Next Article in Journal
A Novel Statistical Test for Life Distribution Analysis: Assessing Exponentiality Against EBUCL Class with Applications in Sustainability and Reliability Data
Previous Article in Journal
Idempotent Triangular Matrices over Additively Idempotent Semirings: Decompositions into Products of Semicentral Idempotents
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Symmetry and Monotonicity of Solutions to Mixed Local and Nonlocal Weighted Elliptic Equations

School of Mathematics and Computer Science, Northwest Minzu University, Lanzhou 730030, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Axioms 2025, 14(2), 139; https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms14020139
Submission received: 14 January 2025 / Revised: 8 February 2025 / Accepted: 12 February 2025 / Published: 17 February 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Mathematical Analysis)

Abstract

:
This paper focuses on the symmetry and monotonicity of non-negative solutions to a mixed local and nonlocal weighted elliptic problem. This problem generalizes the ground-state representation of elliptic equations with the Hardy potential. The novelty of this research lies in developing the moving planes method for mixed local and nonlocal equations with a weighted function, thus clarifying the influence of the weighted function on the solution properties.

1. Introduction

The mixed local and nonlocal operators L = Δ + ( Δ ) s emerge from the superposition of two stochastic processes with different scales; that is, the random walk and jump process [1,2], which is studied by many mathematicians. More precisely, Biagi et al. [3] established some qualitative property of solutions to the following mixed local and nonlocal elliptic problem:
Δ u ( x ) + ( Δ ) s u ( x ) = f ( x ) , x Ω , u ( x ) 0 , x Ω , u ( x ) = 0 , x R N Ω .
Biagi et al. [4] ([Theorem 1.1]) obtained the symmetry properties of solutions to the following mixed operators by the moving planes method:
Δ u ( x ) + ( Δ ) s u ( x ) = f ( u ) , x Ω , u ( x ) 0 , x Ω , u ( x ) = 0 , x R N Ω .
where f is a locally Lipschitz continuous function, and Ω R N satisfies certain symmetry and convexity assumptions. Furthermore, [4] ([Theorem 1.2]) established the symmetry of the global solutions inspired by a Gibbons conjecture. Daiji et al. [5] ([Theorem 1.1]) extended the results of [4] ([Theorem 1.1]) to singular solutions to problem (1) with a singular set. Recently, Dipierro et al. [6,7,8] considered the existence of solutions to the superposition of a continuum of operators. An interesting feature of the superposition operators considered in [6,7,8] is that the type of operators may not only possibly involve uncountably many fractional operators but also that some of these operators may have the wrong sign. Some other results of mixed local and nonlocal operators can be found in [9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17] and the references therein.
It is well known that the Hardy potential has an important influence on the properties of solutions to elliptic equations. Compared to elliptic equations without a Hardy potential, the main difference is that the solutions to elliptic equations involving the Hardy potential must be unbounded, even if the right-hand side data belong to L ( Ω ) . Furthermore, this critical value Λ N , s , which is the sharp constant of the Hardy–Sobolev inequality, has an important effect on solvability. It is worth pointing out that the operators ( Δ ) α s u defined by (4) below appear in a natural way when dealing with the following problems:
( Δ ) s u ( x ) λ u ( x ) | x | 2 s = f ( x , u ) , x Ω , u ( x ) > 0 , x Ω , u ( x ) = 0 , x R N Ω ,
where 0 < λ < Λ N , s . More precisely, by the ground state representation [18] ([Proposition 4.1]), it is well known that, for γ ( 0 , N 2 s 2 ) , let u C 0 ( R N ) and v ( x ) = | x | γ u ( x ) , then
R N | ξ | 2 s | u ^ | 2 d ξ ( Λ N , s + Φ N , s ( γ ) ) R N | x | 2 s | u ( x ) | 2 d x = a N , s R N × R N | v ( x ) v ( y ) | 2 | x y | N + 2 s d x | x | γ d y | y | γ ,
where
Φ N , s ( γ ) = 2 2 s Γ ( γ + 2 s 2 ) Γ ( N γ 2 ) Γ ( N γ 2 s 2 ) Γ ( γ 2 ) Γ 2 ( N + 2 s 4 ) Γ 2 ( N 2 s 4 ) .
Γ is the gamma function. Therefore, if u is the solution to problem (2), then v ( x ) = | x | γ u ( x ) satisfies
L γ v ( x ) = | x | γ f ( x , | x | γ v ( x ) ) , x Ω , v ( x ) > 0 , x Ω , v ( x ) = 0 , x R N Ω ,
where
L γ v ( x ) = a N , s P . V . R N v ( x ) v ( y ) | x y | N + 2 s d y | x | γ | y | γ .
Similarly, the operators div ( | x | 2 α u ) appear when dealing with Laplace problems with a Hardy potential. Thus, it is of interest to deeply study the symmetry of solutions to mixed local and nonlocal weighted elliptic problems.
In this paper, we establish the symmetry of solutions to the following mixed local and nonlocal weighted semilinear elliptic problem:
div ( | x | 2 α u ) + ( Δ ) α s u = f ( u ) | x | 2 α , x Ω , u ( x ) 0 , x Ω , u ( x ) = 0 , x R N Ω ,
where s ( 0 , 1 ) , α [ 0 , N 2 s 2 ) , 0 Ω R N ( N 3 ) is an open bounded set with a C 1 boundary, which is symmetric and convex with respect to the hyperplane { x 1 = 0 } , and the weighted fractional Laplacian ( Δ ) α s is defined by
( Δ ) α s u = C N , s P . V . R N u ( x ) u ( y ) | x y | N + 2 s d y | y | α | x | α ,
where C N , s is given by
C N , s = R N 1 cos ξ 1 | ξ | N + 2 s d ξ 1 .
Our main result is as follows.
Theorem 1. 
Assume that N 3 , s ( 0 , 1 ) , α [ 0 , N 2 s 2 ) . Let f : R R be a locally Lipschitz continuous function, Ω R N be an open bounded set with C 1 boundary, which is symmetric and convex with respect to the hyperplane { x 1 = 0 } . Then, the non-zero weak solution u C ( R N ) to problem (3) is symmetric about the hyperplane { x 1 = 0 } . Moreover, u is strictly increasing in the direction within the set Ω { x 1 < 0 } .
Remark 1. 
On the one hand, we generalize the corresponding symmetry results of mixed local and nonlocal equations without the weighted function established by Biagi et al. [4] ([Theorem 1.1]). On the other hand, we develop the moving planes method for mixed local and nonlocal equations with a weighted function.
This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 gathers some definitions and lemmas. The proof of Theorem 1 is given in Section 3. Section 4 presents a comprehensive summary of the principal findings and outcomes achieved in this paper.

2. Preliminaries

In this section, we introduce some preliminaries to prove Theorem 1.

2.1. Some Definitions

Without loss of generality, we may assume that
inf x Ω x 1 = a ( a > 0 ) .
Definition 1. 
Let s ( 0 , 1 ) define the mixing local and nonlocal Sobolev space
H α s ( R N ) = { u L 2 ( R N , | x | 2 α ) is measurable : [ u ] H α s < + } ,
where
[ u ] H α s ( R N ) = R N | u ( x ) | 2 d x | x | 2 α 1 2 + R 2 N | u ( x ) u ( y ) | 2 | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α 1 2 .
Define
H α s ( Ω ) = { u H α s ( R N ) : u 0 , x R N Ω } .
Now we give the definition of weak solutions to problem (3).
Definition 2. 
We say that u H α s ( Ω ) is a weak solution to problem (3) if
1. 
u > 0 a . e . x Ω .
2. 
For any φ H α s ( Ω ) ,
B ( u , φ ) = R N f ( u ) | x | 2 α φ d x ,
where
B ( u , φ ) = Ω | x | 2 α u · φ d x + R 2 N ( u ( x ) u ( y ) ) ( φ ( x ) φ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α .
Let H R N be an open and affine half space. We denote by Q : R N R N the reflection with respect to H and set
x ¯ = Q ( x ) , x R N .
Definition 3. 
A function v : R N R is antisymmetric with respect to Q if
v ( x ¯ ) = v ( x ) , x R N .

2.2. Some Useful Lemmas

The main tool employed in our analysis is the moving planes method introduced by Sciunzi [19,20]. By carefully applying this method to the mixed local and nonlocal equations with a weighted function, we are able to prove the symmetry and monotonicity of the solutions. The moving planes method is a powerful and influential technique in the field of partial differential equations, primarily utilized to explore the symmetry and monotonicity properties of solutions.
The following is the process of applying the moving plane method to the solution to problem (3). Let u C ( Ω ) be a weak solution to problem (3). For every λ ( a , a ) (where a is given by (5)), define the x λ as the symmetry of x with respect to hyperplane T λ = { x 1 = λ } , so that x λ = ( 2 λ x 1 , x 2 , x N ) and
u λ ( x ) = u ( x λ ) .
According to problem (3), we find that u λ satisfies
div ( | x λ | 2 α u λ ) + R N u λ ( x ) u λ ( y ) | x y | N + 2 s d y | y λ | α | x λ | α = f ( u λ ) | x λ | 2 α , x Ω .
Combining (3) and (13), we obtain the following equation
div ( | x | 2 α u ( x ) ) + ( Δ ) α s u ( x ) [ div ( | x λ | 2 α u λ ( x ) ) + ( Δ ) α s u λ ( x ) ] c 0 ( x ) ( u λ ( x ) u ( x ) ) ,
where
c 0 ( x ) = | x | 2 α f ( u λ ) | x λ | 2 α f ( u ) | x | 2 α | x λ | 2 α ( u λ u ) , λ < 0 , 0 , λ 0 .
We remember
Σ λ = { x R N : x 1 < λ } , λ < 0 , { x R N : x 1 > λ } , λ 0 ,
and
Ω λ = Ω Σ λ .
Let u H α s ( R N ) be any non-identically vanishing weak solution to problem (3). For any λ ( a , 0 ) , where a is given by (5), define w λ : R N R as
w λ ( x ) = ( u u λ ) + ( x ) , x Σ λ , ( u u λ ) ( x ) , x R N Σ λ ,
where
( u u λ ) + = max { u u λ , 0 } , ( u u λ ) = min { u u λ , 0 } .
It is well known that u H α s ( R N ) . Thus, u λ H α s ( R N ) and
( u u λ ) χ ( Σ λ ) + H α s ( R N ) , ( u u λ ) χ ( R N Σ λ ) H α s ( R N ) .
where
u χ ( Σ ) = u , x Σ , 0 , x R N Σ .
Consequently,
w λ = ( u u λ ) χ ( Σ λ ) + + ( u u λ ) χ ( R N Σ λ ) H α s ( R N ) .
This fact implies that
| x | 2 α w λ H α s ( R N ) , | x λ | 2 α w λ H α s ( R N ) .
Note that w λ ( x ) = ( 0 u λ ( x ) ) + = 0 if x Σ λ Ω λ and w λ ( x λ ) = ( u ( x ) u ( x λ ) ) = 0 if x λ Σ λ Ω λ . Thus,
w λ 0 , x R N ( Ω λ Q λ ( Ω λ ) ) = ( Σ λ Ω λ ) Q λ ( Σ λ Ω λ ) .
Now we give the following lemma.
Lemma 1. 
Under the conditions of Theorem 1, we have
( Δ ) α s u , | x | 2 α w λ ( Δ ) α s u λ , | x λ | 2 α w λ R 2 N ( w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α .
Proof. 
According to (19) and (20), we have
( Δ ) α s u , | x | 2 α w λ = R 2 N ( u ( x ) u ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α ,
and
( Δ ) α s u λ , | x λ | 2 α w λ = R 2 N ( u λ ( x ) u λ ( y ) ) ( | x λ | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y λ | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x λ | α | y λ | α .
Thus, (22) and (23) lead to
( Δ ) α s u , | x | 2 α w λ ( Δ ) α s u λ , | x λ | 2 α w λ = R 2 N ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) ( u ( y ) u λ ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α + R 2 N u λ ( x ) u λ ( y ) | x y | N + 2 s | x | α | y | α | x λ | α | y λ | α w λ ( x ) | y λ | α | x λ | α | y | α | x | α w λ ( y ) d x d y = R 2 N ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) ( u ( y ) u λ ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α = R 2 N ( w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x | x | α d y | y | α + R 2 N g ( x , y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α ,
where
g ( x , y ) = ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) ( u ( y ) u λ ( y ) ) ( w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) ,
we have used the fact that
| x λ y λ | N + 2 s = | x y | N + 2 s and | x | α | y | α | x λ | α | y λ | α = 0 .
Now we show that
R 2 N g ( x , y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α 0 .
This fact, together with (24) shows that (21) holds.
In order to show that (25) holds, use the decomposition
R N × R N = ( S λ S λ c D λ D λ c ) × ( S λ S λ c D λ D λ c ) ,
where
S λ = supp w λ ( x ) Σ λ , S λ c = Σ λ S λ , D λ = supp w λ ( x ) ( R N Σ λ ) , D λ c = ( R N Σ λ ) D λ .
By the definition of w λ ( x ) (see (18) for more details), we find that w λ ( x ) = 0 for x S λ c D λ c and w λ ( y ) = u ( y ) u λ ( y ) for y S λ D λ . Thus, for any ( x , y ) ( S λ c D λ c ) × ( S λ D λ ) ,
