On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane

Necessary and sufficient conditions for null-controllability and approximate null-controllability are obtained for the wave equation on a half-plane. Controls solving these problems are found explicitly. Moreover bang-bang controls solving the approximate null-controllability problem are constructed...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Журнал математической физики, анализа, геометрии
Date:2005
Main Author: Fardigola, L.V.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Фізико-технічний інститут низьких температур ім. Б.І. Вєркіна НАН України 2005
Online Access:https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/106567
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Journal Title:Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Cite this:On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane / L.V. Fardigola // Журнал математической физики, анализа, геометрии. — 2005. — Т. 1, № 1. — С. 93-115. — Бібліогр.: 12 назв. — англ.

Institution

Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
_version_ 1860064158112808960
author Fardigola, L.V.
author_facet Fardigola, L.V.
citation_txt On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane / L.V. Fardigola // Журнал математической физики, анализа, геометрии. — 2005. — Т. 1, № 1. — С. 93-115. — Бібліогр.: 12 назв. — англ.
collection DSpace DC
container_title Журнал математической физики, анализа, геометрии
description Necessary and sufficient conditions for null-controllability and approximate null-controllability are obtained for the wave equation on a half-plane. Controls solving these problems are found explicitly. Moreover bang-bang controls solving the approximate null-controllability problem are constructed with the aid of the Markov power moment problem.
first_indexed 2025-12-07T17:06:47Z
format Article
fulltext Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry 2005, v. 1, No. 1, p. 93�115 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane L.V. Fardigola Department of Mechanics and Mathematics, V.N. Karazin Kharkov National University 4 Svobody Sq., Kharkov, 61077, Ukraine E-mail:fardigola@univer.kharkov.ua Mathematical Division, B. Verkin Institute for Low Temperature Physics and Engineering National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine 47 Lenin Ave., Kharkov, 61103, Ukraine E-mail:fardigola@ilt.kharkov.ua Received September 20, 2004 Necessary and su�cient conditions for null-controllability and approxi- mate null-controllability are obtained for the wave equation on a half-plane. Controls solving these problems are found explicitly. Moreover bang-bang controls solving the approximate null-controllability problem are constructed with the aid of the Markov power moment problem. 0. Introduction Controllability problems for hyperbolic partial di�erential equation were in- vestigated in a number of papers (see, e.g., the references in [1]). One of the most generally accepted ways to study control systems with dis- tributed parameters is their interpretation in the form dw dt = Aw+Bu; t 2 (0; T ); (0.1) where T > 0, w : (0; T ) �! H is an unknown function, u : (0; T ) �! H is a control, H, H are Banach spaces, A is an in�nitesimal operator in H, B : H �! H is a linear bounded operator. An important advantage of this approach is a possibility to employ ideas and technique of the semigroup operator theory. At the same time it should be noticed that the most substantial and important for Mathematics Subject Classi�cation 2000: 93B05, 35B37, 35L05. Key words: wave equation, control problem. c L.V. Fardigola, 2005 L.V. Fardigola applications results on operator semigroups deal with the case when the semigroup generator A has a discrete spectrum or a compact resolvent and therefore the semigroup may be treated by means of eigenelements of A. These assumptions correspond to di�erential equations in bounded domains only. In this paper we consider the wave equation on a half-plane. We should note that most of papers studied controllability problems for the wave equation dealt with this equation on bounded domains and controllability problems considered in context of L2-controllability or, more generally, Lp-controllability (2 � p < +1) [2�6]. But only L1-controls can be realized practically. Moreover, such controls should be bounded by a hard constant (like in restriction (0.4)) for practical purposes. Furthermore classical control theory started precisely from this point view as switching controls are the ones realized in a concrete system. That is why we build also bang-bang controls solving approximate null-controllability problem in this paper. Controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-axis in context of bounded of a hard constant controls were investigated in [9, 10]. Consider the wave equation on a half-plane @2w @t2 = �w; x1 2 R; x2 > 0; t 2 (0; T ); (0.2) controlled by the boundary condition w(x1; 0; t) = Æ(x1)u(t); x1 2 R; t 2 (0; T ); (0.3) where T > 0. We also assume that the control u satis�es the restriction u 2 B(0; T ) = � v 2 L2 (0; T ) j jv(t)j � 1 almost everywhere on (0; T ) : (0.4) All functions appearing in the equation (0.2) are de�ned for x1 2 R, x2 � 0. Further, we assume everywhere that they are de�ned for x 2 R 2 and vanish for x2 < 0. Let us give de�nitions of the spaces used in our work. Let S be the Schwartz space [7] S = n ' 2 C1 (R n ) j 8m 2 N 8l 2 N sup n���D�'(x) ��� �1 + jxj2 �l j x 2 R n ^ j�j � m o < +1 o ; S+ = f' 2 S j supp' 2 R � (0;+1)g and let S0, S0+ be the dual spaces, here D = (�i@=@x1; : : : ;�i@=@xn), � = (�1; : : : �n) is multi-index, j�j = �1 + � � �+ �n, j � j is the Euclidean norm. 94 Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane Denote by Hs l the following Sobolev spaces: Hs l = n ' 2 S0 j � 1 + jxj2 �l=2 � 1 + jDj2 �s=2 ' 2 L2 (R n ) o ; k'ksl = 0@Z Rn ����1 + jxj2 �l=2 � 1 + jDj2 �s=2 '(x) ���2 dx 1A1=2 : Let F : S0 �! S0 be the Fourier transform operator. For ' 2 S we have (F') (�) = (2�)�n=2 Z Rn e�ihx;�i'(x) dx; where h�; �i is the scalar product in R n corresponding to the Euclidean norm. It is well known [8, Ch. 1] that FHs 0 = H0 s and k'ks0 = kF'k0 s , if ' 2 Hs 0 . A distribution f 2 S0 is said to be odd if (f; '(�)) = �(f; '(��)), ' 2 S. Further, we assume throughout the paper that s � 0 and use the spaces H s = � ' 2 Hs 0 �Hs�1 0 j ' 2 S0+ ^ 9'(+0) 2 R ;eHs = � ' 2 Hs 0 �Hs�1 0 j ' is odd with resp. to x2 with the norm jjj'jjjs = �� k'0ks0 �2 + � k'1ks�1 0 �2�1=2 and also the space bHs = � ' 2 H0 s �H0 s�1 j ' is odd with resp. to �2 with the norm [[j'j]] s = �� k'0k0s �2 + � k'1k0s�1 �2�1=2 . Denote by A the following operator A = � 0 1 � 0 � ; A : eHs�2 �! eHs�2; D(A) = eHs (0.5) and by B the operator B = � 0 �2Æ(x1)Æ0(x2) � ; B : R �! eHs�2; D(B) = R; (0.6) where Æ is the Dirac function. Then the system (0.2), (0.3) is reduced to the form (0.1) with these operators A and B. In Section 1 we obtain necessary and su�cient conditions for null-controllabi- lity and approximate null-controllability for the system (0.2), (0.3) with restric- tions (0.4) on the control. Controls solving the problems of null-controllability and approximate null-controllability are found explicitly. But these controls may have a rather complicated form. Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 95 L.V. Fardigola The main goal of the Section 2 is to build bang-bang controls solving the approximate null-controllability problem. We show that this problem can be reduced to a system of Markov power moment problems. They may be solved by the method given in [9]. Further, we prove that solutions of the Markov power moment problems give us solutions of the approximate null-controllability problem (Theorems 2.3, 2.4). In Sections 3 and 4 some auxiliary statements are proved. 1. Null-controllability problems Consider the control system (0.2), (0.3) with the initial conditions� w(x; 0) = w0 0(x) @w(x; 0)=@t = w0 1(x) ; x1 2 R; x2 > 0; (1.1) and the steering conditions� w(x; T ) = wT 0 (x) @w(x; T )=@t = wT 1 (x) ; x1 2 R; x2 > 0; (1.2) where w0 = � w0 0 w0 1 � 2 Hs, wT = � wT 0 wT 1 � 2 Hs. We consider solutions of the problem (0.2), (0.3) in the space Hs. Let T > 0, w0 2 Hs. Denote by RT (w 0 ) the set of states wT 2 Hs for which there exists a control u 2 B(0; T ) such that the problem (0.2), (0.3), (1.1), (1.2) has a unique solution. De�nition 1.1. A state w0 2 Hs is called null-controllable at a given time T > 0 if 0 belongs to RT (w 0 ) and approximately null-controllable at a given time T > 0 if 0 belongs to the closure of RT (w 0 ) in Hs . Let w 0 = 2w 0, w T = 2w T , w(�; t) = 2 � w(�; t) @w(�; t)=@t � , where 2 is the odd-extension operator with respect to x2. Evidently, w0 2 eHs, wT 2 eHs, w(�; t) 2 eHs (t 2 (0; T )). It is easy to see that control problem (0.2), (0.3), (1.1), (1.2) is equivalent to the following problem for system (0.1): w(x; 0) = w 0; (1.3) w(x; T ) = w T : (1.4) Let us investigate this new problem. First we analyze the following auxiliary Cauchy problem: system (0.1) with an arbitrary parameter u 2 B(0; T ) under initial condition (1.3). 96 Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane Applying the Fourier transform with respect to x to problem (0.1), (1.3), we obtain the following Cauchy problem in bHs: dv dt = � 0 1 �j�j2 0 � v � i�2 � � 0 1 � u; t 2 (0; T ); (1.5) v(�; 0) = v 0; (1.6) where v(�; t) = Fw(�; t), t 2 [0; T ], v0 = Fw0. Then the function v(�; t) = �(j�j; t) 0@v 0 (�)� i�2 � tZ 0 �(j�j;��) � 0 1 � u(�) d� 1A ; t 2 [0; T ]; (1.7) where �(�; t) � 0@ cos(�t) sin(�t) � �� sin(�t) cos(�t) 1A � � @=@t 1 (@=@t)2 @=@t � sin(�t) � is a unique solution of (1.5), (1.6) in bHs. Put E(jxj; t) = F�1 � �(j�j; t)=(2�). It is well known that F�1 � sin(j�jt) j�j � (x) = sign t H (jtj � jxj)p t2 � jxj2 ; (1.8) where H is the Heaviside function: H(�) = 1 if � � 0 and H(�) = 0 otherwise. Then we have E(r; t) = 1 2� � @=@t 1 (@=@t)2 @=@t � sign t H (jtj � jxj)p t2 � jxj2 : It follows from (1.7) that w(x; T ) = E(jxj; T )� 24w0 (x)� 1 � @ @x2 F �1 0@ TZ 0 0@ �sin(j�jt) j�j cos(j�jt) 1Au(t) dt 1A35 : (1.9) Here and further � is the convolution with respect to x. With regard to Lemma 4.1 we get w(x; T ) = E(jxj; T ) � � w 0 (x)� 1p 2� x2 jxj� � U U 0 � (jxj) � ; (1.10) where U(t) = u(t) (H(t)�H(t� T )), t 2 R. Denote for w0 2 eHs RT (w 0 ) = � E(jxj; T ) � � w 0 (x)� 1p 2� x2 jxj� � U U 0 � (jxj) � j u 2 B(0; T ) � : Then De�nition 1.1 is equivalent to Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 97 L.V. Fardigola De�nition 1.2. A state w 0 2 eHs is called null-controllable at a given time T > 0 if 0 belongs to RT (w 0 ) and approximately null-controllable at a given time T > 0 if 0 belongs to the closure of RT (w 0 ) in eHs . Obviously, the following two statements are true. Statement 1.1. A state w0 2 Hs is null-controllable at a given time T > 0 i� the state w 0 = 2w 0 is null-controllable at this time. Statement 1.2. A state w0 2Hs is approximately null-controllable at a given time T > 0 i� the state w 0 = 2w 0 is approximately null-controllable at this time. Further we consider the (approximate) null-controllability problem for the system (0.1) where w 0 is an odd function with respect to x2. The following theorem give us su�cient conditions for (approximate) null- controllability. Theorem 1.1. For a state w 0 2 eHs assume that there exists w 0 2 S0 such that following conditions hold: w 0 = x2 jxjw 0 (jxj) in Hs 0 �Hs�1 0 ; (1.11) suppw 0 � [0; T ]; (1.12)��w0 0(r) �� � T �r p T 2 � r2 a.e. on (0; T ); (1.13) w 0 1(r) = d dr 24w0 0(r) + 1Z �1 w 0 0(�)k(�; r) d� 35 ; (1.14) where k(�; r) = 2 � H (�(� � r)) �=2Z 0 sin 2 � d�p �2 sin2 �+ r2 cos2 � . Then the state w 0 is null-controllable at the time T . Moreover, the solution of the null-controllability problem (the control u) is unique and u(t) = 2t TZ t w 0 0(r) drp r2 � t2 a.e. on (0; T ): 98 Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane P r o o f. Put U = 1p 2� �w 0 0: (1.15) It follows from (1.12) and Lemma 3.2 that suppU � (0; T ) and U(t) = 2t TZ t w 0 0(r) drp r2 � t2 a.e. on (0; T ): Denote u(t) = U(t), t 2 (0; T ). Due to (1.13) we obtain ju(t)j � 1 a.e. on (0; T ). Applying Lemma 4.2 and (1.15), we have w 0 1 = d dr 24w0 0 + 1Z �1 w 0 0(�)k(�; �) d� 35 = � d dt � �1 w 0 0 = 1p 2� �U 0: Finally, taking into account (1.10), (1.11), (1.15), we get that w(x; T ) = 0 for the found control u where w is a solution of the Cauchy problem (0.1), (1.3). Invertibility of the operator � (see Sect. 4) implies uniqueness of the control u solving the null-controllability problem. Thus the state w0 is null-controllable at the time T that was to be proved. The following theorem asserts that conditions (1.11)�(1.14) are not only suf- �cient but also necessary for (approximate) null-controllability. Theorem 1.2. If a state w 0 2 eHs is approximately null controllable at a given time T > 0 then there exists w 0 2 S0 such that conditions (1.11)�(1.14) hold. P r o o f. For each n 2 N there exists a state w n 2 RT (w 0 ) such that jjjwnjjjs < 1=n. With regard to (1.10) for some un 2 B(0; T ) we have w n (x) = E(jxj; T ) � � w 0 (x)� 1p 2� x2 jxj� � Un U 0 n � (jxj) � ; t 2 R; where Un(t) = un(t) (H(t)�H(t� T )). Using Lemma 4.4, we obtain 1p 2� x2 jxj� � Un U 0 n � (jxj) �! w 0 as n �!1 in eHs: (1.16) Therefore w 0 = x2 jxjw 0 (jxj). According to the Lemma 3.2 suppw 0 0 � [0; T ]. Thus (1.11), (1.12) are true. Denote �Un = hn0 , �U 0 n = hn1 . Taking into account Lemma 4.3, we obtain jhn0 j � T �r p T 2 � r2 ; r 2 (0; T ): (1.17) Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 99 L.V. Fardigola Let an arbitrary " > 0 be �xed, V (") = � x 2 R 2 j jxj < " . It follows from (1.16) that hn(jxj) �! w 0 (jxj) as n �!1 in S0: (1.18) Since hn0 (jxj) 2 L2 � R 2nV (") � and S is dense in L2 � R 2 � we obtain hn0 (jxj) �! w 0 0(jxj) as n �!1 in � L2 � R 2nV (") ��0 : By the Riesz theorem we conclude that w 0 0(jxj) 2 L2 � R 2nV (") � and w 0 0 2 L2 (";+1). Taking into account arbitrariness of " > 0 and (1.17), we get (1.13). We have hn1 = � d dt � �1hn0 . Due to Lemmas 3.1, 4.2 and (1.17) we get (1.14). The theorem is proved. 2. Bang-bang controls and the Markov power moment problem The solution of the null-controllability problem (i.e., the control) found in Sect. 1 may be too complicated for the practical purposes. In this section we �nd bang-bang controls solving the approximate null-controllability problem.We consider a system of Markov power moment problems and show that their bang- bang solutions are solutions of the approximate null-controllability problem. Consider control system (0.1), (1.3) and assume that for T > 0 and w 0 2 eHs conditions (1.11)�(1.14) hold. According to Theorem 1.1 there exists eu 2 B(0; T ) such that w 0 = 1p 2� � �eU� (r); (2.1) where eU(t) = eu(t) [H(t)�H(t� T )]. With regard to Lemma 4.1 and (1.11) we get v 0 (�) = 1 � i�2 TZ 0 0@ �sin(j�jt) j�j cos(j�jt) 1Aeu(t) dt; where v 0 = F 2w 0. Put h(�; u) = 1 � TZ 0 0@ �sin(�t) � cos(�t) 1A (eu(t)� u(t)) dt: (2.2) Then for system (1.5), (1.6) we get v(�; T ) = �(j�j; T )i�2h(j�j; u): With regard to (1.7) and Lemma 4.4 we conclude that [[jv(�; T )j]] s � p 4T 2 + 6 [[ji�2h(j�j; u)j]]s : 100 Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane We have � ki�2hj(j�j; u)k0s�j �2 = � 1Z 0 � 1 + �2 �s�j jhj(j�j; u)j2 �3 d�; j = 0; 1: Hence [[jv(�; T )j]] s � p 4T 2 + 6 � 0@ 1X j=0 1Z 0 � 1 + �2 �s�j jhj(j�j; u)j2 �3 d� 1A1=2 : (2.3) Thus we have proved Theorem 2.1. Assume that T > 0 and for a state w 0 2 eHs conditions (1.11)� (1.14) are ful�lled. Then the following two assertions hold: i. w 0 is null-controllable at the time T i� there exists u 2 B(0; T ) such that h(�; u) � 0 on R; ii. w 0 is approximately null-controllable at the time T i� for each " > 0 there exists u" 2 B(0; T ) such that 1Z 0 � 1 + �2 �s�j jhj(j�j; u")j2 �3 d� < "2; j = 0; 1: (2.4) Moreover, if estimate (2.4) is true then jjjw(�; T )jjjs = [[jv(�; T )j]] s � �" p 4T 2 + 6; (2.5) where w and v are solutions of (0.1), (1.3) and (1.5), (1.6), respectively. Due to the Wiener�Paley theorem we conclude that h(�; u) is an entire func- tion with respect to �. Let us expand it in the Taylor series. To do this we calculate h(m) (0; u) (we consider the derivatives with respect to �). Put ev0(�) = 1 � TZ 0 0@ �sin(�t) � cos(�t) 1Aeu(t) dt; ew0 (jxj) = F �1ev0(j�j): (2.6) Evidently ev0 is also entire. With regard to (1.11) and Lemma 4.1 we get w 0 = ew00: (2.7) Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 101 L.V. Fardigola According to (1.11), (1.12) and (1.14), we conclude that ew0 0(r) = (H(r)�H(r � T )) TZ r eu(t) dtp t2 � r2 ; (2.8) ew0 1(r) = w 0 0(r) + 1Z �1 w 0 0(�)k(�; r) d�: (2.9) Obviously, supp ew0 0 � [0; T ]. It follows from (1.12) that supp ew0 1 � [0; T ]. Taking into account 2T � TZ r 1 � p T 2 � �2 �=2Z 0 sin 2 � d�p �2 sin2 �+ r2 cos2 � d� � T r TZ r 1 � p T 2 � �2 = 1 2r ln �����T + p T 2 � r2 T � p T 2 � r2 ����� ; r 2 (0; T ); (2.10) and (1.13), (1.14), we get ��ew0 0(r) �� � TZ r dtp t2 � r2 = � ln 0@T r � s� T r �2 � 1 1A ; r 2 (0; T ); (2.11) ��ew0 1(r) �� � T �r p T 2 � r2 + 1 � TZ r T �� p T 2 � �2 �=2Z 0 d�p �2 sin2 �+ r2 cos2 � d� = T �r p T 2 � r2 + 1 2r ln �����T + p T 2 � r2 T � p T 2 � r2 ����� ; r 2 (0; T ): (2.12) Taking into account (2.11), (2.12), (2.6), we obtain ev0(2m+1) (0) = 0: ev0(2m) (0) = 1 � d2m d�2m 1Z 0 0@ �Z 0 e�ir� cos' d' 1A ew0 (r) dr ������ �=0 = (�1)m � 1Z 0 0@ �Z 0 cos 2m 'd' 1A r2m+1ew0 (r) dr = (�1)m � B � m+ 1 2 ; 1 2 � 1Z 0 r2m+1ew0 (r) dr; (2.13) 102 Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane where B(�; �) is the Euler beta-function. Therefore ev00(2m) (0) = (�1)m �(2m+ 2) B � m+ 1 2 ; 1 2 � 1Z 0 r2m+2 w 0 0(r) dr: With regard to (2.9) we have ev01(2m) (0) = (�1)m � B � m+ 1 2 ; 1 2 �24 1Z 0 r2m+1 w 0 0(r) dr + 1Z 0 r2m+1 1Z r w 0 0(�)k(�; r) d� dr 35 : Since �=2Z 0 q �2 sin2 �+ r2 cos2 � d� = �Z r t2 dtp �2 � t2 p t2 � r2 then �Z 0 r2m+1k(�; r) dr = ��2m+1 + 2 � 1 � d d� �Z 0 r2m+1 �Z r t2 dtp �2 � t2 p t2 � r2 dr = ��2m+1 + 2 � 1 � d d� �=2Z 0 �2m+3 sin 2m+3 d �=2Z 0 sin 2m+1 'd' = ��2m+1 + 2m+ 3 2� B � m+ 1; 1 2 � B � m+ 2; 1 2 � : Therefore ev01(2m) (0) = (�1)m(2m+ 3) 2�2 B � m+ 1 2 ; 1 2 � B � m+ 1; 1 2 � B � m+ 2; 1 2 � � 1Z 0 r2m+1 w 0 0(r) dr: Put !n = 1Z 0 rn+1 w 0 0(r) dr: (2.14) Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 103 L.V. Fardigola Hence ev00(2m) (0) = (�1)m+1 (2m� 1)!! (2m+ 2)!! ; (2.15) ev01(2m) (0) = (�1)m � (2m+ 2)!! (2m+ 1)!! : (2.16) We have h(2m+1) (0; u) = 0; (2.17) and h(2m) (0; u) = 0 i� 0 = ev00(2m) (0) + (�1)m 2m+ 1 TZ 0 t2m+1u(t) dt; (2.18) 0 = ev01(2m) (0)� (�1)m TZ 0 t2mu(t) dt: (2.19) Thus h(n)(0; u) = 0; (2.20) i� TZ 0 tnu(t) dt = !n; n = 0;1; (2.21) where !2m = (2m+ 2)!! �(2m+ 1)!! !2m ; (2.22) !2m+1 = (2m+ 1)!! (2m+ 2)!! !2m+1 : (2.23) According to Theorem 2.1, we obtain that the state w0 is null-controllable at the time T i� (2.21) is valid. The problem of determination of a function u 2 B(0; T ) satisfying condition (2.21) for a given f!ng1n=0 and T > 0 is called a Markov power moment problem on (0; T ) for the in�nite sequence f!ng1n=0. Uniqueness of the solution of the null-controllability problem yields uniqueness of the solution of the Markov moment problem (2.21) (see Theorem 1.1). Hence u = u is the unique solution of this Markov moment problem. Thus we have proved 104 Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane Theorem 2.2. Assume that T > 0 and for a state w 0 2 eHs conditions (1.11)� (1.14). Assume also that f!ng1n=0 is de�ned by (2.14), (2.22), (2.23). Then Markov power moment problem (2.21) on (0; T ) for f!ng1n=0 has a unique solu- tion. Moreover, this solution is a solution of the null-controllability problem for w 0 at the time T . Consider (2.21) for a �nite set of n: TZ 0 tnu(t) dt = !n; n = 0; N: (2.24) The problem of determination of a function u 2 B(0; T ) satisfying condition (2.24) for a given f!ngNn=0 and T > 0 is called a Markov power moment problem on (0; T ) for the �nite sequence f!ngNn=0. Obviously, u = u is a solution of this problem, but it is not unique. Let us show that solutions of moment problem (2.24) for various N give us controls solving the approximate null-controllability problem. Theorem 2.3. Let T > 0, w 0 2 eHs , s < �1. Let also conditions (1.11)� (1.14) be ful�lled and f!ng1n=0 be de�ned by (2.14), (2.22), (2.23). Then 8" > 0 there exists N > 0 such that for each solution uN 2 B(0; T ) of moment problem (2.24) the corresponding solution w of control system (0.1), (1.3) satis�es the condition jjjw(�; T )jjjs < ". P r o o f. Let N = 2K + 1, uN 2 B(0; T ) be a solution of problem (2.24). With regard to (2.20) and (2.21) for the function h(�; u) de�ned by (2.2) we get h(n)(0; uN ) = 0; n = 0; 2K + 1: By the Taylor formula for j�j < a we obtain ���1�jhj(�; uN )�� � a2K+2 (2K + 2)! sup j�j�a �����1�jhj�(2K+2) (�; uN ) ��� ; j = 0; 1: Taking into account (2.2), we conclude that�����1�jhj(�; uN )�(2K+2) ��� � T 2K+3 �(2K + 3) ; j = 0; 1: Hence ���1�jhj(�; uN )�� � T � (Ta)2K+2 (2K + 3)! ; j = 0; 1; j�j � a: Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 105 L.V. Fardigola Then aZ 0 � 1 + �2 �s�j jhj(�; uN )j2 �3 d� � a � (Ta)2K+3 (2K + 3)! ; j = 0; 1: (2.25) With regard to (2.2) we get���1�jhj(�; uN )�� � T � ; j = 0; 1; � > 0: Therefore 1Z a � 1 + �2 �s�j jhj(�; uN )j2 �3 d� � T � 1Z a � 1 + �2 �s � d� � � Ta2(s+1) 2�(s+ 1) ; j = 0; 1: Taking into account (2.25), we obtain � 1Z 0 � 1 + �2 �s�j jhj(�; uN )j2 �3 d� � a(Ta)2K+3 (2K + 3)! � Ta2(s+1) 2(1 + s) ; j = 0; 1: Due to Theorem 2.1 and (2.3) we conclude that jjjw(�; T )jjjs � p 2T 2 + 3 " a(Ta)2K+3 (2K + 3)! � Ta2(s+1) 2(1 + s) # : (2.26) Applying the Stirling formula, we have (Ta)2K+3 (2K + 3)! � � Tae 2K + 3 �2K+3 1p 2�(2K + 3) : Setting a = (2K + 3)=(2Te), we obtain from (2.26) that jjjw(�; T )jjjs � p 2T 2 + 3 "p 2K + 3 Te4K+2 � T 2s+ 2 � 2K + 3 2Te �2s+2 # ! 0 as K !1: (2.27) The theorem is proved. Denote B N (0; T ) = fu 2 B(0; T ) j 9T� 2 (0; T )(ju(t)j = 1 a.e. on (0; T�)) ^ (u(t) = 0 a.e. on (T�; T )) ^ (u has no more than N discontinuity points on (0; T�))g: 106 Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane It is well known [11, 12] that if Markov power moment problem (2.24) is solv- able then there exists its solution u 2 BN (0; T ). Taking into account Theorem 2.3, we conclude that under the conditions ot this theorem we can �nd a solution uK 2 B2K+1 (0; T ) of Markov power moment problem (2.24) for N = 2K + 1 and such solutions fuKg1K=1 give us bang-bang controls solving the approximate null-controllability problem (see also (2.27)). Thus the following theorem is true. Theorem 2.4. Let T > 0, w 0 2 eHs , s < �1. Let also conditions (1.11)�(1.14) be ful�lled and f!ng1n=0 be de�ned by (2.14), (2.22), (2.23). Then 8K 2 N there exists a solution uK 2 B2K+1 (0; T ) of moment problem (2.24) with N = 2K + 1. Moreover, for this uK the corresponding solution w of control system (0.1), (1.3) satis�es the estimate jjjw(�; T )jjjs � p 2T 2 + 3 "p 2K + 3 Te4K+2 � T 2s+ 2 � 2K + 3 2Te �2s+2 # : (2.28) Let us show that the condition s < �1 of Theorems 2.3, 2.3 is essential. Precisely if �1=2 � s � 0 then 9w0 2 eHs 8T > 0 8u 2 [N2NB N (0; T ) 9"0 > 0 such that for a solution w of (0.1), (1.3), corresponding to the control u we have jjjw(�; T )jjjs � "0. Thus the state w 0 is not approximate null-controllable at the time T by bang-bang controls in space eHs, if �1=2 � s � 0. E x a m p l e 2.1. Let �1=2 � s � 0, T > 0, w 0 0(x) = x2T 2�jxj2 p T 2 � jxj2 [H(jxj)�H(jxj � T )] ; w 0 1(x) = x2 2� q (T 2 � jxj2)3 [H(jxj)�H(jxj � T )] : Obviously, w 0 (x) = 1p 2� � eUeU 0 ! (jxj), where eU(t) = 1 2 [H(t)�H(t� T )]. Therefore w 0 2 eHs satis�es (1.11)�(1.14). Let u 2 BN (0; T ), n 2 N. Hence u(t) = � NX k=0 (�1)k [H(t� tk)�H(t� tk+1)] ; where � = �1, 0 = t0 < t1 < t2 � � � < tN+1 = T� � T , U(t) = [H(t)�H(t� T )]. Let w be a solution of (0.1), (1.3) corresponding to the control u. According to (1.10), we have p 2�E(jxj;�T ) � w(x; T ) = x2 jxj� eU � UeU 0 � U 0 ! (jxj): Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 107 L.V. Fardigola Put a = �=(12T ). With regard to Lemma 4.4 we get jjjw(x; T )jjjs � 1p 2� p 4T 2 + 6 ����� ����� ����� x2jxj� eU � UeU 0 � U 0 ! (jxj) ����� ����� ����� s � 1 p � p 4T 2 + 6 0B@ 1Z 0 � 1 + �2 ��1=2 ������ TZ 0 sin(�t) � eU(t)� U(t) � dt ������ 2 � d� 1CA 1=2 � p a p � 4 p 1 + a2 p 4T 2 + 6 0B@ 1Z a ������ TZ 0 sin(�t) � eU(t)� U(t) � dt ������ 2 d� 1CA 1=2 � p ap 2 4 p 1 + a2 p 4T 2 + 6 264 0@ 1Z �1 ���F �eU � U � (�) ���2 d� 1A1=2 � 0@ aZ �a ���F �eU � U � (�) ���2 d� 1A1=2 375 : (2.29) We have 1Z �1 ���F �eU � U � (�) ���2 d� � 1 4 1Z �1 j(H(t+ T )�H(t� T ))j2 dt = T 2 : (2.30) On the other hand aZ �a ���F �eU � U � (�) ���2 d� � 3 � aZ �a 1 � NX k=0 jcos(tk�)� cos(tk+1�)j !2 d� = 6 � aZ 0 2 � NX k=0 ����sin��tk+1 � tk 2 � sin � � tk+1 + tk 2 ����� !2 d� � 6 � aZ 0 NX k=0 t2 k+1 � t2 k 2 !2 d� � 3T 2a 2� = T 8 : (2.31) Comparing (2.29), (2.31), we obtain jjjw(�; T )jjjs � p ap 2 4 p 1 + a2 p 4T 2 + 6 "r T 2 � r T 8 # � T 4(4T 2 + 6)3=4 = "0: (2.32) That was to be proved. 108 Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane 3. Operators � and �� In this section we introduce and study operators � and � �. Let the operator �� : S �! S be de�ned by the rule (� �') (t) = � r 2 � 1Z �1 H(r(t� r))p t2 � r2 '0(r) dr; ' 2 S: (3.1) Obviously, (��') (t) = � r 2 � Z �=2 0 '0(t sin�) d�, ' 2 S. Hence ��' 2 S, if ' 2 S. It is easy to see that ���1 : S �! S can be de�ned by the rule � � ��1 � (t) = r 2 � 1Z �1 H(t(r � t))p r2 � t2 t (t) dt; 2 S: (3.2) It is clear that � � ��1 � (t) = r 2 � t Z �=2 0 (t sin�) sin� d�, ' 2 S, and � ��1 2 S, if 2 S. Thus � � (S) = S = � ��1 (S): Let the operator � : S0 �! S0 be de�ned by the rule (�f; ') = (f;��') ; ' 2 S; f 2 S0: Obviously, ��1 is de�ned by� � �1f; ' � = � f;���1' � ; ' 2 S; f 2 S0: Thus �(S 0 ) = S 0 = � �1 (S 0 ): One can easily show that the following three lemmas are true. Lemma 3.1. If fn �! f as n �! 1 in S0 then �fn �! �f and � �1fn �! � �1f as n �!1 in S0. Lemma 3.2. Let 0 < A � +1, f 2 S0, supp f � [0; A] and 8a 2 (0; A) f 2 L1 (a;A). Then supp�f � [0; A] and (�f) (r) = � r 2 � d dr AZ r f(t) dtp t2 � r2 ; r 2 (0; A): Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 109 L.V. Fardigola Lemma 3.3. Let 0 < A � +1, g 2 S0, supp g � [0; A] and 8a 2 (0; A) g 2 L1 (a;A). Then supp� �1g � [0; A] and � � �1g � (t) = r 2 � t AZ t g(r) drp r2 � t2 ; t 2 (0; A): 4. Auxiliary statements In this section we denote by Sn the space of functions ' 2 S de�ned on Rn , if we want to indicate the dimension. For each functional f 2 S01, supp f � [0;+1), we can de�ne f(jxj) 2 S02 by the rule (f(jxj); (x)) = (f(r); rSr[ ]) ; (4.1) where Sr[ ] = R 2� 0 (r cos�; r sin�) d�, r 2 R. Obviously, if 2 S2 then Sr[ ] 2 S1. To prove conditions for (approximate) null-controllability we need the follow- ing four lemmas. Lemma 4.1. Let T > 0, u 2 B(0; T ), U(t) = u(t) [H(t)�H(t� T )], � 2 R 2 , x 2 R 2 . Then F �1 24i�2 TZ 0 0@ �sin(j�jt) j�j cos(j�jt) 1Au(t) dt 35 = r � 2 x2 jxj� � U U 0 � (jxj): (4.2) P r o o f. Denote h(�; t) = 0@ �sin(�t) � cos(�t) 1AH(�). We have F �1 24i�2 TZ 0 h(j�j; t)u(t) dt 35 = @ @x2 F �1 24 TZ 0 h(j�j; t)u(t) dt 35 : (4.3) For each ' 2 S2 we get0@F�1 24 TZ 0 h(j�j; t)u(t) dt 35 ; ' 1A = 0@ TZ 0 h(�; t)u(t) dt; �S� [F'] 1A = 1Z 0 0@ TZ 0 h(�; t)u(t) dt 1A �S� [F']d�; 110 Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane where z means the complex conjugation of z. Since �S� [F'] 2 S1 we obtain0@F�1 24 TZ 0 h(j�j; t)u(t) dt 35 ; ' 1A = 1Z 0 U(t) 1Z 0 h(�; t)u(t)�S� [F']d� dt = 0@U(t); 1Z 0 h(�; t)u(t)�S� [F'] d� 1A = � 0@� U(t) U 0 (t) � ; 1Z 0 sin(�t)S� [F'] d� 1A = � 0@� U(t) U 0 (t) � ; Z R2 sin(j�jt) j�j (F') (�) d� 1A = � 0@� U(t) U 0 (t) � ; Z R2 F �1 � sin(j�jt) j�j � (x)'(x) dx 1A : (4.4) With regard to (4.4) and (1.8) that gives0@F�1 24 TZ 0 h(j�j; t)u(t) dt 35 ; ' 1A = � 0@� U(t) U 0 (t) � ; 1Z �1 H (t(t� r))p t2 � r2 rSr['] dr 1A : (4.5) Consider the operator � : S �! S such that ( ��) = 1Z �1 H (t(t� r))p t2 � r2 �(r) dr = �=2Z 0 �(t sin�) d�; � 2 S: It is clear that if � 2 S then �� 2 S. Denote by the operator : S0 �! S0 such that ( f; �) = (f; ��) ; � 2 S; f 2 S0: Evidently, if suppf � [0;+1) (f 2 S0) then supp f � [0;+1). One can see that � = � r � 2 d dr . All this implies that F �1 24 TZ 0 h(j�j; t)u(t) dt 35 = � @ @x2 � U U 0 � (jxj) = r � 2 x2 jxj� � U U 0 � (jxj): That was to be proved. Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 111 L.V. Fardigola Lemma 4.2. Let f 2 S0, supp f � [0;+1) and 8a > 0 f 2 L1 (a;+1). Then� � d dt � �1f � (r) = d dr 24f(r) + 1Z �1 f(�)k(�; r) d� 35 ; (4.6) where k(�; r) = 2 � H (�(� � r)) Z �=2 0 sin 2 �d�p �2 sin2 �+ r2 cos2 � . P r o o f. For each ' 2 S we have� � d dt � �1f; ' � = � � f;���1 d dt � �' � : (4.7) With regard to (3.1), (3.2) for � > 0 we get � � ��1 d dt � �' � (�) = 2 � �Z 0 1p �2 � t2 d dt 24t tZ 0 '0(r) drp t2 � r2 35 dt = 2 � 1 � d d� �Z 0 p �2 � t2 d dt 24t tZ 0 '0(r) drp t2 � r2 35 dt = 2 � 1 � d d� Z � 0 '0(r) �Z r t2 dtp �2 � t2 p t2 � r2 dr = 2 � 1 � d d� �Z 0 '0(r) �=2Z 0 q �2 sin2 �+ r2 cos2 � d� dr = '0(�) + 2 � Z � 0 '0(r) �=2Z 0 sin 2 �d�p �2 sin2 �+ r2 cos2 � d�dr: Taking into account (4.7), we obtain� � d dt � �1f; ' � = � 0@f; '0(�) + 1Z �1 '0(r)k(�; r) dr 1A = 0@ d dr 24f(r) + 1Z �1 f(�)k(�; r) d� 35 ; ' 1A : (4.8) Hence (4.6) holds, and the lemma is proved. 112 Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane Lemma 4.3. Let u 2 B(0; T ), U(t) = u(t) [H(t)�H(t� T )]. Then supp�U � [0; T ] and j(�U) (r)j � p 2T p �r p T 2 � r2 ; r 2 (0; T ): (4.9) P r o o f. According to the Lemma 3.2, we obtain supp�U � [0; T ]. We also have that (�U) (r) = r 2 � d dr TZ r u(t) dtp t2 � r2 ; r 2 (0; T ): Denote fn(r) = Z T r u(t) dtp t2 � (r � 1=n)2 ; f(r) = Z T r u(t) dtp t2 � r2 (r 2 (0; T ]). One can see that fn(r)! f(r) as n!1; r 2 (0; T ]: (4.10) First let us prove that 8r0 2 (0; T ) 8" 2 (0; T � r0) we have f 0n(r)� f 0(r) as n �!1; on [r0; T � "]: (4.11) Let 8r0 2 (0; T ) 8" 2 (0; T � r0) be �xed. We have f 0n(r) = � u(r)p r2 � (r � 1=n)2 + (r � 1=n) TZ r u(t) dt (t2 � (r � 1=n)2)3=2 : (4.12) Let n > m > 0 be large enough. Denote gr(�) = � u(r)p r2 � (r � 1=n)2 + (r � 1=n) TZ r u(t) dt (t2 � (r � 1=n)2)3=2 ; � 2 [r � 1=n; r � 1=m]: Applying the mean value theorem to gr(�) (with respect to �), we get jfn(r)� fm(r)j = jgr(r � 1=n)� gr(r � 1=m)j � sup �2[r� 1 n ;r� 1 m ] 24 2� (r2 � �2)3=2 + TZ r t2 + 2�2 (r2 � �2)5=2 35� 1 m � 1 n � � sup �2[r� 1 n ;r� 1 m ] " 2� � r2 � �2 � + (T � r) � T 2 + 2�2 � (r2 � �2)5=2 # 2 m � 14T 3 m7=2r0 ! 0 as m!1; r 2 [r0; T � "]: Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 113 L.V. Fardigola With regard to (4.10) we conclude that the consequence ff 0ng1n=1 uniformly converges on [r0; T � "] and (4.11) is true. Finally let us prove (4.9). Due to (4.12) we have 8r 2 (0; T )��f 0n(r)�� � � 1 p n(r � 1=n) p 2r � 1=n + T (r � 1=n) p T 2 � (r � 1=n)2 ! T r p T 2 � r2 as n!1: Taking into account (4.11), we conclude that (4.9) holds that was to be proved. Lemma 4.4. If f 2 Hs 0 �Hs�1 0 and g = Ff then jjjE(jxj; t) � f jjjs = [[j�(j�j; t)gj]] s � p 4t2 + 6 [[jgj]] s = p 4t2 + 6 jjjf jjjs ; t 2 R: (4.13) P r o o f. For all t 2 R we have jjjE(jxj; t) � f jjjs = [[j�(j�j; t)gj]] s � ������� cos(j�jt) �j�j sin(j�jt) � g0 ������ s + 2424������ 0@ sin(j�jt) j�j cos(j�jt) 1A g1 ������ 3535 s � p 2 kg0k0s + 0@ sin(j�jt)j�j g1 0 s !2 + � kg1k0s�1 �21A1=2 : Since � 1 + j�j2 � ����sin(j�jt)j�j ����2 � 2 � t2 + 1 � we obtain (4.13). The lemma is proved. References [1] I. Lasiecka and R. Triggiani, Control theory for partial di�erential equations: Con- tinuous and approximation theories. 2: Abstract hyperbolic-like systems over a �nite time horizon. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2000. [2] W. Krabs and G. Leugering, On boundary controllability of one-dimension vibrating systems byW 1;p 0 -controls for p 2 [0;1). � Math. Meth. Appl. Sci. 17, (1994), 77�93. [3] M. Gutat and G. Leugering, Solutions of Lp-norm-minimal control problems for the wave equation. � Comput. Appl. Math. 21 (2002), 227�244. [4] M. Negreanu and E. Zuazua, Convergence of multigrid method for the controllability of a 1-d wave equation. � C.R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 338 (2004), No. 5, 413�418. [5] M. Gutat, Analytic solution of L1-optimal control problems for the wave equation. � J. Optim. Theor. Appl. 114 (2002), 151�192. 114 Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane [6] H.O. Fattorini, In�nite dimensional optimization and control Theory. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1999. [7] L. Schwartz, Th�eorie des distributions, I, II. Hermann, Paris, 1950�1951. [8] S.G. Gindikin and L.R. Volevich, Distributions and convolution equations. Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., Philadelphia, 1992. [9] G.M. Sklyar and L.V. Fardigola, The Markov power moment problem in problems of controllability and frequency extinguishing for the wave equation on a half-axis. � J. Math. Anal. Appl. 276 (2002), 109�134. [10] G.M. Sklyar and L.V. Fardigola, The Markov trigonometric moment problem in controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-axis. � Mat. �z., analiz, geom. 9 (2002), 233�242. [11] M.G. Krein and A.A. Nudel'man, The Markov moment problem and extremal problems. Nauka, Moscow (1973); Engl. transl.: AMS Providence, RI, 1977. [12] V.I. Korobov and G.M. Sklyar, Time optimality and the power moment problem. � Mat. Sb. 134 (1987), No. 2, 186�206. Journal of Mathematical Physics, Analysis, Geometry , 2005, v. 1, No. 1 115
id nasplib_isofts_kiev_ua-123456789-106567
institution Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
issn 1812-9471
language English
last_indexed 2025-12-07T17:06:47Z
publishDate 2005
publisher Фізико-технічний інститут низьких температур ім. Б.І. Вєркіна НАН України
record_format dspace
spelling Fardigola, L.V.
2016-09-30T16:52:22Z
2016-09-30T16:52:22Z
2005
On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane / L.V. Fardigola // Журнал математической физики, анализа, геометрии. — 2005. — Т. 1, № 1. — С. 93-115. — Бібліогр.: 12 назв. — англ.
1812-9471
https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/106567
Necessary and sufficient conditions for null-controllability and approximate null-controllability are obtained for the wave equation on a half-plane. Controls solving these problems are found explicitly. Moreover bang-bang controls solving the approximate null-controllability problem are constructed with the aid of the Markov power moment problem.
en
Фізико-технічний інститут низьких температур ім. Б.І. Вєркіна НАН України
Журнал математической физики, анализа, геометрии
On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane
Article
published earlier
spellingShingle On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane
Fardigola, L.V.
title On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane
title_full On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane
title_fullStr On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane
title_full_unstemmed On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane
title_short On controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane
title_sort on controllability problems for the wave equation on a half-plane
url https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/106567
work_keys_str_mv AT fardigolalv oncontrollabilityproblemsforthewaveequationonahalfplane