# NLS wellposedness

### From DispersiveWiki

In order to establish the well-posedness of the NLS in Hs one needs the non-linearity to have at least s degrees of regularity; in other words, we usually assume

p is an odd integer, or p > [s] + 1.

With this assumption, one has LWP for $s \ge 0, s_c\,$, CaWe1990; see also Ts1987; for the case $s=1\,,$ see GiVl1979. In the $L^2\,$-subcritical cases one has GWP for all $s\ge 0\,$ by $L^2\,$ conservation; in all other cases one has GWP and scattering for small data in $H^s\,$, $s\, \ge s_c.\,$ These results apply in both the focussing and defocussing cases. At the critical exponent one can prove Besov space refinements Pl2000, Pl-p4. This can then be used to obtain self-similar solutions, see CaWe1998, CaWe1998b, RiYou1998, MiaZg-p1, MiaZgZgx-p, MiaZgZgx-p2, Fur2001.

Now suppose we remove the regularity assumption that $p\,$ is either an odd integer or larger than $[s]+1\,.$ Then some of the above results are still known to hold:

• In the $H^1\,$ subcritical case one has GWP in $H^1\,,$ assuming the nonlinearity is smooth near the origin Ka1986
• In $R^6\,$ one also has Lipschitz well-posedness BuGdTz2003

In the periodic setting these results are much more difficult to obtain. On the one-dimensional torus T one has LWP for $s > 0, s_c\,$ if $p > 1\,$, with the endpoint $s=0\,$ being attained when $1 \le p \le 4\,$ Bo1993. In particular one has GWP in $L^2\,$ when $p < 4\,,$ or when $p=4\,$ and the data is small norm.For $6 > p \ge 4\,$ one also has GWP for random data whose Fourier coefficients decay like $1/|k|\,$ (times a Gaussian random variable) Bo1995c. (For $p=6\,$ one needs to impose a smallness condition on the $L^2\,$ norm or assume defocusing; for $p>6\,$ one needs to assume defocusing).

• For the defocussing case, one has GWP in the $H^1\,$-subcritical case if the data is in $H^1\,.$

Many of the global results for $H^s\,$ also hold true for $L^{2}(|x|^{2s} dx)\,$. Heuristically this follows from the pseudo-conformal transformation, although making this rigorous is sometimes difficult. Sample results are in CaWe1992, GiOzVl1994, Ka1995, NkrOz1997, NkrOz-p. See NaOz2002 for further discussion.
{"extraction_info": {"found_math": true, "script_math_tex": 0, "script_math_asciimath": 0, "math_annotations": 0, "math_alttext": 0, "mathml": 0, "mathjax_tag": 0, "mathjax_inline_tex": 0, "mathjax_display_tex": 0, "mathjax_asciimath": 0, "img_math": 28, "codecogs_latex": 0, "wp_latex": 0, "mimetex.cgi": 0, "/images/math/codecogs": 0, "mathtex.cgi": 0}, "config": {"markdown_headings": true, "markdown_code": true, "boilerplate_config": {"ratio_threshold": 0.18, "absolute_threshold": 10, "end_threshold": 15, "enable": true}, "remove_buttons": true, "remove_image_figures": true, "remove_link_clusters": true, "table_config": {"min_rows": 2, "min_cols": 3, "format": "github"}, "remove_chinese": true, "remove_edit_buttons": true, "extract_latex": true}, "english_confidence": 0.9169924855232239, "perplexity_flag": "head"}