g ( x , y ) = ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) ( u ( y ) u λ ( y ) ) ( w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) = ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) ( u ( y ) u λ ( y ) ) + w λ ( y ) ( | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) = u ( x ) u λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) .
It is easily seen that u ( x ) u λ ( x ) 0 if x S λ c and | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) 0 if y S λ , then g ( x , y ) 0 , ( x , y ) S λ c × S λ .
Therefore, using the fact that D λ is the reflection of S λ and w λ ( y λ ) = w λ ( y ) , we have
S λ c × S λ g ( x , y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α + S λ c × D λ g ( x , y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α = S λ c × S λ ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α + S λ c × S λ ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) | y λ | 2 α w λ ( y λ ) | x y λ | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y λ | α = S λ c × S λ ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α + S λ c × S λ ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) | y λ | 2 α w λ ( y ) | x y λ | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y λ | α = S λ c × S λ u ( x ) u λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) | y | 2 α | x y | N + 2 s | x | α | y | α | y λ | 2 α | x y λ | N + 2 s | x | α | y λ | α d x d y = S λ c × S λ u ( x ) u λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) | y | α | x y | N + 2 s | x | α | y λ | α | x y λ | N + 2 s | x | α d x d y 0 ,
where we have used that fact that
| y | α | x y | N + 2 s | y λ | α | x y λ | N + 2 s 0 ,
since | y | | y λ | and | x y | | x y λ | if ( x , y ) S λ c × S λ . Now we consider ( x , y ) ( D λ c × D λ ) ( D λ c × S λ ) . It is obvious that u ( x ) u λ ( x ) 0 if x D λ c and | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) 0 if y D λ . Furthermore, for α [ 0 , N 2 s 2 ) , we have
| y | α | x y | N + 2 s | y λ | α | x y λ | N + 2 s 0 ,
since | y λ | | y | = | x y λ | | x y | and | y λ | | y | for ( x , y ) D λ c × D λ .
Therefore, using D λ as the reflection of S λ and w λ ( y λ ) = w λ ( y ) again, we have
D λ c × D λ g ( x , y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α + D λ c × S λ g ( x , y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α = D λ c × D λ ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α + D λ c × D λ ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) | y λ | 2 α w λ ( y λ ) | x y λ | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y λ | α = D λ c × D λ ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α + D λ c × D λ ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) | y λ | 2 α w λ ( y ) | x y λ | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y λ | α = D λ c × D λ ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) w λ ( y ) | y | 2 α | x y | N + 2 s | x | α | y | α | y λ | 2 α | x y λ | N + 2 s | x | α | y λ | α d x d y = D λ c × D λ ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) w λ ( y ) | y | α | x y | N + 2 s | x | α | y λ | α | x y λ | N + 2 s | x | α d x d y 0 .
Similarly, for ( x , y ) ( S λ D λ ) × ( S λ c D λ c ) ,
g ( x , y ) = ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) ( u ( y ) u λ ( y ) ) ( w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) = ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) ( u ( y ) u λ ( y ) ) w λ ( x ) | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) = u ( y ) u λ ( y ) | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) .
Analysis similar to that in the proof of (27) and (28) shows
S λ × S λ c g ( x , y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α + D λ × S λ c g ( x , y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α 0 ,
and
S λ × D λ c g ( x , y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α + D λ × D λ c g ( x , y ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α 0 .
Furthermore,
g ( x , y ) = 0 , elsewhere .
Combining (27)–(31) yields (25) holds. □
Lemma 2. 
Under the conditions of Lemma 1, we have
R 2 N ( w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α 0 .
