Let $||\cdot||_m$ denote the $H^m$ norm (in particular, $H^0 = L^2$). For $u,v \in L^{\infty}\cap H^m(\mathbb{R}^n)$, $m \in \mathbb{Z}_{\ge 0}$, we have $$ ||uv||_m \lesssim |u|_{L^\infty}||D^mv||_0 + |v|_{L^\infty}||D^mu||_0 $$ (here, $\lesssim$ means "$\le$ a constant times..."). I was reading through the proof and there were a few lines I could not verify:
Fix a multiindex $\alpha$ with $|\alpha|\le m$. Then we have $$ ||D^\alpha(uv)||_0 \lesssim \sum_{\beta \le \alpha} ||D^{\beta}uD^{\alpha-\beta}v||_0 \lesssim \sum_{\beta \le \alpha} ||D^\beta u||_{L^{2m/|\beta|}}||D^{\alpha-\beta}v||_{L^{2m/|\alpha-\beta|}}. $$ They claim the last inequality follows from Holder's Inequality, but those two aren't conjugates, so perhaps there's a step I'm missing?

The next one is as follows. First, they use a form of Gagliardo-Nirenberg I'm not familiar with: $$ ||D^iu||_{L^{2r/i}} \lesssim |u|_{L^\infty}^{1-i/r}||D^ru||_0^{i/r} = (*). $$ I'll take that as fact, but the following is a bit confusing:
Continuing from the above, we have \begin{align} (*) &\lesssim \sum_{\beta \le \alpha} |u|_{L^\infty}^{1-|\beta|/m}||D^mu||_0^{|\beta|/m}|v|_{L^\infty}^{1-|\alpha-\beta|/m}||D^mv||_0^{|\alpha-\beta|/m} \\ &\lesssim \sum_{\beta\le \alpha} (|u|_{L^\infty}||D^mv||_0)^{|\alpha-\beta|/m}(|v|_{L^\infty}||D^mu||_0)^{|\beta|/m}. \end{align} I'm not sure how they combine the terms in the last step.

All of the above makes sense if $|\alpha| = m$, but otherwise I can't see it. Could anyone give some hints?

  • $\begingroup$ Do you get the desired conclusion if you replace $m$ with $|\alpha|$ throughout? $\endgroup$ Sep 25, 2017 at 1:16
  • $\begingroup$ @AnthonyCarapetis Indeed, starting from where I said "I was reading the proof..." replacing $m$ with $|\alpha|$ makes the inequalities hold, but the problem is I need to then sum over all $|\alpha|\le m$ to get the initially claimed result. $\endgroup$
    – Curious
    Sep 25, 2017 at 4:11
  • $\begingroup$ If you can bound each term in the sum by the desired RHS, then you can bound the total by some constant depending only on $n$ and $m$ (just the number of terms in the sum) times this same quantity. $\endgroup$ Sep 25, 2017 at 5:24
  • $\begingroup$ @AnthonyCarapetis So that I agree with, it's just odd that we start with $|\alpha|\le m$, but then it seems like the author just treats everything as if it were $|\alpha|=m$, when there are certainly multi-indices that are not equal to $m$. I suppose in the first inequality, we could change the sum to be $|\beta|\le m$ since all the $\beta \le \alpha$ certainly satisfy that. Then we can just drop $\alpha$ all together. $\endgroup$
    – Curious
    Sep 25, 2017 at 7:21
  • $\begingroup$ I agree that (from what you've reproduced here) it seems the author has made a mistake, or at least made this difficult to follow. $\endgroup$ Sep 25, 2017 at 7:24

1 Answer 1


Replacing the sum over $\beta \le \alpha$ with sum over $\beta \le m$ in the second string of inequalities at the beginning of the post will give us the result, since then $|\alpha-\beta| = m-|\beta|$, and we can apply Holder as they mentioned as well as combine the terms in the second part of my question.


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .