2015 Bookmatter Rate-IndependentSystems

Appendix A
Elements of topology and functional analysis
Here, for the reader’s convenience, we collect fundamental concepts, definitions,

and theorems used in this monograph, which are, however, rather standard and
thus presented here mostly without proof, although some specific generalizations
or modifications are accompanied by proofs. There are many textbooks and
monographs on this subject, such as, e.g., [52, 84, 173, 175, 314, 344, 624].
A.1 Ordering
A binary relation, denoted by , on a set X is called an ordering if it is reflexive

(i.e., x x for all x 2 X), transitive (i.e., x1 x2 & x2 x3 imply x1 x3 for all
x1 ; x2 ; x3 2 X) and antisymmetric (i.e., x1 x2 & x2 x1 imply x1 D x2 ). The
ordering is called linear if x1 x2 or x2 x1 always holds for every x1 ; x2 2 X.
An ordered set X is called directed if for every x1 ; x2 2 X, there is x3 2 X such that
both x1 x3 and x2 x3 . Instead of x1 x2 , we also write x2 x1 . By x1 < x2
we understand that x1 x2 but x1 6D x2 . Having two ordered sets X1 and X2 and a
mapping f W X1 ! X2 , we say that f is nondecreasing (respectively nonincreasing)
if x1 x2 implies f .x1 / f .x2 / (respectively f .x1 / f .x2 /).
We say that x1 2 X is the greatest element of the ordered set X if x2 x1 for
every x2 2 X. Similarly, x1 2 X is the least element of X if x1 x2 for every x2 2 X.
We say that x1 2 X is maximal in the ordered set X if there is no x2 2 X such
that x1 < x2 . Note that the greatest element, if it exists, is always maximal but not
conversely. Similarly, x1 2 X is minimal in X if there is no x2 2 X such that x1 > x2 .
The ordering on X induces the ordering on a subset A of X, given just by the
restriction of the relation . We say that x1 2 X is an upper bound of A X if
x2 x1 for every x2 2 A. Analogously, x1 2 X is called a lower bound of A if
x1 x2 for every x2 2 A. If every two elements x1 ; x2 2 X possess both a least
upper bound and a greatest lower bound, denoted respectively by sup.x1 ; x2 / and
© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015 579

A. Mielke, T. Roubíček, Rate-Independent Systems: Theory and Application,
Applied Mathematical Sciences 193, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-2706-7
580 A Elements of topology and functional analysis
inf.x1 ; x2 / and called the supremum and the infimum of fx1 ; x2 g, then the ordered
set .X; / is called a lattice. Then the supremum and the infimum exist for every
finite subset and are determined uniquely because the ordering is antisymmetric.
The so-called Kuratowski–Zorn lemma [343, 631] says that if every linearly
ordered subset of X has an upper bound in X, then X has at least one maximal
element.1 Having a directed set and another set X, we say that .x /2 is a net in
X if there is a mapping ! X W 7! x . Having another net . xQ Q / Q 2 Q in X, we
say that this net is finer than the net .x /2 if there is a mapping j W Q ! such
that for every Q 2 Q , we have xQ Q D xj. Q / , and moreover, for every 2 , there is
Q 2 Q large enough that j. Q 1 / whenever Q 1 Q .
The set of all natural numbers N ordered by the standard ordering is a directed
set. The nets having N (directed by this standard ordering) as the index set are
called sequences. Every subsequence of a given sequence can be simultaneously
understood as a finer net.2
A.2 Topology
A topology T of a set X is a collection of subsets of X such that T contains the

empty set and X itself, and with every finite collection of sets also their intersection,
and also with every arbitrary collection of sets also their union. The elements of
T are called open sets (or T-open, if we want to indicate explicitly the topology
in question), while their complements are called closed. A set X endowed with a
topology T is called a topological space; sometimes we denote it by .X; T/ to refer to
T explicitly. A collection T0 of subsets of X is called a base of a topology T if every
T-open set is a union of elements of T0 . Then T WD f [˛ A˛ j 8˛ W A˛ 2 T0 g is a
topology (induced by the base T0 ). Having a subset A X, TjA WD f A \ B j B 2 T g
is a topology on A, called a relative topology. Having x 2 N X, we say that N
is a neighborhood of x if there is an open set A such that x 2 A N; the set of all
neighborhoods of a point x is denoted by N .x/ or, more specifically, NT .x/ if the
topology T needs to be specified. A topology T is called Hausdorff if 8x1 ; x2 2 X,
x1 ¤ x2 9A1 2 N .x1 /; A2 2 N .x2 /: A1 \ A2 D ;.
We define the interior, the closure, and the boundary of a set A respectively by
n ˇ o
ˇ
int.A/ WD x 2 X ˇ 9N 2 N .x/ W N A ; (A.2.1a)
1
This assertion is unfortunately highly nonconstructive unless X N, and is equivalent to the
axiom ofS choice: for every set X and every collection fAx gx2X , ; ¤ Ax X, there is a mapping
f W X ! x2X Ax such that f .x/ 2 Ax for every x 2 X.
2
Indeed, having a sequence .xk /k2N and its subsequence .xk /k2N with some N N, one can put
WD .N; /, Q WD .N; /, and j W Q ! the inclusion N N.
A Elements of topology and functional analysis 581
n ˇ o
ˇ
cl.A/ WD x 2 X ˇ 8N 2 N .x/ W N \ A 6D ; (A.2.1b)
@A WD cl.A/ n int.A/: (A.2.1c)
Having A B X, we say that A is dense in B if cl.A/ B. A topological space is

called separable if it contains a countable subset that is dense in it.
Having a net .x /2 in the topological space X, we say that it converges to a
point x 2 X if for every neighborhood N of x, there is 0 2 large enough that
x 2 N whenever 0 ; then we say also that x is the limit point of the net in
question, and write lim2 x WD x or simply x ! x. This concept of convergence
is called the Moore–Smith convergence [433]. Note that x 2 cl.A/ if and only if
there is a net in A converging to x; in this case, we also say that x is attainable by
a net from A. A point x 2 X is called a cluster point of the net .x /2 if for every
neighborhood N of x and for every 0 2 , there is 0 such that x 2 N. Clearly,
every limit point is a cluster point as well, but not conversely. Nevertheless, for every
cluster point x of a net .x /2 , there exists3 a finer net f xQ Q g Q 2 Q converging to x.
Ordering of all topologies on a given set X is naturally by inclusion: having two
topologies T1 and T2 on a set X, we say that T1 is finer than T2 or T2 is coarser
than T1 if T1 T2 (or equivalently, if the identity on X is .T1 ; T2 /-continuous).
The adjectives “stronger” and “weaker” are sometimes used in place of “finer” and
“coarser,” respectively.
A function d W XX ! R1 is called a quasidistance on X if for all x1 ; x2 ; x3 2 X,
d.x1 ; x2 / 0, d.x1 ; x2 / D 0 is equivalent to x1 D x2 , and d.x1 ; x2 / d.x1 ; x3 / C
d.x3 ; x1 /. A quasidistance that does not take values 1 is called a distance. Every
distance d induces a topology T by a base f f x 2 X j d.x; x1 / < " g j x1 2 X; " > 0 g.
A distance d W XX ! R is called a metric on X if d.x1 ; x2 / D d.x2 ; x1 / for
all x1 ; x2 2 X. Conversely, a topology is called metrizable if there exists a metric
that induces it. However, it should be emphasized that there exist nonmetrizable
topologies.
We say that a topological space is compact if every open cover admits a finite
subcover. In terms of nets, the equivalent definition reads that every net has a cluster
point. There are various useful modifications of this notion. We say that a topology is
sequentially compact if every sequence in X admits a subsequence that converges in
X. A metrizable topology is compact if and only if it is sequentially compact. A set
A is called relatively (sequentially) compact if the closure of A is (sequentially)
compact in X. A topological space is called locally (sequentially) compact if every
point of it possesses a (sequentially) compact neighborhood.
3 Q WD N .x/ directed by the ordering and to take, for every Q D

It suffices to put
Q , some xQ Q WD x 2 N with Q .
.; N/ 2
A mapping f W X ! Y is called continuous if f .x/ D lim2 f .x / whenever a

net .x /2 X converges to x 2 X.4 If this holds only for sequences, the mapping
is called sequentially continuous. The image of a (sequentially) compact set via a
(sequentially) continuous mapping is (sequentially) compact.
In the special case that Y D R, (sequential) continuity of a functional X ! R
refers to the canonical Euclidean topology induced by the metric j j. If R
is equipped with the topology TC D f .a; 1/ j a 2 R g (respectively T D
f .1; a/ j a 2 R g), which is obviously coarser than the Euclidean topology, we
say that the function f W X ! R is (sequentially) lower semicontinuous (respectively
(sequentially) upper semicontinuous) with respect the topology on X in question.
Obviously, f is upper semicontinuous if and only if f is lower semicontinuous.
This is also intimately related to the canonical ordering of R and just means that
f .x/ lim inf2 f .x / whenever a net .x /2 X converges to x 2 X, where
the limit inferior of a net .y /2 R (here used for y D f ) is defined as
sup2 inff y j g; if values in R1 are admitted, this supremum always
exists, because is directed and R [ f˙1g is a complete lattice.5 Analogously,
one defines the limit superior of a net .y /2 R as inf2 supf y j g,
and then f upper semicontinuous just means that f .x/ lim sup2 f .x / whenever
x ! x.
If the topology on X is metrizable, all these definitions can equivalently use D
N equipped with the canonical ordering.
Theorem A.2.1 (Bolzano–Weierstrass). 6 A lower (respectively upper) semicon-
tinuous function on a compact space attains its minimum (respectively maximum).
The projective topology generated on X by the collection of mappings f W
X ! Y and topologies T on Y is the coarsest topology T on X making
continuous all the mappings f W X ! Y . Also, T D sup f1 .T /, where
Q
f1 .T / D fA XI f .A/ 2 T g. The topology on the Cartesian product X
is canonically
Q understood as the projective topology
Q generated by the projections
Pr W X ! X ; this topology has a base f 2 A I 8 2 W A 2 T ; & A D
X for all but a finite number of indices 2 g and is referred to as the Tikhonov
product topology. The following important result relies on the Kuratowski–Zorn
lemma if is uncountable:
4
This is equivalent to saying that 8x 2 X, N 2 NTY .f .x// 9M 2 NTX .x/: f .M/ N. Also, it
is equivalent to 8A 2 TY : f 1 .A/ 2 TX . Still alternatively, it is equivalent to that if x is a cluster
point of a net .x /2 , then f .x/ is a cluster point of .f .x //2 .
5
Equivalently, f is lower semicontinuous if f .x/ supA2N .x/ inf f .A/ for every x 2 X.
6
B. Bolzano is usually credited with showing (rather intuitively) that a real continuous function of a
bounded closed interval Œa; b R is bounded. In fact, the compactness of Œa; b was not rigorously
known during Bolzano’s lifetime (1781–1848), since definitions of the real numbers with suitable
completeness properties were invented only later. His results were forgotten, cf. also [76], and later
rediscovered in a much more general and truly rigorous context by K. Weierstrass.
Q
Theorem A.2.2 (Tikhonov [604]). 7 The product X is compact if and only if
all X are compact.
A compactification of .U; T/ is a pair . U; i/ with U compact and i W U ! U
a continuous mapping8 with i.U/ dense in U.
Ordering of compactifications of U is defined as follows: for two compact-
ifications .1 U; i1 / and .2 U; i2 / of U, we say that the former one is a finer
compactification than the latter one (or equivalently, the latter one is coarser than
the former one) and write .1 U; i1 / .2 U; i2 / (or briefly 1 U 2 U) if there is a
continuous mapping W 1 U ! 2 U fixing U in the sense that ı i1 D i2 .
A triple .K; Z; i/ is called a convex compactification of a topological space .U; T/
if Z is a Hausdorff locally convex space, K is a convex, compact subset of Z, i W
U ! K is continuous, and i.U/ is dense in K. If i is also injective, .K; Z; i/ is called
a Hausdorff convex compactification. We define the ordering of convex compacti-
fications as follows: for two convex compactifications .K1 ; Z1 ; i1 / and .K2 ; Z2 ; i2 /
of U, we say that .K1 ; Z1 ; i1 / is finer than .K2 ; Z2 ; i2 /, and write .K1 ; Z1 ; i1 /
.K2 ; Z2 ; i2 /, if there is an affine9 continuous mapping W K1 ! K2 fixing U.
If the Z’s are ignored, the ordering of convex compactifications agrees with the
usual ordering of compactifications. The concept of convex compactifications was
first introduced in [518]; for a comprehensive treatment of convex-compactification
theory, we refer to [520].
A.3 Locally convex spaces, Banach spaces, Banach algebras
On a (real) linear space V ,10 a nonnegative, symmetric, degree-1 homogeneous,

subadditive functional k kV W V ! R is called a norm if it vanishes only at 0; often,
we write briefly k k instead of k kV if V is obvious from the context.11 The norm
induces a metric .v1 ; v2 / 7! kv1 v2 k, which further induces a topology, called
7
The German spelling “Tychonoff” is sometimes used even in the English literature according to
the original reference [604].
8
In general topology, a narrower concept of compactification, requiring i to be a homeomorphic
embedding, is generally adopted. For our purposes, it appears useful to accept a wider concept.
9
The adjective “affine” means . 21 z C 12 Qz / D 1
2
.z/ C 1
2
. Qz / for every z; Qz 2 K1 , while “fixing
U” means ı i1 D i2 .
10
A real linear space means that V is endowed with a binary operation .v1 ; v2 / 7! v1 C v2 W
V V ! V htat makes it a group, i.e., v1 C v2 D v2 C v1 , v1 C .v2 C v3 / D .v1 C v2 / C v3 ,
9 0 2 V : v C 0 D v, and 8v1 2 V 9v2 : v1 C v2 D 0, and furthermore, it is equipped with a
scalar multiplication .a; x/ 7! ax W RV ! V satisfying .a1 C a2 /v D a1 v C a2 v, a.v1 C v2 / D
av1 Cav2 , .a1 a2 /v D a1 .a2 v/, and 1v D v. The occasionally used notation x=a is self-explanatory
and naturally defined as x=a WD .1=a/x.
11
The above-mentioned properties of a norm mean respectively kvk 0, kavk D jaj kvk,
kuCvk kuk C kvk for every u; v 2 V and a 2 R, and kvk D 0 ) v D 0.
the strong topology on V . A subset A V is called bounded if supu2A kuk < 1.

A linear space equipped with a norm is called a normed linear space.
If the last property (i.e., kukV D 0 ) u D 0) is missing, we call such a
functional a seminorm. Having V equipped with a collection fjj˛ g˛2S of seminorms
j j˛ with an arbitrary index set S, we call V a locally convex space. Then f f u 2
V j 8˛ 2 S0 W ju uQ j˛ " g j S0 S finite; " > 0; uQ 2 V g is a base
of a topology, and V is considered equipped with the corresponding topology. If
juj˛ D 0 for all ˛ 2 S implies u D 0, then this topology is Hausdorff, and V is
called a Hausdorff locally convex space. In particular, a normed linear space V has
the Hausdorff topology generated by the base f f u 2 V j ku uQ k " g j " >
0; uQ 2 V g. A normed linear space is a Hausdorff locally convex space with only
one seminorm, namely just its norm; this refers to the strong topology.
A net .u /2 is then called a Cauchy net if for all ˛ 2 S and " > 0, there is
2 such that ju1 u2 j˛ " whenever 1 and 2 . If every Cauchy net
converges, the locally convex space V is called complete. Complete normed linear
spaces are called Banach spaces [51]. An example of a Banach space isP Rn endowed
with the norm, denoted usually by j j instead of k k, defined by jsj D . niD1 s2i /1=2 ;
such a Banach space is called an n-dimensional Euclidean space.
If V is a Banach space such that for every v 2 V , V ! R W u 7! ku C vk2
ku vk2 is linear, then V is called a Hilbert space. In this case, we define the inner
product (also called scalar product) by
1 1
ujv
ujv WD ku C vk2 ku vk2 : (A.3.1)
V 4 4
By assumption, .j/WV V !R is a bilinear form, which is obviously symmetric12

and satisfies .uju/ D kuk2 . For example, the Euclidean space Rn is a Hilbert space.
Let us call a Banach space V uniformly convex if
uCv
kukDkvkD1
8 " > 0 9 ı > 0 8 u; v 2 V W ) 1 ı: (A.3.2)
kuvk " 2
If also a multiplication between elements of a Banach space V is defined that is

(as a binary operation V V ! V ) continuous and makes the Banach space V also
a commutative ring and that is associative, then V is called a commutative Banach
algebra.13 Banach algebras containing a unity14 are called unital. An example of a
Banach algebra is the Banach space BV.˝/ with pointwise multiplication.
Moreover, there is a deep theory of algebras over complex numbers that has
also important projections into commutative unital Banach algebras over the real
12
This means that both u 7! .ujv/ and v 7! .ujv/ are linear functionals on V and .ujv/ D .vju/.
13
This means that uv D vu, a.uv/ D .au/v D u.av/, and kuvk kuk kvk for every u; v 2 V and
a 2 R.
14
This means that there exists 1 2 V such that 1v D v for every v 2 V .
numbers considered in this book. In particular, a C -algebra V is defined [216]

as a Banach algebra over the complex numbers possessing also an involution
operation,15 denoted by v 7! v . The subalgebra of self-adjoint elements WD
f v 2 V j v D v g forms a Banach algebra. Every unital commutative (separable)
C -algebra enjoys a so-called Gelfand representation as C.K/ with a (metrizable)
compact K; here, in contrast to the rest of this book, C stands for the complex-valued
continuous functions instead of real-valued.16
A.4 Functions and mappings on Banach spaces, dual spaces
Having two normed linear spaces V 1 and V 2 and a mapping A W V 1 ! V 2 , we say

that A is continuous if it maps convergent sequences in V 1 to convergent ones in V 2 ,
and is a linear operator if it satisfies A.a1 v1 C a2 v2 / D a1 A.v1 / C a2 A.v2 / for any
a1 ; a2 2 R and v1 ; v2 2 V 1 . Often we write briefly Av instead of A.v/. If V 1 D V 2 ,
a linear continuous operator A W V 1 ! V 2 is called a projector if A ı A D A. The
set of all linear continuous operators V 1 ! V 2 is denoted by Lin.V 1 ; V 2 /, being
itself a normed linear space when equipped with the addition and multiplication by
scalars defined respectively by .A1 C A2 /v D A1 v C A2 v and .aA/v D a.Av/, and
with the norm
kAkLin.V 1 ;V 2 / WD sup kAvkV 2 D sup kAvkV 2 =kvkV 1 : (A.4.1)

kvkV 1 1 v¤0
Since R itself is a linear topological space,17 we can consider the linear space
Lin.V ; R/, being also denoted by V and called the dual space to V . The original
space V is then called predual to V . For an operator (now a functional) f 2 V ,
we write h f ; vi instead of f v. The bilinear form h ; iV V W V V ! R is called a
canonical duality pairing. Instead of h ; iV V , we often write briefly h; i. Always,
V is a Banach space if endowed with the norm (A.4.1), denoted often briefly by
k k instead of k kV , i.e., k f k D supkvk1 h f ; vi. Obviously,
˝ ˛ ˝ ˛ ˝ ˛
f ; u D kuk f ; u=kuk kuk sup f ; v D k f k kuk: (A.4.2)
kvk1
The involution is to satisfy .v / D v, .uCv/ D u C v , uv D v u , .av/ D aN v , and

15
kv vk D kvk kv k for every u; v 2 V and a 2 C with aN denoting the complex conjugate to a.

16
More specifically, the compact K can be taken as the set of all nontrivial multiplicative
functionals from equipped with the weak* topology of . Alternatively, K can be taken
as the set of all maximal ideals of the algebra equipped with the appropriate topology; recall the
standard definition that a linear subset I is called an ideal if v 2 I and u 2 imply v u 2 I .
17
The conventional norm on R is the absolute value j j.
If V is a Hilbert space, then .u 7! .f ; u// 2 V for every f 2 V , and the mapping

f 7! .u 7! .f ; u// identifies V with V . Then (A.4.2) turns into the so-called
Cauchy–Schwarz inequality .f ; u/ kf k kuk. If V
V WD ŒV , the Banach
space V is called reflexive. Every Hilbert space is reflexive.
One can consider a normed linear space V equipped with the collection of
seminorms fv 7! jh f ; vijgf 2V , which makes it a locally convex space; its topology
is referred to as the weak topology and is strictly coarser than the norm topology
unless V is finite-dimensional. Instead of uk ! u weakly, we sometimes write
uk * u.
The (sequential) weakly lower (respectively upper) semicontinuous functionals
are defined just as in Section A.2 with T D the weak topology. It should be
emphasized that sequentially weakly lower semicontinuous functionals need not be
weakly lower semicontinuous.18
Theorem A.4.1. 19 If V is uniformly convex, uk ! u weakly, and kuk k ! kuk, then
uk ! u strongly.
Likewise, the Banach space V can be endowed with the collection of seminorms
ff 7! jh f ; vijgv2V , which makes it a locally convex space, its topology being
referred to as the weak* topology. It is always coarser than the weak topology.
Instead of fk ! f weakly*, we sometimes write fk *f
*
.

The duality pairing is continuous if V V is equipped with the weak*norm or
normweak topology. and it is also separately (weak*,weak)-continuous.20
Proposition A.4.2. If V is separable, then so is the dual space V .
Proposition A.4.3. Bounded sets in V are relatively weakly* compact. If V is
separable, then they are also relatively sequentially weakly* compact.
The last assertion, in particular, yields a broadly applicable theorem:
Theorem A.4.4 (Banach selection principle [52] ). In a Banach space with
a separable predual, every bounded sequence contains a weakly* convergent
subsequence.
Having two locally convex spaces V 1 and V 2 and an operator A 2 Lin.V 1 ; V 2 /,
we define the so-called adjoint operator A 2 Lin.V 2 ; V 1 / by the identity
hA f ; vi D h f ; Avi, to be valid for every v 2 V 1 and f 2 V 2 . If V 1 and V 2
18
An illustrative counterexample (cf. [141, Remarks 2.3–4]) is k k2L2 .˝/ W V WD H1 .˝/ !
R. If it were weakly lower semicontinuous, then it would have to be bounded from below on a
neighborhood N of 0, but each such N contains a line, and this functional is not bounded below on
any line. The sequential (lower semi)continuity is due to the compact embedding H1 .˝/ L2 .˝/
(Rellich’s theorem, Theorem B.4.2) and continuity of this functional in the L2 .˝/ topology.
19
See Fan and Glicksberg [182] for a thorough investigation and various modifications.
20
This means, written “sequentially,” that both limk!1 liml!1 h fk ; ul i D h f ; ui and
liml!1 limk!1 h fk ; ul i D h f ; ui if fk ! f weakly* and uk ! u weakly.
are normed linear spaces, then A 7! A realizes an isometric (i.e., norm-preserving)

isomorphism between Lin.V 1 ; V 2 / and Lin.V 2 ; V 1 /.
The linear structure of V 1 and V 2 allows us to investigate the smoothness of A.
We say that A W V 1 ! V 2 has a directional derivative at u 2 V in the direction
h 2 V if there exists the limit lim"!0C A.uC"h/A.u/
"
. If this limit depends linearly
and continuously on the direction h, then we say that A has a Gâteaux differential
[215] at u 2 V , denoted by DA.u/ 2 Lin.V 1 ; V 2 /. If A W R ! R, we will write
simply A0 instead of DA. If the Gâteaux differential exists in every point, A is called
Gâteaux differentiable and DA W V 7! Lin.V 1 ; V 2 /. In the special case V 2 D R, a
Gâteaux-differentiable functional ˚ W V 1 ! R has the differential D˚ W V 1 ! V 1 .
Moreover, if also
A.u C uQ / A.u/ ŒDA.u/ uQ

lim D 0; (A.4.3)
k uQ kV 1 !0 k uQ kV 1
then A is called Fréchet differentiable at the point u.
A.5 Basics from convex analysis
A set K in a linear space is called convex if u C .1/v 2 K whenever u; v 2 K

and 2 Œ0; 1, and it is called a cone (with the vertex at the origin 0) if v 2 K
whenever v 2 K and 0. A functional f W V ! R is called convex if f .u C
.1/v/ f .u/ C .1/f .v/. A functional f W V ! R is convex (respectively
lower semicontinuous) if and only if its epigraph epi.f / WD f.x; a/ 2 V RI a
f .x/g is a convex (respectively closed) subset of V R. A lower semicontinuous
functional f is convex if and only if
1 1 u C u
1 2
f .u1 / C f .u2 / f : (A.5.1)
2 2 2
If u1 ¤ u2 implies (A.5.1) with strict inequality, then f is called strictly convex.

A convex functional is proper if it is not identically 1 and never takes value 1.
For a convex subset K of a locally convex space V and u 2 K, we define closed
convex cones TK .u/ V and NK .u/ V , called respectively the tangent cone
and the normal cone, by21
[ n ˇ o
ˇ
TK .u/ WD cl a.Ku/ and NK .u/ WD f 2 V ˇ 8v 2 TK .u/ W h f ; vi 0 :
a>0
21
Note that v 2 TK .u/ means precisely that u C ak vk 2 K for suitable sequences fak gk2N R and
fvk gk2N V such that limk!1 vk D v.
Again, the normal cone is always a closed convex cone in V . A domain of a

functional F W V ! R defined as Dom F WD f v 2 V j F.v/ < 1 g is convex
or closed if F is convex or lower semicontinuous, respectively. The subdifferential
of a convex functional F W V ! R is defined as a convex closed subset of V :
n ˇ o
ˇ
@F.v/ WD 2 V ˇ 8 vQ 2 V W F.vC vQ / F.v/ C h; wi Q : (A.5.2)
For two convex functionals F1 ; F2 W V ! R, @.F1 CF2 / @F1 C @F2 holds simply
by the definition (A.5.2), while the full sum rule
@.F1 CF2 / D @F1 C @F2 (A.5.3)
holds if Dom F1 \ int.Dom F2 / ¤ ; or int.Dom F1 / \ Dom F2 ¤ ;; cf. also

Example A.5.2.
Let V be a Banach space and F W V ! R1 a proper, lower semicontinuous, and
convex functional. Its Legendre–Fenchel transform F W V ! R1 is defined via
n ˇ o
ˇ
F ./ WD sup h; vi F.v/ ˇ v 2 V : (A.5.4)
The Fenchel equivalences for subdifferentials read
2 @F.v/ , v 2 @F ./ , F.v/ C F ./ D h; vi: (A.5.5)
By the definition (A.5.4) of F , we always have the Fenchel–Young inequality
F.v/ C F ./ h; vi for all v 2 V and 2 V : (A.5.6)
For a convex proper lower semicontinuous F, we have
F WD .F / D F: (A.5.7)
A Banach linear space V is called ordered by a relation if this relation is an

ordering and, in addition, it is compatible with the linear and topological structure.22
It is easy to see that D WD f u 2 V j u 0 g is a closed convex cone that does not
contain a line. Conversely, having a closed convex cone D V that does not contain
a line, the relation defined by u v, provided u v 2 D, makes V an ordered
linear topological space.
The so-called negative polar cone f f 2 V j 8v 2 V W h f ; vi 0 g defines an
ordering on V if it does not contain a line; this ordering is then called the dual
ordering.
22
This just means the following four properties: u 0 and a 0 imply au 0, u 0 and v 0
imply uCv 0, u v implies uCw vCw for every w, and u 0 and u ! x implies x 0.
Example A.5.1. Using the notation ı K for the so-called indicator function
defined as
(
0 if v 2 K;
ı K .v/ WD (A.5.8)
1 otherwise;
we illustrate the above definitions by the following formulas:
@ı K D NK and @ı K D TK and Œ@ı K 1 D @ı

K D @ı K D NK ; (A.5.9)
holding for every convex closed K. The last relation also implies @ı K D ŒNK 1 , so
that in particular,
@ı K .0/ D ŒNK 1 .0/ D K: (A.5.10)
Example A.5.2 (Inequality in the sum rule). The equality (A.5.3) indeed needs a
qualification of F1 and F2 . In general, even the very extreme situation

V D @.F1 CF2 / .v/ § @F1 .v/ C @F2 .v/ D ; C ;
is easily possible. It occurs, e.g., for v D 0 2 R D V for23

( p
v if v 0;
F1 .v/ D F2 .v/ D
1 if v < 0:
Example A.5.3 (Löwner ordering). The set of positive semidefinite .nn/-matrices

forms a closed convex cone. The ordering of all .nn/-matrices by this cone is called
the Löwner’s ordering.
Example A.5.4 (Orderings on Banach algebras and their duals). The subset f u 2
V j 9v 2 V W u D v v g of a C -algebra V forms a closed convex cone not containing
a line and thus induces an ordering, and the elements in this set are said to be
nonnegative.24 This cone is also contained in a linear subspace of the so-called
self-adjoint elements, i.e., in f u 2 V j u D u g, which is then ordered, too. The
dual ordering then orders the Banach space of all self-adjoint bounded linear
functionals on the C -algebra V . Here a self-adjoint functional on a C -algebra
means that it is real-valued on the self-adjoint elements of V .
23
Note that F1 C F2 D ı 0 , while the derivative of F1 tends to 1 for v ! 0C and the derivative
of F2 tends to 1 for v ! 0, so that indeed, both @F1 .0/ D ; and @F2 .0/ D ;. And obviously,
Dom F1 D Œ0; 1/ and Dom F2 D .1; 0, so that both Dom F1 \ int.Dom F2 / D ; and
int.Dom F1 / \ Dom F2 D ;, and the qualification for (A.5.3) we mentioned above indeed is
not satisfied.
This ordering can alternatively be defined by saying that v 0 if its spectrum .v/ WD f 2
24
C j non9.v11/1 g is nonnegative, i.e., belongs to Œ0; C1/.

Appendix B
Elements of Measure Theory and Function
Spaces
Here we collect basic concepts and results from specific function spaces and
measure theory used in this book. There are many textbooks and monographs on
this subject, such as [4, 179, 339, 444].
B.1 General measures
For a set S and a -algebra1 S of its subsets, a -additive2 set function W S !

R [ f˙1g is called a measure. The variation j j of is a function S ! R1
defined by

X
n ˇ
ˇ
j j.A/ WD sup j .Ai /j ˇ n2N; 81in; 1jn; i¤j W Ai 2S; Ai \Aj D ; :
iD1
We say that has finite variation if the total variation j j.S/ is finite. The measures
on .S; S/ that have finite total variation take values only from R and can naturally
be added and multiplied by real numbers, which makes the set of all such measures
a linear space. It can be normed by the variation j j.S/, which makes it a Banach
space. We denote it by M.S; S/ (or simply M.S/ if S is to be self-understood).
If S is also a topological space, a set function is called regular if
8A2˙ 8">0 9A1 ; A2 2˙ : cl.A1 /Aint.A2 / and j j.A2 nA1 /". The subspace of
regular measures from M.S/, called Radon measures, is denoted by M .S/; it is a
Banach space if normed by the variation j j.S/. An example of a -algebra is the
1
S We call S an algebra if ; 2 S, A 2 S ) S n A 2 S, and A1 ; A2 2 S ) A1 [ A2 2 S. If also
i2N Ai 2 S for every mutually disjoint Ai 2 S, it is called a -algebra.
S P
2
This means . i2N Ai / D i2N .Ai / for every mutually disjoint Ai 2 S.