Proof. 
Obviously,
R 2 N ( w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α = R 2 N h ( x , y ) ( w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) ) 2 | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α ,
where
h ( x , y ) = | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) .
An easy computation shows that
h ( x , y ) = 0 , ( x , y ) ( S λ c D λ c ) × ( S λ c D λ c ) , h ( x , y ) = | x | 2 α 0 , ( x , y ) ( S λ D λ ) × ( S λ c D λ c ) , h ( x , y ) = | y | 2 α 0 , ( x , y ) ( S λ c D λ c ) × ( S λ D λ ) .
For ( x , y ) ( S λ D λ ) × ( S λ D λ ) with | x | | y | , we have
h ( x , y ) | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | x | 2 α w λ ( y ) w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) = | x | 2 α 0 .
The above inequality holds also for ( x , y ) ( S λ D λ ) × ( S λ D λ ) with | x | | y | by symmetry. Combining (33) and (34) gives (32) holds. □
Lemma 3. 
Suppose that H R N is an open and affine half space, U R N is an open set satisfying Q ( U ) = U , U H is open and bounded set, and Ω λ ¯ H U . Let u λ u H α s ( U ) be an antisymmetric function such that
u λ u 0 , x H U .
Then
I : = Ω λ | x | 2 α | w λ | 2 d x + R 2 N ( w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) ) 2 | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α + Ω λ | x | 2 α u · ( | x | 2 α w λ ) d x + R 2 N ( u ( x ) u ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α Ω λ | x λ | 2 α u λ · ( | x λ | 2 α w λ ) d x R 2 N ( u λ ( x ) u λ ( y ) ) ( | x λ | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y λ | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x λ y λ | N + 2 s d x d y | x λ | α | y λ | α 0 .
Proof. 
Thanks to the definition of w λ , it is evident that
u · ln | x | 2 α u λ · ln | x λ | 2 α = 0 ,
which implies that
Ω λ | x | 2 α u · ( | x | 2 α w λ ) d x Ω λ | x λ | 2 α u λ · ( | x λ | 2 α w λ ) d x = Ω λ u · w λ + w λ u · ln | x | 2 α d x Ω λ u λ · w λ + w λ u λ · ln | x λ | 2 α d x = Ω λ u λ · w λ d x Ω λ u · w λ d x = Ω λ ( u u λ ) · w λ d x ,
the Lemma 1 and 2 are applied to complete the proof. □
Inspired by [4], now we consider the first mixed eigenvalue of the operator div ( | x | 2 α u ) + ( Δ ) α s u , which is defined as
Λ 1 ( Ω ) = inf u H α s ( Ω ) B ( u , u ) | | u | | L 2 ( Ω ) 2 ,
where B is defined by (9), we see that
Λ 1 ( Ω ) Λ ( div ( | x | 2 α u ) ) ( Ω ) ,
where Λ ( div ( | x | 2 α u ) ) ( Ω ) stands for the first eigenvalue of div ( | x | 2 α u ) in Ω with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions. Define
Λ 1 ( r ) = { Λ 1 ( Ω ) : Ω R N with | Ω | = r } , r > 0 .
Recalling that
Λ ( div ( | x | 2 α u ) ) ( Ω ) + as | Ω | 0 ,
which, together with (39), gives
Λ 1 ( r ) + as r 0 + .
Lemma 4. 
Let Ω λ R N be an open and bounded set with Ω λ ¯ H and
c ( x ) = f ( u λ ) f ( u ) u λ u , λ < 0 , 0 , λ 0 .
Let λ be small enough such that
c L ( Ω λ ) > Λ 1 ( Ω λ ) ,
where c ( x ) = max { c ( x ) , 0 } denotes the negative part of a function c ( x ) , and Λ 1 ( Ω λ ) is defined as (38). Then, u λ ( x ) u ( x ) 0 for a.e. x H .
Proof. 
Firstly, we claim that
w λ 0 .
where w λ is defined as (18).
We prove this claim by contradiction. Suppose that w λ L 2 ( Ω λ ) 0 . From this, (36), (38) and (41), we conclude that
Λ 1 ( Ω λ ) w λ L 2 ( Ω λ ) 2 = Ω λ | x | 2 α | w λ | 2 d x + R 2 N ( w λ ( x ) w λ ( y ) ) 2 | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α Ω λ | x λ | 2 α u λ · ( | x λ | 2 α w λ ) d x Ω λ | x | 2 α u · ( | x | 2 α w λ ) d x + R 2 N ( u λ ( x ) u λ ( y ) ) ( | x λ | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y λ | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x λ y λ | N + 2 s d x d y | x λ | α | y λ | α R 2 N ( u ( x ) u ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α = Ω λ f ( u λ ) f ( u ) u λ u ( u λ u ) ( x ) w λ ( x ) d x = Ω λ c ( x ) w λ 2 ( x ) d x c L ( Ω λ ) w λ L 2 ( Ω λ ) 2 > Λ 1 ( Ω λ ) w λ L 2 ( Ω λ ) 2 ,
which is a contradiction. This shows that (42) holds. □
We now establish a strong maximum principle for antisymmetric supersolutions, which is the counterpart in the setting of mixed local-nonlocal operators of [4] ([Propossition 2.7]).
Lemma 5. 
Suppose that Ω λ H is an open and bounded set, c L ( Ω λ ) , and
u λ ( x ) u ( x ) 0 a . e . x H .
Then, either u λ ( x ) u ( x ) 0 , x R N or
ess inf K ( u λ ( x ) u ( x ) ) > 0 , for any compact set K Ω λ .
Proof. 
Now assume that
u λ ( x ) u ( x ) 0 , x R N .
For a fixed x 0 Ω λ , we show that
ess inf B r ( x 0 ) ( u λ ( x ) u ( x ) ) > 0 ,
for some radius r > 0 is small enough.
First of all, since (43) and (44), together with the fact that u λ ( x ) u ( x ) is antisymmetric, we know there exists a bounded set M H with | M | > 0 , which does not contain a small neighbourhood of x 0 such that
δ : = inf M ( u λ u ) ( x ) > 0 .
Set
r 0 , dist x 0 ; R N H M 4 ,
such that
Λ 1 B 2 r ( x 0 ) < c L ( U ) .
Let g be a decreasing function satisfying g C 0 2 ( R N ) [ 0 , 1 ] and
g ( x ) = 1 , x B r ( x 0 ) , 0 , x R N B 2 r ( x 0 ) .
Moreover, for a given b > 0 to be selected at a later time, define
h : R N R , h ( x ) = g ( x ) g ( x ¯ ) + b χ M ( x ) χ M ( x ¯ ) .
Write U 0 = B 2 r ( x 0 ) and U 0 = B 3 r ( x 0 ) Q ( B 3 r ( x 0 ) ) . Obviously, ( M Q ( M ) ) U 0 = .
It is easily seen that h L 2 ( R N ) H α s ( R N ) is antisymmetric,
h 0 , x H ( U 0 M ) and h b , x M .
Now we show that there exists a constant C > 0 , depending on g, such that
B ( g , φ ) C U 0 φ ( x ) | x | 2 α d x , φ H α s ( U 0 ) with φ 0 .
Indeed, for any φ H α s ( U 0 ) with φ 0 , We have
U 0 | x | 2 α g · φ d x = U 0 | x | 2 α g · φ d x U 0 div ( | x | 2 α g ) · φ ( x ) d x = U 0 div ( | x | 2 α g ) · φ ( x ) d x = U 0 g · ( | x | 2 α ) φ ( x ) d x U 0 Δ g · φ ( x ) | x | 2 α d x C U 0 φ ( x ) | x | 2 α d x ,
and
R N ( g ( x ) g ( y ) ) ( φ ( x ) φ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x | x | α d y | y | α = U 0 ( Δ ) α s g ( x ) φ ( x ) d x C U 0 φ ( x ) | x | α d x ,
this fact, together with (52), implies that (51) holds. Similarly,
B ( g ( x ¯ ) , φ ) C U 0 φ ( x ) | x | 2 α d x for every φ H α s ( U 0 ) with φ 0 ,
combining (49), (51) and (53), we conclude that, for any φ H α s ( U 0 ) with φ 0 ,
B ( h , φ ) = B ( g ( x ) , φ ) + B ( g ( x ¯ ) , φ ) + b R 2 N ( ( χ M ( x ) χ M ( x ¯ ) ) ( χ M ( y ) χ M ( y ¯ ) ) ) ( φ ( x ) φ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α C U 0 φ ( x ) | x | 2 α d x .
Note that C in (54) depended on b. Choose b > 0 such that
C < c ( x ) L ( U 0 ) ,
which, together with (54), yields
B ( h , φ ) c ( x ) L ( U 0 ) U 0 φ ( x ) d x U 0 c ( x ) h ( x ) φ ( x ) d x ,
since h ( x ) = g ( x ) [ 0 , 1 ] for every x U 0 . Clearly,
( u λ u ) ( x ) δ b h ( x ) L 2 ( R N ) H α s ( R N ) ,
and
( u λ u ) ( x ) δ b h ( x ) 0 , x H U 0 .
According to (14) and (55), we find, for any φ H α s ( U 0 ) with φ 0 ,
B ( u λ , φ ) B ( u , φ ) δ b B ( h , φ ) U 0 c ( x ) ( u λ u ) ( x ) φ ( x ) d x δ b U 0 c ( x ) h ( x ) φ ( x ) d x = U 0 c ( x ) ( ( u λ u ) ( x ) δ b h ( x ) ) φ ( x ) d x .
This fact, together with Lemma 4, leads to ( u λ u ) ( x ) δ b h ( x ) 0 a.e. x U 0 . Consequently,
u λ ( x ) u ( x ) δ b > 0 a . e . x B r ( x 0 ) ,
which shows that (45) holds. □
We came to a conclusion.
Lemma 6. 
Let u be a weak solution to (3). If there exists some λ ( a , 0 ) such that u u λ 0 , x R N , then
u 0 , x Ω ( hence u 0 , x R N ) .
Proof. 
For any fixed λ ( a , 0 ) , obviously Ω λ . The convexity of Ω in the x 1 direction implies that Ω λ Q λ ( Ω ) , where Q λ ( Ω ) is the symmetric region of Ω with respect to the hyperplane T λ .
Clearly, = a + λ ( 0 , a ) since λ ( a , 0 ) . Therefore, Q λ ( Ω ) Ω ¯ = . Thus, u = 0 , x Q λ ( Ω ) and u λ 0 , x Ω , which leads to
u u λ 0 , x Ω .
Set η = a + λ / 2 .
By Ω η Q η ( Ω η ) Ω , we have
u u η = 0 , x Ω η .
Using Lemma 5 again with H = Σ η , U = Ω η , we deduce that
u η u 0 , x R N .
Therefore, u has two different parallel symmetry hyperplanes Σ λ = { x 1 = λ } and Σ η = { x 1 = η } . By u 0 , R N Ω and Q λ ( Ω ( Ω λ Q λ ( Ω λ ) ) ) Ω = , we find that
u 0 , x O = Ω ( Ω λ Q λ ( Ω λ ) ) .
Note that Σ η is a symmetry hyperplane for u and Q η ( Ω λ Q λ ( Ω λ ) O , we infer that
u 0 , x Ω λ Q λ ( Ω λ ) .
Combining (59) with (60), (57) holds. □
The following lemma will be used in the proof of the main theorem.
Lemma 7 
([21]). [Lemma 2.10] Let N 2 and Ω R N be an open and bounded set with a Lipschitz boundary. There exists a real constant C = C n , independent of Ω, such that
u L 2 ( Ω ) C | Ω | 1 / N u L 2 ( Ω ) .

3. Proof of Theorem 1

Now we give the proof of Theorem 1.
Proof of Theorem 1. 
In the following, we show that every solution u H α s ( R N ) to problem (3) is actually symmetric and monotone decreasing around the origin by the moving planes method. For any λ R , the definitions of Σ λ and T λ are given in (16), respectively. Moreover, u λ ( x ) = u ( x λ ) is defined by (12) for x λ = ( 2 λ x 1 , x 2 , x N ) R N .
In the rest of the proof, we assume C N , s 2 = 1 for simplicity of notation.
By (19) and (20), we know that | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) and | x λ | 2 α w λ ( x ) are admissible test functions for problem (3) and (13), respectively. Thus,
Ω | x | 2 α u · ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) ) d x + R 2 N ( u ( x ) u ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α = R N f ( u ) w λ d x ,
and
Ω | x λ | 2 α u ( x λ ) · ( | x λ | 2 α w λ ) d x + R N ( u ( x λ ) u ( y λ ) ) ( | x λ | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y λ | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x λ | α | y λ | α = R N f ( u λ ) w λ d x .
Subtracting from (61) and (62), we obtain
Ω | x | 2 α u · ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) ) d x Ω | x λ | 2 α u ( x λ ) · ( | x λ | 2 α w λ ) d x + R 2 N ( u ( x ) u ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α R 2 N ( u ( x λ ) u ( y λ ) ) ( | x λ | 2 α w λ ( x ) | y λ | 2 α w λ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x λ | α | y λ | α = R N f ( u ) w λ d x R N f ( u λ ) w λ d x .
It is evident that u · ln | x | 2 α u λ · ln | x λ | 2 α = 0 for x Ω , which leads to
Ω | x | 2 α u · ( | x | 2 α w λ ( x ) ) d x Ω | x λ | 2 α u ( x λ ) · ( | x λ | 2 α w λ ) d x = Ω u · w λ + w λ u · ln | x | 2 α d x Ω u λ · w λ + w λ u λ · ln | x λ | 2 α d x = Ω ( u u λ ) · w λ + u · ln | x | 2 α u λ · ln | x λ | 2 α w λ ( x ) d x = Ω ( u u λ ) · w λ d x = Ω | w λ | 2 d x .
Taking into account Lemmas 1 and 2, (63) and (64), we yield
Ω λ ( Q λ ( Ω λ ) { 0 } ) | w λ | 2 d x R N ( f ( u ) f ( u λ ) ) w λ d x = Ω λ ( Q λ ( Ω λ ) { 0 } ) ( f ( u ) f ( u λ ) ) w λ d x = Ω λ ( Q λ ( Ω λ ) { 0 } ) f ( u ) f ( u λ ) ( u ( x ) u λ ( x ) ) w λ 2 d x C Ω λ ( Q λ ( Ω λ ) { 0 } ) w λ 2 d x ,
where we have used the fact that
w λ = 0 , x ( Σ λ Ω ) ( Ω [ Q λ ( Ω λ ) ( R N Σ λ ) Ω ) .
Using Lemma 7 and (65), we obtain that
Ω λ ( Q λ ( Ω λ ) { 0 } ) | w λ | 2 d x C | Ω λ ( Q λ ( Ω λ ) { 0 } ) | 1 / N Ω λ ( Q λ ( Ω λ ) { 0 } ) | w λ | 2 d x .
Let λ + a be small enough such that
C | Ω λ ( Q λ ( Ω λ ) { 0 } ) | 1 / N < 1 2 ,
which, combined with (67), gives that
Ω λ ( Q λ ( Ω λ ) { 0 } ) | w λ | 2 d x = 0 .
Therefore, w λ = 0 , x ( Ω λ ( Q λ ( Ω λ ) ) ) if λ is sufficiently close to a . This fact, together with (67), implies that
u u λ , x Σ λ .
Define
Λ 0 = { λ ( a , 0 ) : u u t , x Σ t , t ( a , λ ] } .
and
λ ¯ = sup Λ 0 .
Now we show that
λ ¯ = 0 .
We argue by contradiction and assume that
λ ¯ < 0 .
By the definition of w λ in (18) and the local continuity of w λ with λ , we find that w λ ¯ = 0 , x Σ λ ¯ , which implies that
u λ ¯ u 0 , x Σ λ ¯ .
This fact, together with u 0 and Lemma 6, leads to u λ ¯ u 0 , x R N . Consequently, Lemma 5 (with H = Σ λ ¯ , U = Ω λ ¯ ) yields
u λ ¯ u > 0 , x Ω λ ¯ .
Let K Ω λ ¯ be a given compact set, which is to be chosen later. By the local continuity of u λ u with λ , there exists a suitable τ ¯ = τ ¯ ( K ) > 0 such that
u λ ¯ + τ ( x ) u ( x ) > 0 , x K , τ ( 0 , τ ¯ ) ,
that is
w λ ¯ + τ ( x ) = 0 , x K , τ ( 0 , τ ¯ ) .
For every fixed τ ( 0 , τ ¯ ) , take | x | 2 α w λ ¯ + τ as an admissible test function in (8), by which we have
Ω u · w λ ¯ + τ + w λ ¯ + τ u · ln | x | 2 α d x + R 2 N ( u ( x ) u ( y ) ) ( | x | 2 α w λ ¯ + τ ( x ) | y | 2 α w λ ¯ + τ ( y ) ) | x y | N + 2 s d x d y | x | α | y | α = R N f ( u ( x ) ) w λ ¯ + τ ( x ) d x .
Take | x λ ¯ + τ | 2 α w λ ¯ + τ as a test function in (62). We find that
Ω u λ ¯ + τ · w λ ¯ + τ + w λ ¯ + τ u λ ¯ + τ · ln | x λ ¯ + τ | 2 α d x + R N ( u ( x λ ¯ + τ ) u ( y λ ¯ + τ ) ) ( | x λ ¯ + τ | 2 α w λ ¯ + τ ( x ) | y λ ¯ + τ | 2 α w λ ¯ + τ ( y ) ) | x λ ¯ + τ y λ ¯ + τ | N + 2 s d x d y | x λ ¯ + τ | α | y λ ¯ + τ | α = R N f ( u λ ¯ + τ ) w λ ¯ + τ d x .
Repeating the previous argument leads to
( Ω λ ¯ + τ K ) Q λ ¯ + τ ( Ω λ ¯ + τ K ) | w λ ¯ + τ | 2 d x C | ( Ω λ ¯ + τ K ) Q λ ¯ + τ ( Ω λ ¯ + τ K ) | 1 / N ( Ω λ ¯ + τ K ) Q λ ¯ + τ ( Ω λ ¯ + τ K ) | w λ ¯ + τ | 2 d x .
Let the compact K be big enough and τ ¯ be small enough such that
C | ( Ω λ ¯ + τ K ) Q λ ¯ + τ ( Ω λ ¯ + τ K ) | 1 / N < 1 ,
which, combined with (73), implies that
( Ω λ ¯ + τ K ) Q λ ¯ + τ ( Ω λ ¯ + τ K ) | w λ ¯ + τ | 2 d x = 0 .
Thus, w λ ¯ + τ 0 , x Ω λ ¯ + τ ; that is,
u u λ ¯ + τ , x Ω λ ¯ + τ .
for every τ ( 0 , τ ¯ ) , provided that τ ¯ > 0 is small enough, which contradicts the definition of λ ¯ . Thus, (71) holds. This completes the proof. □

4. Conclusions

In this paper, by the moving planes method, we have successfully established the symmetry and monotonicity of non-negative solutions to the mixed local and nonlocal weighted elliptic problem. We have overcome the challenges brought about by the weighted function and derived significant results.
The main theorem (Theorem 1) indicates that under specific conditions, non-identically vanishing weak solutions u to the given equation are symmetric with respect to the hyperplane { x 1 = 0 } and strictly increase in the x 1 direction in Ω { x 1 < 0 } . This not only enriches our understanding of the qualitative behavior of solutions to the given equation but also extends the existing symmetry results of mixed local and nonlocal equations without weighted functions, as established by Biagi et al. Moreover, the development of the moving planes method for equations with a weighted function offers a powerful tool for dealing with similar weighted problems in the future.
However, this study also paves the way for future research directions. For instance, it would be interesting to explore the symmetry and monotonicity properties of solutions in more general domains or under more complex nonlinearities. Additionally, investigating the impact of different types of weighted functions on the solutions can further deepen our understanding of the mixed local and nonlocal elliptic equations. Overall, our research serves as a stepping stone for further in-depth studies in this area.

Author Contributions

Writing—original draft, Y.D. and Q.T.; Writing—review & editing, S.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 12361026) and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. 31920240069).

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Dipierro, S.; Lippi, E.; Valdinoci, E. (Non)local logistic equations with Neumann conditions. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire. 2023, 40, 1093–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Dipierro, S.; Valdinoci, E. Description of an ecological niche for a mixed local/nonlocal dispersal: An evolution equation and a new Neumann condition arising from the superposition of Brownian and Lévy processes. Phys. A 2021, 575, 126052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Biagi, S.; Dipierro, S.; Valdinoci, E.; Vecchi, E. Mixed local and nonlocal elliptic operators: Regularity and maximum principles. Comm. Partial Differ. Equ. 2022, 47, 585–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Biagi, S.; Dipierro, S.; Valdinoci, E.; Vecchi, E. Semilinear elliptic equations involving mixed local and nonlocal operators. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. Sect. A 2021, 151, 1611–1641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Daiji, Y.; Wang, Y.; Huang, S. Monotonicity and symmetry of singular solutions to semilinear mixed local and nonlocal elliptic equations. Acta Math. Sci. Ser. A Chin. Ed. 2024, 44, 453–464. [Google Scholar]
  6. Dipierro, S.; Lippi, E.; Sportelli, C.; Valdinoci, E. The Neumann condition for the superposition of fractional Laplacians. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2402.05514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Dipierro, S.; Perera, K.; Sportelli, C.; Valdinoci, E. An existence theory for superposition operators of mixed order subject to jumping nonlinearities. Nonlinearity 2024, 37, 055018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Dipierro, S.; Perera, K.; Sportelli, C.; Valdinoci, E. An existence theory for nonlinear superposition operators of mixed fractional order. Commun. Contemp. Math. 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. De Filippis, D.; Mingione, G. Gradient regularity in mixed local and nonlocal problems. Math. Ann. 2024, 388, 261–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Biagi, S.; Dipierro, S.; Valdinoci, E.; Vecchi, E. A Faber-Krahn inequality for mixed local and nonlocal operators. J. Anal. Math. 2023, 150, 405–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Biagi, S.; Vecchi, E. Multiplicity of positive solutions for mixed local-nonlocal singular critical problems. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 2024, 63, 221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Byun, S.; Kumar, D.; Lee, H. Global gradient estimates for the mixed local and nonlocal problems with measurable nonlinearities. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 2024, 63, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Byun, S.; Lee, H.; Song, K. Regularity results for mixed local and nonlocal double phase functionals. J. Differ. Equ. 2025, 416, 1528–1563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Byun, S.; Song, K. Mixed local and nonlocal equations with measure data. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 2023, 62, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Huang, S.; Hajaiej, H. Lazer-mckenna type problem involving mixed local and nonlocal elliptic operators. NoDEA Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl. 2025, 32, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. LaMao, C.; Huang, S.; Tian, Q.; Huang, C. Regularity results of solutions to elliptic equations involving mixed local and nonlocal operators. AIMS Math. 2022, 7, 4199–4210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Su, X.; Valdinoci, E.; Wei, Y.; Zhang, J. On some regularity properties of mixed local and nonlocal elliptic equations. J. Differ. Equ. 2025, 416, 576–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Frank, R.; Lieb, E.; Seiringer, R. Hardy-Lieb-Thirring inequalities for fractional Schrödinger operators. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 2008, 21, 925–950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Esposito, F.; Montoro, L.; Sciunzi, B. Monotonicity and symmetry of singular solutions to quasilinear problems. J. Math. Pures Appl. 2019, 126, 214–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Sciunzi, B. On the moving plane method for singular solutions to semilinear elliptic equations. J. Math. Pures Appl. 2017, 108, 111–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Biagi, S.; Valdinoci, E.; Vecchi, E. A symmetry result for cooperative elliptic systems with singularities. Publ. Mat. 2020, 64, 621–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Daiji, Y.; Huang, S.; Tian, Q. Symmetry and Monotonicity of Solutions to Mixed Local and Nonlocal Weighted Elliptic Equations. Axioms 2025, 14, 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms14020139

AMA Style

Daiji Y, Huang S, Tian Q. Symmetry and Monotonicity of Solutions to Mixed Local and Nonlocal Weighted Elliptic Equations. Axioms. 2025; 14(2):139. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms14020139

Chicago/Turabian Style

Daiji, Yongzhi, Shuibo Huang, and Qiaoyu Tian. 2025. "Symmetry and Monotonicity of Solutions to Mixed Local and Nonlocal Weighted Elliptic Equations" Axioms 14, no. 2: 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms14020139

APA Style

Daiji, Y., Huang, S., & Tian, Q. (2025). Symmetry and Monotonicity of Solutions to Mixed Local and Nonlocal Weighted Elliptic Equations. Axioms, 14(2), 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms14020139

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop