \(a \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0)\) and (6.12) are the homogeneous polynomials that depend on either x or \(\xi \) (but not both) studied in Sect. 5 (cf. Remarks 5.2 and 5.5), that is
where \(m \in \textbf{N}\) and \(m \geqslant 2\). Other examples are
where \(\sigma > 0\) and \(c \in \textbf{R}\setminus 0\), and
with \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\) and \(c \in \textbf{R}{\setminus } 0\).
Note that the Hamiltonians
with \(c_1, c_2 \in \textbf{R}\) and \(\sigma > 0\),
with \(k \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = 2k-1\) and \(c_1, c_2 \in \textbf{R}\), and
with \(\sigma = \frac{1}{2k-1}\) and \(c_1, c_2 \in \textbf{R}\), all satisfy (6.12). But none of them satisfy \(a \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0)\).
The final result in this section will be useful in Sect. 8. It says that the \(G^{m,\sigma }\) property of a symbol is preserved under composition with a Hamiltonian flow that satisfies the anisotropic scaling commutativity (6.9). We need a cutoff function \(\psi _\delta (x,\xi ) = \varphi (|x|^2 + |\xi |^2) \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d})\) where \(\varphi \in C^{\infty }(\textbf{R})\), \(0 \leqslant \varphi \leqslant 1\), \(\varphi (t) = 0\) for \(t \leqslant \frac{\delta ^2}{4}\) and \(\varphi (t) = 1\) for \(t \geqslant \delta ^2\) for a given \(\delta > 0\). Thus \(\psi _\delta \big |_{{\text {B}}_{\frac{\delta }{2}}} \equiv 0\) and \(\psi _\delta \big |_{\textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } {\text {B}}_\delta } \equiv 1\).
Proposition 6.5
Let \(\sigma , \delta , T > 0\), and suppose \(\chi _t \in C^\infty ( \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0, \textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0)\) for \(-T \leqslant t \leqslant T\) is a Hamiltonian flow that satisfies the anisotropic scaling commutativity (6.9). If \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) then \(b_t = \psi _\delta (a \circ \chi _t) \in G^{m,\sigma }\) uniformly for all \(-T \leqslant t \leqslant T\).
Proof
Let \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\) satisfy \(|(x,\xi )| \geqslant \delta \) and let \(\lambda \geqslant 1\). From (6.9) we obtain
decomposing \(\chi _t = ( \chi _{t,1}, \chi _{t,2} )\) into its two \(\textbf{R}^{d}\) component functions. For \(1 \leqslant k \leqslant d\) we denote by \(\chi _{t,j,k}\) the component with index k of \(\chi _{t,j}\) for \(j = 1,2\).
We claim that for \(|(x,\xi )| > \delta \), \(\lambda \geqslant 1\), and \(\alpha , \beta \in \textbf{N}^{d}\) we have
where \(f_{\gamma ,\kappa } \in C^\infty ( \textbf{R}^{2d} \setminus 0)\) are smooth functions. In fact the claim follows by induction with respect to \(|\alpha +\beta |\), starting with \(|\alpha +\beta | = 1\), as follows. With \(e_k \in \textbf{N}^{d}\) denoting the standard basis vector, \(1 \leqslant k \leqslant d\), we may write \(\partial _{x_k} a(x,\xi ) = \partial _{x} ^{e_k} a(x,\xi )\) and \(\partial _{\xi _k} a(x,\xi ) = \partial _{\xi } ^{e_k} a(x,\xi )\). If \(|\alpha +\beta | = 1\) we have either
or
for \(1 \leqslant j \leqslant d\). Thus (6.13) holds when \(|\alpha +\beta | = 1\). The induction step follows straight-forwardly. It follows that (6.13) holds for all \(\alpha , \beta \in \textbf{N}^{d}\), \(|(x,\xi )| > \delta \), and \(\lambda \geqslant 1\), as claimed.
We fix \(r > \delta \) and consider any \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\) such that \(|(x,\xi )| = r\). Using (6.13), the assumption \(a \in G^{m,\sigma }\) and
we estimate for \(\alpha , \beta \in \textbf{N}^{d}\)
for all \(\lambda \geqslant 1\). The conclusion \(b_t \in G^{m,\sigma }\) uniformly for all \(-T \leqslant t \leqslant T\) is now a consequence of Lemma 3.2. \(\square \)
7 Solutions to a class of Schrödinger type equations with anisotropic Hamiltonians
In the sequel we use \(k,m \in \textbf{N}\setminus 0\) and \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\). We consider in this section first the Cauchy problem
where \(T > 0\) and \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma ,\sigma }\). Later we will extend the time domain to \([-T,T]\).
Simplifying notation we set \(M_s = M_{\sigma ,s}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) for \(s \in \textbf{R}\) and \(a^w = a^w(x,D)\). The main purpose of the section is to show existence and uniqueness of solutions to (7.1) considering \(u(t,\cdot )\) as a function of t with values in \(M_s\) spaces.
We will need the following lemma which says that \(C^1([0,T], \mathscr {S})\) is dense in \(C([0,T], M_\mu ) \cap C^1 ([0,T], M_\nu )\) for any \(\mu , \nu \in \textbf{R}\).
Lemma 7.1
If \(\mu , \nu \in \textbf{R}\) and \(u \in C([0,T], M_\mu ) \cap C^1 ([0,T], M_\nu )\) then there exists a sequence \((u_n)_{n \geqslant 1} \subseteq C^1([0,T], \mathscr {S})\) such that
Proof
Let \(\varphi \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) satisfy \(\Vert \varphi \Vert _{L^2} = 1\). We use the approximations (cf. [13])
where \(\chi _n\) is the indicator function of the ball \({\text {B}}_n \subseteq \textbf{R}^{2d}\), \(n \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\).
By [13, Eq. (11.29)] we have on the one hand
and on the other hand, using (2.5) in the form \(V_\varphi ^* V_\varphi = \textrm{id}_{\mathscr {S}'}\),
With \(m \geqslant 0\) we write using (3.2) and (3.5)
which inserted into (7.4) gives by means of the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, again (3.5) and (2.3)
Referring to the assumption \(u \in C([0,T], M_\mu )\) and to the seminorms (2.6) this shows that \(u_n \in C([0,T], \mathscr {S})\), and \(u_n \in C^1([0,T], \mathscr {S})\) follows similarly from \(\partial _t u_n (t,\cdot ) = V_\varphi ^* \chi _n V_\varphi \partial _t u(t,\cdot )\), replacing \(\mu \) with \(\nu \) and using the assumption \(u \in C^1 ([0,T], M_\nu )\).
From (7.5) and Young’s inequality we obtain, again using (3.2), (2.3) and (3.5),
Note the monotonicity \(f_n (t) \geqslant f_{n+1} (t)\) for each \(n \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), and by the assumption \(u \in C([0,T], M_\mu )\) and dominated convergence we get \(\lim _{n \rightarrow \infty } f_n (t) = 0\) for each \(t \in [0,T]\). For each \(n \in \textbf{N}\setminus 0\) we have \(f_n \in C([0,T])\). In fact
so \(f_n \in C([0,T])\) follows from the assumption \(u \in C([0,T], M_\mu )\). Now it follows from Dini’s theorem that \(f_n (t) \rightarrow 0\) uniformly for \(t \in [0,T]\) as \(n \rightarrow \infty \). This means that we have shown (7.2), and (7.3) follows in the same fashion. \(\square \)
Remark 7.2
We note that Lemma 7.1 is true also when we replace the interval [0, T] with \([-T,T]\).
By (3.4) we have \(w_{k,m}^{1/k} \asymp \theta _\sigma \) when \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\) and \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\). Combining this with (4.1), (4.7) and [14, Theorem 1.1] it follows that if \(s \in \textbf{R}\) then the symbol \(\theta _\sigma ^s\) for the localization operator (4.7) that defines the isometry \(M_s \rightarrow L^2\) can be replaced by \(w_{k,m}^{s/k}\). We denote for simplicity this localization operator by \(A_s = A_{w_{k,m}^{s/k}}\). We will need the following auxiliary result.
Lemma 7.3
Let \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\) and \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma ,\sigma }\), and suppose that
for \(C_1 > 0\). If \(s \in \textbf{R}\) then \(A_s \, a^w A_s^{-1} = b^w\) where \(b \in G^{1 + \sigma ,\sigma }\) and
for some \(C_2 > 0\).
Proof
By Lemma 3.6 we have \(w_{k,m}^{s/k} \in G^{s,\sigma }\) for the symbol of \(A_s\). From [20, Theorem 1.7.10] it follows that \(A_s = a_1^w\) where \(a_1 \in G^{s,\sigma }\) is real-valued, cf. Sect. 4.
The symbol \(w_{k,m}^{s/k}\) for \(A_s\) is positive everywhere and elliptic, cf. (3.15). By the proof of [2, Theorem 8.2] (cf. also [20, Proposition 1.7.12]), slightly modified to the anisotropic calculus, it follows that \(A_s\) is invertible on \(\mathscr {S}\), and \(A_s^{-1} = c^w\) where \(c \in G^{-s,\sigma }\). From
for all \(f \in \mathscr {S}\setminus 0\) it follows that \((c^w f, f) > 0\) for all \(f \in \mathscr {S}\setminus 0\) which implies that c is a real-valued symbol. Indeed we have
for all \(f \in \mathscr {S}\), which by polarization yields
for all \(f,g \in \mathscr {S}\). This implies \(\textrm{Im}\, c \equiv 0\).
Finally from \(b^w = A_s \, a^w A_s^{-1} = a_1^w a^w c^w\) and (3.13) we obtain
where \(b_1 \in G^{0, \sigma }\) is bounded. Thus since \(a_1 \, c \in G^{0, \sigma }\) is also bounded we get
for some \(C_2 > 0\). \(\square \)
Remark 7.4
The proof of Lemma 7.3 shows that from the added assumption
follows the stronger conclusion
The following two results Lemma 7.5 and Theorem 7.9 are detailed adaptations of [16, Lemma 23.1.1 and Theorem 23.1.2] from the calculus of Hörmander symbols to the anisotropic Shubin calculus.
Lemma 7.5
Let \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\), \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma , \sigma }\), and suppose that
for \(C > 0\). If \(s \in \textbf{R}\), \(u \in C([0,T], M_{s + 1 + \sigma } ) \cap C^1 ([0,T], M_s)\) then
and there exists \(c > 0\) such that
for \(0 \leqslant t \leqslant T\).
Proof
First we prove the result for \(s = 0\). The assumptions, \(M_{1 + \sigma } \subseteq L^2\) and Proposition 4.2 imply
The conclusion (7.7) follows.
By Lemma 7.1 we may replace \(L^2\) by \(\mathscr {S}\) above. The assumptions \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma , \sigma }\) and \(\textrm{Im}\, a (x,\xi ) \leqslant C\) make Lemma 4.3 applicable. Combining with (3.12) and the fact that W(g, g) is real-valued [13] we get for \(g \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\)
where \(b > 0\). If \(0 \leqslant t \leqslant T\) and \(\mu \in \textbf{R}\) this gives, writing \(u(t) = u(t,\cdot )\) for brevity,
provided \(\mu \geqslant b + C\).
Integration gives for any \(0 \leqslant \nu \leqslant t\)
with
Thus
which yields
We have now shown (7.8) for \(s = 0\) and \(c = \mu \).
Next let \(s \in \textbf{R}\) and \(u \in C([0,T], M_{s + 1 + \sigma } ) \cap C^1 ([0,T], M_s)\). Then \(\partial _t u, a^w u \in C ([0,T], M_s)\), again appealing to Proposition 4.2, and the conclusion (7.7) follows. By the proof of Lemma 7.3 we know that \(A_s = a_1^w\) with \(a_1 \in G^{s,\sigma }\). Proposition 4.2 yields
By Lemma 7.3 the symbol \(b \in G^{1 + \sigma , \sigma }\) defined by \(b^w = A_s \, a^w A_s^{-1}\) satisfies \(\textrm{Im}\, b \leqslant C_2\) for some \(C_2 > 0\). The inequality (7.8) with \(a=b\) and \(s = 0\) thus gives
which finally yields
\(\square \)
Remark 7.6
If we strengthen the assumption (7.6) with a lower bound as
for \(C > 0\), then the time direction may be reversed in Lemma 7.5. More precisely the lower bound in (7.9) yields the estimate
Straightforward modifications of the argument in the proof for the case \(s = 0\) leads to the estimate
for \(c > 0\) and \(0 \leqslant t \leqslant T\). Taking into account Remark 7.4 a statement replacing (7.8) can then be formulated as follows. If \(s \in \textbf{R}\), \(u \in C([-T,T], M_{s + 1 + \sigma } ) \cap C^1 ([-T,T], M_s)\) then
for \(-T \leqslant t \leqslant T\), where \(c > 0\).
The final tool for the proof of existence and uniqueness of a solution to (7.1) we need is the following approximation lemma.
Lemma 7.7
Let \(s \in \textbf{R}\). If \(f \in L^1([0,T], M_s)\) then there exists a sequence \((f_n)_{n \geqslant 1} \subseteq C_c^\infty ( (0,T), \mathscr {S}( \textbf{R}^{d}) )\) such that
Proof
Since \(C([0,T], M_s) {\subseteq } L^1([0,T], M_s)\) is dense we may assume \(f {\in } C([0,T], M_s)\), and by Lemma 7.1 we may assume \(f \in C([0,T], \mathscr {S})\). Thus we have
We regularize f with respect to \(t \in [0,T]\) as
where \(\chi _n \in C_c^\infty (\textbf{R})\) is the indicator function for the interval \([\frac{1}{n},T-\frac{1}{n}] \subseteq \textbf{R}\), \(\psi \in C_c^\infty (\textbf{R})\), \(\psi \geqslant 0\), \({\text {supp}}\psi \subseteq [-\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]\), \(\int _\textbf{R}\psi (x) \, \textrm{d}x = 1\), and \(\psi _n(x) = n \psi (n x)\).
Writing
we may estimate
where
using (7.11). Finally
We have shown (7.10). \(\square \)
Remark 7.8
Again we note (cf. Remark 7.2) that Lemma 7.7 is true also when we replace the interval [0, T] with \([-T,T]\).
We have now finally arrived at a point where we may state and prove the existence and uniqueness of solutions to (7.1) that are continuous on the spaces \(M_s\).
Theorem 7.9
Let \(T > 0\), \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\), \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma ,\sigma }\), suppose
for \(C > 0\), and let \(s \in \textbf{R}\). If \(u_0 \in M_s\) and \(f \in L^1([0,T], M_s)\), then the equation (7.1) has a unique solution \(u \in C ([0,T], M_s)\).
Proof
First we assume \(u_0 \in \mathscr {S}\) and \(f \in C_c^\infty ( (0,T), \mathscr {S}( \textbf{R}^{d}) )\).
Let \(\psi \in C_c^\infty ( (0,T) \times \textbf{R}^{d})\). With \(\psi (t) = \psi (t,\cdot )\) we have \(\psi (t), \partial _t \psi (t), {\overline{a}}^w \psi (t) \in C( (0,T), \mathscr {S})\). Let \(\nu \in \textbf{R}\). Lemma 7.5 applied to \(t \mapsto \psi (T-t,\cdot )\) and \(- {{\overline{a}}}\) gives
This implies
Thus
is an anti-linear continuous functional. By the Hahn–Banach theorem it can be extended to a functional on \(L^1( (0,T], M_{-\nu })\). From [9, Theorem IV.1 and Corollary IV.4] we know that the dual space of \(L^1( (0,T], M_{-\nu })\) can be identified with \(L^\infty ( (0,T], M_\nu )\) through the natural pairing. Hence there exists \(u \in L^\infty ( (0,T], M_\nu ) \subseteq \mathscr {D}' ( (0,T) \times \textbf{R}^{d}) \) such that
It follows from this argument that \(\partial _t u + i a^w u = f\) in \(\mathscr {D}'( (0,T) \times \textbf{R}^{d})\). From \(u \in L^\infty ( (0,T], M_\nu )\), \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma ,\sigma }\) and Proposition 4.2 it follows that \(\partial _t u \in L^\infty ( (0,T], M_{\nu -(1+\sigma )})\). If we set \(g(0) = u_0\) and
then \(g \in C([0,T], M_{\nu -(1+\sigma )})\), and it follows from Lebesgue’s differentiation theorem for Bochner integrals [9, Theorem II.2.9] that \(g'(t) = \partial _t u(t)\) for almost all \(t \in [0,T]\).
If \(\psi \in C_c^\infty ( (0,T) \times \textbf{R}^{d})\) then we obtain from this
which shows that \(u = g \in C( [0,T], M_{\nu -(1+\sigma )})\). Now \(\partial _t u + i a^w u = f\) and \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma ,\sigma }\) yields \(u \in C^1( [0,T], M_{\nu -2(1+\sigma )})\). We may now apply Lemma 7.5 and conclude
Since \(\nu \in \textbf{R}\) is arbitrary we get the following conclusion. If \(u_0 \in \mathscr {S}\) and \(f \in C_c^\infty ( (0,T), \mathscr {S}( \textbf{R}^{d}) )\) then for any \(\nu \in \textbf{R}\) there exists a solution
to (7.1) such that
If \(u_0 \in M_s\) and \(f \in L^1( [0,T], M_s)\) we take sequences \((u_n)_{n = 1}^{\infty } \subseteq \mathscr {S}\) and \(( f_n)_{n = 1}^{\infty } \subseteq C_c^\infty ((0,T), \mathscr {S}( \textbf{R}^{d}) )\) such that \(\Vert u_n - u_0 \Vert _{M_s} \rightarrow 0\) and \(\Vert f_n - f \Vert _{L^1([0,T], M_s)} \rightarrow 0\) as \(n \rightarrow +\infty \). The former is possible due to [13, Proposition 11.3.4], and the latter thanks to Lemma 7.7. By the first part of the proof there exists a sequence \((u_n(t))_{n = 1}^{+\infty } \subseteq C( [0,T], M_{s+1+\sigma })\) such that \(\partial _t u_n (t) + i a^w u_n (t) = f_n (t) \) and \(u_n(0) = u_n\) for each \(n \geqslant 1\). By (7.12) with \(\nu = s\) the sequence \((u_n (t) )_n\) is a Cauchy sequence in \(C( [0,T], M_s)\). It follows that \(( \partial _t u_n(t))_{n = 1}^{+\infty } \subseteq C( [0,T], M_{s})\) is a Cauchy sequence in \(L^1( [0,T], M_{s-1-\sigma })\).
The sequence \((u_n (t) )_n\) converges in \(C( [0,T], M_s)\) to \(u (t) \in C( [0,T], M_s)\), and the sequence \((\partial _t u_n (t) )_n\) converges in \(L^1( [0,T], M_{s-1-\sigma })\) to \(v(t) \in L^1( [0,T], M_{s-1-\sigma })\), \(v + i a^w u = f\) in \(L^1( [0,T], M_{s-1-\sigma })\), and \(u(0) = u_0\).
If \(\psi \in C_c^\infty ( (0,T) \times \textbf{R}^{d})\) then
which shows that \(v = \partial _t u\) in \(L^1( [0,T], M_{s-1-\sigma })\). We conclude that \(\partial _t u + i a^w u = f\) in \(L^1( [0,T], M_{s-1-\sigma })\), \(u(0) = u_0\), \(u \in C( [0,T], M_{s})\), and
It remains to prove the uniqueness of the solution. Suppose \(u \in C( [0,T], M_s)\), \(\partial _t u + i a^w u = 0\) and \(u(0) = 0\). Then \(u \in C^1( [0,T], M_{s-1-\sigma })\) by Proposition 4.2, and thus by Lemma 7.5 we have \(u(t) = 0\) in \(M_{s-1-\sigma }\), which implies \(u(t) = 0\) in \(M_{s}\), for each \(t \in [0,T]\). \(\square \)
By Remarks 7.2, 7.6, 7.8 and straightforward modifications in the proof of Theorem 7.9 we may strengthen the assumption on \(\textrm{Im}\,a\), reverse the time direction and obtain results for the equation
Corollary 7.10
Let \(T > 0\), \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\), \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma , \sigma }\), suppose
for \(C > 0\), and let \(s \in \textbf{R}\). If \(u_0 \in M_s\) and \(f \in L^1([-T,T], M_s)\), the equation (7.13) has a unique solution \(u \in C ([-T,T], M_s)\).
Since
we get the following corollary taking into account (4.2).
Corollary 7.11
Let \(T > 0\), \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\), \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma , \sigma }\), and suppose
for \(C > 0\). If \(f \in L^1 ([-T,T], \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}))\) and \(u_0 \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) then the unique solution to (7.13) satisfies \(u \in C ([-T,T], \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}))\).
Finally we state a result dual to Corollary 7.11.
Corollary 7.12
Let \(T > 0\), \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\), \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma , \sigma }\), and suppose
for \(C > 0\). If \(u_0 \in \mathscr {S}'\) then by (4.2) there exists \(s \in \textbf{R}\) such that \(u_0 \in M_s\). If \(f \in L^1 ([-T,T], M_s)\) then the unique solution to (7.13) satisfies \(u \in C ([-T,T], M_s)\).
8 Propagation of anisotropic Gabor wave front sets for Schrödinger type equations
The following lemma is an anisotropic version of [6, Lemma 3.6]. Its proof is similar so we omit it (cf. also [27, Lemma 3.2]). The lemma will be used in the proof of Proposition 8.2 which is essential for our main result Theorem 8.3.
Lemma 8.1
Suppose \(\sigma > 0\), \(r_j(t) \in C([-T,T], G^{m_j,\sigma })\) for \(j \geqslant 0\), where \((m_j)_{j=0}^\infty \subseteq \textbf{R}\) is decreasing, \([-T,T] \ni t \mapsto \partial _t r_j(t)(z)\) is continuous for each \(z \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\), and \(\partial _t r_j(t) \in L^\infty ([-T,T], G^{m_j,\sigma })\) for all \(j \geqslant 0\). Then there exists \(r(t) \in C([-T,T], G^{m_0,\sigma })\) such that for any \(n \geqslant 1\)
We write \(r(t) \sim \sum _{j=0}^{\infty } r_j(t)\).
Note that r(t) is unique modulo an element in \(C([-T,T], \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{2d}))\).
If \(r_j(t) \in L^\infty ([-T,T], G^{m_j,\sigma })\) for \(j \geqslant 0\) we abuse the notation \(r(t) \sim \sum _{j=0}^{\infty } r_j(t)\) to mean
for \(n \geqslant 1\). In this interpretation r(t) is unique modulo an element in \(L^\infty ([-T,T], \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{2d}))\). Thus in Lemma 8.1 it holds \(\partial _t r(t) \sim \sum _{j=0}^{\infty } \partial _t r_j(t)\) in the latter sense.
In the next result we use the cutoff function \(\psi _\delta \) introduced prior to Proposition 6.5.
Proposition 8.2
Let \(\delta > 0\), \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\), and suppose that \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma ,\sigma }\), \(a \sim \sum _{j = 0}^{\infty } a_j\), where \(a_0 \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0)\) is real-valued,
and \(a_j \in G^{(1+\sigma ) (1- 2 j ), \sigma }\) for \(j \geqslant 1\). The Hamiltonian flow \(\chi _t: T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0 \rightarrow T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) corresponding to the Hamiltonian \(a_0\) is then defined for \(-T \leqslant t \leqslant T\) with \(T > 0\).
If \(q_0 \in G^{0,\sigma }\) then there exists a function \(t \mapsto q(t)\) such that \(q(0) = \psi _\delta q_0\),
and \(r(t) \in L^\infty ([-T,T], \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{2d}))\) where
Proof
The claim that the Hamiltonian flow \(\chi _t(x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) corresponding to the Hamiltonian \(a_0\) is defined for \(-T \leqslant t \leqslant T\) with the same parameter \(T > 0\) for all initial data \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) is a consequence of Proposition 6.2.
We will design q(t) such that (8.2), (8.3), (8.4) and (8.5) are satisfied, and, noting that \(\partial _t q(t)^w = q(t)^w \partial _t + \left( \partial _t q(t) \right) ^w\),
By [16, Theorem 18.5.4] we have
where we use the Poisson bracket notation
If we introduce for \(j \geqslant 0\) the bilinear differential operator
then \(\{ f,g \}_{1} = \{ f,g\}\), so \(\{ f,g \}_{j}\) extends the Poisson bracket to higher order differential operators. Note that for \(j \geqslant 0\)
The notation (8.8) allows us to abbreviate (8.7) as
Inserting \(a \sim \sum _{j = 0}^{\infty } a_j\) and \(q(t) \sim \sum _{j = 0}^{\infty } q_j (t)\), and collecting terms of order \(j \geqslant 0\) gives
since \(\{ q_k (t),a_n \}_{2\,m+1} \in C([-T,T], G^{- 2 j (1+\sigma ),\sigma })\) when \(k + n + m = j\).
The remainder (8.6) can now be written \(r(t) \sim \sum _{j=0}^\infty r_j (t)\) as an asymptotic sum in \(L^\infty ([-T,T], G^{0,\sigma })\) with
for \(j \geqslant 0\). In the proof we show how to pick \(\{ q_j(t)\}_{j=0}^\infty \) with the stated properties so that \(r(t) \in L^\infty ([-T,T], \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{2d}) )\).
Set for \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\) and \(t \in [-T,T]\)
so that (8.5) is satisfied. The purpose of the factor \(\psi _\delta \) is to make \(q_0 (t)\) a well defined smooth function also around \((0,0) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\) where \(\chi _{-t}\) may not be smooth. For each \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\), \(t \mapsto q_0 (t)(x, \xi ) \in C([-T,T])\). By Proposition 6.5 we have \(q_0 (t) \in G^{0,\sigma }\) uniformly for all \(t \in [-T,T]\).
We write \(q_0 (t) ( \chi _t (x, \xi ) ) = \psi _\delta ( \chi _t (x, \xi ) ) q_0 ( x,\xi )\). Then differentiation with respect to t, \(\partial _t \chi _t(x,\xi ) = \mathcal {J}\nabla a_0 ( \chi _t(x,\xi ) )\) (cf. (6.2)) and the Chain Rule give for \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\)
Thus for all \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\)
Note that the right hand side is supported in \(\textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } {\text {B}}_{\frac{\delta }{2}}\), and the second term is compactly supported in \({\overline{{\text {B}}}}_\delta \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\).
The function \([-T,T] \ni t \mapsto \partial _t q_0 (t)(x, \xi )\) is continuous for each \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\). Indeed the continuity of the first term
is a consequence of (6.3) and the chain rule, and the continuity of the second term has been verified above.
From \(q_0 (t) \in G^{0,\sigma }\) and (8.9) it now follows that \(\partial _t q_0(t) \in L^\infty ([-T,T], G^{0,\sigma })\), and then the continuity of \([-T,T] \ni t \mapsto \partial _t q_0 (t)(x, \xi )\) and the mean value theorem gives \(q_0 (t) \in C( [-T,T],G^{0,\sigma })\). By (8.11) we have
which implies that \({\text {supp}}\,r_0(t) \subseteq {\overline{{\text {B}}}}_\delta \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\) for all \(t \in [-T,T]\) so in fact we have \(r_0(t) \in L^\infty ( [-T,T], C_c^{\infty } )\). This means that the principal symbol of r(t) vanishes: \(r_0(t) \sim 0\).
Next we eliminate the second highest order term in (8.11) \(r_1(t) \in L^\infty ( [-T,T], G^{- 2(1+\sigma ), \sigma })\) by a proper choice of \(q_1(t) \in C( [-T,T], G^{- 2(1+\sigma ), \sigma })\). The term in \(C( [-T,T], G^{- 2(1+\sigma ), \sigma })\) in (8.10) is
Define
so that \(\rho _1(t) + \{ q_1(t), a_0 \} \) is the term in \(C( [-T,T], G^{- 2(1+\sigma ), \sigma })\) in (8.10). Define
or equivalently
From (8.13) and Proposition 6.5 it follows that \(q_1 (t) \in G^{- 2(1+\sigma ),\sigma }\) uniformly for all \(t \in [-T,T]\). We differentiate (8.14) with respect to t which gives if \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\)
Thus \(\partial _t q_1(t) - \{ q_1 (t), a_0 \} = \rho _1 (t)\) which implies \(\partial _t q_1 (t)\in L^\infty ( [-T,T], G^{- 2(1+\sigma ),\sigma })\).
Let \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\) be fixed. We know that \([-T,T] \ni t \mapsto \rho _1 (t) (x,\xi )\) is continuous, and the continuity of
is a consequence of the continuity of
for \(z = x_j\) and \(z = \xi _j\) for all \(1 \leqslant j \leqslant d\). In turn, the latter is a consequence of
the chain rule, and again (6.3).
It follows that \([-T,T] \ni t \mapsto \partial _t q_1 (t) (x,\xi )\) is continuous for each \((x,\xi ) \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\). Combining this with \(\partial _t q_1 (t)\in L^\infty ( [-T,T], G^{- 2(1+\sigma ),\sigma })\) we may conclude that \(q_1(t) \in C( [-T,T], G^{- 2(1+\sigma ),\sigma })\). Referring to (8.11) this implies that \(r_1 (t) \in L^\infty ( [-T,T], G^{- 2(1+\sigma ),\sigma })\) and
which shows that the choice of \(q_1(t)\) in (8.14) indeed eliminates \(r_1(t) \in L^\infty ( [-T,T], G^{- 2(1+\sigma ),\sigma })\).
In a similar way we construct \(q_j(t) \in C( [-T,T], G^{- 2 j (1+\sigma ),\sigma } )\) for \(j \geqslant 2\) using \(\{ q_k (t) \}_{k=0}^{j-1}\), by defining
and
As before \(\partial _t q_j(t) \in L^\infty ( [-T,T], G^{- 2 j (1+\sigma ), \sigma })\), \(q_j(t) \in C( [-T,T], G^{- 2 j (1+\sigma ), \sigma })\), and \(\partial _t q_j(t) - \{ q_j (t), a_0 \} = \rho _j (t)\), which yields \(r_j (t) \in L^\infty ( [-T,T], G^{- 2j (1+\sigma ), \sigma })\) (cf. (8.11)) and
So \(r_j(t) \sim 0\) for all \(j \geqslant 0\) which means that
Finally defining q(t) by (8.3), Lemma 8.1 shows that (8.2) and (8.4) hold. The claim \(q(0) = \psi _\delta q_0\) is a consequence of \(q_0(0) = \psi _\delta q_0\) and \(q_j(0) = 0\) for \(j \geqslant 1\). \(\square \)
Combining Corollaries 7.10 and 7.11 with Proposition 8.2 we obtain our main result about propagation of anisotropic Gabor singularities for the evolution equation
Theorem 8.3
Let \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\), and suppose that \(a \in G^{1 + \sigma ,\sigma }\), \(a \sim \sum _{j = 0}^{\infty } a_j\), where \(a_0 \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d} {\setminus } 0)\) is real-valued,
and \(a_j \in G^{(1+\sigma ) (1-2 j ), \sigma }\) for \(j \geqslant 1\). The Hamiltonian flow \(\chi _t: T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0 \rightarrow T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) corresponding to the Hamiltonian \(a_0\) is then defined for \(-T \leqslant t \leqslant T\) with \(T > 0\). If \(u_0 \in \mathscr {S}'(\textbf{R}^{d})\) then (8.17) has a unique solution denoted \(\mathscr {K}_t u_0\), and we have
Proof
By Proposition 6.2 there exists \(T > 0\) such that the Hamiltonian flow \(\chi _t: T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0 \rightarrow T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) corresponding to the Hamiltonian \(a_0\) is well defined for \(-T \leqslant t \leqslant T\).
By (4.2) there exists \(s \in \textbf{R}\) such that \(u_0 \in M_s\). From Corollary 7.10 we obtain the existence of a unique solution \(u(t) = \mathscr {K}_t u_0 \in C( [-T,T], M_s)\) to (8.17).
Let \(z_0 \in T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } \left( \mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}(u_0) \cup \{ 0 \} \right) \). We may assume that \(|z_0| = 1\). By (3.19) with \(m = 0\) there exists \(q_0 \in G^{0,\sigma }\) such that \(q_0^w u_0 \in \mathscr {S}\) and \(z_0 \notin {\text {char}}_\sigma (q_0)\). By (3.14) there exists a \(\sigma \)-conic neighborhood \(\Gamma \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d} \setminus 0\) such that \(z_0 \in \Gamma \), and \(|q_0(x,\xi ) | \geqslant C > 0\) when \((x,\xi ) \in \Gamma \setminus {\text {B}}_r\) for some \(r > 0\).
Let \(0 < \delta \leqslant |\chi _t (z_0)|\) for all \(t \in [-T,T]\). By Proposition 8.2 there exists \(q(t) \in C([-T,T], G^{0,\sigma })\) such that \(q(t) \sim \sum _{j = 0}^{\infty } q_j (t)\) with \(q_j (t) \in C([-T,T], G^{- 2j(1+\sigma ),\sigma })\) for \(j \geqslant 0\), \(q_0(t) (x,\xi ) = \psi _\delta (x,\xi ) q_0( \chi _{-t} (x,\xi ))\) and \(r(t) \in L^\infty ([-T,T], \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{2d}))\) where
This gives
that is
Set \(f (t) = - r(t)^w u(t)\). By (3.8) and Proposition 4.2 we have for any \(m \in \textbf{R}\)
which by (4.2) implies that \(f \in L^\infty ( [-T,T], \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})) \subseteq L^1 ( [-T,T], \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d}))\).
Thus \(q(t)^w u(t)\) solves the equation (7.13), and for the initial value we have
due to \(\psi _\delta -1 \in C_c^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d})\). At this point we may apply Corollary 7.11 which gives \(q(t)^w u(t) \in \mathscr {S}(\textbf{R}^{d})\) for all \(t \in [-T,T]\). We note that \(q_0 (t) (\chi _t(x,\xi )) = q_0(x,\xi )\) if \(|\chi _t(x,\xi )| \geqslant \delta \), and \(\chi _t \Gamma \subseteq T^* \textbf{R}^{d} {\setminus } 0\) is a \(\sigma \)-conic neighborhood of \(\chi _t(z_0)\), which is a consequence of Proposition 6.2. This implies that \(\chi _t(z_0) \notin {\text {char}}_\sigma ( q(t) )\), since the lower order terms \(\{ q_j(t) \}_{j \geqslant 1}\) in q(t) decay on \(T^* \textbf{R}^{d}\). By (3.19) this means that \(\chi _t(z_0) \notin \mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}( u(t) ) = \mathrm {WF_{g}^{ \sigma }}( \mathscr {K}_t u_0 ) \). We have shown
The opposite inclusion follows from \(\mathscr {K}_t^{-1} = \mathscr {K}_{-t}\) and \(\chi _t^{-1} = \chi _{-t}\). \(\square \)
Remark 8.4
In Theorem 5.1 the Hamiltonian has by Remark 5.2 the form
where \(a_j\) is real-valued for all \(0 \leqslant j \leqslant m\), \(\sigma = \frac{1}{m-1}\), \(a_0 \in G^{1+\sigma ,\sigma }\) satisfies (8.18), and \(a_j \in G^{\sigma (m-j),\sigma } = G^{(1+\sigma ) \left( 1 - \frac{j}{m} \right) ,\sigma } \subseteq G^{1,\sigma }\) for \(1 \leqslant j \leqslant m\).
In Theorem 8.3 on the other hand \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\) and the Hamiltonian is \(a \sim \sum _{j=0}^\infty a_j\), \(a_0\) is again real-valued and satisfies (8.18), and \(a_j \in G^{(1+\sigma ) (1-2 j ), \sigma } \subseteq G^{-(1+\sigma ), \sigma }\) for \(j \geqslant 1\).
Comparing Theorem 5.1 and Theorem 8.3 we may conclude that the former is not a particular case of the latter, due to the different assumptions on the perturbation \(a - a_0\) of the Hamiltonian.
9 Examples
Let again \(\psi _\delta (x,\xi ) = \varphi (|x|^2 + |\xi |^2) \in C^\infty (\textbf{R}^{2d})\) where \(\varphi \in C^{\infty }(\textbf{R})\), \(0 \leqslant \varphi \leqslant 1\), \(\varphi (t) = 0\) for \(t \leqslant \frac{\delta ^2}{4}\) and \(\varphi (t) = 1\) for \(t \geqslant \delta ^2\) for a given \(\delta > 0\). Thus \(\psi _\delta \big |_{{\text {B}}_{\frac{\delta }{2}}} \equiv 0\) and \(\psi _\delta \big |_{\textbf{R}^{2d} \setminus {\text {B}}_\delta } \equiv 1\).
Example 9.1
Let \(\delta > 0\), \(c \in \textbf{R}{\setminus } 0\), \(k,m \in \textbf{N}{\setminus } 0\), \(\sigma = \frac{k}{m}\), and set
Then
and \(a \in G^{1+\sigma ,\sigma }\). Theorem 8.3 applies to this Hamiltonian.
Example 9.2
Let \(c_1, c_2 \in \textbf{R}\setminus 0\), \(k \in \textbf{N}\setminus 0\), and set
With \(\sigma = \frac{1}{2k-1}\) we have
However, we note that the singularity (non-smoothness) of the term \(|x|^{\frac{2k}{2k-1}} = |x|^{1 + \sigma }\) at the origin is not annihilated by the cutoff function \(\psi _\delta \) unless \(k = 1\). For this purpose, we would need a cutoff function that depends on x only. But this type of cutoff function does not fit into the calculus with \(G^{m,\sigma }\) symbols. So \(a \notin G^{1+\sigma ,\sigma }\) and we cannot apply Theorem 8.3 to this Hamiltonian.
Data availability
Not applicable.
References
V. I. Arnold, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, Springer-Verlag, New York Heidelberg Berlin, 1978.
P. Boggiatto, E. Buzano and L. Rodino, Global Hypoellipticity and Spectral Theory, Akademie Verlag Mathematical Research 92, Berlin, 1996.
M. Cappiello, T. Gramchev and L. Rodino, Entire extensions and exponential decay for semilinear elliptic equations, J. Anal. Math. 111 (2010), 339–367.
M. Cappiello, R. Schulz and P. Wahlberg, Conormal distributions in the Shubin calculus of pseudodifferential operators, J. Math. Phys. 59 (2) 021502 (2018).
M. Cappiello, T. Gramchev, S. Pilipović and L. Rodino, Anisotropic Shubin operators and eigenfunction expansions in Gelfand–Shilov spaces, J. Anal. Math. 138 (2019), 857–870.
M. Cappiello, R. Schulz and P. Wahlberg, Shubin type Fourier integral operators and evolution equations, J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl. 11 (1) (2020) 119–139.
M. Chatzakou, J. Delgado and M. Ruzhansky, On a class of anharmonic oscillators, J. Math. Pures Appl. 153 (2021) 1–29.
M. A. de Gosson, Symplectic Methods in Harmonic Analysis and in Mathematical Physics, Birkhäuser, Basel, 2011.
J. Diestel and J. J. Uhl, Jr., Vector Measures, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs 15 AMS, Providence, Rhode Island, 1977.
G. B. Folland, Harmonic Analysis in Phase Space, Princeton University Press, 1989.
G. Garello and A. Morando, \(m\)-Microlocal elliptic pseudodifferential operators acting on\(L_{{\rm loc}}^p (\Omega )\), Math. Nachr. 289 (2016), 1820–1837.
I. M. Gel’fand and G. E. Shilov, Generalized Functions, Vol. II, Academic Press, New York London, 1968.
K. Gröchenig, Foundations of Time-Frequency Analysis, Birkhäuser, Boston, 2001.
K. Gröchenig and J. Toft, Isomorphism properties of Toeplitz operators and pseudo-differential operators between modulation spaces, J. Anal. Math. 114 (2011), 255–283.
P. Hartman, Ordinary Differential Equations, Birkhäuser, Boston Basel Stuttgart, 1982.
L. Hörmander, The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators, Vol. I, III, IV, Springer, Berlin, 1990.
L. Hörmander, Quadratic hyperbolic operators, Microlocal Analysis and Applications, Lecture Notes in Math. 1495, Eds. L. Cattabriga, L. Rodino, pp. 118–160, Springer, 1991.
R. Lascar, Propagation des singularités d’équations pseudodifférentielles quasi homogènes, Ann. Inst. Fourier Grenoble 27 (1977), 79–123.
J. Martin, Spectral inequalities for anisotropic Shubin operators, arXiv:2205.11868 [math.AP] (2022).
F. Nicola and L. Rodino, Global Pseudo-Differential Calculus on Euclidean Spaces, Birkhäuser, Basel, 2010.
F. Nicola and L. Rodino, Propagation of Gabor singularities for semilinear Schrödinger equations, Nonlinear Differential Equations Appl. 22 (6) (2015), 1715–1732.
C. Parenti and L. Rodino, Parametrices for a class of pseudo differential operators I,II, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 125 (4) (1980), 221–254 and 255–278.
A. Petersson, Fourier characterizations and non-triviality of Gelfand-Shilov spaces, with applications to Toeplitz operators, J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 29 (3) 29 (2023).
K. Pravda-Starov, L. Rodino and P. Wahlberg, Propagation of Gabor singularities for Schrödinger equations with quadratic Hamiltonians, Math. Nachr. 291 (1) (2018), 128–159.
L. Rodino and P. Wahlberg, The Gabor wave front set, Monaths. Math. 173 (4) (2014), 625–655.
L. Rodino and P. Wahlberg, Microlocal analysis of Gelfand–Shilov spaces, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 202 (5) (2023), 2379–2420.
L. Rodino and P. Wahlberg, Anisotropic global microlocal analysis for tempered distributions, Monatsh. Math. 202 (2) (2023), 397–434.
M. A. Shubin, Pseudodifferential Operators and Spectral Theory, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 2001.
R. Schulz and P. Wahlberg, Equality of the homogeneous and the Gabor wave front set, Comm. Partial Differential Equations 42 (5) (2017), 703–730.
J. Toft, The Bargmann transform on modulation and Gelfand–Shilov spaces, with applications to Toeplitz and pseudo-differential operators, J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl. 3 (2) (2012), 145–227.
P. Wahlberg, Propagation of anisotropic Gelfand–Shilov wave front sets, J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl. 14 (1) 7 (2023).
P. Wahlberg, Propagation of anisotropic Gabor wave front sets, arXiv:2301.03190 [math.AP] (2022).
Acknowledgements
We thank the anonymous referee whose careful comments have spurred us to improve the manuscript. The first author is partially supported by the INDAM-GNAMPA project CUP E53C23001670001. This work is partially supported by the MIUR project “Dipartimenti di Eccellenza 2018-2022” (CUP E11G18000350001).
Funding
Open access funding provided by Politecnico di Torino within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
There are no conflicts of interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Cappiello, M., Rodino, L. & Wahlberg, P. Propagation of anisotropic Gabor singularities for Schrödinger type equations. J. Evol. Equ. 24, 36 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00028-024-00963-w
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00028-024-00963-w
Keywords
- Tempered distributions
- Global wave front sets
- Microlocal analysis
- Phase space
- Anisotropy
- Propagation of singularities
- Evolution equations