It is known that the bilinear Strichartz estimate $$\Vert e^{it\Delta}u_0\cdot \overline{e^{it\Delta}v_0}\Vert_{L_t^2L^2(\mathbb{R}^d)}\lesssim_{\delta} \Vert u_0\Vert_{H^{-1/2+\delta}(\mathbb{R}^d)}\Vert v_0\Vert_{H^{(d-1)/{2}-\delta}(\mathbb{R}^d)},\quad\delta>0$$ for the Schrodinger equation in dimension $d\geq 2$, fails for $\delta=0$ (it holds true with $\delta=0$ for dyadically localised data, but the dyadic contributions do not lead to a finite sum in general).

I'm wondering what happens in the case $u_0=v_0$, as in principle one may expect some cancellations when summing up the dyadic contributions.

More precisely, one can consider the following inequality: $$ \Vert e^{it\Delta}u_0\Vert_{L_t^4L^4(\mathbb{R}^d)}^2\lesssim\Vert u_0\Vert_{H^{-1/2}(\mathbb{R}^d)}\Vert u_0\Vert_{H^{(d-1)/{2}}(\mathbb{R}^d)}\qquad(*)$$ Is estimate (*) actually true? Thank you for any suggestion.


1 Answer 1


In general spatial dimensions $d\geq 2$, (non-endpoint) Strichartz for Schrodinger holds with

$$ \| e^{it \Delta} u_0 \|_{L^{q}_t L^p_x} \lesssim \| u_0\|_{L^2}$$

where $p\in (2, \frac{2d}{d-2})$ and $q = \frac{4p}{d(p-2)}$. To get $L^4$ in time you want

$$ q = 4 \iff p = \frac{2d}{d-1} \tag{1}$$

So in $d = 2$ you have the $L^4_t L^4_x$ estimate based on initial date in $L^2$.

Notice next that we have the Sobolev inequality

$$ \|f\|_{L^4_x} \lesssim \|f\|_{W^{\frac{d-2}{4},p}} $$

where $p$ is as in (1). So this means we have the Strichartz inequality

$$ \|e^{it\Delta} u_0\|_{L^4_t L^4_x} \lesssim \| u_0\|_{H^{(d-2)/4}} $$

using that the linear Schrodinger equation commutes with differentiation.

A simple interpolation gives you finally that

$$ \|u_0\|_{H^{(d-2)/4}}^2 \lesssim \|u_0\|_{H^{-1/2}} \|u_0\|_{H^{(d-1)/2}}$$

  • $\begingroup$ Thank you! Incidentally, your argument is essentially the same used in the proof of bilinear estimates when the data have comparable frequencies. This actually puzzles me a bit: in principle, setting e.g. $u:=e^{it\Delta}u_0$, in the bilinear expression we have terms of the form $Re(u_j\overline{u_k})$, with (say) $j>>k$. I would like to understand, intuitively, why the contributions of these terms can be summed. $\endgroup$
    – Capublanca
    Commented Nov 17, 2020 at 17:42
  • $\begingroup$ Do you have a handy reference for the proof of the bilinear estimates you are looking at? I can take a look and see if I can see what's going on. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 17, 2020 at 18:00
  • $\begingroup$ Sure, for example you can refer to Lemma 3.4 in "Global well-posedness and scattering for the energy critical non-linear Schrodinger equation in $\mathbb{R}^3$", by the I- team. Thank you. $\endgroup$
    – Capublanca
    Commented Nov 17, 2020 at 18:13
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think it is so much that they can be summed, but that in the symmetric/quadratic case, when summing, you can choose to put (when $j\gg k$) $\| u_j u_k\|_{L^2}$ into $\|u_k\|_{H^{-1/2}} \|u_j\|_{H^{(d-1)/2}}$ instead of the other way around which is what the Lemma is trying to accomplish. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 17, 2020 at 19:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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