JAM Journal of Applied Mathematics 1687-0042 1110-757X Hindawi Publishing Corporation 724582 10.1155/2014/724582 724582 Research Article Asymptotic Behavior of Solutions of Free Boundary Problem with Logistic Reaction Term Cai Jingjing Wei Junjie School of Mathematics and Physics Shanghai University of Electric Power Pingliang Road 2103 Shanghai 200090 China shiep.edu.cn 2014 262014 2014 16 03 2014 19 05 2014 2 6 2014 2014 Copyright © 2014 Jingjing Cai. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

We study a free boundary problem for a reaction diffusion equation modeling the spreading of a biological or chemical species. In this model, the free boundary represents the spreading front of the species. We discuss the asymptotic behavior of bounded solutions and obtain a trichotomy result: spreading (the free boundary tends to + and the solution converges to a stationary solution defined on [ 0 + ) ), transition (the free boundary stays in a bounded interval and the solution converges to a stationary solution with positive compact support), and vanishing (the free boundary converges to 0 and the solution tends to 0 within a finite time).

1. Introduction

Consider the following free boundary problem: (1) u t = u x x + u ( 1 - u ) , 0 < x < h ( t ) , t > 0 , u ( t , 0 ) = u ( t , h ( t ) ) = 0 , t > 0 , h ( t ) = - μ u x ( t , h ( t ) ) - μ α , t > 0 , h ( 0 ) = h 0 , u ( 0 , x ) = u 0 ( x ) , 0 x h 0 , where x = h ( t ) is a moving boundary to be determined together with u ( t , x ) and α > 0 is a given constant. The initial function u 0 belongs to Y ( h 0 ) for some h 0 > 0 , where (2) Y ( h 0 ) = { ϕ C 2 ( [ 0 , h 0 ] ) ϕ ( 0 ) = ϕ ( h 0 ) = 0 , s s ϕ ( x ) ( ) 0    in    ( 0 , h 0 ) } .

Recently, problem (1) with α = 0 was studied by  and so forth. They used this model to describe the spreading of a new or invasive species; they used the free boundary h ( t ) which represents the expanding front of the species whose density is represented by u ( t , x ) . They obtained a spreading-vanishing dichotomy result; namely, the species either spreads to the whole environment and stabilizes at the positive state 1 (i.e., u 1 ) or vanishes (i.e., u 0 ) as time goes to infinity. Such a result shows that problem (1) with α = 0 has advantages comparing with the Cauchy problems (the Cauchy problems have hair-trigger effect: any positive solution which converges to a positive constant; cf. [4, 5]). In the last two years,  also studied the corresponding problem of (1) with α = 0 in high dimension spaces.

In this paper, we mainly study problem (1) with α > 0 ; such a boundary condition represents that there is a spreading resistant force at the front for some species. Intuitively, the presence of α > 0 makes the solution more difficult to spread than the case where α = 0 . Indeed, h ( t ) > 0 only if u x ( t , h ( t ) ) < - α . This boundary condition is widely used in many biological models. For example, it is often used in protocell models (cf. [7, 8]).

We give the following theorem whose proof is similar to that of [1, 2]. It suffices to repeat their arguments with obvious modification.

Theorem 1.

For any given γ ( 0,1 ) , there is a T ( 0 , + ) such that free boundary problem (1) has a solution (3) ( u , h ) C ( ( 1 + γ ) / 2 ) , 1 + γ ( D ¯ T ) × C 1 + γ / 2 ( [ 0 , T ] ) , where D T : = { ( t , x ) R 2 : x [ 0 , h ( t ) ] , t ( 0 , T ] } , and the solution can be extended to some interval ( 0 , T 0 ) with T 0 > T as long as inf 0 < t < T h ( t ) > 0 .

Moreover, as in the proof of [9,  Lemma 2.8], one can show that h : = lim t T h ( t ) [ 0 , + ] exist.

The main purpose of this paper is to study the asymptotic behavior of bounded solutions of (1) and obtain trichotomy result. We will prove that, for a solution ( u , h ) of (1), one has either

spreading: h = + and (4) lim t u ( t , x ) = w ( x ) locally uniformly in    ( 0 , + ) , where w is the unique positive solution of (5) q ′′ + q ( 1 - q ) = 0 , x > 0 , q ( 0 ) = 0 , or

vanishing: lim t T h ( t ) = 0 and (6) T < + , lim t T max 0 x h ( t ) u ( t , x ) = 0 or

transition: 0 < h < + and (7) lim t u ( t , · ) = v ( · ) locally uniformly in    ( 0 , h ) , where v is the solution of (8) v ′′ + v ( 1 - v ) = 0 , x ( 0 , h ) , h h h h v ( 0 ) = v ( h ) = 0 , - v ( h ) = α .

Remark 2.

Comparing with the results in , the phenomenon (iii) is a new one, since it does not happen in case α = 0 .

Remark 3.

(ii) shows that vanishing happens in a finite time and the free boundary converges to the point 0 ; those phenomena are also new and do not happen in case α = 0 .

2. Asymptotic Behavior of Solutions

In this section, we study the asymptotic behavior of solutions and obtain trichotomy result when α < 3 / 3 ; namely, the solution of (1) is either vanishing (Theorem 6) or transition (Theorem 7) or spreading (Theorem 10). Then, we prove that only vanishing happens if α 3 / 3 (Theorem 11) for the completeness of the paper.

We first prepare the following comparison theorems which can be proved similarly as in [2, Lemma 3.5].

Lemma 4.

Suppose that T ( 0 , ) , h ¯ C 1 ( [ 0 , T ] ) , and u ¯ C ( D ¯ T ) C 1,2 ( D T ) with D T = { ( t , x ) R 2 : 0 < t T , 0 < x < h ¯ ( t ) } and (9) u ¯ t u ¯ x x + u ¯ ( 1 - u ¯ ) , 0 < t T , 0 < x < h ¯ ( t ) , u ¯ ( t , 0 ) 0 , u ¯ ( t , h ¯ ( t ) ) = 0 , 0 < t T , h ¯ ( t ) - μ u ¯ ( t , h ¯ ( t ) ) - μ α , 0 < t T . If h 0 h ¯ ( 0 ) and u 0 ( x ) u ¯ ( 0 , x ) in [ 0 , h 0 ] and if ( u , h ) is a solution of (1), then (10) h ( t ) h ¯ ( t ) , u ( x , t ) u ¯ ( x , t ) f o r    t ( 0 , T ] , ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss h h g g k k x ( 0 , h ( t ) ) .

Remark 5.

The pair ( u ¯ , h ¯ ) is usually called an upper solution of problem (1) and one can define a lower solution by revising all the inequalities.

Theorem 6.

Let ( u , h ) be a solution of (1) on [ 0 , T * ) . If lim t T * h ( t ) = 0 , then T * < + and (11) lim t T * max 0 x h ( t ) u ( t , x ) = 0 .

Proof.

By [2, 10], one can prove that there exists a constant C 1 such that u ( t , x ) C 1 . In order to prove that u converges to 0 , we need to construct the function (12) U ( t , x ) : = C 1 [ 2 M ( h ( t ) - x ) - M 2 ( h ( t ) - x ) 2 ] over the region (13) Q : = { ( t , x ) : 0 < t < T * , max { h ( t ) - M - 1 , 0 } < x < h ( t ) } , where (14) M : = max { α + α 2 + 2 2 , 4 u 0 C 1 ( [ - h 0 , h 0 ] ) 3 C 1 } .

Clearly 0 U C 1 in Q . By the definitions of U and M , we have (15) U t - U x x - U ( 1 - U ) C 1 ( 2 M 2 - 2 M α - 1 ) 0 in Q . Moreover, (16) U ( t , h ( t ) ) = u ( t , h ( t ) ) = 0 for t ( 0 , T * ) , U ( t , 0 ) > 0 = u ( t , 0 ) when h ( t ) < M - 1 . Therefore, u ( t , x ) U ( t , x ) in Q by the comparison principle Lemma 4. Note that lim t T * h ( t )    = 0 ; then there exists T 1 < T * such that h ( t ) - M - 1 < 0 for t > T 1 . Therefore, u ( t , x ) U ( t , x ) for t > T 1 and x [ 0 , h ( t ) ] . For such t and x , we have (17) U ( t , x ) 2 M C 1 h ( t ) 0 as t T * ; it follows that (18) u ( t , · ) L ( [ 0 , h ( t ) ] ) 0 as t T * .

We now prove that T * < + . By lim t T * h ( t ) = 0 , there is some L * > 0 such that (19) h ( t ) L * for t [ 0 , T * ) . Set L : = 2 ( 1 + L * ) and (20) ξ 0 ( x ) : = 2 ε L 2 ( L 2 - x 2 ) , where ε > 0 is small such that (21) 8 ( α + α 2 + 2 ) ε α , 32 ε α . Consider the problem (22) ξ t = ξ x x + 2 ξ ( 1 - ξ 2 ε ) , 0 < x < h - ( t ) , t > 0 , ξ ( t , 0 ) = ξ ( t , h - ( t ) ) = 0 , t > 0 , h - ( t ) = - μ ξ x ( t , h - ( t ) ) - μ α , t > 0 , h - ( 0 ) = L , ξ ( 0 , x ) = ξ 0 ( x ) , 0 x L . It is obvious that ξ ( t , x ) 2 ε for all t 0 . Construct a function (23) U ε ( t , x ) : = 2 ε [ 2 M ( h - ( t ) - x ) - M 2 ( h - ( t ) - x ) 2 ] over Q ¯ : = { ( t , x ) : t > 0 , max { 0 , h - ( t ) - M - 1 } x h - ( t ) } , where M : = max { α + α 2 + 2 , 4 } . Then U ε ( t , x ) is an upper solution of (22) over Q ¯ and so (24) - ξ x ( t , h - ( t ) ) - U x ε ( t , h - ( t ) ) = 4 M ε α 2 . Therefore, h - ( t ) - α μ / 2 . Thus, h - ( t ) 0 as t T ¯ * 2 L / α μ .

On the other hand, (18) implies that there exists some T 0 ( 0 , T * ) such that u ( t , x ) ε for all x [ 0 , h ( t ) ] and t > T 0 . Clearly ξ 0 ( x ) u ( T 0 , x ) for x [ 0 , h ( T 0 ) ] . By the comparison principle, we have h ( t + T 0 ) h - ( t ) , and so T * cannot be .

Theorem 7.

Assume that 0 < α < 3 / 3 . Let ( u , h ) be a solution of (1). If 0 < h < + , then (25) h = L α , lim t u ( t , · ) = v α ( · ) l o c a l l y    u n i f o r m l y    i n    ( 0 , h ) , where v α is a unique positive solution of (26) v ′′ + v ( 1 - v ) = 0 , 0 < x < L α , v ( 0 ) = v ( L α ) = 0 , v ( 0 ) = - v ( L α ) = α , where (27) L α : = 2 0 B d r α 2 - r 2 + ( 2 / 3 ) r 3 with B ( 0,1 ) given by α 2 = 2 0 B s ( 1 - s ) d s .

Remark 8.

This is a new phenomenon. It never happens when α = 0 . Moreover, by the phase plane method, one can prove that v α 0 and L α π as α 0 . This conclusion gives an explanation of Lemma 3.1 in ; that is, vanishing happens if h π .

Remark 9.

It is easily seen that (26) has no positive solution when α 2 0 1 s ( 1 - s ) d s = 3 / 3 .

Proof of Theorem <xref ref-type="statement" rid="thm2.4">7</xref>.

For any ε > 0 , there exists t * > 0 such that h - ε < h ( t ) < h + ε for t > t * . Let u ¯ 0 ( x ) be a function defined on ( 0 , h + ε ) and satisfies (28) u ¯ 0 ( x ) u ( t * , x ) for x ( 0 , h ) , c c u ¯ 0 ( 0 ) = u ¯ 0 ( h + ε ) = 0 .

By the comparison principle we have u ( t , x ) u ¯ ( t , x ) in ( t * , ) × ( 0 , h ( t ) ) , where u ¯ ( t , x ) is the solution of (29) u ¯ t = u ¯ x x + u ¯ ( 1 - u ¯ ) , t > t * , 0 < x < h + ε , u ¯ ( t , 0 ) = u ¯ ( t , h + ε ) = 0 , t > t * , u ¯ ( t * , x ) = u ¯ 0 ( x ) , 0 < x < h + ε . It is well known that

u ¯ 0 as t    if h + ε π ; or

u ¯ u ¯ ε * as t    if h + ε > π ,

where u ¯ ε * is a positive function. More precisely, when h + ε > π , it follows from [11, Corollary 3.4] that u ¯ ε * is the unique positive solution of (30) ( u ¯ ε * ) ′′ + u ¯ ε * ( 1 - u ¯ ε * ) = 0 , 0 < x < h + ε , u ¯ ε * ( h + ε ) = u ¯ ε * ( 0 ) = 0 . Hence, (31) lim t u ( t , x ) = 0 , or lim sup t u ( t , x ) u ¯ ε * . Similarly, (32) lim inf  t u ( t , x ) u _ ε * ( x ) when h - ε > π , where u _ ε * ( x ) is a positive solution of (33) ( u _ ε * ) ′′ + u _ ε * ( 1 - u _ ε * ) = 0 , 0 < x < h - ε , u _ ε * ( h - ε ) = u _ ε * ( 0 ) = 0 . We conclude from (31) and (32) that (34) lim t u ( t , x ) = 0 if h π , or when h > π , (35) lim t u ( t , x ) = u * ( x ) locally uniformly in ( 0 , h ) , where u * ( x ) is the unique positive solution of (36) ( u * ) ′′ + u * ( 1 - u * ) = 0 , 0 < x < h , u * ( h ) = u * ( 0 ) = 0 .

We now show that lim t u ( t , x ) = 0 is impossible when h > 0 . Suppose that this does not hold; there exists L 0 such that h ( t ) L 0 . Then using the approach of proving T * < + in Theorem 7, we can show that lim t T h ( t ) = 0 for some 0 < T < + ; this contradicts the assumption h > 0 . Hence, lim t u ( t , x ) = u * ( x ) , locally uniformly in ( 0 , h ) ; we next prove that u * ( x ) = v α ( x ) .

Make a change of the variable x to reduce [ 0 , h ( t ) ] to the fixed interval [ 0 , h 0 ] and use L p estimates as well as Sobolev embedding theorems on the reduced equation with Dirichlet boundary conditions to conclude that (37) u ( t , · ) - u * ( · ) C 1 + ( γ / 2 ) ( [ 0 , h ( t ) ] ) 0 ( t ) for some γ > 0 . It follows that h ( t ) = - μ u x ( t , h ( t ) ) - μ α - μ ( u * ) ( h ) - μ α as t . Hence, we conclude that ( 0 , h ) is not a finite interval unless - ( u * ) ( h ) = α .

Theorem 10.

Let ( u , h ) be a solution of (1). If h = + , then (38) lim t u ( t , x ) = w ( x ) l o c a l l y    u n i f o r m l y    i n    [ 0 , + ) , where w is the unique positive solution of (39) q ′′ + q ( 1 - q ) = 0 , x > 0 , q ( 0 ) = 0 .

Proof.

Choose a bounded continuous function W 0 ( x ) u 0 ( x ) for x [ 0 , h 0 ] and W 0 0 for x [ 0 , + ) . Let W ( t , x ) be the unique solution of (40) W t = W x x + W ( 1 - W ) , t > 0 , x > 0 , W ( t , 0 ) = 0 , t > 0 , W ( 0 , x ) = W 0 ( x ) , x > 0 . Then the comparison principle theorem shows that u ( t , x ) W ( t , x ) for t > 0 , x > 0 . Using [11, Lemma 3.4], we see that (41) lim sup t u ( t , x ) lim t W ( t , x ) = w ( x )  for x [ 0 , + ) .

On the other hand, since h = + , for any large l > π , there is τ > 0 such that h ( τ ) = l and h ( t ) l for all t > τ . Let u _ l ( t , x ) be the solution of the following problem: (42) u _ t = u _ x x + u _ ( 1 - u _ ) , t > τ , 0 < x < l , u _ ( t , 0 ) = u _ ( t , l ) = 0 , t > τ , u _ ( 0 , x ) = ψ ( x ) , 0 < x < l , where ψ is a nonnegative continuous function satisfying ψ ( x ) u ( τ , x ) for 0 < x < l . The comparison principle implies (43) u _ l ( t , x ) u ( t , x ) for t > τ , 0 x l . By , one can obtain (44) lim t u _ l ( t , x ) = v l ( x ) uniformly    in [ 0 , l ] , where v l is the positive solution of (45) v ′′ + v ( 1 - v ) = 0 , 0 < x < l , v ( 0 ) = v ( l ) = 0 , It is well known that lim l v l ( x ) = w ( x ) . Combining this with (43) and (44), we have (46) w ( x ) lim inf t u ( t , x ) . By (41) and (46), we have (47) lim t u ( t , x ) = w ( x ) .

Theorem 11.

Suppose that α 3 / 3 and ( u , h ) is a solution of (1) defined on some maximal existence interval [ 0 , T * ) ; then T * < + , u converges to 0 as t T * , and lim t T * h ( t ) = 0 .

Proof.

The proof of this theorem is similar to ; it suffices to repeat their arguments with obvious modification.

3. Example

In this section, we give some sufficient conditions for vanishing, spreading, and transition.

Example 1.

Suppose that α < 3 / 3 . Let h 0 > 0 and u 0 ( x ) Y ( h 0 ) ; then the following properties hold:

vanishing happens when u 0 ( x ) < v α ( x ) ;

spreading happens if u 0 ( x ) > v α ( x ) for x [ 0 , h 0 ] ;

transition happens if u 0 ( x ) v α ( x ) for x [ 0 , h 0 ] .

Proof.

(i) By , we see that v α 1 ( x ) < v α 2 ( x ) for α 1 < α 2 . Since u 0 ( x ) < v α ( x ) , there is β < α such that u 0 ( x ) < v β ( x ) , by the comparison principle that u ( t , x ) < v β ( x ) , so h + and h L α . It then follows from Theorem 6 that vanishing happens.

(ii) Let ( u , h ) be a solution of (1) with initial data u 0 ( x ) ; by the phase plane analysis, there is γ > α such that u 0 ( x ) > v γ ( x ) . It then follows from the comparison principle that u ( t , x ) > v γ ( x ) , so Theorem 10 implies that h = + and spreading happens.

(iii) It follows from the comparison principle Lemma 4 that u ( t , x ) v α ( x ) and h ( t ) L α for all t > 0 .

Conflict of Interests

The author declares that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by Shanghai Natural Science Foundation (no. 13ZR1454900) and Shanghai University Young Teachers Training Scheme (no. ZZsdl13021).

Du Y. Lou B. Spreading and vanishing in nonlinear diffusion problems with free boundaries http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.5373 Du Y. Lin Z. Spreading-vanishing dichotomy in the diffusive logistic model with a free boundary SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis 2010 42 1 377 405 2-s2.0-77955814290 10.1137/090771089 MR2607347 ZBL1219.35373 Kaneko Y. Yamada Y. A free boundary problem for a reaction-diffusion equation appearing in ecology Advances in Mathematical Sciences and Applications 2011 21 2 467 492 MR2953128 ZBL1254.35248 Aronson D. G. Weinberger H. F. Multidimensional nonlinear diffusion arising in population genetics Advances in Mathematics 1978 30 1 33 76 2-s2.0-49349119963 10.1016/0001-8708(78)90130-5 MR511740 ZBL0407.92014 Aronson D. G. Weinberger H. F. Nonlinear diffusion in population genetics, combustion, and nerve pulse propagation Partial Differential Equations and Related Topics 1975 446 Berlin, Germany Springer 5 49 Lecture Notes in Mathematics MR0427837 ZBL0325.35050 Du Y. Guo Z. The Stefan problem for the Fisher-KPP equation Journal of Differential Equations 2012 253 3 996 1035 2-s2.0-84861234049 10.1016/j.jde.2012.04.014 MR2922661 ZBL1257.35110 Friedman A. Hu B. A Stefan problem for a photocell model SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis 1999 30 4 912 926 2-s2.0-0033243614 10.1137/S0036141098337588 MR1684731 ZBL0933.35199 Zhang H. Qu C. Hu B. Bifurcation for a free boundary problem modeling a protocell Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications 2009 70 7 2779 2795 2-s2.0-59849116945 10.1016/j.na.2008.04.003 MR2499746 ZBL1157.35505 Cai J. Lou B. Zhou M. Asymptotic behavior of solutions of a reaction diffusion equation with free boundary conditions Preprint Cai J. Asymptotic behavior of solutions of Fisher-KPP equation with free boundary conditions Nonlinear Analysis: Real World Applications 2014 16 170 177 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2013.09.016 MR3123809 Cantrell R. S. Cosner C. Spatial Ecology via Reaction-Diffusion Equations 2003 Chichester, UK John Wiley & Sons 10.1002/0470871296 MR2191264