2016
DOI: 10.1002/mma.4004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ground state solutions of Nehari‐Pankov type for a superlinear elliptic system on

Abstract: This paper is concerned with the following Schrödinger elliptic system −normalΔu+V(x)u=g(x,v),1emx∈double-struckRN,−normalΔv+V(x)v=f(x,u),1emx∈double-struckRN,u(x)→01emand1emv(x)→0,1em1em1em1emas1em|x|→∞, where the potential V is periodic and 0 lies in a gap of the spectrum of −Δ+V, f(x,t) and g(x,t) are superlinear in t at infinity. By using non‐Nehari manifold method developed recently by Tang, we demonstrate the existence of the ground state solutions of Nehari‐Pankov type for the above problem with peri… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For p2, we refer the reader to with their references. For p=2, we refer the reader to and the references therein. The p(x)‐Laplacian is a generalization of the p ‐Laplacian, and it possesses more complicated nonlinearities than the p ‐Laplacian, due to the fact that the operator normalΔp(x)u:=divtrue(false|ufalse|pfalse(xfalse)2utrue) is not homogeneous.…”
Section: Introduction and Statement Of Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For p2, we refer the reader to with their references. For p=2, we refer the reader to and the references therein. The p(x)‐Laplacian is a generalization of the p ‐Laplacian, and it possesses more complicated nonlinearities than the p ‐Laplacian, due to the fact that the operator normalΔp(x)u:=divtrue(false|ufalse|pfalse(xfalse)2utrue) is not homogeneous.…”
Section: Introduction and Statement Of Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Condition (F3) together with | f ( x , u )|= o (| u |) as | u |→0 imply that 122ptffalse(x,ufalse)·uFfalse(x,ufalse)0,.4em.2emfalse(x,ufalse)normalΩ×R3,.4emand.4emffalse(x,ufalse)·u>Ffalse(x,ufalse).4emfor.2emu0, which is a weaker version of the classic Ambrosetti‐Rabinowitz condition. As pointed out in Qin and Tang, condition was first introduced by Schechter (2.7) or (3.1) for scalar Schrödinger equation, and it was commonly used (see Qin and Tang and Tang) instead of the usual monotonic condition:…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%