592 B Elements of Measure Theory and Function Spaces
Borel -algebra,3 denoted by B.S/. In the case S D B.S/, elements of M.S; S/

are called Borel measures. If S is compact, there isRan isometric isomorphism
f 7! W C.S/ ! M .S/ defined by setting h f ; vi D S v .dx/ for all v 2 C.S/;
this is known as the Riesz theorem.4 Then kf kC.S/ D j j.S/.
For a measure , we define its positive variation C WD 12 j
j C 12 . If C D
, we say that is positive. We denote by M0C .S/ WD f 2 M .S/ j .S/ D
1; positive g the convex set of probability measures. For s 2 S, the measure ıs 2
M0C .S/ defined by hıs ; vi D v.s/ is called the Dirac measure supported at s 2 S.
One way of generating a -algebra on S is by an outer measure, which is, by
definition, a -subadditive monotone function 2S ! R1 vanishing on the empty
set.5 A subset E of S is called -measurable if .A/ D .A \ E/ C .A n E/
for every A S. The -measurable sets form a -algebra, and restricted to the
measurable sets is a complete measure.6
If .S; S/ and .X; X/ are measurable spaces, i.e., S and X are -algebras on S
and X, respectively, then a mapping f W S ! X is called measurable (more precisely
.S; X/-measurable) if f 1 .B/ WD f s 2 S j f .s/ 2 B g 2 S for all B 2 X.
For mapping F W S ! 2X , where 2X denotes the power set, we write F W S X
to indicate that F is a set-valued map, i.e., for all s 2 S, we have F.s/ X. The
set Gr F WD f .s; x/ j x 2 F.s/ g is referred to as a graph of F. A set-valued map
F W S X is called measurable (more precisely, .S; X/-measurable) if for all
B 2 X, the preimage F 1 .B/ WD f s 2 S j F.s/ \ B ¤ ; g lies in S. A mapping
f W S ! X is a selection of F if for all s 2 S, we have f .s/ 2 F.s/.
For a set S, a -algebra S of its subsets, and a measure W S ! R [ f˙1g, we
say that .S; S; / is a -finite S
complete measure space if there exists fSk gk2N S
with .Sk / < 1 and S D k2N Sk such that S1 S2 2 S and .S2 / D 0
implies S1 2 S. Throughout the rest of this subsection, we assume .S; S; / to
be qualified in this way. On the product space SX, we use the product -algebra
S˝B.X/, which is the smallest -algebra containing all cylinders AB with A 2 S
and B 2 B.X/.
Theorem B.1.1. 7 Let .S; S; / be a -finite complete measure space and X a
complete separable metric space8 and consider a set-valued map F W S X.
On X, we consider the Borel -algebra B.X/.
3
This is defined as the smallest -algebra containing all open subsets of S.
4
The integral via is defined as the limit of simple functions, similarly as in Section B.2.
P1
5
This means that W 2S ! R1 is to satisfy .[1 jD1 Aj / jD1 .Aj / for every collection
.Aj /j2N , and A B ) .A/ .B/, and also .;/ D 0.
6
This means that every subset of a null set is measurable: S
N 2 ˙ and .N/ D 0 H)
S 2 ˙.
7
See, e.g., [30, Theorems 8.1.3 and 8.1.4].
8
Completeness in metric spaces means that every Cauchy sequence converges. In fact, here (and
at some other places too) a specific metric is not important, and it suffices only to assume the
existence of some metric that makes X a complete and separable space. Such spaces are called
Polish.
B Elements of Measure Theory and Function Spaces 593
(i) If F W S X is measurable and for each s 2 S, the sets F.s/ are nonempty and
closed, then there exists a measurable selection f W S ! X for F.
(ii) A set-valued map F W S X is measurable if and only if Gr F 2 S ˝ B.X/.
Proposition B.1.2 (Filippov selection, generalized9 ). Let .S; S; / and X be as
in Theorem B.1.1, let F W S X be a measurable set-valued mapping with closed
nonempty images, let G be the -algebra on Gr.F/ that is the restriction of S ˝
B.X/ to Gr.F/, i.e., G WD f C \ Gr.F/ j C 2 S ˝ B.X/ g, and let g W Gr.F/ ! R
be .G; B.R//-measurable and satisfy

9 x 2 F.s/ W g.s; x/ D 0;
8s 2 S W (B.1.1)
g.s; / W F.s/ ! R is continuous:
Then there exists a measurable selection f W S ! X of F such that g.s; f .s// D 0 for
all s 2 S.
Proof. We define the set-valued mapping H W S X via H.s/ D f x 2
F.s/ j g.s; x/ D 0 g. By assumption, each H.s/ is nonempty. Moreover, since g.s; /
is continuous, each H.s/ is closed. Thus, to apply Theorem B.1.1(ii), it suffices to
show that H W S ! X is measurable. For this, we use Theorem B.1.1(i).
Define the function ' W Gr.F/ ! RI .s; x/ !
7 .s; g.s; x//. Then for all S 2 S and
B 2 B.R/, we have
n ˇ o
' 1 .SB/ D .s; x/ 2 Gr.F/ ˇ g.s; x/ 2 B \ .SR/ 2 S ˝ B.X/;
since the first term lies in S ˝ B.X/ due to the measurability of g. Thus, ' W
Gr.F/ ! R is measurable, and we conclude that Gr.H/ D ' 1 .Sf0g/ 2
S ˝ B.X/, which is the desired measurability of H W S X. t
u
B.2 Lebesgue and Hausdorff measures
The d-dimensional Lebesgue outer measure L d ./ on the Euclidean space Rd , d

1, is defined as

X
1 Y
d ˇ 1
[
ˇ
L .A/ WD inf
d
bki aki ˇA Œa1 ; b1 : : : Œad ; bd ; ai bi :
k k k k k k
kD1 iD1 kD1

(B.2.1)
9
This is a variant of the slight extensions of Filippov’s theorem as given in [30, Theorems 8.2.9
and 8.2.10]. The difference is that our function g is defined only on Gr F and not on SX.
Measurable sets with respect to this outer measure are called Lebesgue measur-
able.10 Since L d ./ is an outer measure, the collection ˙ of Lebesgue measurable
subsets of ˝ forms a -algebra.11 The function L d W ˙ ! R1 is called the
Lebesgue measure. For a set ˝ 2 ˙ , we say that a property holds almost everywhere
on ˝ (abbreviated a.e. on ˝) on ˝ if this property holds everywhere on ˝ with
the possible exception of a set of Lebesgue-measure zero; referring to those x where
this property holds, we also say that it holds at almost all x 2 ˝ (abbreviated
a.a. x 2 ˝).
A function u W Rd ! Rm is called (Lebesgue) measurable if u1 .A/ WD fx 2
R I u.x/ 2 Ag is Lebesgue measurable for every A 2 Rm open.
d
We call u W Rd ! Rm a simple if it takes only a finite number R of values vi 2 R

m
1
andP u .vi / D fxI u.x/ D vi g 2 ˙; then we define the integral Rd u.x/ dx naturally
as finite L d .Ai /vi . Furthermore, a measurable u is called integrable if there is a
sequence of simple
R functions .uk /k2N such that limk!1 uk .x/ D u.x/R for a.a. x 2 ˝,
and limk!1 Rd uk .x/ dx exists in R. Then this limit is denoted by Rd u.x/ dx, and
we call it the (Lebesgue) integral of u. It is then independent
R of the particular choice
of
R the sequence .u k / k2N . If ˝ R d
is measurable, by ˝ u dx we mean naturally
R d Q
u dx, where Q
u WD ˝ u. By A , we mean the characteristic function defined by
A .x/ WD 1 for x 2 A and A .x/ WD 0 for x 62 A.
Let .X; / be a metric space. For a subset U X, let diam(U) denote its diameter,
that is, diam(U/ WD supf .x; y/ j x; y 2 U g. For d 0 and S X, we define
1
d=2 X diam.Ui / d
H d .S/ WD lim Sinf ; (B.2.2)
.1Cd=2/ ı!0 S 1 iD1 Ui iD1
2
diam.Ui /<ı
R1
with denoting the gamma function .z/ WD 0 tz1 et dt. Note that the infimum
in (B.2.2) depends monotonically on ı; hence the limit exists. It can be seen that
H d ./ is an outer measure. By general theory, its restriction to the corresponding
-algebra of measurable sets is a measure. It is called the d-dimensional Hausdorff
measure [261]. All Borel subsets of X are H d -measurable. If d is a positive integer
and X D Rd , then the coefficient d=2 = .1Cd=2/ is the volume of the unit ball in
Rd , and H d is just the d-dimensional Lebesgue measure L d .
10
This just means that A Rd is Lebesgue measurable if L d .A/ D L d .A \ S/ C L d .A n S/ for
every subset S Rd . For example, all closed sets are Lebesgue measurable, hence every open set
too, as well as their countable unions or intersections, etc.
11
In fact, ˙ is the so-called Lebesgue extension of the Borel -algebra, created by adding all
subsets of sets having measure zero. It has, together with the function L d W ˙ ! R [ f1g,
(and is characterized by) the following four properties: (i) A open implies A 2 ˙ ; (ii) A D
Qd
Œa1 ; b1 S
Œad ; bd with
P ai bi implies L d .A/ D iD1 .bi ai /; (iii) L d is countably additive,
i.e., L d k2N Ak D k2N L .Ak / for every countable collection fAk gk2N of mutually disjoint
d
sets Ai 2 ˙ ; (iv) A B 2 ˙ and L d .B/ D 0 implies A 2 ˙ and L d .A/ D 0.

B.3 Lebesgue spaces, Nemytskiı̆ mappings
We now consider ˝ Rd measurable with L d .˝/ < 1. The notions of

measurability and the integral of functions ˝ ! Rm can be understood as before,
provided all these functions are extended on Rd n ˝ by 0. By Lp .˝I Rm / we denote
the set of all measurable functions12 u W ˝ ! Rm such that kukLp .˝IRm / < 1,
where
( qR

˝ ju.x/j dx for 1 p < 1 ;
p p
u p WD (B.3.1)
L .˝IRm /
ess supx2˝ ju.x/j for p D 1
with j j denoting the Euclidean norm on Rm . The essential supremum ess sup
in (B.3.1) is defined as
ess sup f WD inf sup f .x/: (B.3.2)

x2˝ measd .N/D0 x2˝nN
Replacing “sup” with “inf” in (B.3.2) yields the essential infimum, denoted by
ess inf.
The set Lp .˝I Rm / endowed with pointwise addition and scalar multiplication,
is a linear space. Besides, k kLp .˝IRm / is a norm on Lp .˝I Rm /, which makes it a
Banach space, called a Lebesgue space.
N 1
R If a measure 2 M . ˝ / possesses a density d 2 L .˝/, which means .A/ D
A d .x/dx for every measurable A ˝, then has a certain special property,
namely it is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure13 and
also the converse assertion is true: every absolutely continuous measure possesses
a density belonging to L1 .˝/. This fact is known as the Radon–Nikodým theorem
[457, 496].
An important question is how to characterize concretely the dual spaces. The
2
“natural” duality
R pairing comes from the inner Pmproduct in L -spaces, which means
hu; vi WD ˝ u.x/ v.x/ dx, where u v WD iD1 ui vi is the inner product in R .
m
If 1 < p < 1, then L .˝I R / is reflexive. From the algebraic Young inequality
p m
1 p 1 0
ab a C 0 bp ; (B.3.3)
p p
12
Here, however, we adopt the usual convention not to distinguish between functions that are equal
a.e., so that strictly speaking, Lp .˝I Rm / contains equivalence classes of such functions.
13
This means that 8" > 0 9ı > 0 8A ˝ measurable: measd .A/ ı H) j .A/j ".
one gets14 the Hölder inequality [272]15

Z
ˇ ˇ
ˇu.x/v.x/ˇ dx u v 0 ; (B.3.4)
Lp .˝IRm / Lp .˝IRm /
˝
where p0 is the so-called conjugate exponent defined as

8
< 1 for p D 1;
p0 WD p=.p1/ for 1 < p < 1; (B.3.5)
: 1 for p D 1:
R
In fact, the modification of (B.3.4) for p D 1 or p D 1 is trivially ˝ ju vjdx
kukL1 .˝IRd / kukL1 .˝IRd / . Iterating this in the case m D 1, we get the Hölder
inequality for a product of K 2 scalar functions:
Z ˇY ˇ Y X
ˇ
K
ˇ
K
K
1
ˇ uk .x/ˇ dx uk p with D 1: (B.3.6)
L k .˝/ p
˝ kD1 kD1 kD1 k
From (B.3.4), it can be shown that the dual space is isometrically isomorphic to
0
Lp .˝I Rm / if 1 p < 1. On the other hand, the dual space to L1 .˝I Rm / is
substantially larger than L1 .˝I Rm /.16
Applying the algebraic Young inequality (B.3.3) to the right-hand side of (B.3.6),
we obtain another important inequality, the integral Young inequality
Z ˇY ˇ X X
1
K K K
ˇ ˇ uk p 1
ˇ uk .x/ˇ dx L k .˝/
with D 1: (B.3.7)
˝ kD1 p
kD1 k
p
kD1 k
An important geometric property of the norm (B.3.1) is that for 1 < p < 1, the
space Lp .˝I Rm / is uniformly convex; cf. [130]. If 1 q p 1, the embeddings
C. ˝N I Rm / Lp .˝I Rm / Lq .˝I Rm / are continuous; recall that L d .˝/ < 1
is always assumed here. Moreover, for p < 1, these embeddings are dense, and
then, since C. ˝N I Rm / is separable, Lp .˝I Rm / is separable, too. On the other hand,
L1 .˝/ is not separable.
Further, we say that a sequence uk W ˝ ! Rm converges in measure to u if
n ˇˇ ˇ o
ˇ
8" > 0 W lim L d x 2 ˝ ˇ ˇuk .x/u.x/ˇ " D 0: (B.3.8)
k!1
R p R p0 R 0
14
Just simply kuk1 1
Lp .˝/ kvkLp0 .˝/ ˝ ju vjdx 1p kukLp .˝/ ˝ jujp dx C p10 kvkLp0 .˝/ ˝ jujp dx D 1.
15
Originally, Hölder stated this in a less symmetric form for sums in place of integrals.
16
The elements of L1 .˝I Rm / are indeed very abstract objects and can be identified with finitely
additive measures vanishing on zero-measure sets; see Yosida and Hewitt [621].
Naturally, convergence a.e. means that uk .x/ ! u.x/ for a.a. x 2 ˝.

Proposition B.3.1 (Various modes of convergence).
(i) Every sequence converging a.e. converges also in measure.
(ii) Every sequence converging in measure admits a subsequence converging a.e.
(iii) Every sequence converging in L1 .˝/ converges in measure.
Theorem B.3.2 (Lebesgue [353]). Let fuk gk2N L1 .˝/ be a sequence converg-
1 1
R u and juk .x/j
ing a.e. to some R v.x/ for some v 2 L .˝/. Then u lives in L .˝/,
and limk!1 A uk .x/ dx D A u.x/ dx for every A ˝ measurable.
1
Theorem B.3.3 (Fatou [183]). Let fuk gk2N R L .˝/ be a sequence of non-
negative functions such that lim infk!1 ˝ uk .x/ dx < 1. Then the function
17
x 7! lim infk!1 uk .x/ is integrable, and

Z Z
lim inf uk .x/ dx lim inf uk .x/ dx: (B.3.9)
k!1 ˝ ˝ k!1
Useful generalizations of the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem (The-

orem B.3.2) and the Fatou theorem (Theorem B.3.3) use sequences of upper or
lower bounds that are uniformly integrable: a set M L1 .˝/ (or more generally, of
L1 .˝I Rm /) is uniformly integrable if
Z
8" > 0 9K 2 RC W sup ju.x/j dx " : (B.3.10)
u2M fx2˝Iju.x/jKg
Theorem B.3.4 (Vitali [613]18 ). Let fuk gk2N L1 .˝/ be a sequence converging
a.e. to some u. Then u 2 Lp .˝/ and uk ! u in Lp .˝/ if and only if fjuk jp gk2N is
uniformly integrable.
Theorem B.3.5 (Fatou, generalized19 ). The conclusion of Theorem B.3.3 holds if
uk 0 is replaced by uk vk with fvk gk2N uniformly integrable.
From Theorem A.4.4, it immediately follows that bounded sets in Lp .˝I Rm /
are weakly or weakly* relatively sequentially compact, provided 1 < p < 1 or
p D 1, respectively.
Also, the following assertions are useful:
Lemma B.3.6 (Monotone convergence, Beppo–Levi). Let X be a measure space,
and let 0 f1 f2 be a monotonically increasing sequence of nonnegative
17
Obviously, existence of a common integrable minorant can simplify (but weaken) this assertion.
18
More precisely, in [613], the integration of summable series is investigated rather than mere
sequences.
19
See Ash [27, Thm.7.5.2].
measurable functions. Let f W X ! R1 be the R functionR defined by f .x/ D

limn!1 fn .x/. Then f is measurable, and limn!1 X fn dx D X f dx.
Theorem B.3.7 (Lusin [365]). Every measurable function Œa; b ! C is a contin-
uous function on nearly all its domain.20
Theorem B.3.8 (Dunford and Pettis [166]). Let M L1 .˝I Rm / be bounded.
Then the following statements are equivalent:
(i) M is relatively weakly compact in L1 .˝I Rm /;
(ii) the set M is uniformly integrable.
The fundamental phenomenon that composition of two measurable mappings
need Rnot be measurable can be handled in the context of integral functionals of the
type ˝ a.x; u.x// dx by qualifying a W ˝Rm ! R1 as a normal integrand if
a.x; / W Rm ! R1 is lower semicontinuous for a.a. x 2 ˝ and a is measurable.21
A special case of a normal integrand a W ˝Rm ! R1 with a.x; / W Rm ! R
continuous for a.a. x 2 ˝ is called a Carathéodory integrand. Having guaranteed
measurability of a.x; u.x//, we can ask about integrability. The scalar character of
values no longer plays any role, so we can consider a.x; / W Rm ! Rm0 , m0 1.
Now, however, the growth of ja.x; /j plays a role, and it is thus worth allowing
some “anisotropy” by splitting Rm D Rm1 Rmj with some integers j, m1 ,
. . . , mj . We say that a W ˝Rm1 Rmj ! Rm0 is a Carathéodory mapping
if a.; r1 ; : : : ; rj / W ˝ ! Rm0 is measurable for all .r1 ; : : : ; rj / 2 Rm1 Rmj and
a.x; / W Rm1 Rmj ! Rm0 is continuous for a.a. x 2 ˝. Then the so-called
Nemytskiı̆ mapping Na maps functions ui W ˝ ! Rmi , i D 1; : : : ; j, to a function
Na .u1 ; : : : ; uj / W ˝ ! Rm0 defined by

Na .u1 ; : : : ; uj / .x/ D a x; u1 .x/; : : : ; uj .x/ : (B.3.11)
It should be emphasized that the composition of two measurable mappings need not
be measurable, and thus the continuity of a.x; / is an important assumption.
Theorem B.3.9 (Nemytskiı̆ mappings on Lebesgue spaces). Let a W ˝Rm1
Rmj ! Rm0 be a Carathéodory mapping and let the functions ui W ˝ !
Rmi , i D 1; : : : ; j, be measurable. Then Na .u1 ; : : : ; uj / is measurable. Moreover, if a
also satisfies the growth condition
ˇ ˇ X
j
ˇ ˇpi =p0
ˇa.x; r1 ; : : : ; rj /ˇ .x/ C C ˇr i ˇ for some 2 Lp0 .˝/; (B.3.12)
iD1
20
More specifically, this means that for an interval Œa; b, let f W Œa; b ! C be a measurable
function. Then given " > 0, there exists a compact E Œa; b such that f restricted to E is
continuous and .Œa; b n E/ < ". Note that E inherits the subspace topology from Œa; b; continuity
of f restricted to E is defined using this topology.
More precisely, this means that for each A open in Rm , f x 2 ˝ j epif .x; /\A ¤ ; g is Lebesgue
21
measurable, i.e., the set-valued mapping t 7! epif .x; / is Lebesgue measurable.

with 1 pi < 1, 1 p0 < 1, then Na is a bounded continuous mapping

Lp1 .˝I Rm1 / Lpj .˝I Rmj / ! Lp0 .˝I Rm0 /. If some pi D 1, i D 1; : : : ; j, the
same holds if the terms j jpi =p0 are replaced by any continuous function.
B.4 Sobolev spaces
We now consider ˝ Rd open with L d .˝/ < 1; such a set is called a domain.
For a function u 2 Lp .˝/, we define its distributional derivative @k u=@x1k1 : : : @xdkd
with k1 C Ckd D k and ki 0 for every i D 1; : : : ; n as a distribution such that
D E Z
@k u @k g
8g 2 D.˝/ W kd
; g D .1/ k
u dx; (B.4.1)
@x1k1 : : : @xd ˝ @x1k1 : : : @xdkd
where D.˝/ stands for infinitely differentiable functions

with compact support. The
d-tuple of the first-order distributional derivatives @x@1 u; : : : ; @x@d u is denoted by ru
and called the gradient of u. For p < 1, we define a Sobolev space
n ˇ o
ˇ
W1;p .˝/ WD u 2 Lp .˝/ ˇ ru 2 Lp .˝I Rd / ; equipped with the norm
(B.4.2a)
8q p
< p up
p .˝/ C ru Lp .˝IRd / if p < 1
u WD L (B.4.2b)
W1;p .˝/ :
max kukL1 .˝/ ; krukL1 .˝IRd / if p D 1:
Since by Rademacher’s theorem, Lipschitz functions are a.e. differentiable, we have

W1;1 .˝/ D C0;1 .˝/.
Analogously, for k > 1, we define
n ˇ o
ˇ k
Wk;p .˝/ WD u 2 Lp .˝I Rm / ˇ r k u 2 Lp .˝I Rd / ; ; (B.4.3)
where r k u denotes the set of all kth-order partial derivatives of u understood in the
p
distributional sense. The standard norm on Wk;p .˝/ is kukWk;p .˝/ D .kukLp .˝/ C
/1=p , which makes it a Banach space. Likewise for Lebesgue spaces,
p
kr k uk p dk
L .˝IR /
for 1 p < 1, the Sobolev spaces Wk;p .˝I Rm / are separable, and if 1 < p < 1,
they are uniformly convex, whence by the Milman–Pettis theorem also reflexive.
The spaces of Rm -valued functions Wk;p .˝I Rm / are defined analogously.22 For
p D 2, the Sobolev spaces are Hilbert spaces, and for brevity, we write
22
This means that Wk;p .˝I Rm / WD f .u1 ; : : : ; um / j ui 2 Wk;p .˝/; i D 1; : : : ; m g.
Hk .˝I Rm / WD Wk;2 .˝I Rm /: (B.4.4)
To make traces well defined on the boundary WD @˝ WD ˝N n ˝ with ˝N WD

cl.˝/, we must qualify ˝ suitably. We say that ˝ is a domain of Ck -class if there
is a finite number of overlapping parts i of the boundary of that are graphs of
Lipschitz Ck -functions in local coordinate systems and ˝ lies on one side of .23
Replacing Ck with C0;1 , we say that ˝ is of the C0;1 -class or that it is a Lipschitz
domain.
Theorem B.4.1 (Sobolev embedding [566]). The continuous embedding

W1;p .˝/ Lp .˝/ (B.4.5)
holds if the so-called Sobolev exponent p is defined as

8
ˆ
ˆ
dp
for p < d;
< dp

p WD an arbitrarily large real for p D d; (B.4.6)
ˆ
:̂
1 for p > d:
Moreover, for p > d, we have also W1;p .˝/ C. ˝N /.24

Theorem B.4.2 (Rellich, Kondrachov [312, 501]25 ). The compact embedding

W1;p .˝/ b Lp .˝/ ; 2 .0; p 1; (B.4.7)
holds for p from (B.4.6). Moreover, for p > d, we have also W1;p .˝/ b C. ˝N /.
Reiterating Theorems B.4.1 and B.4.2, one gets the following corollary26
23
Written formally, we require the existence of transformation unitary matrices Ai and open sets
Gi 2 Rd1 and gi 2 C0;1 .Rd1 / such that each i can be expressed as i D fAi j 2 Rd ;
.1 ; : : : ; d1 / 2 Gi ; d D gi .1 ; : : : ; d1 /g and fAi j 2 Rd ; .1 ; : : : ; d1 / 2 Gi ;
gi .1 ; : : : ; d1 / " < d < gi .1 ; : : : ; d1 /g ˝ and simultaneously fAi j 2 Rd ;
N for some " > 0.
.1 ; : : : ; d1 / 2 Gi ; gi .1 ; : : : ; d1 / < d < gi .1 ; : : : ; d1 / C "g Rd n ˝
24 N
It is to be understood that each u 2 W1;p .˝/ admits a continuous extension on the closure ˝
or ˝.
25
The pioneering work of Rellich dealt with p D 2 only.
26
E.g., W2;p .˝/ W1;dp=.dp/ .˝/ by applying Theorem B.4.1 to first derivatives, and applying
Theorem B.4.1 once again for dp=.d p/ instead of p, one arrives at W1;dp=.dp/ .˝/
Ldp=.d2p/ .˝/, provided 2p < d. Repeating once again yields W3;p .˝/ b Ldp=.d3p/ .˝/, provided
3p < d, etc.
Corollary B.4.3 (Higher-order Sobolev embedding).

(i) If kp < d, the continuous embedding Wk;p .˝/ Ldp=.dkp/ .˝/ and the
compact embedding Wk;p .˝/ b Ldp=.dkp/ .˝/ hold for every > 0.
(ii) For kp D d, we have Wk;p .˝/ b Lq .˝/ for every q < 1.
(iii) For kp > d, we have Wk;p .˝/ b C. ˝N /.
Theorem B.4.4 (Trace operator.27 ). There is exactly one linear continuous opera-
tor T W W1;p .˝/ ! L1 . / such that for every u 2 C. ˝N /, we have Tu D uj (= the
restriction of u on ). Moreover, T remains continuous (respectively is compact) as
the mappings
]
u 7! uj W W1;p .˝/ ! Lp . /; respectively (B.4.8a)
]
u 7! uj W W1;p .˝/ ! Lp . / ; 2 .0; p] 1; (B.4.8b)
provided the so-called Sobolev trace exponent p] is defined as

8 dp p
ˆ
< dp for p < d ;
p] WD an arbitrarily large real for p D d ; (B.4.9)
:̂
1 for p > d :
We call the operator T from Theorem B.4.4 the trace operator, and write simply
uj instead of Tu even if u 2 W1;p .˝/ n C. ˝N /. Then we define W0 .˝/ WD
1;p
1;p k;p
f v 2 W .˝/ j vj D 0 g. For k > 1, we define similarly W0 .˝/ WD f v 2
ki;p i
Wk;p .˝/ j r i v 2 W0 .˝I Rd /; i D 0; : : : ; k1 g.
Assuming ˝ a Lipschitz domain, we denote by
D
.x/ 2 Rd the unit outward
normal to the boundary at a point x 2 ; this is well defined H d1 -almost
everywhere on .28 The multidimensional integration by parts
Z Z
@z @v
v C z dx D vz
i dS with dS WD H d1 j (B.4.10)
˝ @xi @xi
0
holds for every v 2 W 1;p .˝/ and z 2 W 1;p .˝/ and for all i D 1; ::; d. Considering
z D .z1 ; : : : ; zd /, writing P
(B.4.10) for zi instead of z, and finally summing over
i D 1; : : : ; d with div z WD diD1 @x@ i zi the divergence of the vector field z, we arrive
at a formula that we will often use:
27
In fact, u 7! uj W W1;p .˝/ ! W11=p;p . /, where the Sobolev–Slobodeckiı̆ space
W11=p;p . / defined now on a .d1/-dimensional manifold instead of a d-dimensional
]
domain ˝. Then, similarly as in Theorem B.4.1, we have the embedding W11=p;p . / Lp . /,
11=p;p p]
respectively W . / b L . /.
28
This normal can be defined by means of gradients of Lipschitz functions describing locally as
their graphs. By Rademacher’s theorem, these derivatives exist H d1 -almost everywhere on .
Theorem B.4.5 (Green formula [233]29 ). The following formula holds for every
0
v 2 W 1;p .˝/ and z 2 W 1;p .˝I Rd /:
Z Z

v .div z/ C zrv dx D v .z
/ dS: (B.4.11)
˝
A variant of the Green formula on a curved smooth surface is sometimes

useful: Considering a scalar field in the neighborhood of , let us define the surface
gradient rS g WD .rg/P with the projector P D I
˝
onto a tangent space.
Alternatively, pursuing the concept of fields defined exclusively on , we can
consider g W ! R and extend it to a neighborhood of and then again define
rS g WD .rg/P, which, in fact, does not depend on the particular extension. Then,
for a vector field v W ! Rd , we define the surface divergence, denoted by divS ,
as divS g WD tr.rS g/. With such definitions, we have divS .gv/ D gdivS v C vrS g; cf.
e.g., [210, Formula (21)] for the vectorial case. Integrating over yields the Green
formula on the surface :
Z Z Z Z
g divS v dS C vrS g dS D divS .gv/ dS D .gv/
ds; (B.4.12)
@
where
here is the unit outward normal to the .d2/-dimensional boundary @ of
the .d1/-dimensional surface . Cf. also [484, 600]. The operator divS rS is called
the Laplace–Beltrami operator.
A generalization of Sobolev spaces for k 0 noninteger is often useful for var-
ious finer investigations: We define the Sobolev–Slobodeckiı̆ space as Wk;p .˝/ WD
f u2WŒk;p .˝/ j kukWk;p .˝/ < 1 g with

ˇ Z
Œk;p ˇ jr Œk u.x/ r Œk u./jp
W .˝/ WD
k;p
u2W .˝/ ˇ dxd < 1 ;
˝˝ jx jnCp.kŒk/
(B.4.13)
where Œk denotes the integer part of k. They are Banach spaces. In fact, Corol-
lary B.4.3 holds also for k 0 noninteger.
B.5 Abstract functions on Œ0; T: their variations, integrals,

derivatives
We now define spaces of abstract functions on a bounded interval Œ0; T R valued

in a Banach space V , invented by Bochner [75]. We say that z W Œ0; T ! V
R R
29
Putting z D ru into (B.4.11), we get ˝ vu C rv ru dx D v d
du
dS derived in [233]. In
fact, (B.4.11) holds, by continuous extension, under weaker assumptions; cf. [446].
is simple if it takes only a finite number of values vi 2 V and Ai WD z1 .vi /

RT P 1
is Lebesgue measurable; then 0 z.t/ dt WD finite L .Ai /vi . We say that z W
.0; T/ ! V is Bochner measurable if it is the pointwise limit (in the strong
topology) of V of a sequence fzk gk2N of simple functions; i.e., zk .t/ ! z.t/ for
a.a. t 2 Œ0; T. The space of all bounded (everywhere defined) Bochner measurable
mappings z W Œ0; T ! V is denoted by B.Œ0; TI V /. It is a linear space under
pointwise multiplication/addition, and if equipped with the norm kzkB.Œ0;TIV / D
sup0tT kz.t/kV , also a Banach space.30
Moreover, we say that z W Œ0; T ! V is weakly measurable if hv ; z./i is
Lebesgue measurable for every v 2 V . If V D .V 0 / for some Banach space
V 0 , then z W Œ0; T ! V is weakly* measurable if hv ; z./i is Lebesgue measurable
for every v 2 V 0 .
For y subset I R, let us denote by F.I/ the collection of all finite subsets
.t1 ; : : : ; tn / I, n 2 N, considered ordered and satisfying t1 < t2 < : : : < tn .31
A variation of z W I ! V with respect to the norm of V is defined as
X
n

VarV .z; I/ WD sup z.ti /z.ti1 / : (B.5.1)
V
.t1 ;:::;tn /2F.I/ iD1
Realizing that F.I/ is a directed set if ordered by inclusion, the “sup” in (B.5.1) can
be replaced by “lim.” A subspace of mappings z 2 B.II V / with bounded variation
VarV .z; I/ < 1 is a Banach space if normed by k kB.IIV / C VarV .; I/, denoted
by BV.II V /.32 It should be pointed out that for I a closed interval, BV.˝/ for
˝ D int I as defined in (4.2.98) on p. 306, ignores values on zero-measure sets and
is thus obviously different from BV.I/ as defined here.
We say that z W Œ0;PKT ! V is absolutely continuous if for each " > 0, there
33
is ı > 0 such that kD1 kz.tk / z.sk /kV " whenever tk1 sk tk T for
P
k D 1; : : : ; K 2 N, t0 D 0, and KkD1 tk sk ı. The space of absolutely continuous
mappings z W Œ0; T ! V is denoted by AC.Œ0; TI V /. Always AC.Œ0; TI V /
BV.Œ0; TI V /.
A point t 2 .0; T/ is called a Lebesgue point of z W Œ0; T ! V if
R h=2
limh!0C 1h h=2 kz.tC#/ z.t/kd# D 0. Analogously, a right Lebesgue point
Rh
t 2 Œ0; T/ means limh!0C 1h 0 kz.tC#/ z.t/kd# D 0.
30
Note that metrizability allows us to work with sequences and that every Cauchy sequence .zk /k2N
in B.Œ0; TI V / induces sequences .zk .t//k2N that are Cauchy in V , and their limit z.t/ also forms
the limit u in B.Œ0; TI V /, which is attainable by a sequence of simple functions, because each zk
is simple; here a diagonalization procedure applies.
31
In particular, for I D Œr; s, then Part.Œr; s/ F.Œr; s/.
32
If I is a closed interval, in view of (B.5.6) below, we can also write kzkBV.IIV / D supt2I kz.t/kV C
R
k kV dz.t/.
I
If V D R1 , this definition naturally coincides with absolute continuity with respect to the
33
Lebesgue measure on Œ0; T as defined on p. 595.

Theorem B.5.1 (Pettis [476].34 ). If V is separable, then u is Bochner measurable

if and only if it is weakly measurable.
Considering simple functions fuk gk2N as above, we call z W Œ0; T ! V
RT RT
Bochner integrable if limk!1 0 kz.t/ zk .t/kV dt D 0. Then 0 z.t/ dt WD
RT
limk!1 0 zk .t/ dt; this limit exists and is independent of the particular
choice of the sequence .zk /k2N . Moreover, if V is separable, then a Bochner
measurable function z is Bochner integrable if and only if kz./kV is Lebesgue
RT RT
integrable. Then also k 0 z.t/ dtkV 0 kz.t/kV dt. From this, we can
R
1 h=2
see that limh!0C h h=2 z.tC#/d# ! z.t/ at each Lebesgue point t 2
R h=2 R h=2
.0; T/; note that kz.t/ 1h h=2 z.tC#/d#kV D k 1h h=2 z.tC#/z.t/d#kV
R
1 h=2
h h=2
kz.tC#/z.t/kV d#.
Theorem B.5.2. If z 2 L1 .0; TI X/, then a.e. t 2 .0; T/ is a Lebesgue point for z.
An analogous assertion holds for right Lebesgue points.
Every u 2 Cw .Œ0; TI V / WD fŒ0; T ! V weakly continuousg is an
example of a Bochner integrable function. For such u, the Lebesgue integral
RT RT
0 u.t/ dt can alternatively be defined like a Riemann integral, i.e., 0 u.t/ dt D
lim¿.˘ /!0 Riem.u; ˘ / over all partitions ˘ of Œ0; T the form 0 D t0 < t1 < : : : <
tN1 < tN D T, N 2 N, with ¿.˘ / WD maxjD1;:::;N .tj tj1 /, and where
X
N
Riem.u; ˘ / WD u.tj /.tj tj1 / (B.5.2)
jD1
RT
is a Riemann sum for the integral 0 u.t/ dt with respect to the partition ˘ of Œ0; T.
This cannot hold for a general u 2 L1 .0; TI V /, which is defined only a.e. on .0; T/.
Anyhow, the following result still holds:
Theorem B.5.3 (Approximation by Riemann sums). 35 For every u 2 L1 .0; TI V /
with V a Banach space, there exists a sequence of partitions ˘ m with ¿.˘ m / ! 0
RT
such that Riem.u; ˘ m / ! 0 u.t/ dt in V for m ! 1.
A generalization of the construction lim¿.˘ /!0 Riem.u; ˘ / yields the Riemann–
.
Stieltjes integral of a scalar-valued function u with respect to a measure v induced
34
In fact, [476] works with a general Banach space, showing the equivalence of the Bochner
measurable mappings with a.e. separably valued weakly measurable mappings.
35
See [149, Sect.4.4]. In the scalar-valued variant, this sort of result dates back to Hahn [252],
recently also to be found, e.g., in [372, Sect.A.3]. Moreover, the assertion holds in fact for a.a.
sequences of partitions ˘ m with ¿.˘ m / ! 0. Note that we rely on the fact that u is defined
everywhere on Œ0; T, and in particular, that u.T/ is defined, although its particular value is not
important, because the term u.tN /.tN tN1 / can always be made arbitrarily small by sending
tN1 ! tN D T.
RT RT RT
by a nondecreasing function v, defined by 0 u dv.t/ WD 0 u dv.t/ D u dv.t/
0
if there is equality of the upper and lower Riemann–Stieltjes integrals. These two
integrals are defined respectively by the infimum and supremum of the upper and
lower Darboux sums as
Z T X
N

u dv.t/ WD inf Darb.u; ˘; v/; Darb.u; ˘; v/ WD sup u.t/ v.tj /v.tj1 / ;
0 ˘
jD1 t2Œtj1 ;tj
(B.5.3)
Z X
T N

u dv.t/ WD sup Darb.u; ˘; v/; Darb.u; ˘; v/ WD inf u.t/ v.tj /v.tj1 / :
˘ t2Œtj1 ;tj
0 jD1
(B.5.4)
for ˘ again ranging all partitions of Œ0; T of the form 0 D t0 < t1 < : : : <
tN1 < tN D T, N 2 N; cf. [554, Chap. 6] for details. Notably, (B.5.4) bears
a straightforward generalization for v valued in a Banach-space V and f .t; / a
(possibly even nonlinear) 1-homogeneous convex functional on V :
Z T X
N v.t /v.t /
j j1
f .t; / dv.t/WD lim sup .tj tj1 / inf f t;
0 ˘ 2F.Œ0;T/ jD1 t2Œtj1 ;tj tj tj1
by 1-homo-
geneity
D lim sup Darb.f ; ˘; v/
˘ 2F.Œ0;T/
X
N

with Darb.f ; ˘; v/ WD inf f t; v.tj /v.tj1 / :
t2Œtj1 ;tj
jD1
(B.5.5)
Here, as f depends on t, the mapping ˘ 7! Darb.f ; ˘; v/ is not monotone and

considering its supremum like in (B.5.4) would not work properly. Therefore, in
(B.5.5) we have used that F.Œ0; T/ is a directed set when ordered by the inclusion,
and thus “limsup” could be used instead. This is a so-called Moore-Pollard’s
modification of the Riemann-Stieltjes construction, cf. [434, 490]. If v is absolutely
RT . RT .
continuous, (B.5.5) equals 0 Œf .t; /v.t/ dt D 0 f .t; v.t// dt, but let us emphasize
.
that in the general non-absolutely-continuous case, v does not need to be valued in
V or even defined at all for (B.5.5). Only if f is non-negative and independent of
t, one can use the supremum (or, in fact, also the Moore-Smith limit), which is the
Riemann-Stieltjes-type construction used for the definition (3.2.12) on p. 124. By
this definition, we can also write VarV from (B.5.1) in terms of the lower Riemann–
Stieltjes integral simply as
Z T

VarV z; Œ0; T D dz.t/: (B.5.6)
V
0
In the special case V D Rd equipped with the Euclidean norm, the construc-
tion (B.5.6) based on the lower Riemann–Stieltjes integral is known as the length of
the curve z W Œ0; T ! Rd , cf. [554, Chap. 6], and (B.5.5) can thus be understood as
a generalization of this construction. An important attribute is the additivity of (this
generalization of) the lower Riemann–Stieltjes integral, i.e.,36
Z t2 Z t3 Z t2
8 0 t1 t3 t2 T W f .t; / dv.t/ D f .t; / dv.t/ C f .t; / dv.t/:
t1 t1 t3
(B.5.7)
Also, if f W Œ0; TV ! R1 is lower semicontinuous with respect to a topology T

on V , then lower semicontinuity is an important attribute of this definition37 :
Z T Z T
T
8 t 2 Œ0; T W vk .t/ ! v.t/ ) lim inf f .t; / dvk .t/ f .t; / dv.t/:
k!1
0 0
(B.5.8)
In general if the “integrator” function v is vector-valued as in (B.5.5) but the

functional f is now linear (being in duality with values of v), then neither non-
negativity of f nor the monotonicity of v are relevant and again ˘ 7! Darb.f ; ˘; v/
is not monotone. Then (B.5.4) must be modified by replacing “sup” with “lim sup”
as we did already in (B.5.5) which now takes the form:
Z
˝T ˛
f .t/; dv.t/ WD lim sup Darb.f ; ˘; v/
0 ˘ 2F.Œ0;T/
X
N
˝ ˛
where now Darb.f ; ˘; v/ WD inf f .t/; v.tj /v.tj1 / : (B.5.9)
t2Œtj1 ;tj
jD1
This limit-construction is a special case what is called a (here lower) Moore-Pollard-

Stieltjes integral, cf. [434, 490]. In fact, it can be understood as a very special case
of a so-called multilinear Stieltjes integral used here for two vector-valued functions
in duality. Like in the classical scalar situation of lower Riemann-Stieltjes integral
(B.5.4), the sub-additivity of the integral with respect to u and to v holds together
with the additivity with respect to the domain like (B.5.7) holds.
For 1 p < 1, a Bochner space Lp .0; TI V / is the linear space (of classes
with respect to equivalence a.e.) of Bochner integrable functions z W .0; T/ ! V
36
The inequality in (B.5.7) is a simple consequence of the definition (B.5.5). The opposite
R t relies on the fact that a refinement of a partition of Œt1 ; t2 by including ft3 g still approxi-
inequality
mates 2 f .t; / dv.t/ from below, and then on the inequality sup˘ 2Part.Œt1 ;t2 /; ˘ 3t3 Darb.f ; ˘; v/
t1
sup˘ 2Part.Œt1 ;t3 / Darb.f ; ˘; v/ C sup˘ 2Part.Œt3 ;t2 / Darb.f ; ˘; v/; cf. also (B.5.6).
RT
37
Thanks to the joint lower semicontinuity of f , we have lim infk!1 f .t; / dvk .t/
0
lim infk!1 Darb.f ; ˘; vk / Darb.f ; ˘; v/ for every ˘ fixed, and taking the supremum over
˘ ’s yields (B.5.8); cf. also the arguments (5.1.106)–(5.1.107) for more details.
RT p
satisfying 0 kz.t/kV dt < 1. This space is a Banach space if endowed with the
norm
8Z 1=p
ˆ
< T z.t/p dt if 1 p < 1;
z p WD 0
V
(B.5.10)
:̂ess sup z.t/V
L .0;TIV /
if p D 1:
t2I
If V has a predual, i.e., V D .V 0 / for some Banach space V 0 , the notation

p
Lw .0; TI V /stands for the space of weakly* measurable p-integrable (or if p D 1,
essentially bounded) functions .0; T/ ! V .
We often use an equidistant partition of .0; T/ into subintervals of length WD
2K T, K 2 N.
Proposition B.5.4 (Uniform convexity). If V is uniformly convex and 1 < p < 1,
then Lp .0; TI V / is uniformly convex, too.
Proposition B.5.5 (Dual space).
0
(i) If p 2 Œ1; 1/, the dual space to Lp .0; TI V / always contains Lp .0; TI V /, and
equality holds if V is separable, the duality pairing being given by the formula
Z
˝ ˛ T˝ ˛
f ; z Lp0 .0;TIV /Lp .0;TIV / WD f .t/; z.t/ V V dt : (B.5.11)
0
Thus, if p 2 .1; 1/ and V is reflexive and separable, then Lp .0; TI V / is

reflexive.
(ii) Moreover, L1 1 0
w .0; TI V / is dual to the space L .0; TI X /.
Let us emphasize that in general, L1 1

w .0; TI V / is not equal to L .0; TI V /. If
1 1
V is separable reflexive, then L .0; TI V / D Lw .0; TI V / by Pettis’s theorem
(Theorem B.5.1).
Considering Banach spaces V 0 , V 1 ,. . . , V k and a W IV 1 V k ! V 0 , let
us define the Nemytskiı̆ mappings Na again by the formula (B.3.11). The following
generalization of Theorem B.3.9 holds:
Theorem B.5.6 (Nemytskiı̆ mappings on Bochner spaces [364]). Let V 0 ,
V 1 ,. . . ,V k be separable Banach spaces, a W Œ0; TV 1 V k ! V 0 a
Carathéodory mapping,38 and suppose that the growth condition
X
k
pi =p0
a.x; r1 : : : ; rk / .x/ C C r i for some 2 Lp0 .0; T/;
V0 Vi
iD1
(B.5.12)
38
Generalizing the finite-dimensional case, this means that for a.a. t 2 Œ0; T, a.t; / W
V 1 V k ! V 0 is to be (norm, norm)-continuous and a. ; r1 ; : : : ; rk / W Œ0; T ! V 0 is to
be measurable.
holds with p0 ; p1 ; : : : ; pk as in (B.3.12). Then Na maps Lp1 .0; TI V 1 / Lpk

.0; TI V k / continuously into Lp0 .0; TI V 0 /.
.
We denote by ./ the distributional derivative of u understood as the abstract
.
linear operator u 2 Lin.D.Œ0; T/; .V ; weak// defined by
Z
8 ' 2 D.0; T/ W
.
u.'/ WD
T
.
u ' dt; (B.5.13)
0
where again D.0; T/ stands for smooth compactly supported functions on .0; T/.
Then we define the Sobolev–Bochner space W1;p .0; TI V / by

ˇ
ˇ.
W1;p .0; TI V / WD z 2 L1 .0; TI V / ˇ z 2 Lp .0; TI V / : (B.5.14)
.
It is a Banach space if normed by kzkW1;p .0;TIV / WD kzkL1 .0;TIV / C kzkLp .0;TIV / .
The abstract setting for evolution problems often relies on the construction of a
so-called evolution (also called Gelfand’s) triple. Assuming that V is embedded
continuously and densely into a Hilbert space H identified with its own dual
H
H , we have also H V continuously. Indeed, denoting by i W V ! H the
mentioned embedding, we have that the adjoint mapping i (which is continuous)
maps H into V and is injective, because i is just the restriction of linear
continuous functionals H ! R on the subset V , and different continuous functional
must remain different when restricted to such a dense subset. The mentioned
identification of H with its own dual H yields altogether
V H
H V I (B.5.15)
the triple .V ; H ; V / is called a Gelfand triple. The duality pairing between V and
V is then a continuous extension of the inner product on H , denoted by .j/H , i.e.,
for u 2 H and v 2 V, we have39
˝ ˛ ˝ ˛ ˝ ˛ ˝ ˛
ujv H D u; v H H D u; iv H H D i u; v V V D u; v V V : (B.5.16)
Moreover, the embedding H V is dense.

Lemma B.5.7 (Integration by parts formula). Let V H Š H V .
0
Then Lp .0; TI V / \ W1;p .0; TI V / C.0; TI H / continuously, and the following
0
integration by parts formula holds for every u; v 2 Lp .0; TI V / \ W1;p .0; TI V /
and 0 t1 t2 T:
Z t2 D E D
du dv E
u.t2 /jv.t2 / u.t1 /jv.t1 / D ; v.t/ C u.t/; dt: (B.5.17)
t1 dt dt
The equalities in (B.5.16) follow successively from the identification of H with H , the
39
embedding V H , the definition of the adjoint operator i , and the identification of i u with u.
In particular, the formula (B.5.17) for u D v gives

Z D du E
1
u.t2 /2 1 u.t1 /2 D
t2
; u.t/ dt ; (B.5.18)
2 H 2 H
t1 dt
1
and shows that the function t 7! 2
ku.t/k2H is absolutely continuous and its
derivative exists a.e. on .0; T/ and
1 d D E
u.t/2 D du ; u.t/ for a.a. t 2 .0; T/: (B.5.19)
2 dt H dt
Another important ingredient often used in evolution problems deals with
compactness:
Lemma B.5.8 (Aubin and Lions [29, 361]). Let V 1 , V 2 , V 3 be Banach spaces,
V 1 separable and reflexive, V 1 b V 2 (a compact embedding), V 2 V 3 (a
continuous embedding), 1 < p < 1, 1 q 1. Then Lp .0; TI V 1 / \
W1;q .0; TI V 3 / b Lp .0; TI V 2 /, a sequentially compact embedding.40
In the context of rate-independent processes, it is important to have a generaliza-
tion that allows for the time-derivative to be controlled only as a measure:
.
Lemma B.5.9 (Generalization for u a measure [532]). 41 Assuming V 1 b V 2
V 3 (the compact and the continuous embeddings between Banach spaces, respec-
tively), V 1 reflexive, the Banach space V 3 having a predual space V 03 , i.e., V 3 D
.V 03 / , and 1 < p < 1, then
Lp .0; TI V 1 / \ BV.Œ0; TI V 3 /

n ˇ . o
ˇ
D u 2 Lp .0; TI V 1 / ˇ u 2 M .Œ0; TI V 3 / b Lp .0; TI V 2 / (B.5.20)
in the sense that bounded sets in Lp .0; TI V 1 / \ BV.Œ0; TI V 3 / are sequentially
relatively compact in Lp .0; TI V 2 /.
In particular, Lemma B.5.9 combined with Proposition B.3.1(ii)–(iii) yields that
every sequence bounded in Lp .0; TI V 1 / \ BV.Œ0; TI V 3 / possesses a subsequence
converging a.e. in .0; T/ strongly in V 2 .42 There is another selection principle
40
This means that every bounded sequence is mapped to a relatively compact one. In fact,
these original references deal with a slightly different compactness concept and slightly stronger
assumptions, e.g., reflexivity of V 3 or 1 < q < 1.
41
For L1
w .0; TI V 1 / \ BV.Œ0; TI V 3 / b L .0; TI V 2 /, see also [447].
p
42
Indeed, by Lemma B.5.9, the sequence in question, say .zk /k2N , is relatively compact in
p
Lp .0; TI V 2 /, and thus, up to a subsequence, zk ! z in Lp .0; TI V 2 /, i.e., kzk . / z. /kV 2 ! 0
in L1 .I/, and then, by Proposition B.3.1(ii)–(iii), by selecting further a subsequence, we have
p
kzk .t/ z.t/kV 2 ! 0 for a.a. t 2 .0; T/.
yielding a subsequence converging only weakly* in V 3 but everywhere on Œ0; T.

In fact, this principle needs much less, namely only the BV-boundedness:
Theorem B.5.10 (Helly selection principle for Banach spaces43 ). Let V D V 0
with a separable Banach space V 0 . Then every bounded sequence in BV.Œ0; TI V /
contains a subsequence converging weakly* in V everywhere on Œ0; T, and the limit
lives again in BV.Œ0; TI V /.
This is, in fact, a generalization of Helly’s selection principle [264], which in its
classical version, often used in probability theory for distribution functions, states
that each bounded sequence of nondecreasing bounded functions on an interval
possesses a subsequence that converges pointwise to a nondecreasing limit function.
Corollary B.5.11. 44 Let V be as in Theorem B.5.10, and let V 1 be a reflexive
Banach space continuously embedded into V and having a separable predual.
Every bounded sequence in Cw .Œ0; TI V 0 / \ BV.Œ0; TI V / contains a subsequence
converging weakly in V 1 everywhere on Œ0; T, and the limit lives in B.Œ0; TI V 0 / \
BV.Œ0; TI V /.
A combination of Helly’s principle and an Arzelà–Ascoli-type modification
of the Aubin–Lions lemma (Lemma B.5.8) allows us to make the following
assertion, applicable to discontinuous piecewise constant functions arising in time
discretizations:
Corollary B.5.12. Assuming again V 1 b V 2 V 3 with V 1 and V 3 reflexive, and
1 < q 1, and an equidistant partition of Œ0; T with time step > 0, we have

f uN g >0 bounded in B.Œ0; TI V 1 / uN ! u strongly in L1 .0; TI V 2 /

. 1;q )
fu g >0 bounded in W .0; TI V 3 / for a subsequence (B.5.21)
for a piecewise constant uN and the corresponding piecewise affine continuous u ,

and for some u 2 L1 .0; TI V 2 / \ W1;q .0; TI V 3 /.
Proof. 45 Considering a bounded sequence . uN / >0 in B.Œ0; TI V 1 /\W1;q .0; TI V 3 /
and taking into account W1;q .0; TI V 3 / BV.Œ0; TI V 3 /, by Helly’s selection
principle, we can be certain that uN .t/ ! u.t/ weakly in V 3 for every t 2 Œ0; T.
Then also uN .t/ ! u.t/ weakly in V 1 , and by the compact embedding
43
See [55, 432] for separable reflexive V , or [143, Lemma 7.2] for the general case.
44
By Cw .Œ0; TI V 0 / L1 .0; TI V 0 /, there is a subsequence converging weakly* in
L1 .0; TI V 0 /, and in particular, the limit is Bochner measurable. By Theorem B.5.10, selecting
a further subsequence, we get the pointwise convergence weakly in V . At each particular time
instance, its subsequences must converge in V 0 , but their limits must be again the same as the limit
in V .
45
This proof paraphrases the arguments of the proof of [532, Lemma 7.10], claiming the compact
embedding Cweak .Œ0; TI V 1 / \ W1;q .0; TI V 3 / b C.Œ0; TI V 2 /, which, however, cannot be used
N 62 Cweak .Œ0; TI V 1 /.
directly, because u
V 1 b V 2 , also uN .t/ ! u.t/ strongly in V 2 for every t 2 Œ0; T. The sequence
f uN W Œ0; T ! V 3 g >0 is “equicontinuous” (although particular mappings uN are
not continuous) because
Z t2 Z t2
.
uN .t1 / uN .t2 /

.
u dt

1 u dt
V3 V3
t1 V3 t1
. .
k1kLq0 .Œt1 ;t2 / u Lq .0;TIV 3 / D jt1 t2 j11=q u Lq .0;TIV 3 /
for every 0 t1 < t2 T. Assume that the selected sequence f uN g >0 does
not converge to u in L1 .0; TI V 2 /. Thus k uN ukL1 .0;TIV 2 / > 0 for some
and for all > 0 (from the already selected subsequence), and we would get
k uN .t /u.t /kV 2 for some t . By compactness of Œ0; T, we can further select
a subsequence and some t 2 Œ0; T so that t ! t. Then we have u.t / ! u.t/ in V 2 .
By the above proved equicontinuity, we have also uN .t / ! u.t/ weakly in V 3 . By
the boundedness of f uN .t /g >0 in V 1 b V 2 , we have also uN .t / ! u.t/ in V 2 .
Then k uN .t /u.t /kV 2 ! ku.t/u.t/kV 2 D 0, a contradiction. Thus (B.5.21) is
proved. t
u
There are further generalizations of Theorem B.5.10 that do not need any linear
structure of V and rely fully on a metric. In [373, Thm. 3.2], a version was provided
for general quasimetrics as introduced in Chapter 2.46
We provide a very general version requiring that the underlying space Z be only
a Hausdorff topological space and, instead of a single quasimetric, using a sequence
.Dk /k2N of quasidistances and a limit D1 , all defined on Z, and then showing that
Theorem 2.1.24 can be deduced from that. In this appendix, we explicitly state at
each instance that all topological notions such as semicontinuity and compactness
are meant in the “sequential sense.” Specifically, we assume
8 k 2 N1 8 z1 ; z2 ; z3 2 Z W
Dk .z1 ; z2 / D 0 ” z1 D z2 ; (B.5.22a)
Dk .z1 ; z3 / Dk .z1 ; z2 / C Dk .z2 ; z3 /I (B.5.22b)
zk ! z and Qz k ! Qz I H) D1 .z; Qz / lim inf Dk .zk ; Qz k /: (B.5.22c)
k!1
D1 W ZZ ! Œ0; 1 is sequentially lower semicontinuous: (B.5.22d)
Theorem B.5.13 (General Helly selection principle). Assume that the sequence
.Dk /k2N1 satisfies the conditions (B.5.22). Moreover, let K be a sequentially
compact subset of Z, and zk W Œ0; T ! Z; k 2 N, a sequence satisfying
8 t 2 Œ0; T 8 k 2 N W zk .t/ 2 K; (B.5.23a)

sup DissDk .zk I Œ0; T/ < 1: (B.5.23b)
k2N
46
Various generalizations of this kind have been made in [64, 121] and, assuming, in addition,
continuity over Œ0; T, also in [119, 120, 122].
Then there exist a subsequence .zkl /l2N , a limit function z W Œ0; T ! Z, and a
nondecreasing function ı W Œ0; T ! Œ0; 1Œ with the following properties:

8 t 2 Œ0; T W ı.t/ D liml!1 DissDkl zkl I Œ0; t ; (B.5.24a)
Z
8 t 2 Œ0; T W zkl .t/ ! z.t/ and z.t/ 2 K; (B.5.24b)

8 s; t 2 Œ0; T with s < t W DissD1 zI Œs; t ı.t/ ı.s/: (B.5.24c)
Proof. Let us abbreviate Dissk .z; Œs; t/ WD DissDk .z; Œs; t/. Of course, we have
Dk .z.s/; z.t// Dissk .zI Œs; t/.
We define the functions dk W Œ0; T ! Œ0; 1 with dk .t/ D Dissk .zk I Œ0; t/,
which are nondecreasing by definition and uniformly bounded by (B.5.23b). Hence,
the classical Helly’s selection principle [264] for real-valued functions provides a
subsequence such that d Qk n .t/ ! ı.t/ for all t 2 Œ0; T. Hence, ı W Œ0; T ! Œ0; 1 is
also nondecreasing and bounded. This proves (B.5.24a).
Denote by IJ Œ0; T the set of discontinuity points of ı. Then IJ is countable.
Hence, we may choose a countable, dense subset I0 of Œ0; T with IJ I0 . For
each t 2 I0 , every subsequence of .z Qk n .t//n2N lies in the sequentially compact set
K Z and thus contains a convergent subsequence. Using Cantor’s diagonalization
procedure, we find a subsequence .zkl /l2N of .z Qk n /n2N such that (B.5.24a) remains
true, and additionally, we have
Z
8 t 2 I0 W zkl .t/ ! z.t/ for l ! 1:
This defines the limit function z W I0 ! Z.

To prove convergence on Œ0; T n I0 , we use the continuity of ı. We fix t 2
Z
Œ0; T n I0 . Then the sequence .zkl .t //l2N has a convergent subsequence zOkm .t / !
z . Moreover, there exists a sequence tn 2 I0 with tn ! t . Below, we show that
Z
z.tn / ! z . By the Hausdorff property of Z, we conclude that .zkl .t //l2N has
exactly one accumulation point, and we define z.t / D z .
To prove z.tn / ! z , first note that we may assume z.tn / ! Oz 2 K, since
Z Z
each z.tn / lies in the sequentially compact set K. Next we consider tn < t . Then,
using (B.5.22c), we have
D1 .z.tn /; z / lim inf DOkm.zOkm .tn /; zOkm .t //

m!1
lim inf DissOkm.zOkm I Œtn ; t / D ı.t /ı.tn /: (B.5.25)

m!1
Similarly, for t < tn , we obtain D1 .z ; z.tn // ı.tn / ı.t /. Using the continuity
of ı in t , we conclude that
˚ ˇ ˇ
min D1 .z.tn /; z /; D1 .z ; z.tn // ˇı.t /ı.tn /ˇ ! 0 for n ! 1:
(B.5.26)
Employing (B.5.22d), we obtain

˚ ˚
min D1 .z ; Oz/; D1 .Oz; z / lim inf min D1 .z ; z.tn //; D1 .z.tn /; z / D 0:
n!1
Thus, using (B.5.22a), we conclude that Oz D z , and hence z.tn / ! z .

Z
Assertion (B.5.24b) is proved.

The final estimate is obtained using (B.5.22c) again. For every partition s t0 <
t1 < : : : < tN t of Œs; t, we have
X
N X
N
D1 .z.tj1 /; z.tj // lim inf Dkl .zkl .tj1 /; zkl .tj //
l!1
jD1 jD1
X
N
lim inf Dkl .zkl .tj1 /; zkl .tj //
l!1
jD1
lim inf Disskl .zkl I Œs; t/ D ı.t/ı.s/: (B.5.27)

l!1
Thus, Diss1 .zI Œs; t/ ı.t/ı.s/, and (B.5.24c) is proved. t

u
Note that (B.5.22a,b) corresponds to (D1), and (B.5.22c,d) reduces to (D2) in
the case Dk D D. Note also that Theorem B.5.13 reduces to Theorem 2.1.24 if we
assume that Dk D D for all k 2 N1 .
Appendix C
Young Measures and Beyond
Here we present briefly an analytical tool that yields, roughly speaking, (local)
compactifications of function spaces that are also convex in a natural way, imitating
thereby the most important topological/geometric properties of Euclidean spaces,
and that allow for continuous extensions of Nemytskiı̆ mappings.
C.1 Young measures: a tool to handle oscillations
Let us begin with the simplest situation: ˝ Rd a domain S be a metrizable

compact set and U WD fu W ˝ ! S measurable g. Let us now embed U into the dual
space L1 .˝I C.S// by means of the embedding i W U ! L1 .˝I C.S// defined by
Z
hi.u/; hi WD h.x; u.x// dx : (C.1.1)
˝
The weak* closure of i.U/ in L1 .˝I C.S// is denoted by Y.˝I S/, i.e.,1
n ˇ o
ˇ
Y.˝I S/ WD 2 L1 .˝I C.S// ˇ 9.uk /k2N U W D w*-lim i.uk / : (C.1.2)
k!1
1
Note that in (C.1.2), we confined ourselves to considering limits of sequences, relying on the fact
that L1 .˝I C.S// is separable because S is metrizable and compact.

616 C Young Measures and Beyond
For X a Banach space, let L1

w .˝I X / denote the Banach space of weakly*

measurable mappings
W ˝ ! X , i.e., all functions x 7! h
.x/; 'i are
Lebesgue measurable for every ' 2 X. There is an isometric isomorphism W
L1 .˝I C.S// ! L1
w .˝I M .S// defined as
W
7! W L1 1
w .˝I M .S// ! L .˝I C.S//

(C.1.3)
with 2 L1 .˝I C.S// defined by

Z Z Z
h; hi WD Œh
.x/ dx D h.x; s/
x .ds/ dx; (C.1.4)
˝ ˝ S
where we have also used h

W ˝ ! R defined, for a.a. x 2 ˝, by
Z
Œh
.x/ WD h.x; s/
x .ds/: (C.1.5)
S
We can use this isometric isomorphism for an alternative and perhaps

“optically” more explicit construction. Let us define the embedding ı W U !
L1
w .˝I M .S// by means of
Œı.u/.x/ WD ıu.x/ ; (C.1.6)
where ıs 2 M0C .S/ for s 2 S denotes the Dirac distribution supported at s. Let us
denote the set of all Young measures by Y .˝I S/, defined by
n ˇ o
ˇ C
Y .˝I S/ WD
D f
x gx2˝ 2 L1
w .˝I M .S// ˇ
x 2 M0 .S/ for a.a. x 2 ˝ :
(C.1.7)
The mapping W L1 1
w .˝I M .S// ! L .˝I C.S// from (C.1.3) maps the set of all
Young measures Y .˝I S/ onto Y.˝I S/ and ı i D ı.
Theorem C.1.1. 2 The set of Young measures Y .˝I S/ is convex and weakly*
compact in L1 w .˝I M .S//, and ı.U/ is weakly* dense in Y .˝I S/, and therefore,
the convex compactifications .Y .˝I S/; ı/ and .Y.˝I S/; i/ of U are equivalent via
the affine homeomorphism from (C.1.3).
We see that alternatively, each parameterized measure
D f
x gx2˝ can be
considered a linear continuous
R functional on a suitable space of integrands, given
by the formula h 7! ˝ Œh
.x/ dx, i.e.,
2
See, e.g., [520].
C Young Measures and Beyond 617
Z Z
W h 7! h.x; s/
x .ds/ dx : (C.1.8)
˝ S
This is basically the original understanding in the work of L.C. Young.3 Parameter-
ized probability measures contain enough information to describe the L1 .˝I Rm /-
weak* limits of .h ı uk /k2N for h W ˝S ! Rm ; namely, we have h ı uk ! h
weakly* if h is a bounded Carathéodory mapping. In other words, the Nemytskiı̆

mapping Nh induced by h has a weak*-continuous extension to N N h W
7! h
.
Note that NN h is an affine mapping Y .˝I S/ ! L1 .˝I Rm /.
An important modification for S noncompact but locally compact, in particular
for S D Rm , combines Theorem C.1.1 for the one-point compactification of S
with fine techniques based on relative L1 -weak compactness, in particular also
Theorem B.3.8, resulting in the following lemma.
Lemma C.1.2 (J.M. Ball [41]). Let uk W ˝ ! Rm be measurable for every
k 2 RN and suppose that the sequence .uk /k2N is tight in the sense that
supk2N ˝ v.juk .x/j/dx < 1 for some v W RC ! RC nondecreasing with
lima!1 v.a/ D 1. Then there exist a subsequence, denoted again by .uk /, and a
family of probability measures
WD f
x gx2˝ on Rm such that for every v 2 C0 .Rm /,
Z
1
v.uk / ! v
weakly* in L .˝/; where v
.x/ WD v.s/
x .ds/: (C.1.9)
Rm
Besides, for every Carathéodory function h W ˝Rm ! R, we have
Nh .uk / ! h
weakly in L1 .˝/ (C.1.10)
whenever .Nh .uk //k2N is relatively weakly compact in L1 .˝/; recall that h
is
defined in (C.1.5) with S WD Rm .
C.2 Convex local compactifications of Lp -spaces
The Lebesgue spaces are definitely the most prominent function spaces occurring in
applications. Following [520, 521], we briefly present a fairly universal construction
of their locally compact envelopes that are also metrizable and convex in a natural
linear space, imitating thus most of the important properties of Euclidean spaces
(with the exception that these envelopes are not linear spaces but only convex
subsets of those).
3
More precisely, this is essentially the concept from [623], while in the original work [622], Young
used functions x 7! C.S/ , which is already close to the concept of parameterized measures when
one identifies C.S/ with M .S/ by Riesz’s theorem. Measure theory itself was not yet launched,
however.
Considering the Lebesgue space Lp .˝I Rm /, we define a normed linear space

˚
Carp .˝I Rm / WD h W ˝Rm ! R j h.; s/ measurable; h.x; / continuous;

9 a 2 L1 .˝/; b 2 R W jh.x; s/j a.x/ C bjsjp (C.2.1)
of “test Carathéodory integrands” and equip it with the norm

h p WD inf a 1 C bI (C.2.2)
Car .˝IRm / jh.x;s/ja.x/Cbjsjp L .˝/
more precisely, as usual, we consider equivalence classes up to zero-measure sets of

such integrands. The essential trick is to consider a sufficiently large (but preferably
still separable) linear subspace H Carp .˝I Rm / to define the embedding
Z
iH W Lp .˝I Rm / ! H W u 7! h 7! h.x; u.x// dx ; (C.2.3)
˝
and eventually to put

p
YH .˝I Rm / WD the weak* closure of iH .Lp .˝I Rm //: (C.2.4)
p
The elements of YH .˝I Rm / are referred to as Young functionals.
Proposition C.2.1 (Convex locally compact envelopes of Lp -spaces). The set
YH .˝I Rm / is always convex in H . Assuming that H contains at least one coercive
p
p
integrand, i.e., H 3 h0 with h0 .x; s/ jsjp , then YH .˝I Rm / is locally compact
in H and Lp .˝I Rm / itself is embedded into it (norm,weak*)-continuously via iH
defined by (C.2.3). Moreover, if H is rich enough, namely if one of the following
situations holds,
(a) H fg ˝ vI g 2 C. ˝N /; v linear Rm ! Rg [ f1 ˝ jsjp g; 1 < p < 1;
(b) H fhu I u 2 Ug for a dense U Lp .˝I Rm /, where hu .x; s/ D js u.x/jp ,
(c) H L1 .˝I C.Rm // [ f1 ˝ jsjp g,
p
then this embedding iH is even homeomorphic.4 If H is separable, then YH .˝I Rm /
is locally sequentially compact.
Proposition C.2.2 (Extension of Nemytskiı̆ mappings). Let p0 > 1 (respectively
p0 D 1). If a W ˝Rm1 ! Rm0 satisfies (B.3.12) with j D 1 and the linear subspace
H Carp1 .˝I Rm1 / is sufficiently rich such that a g W .x; s/ 7! a.x; s/ g.x/ for
4
More specifically, iH is (norm,weak*)-homeomorphic.
every g 2 Lp0 .˝I Rm0 / (respectively g 2 C. ˝N I Rm0 /), then the Nemytskiı̆ mapping
0
Na W Lp1 .˝I Rm1 / ! Lp0 .˝I Rm0 / admits an affine continuous extension N N a from
YH1 .˝I Rm / to Lp0 .˝I Rm0 / (respectively to M . ˝N I Rm0 /) defined by
p
Z Z
N a g dx WD h; a gi respectively
ŒN N a .dx/ WD h; a gi :
gŒ N
˝ N̋
Remark C.2.3 (Convex compactifications of balls in Lp -spaces). Modifying (C.2.4)

p
as YH;% .˝I Rm / WD the weak* closure of iH .B% /, where B% WD f u 2
L .˝I Rm / j kuk % g, we get a convex compactification of the ball B% .
p
p
For two subspaces H2 H1 of Carp .˝I Rm /, YH1 ;% .˝I Rm / is a finer convex
p
compactification than YH2 ;% .˝I R /, the affine continuous surjection being (the
m
restriction of) the adjoint mapping of the inclusion H2 ! H1 . This class of

convex compactifications is a lattice, the supremum and the infimum being given
respectively by
n o
p p p
sup YH1 .˝I Rm /; YH2 .˝I Rm / D YH1 CH2 .˝I Rm / ; (C.2.5a)
n o
p p p
inf YH1 .˝I Rm /; YH2 .˝I Rm / D Y HN \ HN .˝I Rm / ; (C.2.5b)
1 2
where HN jRis the closure of Hj in Carp .˝I Rm / with respect to the seminorm jhj% WD
supu2B% j ˝ h.x; u.x// dxj.
Example C.2.4. Following DiPerna and Majda [162], we take G D C. ˝N /, V D

f v 2 C.S/ j v./=.1 C j jp / has a continuous extension on S g, where S is a
certain metrizable compactification of S Rm .5 Then we consider H D G ˝ V WD
spanf g ˝ v j g 2 G; v 2 V g. It was essentially proved in [333] that after a certain
rearrangement, 2 YH .˝I Rm / has a representation 2 M . ˝N S/ of the form
p
Z
h.x; s/
h; hi D .dx ds/; (C.2.6)
N̋ S 1 C jsjp
where for s 2 S n S, h.x; /=.1 C j jp / is considered extended by continuity and

where the measure satisfies
Z n ˇ o
.; ds/ ˇ
0; D 1; L d x2 ˝N ˇ .fxgS/ D 0 D 0: (C.2.7)
S 1 C jsjp
5
If S is bounded, then one can take S a closure of S in Rm . If S D Rm , one can consider S
the one-point compactification of the locally compact space Rm . For m D 1, the usual two-point
compactification S D R [ f˙1g of R is finer and still metrizable. We note that the celebrated
Stone–Čech compactification ˇRm is not metrizable, however.
Let us emphasize that (C.2.7) is a precise characterization of those that are

weakly* attainable from Lp .˝I Rm /. Those are called DiPerna–Majda measures.
Replacing ˝ with .0; T/˝ and considering suitable normed linear spaces
of Carathéodory integrands .I˝/Rm ! R, we can straightforwardly
modify the previous construction of the convex locally compact envelopes for
Lp .I˝I Rm / Š Lp .0; TI Lp .˝I Rm // or even for Lq .0; TI Lp .˝I Rm // instead of
Lp .˝I Rm /. In applications to rate-independent processes, one needs to compactify
B.Œ0; TI Lp .˝I Rm // rather than L1 .0; TI Lp .˝I Rm //, however. More specifically,
one needs rather to compactify only bounded sets in B.Œ0; TI Lp .˝I Rm //, say
the balls
n ˇ o
ˇ
B WD u 2 B.Œ0; TI Lp .˝I Rm // ˇ 8 t 2 IN W ku.t/kLp : (C.2.8)
One simple construction is to consider H as before and the Cartesian product

.H /Œ0;T equipped with the Tikhonov product topology, here counting the weak*
topology on H . Let us define
n ˇ o
p ˇ
YH; .˝I Rm / WD w*-cl iH u 2 Lp .˝I Rm / ˇ ku.t/kLp : (C.2.9)
The set YH; .˝I Rm /Œ0;T is always convex and compact in .H /Œ0;T . The set B is
p
embedded into YH; .˝I Rm /Œ0;T by

p
Œ0;T
i W u 7! iH .u.t// t2Œ0;T W B.Œ0; TI Lp .˝I Rm // ! YH; .˝I Rm /Œ0;T H
p
(C.2.10)
with iH from (C.2.3). It can be shown that the closure of i.B / in .H /Œ0;T
is just YH; .˝I Rm /Œ0;T .6 Thus the triple .YH; .˝I Rm /Œ0;T ; i; .H /Œ0;T / forms a
p p
convex compactification of B . This compactification is used in a nontrivial way

in Tikhonov’a theorem (Theorem A.2.2) and is, however, not metrizable even if H
is separable, because Œ0; T is uncountable.
Remark C.2.5 (Finer convex compactifications). Some other, finer convex com-
pactifications of B.Œ0; TI Lp )-spaces have been devised in [530], following the
construction of time-correlated Young measures as introduced in [146, Sect.7]
(under the name “compatible systems of generalized Young measures”) and further
used in [144, 145, 186, 187].
Every 2 YH; .˝I Rm /Œ0;T can be attained by a net .u˘;F;k /.˘;F/Œ0;TH finite;k2N with u˘;F;k 2 B
6 p
R
chosen such that h.t/; hi ˝ h.x; u˘;F;k .t; x// dx 1=k for every h 2 F and t 2 ˘ . Note that
even nonmeasurable mappings IN ! YH; .˝I Rm / can be attained in this way.
p
C.3 Suppression of concentration effects

p
We say that 2 YH .˝I Rm / is p-nonconcentrating if there is a sequence .uk /k2N
such that D w*- limk!1 iH .uk / and f juk jp j k 2 N g is weakly relatively compact
ıp
in L1 .˝/. Let us denote the set of all such ’s by YH.˝I Rm /.
ıp
If H is separable, then every 2 YH.˝I Rm / has a Lp -Young measure represen-
tation
in the sense that there is a weakly*
R measurable mapping x 7!
x with
x a
probability measure on Rm such that x 7! Rm jsjp
x .ds/ belongs to L1 .˝/ and
Z Z
˝ ˛
8h 2 H W ; h D h.x; s/
x .ds/ dxI (C.3.1)
˝ Rm
R
see [520, Prop. 3.4.15]. We have Œ h.x/ D Rm h.x; s/
x .ds/ for a.a. x 2 ˝.
p
Every sequence in Lp .˝I Rm / that attains a p-nonconcentrating 2 YH .˝I Rm /
p
does not concentrate energy, provided the convex local compactification YH .˝I Rm /
in question is fine enough, i.e., if H is large enough. Somewhat more generally, let
.uk /k2N be a bounded sequence in Lp .˝I Rm / such that each weak* cluster point of
.iH .uk //k2N in H is p-nonconcentrating and let H be sufficiently rich, namely let H
contain H0 WD C. ˝N / ˝ p .R0 / with R0 the smallest complete subring of C0 .Rm /
containing constants. Then the set f juk jp j k 2 N g is relatively weakly compact in
L1 .˝/; cf. [520, Prop 3.4.16].
ı ıp
We say that 2 YH.˝I Rm / is a p-nonconcentrating modification of 2
p ı
YH .˝I Rm / if h; hi D h; hi holds for every h 2 H such that jh.x; s/j a.x/ C
o.jsjp / with some a 2 L1 .˝/ and o W RC ! R satisfying limr!1 o.r/=r D 0.
Proposition C.3.1 (See [520, Prop. 3.4.17–18, Lem. 4.2.3]).
p
(i) Every 2 YH .˝I Rm / can have at most one p-nonconcentrating modification
ı p
2YH .˝I Rm /. Moreover, if H is separable, then also:
ı p p
(ii) The p-nonconcentrating modification 2 YH .˝I Rm / of 2 YH .˝I Rm / exists.
ı
(iii) h ; hi 0, provided there is h 2 H such that h.x; s/ a0 .x/ for some
a0 2 L1 .˝/.
ı ı
(iv) h ; hi > 0, provided 6D and h 2 H is coercive in the sense that
h.x; s/ a0 .x/ C bjsj with some a0 2 L1 .˝/ and b > 0.
p
Specific examples arise for H D L1 .˝I C0 .Rm // or H D L1 .˝I Cp .Rm // with

Cp .Rm / WD f v 2 C.Rm / j limjsj!1 c.s/=.1Cjsjp / D 0 g, yielding Lp -Young
measures defined before (C.3.1), or the DiPerna–Majda measures mentioned above.
The following useful assertions are demonstrations of the above theory for simple
proofs; cf. also Proposition 4.1.5 on p. 248 for a more advanced use of this
technique.
Proposition C.3.2. Let v W Rm ! R be continuous and 0 v.s/ C.1 C jsjp /,
p > 1, and Rlet .uk /k2N be bounded
R in Lp .˝I Rm / and uk ! u in L1 .˝I Rm /. Then
lim infk!1 ˝ v.uk / dx ˝ v.u/ dx.
Proof. Consider H WD span..C. ˝N / ˝ V/ [ L1 .˝I Cp .Rm /// with a suitable

p
V,7 and a weak* limit 2 YH .˝I Rm / of a subsequence of .uk /k2N . Then
consider the DiPerna–Majda representation from Example C.2.4, here extended
on L1 .˝I C0 .Rm //. Let us decompose D 0 C 1 with supp. 0 / ˝N Rm and
supp. 1 / ˝N . Rm nRm /. Taking a test function h.x; s/ WD jsu.x/j and taking
into account that the continuous extension of h.x; /=.1 C j jp / on Rm is zero, since
p > 1, and that uk ! u converges in L1 .˝I Rm /, we get
Z

0 uk u D h.x; uk .x// dx
L1 .˝IRm /
˝
Z Z
h.x; s/ h.x; s/
! .dx ds/ D 0 .dx ds/: (C.3.2)
N̋ Rm 1 C jsjp N̋ Rm 1 C jsjp
Since the last integral must vanish and 0 0 and h.x; /=.1 C j jp / 0 vanishes
only at u.x/, we can see that 0 .x; / is supported at u.x/ for a.a. x 2 ˝. Then, since
v 0 is assumed and since always 1 0, we have
Z Z
v.s/
lim v.uk / dx D .dx ds/
k!1 ˝ N̋ Rm 1 C jsjp
Z Z
v.s/ v.s/
D 0 .dx ds/ C 1 .dx ds/
˝Rm 1 C jsj N̋ .Rm nRm / 1 C jsjp
p
Z Z Z
v.s/
D v.u.x// dx C 1 .dx ds/ v.u.x// dx:
˝ N̋ .Rm nRm / 1Cjsjp ˝
(C.3.3)
By a contradiction argument, one can show that in fact, (C.3.3) holds not only for
the subsequence selected above but for the whole sequence .uk /k2N . u
t
The next assertion is about suppressing oscillations of minimizing sequences of
strictly convex functionals, which was first realized by A. Visintin [607], cf. also
[609, Sect. X], although the proof used a different technique for a more general
situation.8 Here, using Young measure, one can prove the following result.
Proposition C.3.3 (Strong convergence of minimizing sequences). Let
.uk /k2N be a sequence in Lp .˝I Rm / such that uk * u in L1 .˝I Rm / and
7
Without going into details, we can assume that V contains v and is such that f v. /=.1 C j
jp / j v 2 V g is a complete separable ring of bounded continuous functions containing 1. Then Rm
corresponding to this ring is metrizable, and v. /=.1 C j jp / can be continuously extended on Rm .
R
8
Analogous arguments can be used also for the functional u 7! ˝ h.x; ru.x// dx on W1;p .˝/,
p > 1, where in addition, the constraint id D ru is to be considered; cf. [520, Chap. 5]. In
[324, Theorem 3.10], a direct construction of a modified sequence having a relatively L1 -weakly
compact energy of gradients is performed using a Hodge decomposition. See also [191] for a
general investigation of oscillations and concentration in the vectorial case.
R R
limk!1 ˝ h.x; uk .x// dx D ˝ h.x; u.x// dx for some h 2 Carp .˝I Rm / satisfying
h.x; s/ jsjp , p > 1, and h.x; / strictly convex for a.a. x 2 ˝. Then uk ! u in
Lp .˝I Rm /.
Sketch of the proof. We can consider a separable linear space H containing h and
also L1 .˝I C0 .Rm //. Since h is coercive, the minimizing sequence .uk /k2N induces,
when embedded into H , a Young functional 2 YH .˝I Rm / that minimizes h; hi on
p
p
YH .˝I Rm / and is p-nonconcentrating due to Proposition C.3.1(iv). Otherwise, its
ı p
p-nonconcentrating modification 2 YH .˝I Rm / would yield a strictly smaller value
of h; hi, which would contradict the minimality of . Then has a Young-measure
representation
in the sense of (C.3.1). The strict convexity of h.x; / implies that
is composed from Dirac measures, i.e.,

x D ıu.x/ for a.a. x 2 ˝ with some
u 2 Lp .˝I Rm /. Otherwise would again not be a mimimizer of h; hi. Then we use
a test integrand hu .x; s/ WD js u.x/jp , and from hi.uk /; hu i ! h
; hu i we read that
Z Z
ˇ ˇ ˝ ˛ ˝ ˛ ˇ ˇ
ˇuk .x/u.x/ˇp dx D i.uk /; hu !
; hu D ˇu.x/u.x/ˇp dx D 0:
˝ ˝
t
u
References
1. R. Abeyaratne and J. K. Knowles. On the propagation of maximally dissipative phase

boundaries in solids. Q. Appl. Math., 50:149–172, 1992.
2. E. Acerbi and N. Fusco. Semicontinuity problems in the calculus of variations. Arch. Rational
Mech. Anal., 86:125–145, 1984.
3. L. Adam, J. V. Outrata, and T. Roubíček. Identification of some nonsmooth evolution systems
with illustration on adhesive contacts at small strains. Optimization, arXiv:1411.4903.
4. R. A. Adams. Sobolev Spaces. Academic Press, New York, 1975.
5. V. Agostiniani, R. Rossi, and G. Savaré. On the transversality conditions and their genericity.
Rendiconti del Circolo Matematico di Palermo, 64:101–116, 2015.
6. E. C. Aifantis. On the microstructural origin of certain inelastic models. ASME J. Eng. Mater.
Technol., 106:326–330, 1984.
7. E. C. Aifantis. The physics of plastic deformation. Int. J. Plasticity, 3:211–247, 1987.
8. H.-D. Alber. Materials with Memory. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1998.
9. G. Alberti and A. DeSimone. Quasistatic evolution of sessile drops and contact angle
hysteresis. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 202:295–348, 2011.
10. J. Alberty and C. Carstensen. Numerical analysis of time-depending primal elastoplasticity
with hardening. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 37:1271–1294, 2000.
11. F. Alizadeh and D. Goldfarb. Second-order cone programming. Math. Program., Ser. B,
95:3–51, 2003.
12. F. Alouges, A. DeSimone, and A. Levebvre. Optimal strokes for low Reynolds optnumber
swimmers: an example. J. Nonlinear Sci., 18:277–302, 2008.
13. L. Ambrosio and E. De Giorgi. Un nuovo tipo di funzionale del calcolo delle variazioni.
Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rend. Classe di Sci. Fisiche, Mat. e Natur.,
82:199–210, 1988.
14. L. Ambrosio, N. Fusco, and D. Pallara. Functions of Bounded Variation and Free Disconti-
nuity Problems. Clarendon Press, Oxford, New York, 2000.
15. L. Ambrosio, N. Gigli, and G. Savaré. Gradient Flows in Metric Spaces and in the Space of
Probability Measures. Birkhäuser, Basel, 2005.
16. L. Ambrosio and V. M. Tortorelli. Approximation of functional depending on jumps via by
elliptic functionals via -convergence. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 43:999–1036, 1990.
17. L. Ambrosio and V. M. Tortorelli. Approximation of frre discontinuity problems. Boll. Unione
Mat. Italiana, 6-B:105–123, 1992.
18. L.-E. Andersson. Existence results for quasistatic contact problems with Coulomb friction.
Appl. Math. Optim., 42:169–202, 2000.

626 References
19. L.-E. Andersson and A. Klarbring. A review of the theory of static and quasi-static frictional
contact problems in elasticity. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A, 359:2519–2539, 2001.
20. K. T. Andrews, A. Klarbring, M. Shillor, and S. Wright. A dynamical thermoviscoelastic
contact problem with friction and wear. Int. J. Engng. Sci., 35:1291–1309, 1997.
21. S. S. Antman. Nonlinear Problems of Elasticity. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995.
22. S. S. Antman. Physically unacceptable viscous stresses. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Physik,
49:980–988, 1998.
23. E. Aranda and P. Pedregal. On the computation of the rank-one convex hull of a function.
SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 22:1772–1790 (electronic), 2000.
24. J. F. Archard. Contact and rubbing of flat surfaces. J. Appl. Phys., 24:981–988, 1953.
25. M. Arndt. Modelling and numerical simulation of martensitic transformation. In W. Wendland
and M. Efendiev, editors, Anal. and Simul. of Multifield Probl., L. N. Appl. Comput. Mech.,
pages 59–66. Springer, 2003.
26. M. Arndt, M. Griebel, and T. Roubíček. Modelling and numerical simulation of martensitic
transformation in shape memory alloys. Continuum Mech. Thermodyn., 15:463–485, 2003.
27. R. B. Ash. Real Analysis and Probablity. Acad. Press, New York, 1972.
28. H. Attouch. Variational Convergence of Functions and Operators. Pitman, 1984.
29. J.-P. Aubin. Un théorème de compacité. C.R. Acad. Sci., 256:5042–5044, 1963.
30. J.-P. Aubin and H. Frankowska. Set-valued Analysis. Birkhäuser, Boston, 1990.
31. S. Aubry, M. Fago, and M. Ortiz. A constrained sequential-lamination algorithm for the
simulation of sub-grid microstructure in martensitic materials. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech.
Engrg., 192:2823–2843, 2003.
32. F. Auricchio, A. Mielke, and U. Stefanelli. A rate-independent model for the isothermal quasi-
static evolution of shape-memory materials. Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 18:125–164,
2008.
33. F. Auricchio and L. Petrini. A three-dimensional model describing stress-temperature induced
solid phase transformations. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engrg., 61:716–737 and 807–836, 2004.
34. F. Auricchio, A. Reali, and U. Stefanelli. A three-dimensional model describing stress-
induced solid phase transformation with permanent inelasticity. Int. J. Plasticity, 23:207–226,
2007.
35. F. Auricchio and E. Sacco. Thermo-mechanical modelling of a superelastic shape-memory
wire under cyclic stretching-bending loadings. Int. J. Solids Structures, 38:6123–6145, 2001.
36. F. Auricchio, R. L. Taylor, and J. Lubliner. Shape-memory alloys: macromodelling and
numerical simulations of the superelastic behaviour. Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engr.,
146:281–312, 1997.
37. Y. Bai and Z.-P. Li. A truncation method for detecting singular minimizers involving the
Lavrentiev phenomenon. Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 16:847–867, 2006.
38. J. M. Ball. Convexity conditions and existence theorems in nonlinear elasticity. Arch. Rational
Mech. Anal., 63:337–403, 1977.
39. J. M. Ball. Minimizers and the Euler-Lagrange equations. In Trends and applications of pure
mathematics to mechanics (Palaiseau, 1983), volume 195 of Lecture Notes in Physics, pages
1–4. Springer, Berlin, 1984.
40. J. M. Ball. Singular mimimizers and their significance in elasticity. In Directions in partial
differential equations, pages 1–15. Acad. Press, 1987.
41. J. M. Ball. A version of the fundamental theorem for Young measures. In M. Rascle, D. Serre,
and M. Slemrod, editors, PDEs and continuum models of phase transitions (Nice, 1988),
pages 207–215. Springer, Berlin, 1989.
42. J. M. Ball. Continuity properties and global attractors of generalized semiflows and the
Navier-Stokes equations. J. Nonlinear Sci., 7:475–502, 1997. Erratum J. Nonlinear Sci. 8
(1998) page 233.
43. J. M. Ball. Some open problems in elasticity. In P. Newton, P. Holmes, and A. Weinstein,
editors, Geometry, Mechanics, and Dynamics, pages 3–59. Springer, New York, 2002.
44. J. M. Ball, C. Chu, and R. D. James. Hysteresis during stress-induced variant rearrangement.
J. de Physique IV (C8), 5:245–251, 1995.
References 627
45. J. M. Ball, P. J. Holmes, R. D. James, R. L. Pego, and P. J. Swart. On the dynamics of fine
structure. J. Nonlinear Sci., 1:17–70, 1991.
46. J. M. Ball and R. D. James. Fine phase mixtures as minimizers of energy. Arch. Rational
Mech. Anal., 100:13–52, 1987.
47. J. M. Ball and R. D. James. Proposed experimental tests of a theory of fine microstructure and
the two-well problem. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A, 338:389–450, 1992.
48. J. M. Ball and V. J. Mizel. One-dimensional variational problems whose minimizers do not
satisfy the Euler-Lagrange equation. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 90:325–388, 1985.
49. J. M. Ball and F. Murat. W 1;p -quasiconvexity and variational problems for multiple integrals.
J. Funct. Anal., 58:225–253, 1984.
50. W. Baltensperger and J. S. Helman. Dry friction in micromagnetics. IEEE Tran. Mag.,
27:4772–4774, 1991.
51. S. Banach. Sur les opérations dans les ensembles abstraits et leur applications aux équations
intégrales. Fund. Math., 3:133–181, 1922.
52. S. Banach. Théorie des Opérations Linéaires. M.Garasiński, Warszawa (Engl. transl. North-
Holland, Amsterdam, 1987), 1932.
53. H. T. Banks, A. J. Kurdila, and G. Webb. Identification and hysteretic control influence
operators representing smart actuators, Part II: Convergent approximations. J. Int. Mat. Syst.
Struct., 8:536–550, 1997.
54. L. Banks-Sills and D. Askenazi. A note on fracture criteria for interface fracture. Int. J.
Fracture, 103:177–188, 2000.
55. V. Barbu and T. Precupanu. Convexity and Optimization in Banach Spaces. D. Reidel
Publishing Co., Dordrecht, third edition, 1986.
56. T. Bartel and K. Hackl. A micromechanical model for martensitic phase-transformations
in shape-memory alloys based on energy-relaxation. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech.,
89:792–809, 2009.
57. S. Bartels. Quasi-optimal error estimates for implicit discretizations of rate-independent
evolution problems. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 52:708–716, 2014.
58. S. Bartels, C. Carstensen, K. Hackl, and U. Hoppe. Effective relaxation for microstruc-
ture simulations: algorithms and applications. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg.,
93:5143–5175, 2004.
59. S. Bartels, A. Mielke, and T. Roubíček. Quasistatic small-strain plasticity in the limit of
vanishing hardening and its numerical approximation. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 50:951–976,
2012.
60. S. Bartels and T. Roubíček. Thermo-visco-elasticity with rate-independent plasticity in
isotropic materials undergoing thermal expansion. Math. Model. Numer. Anal., 45:477–504,
2011.
61. S. Bartels and T. Roubíček. Numerical approaches to thermally coupled perfect plasticity.
Numer. Meth. for Partial Diff. Equations, 29:1837–1863, 2013.
62. Z. P. Bažant and M. Jirásek. Nonlocal integral formulations of plasticity and damage: Survey
of progress. J. Engrg. Mech., 128:1119–1149, 2002.
63. A. Bedford. Hamilton’s Principle in Continuum Mechanics. Pitman, Boston, 1985.
64. S. A. Belov and V. V. Chistyakov. A selection principle or mappings of bounded variation. J.
Math. Anal. Appl., 249:351–366, 2000.
65. B. Benešová. Models of specific shape-memory materials. Master’s thesis, Math.-
Phys. Faculty, Charles Univ., Prague, 2008.
66. B. Benešová. Global optimization numerical strategies for rate-independent processes. J.
Global Optim., 50:197–220, 2011.
67. A. Bergqvist. Magnetic vector hysteresis model with dry friction-like pinning. Physica B,
233:342–347, 1997.
68. G. Bertotti. Hysteresis in Magnetism. Acad. Press, San Diego, 1998.
69. M. Bertsch, P. Podio Guidugli, and V. Valente. On the dynamics of deformable ferromagnets
i. global weak solutions for soft ferromanets at rest. Annali Mat. Pura Appl., 179:331–360,
2001.
628 References
70. K. Bhattacharya. Microstructure of Martensite. Why it Forms and How it Gives Rise to the
Shape-Memory Effect. Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 2003.
71. K. Bhattacharya, P. Purohit, and B. Craciun. Mobility of twin and phase boundaries. Journal
de Physique IV, 112:163–166, 2003.
72. M. A. Biot. Mechanics of Incremental Deformations. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1965.
73. L. Boccardo, A. Dall’aglio, T. Gallouët, and L. Orsina. Nonlinear parabolic equations with
measure data. J. Funct. Anal., 147:237–258, 1997.
74. L. Boccardo and T. Gallouët. Non-linear elliptic and parabolic equations involving measure
data. J. Funct. Anal., 87:149–169, 1989.
75. S. Bochner. Integration von Funktionen, deren Werte die Elemente eines Vektorraumes sind.
Fund. Math., 20:262–276, 1933.
76. B. Bolzano. Funktionenlehre. K.Rychlík, Prague, 1930.
77. E. Bonetti, G. Bonfanti, and R. Rossi. Global existence for a contact problem with adhesion.
Math. Meth. Appl. Sci., 31:1029–1064, 2008.
78. E. Bonetti, G. Bonfanti, and R. Rossi. Thermal effects in adhesive contact: modelling and
analysis. Nonlinearity, 22:2697–2731, 2009.
79. E. Bonetti, G. Bonfanti, and R. Rossi. Long-time behaviour of a thermomechanical model for
adhesive contact. Discr. Cont. Dynam. Systems - S, 4:273–309, 2011.
80. E. Bonetti, G. Schimperna, and A. Segatti. On a doubly nonlinear model for the evolution of
damaging in viscoelastic materials. J. Differential Equations, 218:91–116, 2005.
81. G. Bonfanti. A vanishing viscosity approach to a two degree-of-freedom contact problem in
linear elasticity with friction. Annali dell’Universita di Ferrara, 42:127–154, 1996.
82. E. Bonnetti and G. Schimperna. Local existence for Frémond model of damage in elastic
materials. Continuum Mech. Thermodyn., 16:319–335, 2004.
83. R. De Borst, A. Benallal, and O.M. Heeres. A gradient-enhanced damage approach to
fracture. J. de Physique IV, 6:491–509, 1996.
84. J. M. Borwein and A. S. Lewis. Convex analysis and nonlinear optimization. Theory and
examples. Springer, 2000.
85. E. Bouchbinder and J. S. Langer. Nonequilibrium thermodynamics of driven amorphous
materials. II. Effective-temperature theory. Phys. Rev. E., 80:031132, 2009.
86. G. Bouchitté, A. Mielke, and T. Roubíček. A complete-damage problem at small strains.
Zeitschrift angew. Math. Physik, 60:205–236, 2009.
87. G. Bouchitté and M. Valadier. Integral representation of convex functional on a space of
measures. J. Funct. Anal., 80:398–420, 1988.
88. M. Bounkhel and L. Thibault. On various notions of regularity of sets in nonsmooth analysis.
Nonlinear Anal., 48:223–246, 2002.
89. B. Bourdin. Numerical implementation of the variational formulation for quasi-static brittle
fracture. Interfaces Free Bound., 9:411–430, 2007.
90. B. Bourdin, G. A. Francfort, and J.-J. Marigo. Numerical experiments in revisited brittle
fracture. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 48:797–826, 2000.
91. B. Bourdin, G. A. Francfort, and J.-J. Marigo. The variational approach to fracture. J.
Elasticity, 91:5–148, 2008.
92. B. Bourdin, C. J. Larsen, and C. L. Richardson. A time-discrete model for dynamic fracture
based on crack regularization. Int. J. of Fracture, pages 133–143, 2011.
93. F. Bourquin, P. G. Ciarlet, G. Geymonat, and A. Raoult. -convergence and asymptotic
analysis of thin plates. C. R. Acad. Sci., Paris, Sér. I, 315(9):1017–1024, 1992.
94. A. Braides. -Convergence for Beginners. Oxford University Press, 2002.
95. A. Braides. A handbook of -convergence. In M. Chipot and P. Quittner, editors, Handbook
of Diff. Eqs. Stationary P. D. E. Vol. 3. Elsevier, 2006.
96. D. Brandon, I. Fonseca, and P. Swart. Oscillations in a dynamical model of phase transitions.
Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A, 131:59–81, 2001.
97. P. W. Bridgman. The Nature of Thermodynamics. Harward Univ. Press, Cambridge (MA),
1943.
References 629
98. M. Brokate, C. Carstensen, and J. Valdman. A quasi-static boundary value problem in multi-
surface elastoplasticity: part I - analysis. Math. Meth. Appl. Sci., 27:1697–1710, 2004.
99. M. Brokate, C. Carstensen, and J. Valdman. A quasi-static boundary value problem in multi-
surface elastoplasticity: part II - numerical solution. Math. Meth. Appl. Sci., 28:881–901,
2005.
100. M. Brokate, P. Krejčí, and H. Schnabel. On uniqueness in evolution quasivariational
inequalities. J. Convex Analysis, 11:111–130, 2004.
101. M. Brokate and J. Sprekels. Hysteresis and Phase Transitions. Springer-Verlag, New York,
1996.
102. F. Browder. Nonlinear Operators and Nonlinear Equations of Evolution in Banach Spaces.
Proc.Symp.Pure Math. AMS, Providence, 1976.
103. W. F. Brown, Jr. Magnetostatic Interactions. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1962.
104. W. F. Brown, Jr. Micromagnetics. Interscience, New York, 1963.
105. W. F. Brown, Jr. Magnetostatic Principles in Ferromagnetism. Springer, New York, 1966.
106. M. Bulíček, E. Feireisl, and J. Málek. A Navier-Stokes-Fourier system for incompressible
fluids with temperature dependent material coefficients. Nonlinear. Anal., Real World Appl.,
10:992–1015, 2009.
107. M. Bulíček, P. Kaplický, and J. Málek. An L2 -maximal regularity result for the evolutionary
Stokes-Fourier system. Applic. Anal., 90:31–45, 2011.
108. F. Cagnetti. A vanishing viscosity approach to fracture growth in a cohesive zone model with
prescribed crack path. Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 18:1027–1071, 2009.
109. F. Cagnetti and R. Toader. Quasistatic crack evolution for a cohesive zone model with different
response to loading and unloading: a Young measures approach. ESAIM Control Optim. Calc.
Var., 17:1–27, 2011.
110. C. Carstensen, S. Heinz, and A. Mielke. Analysis and numerics of a phase-transformation
model. In preparation, 2015.
111. C. Carstensen and C. Ortner. Analysis of a class of penalty methods for computing singular
minimizers. Comp. Meth. Appl. Math., 10:137–163, 2010.
112. C. Carstensen and P. Plecháč. Numerical analysis of a relaxed variational model of hysteresis
in two-phase solids. Math. Model. Numer. Anal., 35:865–878, 2001.
113. A. Chambolle. A density result in two-dimensional linearized elasticity and applications.
Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 167:211–233, 2003.
114. A. Chambolle, A. Giacomini, and M. Ponsiglione. Crack initiation in brittle materials. Arch.
Rational Mech. Anal., 188:309–349, 2008.
115. S. J. Chapman. A hierachy of models for type-II superconductors. SIAM Rev., 42:555–598,
2000.
116. K. Chełmiński. Coercive approximation of viscoplasticity and plasticity. Asymptot. Anal.,
26:105–133, 2001.
117. K. Chełmiński. Perfect plasticity as a zero relaxation limit of plasticity with isotropic
hardening. Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 24:117–136, 2001.
118. K. Chełmiński. On quasistatic inelastic models of gradient type with convex composite
constitutive equations. Cent. Eur. J. Math., 1:670–689 (electronic), 2003.
119. V. V. Chistyakov. Mappings of bounded variations. J. Dyn. Cont. Syst., 3:261–289, 1997.
120. V. V. Chistyakov. Mappings of bounded variation with values in a metric space: generaliza-
tions. J. Math. Sciences, 100:2700–2715, 2000.
121. V. V. Chistyakov. Multi-valued mappings of bounded generalized variation. Math. Notes,
71:556–575, 2002. transl.from Matem. Zemetki 71 (2002), 611–632.
122. V. V. Chistyakov and O. E. Galkin. Mappings of bounded ˚-variation with arbitrary function
˚. J. Dyn. Cont. Syst., 4:217–247, 1998.
123. R. Choksi and R. V. Kohn. Bounds on the micromagnetic energy of a uniaxial ferromagnet.
Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 55:259–289, 1998.
124. L. C. Chow and J. Wang. An anisotropic theory of elasticity for continuum damage
mechanics. Int. J. Fracture, 33:3–16, 1987.
630 References
125. P. G. Ciarlet. Mathematical Elasticity. Vol. I: Three-Dimensional Elasticity. North-Holland,

Amsterdam, 1988.
126. P. G. Ciarlet. Mathematical Elasticity. Vol. II Theory of Plates. North-Holland, Amsterdam,
1997.
127. P. G. Ciarlet and P. Destuynder. A justification of the two-dimensional linear plate model. J.
Mécanique, 18:315–344, 1979.
128. P. G. Ciarlet and J. Nečas. Injectivity and self-contact in nonlinear elasticity. Arch. Rational
Mech. Anal., 97:171–188, 1987.
129. E. Clapeyron. Mémoire sur le travail des forces élastiques dans un corps solide élastique
déformé par l’action de forces extérieures. Compt. Rendus Paris, XLVI:208–212, 1858.
130. J. A. Clarkson. Uniformly convex spaces. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 40:396–414, 1936.
131. P. Colli. On some doubly nonlinear evolution equations in Banach spaces. Japan J. Indust.
Appl. Math., 9:181–203, 1992.
132. P. Colli and A. Visintin. On a class of doubly nonlinear evolution equations. Comm. Partial
Differential Equations, 15:737–756, 1990.
133. M. Comninou. Stress singularity at a sharp edge in contact problems with friction. Zeitschrift
angew. Math. Physik, 27:493–499, 1976.
134. S. Conti and M. Ortiz. Dislocation microstructures and the effective behavior of single
crystals. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 176:103–147, 2005.
135. S. Conti and M. Ortiz. Minimum principles for the trajectories of systems governed by rate
problems. J. Mech. Physics Solids, 56:1885–1904, 2008.
136. L. Contrafatto and M. Cuomo. A new thermodynamically consistent continuum model for
hardening plasticity coupled with damage. Intl. J. Solids Structures, 39:6241–6271, 2002.
137. E. Cosserat and E. Cosserat. Thèorie des corps déformables. In Librairie Scientique. A.
Hermann et Fils, Paris, 1909.
138. C.-A. Coulomb. Recherche théoriques et expérimentales sur la force de torsion et sur
l’élasticite des fils de métal: . . . et de la cohérence. Histoire de l’Académie Royale des
Sciences, pages 229–269, 1784.
139. B. Dacorogna. Weak continuity and weak lower semicontinuity of nonlinear functionals.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1982. Lecture Notes in Math. Vol. 922.
140. B. Dacorogna. Direct Methods in the Calculus of Variations. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1989.
141. G. Dal Maso. An Introduction to -Convergence. Birkhäuser Boston Inc., Boston, MA, 1993.
142. G. Dal Maso and A. DeSimone. Quasistatic evolution for cam-clay plasticity: examples of
spatially homogeneous solutions. Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 19:1643–1711, 2009.
143. G. Dal Maso, A. DeSimone, and M. G. Mora. Quasistatic evolution problems for linearly
elastic-perfectly plastic materials. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 180:237–291, 2006.
144. G. Dal Maso, A. DeSimone, M. G. Mora, and M. Morini. Globally stable quasistatic evolution
in plasticity with softening. Netw. Heterog. Media, 3:567–614, 2008.
145. G. Dal Maso, A. DeSimone, M. G. Mora, and M. Morini. A vanishing viscosity approach to
quasistatic evolution in plasticity with softening. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 189:469–544,
2008.
146. G. Dal Maso, A. DeSimone, M.G. Mora, and M. Morini. Time-dependent systems of
generalized Young measures. Netw. Heterog. Media, 2:1–36, 2007.
147. G. Dal Maso, A. DeSimone, and F. Solombrino. Quasistatic evolution for cam-clay plasticity:
a weak formulation via viscoplastic regularization and time parametrization. Calc. Var. Part.
Diff. Eqns., 40(2):125–181, 2011.
148. G. Dal Maso, A. DeSimone, and F. Solombrino. Quasistatic evolution for Cam-Clay
plasticity: properties of the viscosity solution. Calc. Var. Part. Diff. Eqns., 44:495–541, 2012.
149. G. Dal Maso, G. A. Francfort, and R. Toader. Quasistatic crack growth in nonlinear elasticity.
Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 176:165–225, 2005.
150. G. Dal Maso and C. J. Larsen. Existence for wave equations on domains with arbitrary
growing cracks. Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl., 22:387–408, 2011.
151. G. Dal Maso and G. Lazzaroni. Quasistatic crack growth in finite elasticity with non-
interpenetration. Ann. Inst. H. Poinc. Anal. Non Lin., 27:257–290, 2010.
References 631
152. G. Dal Maso and R. Toader. A model for quasi–static growth of brittle fractures: existence
and approximation results. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 162:101–135, 2002.
153. G. Dal Maso and R. Toader. Quasistatic crack growth in elasto-plastic materials: the two-
dimensional case. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 196:867–906, 2010.
154. G. Dal Maso and C. Zanini. Quasi-static crack growth for a cohesive zone model with
prescribed crack path. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb., Sect. A, Math., 137(2):253–279, 2007.
155. E. De Giorgi. -convergenza e G-convergenza. Boll. Unione Mat. Ital., V. Ser., A 14:213–220,
1977.
156. E. De Giorgi and T. Franzoni. Su un tipo di convergenza variazionale. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei
Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur. (8), 58:842–850, 1975.
157. E. A. De Souza Neto, D. Peric, and D. R. J. Owen. A phenomenological three-dimensional
rate-independent continuum damage model for highly filled polymers: Formulation and
computational aspects. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 42:1533–1550, 1994.
158. S. Demoulini. Weak solutions for a class of nonlinear systems of viscoelasticity. Arch. Rat.
Mech. Anal., 155:299–334, 2000.
159. A. DeSimone. Energy minimizers for large ferromagnetic bodies. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal.,
125:99–143, 1993.
160. A. DeSimone, J.-J. Marigo, and L. Teresi. A damage mechanics approach to stress softening
and its application to rubber. Eur. J. Mech. A Solids, 20:873–892, 2001.
161. O. W. Dillon and J. Kratochvíl. A strain gradient theory of plasticity. Int. J. Solids Structures,
6:1513–1533, 1970.
162. R. J. DiPerna and A. J. Majda. Oscillations and concentrations in weak solutions of the
incompressible fluid equations. Comm. Math. Phys., 108:667–689, 1987.
163. B. J. Dmitrijevic and K. Hackl. A variational coupled damage-plasticity model via gradient
enhancement of the free energy function. PAMM, 9:199–200, 2009.
164. A. Dorfmann and R. W. Ogden. Some problems in nonlinear magnetoelasticity. Zeitschrift
165. Z. Dostál. Optimal Quadratic Programming Algorithms. Springer, Berlin, 2009.
166. N. Dunford and J. T. Pettis. Linear operators on summable functions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.,
47:323–392, 1940.
167. F. Ebobisse and B. D. Reddy. Some mathematical problems in perfect plasticity. Comput.
Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 193:5071–5094, 2004.
168. C. Eck, J. Jarušek, and M. Krbec. Unilateral Contact Problems, volume 270. Chapman &
Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2005.
169. C. Eck, J. Jarušek, and J. Stará. Normal compliance contact models with finite interpenetra-
tion. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 208:25–57, 2013.
170. M. Efendiev. On the compactness of the stable set for rate–independent processes. Comm.
Pure Applied Analysis, 2:495–509, 2003.
171. M. Efendiev and A. Mielke. On the rate–independent limit of systems with dry friction and
small viscosity. J. Convex Anal., 13:151–167, 2006.
172. G. Eisen. A selection lemma for sequences of measurable sets, and lower semicontinuity of
multiple integrals. Manuscripta Math., 27:73–79, 1979.
173. I. Ekeland and R. Temam. Convex Analysis and Variational Problems. North Holland, 1976.
174. M. Eleuteri, L. Lussardi, and U. Stefanelli. A rate-independent model for permanent inelastic
effects in shape memory materials. Netw. Heterog. Media, 6:145–165, 2011.
175. R. Engelking. General Topology. PWN, Warszawa, 2 edition, 1985.
176. A. G. Evans, M. Rühle, B. J. Dalgleish, and P. G. Charalambides. The fracture energy of
bimaterial interfaces. Matallurgical Transactions A, 21A:2419–2429, 1990.
177. L. C. Evans. Weak Convergence Methods for Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations. Amer.
Math. Soc., 1990.
178. L. C. Evans. Entropy and Partial Differential Equations. UC Berkeley, Lecture notes, Dept.
of Math., UC Berkeley, 1996.
179. L. C. Evans. Partial differential equations. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1998.
632 References
180. R. A. Eve, B. D. Reddy, and R. T. Rockafellar. An internal variable theory of elastoplasticity

based on the maximum plastic work inequality. Quarterly Appl. Math., 48:59–83, 1990.
181. F. Falk. Model free energy, mechanics and thermodynamics of shape memory alloys. Acta
Metall., 28:1773–1780, 1980.
182. K. Fan and I. L. Glicksberg. Some geometric properties of the spheres in a normed linear
space. Duke Math. J., 25:553–568, 1958.
183. P. Fatou. Séries trigonométriques et séries de Taylor. Acta Math., 30:335–400, 1906.
184. E. Feireisl, H. Petzeltová, and E. Rocca. Existence of solutions to a phase transition model
with microscopic movements. Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 32:1345–1369, 2009.
185. J. R. Fernández and M. Sofonea. Variational and numerical analysis of the signorini’s conctact
problem in viscoplasticity with damage. J. Appl. Math., 2:87–114, 2003.
186. A. Fiaschi. A vanishing viscosity approach to a quasistatic evolution problem with nonconvex
energy. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré, Anal. Nonlin., 26:1055–1080, 2009.
187. A. Fiaschi. A Young measures approach to quasistatic evolution for a class of material models
with nonconvex elastic energies. ESAIM Control Optim. Calc. Var., 15:245–278, 2009.
188. A. Fiaschi. Rate-independent phase transitions in elastic materials: a Young-measure
approach. Network Heter. Media, 5:257–298, 2010.
189. I. Fonseca, D. Kinderlehrer, and P. Pedregal. Energy functionals depending on elastic strain
and chemical composition. Calc. Var. PDEs, 2:283–313, 1994.
190. I. Fonseca and S. Müller. A-quasiconvexity, lower semicontinuity, and Young measures.
SIAM J. Math. Anal., 30:1355–1390 (electronic), 1999.
191. I. Fonseca, S. Müller, and P. Pedregal. Analysis of concentration and oscillation effects
generated by gradients. SIAM J. Math. Anal., 29:736–756, 1998.
192. R. Fosdick and L Truskinovsky. About Clapeyron’s theorem in linear elasticity. J. Elasticity,
72:145–172, 2003.
193. M. Foss, W. J. Hrusa, and V. J. Mizel. The Lavrentiev gap phenomenon in nonlinear elasticity.
Archive Rat. Mech. Anal., 167:337–365, 2003.
194. G. Francfort and A. Garroni. A variational view of partial brittle damage evolution. Arch.
195. G. Francfort and A. Mielke. Existence results for a class of rate-independent material models
with nonconvex elastic energies. J. reine angew. Math., 595:55–91, 2006.
196. G. A. Francfort and C. J. Larsen. Existence and convergence for quasi-static evolution of
brittle fracture. Comm. Pure Applied Math., 56:1495–1500, 2003.
197. G. A. Francfort and J.-J. Marigo. Stable damage evolution in a brittle continuous medium.
European J. Mech. A Solids, 12:149–189, 1993.
198. G. A. Francfort and J.-J. Marigo. Revisiting brittle fracture as an energy minimization
problem. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 46:1319–1342, 1998.
199. G. A. Francfort and U. Stefanelli. Quasi-static evolution for the Armstrong-Frederick
hardening-plasticity model. Appl. Math. Research, 2:297–344, 2013.
200. J. Francu and P. Krejčí. Homogenization of scalar wave equation with hysteresis operator. In
Int. Conf. on Differential Equations, pages 363–368. World Sci. Publishing, River Edge, NJ,
2000.
201. L. Freddi, R. Paroni, T. Roubíček, and C. Zanini. Quasistatic delamination models for
kirchhoff-love plates. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 91:845–865, 2011.
202. L. Freddi, T. Roubíček, and C. Zanini. Quasistatic delamination of sandwich-like kirchhoff-
love plates. J. Elasticity, 113:219–250, 2013.
203. M. Frémond. Matériaux à mémoire de forme. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Série II, 304:239–244,
1987.
204. M. Frémond. Non-Smooth Thermomechanics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2002.
205. M. Frémond, K. L. Kuttler, B. Nedjar, and M. Shillor. One-dimensional models of damage.
Adv. Math. Sci. Appl., 8:541–570, 1998.
206. M. Frémond, K.L. Kuttler, and M. Shillor. Existence and uniqueness of solutions for a
dynamic one-dimensional damage model. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 229:271–294, 1999.
207. M. Frémond and S. Miyazaki. Shape Memory Alloys. Springer-Verlag, Wien, 1996.
References 633
208. M. Frémond and B. Nedjar. Damage in concrete: the unilateral phenomenon. Nucl. Eng. Des.,
156:323–335, 1995.
209. M. Frémond and B. Nedjar. Damage, gradient of damage and principle of virtual power. Int.
J. Solids Structures, 33:1083–1103, 1996.
210. E. Fried and M. E. Gurtin. Tractions, balances, and boundary conditions for nonsimple
materials with application to liquid flow at small-lenght scales. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal.,
182:513–554, 2006.
211. M. Frost, B. Benešová, and P. Sedlák. A microscopically motivated constitutive model for
shape memory alloys: formulation, analysis and computations. Math. Mech. of Solids, 2014.
doi:10.1177/1081286514522474.
212. M. Frost, P. Sedlák, A. Kruisová, and M. Landa. Simulations of self-expanding braided stent
using macroscopic model of NiTi shape memory alloys covering R-phase. J. Mater. Engr.
Performance, 23:2584–2590, 2014.
213. D. Gabriel, J. Plešek, and M. Ulbin. Symmetry preserving algorithm for large displacement
frictionless contact by the pre-discretisation penalty method. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engr.,
61:2615–2638, 2004.
214. F. Gastaldi, M. D. P. M. Marques, and J. A. C. Martins. Mathematical analysis of a two
degree-of-freedom frictional contact problem with discontinuous solutions. Math. Comput.
Modelling, 28:247–261, 1998.
215. R. Gâteaux. Sur les fonctionnelles continues at les fonctionnelles analytiques. C.R. Acad. Sci.
Paris, Sér I Math., 157:325–327, 1913.
216. I. M. Gelfand and M. A. Naimark. On the imbedding of normed rings into the ring of operators
in hilbert space. Mat. Sb., 12:197–213, 1943.
217. I. M. Gelfand, D. A. Raı̆kov, and G. E. Shilov. Commutative Normed Rings (In Russian,
1960). Engl. transl.: Chelsea Publ., New York, 1964.
218. P. Germain, Q. S. Nguyen, and P. Suquet. Continuum thermodynamics. J. Applied Mechanics
(Trans. ASME), 50:1010–1020, 1983.
219. G. Geymonat and P. Suquet. Functional spaces for Norton-Hoff materials. Math. Meth. Appl.
Sci., 8:206–222, 1986.
220. A. Giacomini and L. Lussardi. Quasistatic evolution for a model in strain gradient plasticity.
SIAM J. Math. Anal., 40:1201–1245, 2008.
221. A. Giacomini and A. Musesti. Two-scale homogenization for a model in strain gradient
plasticity. ESAIM Control Optim. Calc. Var., 17:1035–1065, 2011.
222. A. Giacomini and M. Ponsiglione. Discontinuous finite element approximation of quasistatic
crack growth in nonlinear elasticity. Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 16:77–118, 2006.
223. A. Giacomini and M. Ponsiglione. A -convergence approach to stability of unilateral
minimality properties in fracture mechanics and applications. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal.,
180:399–447, 2006.
224. T. L. Gilbert. A Lagrangian formulation of the gyromagnetic equation of the magnetization
field. Phys. Rev., 100:1243, 1955.
225. N. Gould, D. Orban, and P. Toint. Numerical methods for large-scale nonlinear optimization.
Acta Numerica, 14:299–361, 2005.
226. S. Govindjee, K. Hackl, and R. Heinen. An upper bound to the free energy of mixing by twin-
compatible lamination for n-variant martensitic phase transformations. Continuum Mech.
Thermodyn., 18:443–453, 2007.
227. S. Govindjee and C. Miehe. A multi–variant martensitic phase transformation model:
Formulation and numerical implementation. Computer Meth. Applied Mech. Eng.,
191:215–238, 2001.
228. S. Govindjee, A. Mielke, and G. J. Hall. The free–energy of mixing for n–variant martensitic
phase transformations using quasi–convex analysis. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 50:1897–1922,
2002. Erratum and Correct Reprinting: 51(4) 2003, pp. 763 & I-XXVI.
229. S. Govindjee, A. Mielke, G. J. Hall, and C. Miehe. Application of notions of quasi-convexity
to the modeling and simulation of martensitic and shape memory phase transformations. In
H.A. Mang, F.G. Rammerstorfer, and J. Eberhardsteiner, editors, Proc. Fifth World Cong. on
Comput. Mech. (WCCM V), July 2002, Vienna, Austria, 2002.
634 References
230. S. Govindjee and J. C. Simo. A micro-mechanically based continuum damage model for
carbon black-filled rubbers incorporating Mullins’ effect. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 39:87–112,
1991.
231. D. Grandi and U. Stefanelli. A phenomenological model for microstructure-dependent
inelasticity in shape-memory alloys. Meccanica, 49:2265–2283, 2014.
232. A. E. Green and P. M. Naghdi. A general theory of an elastic-plastic continuum. Arch.
233. G. Green. An essay on the application of mathematical analysis to the theories on electricity
and magnetism. Nottingham, 1828.
234. A. A. Griffith. The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London
Ser. A, Math. Phys. Eng. Sci., 221:163–198, 1921.
235. K. Gröger. Evolution equations in the theory of plasticity. In Theory of nonlinear operators
(Proc. 5th Int. Summer School, Central Inst. Math. Mech. Acad. Sci. GDR, Berlin, 1977),
volume 6 of Abh. Akad. Wiss. DDR, Abt. Math. Naturwiss. Tech., 1978, pages 97–107.
Akademie-Verlag, Berlin, 1978.
236. K. Gröger. Zur Lösung einer Klasse von Gleichungen mit einem monotonen Potentialopera-
tor. Math. Nachr., 81:7–24, 1978.
237. K. Gröger. Zur Theorie des dynamischen Verhaltens von elastisch-plastischen Körpern.
Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 58:483–487, 1978.
238. K. Gröger. Zur Theorie des quasi-statischen Verhaltens von elastisch-plastischen Körpern.
Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 58:81–88, 1978.
239. K. Gröger. A W 1;p -estimate for solutions to mixed boundary value problems for second order
elliptic differential equations. Math. Anal., 283:679–687, 1989.
240. K. Gröger and J. Nečas. On a class of nonlinear initial value problems in Hilbert spaces. Math.
Nachr., 93:21–31, 1979.
241. P. G. Gruber and J. Valdman. Solution of one-time-step problems in elastoplasticity by a slant
Newton method. SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 31:1558–1580, 2008/09.
242. R. B. Guenther, P. Krejčí, and J. Sprekels. Small strain oscillations of an elastoplastic
Kirchhoff plate. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 88:199–217, 2008.
243. E. Gürses, A. Mainik, C. Miehe, and A. Mielke. Analytical and numerical methods for finite-
strain elastoplasticity. In R. Helmig, A. Mielke, and B.I. Wohlmuth, editors, Multifield Probl.
in Solid and Fluid Mech., pages 443–481. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2006.
244. M. E. Gurtin. On the plasticity of single crystals: free energy, microforces, plastic-strain
gradients. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 48:989–1036, 2000.
245. M. E. Gurtin and L. Anand. A theory of strain-gradient plasticity for isotropic, plastically
irrotational materials. I. Small deformations. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 53:1624–1649, 2005.
246. A. Haar and T. van Kármán. Theorie der Spannungszustände in plastischen und sandartigen
medien. Gött. Nachr., pages 204–218, 1909.
247. D. Habeck and F. Schuricht. Contact between nonlinearly elastic bodies. Proc. Roy. Soc.
Edinburgh Sect. A, 136:1239–1266, 2006.
248. K. Hackl and F. D. Fischer. On the relation between the principle of maximum dissipation and
inelastic evolution given by dissipation potential. Proc. Royal Soc. A, 464:117–132, 2007.
249. K. Hackl and U. Hoppe. On the calculation of microstructures for inelastic materials using
relaxed energies. In C. Miehe, editor, IUTAM Symp. on Comput. Mech. of Solids at Large
Strains, pages 77–86. Kluwer, 2003.
250. K. Hackl, A. Mielke, and D. Mittenhuber. Dissipation distances in multiplicative elastoplas-
ticity. In W.L. Wendland and M. Efendiev, editors, Anal. and Simul. of Multifield Probl., pages
87–100. Springer-Verlag, 2003.
251. K. Hackl and H. Stumpf. Micromechanical concept for the analysis of damage evolution in
thermo-viscoelastic and quasi-static brittle fracture. Int. J. Solids Structures, 30:1567–1584,
2003.
252. H. Hahn. Über eine Verallgemeinerung der Riemannschen Inetraldefinition. Monatshefte
Math. Physik, 26:3–18, 1915.
References 635
253. G. J. Hall and S. Govindjee. Application of the relaxed free energy of mixing to problems
in shape memory alloy simulation. J. Intelligent Material Systems Structures, 13:773–782,
2002.
254. B. Halphen and Q. S. Nguyen. Sur les matériaux standards généralisés. J. Mécanique,
14:39–63, 1975.
255. Y. Hamiel, V. Lyakhovsky, and Y. Ben-Zion. The elastic strain energy of damaged solids
with applications to non-linear deformation of crystalline rocks. Pure Appl. Geophys.,
168:2199–2210, 2011.
256. W. Han and B. D. Reddy. Convergence analysis of discrete approximations of problems in
hardening plasticity. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 171:327–340, 1999.
257. W. Han and B. D. Reddy. Plasticity (Mathematical Theory and Numerical Analysis).
Springer-Verlag, New York, 1999.
258. W. Han and B. D. Reddy. Convergence of approximations to the primal problem in plasticity
under conditions of minimal regularity. Numer. Math., 87:283–315, 2000.
259. W. Han, M. Shillor, and M. Sofonea. Variational and numerical analysis of a quasistatic
viscoelastic problem with normal complience, friction and damage. J. Comput. Appl. Math.,
137:377–398, 2001.
260. H. Hanke. Homogenization in gradient plasticity. Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci.,
21:1651–1684, 2011.
261. F. Hausdorff. Dimension und äusseres Mass. Math. Annalen, 79:157–179, 1918.
262. O. Heczko, N. Scheerbaum, and O. Gutfleisch. Magnetic shape memory phenomena. In
J.P. Liu et al., editor, Nanoscale Magnetic Materials and Applications, chapter 14, pages
399–439. Springer, 2009.
263. R. Heinen and A. Schlömerkemper. A comparative study of lamination upper and convexi-
fication lower bound on the free energy of monocrystalline shape memory alloys. Preprint,
2013.
264. E. Helly. Über lineare Funktionaloperationen. Sitzungsberichte der Math.-Natur. Klasse der
Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 121:265–297, 1912.
265. H. Hencky. Theorie plastischer Deformationen. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 4:323–334,
1924.
266. R. Herzog, C. Meyer, and G. Wachsmuth. Regularity of displacement and stresses in linear
and nonlinear elasticity with mixed boundary conditions. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 382:802–813,
2011.
267. R. Hill. A variational principle of maximum plastic work in classical plasticity. Q.J. Mech.
Appl. Math., 1:18–28, 1948.
268. M. Hintermüller, K. Ito, and K. Kunisch. The primal-dual active set strategy as a semismooth
newton method. SIAM J. Optim., 13:865–888, 2003.
269. I. Hlaváček and J. Nečas. On inequalities of Korn’s type. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal.,
36:305–311,312–334, 1970.
270. K.-H. Hoffmann and G. H. Meyer. A least squares method for finding the Preisach hysteresis
operator from measurements. Numer. Math., 55:695–710, 1989.
271. K.-H. Hoffmann, J. Sprekels, and A. Visintin. Identification of hysteretic loops. J. Comp.
Physics, 78:215–230, 1988.
272. O. Hölder. Über einen Mittelwertsatz. Nachr. Ges. Wiss. Göttingen, pages 38–47, 1889.
273. C. O. Horgan. Korn’s inequalities and their applications in continuum mechanics. SIAM
Review, 37:491–511, 1995.
274. K. Hormann and J. Zimmer. On Landau theory and symmetric energy landscapes for phase
transitions. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 55:1385–1409, 2007.
275. A. Hubert and R. Schäfer. Magnetic Domains: The Analysis of Magnetic Microstructures.
Springer, Berlin, 1998.
276. R. Hünlich. On simultaneous torsion and tension of a circular bar consisting of an elastiplastic
material with hardening. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 58:509–516, 1979.
277. Y. Huo and I. Müller. Nonequilibrium thermodynamics of pseudoelasticity. Continuum Mech.
Thermodyn., 5:163–204, 1993.
636 References
278. J. W. Hutchinson and Z. Suo. Mixed mode cracking in layered materials. Advances in Applied
Mechanics, 29:63–191, 1992.
279. A. Y. Ishlinskiı̆. Some applications of statistical methods to describing deformations of bodies.
Izv. A.N. S.S.S.R. Techn. Ser., 9:580–590, 1944. (Russian).
280. R. D. James. Hysteresis in phase transformations. In ICIAM 95 (Hamburg, 1995), volume 87
of Math. Res., pages 135–154. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1996.
281. R. D. James. Configurational forces in magnetism with application to the dynamics
of a small-scale ferromagnetic shape memory cantilever. Continuum Mech. Thermodyn.,
14:55–86, 2002.
282. R. D. James and K. F. Hane. Martensitic transformations and shape-memory materials. Acta
Mater., 48:197–222, 2000.
283. R. D. James and D. Kinderlehrer. Frustration in ferromagnetic materials. Continuum Mech.
Thermodyn., 2:215–239, 1990.
284. R. D. James and S. Müller. Internal variables and fine scale oscillations in micromagnetics.
Continuum Mech. Thermodyn., 6:291–336, 1994.
285. R. D. James and Z. Zhang. A way to search for multiferroic materials with “unlikely”
combination of physical properties. In L. Manoza et al., editor, Interplay of Magnetism and
Structure in Functional Materials. Springer, 2004.
286. D. Jiles. A self consistent generalized model for the calculation of minor loop excursions in
the theory of hysteresis. IEEE Trans. Mag., 28:2603, 1992.
287. M. Jirásek. Nonlocal damage mechanics with application to concrete. Failure, Degradation
and Instabilities, 8:683–707, 2004.
288. M. Jirásek and Z. P. Bažant. Inelastic Analysis of Structures. J.Wiley, Chichester, 2002.
289. M. Jirásek and J. Zeman. Localization study of regularized variational damage model. Intl. J.
Solid Structures, 2015, DOI:10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2015.06.001.
290. M. Jirásek, J. Zeman, and J. Vondřejc. Softening gradient plasticity: Analytical study of
localization under nonuniform stress. Int. J. Multiscale Computational Engr., 8:37–60, 2010.
291. C. Johnson. Existence theorems for plasticity problems. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 55:431–444,
1976.
292. C. Johnson. On plasticity with hardening. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 62:325–336, 1978.
293. C. Johnson and R. Scott. A finite element method for problems in perfect plasticity using
discontinuous trial functions. In W. Wunderlich, E. Stein, and K.-J. Bathe, editors, Nonlin.
Finite Element Anal. in Structural Mech., pages 307–324, Berlin, 1981. Springer.
294. L. M. Kachanov. Time of rupture process under Deep conditions. Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 8:26,
1958.
295. L. M. Kachanov. Introduction to Continuum Damage Mechanics. Kluwer, second edition,
1990.
296. M. Kamlah. Ferroelectric and ferroelastic piezoceramics – modeling of electromechanical
hysteresis phenomena. Continuum Mech. Thermodyn., 13:219–268, 2001.
297. M. Kamlah and Z. Wang. A thermodynamically and microscopically motivated constitutive
model for piezoceramics. Comput. Materials Science, 28:409–418, 2003.
298. D. Kinderlehrer and P. Pedregal. Gradient Young measures generated by sequences in
Sobolev spaces. J. Geom. Anal., 4:59–90, 1994.
299. D. Knees. Regularity results for quasilinear elliptic systems of power-law growth in
nonsmooth domains. Boundary, transmission and crack problems. PhD thesis, Universität
Stuttgart, 2005.
300. D. Knees. On global spatial regularity in elasto-plasticity with linear hardening. Calc. Var.
Part. Diff. Eqns., 36:611–625, 2009.
301. D. Knees and A. Mielke. Energy release rate for cracks in finite-strain elasticity. Math.
Methods Appl. Sci., 31:501–528, 2008.
302. D. Knees, A. Mielke, and C. Zanini. On the inviscid limit of a model for crack propagation.
Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 18:1529–1569, 2008.
303. D. Knees, R. Rossi, and C. Zanini. A vanishing viscosity approach to a rate-independent
damage model. Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 23:565–616, 2013.
References 637
304. D. Knees and A. Schröder. Global spatial regularity for elasticity models with cracks, contact
and other nonsmooth constraints. Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 35:1859, 2012.
305. D. Knees and A. Schröder. Computational aspects of quasi-static crack propagation. Discr.
Cont. Dynam. Systems Ser. S, 6:63–99, 2013.
306. D. Knees and A. Schröder. Computational aspects of quasi-static crack propagation. Discr.
307. D. Knees, C. Zanini, and A. Mielke. Crack growth in polyconvex materials. Physica D,
239:1470–1484, 2010.
308. D. Knees. On global spatial regularity and convergence rates for time dependent elasto-
plasticity. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 20:1823–1858, 2010.
309. M. Kočvara, M. Kružík, and J. V. Outrata. On the control of an evolutionary equilibrium in
micromagnetics. In Optimization with multivalued mappings, pages 143–168. Springer, New
York, 2006.
310. M. Kočvara, A. Mielke, and T. Roubíček. A rate–independent approach to the delamination
problem. Math. Mechanics Solids, 11:423–447, 2006.
311. R. V. Kohn. The relaxation of a double-well energy. Continuum Mech. Thermodyn.,
3:193–236, 1991.
312. V. I. Kondrachov. Sur certaines propriétés fonctions dans l’espace Lp . C.R. (Doklady) Acad.
Sci. USSR (N.S.), 48:535–538, 1945.
313. A. Korn. Die Eigenschwingungen eines elastischen Korpers mit ruhender Oberflache. Akad.
der Wissensch., München, Math.-phys.Kl,, 36:351–401, 1906.
314. G. Köthe. Topological Vector Spaces I. Springer, Berlin, 2 edition, 1983.
315. J. Koutný, M. Kružík, A. Kurdila, and T. Roubíček. Identification of preisach-type hysteresis
operators. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim., 29:149–160, 2008.
316. M. A. Krasnosel’skiı̆ and A. V. Pokrovskiı̆. Simulation of transformers with hysteresis by
means of continual relay systems (russian). Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 227:547–550, 1976.
317. M. A. Krasnosel’skiı̆ and A. V. Pokrovskiı̆. Systems with Hysteresis. Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
1989.
318. J. Kratochvíl, M. Kružík, and R. Sedláček. Energetic approach to gradient plasticity. Zeitschift
angew. Math. Mech., 90:122–135, 2010.
319. P. Krejčí. Hysteresis, Convexity and Dissipation in Hyperbolic Equations. Gakkotosho,
Tokyo, 1996.
320. P. Krejčí. Evolution variational inequalities and multidimensional hysteresis operators. In
P. Drábek, P. Krejčí, and P. Takáč, editors, Nonlinear differential equations, pages 47–110.
Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 1999.
321. P. Krejčí and M. Liero. Rate independent Kurzweil processes. Appl. Math., 54:117–145, 2009.
322. P. Krejčí and A. Vladimirov. Lipschitz continuity of polyhedral Skorokhod maps. Zeitschrift
Anal. Anwend., 20:817–844, 2001.
323. P. Krejčí and A. Vladimirov. Polyhedral sweeping processes with oblique reflection in the
space of regulated functions. Set-Valued Anal., 11:91–110, 2003.
324. J. Kristensen. Lower semicontinuity of variational integrals. Phd.thesis, Math. Inst., Tech.
Univ. of Denmark, Lungby, 1994.
325. J. Kristensen. On the non-locality of quasiconvexity. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non
Linéaire, 16:1–13, 1999.
326. M. Kružík. Numerical approach to double well problems. SIAM J. Numer. Anal.,
35:1833–1849 (electronic), 1998.
327. M. Kružík and M. Luskin. The computation of martensitic microstructure with piecewise
laminates. J. Sci. Comp., 19:293–308, 2003.
328. M. Kružík, A. Mielke, and T. Roubíček. Modelling of microstructure and its evolution in
shape-memory-alloy single-crystals, in particular in CuAlNi. Meccanica, 40:389–418, 2005.
329. M. Kružík and F. Otto. A phenomenological model for hysteresis in polycrystalline shape
memory alloys. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 84:835–842, 2004.
330. M. Kružík, C. G. Panagiotopoulos, and T. Roubíček. Quasistatic adhesive contact delaminat-
ing in mixed mode and its numerical treatment. Math. Mech. of Solids, 2014. in print. DOI:
10.1177/1081286513507942.
638 References
331. M. Kružík and A. Prohl. Young measures approximation in micromagnetics. Numer. Math.,
90:291–307, 2001.
332. M. Kružík and A. Prohl. Recent developments in the modeling, analysis, and numerics of
ferromagnetism. SIAM Rev., 48:439–483, 2006.
333. M. Kružík and T. Roubíček. On the measures of diperna and majda. Math. Bohemica,
122:383–399, 1997.
334. M. Kružík and T. Roubíček. Weierstrass-type maximum principle for microstructure in
micromagnetics. Zeitschrift Anal. Anwend., 19:415–428, 2000.
335. M. Kružík and T. Roubíček. Specimen shape influence on hysteretic response of bulk
ferromagnets. J. Magnetism Magn. Mater., 256:158–167, 2003.
336. M. Kružík and T. Roubíček. Interactions between demagnetizing field and minor-loop
development in bulk ferromagnets. J. Magnetism Magn. Mater., 277:192–200, 2004.
337. M. Kružík and T. Roubíček. Mesoscopic model of microstructure evolution in shape memory
alloys with applications to NiMaGa. Technical report, IMA Minneapolis, 2004.
338. M. Kružík and J. Zimmer. A model of shape memory alloys taking into account plasticity.
IMA J. Appl. Math., 76:193–216, 2011.
339. A. Kufner, O. John, and S. Fučík. Function spaces. Academia & Nordhoff Int. Publ., Praha
& Leyden, 1977.
340. A. A. Kulikovski. Analytical Modelling of Fuel Cells. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2010.
341. M. Kunze and M. D. P. Monteiro Marques. Existence of solutions for degenerate sweeping
processes. J. Convex Anal., 4:165–176, 1997.
342. M. Kunze and M. D. P. Monteiro Marques. On parabolic quasi-variational inequalities and
state-dependent sweeping processes. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal., 12:179–191, 1998.
343. K. Kuratowski. Une méthode d’élimination des nombree transfinis des raisonnements mathé-
matiques. Fund. Math., 3:76–108, 1922.
344. K. Kuratowski. Topology I, II. Acad. Press & PWN, New York & Warszawa, 1966.
345. L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz. On the theory of the dispersion of magnetic permeability of
ferromagnetic bodies. Physik Z. Sowjetunion, 8:153–169, 1935.
346. L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz. Course of Theoretical Physics, volume 8. Pergamon Press,
Oxford, 1960.
347. C. J. Larsen. Epsilon-stable quasi-static brittle fracture evolution. Comm. Pure Appl. Math.,
63:630–654, 2010.
348. C. J. Larsen. Models for dynamic fracture based on griffith’s criterion. In K. Hackl, editor,
IUTAM Symp. on Variational Concepts with Appl. to the Mech. of Mater., pages 131–140.
Springer, 2010. Proceedings of the IUTAM Symposium on Variational Concepts, Bochum,
Germany, Sept. 22–26, 2008.
349. C. J. Larsen, M. Ortiz, and C. L. Richardson. Fracture paths from front kinetics: relaxation
and rate-independence. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 193:539–583, 2007.
350. C. J. Larsen, C. Ortner, and E. Suli. Existence of solution to a regularized model of dynamic
fracture. Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 20:1021–1048, 2010.
351. A. Lavrentiev. Sur quelques problémes du calcul des variations. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl.,
41:107–124, 1926.
352. H. Le Dret and A. Raoult. Variational convergence for nonlinear shell models with directors
and related semicontinuity and relaxation results. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 154:101–134,
2000.
353. H. Lebesgue. Sur les intégrales singuliéres. Ann. Fac. Sci Univ. Toulouse, Math.-Phys.,
1:25–117, 1909.
354. E. H. Lee and D. T. Liu. Finite-strain elastic-plastic theory with application to plain-wave
analysis. J. Applied Phys., 38:19–27, 1967.
355. D. Leguillon. Strength or toughness? A criterion for crack onset at a notch. European J. of
Mechanics A/Solids, 21:61–72, 2002.
356. S. Lenci. Analysis of a crack at a weak interface. Int. J. Fracture, 108:275–290, 2001.
357. C. Lexcellent, S. Moyne, A. Ishida, and S. Miyazaki. Deformation behaviour associated with
the stress-induced martensitic transformation in ti-ni thin films and their thermodynamical
modelling. Thin Solid Films, 324:184–189, 1998.
References 639
358. Z. Li. Numerical methods for mimizers and microstructures in nonlinear elasticity. Math.
Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 6:957–975, 1996.
359. K. M. Liechti and Y. S. Chai. Asymmetric shielding in interfacial fracture under in-plane
shear. J. Appl. Mech., 59:295–304, 1992.
360. M. Liero and A. Mielke. An evolutionary elastoplastic plate model derived via
-convergence. Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 21:1961–1986, 2011.
361. J. L. Lions. Quelques Méthodes de Résolution des Problémes aux Limites non linéaires.
Dunod, Paris, 1969.
362. E. Lorentz and S. Andrieux. A variational formulation for nonlocal damage models. Int. J.
Plasticity, 15:119–138, 1999.
363. J. Lubliner. A maximum dissipation principle in generalized plasticity. Acta Mech.,
52:225–237, 1984.
364. R. Lucchetti and F. Patrone. On Nemytskii’s operator and its application to the lower
semicontinuity of integral functionals. Indiana Univ. Math. J., 29:703–713, 1980.
365. N. Lusin. Sur les propriétés des fonctions measurables. Compt. Rendus Acad. Sci. Paris,
154:1688–1692, 1912.
366. M. Luskin. On the computation of crystalline microstructure. Acta Numerica, 5:191–257,
1996.
367. F. Luterotti, G. Schmiperna, and U. Stefanelli. Global solution to a phase field model with
irreversible and constrained phase evolution. Quart. Appl. Math., 60:301–316, 2002.
368. V. Lyakhovsky and Y. Ben-Zion. Scaling relations of earthquakes and aseismic deformation
in a damage rheology model. Geophys. J. Int., 172:651–662, 2008.
369. V. Lyakhovsky, Y. Ben-Zion, and A. Agnon. Distributed damage, faulting, and friction. J.
Geophysical Res., 102:27,635–27,649, 1997.
370. V. Lyakhovsky, Y. Hamiel, and Y. Ben-Zion. A non-local visco-elastic damage model and
dynamic fracturing. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 59:1752–1776, 2011.
371. V. Lyakhovsky, Z. Reches, R. Weiberger, and T. E. Scott. Nonlinear elastic behaviour of
damaged rocks. Geophys. J. Int., 130:157–166, 1997.
372. A. Mainik. A rate-independent model for phase transformations in shape-memory alloys. PhD
Thesis, IADM, Universität Stuttgart, http://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/opus/volltexte/2005/2235/,
2005.
373. A. Mainik and A. Mielke. Existence results for energetic models for rate–independent
systems. Calc. Var. Part. Diff. Eqns., 22:73–99, 2005.
374. A. Mainik and A. Mielke. Global existence for rate-independent gradient plasticity at finite
strain. J. Nonlinear Sci., 19:221–248, 2009.
375. V. Mantič. Discussion “on the reference length and mode mixity for a bimaterial interface”.
J. Engr. Mater. Technology, 130:045501–1–2, 2008.
376. V. Mantič. Interface crack onset at a circular cylindrical inclusion under a remote transverse
tension. application of a coupled stress and energy criterion. Int. J. Solids Structures,
46:1287–1304, 2009.
377. P. M. Mariano and G. Augusti. Basic topics on damage pseudo-potentials. Int. J. Solids
Structures, 38:1963–1974, 2001.
378. P. M. Mariano and G. Modica. Ground states in complex bodies. ESAIM Control Optim. Calc.
Var., 15:377–402, 2009.
379. J. A. C. Martins, M. D. P. Monteiro Marques, and F. Gastaldi. On an example of nonex-
istence of solution to a quasistatic frictional contact problem. European J. Mech. A Solids,
13:113–133, 1994.
380. J. A. C. Martins and J. T. Oden. Existence and uniqueness results for dynamic contact
problems with nonlinear normal and friction interface laws. Nonlinear Anal., 11:407–428,
1987. Corrigendum: 12 (1988) p. 747.
381. J. A. C. Martins, F. M. F. Simões, F. Gastaldi, and M. D. P. Monteiro Marques. Dissipative
graph solutions for a 2 degree-of-freedom quasistatic frictional contact problem. Int. J. Engrg.
Sci., 33:1959–1986, 1995.
640 References
382. G. A. Maugin. The Thermomechanics of Plasticity and Fracture. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1992.
383. G. A. Maugin. The Thermomechanics of Nonlinear Irreversible Behaviors. World Scientific,
Singapore, 1999.
384. I.D. Mayergoyz. Mathematical models of hysteresis. New York etc.: Springer-Verlag, 1991.
385. A. Menzel and P. Steinmann. A theoretical and computational framework for anisotropic
continuum damage mechanics at large strains. Int. J. Solids Structures, 38:9505–9523, 2001.
386. C. Miehe. Discontinuous and continuous damage evolution in ogden-type large-strain elastic
materials. Eur. J. Mech., A, 14:697–720, 1995.
387. C. Miehe and J. Keck. Superimposed finite elastic-viscoelastic-plastoelastic stress response
with damage in filled rubbery polymers. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 48:323–365, 2000.
388. A. Mielke. Flow properties for Young-measure solutions of semilinear hyperbolic problems.
Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A, 129:85–123, 1999.
389. A. Mielke. Estimates on the mixture function for multiphase problems in elasticity. In A.-M.
Sändig, W. Schiehlen, and W. Wendland, editors, Multifield Problems, pages 96–103, Berlin,
2000. Springer–Verlag.
390. A. Mielke. Finite elastoplasticity, Lie groups and geodesics on SL.d/. In P. Newton,
A. Weinstein, and P. J. Holmes, editors, Geometry, Mechanics, and Dynamics, pages 61–90.
Springer–Verlag, New York, 2002.
391. A. Mielke. Energetic formulation of multiplicative elasto–plasticity using dissipation dis-
tances. Continuum Mech. Thermodyn., 15:351–382, 2003.
392. A. Mielke. Deriving new evolution equations for microstructures via relaxation of variational
incremental problems. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 193:5095–5127, 2004.
393. A. Mielke. Evolution in rate-independent systems (Ch. 6). In C.M. Dafermos and E. Feireisl,
editors, Handbook of Differential Equations, Evolutionary Equations, vol. 2, pages 461–559.
Elsevier B.V., Amsterdam, 2005.
394. A. Mielke. Lipschitz Lectures: Modeling and analysis of rate-independent processes. Univer-
sität Bonn (Lecture Notes, 42 pp.), January 2007.
395. A. Mielke. Weak-convergence methods for Hamiltonian multiscale problems. Discr. Cont.
Dynam. Systems Ser. A, 20:53–79, 2008.
396. A. Mielke. Existence theory for finite-strain crystal plasticity with gradient regularization. In
K. Hackl, editor, IUTAM Symp. on Variational Concepts with Appl. to the Mech. of Mater.,
pages 171–183. Springer, 2010.
397. A. Mielke. Complete-damage evolution based on energies and stresses. Discr. Cont. Dynam.
Systems Ser. S, 4:423–439, 2011.
398. A. Mielke. Differential, energetic, and metric formulations for rate-independent processes.
In L. Ambrosio and G. Savaré, editors, Nonlinear PDE’s and Applications, pages 87–170.
Springer, 2011. (C.I.M.E. Summer School, Cetraro, Italy 2008, Lect. Notes Math. Vol. 2028).
399. A. Mielke. Emergence of rate-independent dissipation from viscous systems with wiggly
energies. Continuum Mech. Thermodyn., 24:591–606, 2012.
400. A. Mielke. Generalized Prandtl-Ishlinskii operators arising from homogenization and dimen-
sion reduction. Physica B, 407:1330–1335, 2012.
401. A. Mielke. On evolutionary -convergence for gradient systems. WIAS Preprint 1915, 2014.
To appear in Proc. Summer School in Twente University June 2012.
402. A. Mielke and S. Müller. Lower semicontinuity and existence of minimizers for a functional
in elastoplasticity. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 86:233–250, 2006.
403. A. Mielke and M. Ortiz. A class of minimum principles for characterizing the trajectories of
dissipative systems. ESAIM Control Optim. Calc. Var., 14:494–516, 2008.
404. A. Mielke, L. Paoli, and A. Petrov. Existence and approximation for a 3D model of
thermally-induced phase transformations in shape-memory alloys. Proc. Appl. Math. Mech.,
8:10395–10396, 2008.
405. A. Mielke, L. Paoli, A. Petrov, and U. Stefanelli. Error estimates for space-time discretizations
of a rate-independent variational inequality. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 48:1625–1646, 2010.
References 641
406. A. Mielke and A. Petrov. Thermally driven phase transformation in shape-memory alloys.
Adv. Math. Sci. Appl., 17:667–685, 2007.
407. A. Mielke, A. Petrov, and J. A. C. Martins. Convergence of solutions of kinetic variational
inequalities in the rate-independent quasiastatic limit. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 348:1012–1020,
2008.
408. A. Mielke and F. Rindler. Reverse approximation of energetic solutions to rate-independent
processes. Nonl. Diff. Eqns. Appl., 16:17–40, 2009.
409. A. Mielke and R. Rossi. Existence and uniqueness results for a class of rate-independent
hysteresis problems. Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 17:81–123, 2007.
410. A. Mielke, R. Rossi, and G. Savaré. Modeling solutions with jumps for rate-independent
systems on metric spaces. Discr. Cont. Dynam. Systems Ser. A, 25:585–615, 2009.
411. A. Mielke, R. Rossi, and G. Savaré. A vanishing viscosity approach to rate-independent
modelling in metric spaces. In T. Roubíček and U. Stefanelli, editors, Rate-Independent Evol.
and Mater. Modeling, pages 33–38, 2010. Pubblicazione IMATI-CNR 29PV10/27/0 (Special
Section of EQUADIFF 2007).
412. A. Mielke, R. Rossi, and G. Savaré. BV solutions and viscosity approximations of rate-
independent systems. ESAIM Control Optim. Calc. Var., 18:36–80, 2012.
413. A. Mielke, R. Rossi, and G. Savaré. Nonsmooth analysis of doubly nonlinear evolution
equations. Calc. Var. Part. Diff. Eqns., 46:253–310, 2013.
414. A. Mielke, R. Rossi, and G. Savaré. Balanced-viscosity (BV) solutions to infinite-dimensional
rate-independent systems. J. Europ. Math. Soc., 2014. To appear. (WIAS preprint 1845. http://
arxiv.org/abs/1309.6291).
415. A. Mielke, R. Rossi, and G. Savaré. Balanced-Viscosity solutions for multi-rate systems. J.
Physics, Conf. Series, 2014. WIAS Preprint no. 2001. Submitted.
416. A. Mielke and T. Roubíček. A rate–independent model for inelastic behavior of shape–
memory alloys. Multiscale Model. Simul., 1:571–597, 2003.
417. A. Mielke and T. Roubíček. Rate-independent damage processes in nonlinear elasticity. Math.
Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 16:177–209, 2006.
418. A. Mielke and T. Roubíček. Numerical approaches to rate-independent processes and
applications in inelasticity. Math. Model. Numer. Anal., 43:399–428, 2009.
419. A. Mielke, and T. Roubíček. Rate-independent elastoplasticity at finite strains and its
numerical approximation. In preparation, 2015.
420. A. Mielke, T. Roubíček, and U. Stefanelli. -limits and relaxations for rate-independent
evolutionary problems. Calc. Var. Part. Diff. Eqns., 31:387–416, 2008.
421. A. Mielke, T. Roubíček, and M. Thomas. From damage to delamination in nonlinearly elastic
materials at small strains. J. Elasticity, 109:235–273, 2012.
422. A. Mielke, T. Roubíček, and J. Zeman. Complete damage in elastic and viscoelastic media
and its energetics. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 199:1242–1253, 2010.
423. A. Mielke and U. Stefanelli. A discrete variational principle for rate-independent evolution.
Advances Calculus Variations, 1:399–431, 2008.
424. A. Mielke and F. Theil. A mathematical model for rate-independent phase transformations
with hysteresis. In H.-D. Alber, R.M. Balean, and R. Farwig, editors, Proc. Workshop on
“Models of Continuum Mechanics in Analysis and Engineering”, pages 117–129, Aachen,
1999. Shaker-Verlag.
425. A. Mielke and F. Theil. On rate–independent hysteresis models. Nonl. Diff. Eqns. Appl.,
11:151–189, 2004. (Accepted July 2001).
426. A. Mielke, F. Theil, and V. I. Levitas. A variational formulation of rate–independent phase
transformations using an extremum principle. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 162:137–177,
2002.
427. A. Mielke, F. Theil, and V. I. Levitas. Mathematical formulation of quasistatic phase
transformations with friction using an extremum principle. Preprint A8, Hannover, Sept.
1998.
428. A. Mielke and A. Timofte. An energetic material model for time-dependent ferroelectric
behavior: existence and uniqueness. Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 29:1393–1410, 2006.
642 References
429. A. Mielke and A. M. Timofte. Two-scale homogenization for evolutionary variational

inequalities via the energetic formulation. SIAM J. Math. Anal., 39:642–668, 2007.
430. A. Mielke and L. Truskinovsky. From discrete visco-elasticity to continuum rate-independent
plasticity: rigorous results. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 203:577–619, 2012.
431. A. Mielke and S. Zelik. On the vanishing viscosity limit in parabolic systems with rate-
independent dissipation terms. Ann. Sc. Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5), XIII:67–135, 2014.
432. M. D. P. Monteiro Marques. Differential inclusions in nonsmooth mechanical problems.
Shocks and dry friction. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1993.
433. E. H. Moore and H. L. Smith. A general theory of limit. Amer. J. Math., 44:102–121, 1922.
434. J.-J. Moreau. Problème d’évolution associé à un convexe mobile d’un espace hilbertien. C. R.
Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. A-B, 276:A791–A794, 1973.
435. J.-J. Moreau. On unilateral constraints, friction and plasticity. In New Variational Techniques
in Math. Phys. (Centro Internaz. Mat. Estivo (C.I.M.E.), II Ciclo, Bressanone, 1973), pages
171–322. Edizioni Cremonese, Rome, 1974.
436. J.-J. Moreau. Application of convex analysis to the treatment of elastoplastic systems. In
P. Germain and B. Nayroles, editors, Appl. of Meth. of Funct. Anal. to Problems in Mech.,
pages 56–89. Springer-Verlag, 1976. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 503.
437. J.-J. Moreau. Evolution problem associated with a moving convex set in a Hilbert space. J.
Differential Equations, 26:347–374, 1977.
438. C. B. Morrey, Jr. Quasi-convexity and the lower semicontinuity of multiple integrals. Pacific
J. Math., 2:25–53, 1952.
439. U. Mosco. Approximation of the solutions of some variational inequalities. Ann. Scuola
Norm. Sup. Pisa, 21:373–394, 1967. Erratum, ibid. (3) 765.
440. U. Mosco. A remark on a theorem of F. E. Browder. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 20:90–93, 1967.
441. U. Mosco. Convergence of convex sets and of solutions of variational inequalities. Adv. in
Math., 3:510–585, 1969.
442. S. Müller. Variational models for microstructure and phase transitions. In Calculus of
Variations and Geometric Evolution Problems (Cetraro, 1996), pages 85–210. Springer,
Berlin, 1999.
443. F. Murat. Compacité par compensation. Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (4), 5:489–507,
1978.
444. Dunford N. and J.T. Schwartz. Linear Operators, Part I. Interscience, New York, 1967.
445. J. Nečas. Sur les normes équivalentes dans Wpk .˝/ et sur la coercivité des formes formelle-
ment positives, pages 102–128. Séminaire de Mathématiques Supérieures. 19. Les Presses de
l’Université de Montréal, Montréal, 1966.
446. J. Nečas. Les Méthodes Directes en la Théorie des Equations Elliptiques. Academia &
Masson, Praha, Paris, 1967.
447. J. Nečas and T. Roubíček. Buoyancy-driven viscous flow with L1 -data. Nonlinear Anal.,
46:737–755, 2001.
448. P. Neff and K. Chelmiński. Well-posedness of dynamic Cosserat plasticity. Appl. Math.
Optim., 56:19–35, 2007.
449. P. Neff and D. Knees. Regularity up to the boundary for nonlinear elliptic systems arising in
time-incremental infinitesimal elasto-plasticity. SIAM J. Math. Anal., 40:21–43, 2008.
450. M. Negri. From rate-dependent to rate-independent brittle crack propagation. J. Elasticity,
98:159–187, 2010.
451. M. Negri. Quasi-static rate-independent evolutions: characterization, existence, approxima-
tion and application to fracture mechanics. ESAIM Control Optim. Calc. Var., 2014. To appear.
452. M. Negri and C. Ortner. Quasi-static crack propagation by Griffith’s criterion. Math. Models
Methods Appl. Sci., 18:1895–1925, 2008.
453. S. Nesenenko. Homogenization in viscoplasticity. SIAM J. Math. Anal., 39:236–262, 2007.
454. E. A. De Souza Neto, D. Peric, and D. R. J. Owen. A phenomenological three-dimensional
rate-independent continuum damage model for highly filled polymers. J. Mech. Phys. Solids,
42:1533–1550, 1994.
455. Q. S. Nguyen. Stability and Nonlinear Solid Mechanics. J. Wiley, Chichester, 2000.
References 643
456. R. A. Nicolaides and N. J. Walkington. Computation of microstructure utilizing Young

measure representations. In C.A. Rogers and R.A. Rogers, editors, Rec. Adv. in Adaptive
and Sensory Mater. and their Appl., pages 131–141. Technomic Publ., 1992.
457. O. Nikodym. Sur une généralisation des intégrales de M. J. Radon. Fund. Math., 15:131–179,
1930.
458. R. H. Nochetto, G. Savaré, and C. Verdi. A posteriori error estimates for variable-time step
discretizations of nonlinear evolution equations. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 53(5):525–589,
2000.
459. W. Noll. A mathematical theory of the mechanical behaviour of continuous media. Archive
Rat. Mech. Anal., 2:197–226, 1958.
460. J. T. Oden. Exterior penalty methods for contact problems in elasticity. In W. Wunderlich,
E. Stein, and K.J. Bathe, editors, Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis in Structural Mechanics,
pages 655–665, Berlin, 1981. Springer.
461. L. Onsager. Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes, I+II. Physical Review, 37:405–426,
1931. (part II, 38:2265–2279).
462. D. Ornstein. A non-inequality for differential operators in the L1 -norm. Arch. Rat. Mech.
Anal., 11:40–49, 1962.
463. M. Ortiz. A constitutive theory for the inelastic behavior of concrete. Mech. Materials,
4:67–93, 1985.
464. M. Ortiz. An analytical study of the localized failure modes of concrete. Mech. Mater.,
6:159–174, 1987.
465. M. Ortiz and E. A. Repetto. Nonconvex energy minimization and dislocation structures in
ductile single crystals. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 47:397–462, 1999.
466. C. Padovani, G. Pasquinelli, and M. Šilhavý. Processes in masonry bodies and the dynamical
significance of collapse. Math. Mech. Solids, 13:573–610, 2008.
467. C. G. Panagiotopoulos and V. Mantič. Symmetric and non-symmetric debonds at fiber-matrix
interface under transverse loads. an application of energetic approaches using collocation
BEM. Anales de Mecánica de la Fractura, 30:125–130, 2013.
468. C. G. Panagiotopoulos, V. Mantič, and T. Roubíček. BEM implementation of energetic
solutions for quasistatic delamination problems. In M.H. Aliabadi E.L. Albuquerque, editor,
Int. Conf. on Boundary Element and Meshless Techniques (BETEQ 2011), pages 261–268,
Eastleigh, 2011. Engineering Conferences Ltd.
469. C. G. Panagiotopoulos, V. Mantič, and T. Roubíček. Two adhesive-contact models for qua-
sistatic mixed-mode delamination problems. Math. Comput. in Simulation, 2014. Submitted.
470. N. S. Papageorgiou. On the existence of solutions for nonlinear parabolic problems with
nonmonotone discontinuities. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 205:434–453, 1997.
471. P. Pedregal. Relaxation in ferromagnetism: the rigid case. J. Nonlinear Sci., 4:105–125, 1994.
472. P. Pedregal. Parametrized Measures and Variational Principles. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel,
1997.
473. R. H. J. Peerlings, R. de Borst, W. A. M. Brekelmans, and J. H. P. de Vree. Gradient enhanced
damage for quasi-brittle materials. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engr., 39:3391–3403, 1996.
474. R. H. J. Peerlings, M. G. D. Geers, R. de Borst, and W. A. M. Brekelmans. Critical
comparison of nonlocal and gradient-enhanced softening continua. Int. J. Solids Structures,
38:7723–7746, 2001.
475. H. Petryk. Incremental energy minimization in dissipative solids. C. R. Mecanique,
331:469–474, 2003.
476. B. J. Pettis. On integration in vector spaces. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 44:277–304, 1938.
477. G. Pijaudier-Cabot and Z. P. Bažant. Nonlocal damage theory. J. Engr. Mech.,
113:1512–1533, 1987.
478. M. Pitteri and G. Zanzotto. Continuum Models for Phase Transitions and Twinning in
Crystals. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton, 2003.
479. P. Plecháč and T. Roubíček. Visco-elasto-plastic model for martensitic phase transformation
in shape-memory alloys. Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 25:1281–1298, 2002.
480. J. Plešek and D. Gabriel. PMD example manual. Inst. of Thermomechanics, Prague, 2000.
644 References
481. P. Podio-Guidugli. On dissipation mechanism in micromagnetics. Eur. Physical J. B,

19:417–424, 2001 .
482. P. Podio-Guidugli. Contact interactions, stress, and material symmetry, for nonsimple elastic
materials. Theor. Appl. Mech., 28–29:261–276, 2002.
483. P. Podio Guidugli, T. Roubíček, and G. Tomassetti. A thermodynamically-consistent theory
of the ferro/paramagnetic transition. Archive Rat. Mech. Anal., 198:1057–1094, 2010.
484. P. Podio-Guidugli and M. Vianello. Hypertractions and hyperstresses convey the same
mechanical information. Continuum Mech. Thermodynam., 22:163–176, 2010.
485. N. Point. Unilateral contact with adherence. Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 10:367–381, 1988.
486. N. Point and E. Sacco. A delamination model for laminated composites. Math. Methods Appl.
Sci., 33:483–509, 1996.
487. N. Point and E. Sacco. Mathematical properties of a delamination model. Math. Comput.
Modelling, 28:359–371, 1998.
488. V. L. Popov and J. A. T. Gray. Prandtl-Tomlinson model: History and applications in friction,
plasticity, and nanotechnologies. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 92:692–708, 2012.
489. W. Prager. A new method of analyzing stress and strains in work hardening solids. ASME J.
Appl. Mech., 23:493–496, 1956.
490. L. Prandtl. Anwendungsbeispiel zu einem Henckyschen Satz über das plastische Gleichge-
wicht. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 3:401–406, 1923.
491. L. Prandtl. Gedankenmodel zur kinetischen Theorie der festen Körper. Zeitschrift angew.
Math. Mech., 8:85–106, 1928.
492. F. Preisach. über die magnetische nachwirkung. Zeitschrift f. Physik, 94:277–302, 1935.
493. A. Prohl. Computational Micromagnetism. Teubner, Stuttgart, 2002.
494. G. Puglisi and L. Truskinovsky. Rate independent hysteresis in a bi-stable chain. J. Mech.
Phys. Solids, 50:165–187, 2002.
495. G. Puglisi and L. Truskinovsky. Thermodynamics of rate-independent plasticity. J. Mech.
Phys. Solids, 53:655–679, 2005.
496. J. Radon. Teorie und Anwendungen der absolutadditiven Mengenfunktionen. Sitzungsber. der
Math.-Naturwiss. Acad. Wien, 112:1295–1438, 1913.
497. K. R. Rajagopal and T. Roubíček. On the effect of dissipation in shape-memory alloys.
Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl., 4:581–597, 2003.
498. K. R. Rajagopal and A. R. Srinivasa. On the inelastic behavior of solids - Part I: Twinning.
Int. J. Plasticity, 11:653–678, 1995.
499. K. R. Rajagopal and A. R. Srinivasa. On the thermomechanics of materials that have multiple
natural configurations. Part I: Viscoelasticity and classical plasticity. Zeitschrift angew. Math.
Physik, 55:861–893, 2004.
500. K. R. Rajagopal and A. R. Srinivasa. On thermomechanical restrictions of continua. Proc. R.
Soc. Lond. A, 460:631–651, 2004.
501. F. Rellich. Ein Satz über mittlere Konvergenz. Nachr. Akad. Wiss. Göttingen, pages 30–35,
1930.
502. X. Ren and L. Truskinovsky. Finite scale microstructures in nonlocal elasticity. J. Elasticity,
59:319–355, 2000.
503. S. I. Repin. Errors of finite element method for perfectly elasto-plastic problems. Math.
Models Methods Appl. Sci., 6:587–607, 1996.
504. S. I. Repin and J. Valdman. Functional a posteriori error estimates for incremental models in
elasto-plasticity. Central Euro. J. Math., 7:506–519, 2009.
505. Y. G. Reshetnyak. On the stability of conformal maps in multidimensional spaces. Siberian
Math. J., 8:69–85, 1967.
506. F. Rindler. Optimal control for nonconvex rate-independent evolution processes. SIAM J.
Control Optim., 47:2773–2794, 2008.
507. F. Rindler. Approximation of rate-independent optimal control problems. SIAM J. Numer.
Anal., 47:3884–3909, 2009.
508. E. Rocca and R. Rossi. A degenerating PDE system for phase transitions and damage. Math.
Models Methods Appl. Sci., 24:1265–1341, 2014.
References 645
509. R. C. Rogers. A nonlocal model for the exchange energy in ferromagnetic materials. J.
Integral Eqns. Appl., 3:85–127, 1991.
510. R. C. Rogers. Some remarks on nonlocal interactions and hysteresis in phase transitions.
Continuum Mech. Thermodyn., 8:65–73, 1994.
511. R. C. Rogers and L. Truskinovsky. Discretization and hysteresis. Physica B, 233:370–375,
1997.
512. H. Romanowski and J. Schröder. Coordinate invariant modelling of the ferroelectric hysteresis
within a thermodynamically consistent framework. A mesoscopic approach. In Y. Wang and
K. Hutter, editors, Trends in Applications of Mathematics to Mechanics, pages 419–428.
Shaker Verlag, 2005.
513. R. Rossi, A. Mielke, and G. Savaré. A metric approach to a class of doubly nonlinear evolution
equations and applications. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5), VII:97–169, 2008.
514. R. Rossi and T. Roubíček. Thermodynamics and analysis of rate-independent adhesive contact
at small strains. Nonlinear Anal., 74:3159–3190, 2011.
515. R. Rossi and T. Roubíček. Adhesive contact delaminating at mixed mode, its thermodynamics
and analysis. Interfaces and Free Boundaries, 14:1–37, 2013.
516. R. Rossi and G. Savaré. A characterization of energetic and BV solutions to one-dimensional
rate-independent systems. Discr. Cont. Dynam. Systems Ser. S, 6:167–191, 2013.
517. R. Rossi and M. Thomas. From an adhesive to a brittle delamination model in thermo-visco-
elasticity. ESAIM Contr. Optim. Calc. Var., 21:1–59, 2015.
518. T. Roubíček. Convex compactifications and special extensions of optimization problems.
Nonlinear Anal., Th. Meth. Appl., 16:1117–1126, 1991.
519. T. Roubíček. A note on an interaction between penalization and discretization. In A. Kurzhan-
ski and I. Lasiecka, editors, Proc. IFIP-IIASA Conf. Modelling and Inverse Problems of
Control for Dist. Param. Syst., volume 154 of L.N. in Control and Inf. Sci., pages 145–150,
Berlin, 1991. Springer.
520. T. Roubíček. Relaxation in Optimization Theory and Variational Calculus. W. de Gruyter,
Berlin, 1997.
521. T. Roubíček. Convex locally compact extensions of Lebesgue spaces and their applications.
In A. Ioffe, S. Reich, and I. Shafrir, editors, Calculus of variations and optimal control, pages
237–250. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 1999.
522. T. Roubíček. Dissipative evolution of microstructure in shape memory alloys. In C. Zenger
J. Bungartz, R. H. W. Hoppe, editor, Lectures on Applied Mathematics, pages 45–63. Springer,
Berlin, 2000.
523. T. Roubíček. Optimization of fine structure in micromagnetism. In N. Kenmochi, editor, Free
Boundary Problems II, pages 398–408. Gakkotosho, 2000.
524. T. Roubíček. Evolution model for martensitic phase transformation in shape–memory alloys.
Interfaces Free Bound., 4:111–136, 2002.
525. T. Roubíček. Models of microstructure evolution in shape memory alloys. In P. Ponte Cas-
taneda, J.J. Telega, and B. Gambin, editors, Nonlin. Homogenization and its Appl. to
Composites, Polycrystals and Smart Mater., pages 269–304, Dordrecht, 2004. Kluwer Acad.
Publ. NATO Sci. Series II/170.
526. T. Roubíček. Rate independent processes in viscous solids at small strains. Math. Methods
Appl. Sci., 32:825–862, 2009. Erratum Vol. 32(16) p. 2176.
527. T. Roubíček. Rate independent processes in viscous solids. In T. Roubíček and U. Stefannelli,
editors, Rate-independent evolutions and material modeling (EQUADIFF 2007), pages
45–50. IMATI, Pavia, 2010.
528. T. Roubíček. Thermodynamics of rate independent processes in viscous solids at small strains.
SIAM J. Math. Anal., 42:256–297, 2010.
529. T. Roubíček. Inviscid limit of viscoelasticity with delamination. In A. Mielke, F. Otto,
G. Savaré, and U. Stefanelli, editors, Variat. Meth. for Evol., Oberwolfach Rep. No.55/2011.
Math. Forschungsinst. Oberwolfach, 2011.
530. T. Roubíček. On certain convex compatifications for relaxation in evolution problems. Discr.
646 References
531. T. Roubíček. Adhesive contact of visco-elastic bodies and defect measures arising by
vanishing viscosity. SIAM J. Math. Anal., 45:101–126, 2013.
532. T. Roubíček. Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations with Applications. Birkhäuser, Basel,
2nd edition, 2013.
533. T. Roubíček. Thermodynamics of perfect plasticity. Discr. Cont. Dynam. Systems Ser. S,
6:193–214, 2013.
534. T. Roubíček. Calculus of variations. In M. Grinfeld, editor, Mathematical Tools for Physicists,
chapter 17, pages 551–587. J. Wiley, Weinheim, 2014.
535. T. Roubíček. A note about the rate-and-state-dependent friction model in a thermodynamic
framework of the Biot-type equation. Geophys. J. Int., 199:286–295, 2014.
536. T. Roubíček. Maximally-dissipative local solutions to rate-independent systems and applica-
tion to damage and delamination problems. Nonlin. Anal, Th. Meth. Appl., 113:33–50, 2015.
537. T. Roubíček and M. Kružík. Microstructure evolution model in micromagnetics. Zeitschrift
538. T. Roubíček and M. Kružík. Mesoscopic model for ferromagnets with isotropic hardening.
Zeitschrift angew. Math. Physik, 56:107–135, 2005.
539. T. Roubíček and M. Kružík. Mesoscopic model of microstructure evolution in shape
memory alloys, its numerical analysis and computer implementation. GAMM Mitteilungen,
29:192–214, 2006.
540. T. Roubíček, M. Kružík, and J. Koutný. A mesoscopical model of shape-memory alloys. Proc.
Estonian Acad. Sci. Phys. Math., 56:146–154, 2007.
541. T. Roubíček, M. Kružík, and J. Zeman. Delamination and adhesive contact models and
their mathematical analysis and numerical treatment. In V. Mantič, editor, Math. Methods
& Models in Composites, chapter 9, pages 349–400. Imperial College Press, 2013.
542. T. Roubíček, V. Mantič, and C. G. Panagiotopoulos. Quasistatic mixed-mode delamination
model. Discr. Cont. Dynam. Systems Ser. S, 6:591–610, 2013.
543. T. Roubíček, C. G. Panagiotopoulos, and V. Mantič. Quasistatic adhesive contact of visco-
elastic bodies and its numerical treatment for very small viscosity. Zeitschrift angew. Math.
Mech., 93:823–840, 2013.
544. T. Roubíček, C. G. Panagiotopoulos, and V. Mantič. Local-solution approach to quasistatic
rate-independent mixed-mode delamination. Math. Models Meth. Appl. Sci., 25:1337–1364,
2015.
545. T. Roubíček, L. Scardia, and C. Zanini. Quasistatic delamination problem. Continuum Mech.
Thermodyn., 21:223–235, 2009.
546. T. Roubíček, O. Souček, and R. Vodička. A model of rupturing lithospheric faults with
re-occurringing earthquakes. SIAM J. Appl. Math., 73:1460–1488, 2013.
547. T. Roubíček and U. Stefanelli. Magnetic shape-memory alloys: thermomechanical modeling
and analysis. Continuum Mech. Thermodyn., 26:783–810, 2014.
548. T. Roubíček, M. Thomas, and C. G. Panagiotopoulos. Stress-driven local-solution approach
to quasistatic brittle delamination. Nonlin. Anal, Real Worl Appl., 22:645–663, 2015.
549. T. Roubíček and G. Tomassetti. Thermomechanics of demageable materials under diffusion:
modeling and analysis. In preparation, 2015.
550. T. Roubíček, G. Tomassetti, and C. Zanini. The Gilbert equation with dry-friction-type
damping. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 355:453–468, 2009.
551. T. Roubíček and J. Valdman. Perfect plasticity with damage and healing at small strains, its
modelling, analysis, and computer implementation. (Preprint arXiv 1505.01018), submitted,
2015.
552. T. Roubíček and J. Valdman. Stress-driven solution to rate-independent damage with plasticity
at small strains and its computer implementation. (Preprint arXiv no. 1506.01421), submitted,
2015.
553. W. Rudin. Functional Analysis. McGraw-Hill, 1973.
554. W. Rudin. Principles of Mathematical Analysis. McGraw-Hill, New York, 3rd edition, 1976.
555. P. Rybka and M. Luskin. Existence of energy minimizers for magnetostrictive materials. SIAM
J. Math. Anal., 36:2004–2019, 2005.
References 647
556. A. Sadjadpour and K. Bhattacharya. A micromechanics inspired constitutive model for shape-
memory alloys. Smart Mater. Structures, 16:1751–1765, 2007.
557. F. Schmid and A. Mielke. Vortex pinning in super-conductivity as a rate-independent process.
Europ. J. Appl. Math., 16:799–808, 2005.
558. F. Schmid and A. Mielke. Existence results for a contact problem with varying friction
coefficient and nonlinear forces. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 87:616–631, 2007.
559. P. Sedlák, M. Frost, B. Benešová, T. Ben Zineb, and P. Šittner. Thermomechanical model for
NiTi-based shape memory alloys including R-phase and material anisotropy under multi-axial
loadings. Int. J. Plasticity, 39:132–151, 2012.
560. M. Shillor, M. Sofonea, and J. J. Telega. Models and Analysis of Quasistatic Contact.
Springer, Berlin, 2004.
561. M. Šilhavý. Phase transitions in non-simple bodies. Archive Rat. Mech. Anal., 88:135–161,
1985.
562. M. Šilhavý. On the hysteresis in martensitic transformations. In P. Podio-Guidugli and
M. Brokate, editors, Rational Continua, Classical and New, pages 151–168, Berlin, 2003.
Springer.
563. M. Šilhavý. Zeroes of the polyconvex hull of powers of the distance and s–polyconvexity. J.
of Convex Analysis, 14:319–344, 2007.
564. J. C. Simo. Numerical analysis and simulation of plasticity. In P.G. Ciarlet and J.L.
Lions, editors, Handbook of Numerical Analysis, Vol. VI, pages 183–499. North-Holland,
Amsterdam, 1998.
565. J. C. Simo and J. R. Hughes. Computational Inelasticity. Springer, Berlin, 1998.
566. S. L. Sobolev. On some estimates relating to families of functions having derivatives that are
square integrable. (In Russian). Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 1:267–270, 1936.
567. M. Sofonea, W. Han, and M. Shillor. Analysis and approximation of contact problems with
adhesion or damage. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2006.
568. A. Souza, E. Mamiya, and N. Zouain. Three-dimensional model for solids undergoing stress-
induced phase transformations. Europ. J. Mech., A/Solids, 17:789–806, 1998.
569. U. Stefanelli. The Brezis-Ekeland principle for doubly nonlinear equations. SIAM J. Control
Optim., 47:1615–1642, 2008.
570. U. Stefanelli. A variational principle for hardening elastoplasticity. SIAM J. Math. Analysis,
40:623–652, 2008.
571. U. Stefanelli. A variational characterization of rate-independent evolution. Mathem. Nach.,
282:1492–1512, 2009.
572. N. Strömberg, L. Johansson, and A. Klarbring. Derivation and analysis of a generalized
standard model for contact, friction and wear. Int. J. Solids Structures, 33:1817–1836, 1996.
573. M. Struwe. Variational Methods. Applications to Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations
and Hamiltonian Systems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990.
574. S. Stupkiewicz. Extension of the node-to-segment contact element for surface-expansion-
dependent contact laws. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engr., 50:739–759, 2001.
575. S. Stupkiewicz, J. Lengiewicz, and J. Korelc. Sensitivity analysis for frictional contact
problems in the augmented Lagrangian formulation. Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng.,
199:2165–2176, 2010.
576. S. Stupkiewicz and H. Petryk. Modelling of laminated microstructures in stress-induced
martensitic transformations. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 50:2303–2331, 2002.
577. J. F. Sturm. Implementation of interior point methods for mixed semidefinite and second order
cone optimization problems. Optimization Methods and Software, 17:1105–1154, 2002.
578. P.-M. Suquet. Existence et régularité des solutions des équations de la plasticité parfaite. C.
R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér.A, 286:1201–1204, 1978.
579. P.-M. Suquet. Sur les équations de la plasticité: existence et régularité des solutions. J.
Mécanique, 20:3–39, 1981.
580. B. Svendsen. Continuum thermodynamic models for crystal plasticity including the effects of
geometrically necessary dislocations. J. Mech. Physics Solids, 50:1297–1329, 2002.
648 References
581. V. Šverák. Rank-one convexity does not imply quasiconvexity. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh
Sect. A, 120:185–189, 1992.
582. J. Svoboda, I. Turek, and F. D. Fischer. Application of the thermodynamic extremal
principle to modeling of thermodynamic processes in material sciences. Philos. Magazine,
85:3699–3707, 2005.
583. J. G. Swadener, K. M. Liechti, and A. L. deLozanne. The intrinsic toughness and adhesion
mechanism of a glass/epoxy interface. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 47:223–258, 1999.
584. L. Tartar. H-measures, a new approach for studying homogenisation, oscillations and
concentration effects in partial differential equations. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A,
115:193–230, 1990.
585. L. Tartar. Beyond Young measures. Meccanica, 30:505–526, 1995.
586. L. Távara, V. Mantič, E. Graciani, J. Canas, and F. París. Analysis of a crack in a thin
adhesive layer between orthotropic materials: an application to composite interlaminar
fracture toughness test. Computer Modeling in Engr. Sci., 58:247–270, 2010.
587. L. Távara, V. Mantič, E. Graciani, and F. París. BEM analysis of crack onset and propagation
along fiber-matrix interface under transverse tension using a linear elastic-brittle interface
model. Engr. Anal. with Boundary Elements, 35:207–222, 2011.
588. R. Temam. Navier-Stokes equations. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 3rd edition, 1984.
589. R. Temam. Mathematical Problems in Plasticity. Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1985. (French
original in 1983).
590. P. Thamburaja and L. Anand. Thermomechanically coupled superelastic response of initially-
textured tini sheet. Acta Mater., 51:325–338, 2003.
591. F. Theil. Young-measure solutions for a viscoelastically damped wave equation with non-
monotone stress-strain relation. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 144:47–78, 1998.
592. F. Theil. Approximation of quasistatic processes with friction by incremental problems in the
theory of phase transitions. In G. Iooss, O. Guès, and A. Nouri, editors, Trends in Appl. of
Math. to Mech., pages 172–179. Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2000.
593. M. Thomas. Rate-independent damage processes in nonlinearly elastic materials. PhD thesis,
Institut für Mathematik, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, February 2010.
594. M. Thomas. Quasistatic damage evolution with spatial BV-regularization. Discr. Cont.
Dynam. Systems, Ser. S, 6:235–255, 2013. Preprint no. 1638, WIAS, Berlin, 2011.
595. M. Thomas and A. Mielke. Damage of nonlinearly elastic materials at small strain – Existence
and regularity results –. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Mech., 90:88–112, 2010.
596. M. Thomas and A.-M. Sändig. Energy-release rate for interface-crack in compounds for p-
Laplacian type-Griffith formula and j-integral. Technical report, Bericht 2006/13, SFB 4040,
Univ. Stuttgart., 2006.
597. A. Timofte. Homogenization for a nonlinear ferroelectric model. Asymptot. Anal.,
61:177–194, 2009.
598. R. Toader and C. Zanini. An artificial viscosity approach to quasistatic crack growth. Boll.
Unione Matem. Ital., 2:1–36, 2009.
599. G. A. Tomlinson. A molecular theory of friction. Philos. Mag., 7:905–939, 1929.
600. R. A. Toupin. Elastic materials with couple stresses. Archive Rat. Mech. Anal., 11:385–414,
1962.
601. C. Truesdell and W. Noll. The non-linear field theories of mechanics. In Handbuch der Physik,
Band III/3, pages 1–602. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1965.
602. L. Truskinovsky. Transition to detonation in dynamic phase changes. Archive Rat. Mech.
Anal., 125:375–397, 1994.
603. I. Tsagrakis and E. C. Aifantis. Recent developments in gradient plasticity. Part I: Formulation
and size effects. J. Eng. Mater. Tech., 124:352–357, 2002.
604. A. Tychonoff. Über die topologische Erweiterung von Räumen. Math. Annalen, 102:544–561,
1930.
605. A. Vainchtein and P. Rosakis. Hysteresis and stick-slip motion of phase boundaries in dynamic
models of phase transitions. J. Nonlin. Sci., 9:697–719, 1999.
References 649
606. J. Valdman. Mathematical and numerical analysis of elasto-plastic material with multi-
surface stress-strain relation. PhD thesis, Christian-Albrechts-Univ. Kiel, 2002.
607. A. Visintin. Strong convergence results related to strict convexity. Comm. Partial Differential
Equations, 9:439–466, 1984.
608. A. Visintin. Differential Models of Hysteresis. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1994.
609. A. Visintin. Models of Phase Transitions. Birkhäuser, Boston, 1996.
610. A. Visintin. Modified Landau-Lifshitz equation for ferromagnetism. Physica B, 233:365–369,
1997.
611. A. Visintin. On some models of ferromagnetism. In N. Kenmochi, editor, Free Boundary
Problems I, pages 411–428. Gakkotosho, 2000.
612. A. Visintin. A Weiss model of ferromagnetism. Physica B, 275:87–91, 2000.
613. G. Vitali. Sui gruppi di punti e sulle funzioni di variabili reali. Atti Accad. Sci. Torino,
43:75–92, 1908.
614. A. Vivet and C. Lexcellent. Micromechanical modelling for tension-compression pseudoelas-
tic behaviour of aucd single crystals. Euro Phys. J. A.P., 4:125–132, 1998.
615. R. Vodička, V. Mantič, and T. Roubíček. Energetic versus maximally-dissipative local
solutions of a quasi-static rate-independent mixed-mode delamination model. Meccanica,
49:2933–2963, 2014.
616. R. Vodička, V. Mantič, and T. Roubíček. Quasistatic normal-compliance contact problem of
visco-elastic bodies with Coulomb friction implemented by SGBEM/QP. Comp. Meth. Appl.
Mechanics Engrg., 2015, submitted.
617. R. von Mises. Mechanik der festen Körper im plastisch-deformablen Zustand. Nachr. Akad.
Wiss. Gött. Math.-Phys. Kl., 1:582–595, 1913.
618. R. von Mises. Mechanik der plastischen Formänderung von Kristallen. Zeitschrift angew.
Math. Mech., 8:161–185, 1928.
619. P. Wriggers. Computational Contact Mechanics. Springer, Berlin, 2 edition, 2006.
620. J. Würschmidt. Theorie des Entmagnetisierungsfaktors und der Scherung von Mag-
netisierungskurven. Vieweg & Sohn, Braunschweig, 1925.
621. K. Yosida and E. Hewitt. Finitely additive measures. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 72:46–66, 1952.
622. L. C. Young. Generalized curves and the existence of an attained absolute minimum in the
calculus of variations. Comptes Rendus de la Société des Sciences et des Lettres de Varsovie,
Classe III, 30:212–234, 1937.
623. L. C. Young. Generalized surfaces in the calculus of variations. Ann. Math., 43:Part I: 84–103,
Part II: 530–544, 1942.
624. C. Zălinescu. Convex Analysis in General Vector Spaces. World Scientific Publ. Co. Inc.,
River Edge, NJ, 2002.
625. A. T. Zayak, V. D. Buchelnikov, and P. Entel. A Ginzburg-Landau theory for Ni-Mn-Ga.
Phase Transit., 75:243–256, 2002.
626. E. Zeidler. Nonlinear Functional Analysis and its Applications III, Variational Methods and
Optimization. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1985.
627. H. Ziegler. An attempt to generalize Onsager’s principle, and its significance for rheological
problems. Zeitschrift angew. Math. Physik, 9:748–763, 1958.
628. H. Ziegler. Some extremum principles in irreversible thermodynamics with application to
continuum mechanics. In Progress in Solid Mechanics, Vol. IV, pages 91–193. North-Holland,
Amsterdam, 1963.
629. H. Ziegler and Ch. Wehrli. The derivation of constitutive relations from the free energy and the
dissipation function. In Advances in Applied Mechanics, Vol. 25, pages 183–237. Academic
Press, Orlando, FL, 1987.
650 References
630. H. Ziegler and Ch. Wehrli. On a principle of maximal rate of entropy production. J. Non-
Equilib. Thermodyn., 12:229–243, 1987.
631. M. Zorn. A remark on a method in transfinite algebra. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 41:667–670,
1935.
632. P. K. Zysset and A. Curnier. An implicit projection algorithm for simultaneous flow
of plasticity and damage in standard generalized materials. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engr.,
39:3065–3082, 1996.
Index
Symbols assumptions of general use

-convergence, 90 (AC1)-(AC2): approxim. compatibility, 87
simultaneous, 356 (C1)-(C2): compatibility, 55
ˇ-differentiable, 357 (D1)-(D2): about dissipation, 46
-algebra, 591 (E1)-(E2): about stored energy, 47
-finite complete measure space, 592 (GC1)-(GC2): generalized compatibility, 83
(I1)-(I2): about reduced functionals, 75
(RC1)-(RC2): reduced compatibility, 77
A attainable point, 581
A-quasiconvexity, 247 Aubin–Lions lemma, 609
a.e.-local solution, 36, 132, 230 austenite, 285
to problems with viscosity/inertia, 462 available driving force, 17
absolutely continuous, 595
absolutely continuous mapping, 603
actual driving force, 17 B
adhesive contact, 297 back stress, 313
dynamical, 513 backtracking, 206
small strains, 395 balanced-viscosity solution, 36, 222
with friction, 523 Banach algebra, 535, 584
adjoint operator, 586 Gelfand representation, 536
admissible, 7 ordered, 589
aging, 502 unital, 535, 584
algebra, 591 Banach selection principle, 586
almost all (a.a.), 594 Banach space, 584
almost everywhere (a.e.), 594 ordered, 588
alternating minimization algorithm, 209 bang-bang-type delamination, 292, 296
Ambrosio–Tortorelli functional, 368, 525 base of a topology, 580
anisotropy energy, 439 binomial formula, 162, 199, 483
approximable solution, 36, 222 Biot equation, 3, 18
approximate incremental problem, 86 Bochner integrable, 604
convergence, 88 Bochner measurable, 603
strengthened, 86 Bochner space, 606
approximate minimizers, 85 Bolzano–Weierstrass theorem, 582
approximate-stability set, 86, 107 Borel -algebra, 592
approximately stable sequence, 87 Borel measure, 592

652 Index
boundary, 580, 600 continuous, 181

bounded deformations, 316 epigraph, 90
bounded set, 584 in measure, 596
bounded variation, 306, 603 Moore–Smith, 57, 581
BV solution, 36, 222, 226 Mosco, 181
two-scale, 343
variational, 90
C convex compactification, 583
calibration, 159 of balls in Lp -spaces, 619
Carathéodory mapping, 598 convex functional, 587
Cauchy net, 584 partial/separate, 151
Cauchy–Green stretch tensor, 237 proper, 587
Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, 586 convex locally compact envelope, 618
causal, 7 convex set, 587
CD solution, 35, 131 convex subdifferential, 12, 129, 588
chemical potential, 529 Cosserat continuum, 331
Ciarlet–Nečas condition, 242, 264 Cosserat couple modulus, 331
for delamination, 293 Coulomb friction, vii, 429, 518
in crack problem, 306 crack, 26
Clapeyron principle, 397 prescribed-path, 290
Clarke subdifferential, 129 crack-transfer lemma, 308
Clausius–Duhem inequality, 565, 576 cross-quasiconvex, 247
abstract, 559 cross-quasiconvexification, 389
closed, 580
closure, 580
cluster point, 581 D
coarser topology, 581 damage, 309, 346
coercive, 117 by swelling, 529
force, 441 cohesive, 368
cofactors, 239 complete, 356
cohesive contact, 302 ductile, 379
coldness, 559 in Jeffreys materials, 510
compact, 581 in plasticizable materials, 379
locally, 581 in viscoelastic materials, 505
sequentially, 581 regularity, 351, 508
compactification, 583 stress-driven, 509
coarser, 583 with healing, 500, 532
convex, 583 Darboux sum, 605
finer, 583 Darcy law, 528
compatibility conditions, 55 debonding, 290
complete damage, 356 defect measure, 133, 229
generalized energetic solution, 365 deformation, 237
composite material, 104 bounded, 316
concatenation property, 7, 49 deformation gradient, 237, 238
conditioned continuity delamination, 290
of the power of the external forces, 55 at small strains, 394, 512
cone, 587 bang-bang type, 292
conjugate exponent, 596 brittle, 294, 395, 425, 516
contact set, 224 BV-bound on u, 427
continuous mapping, 582 local solution, 404
minors, 245 mixed-mode sensitive, 400, 406, 428
continuous operator, 585 engineering model, 403
convergence mixity-sensitive
-, 90 engineering model, 515, 577
Index 653
regularity, 426 duality pairing, 585

weakening, 303 Dunford–Pettis compactness criterion, 598
with healing, 534
with inertial/visco-effects, 512
demagnetizing field, 439 E
dense, 581 earthquakes, 504
depolarizing field, 456 elastic modulus, 239
deviatoric part of a tensor, 313 of adhesive, 297, 399
diameter, 594 elasticity domain, 15
differential solution, 35, 131, 146 elastoplasticity, 21, 313
to friction problem, 434 dynamic, 497
Dini subdifferential, 129 finite-strain, 250
DiPerna–Majda measures, 620 energetic rate-independent system, viii, 9,
Dirac measure, 592 45
direct method in the calculus of variations, 51 energetic solution, 36, 48, 546
directed set, 579 absolute continuity, 178
direction of easy magnetization, 440 continuity, 144
directional derivative, 81, 587 continuous dependence on data, 169
Dirichlet boundary conditions, 241 generalized, 82
displacement, 237 regularity, 484
Kirchhoff–Love, 337 symmetry-breaking, 375
dissipated energy to damage at large strains, 311
effective, 401, 507 to delamination model, 298, 395
dissipation to fracture model, 369
hardening, 212 to plasticity at large strains, 254
total, 47 to Prandtl–Reuss plasticity, 317
weakening, 211 to problems with viscosity/inertia, 463
dissipation distance, viii, 46, 75 existence, 464, 492
dissipation function, 123 to shape-memory-alloy model, 268
dissipation metric, 120, 123 to thermodynamical system, 546
in problems with viscosity, 490 uniqueness, 146, 150, 484, 488
dissipation potential, 2, 12, 123 energetic solutions, viii, 24
p-homogeneous, 12 energy balance (E), 16, 48, 76
translation-invariant, 120 for Kelvin–Voigt material, 240
dissipation pseudopotential, 2, 15 total for thermodynamic system, 543
dissipation rate, 15, 123 weakened, 82
dissipative component, 13 energy-dissipation principle, 19
distance, 581 energy-storage functional, viii
intrinsic, 124 wiggly, 28
path, 124 enthalpy transformation, 542
distortion matrices, 287 entropy, 540
distributional derivative, 599 equation, 540, 559, 565
distributional time derivative, 608 epigraph, 587
divergence, 601 convergence, 90
domain, 599 essential infimum, 595
Lipschitz, 600 essential supremum, 595
of Ck -class, 600 Euclidean space, 584
of a functional, 47, 588 Euler–Lagrange equation, 259
doubly nonlinear equation, 42 evolutionary system, 7
driving force, 17 evolutionary -convergence of ERIS, 100
dual ordering, 588 evolutionary variational inequality, 14
dual space, 585 evolutionary variational inequality, 169
to Bochner space Lp .0; TI V /, 607 exchange energy, 439
654 Index
F global stability (S), 48

Fan Glicksberg theorem, 586 gradient, 599
fatigue, 43, 393 gradient flow
Fatou theorem, 597 generalized, 18
Fenchel–Young inequality, 588 viscous, 18, 33
ferroic, 438 gradient system
multi-, 453 generalized, 17
Filippov selection, 593 viscous, 17
fine structure, 278, 444 gradient theory, 267
fineness of a partition, 51 in damage, 310
finer convex compactification, 583 in plasticity, 250, 329
finer net, 580 graph of a (set-valued) mapping, 592
finer topology, 581 Green formula, 602
finite interpenetration, 430, 518 on a surface, 602
flow rule, 18 Green–Lagrange strain, 239, 287
Fourier law, 538, 541 Griffith criterion, 292
Fréchet differential, 587 group of orientation-preserving rotations, 238
Fréchet subdifferential, 129
fractional-step strategy, 207
for plasticity with damage, 501 H
for thermodynamical systems, 548 Hamilton’s variational principle, 498
for visco/inertial systems, 465 hardening, 212, 250, 254, 255, 313, 496
fracture, 368 in ferromagnets, 449
in viscoelestic material, 525 hardening parameters, 245
frame indifference, 250 Hausdorff, 584
frame-indifference, 238, 249 Hausdorff measure, 594
for dissipative forces, 241 healing, 349, 415, 500, 531
for gradient theory, 271 heat capacity, 541
for nonlocal terms, 277 heat-transfer equation, 541
Fréchet differential, 130 Heisenberg constraint, 439
friction, 20, 429, 517 Helly selection principle, 72, 610
dynamic vs static, 524 generalized, 72
on adhesive contact, 523 Helmholtz decomposition, 455
functions of bounded variation, 306 Hilbert space, 584
special, 306 holder-inequality, 596
homogenization, 104
counterexample, 190
G for linearized elastoplasticity, 342
Gâteaux differential, 587 with quadratic energies, 189
gamma convergence, 90, 91 hyperbolic, 486, 497
strong, 91 hyperelastic materials, 238
weak, 91 hyperstress, 267
Gâteaux differential, 130 hysteresis operator, 7
Gelfand representation, 536, 585 identification, 176
Gelfand triple, 544, 608 Krasnoselskiı̆–Pokrovskiı̆, 176
general linear group, 242 Prandtl–Ishlinskiı̆, 172
generalized standard materials, 236 Preisach, 175
generalized energetic solution, 82
for complete damage, 365
generalized gradient flow, 18, 527 I
generalized gradient system, 17 identification
generalized Prandtl–Ishlinskiı̆ operator, 173 of hysteresis operators, 176
Gibbs simplex, 287 of rate-independent systems, 159
Gilbert equation, 443 improved stability estimate, 145
Index 655
incremental problem, 26, 51, 191 laminate, 282, 285

approximate, 86 Landau–Lifshitz equation, 443
decoupled, 467, 548 Laplace–Beltrami operator, 602
finite-dimensional, 191 Lavrentiev phenomenon, 264
strengthened approximate, 86 Lebesgue measurable, 594
indicator function ı K , 589 Lebesgue measure, 594
induced distance, 123 Lebesgue outer measure, 593
induced metric, 124 Lebesgue point, 603
infimum, 580 Lebesgue space, 595
inner product, 584 uniformly convex, 596
input–output system, 7 Lebesgue theorem, 597
integrable function, 594 left derivative, 76
integral, 594 Legendre–Fenchel transform, 588
integration by parts formula, 608 limit, 581
interaction energy, 439 inferior or superior, 582
interface plasticity, 400 simultaneous -, 356
interfacial energy, 271 slow-loading, 488
nonlocal, 276 limiting subdifferential, 129
interior, 580 linear operator, 585
internal energy, 540, 544 linear ordering, 579
internal parameters, 236 linearized elastoplasticity, 21
internal variable, 14, 236, 249 Lipschitz domain, 600
internal variables, 244 local stability, 16
interpolant local solution, 36, 132
piecewise affine, 156, 466 a.e.-, 132, 230
piecewise constant, 53, 153, 192 force-driven, 374
intrinsic distance, 124 maximally dissipative, 138, 222, 372
irreversibility, 304 counterexample, 376
irreversible crack evolution, 304 symmetry breaking, 376
irreversible quasistatic evolution, 46 to brittle delamination, 398
isotropic hardening, 255, 313, 449 to delamination, 405
isotropic material, 240, 243, 561 to delamination in mixed modes, 408
to plasticity with damage, 382
local stability, 16, 24
J local stability condition, 132
jump-transfer lemma, 305, 308 locally convex space, 584
complete, 584
lower semicontinuity, 582
Löwner ordering, 589
K
Kelvin–Voigt material, 240
vanishing viscosity, 421 M
kinematic hardening, 254, 313 magnetic constant, 439
kinetic energy, 461 magnetostatic energy, 439
Kirchhoff stress, 253, 257, 274 magnetostrictive materials, 453
Kirchhoff–Love displacement, 337 mapping
Korn inequality, 244 nondecreasing, 579
Kuratowski–Zorn lemma, 580 nonincreasing, 579
set-valued, 592
martensite, 285
L maximal, 579
Lamé coefficients, 240 maximal monotone operator, 120
Lamé system, 243 maximal responsive mapping, 122
656 Index
maximally dissipative local solution, 138, 234 mutual uniform ˛-convexity, 146
alternative definition, 139, 376 mutual-convexity condition, 23, 31
example, 141
to damage, 349
maximum-dissipation principle, 17, 137, 374 N
approximate, 158, 379, 383, 410 neighborhood, 580
counterexample, 376 Nemytskiı̆ mapping, 598
Maxwell system extension, 618
rest (magnetostatics), 439 on Bochner spaces, 607
measurable function, 594 net, 580
measurable mapping, 592 Neumann boundary conditions, 241
measurable set, 592 non-self-penetration condition, 242
measurable set-valued map, 592 nonassociative, 211
measure, 591 nonconvex elastic energy, 504
absolutely continuous, 595 nondissipative component, 13
Borel, 592 nonsimple material, 267, 332, 427
complete, 592 norm, 583
Dirac, 592 normal cone, 587
Hausdorff, 594 normal integrand, 598
Lebesgue, 594 normal jump ŒŒ n , 394
outer, 592 normal-compliance contact, 429, 437, 518
regular, 591 normed linear space, 584
Young, 113, 278, 616 numerical strategies
metric, 581 alternating-minimization, 209
metrizable, 581 backtracking, 206
minimal, 579 for delamination at large strain, 297
minimization dissipation potential, 16, 139 for plasticity at large strain, 261
minimization-energy principle, 238 fractional-steps, 207, 465, 501, 548
minor, 245 incremental minimization, 26, 51, 191
minor hysteretic loop, 448 quadratic nonsmooth terms, 208
mixity of modes, 400 semi-implicit formula, 152, 407
angle of, 403 for plasticity with damage, 380
mixture function, 390
mode-mixity angle, 403
modulus of continuity, 64
momentum equilibrium, 238 O
monotone operator, 120 Ogden-type material, 239
maximal, 120 example, 254
Moore–Smith convergence, 581 one-sided limits, 59
Moore-Pollard-Stieltjes integral, 606 open, 580
Mosco convergence, 91, 181 operator
Mosco transformation, 206 adjoint, 586
multiferroic, 453 hysteresis, 172, 175
multiplicative decomposition, 251 Krasnoselskiı̆–Pokrovskiı̆, 176
multiplicative split, 242 linear, 585
multiplicative stress control, 253 memory, 9
mutual recovery sequences, 308 play, 20
mutual recovery sequence, 62, 97 Prandtl–Ishlinskiı̆, 172
for damage, 312, 507 Preisach, 175
for delamination problem, 295, 514 stop, 171
numerical approximation, 301 stop vector-valued, 171
for plasticity at large strains, 259 trace, 601
for vanishing-hardening plasticity, 321 vector-valued play, 21
for viscous problems, 153 optimal jump paths, 225
Index 657
ordering, 579 premonotone mapping, 122

dual, 588 principle
Löwner, 589 Hamilton’s, 498
of compactifications, 583 of energy minimization, 238
of convex compactifications, 583 of maximum dissipation, 17, 137, 374
of topologies, 581 of minimum dissipation potential, 16, 139
on a Banach algebra, 589 probability measure, 592
outer measure, 592 projective topology, 582
projector, 585
proper functional, 587
P pseudoelasticity, 285
p-homogeneous, 12 pseudopotential of dissipative forces, 240
dissipation potential, 120 pseudopotential of viscous forces, 461
p-nonconcentrating modification, 621
parameterized solution, 36
parent hysteretic loop, 448
Q
path distance, 124
quadratic mathematical-programming, 208
penalty function, 92, 276
quadratic trick, 63, 160, 162
Pettis theorem, 604
in micromagnetism, 572
phase transformation, 285
quasiconvex, 238
phase-field variable, 267, 530, 569
A-, 247
piecewise constant interpolants, 53, 192
cross-, 247
piezoelectric materials, 456
lower semicontinuity, 248
Piola–Kirchhoff stress, 238
quasidistance, 581
plastic indifference, 250
quasiplasticity, 285
plastic strain, 245
quasistatic crack evolution, 304, 308
plastic tensor, 250
quasistatic evolution, 460
plasticity
irreversible, 46
at large strains, 21, 250
quasivariational inequality, 133, 519
by swelling, 526
gradient, 250, 330, 379
interface, 400
linearized, 313, 496 R
multiple thresholds, 331 Radon measure, 591
perfect, 316, 568 Radon–Nikodým theorem, 595
with damage, 502 rank-1 condition, 282
stress-driven, 498, 567 rate-independent, 7
with aging, 502 rate-independent system, ix, 9, 45
with damage, 379, 499, 534 arising by slow-loading limit, 488
with hardening, 250, 313, 496 arising by vanishing viscosity, 38, 215
play operator, 20, 171 calibration of, 159
vector-valued, 21 energetic, viii, 9, 45
Poisson ratio, 243 identification of, 159
polyconvex, 238 reduced, 13
lower semicontinuity, 246 rebonding, 534
positive measure, 592 recovery sequence, 91
positive variation, 592 reduced compatibility condition, 77
positivity of temperature, 557 reduced energy functional, 68, 75
power balance, 16 reduced functional, 45, 54
Prandtl–Ishlinskiı̆ operator, 172 reduced power, 54
Prandtl–Reuss (perfect) plasticity, 316 reduced problem, 13
thermodynamics, 568 reduced rate-independent system, 68
predual, 585 reduced RIS, 13
Preisach operator, 175 reduced stability sets, 68
658 Index
reference configuration, 237 magnetic, 453

reflexive space, 586 polycrystals, 387
regular measure, 591 simple function, 594
regularity simple mapping, 603
in z-variable, 484 simultaneous -limit, 356
in small-strain plasticity, 316 singular perturbation, 112, 278, 444
inviscid hyperbolic case, 486 slide, 140
of damage, 351, 508 slide solution, 37, 140
of delamination, 426 slow-loading limit, 488
of displacements, 507 small-strain tensor, 243
of energetic solutions, 162, 484 smart material, 284
relaxation, 107 Sobolev exponent, 600
by lower semicontinuous envelope, 110 Sobolev space, 599
by Young measures, 113, 279, 444 Sobolev trace exponent, 601
relaxed problem, 114, 281, 445 Sobolev–Bochner space, 608
relay operator, 174 Sobolev–Slobodeckiı̆ space, 602
Rellich–Kondrachov theorem, 600 solution
remanent polarization, 456 a.e.-local, 36, 132, 230, 462
responsive set-valued operator, 122 maximally dissipative, 222, 234
restriction property, 7, 49 approximable, 36, 222
Riemann sum, 604 balanced-viscosity (= BV), 36, 222
Riemann–Stieltjes integral, 604 BV, 36, 222, 226
Riesz theorem, 592 CD , 35, 131
RIS (= rate-independent system), 9 differential, 35, 131, 146
Robin boundary conditions, 241 energetic, 36, 48, 546
rotation of a vector field, 439 generalized, 82
local, 36, 132
maximally dissipative, 138, 372
S parameterized, 36
(SC )-property, 152, 480 semi-energetic, 133, 229
integral variant, 464 semidifferential, 131, 146
of p-Laplacian, 158 slide, 37, 140
safe-load condition, 177 V-approximable, 215
saturation magnetization, 439 semi-energetic, 229
scalar play operator, 171 V-parameterized, 216
scalar product, 584 vanishing-viscosity, 36, 213
second-order cone programming, 208 weak, 37, 132
selection of a set-valued map, 592 St. Venant–Kirchhoff material, 287
self-adjoint linear functional, 589 St. Venant–Kirchhoff material, 239
self-controlling models, 48 stability
semi-energetic solution, 133, 229 global, 48
semi-implicit formula, 152, 465, 491 local, 16, 24, 132, 140
semidifferential solution, 131, 146 semi-, 139
seminorm, 584 stability set, 49
semistability, 139, 463 stability set
in problems with generalized viscosity, 490 closedness of, 55
semistable sequence, 154, 491 stable sequence, 54, 77, 95
separable, 581 approximately, 87
sequence, 580 for a sequence of problems, 95
sequential laminate, 283 semi-, 154
sequential semicontinuity, 582 stable states, 49
sequentially continuous mapping, 582 state space, 45
set-valued map, 592 stop operator, 171
shape-memory alloys, 286 vector-valued, 171
Index 659
stored energy, 238 uniformly integrable set, 597

multiwell, 288 unilateral contact, 291, 512
stress at large strains, 265
back, 313 with friction, 429
hyper-, 267 uniqueness
Kirchhoff, 253 counterexample, 375
Piola–Kirchhoff, 238 of energetic solution, 146, 150
strict convergence, 318 of solutions to linearized plasticity, 314
strictly convex functional, 587 of viscous delamination, 420
stronger topology, 581 unit outward normal, 601
subdifferential upper semicontinuity, 582
Clarke, 129
convex, 12, 129, 588
Dini, 129 V
Fréchet, 129 V-approximable solution, 215
limiting, 129 semi-energetic, 229
sublevel set, 48 V-parameterized solution, 216
sum rule, 588 vacuum permeability, 439
superconductivity, 452 vanishing viscosity
supremum, 580 approach, 213
surface divergence divS , 602 contact potential, 223, 224
surface gradient rS , 602 in dynamical systems, 490
sweeping process, 3, 21 in Kelvin–Voigt material, 421
swelling, 526 RIS, 38, 215
stress-driven, 530 vanishing-viscosity
limit, 20
solution, 36
T variable
tangent cone, 587 (non)dissipative, 13
tangential jump ŒŒ t , 394 intensive vs. extensive, 544
Tikhonov product topology, 582 internal, 14, 236
Tikhonov theorem, 583 variation, 223, 603
topological space, 580 of a measure, 591
topology, 580 special functions of bounded, 306
compact, 581 variational convergence, 90
Hausdorff, 580 variational inequality, 14
locally compact, 581 viscous gradient flow, 18, 33
relative, 580 viscous gradient system, 17
relatively compact, 581 Vitali theorem, 597
sequentially compact, 581 volume fraction, 444
strong, 584
weak, 586
total dissipation, 47 W
in problems with viscosity, 491 weak lower semicontinuity, 586
total variation, 537, 591 weak solution, 37, 132
trace, 601 to damage with healing, 532
translation-invariant D , 124 to micromagnetic problem, 443
translation-invariant R , 120 weak topology, 586
weak* topology, 586
weakened energy balance, 82
U weakening, 211
unidirectional processes, 210, 560 delamination, 303
uniform ˇ-differentiability, 357 weaker topology, 581
uniformly convex space, 584 weakly lower semicontinuous, 117
660 Index
weakly measurable, 603 Young functional, 618

weakly* measurable, 603 p-nonconcentrating, 621
wetting/dewetting, 50 Young-measure representation, 621
wiggly energy, 28 Young inequality, 595
Young measure, 113, 279, 444, 616
gradient, 278
Y representation, 621
Yosida–Moreau regularization, 247 Young modulus, 243

2015 Bookmatter Rate-IndependentSystems

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2015 Bookmatter Rate-IndependentSystems

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2015 Bookmatter Rate-IndependentSystems

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Appendix A

Elements of topology and functional analysis

Here, for the reader’s convenience, we collect fundamental concepts, definitions,

A binary relation, denoted by , on a set X is called an ordering if it is reflexive

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015 579

A topology T of a set X is a collection of subsets of X such that T contains the

@A WD cl.A/ n int.A/: (A.2.1c)

Having A B X, we say that A is dense in B if cl.A/  B. A topological space is

3 Q WD N .x/ directed by the ordering  and to take, for every Q D

A mapping f W X ! Y is called continuous if f .x/ D lim2 f .x / whenever a

A.3 Locally convex spaces, Banach spaces, Banach algebras

On a (real) linear space V ,10 a nonnegative, symmetric, degree-1 homogeneous,

the strong topology on V . A subset A V is called bounded if supu2A kuk < 1.

By assumption, .j/WV V !R is a bilinear form, which is obviously symmetric12

If also a multiplication between elements of a Banach space V is defined that is

numbers considered in this book. In particular, a C -algebra V is defined [216]

A.4 Functions and mappings on Banach spaces, dual spaces

Having two normed linear spaces V 1 and V 2 and a mapping A W V 1 ! V 2 , we say

kAkLin.V 1 ;V 2 / WD sup kAvkV 2 D sup kAvkV 2 =kvkV 1 : (A.4.1)

The involution is to satisfy .v / D v, .uCv/ D u C v , uv D v u , .av/ D aN v , and

kv vk D kvk kv k for every u; v 2 V and a 2 C with aN denoting the complex conjugate to a.

If V is a Hilbert space, then .u 7! .f ; u// 2 V  for every f 2 V , and the mapping

are normed linear spaces, then A 7! A realizes an isometric (i.e., norm-preserving)

A.u C uQ /  A.u/  ŒDA.u/ uQ

then A is called Fréchet differentiable at the point u.

A.5 Basics from convex analysis

A set K in a linear space is called convex if u C .1/v 2 K whenever u; v 2 K

If u1 ¤ u2 implies (A.5.1) with strict inequality, then f is called strictly convex.

Again, the normal cone is always a closed convex cone in V  . A domain of a

@.F1 CF2 / D @F1 C @F2 (A.5.3)

holds if Dom F1 \ int.Dom F2 / ¤ ; or int.Dom F1 / \ Dom F2 ¤ ;; cf. also

The Fenchel equivalences for subdifferentials read

2 @F.v/ , v 2 @F  ./ , F.v/ C F  ./ D h; vi: (A.5.5)

By the definition (A.5.4) of F  , we always have the Fenchel–Young inequality

F.v/ C F  ./ h; vi for all v 2 V and 2 V  : (A.5.6)

For a convex proper lower semicontinuous F, we have

A Banach linear space V is called ordered by a relation if this relation is an

we illustrate the above definitions by the following formulas:

@ı K D NK and @ı K D TK and Œ@ı K 1 D @ı 

@ı K .0/ D ŒNK 1 .0/ D K: (A.5.10)

is easily possible. It occurs, e.g., for v D 0 2 R D V for23

Example A.5.3 (Löwner ordering). The set of positive semidefinite .nn/-matrices

C j non9.v11/1 g is nonnegative, i.e., belongs to Œ0; C1/.

B.1 General measures

For a set S and a  -algebra1 S of its subsets, a  -additive2 set function W S !

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015 591

Borel  -algebra,3 denoted by B.S/. In the case S D B.S/, elements of M.S; S/

B.2 Lebesgue and Hausdorff measures

The d-dimensional Lebesgue outer measure L d ./ on the Euclidean space Rd , d

kD1 iD1 kD1

We call u W Rd ! Rm a simple if it takes only a finite number R of values vi 2 R

sets Ai 2 ˙ ; (iv) A B 2 ˙ and L d .B/ D 0 implies A 2 ˙ and L d .A/ D 0.

B.3 Lebesgue spaces, Nemytskiı̆ mappings

We now consider ˝ Rd measurable with L d .˝/ < 1. The notions of

ess sup f WD inf sup f .x/: (B.3.2)

one gets14 the Hölder inequality [272]15

where p0 is the so-called conjugate exponent defined as

Naturally, convergence a.e. means that uk .x/ ! u.x/ for a.a. x 2 ˝.

Having A B X, we say that A is dense in B if cl.A/ B. A topological space is

3 Q WD N .x/ directed by the ordering and to take, for every Q D

By assumption, .j/WV V !R is a bilinear form, which is obviously symmetric12

numbers considered in this book. In particular, a C -algebra V is defined [216]

If V is a Hilbert space, then .u 7! .f ; u// 2 V for every f 2 V , and the mapping

are normed linear spaces, then A 7! A realizes an isometric (i.e., norm-preserving)

A.u C uQ / A.u/ ŒDA.u/ uQ

A set K in a linear space is called convex if u C .1/v 2 K whenever u; v 2 K

Again, the normal cone is always a closed convex cone in V . A domain of a

2 @F.v/ , v 2 @F ./ , F.v/ C F ./ D h; vi: (A.5.5)

By the definition (A.5.4) of F , we always have the Fenchel–Young inequality

F.v/ C F ./ h; vi for all v 2 V and 2 V : (A.5.6)

@ı K D NK and @ı K D TK and Œ@ı K 1 D @ı

@ı K .0/ D ŒNK 1 .0/ D K: (A.5.10)

Example A.5.3 (Löwner ordering). The set of positive semidefinite .nn/-matrices

C j non9.v11/1 g is nonnegative, i.e., belongs to Œ0; C1/.

For a set S and a -algebra1 S of its subsets, a -additive2 set function W S !

Borel -algebra,3 denoted by B.S/. In the case S D B.S/, elements of M.S; S/

The d-dimensional Lebesgue outer measure L d ./ on the Euclidean space Rd , d

To make traces well defined on the boundary WD @˝ WD ˝N n ˝ with ˝N WD

holds if the so-called Sobolev exponent p is defined as

A variant of the Green formula on a curved smooth surface is sometimes

We now define spaces of abstract functions on a bounded interval Œ0; T R valued

is simple if it takes only a finite number of values vi 2 V and Ai WD z1 .vi /

Lebesgue measure on Œ0; T as defined on p. 595.

Also, if f W Œ0; TV ! R1 is lower semicontinuous with respect to a topology T

If V has a predual, i.e., V D .V 0 / for some Banach space V 0 , the notation

holds with p0 ; p1 ; : : : ; pk as in (B.3.12). Then Na maps Lp1 .0; TI V 1 / Lpk

Moreover, the embedding H V is dense.

Lp .0; TI V 1 / \ BV.Œ0; TI V 3 /

yielding a subsequence converging only weakly* in V 3 but everywhere on Œ0; T.

f uN g >0 bounded in B.Œ0; TI V 1 / uN ! u strongly in L1 .0; TI V 2 /

8 t 2 Œ0; T 8 k 2 N W zk .t/ 2 K; (B.5.23a)

D1 .z.tn /; z / lim inf DOkm.zOkm .tn /; zOkm .t //

lim inf DissOkm.zOkm I Œtn ; t / D ı.t /ı.tn /: (B.5.25)

Thus, using (B.5.22a), we conclude that Oz D z , and hence z.tn / ! z .

lim inf Disskl .zkl I Œs; t/ D ı.t/ı.s/: (B.5.27)

Thus, Diss1 .zI Œs; t/ ı.t/ı.s/, and (B.5.24c) is proved. t

For X a Banach space, let L1

with 2 L1 .˝I C.S// defined by

Œı.u/.x/ WD ıu.x/ ; (C.1.6)

Besides, for every Carathéodory function h W ˝Rm ! R, we have

where for s 2 S n S, h.x; /=.1 C j jp / is considered extended by continuity and

embedded into YH; .˝I Rm /Œ0;T by