9
$\begingroup$

Suppose $f(x_1,x_2)\in C^\infty_c(\mathbb R^2)$. I wonder how one may derive the asymptotic expansion of the following integral when the real paramter $\lambda\rightarrow \infty$: \begin{equation} \int_{\mathbb R^2}e^{i\lambda x_1x_2(x_1+x_2)}f(x_1,x_2) dx_1 dx_2. \end{equation} Note that the origin is the only critical point of the phase function $\phi(x_1,x_2)=x_1x_2(x_1+x_2)$, but it is a very degenerate one as the Hessian matrix $\big(\frac{\partial^2 \phi}{\partial x_i\partial x_j}\big)$ is zero at the origin. Actually, the Milnor number that describes the singularity of $\phi$ at the origin is $4$.

[EDIT: I have found an answer for this question myself. When the phase function $\phi$ is as simple as stated above, the integral's asymptotic behavior can be written down in a clean manner. The real complexity shows up when there is some perturbation in the phase, that is, when the phase is of the form $\Phi(x_1,x_2)=x_1x_2(x_1+x_2)+ax_1x_2+bx_1+cx_2$, with $a,b,c$ denoting the control parameters. In the latter case, an asymptotic $\lambda$-expansion that is uniform in $a,b,c$ is very hard to get and seems not existent in the literature yet.]

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

(I am not really an expert, so it should be taken with a pinch of salt.)

One may take $f=1$ and simply compute the integral using polar coordinates. (There are minor problems with convergence, but they are irrelevant.) The result is $c|\lambda|^{-2/3}$, where $c\neq 0$ is an absolute constant which I was too lazy to compute. So, in the general case the asymptotic must be $c|\lambda|^{-2/3}f(0,0)$. (To actually prove this may be a piece of work, but it certainly can be done if necessary.)

[EDIT] Now I think I can help. First, I would change coordinates to make the phase function more symmetric, $\phi(x,y)=y^3-3x^2 y$. Then, I would make use of complex variables. Let $\Sigma\subset\mathbb{C}^2$ be a surface defined by $x=(\cos t-iu\sin 2t)r,\,y=(\sin t -iu\cos 2t)r$, where $u>0$ is not very big. ($u=1/2$ will do.) Here $0\le t<2\pi$ and $r>0$.

The idea is to replace the original integral with $$\int_{\Sigma}e^{i\lambda\phi(x,y)}f(x,y)dx\wedge dy,$$ which must have the same asymptotic. This integral is convergent even if $f$ is an entire function, because on this surface $\Im \phi(x,y)>0$. The asymptotic series simply comes from the Taylor series. (To make the argument rigorous one may use a partition of unity and other standard techniques.)

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The asymptotic expansion should look like $\sum_{n=0}^\infty c_n\lambda^{-\frac{2+n}{3}}$. The precise questions are i) to prove that the expansion is of such a form and ii) to provide expressions or an algorithm for the coefficients $c_n$. The leading coefficient is $c_0=3^{-\frac{1}{6}}\Gamma(\frac{1}{3})^2f(0,0)$, which can be computed by a different method. But it is not clear how to derive other coefficients. Thanks for sharing your thought on the problem. $\endgroup$ – Chris Sep 8 '16 at 3:26
  • $\begingroup$ When $u>0$, the smooth function $f$ on $\mathbb R^2$ may not be defined on the surface $\Sigma_u$ in $\mathbb C^2$. Nevertheless, one could replace $f$ by its Taylor polynomial $T_n(f)$ of degree $n$ and show that the contribution from the difference is a power of $\lambda^{-1}$ depending on $n$ in certain way. However, for $T_n(f)$, one still needs to argue that the asymptotic expansion of its integral on $\Sigma_u$ leads to the expansion of the integral on $\Sigma_0$ when $u\rightarrow 0$. Is this obvious? (As you are aware of, $Im(\phi)$ is no longer positive on $\Sigma_0$). $\endgroup$ – Chris Sep 10 '16 at 21:03
  • $\begingroup$ Of course, it is not THIS straightforward. The argument may go as follows. Assume that $f=F\omega$, where $F$ is entire and $\omega$ is a "cap", i.e. it has a compact support and $\omega=1$ near the origin. Then the integral of $f$ over $\Sigma_0$ is equal to the integral of $f$ over some "intermediate" surface $\Sigma'$, which coincides with $\Sigma_0$ where $\omega\neq 0$ but coincides with $\Sigma_u$ far from the origin. On the other hand, the integral of $F$ over $\Sigma_u$ is equal to the integral of $F$ over the same $\Sigma'$, because the form is holomorphic. $\endgroup$ – Alex Gavrilov Sep 11 '16 at 6:31
  • $\begingroup$ Then, the difference is an integral of $F(1-\omega)$ over $\Sigma'$, which is small because the function is smooth and zero near the origin. $\endgroup$ – Alex Gavrilov Sep 11 '16 at 6:36
  • $\begingroup$ At least, this is an answer to question ii (algorithm for the coefficients). $\endgroup$ – Alex Gavrilov Sep 11 '16 at 6:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.