Variable coefficient Schrödinger flows for ultrahyperbolic operators

C.E. KenigPartially supported by NSF and IBERDROLA program of Profesores Visitantes University of Chicago, Chicago Il., USA 60637, cek@math.uchicago.edu

G. PoncePartially supported by NSF and IBERDROLA program of Profesores Visitantes University of California, Santa Barbara, Ca, USA ponce@math.ucsb.edu

C. Rolvung Nykredit Markets & Asset Management, Kalvevod Bridge 1–3, DK-1780 Copenhagen V, Denmark, cro@nykredit.dk

L. VegaPartially supported by a MECyT grant Universidad del Pais Vasco, Apdo. 644, 48080, Bilbao, Spain, mtpvegol@lg.ehu.es

Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

In this paper we shall consider nonlinear Schrödinger equations of the form
t u = i ( x ) u + b 1 ( x ) x u + b 2 ( x ) x u ¯ + c 1 ( x ) u + c 2 ( x ) u ¯ + P ( u , u ¯ , x u , x u ¯ ) , (1.1)
where x R n   , t > 0   , ( x ) = j , k = 1 n x j ( a j k ( x ) x k )   , A ( x ) = ( a j k ( x ) ) j , k = 1 , . . , n   is a real, symmetric and nondegenerate variable coefficient matrix, and P   is a polynomial with no linear or constant terms.
Equations of the form described in ( 1.1 ) with A ( x )   merely invertible as opposed to positive definite arise in connection with water wave problems, and in higher dimensions as completely integrable models, see [5, [14, and [32.
In this work we shall study the existence, uniqueness and regularity of the local solutions to the initial value problem (IVP) associated to the equation ( 1.1 ). The class of equations is rather general and appropriate assumptions have to be imposed on the smoothness and decay of the coefficients a j k , b 1 , b 2 , c 1   and c 2   and on the initial data u ( x , 0 ) = u 0 ( x )   as well as on the asymptotic behavior of a j k ( x )   as | x |   . Also it will be necessary to measure the regularity of solutions in weighted Sobolev spaces of high indexes. The main result we obtain in this direction is Theorem  6.2.1 -also see Remark  6.2.2 , in Section  6 .
One of the main difficulties in ( 1.1 ) is that the nonlinear terms incur in the so called “loss of derivatives”. This can be avoided if P   is assumed to have a special symmetric form and b 1   is real valued. In this case, the standard energy method gives local well-posedness of the corresponding IVP in H s ( R n )   for s > n / 2 + 1   independently of the dispersive nature of ( 1.1 ), see [15, [23. Another approach used to overcome this loss of derivatives is to restrict oneself to working with = Δ   , b 1 = b 2 = 0   in suitable analytic function spaces, see [10and references therein.
In [18, C. E. Kenig, G. Ponce and L. Vega used linear dispersive smoothing effects of the associated linear equation to show that the IVP for the equation ( 1.1 ) with = Δ   , b 1 = b 2 = 0   , c 1 = c 2 = 0   and general P   is locally well posed in (possibly weighted) Sobolev spaces with high index for small initial data. For the case n = 1   , N. Hayashi and T. Ozawa [11removed the smallness condition by using an integrating factor which reduces the problem to a system where the energy method applies. H. Chihara [2removed the smallness assumptions in weighted Sobolev spaces [18in any dimension n   by considering systems of two equations which he diagonalized to essentially eliminate the conjugate first order terms. The remaining first order terms are treated by a method similar to the one used by S. Mizohata [26and S. Doi [7to solve linear Schrödinger equations with lower order terms. It consists in applying a pseudo-differential operator K   to the equation. The commutator i [ K Δ Δ K ]   basically absorbs the first orderterm to overcome the loss of derivatives in a way related to the method of integrating factors. In Chihara's approach the ellipticity of = Δ   is key in the diagonalization argument. C. E. Kenig, G. Ponce and L. Vega [22obtained local well-posedness for the IVP for ( 1.1 ) in the non-elliptic constant coefficient case = j = 1 k x j 2 j = k + 1 n x j 2 , k = 1 , . . , n 1 ,   using the pseudo-differential operators of [1in the linear problem to avoid the diagonalization process. Furthermore, their results are valid in Sobolev spaces with no weights if P   has no quadratic terms.
It may be gathered from this short summary of background literature that a thorough understanding of linear Schrödinger equations is important in the attempt to solve the nonlinear problem for ( 1.1 ).
Our approach in this work will be illustrated with the special case of ( 1.1 )
{ t u = i ( x ) u + b 1 ( x ) x u + u x 1 u , u ( x , 0 ) = u 0 ( x ) , (1.2)
or equivalently
{ t u = i ( x ) u + [ b 1 ( x ) x u + u 0 ( x ) x 1 u ] + ( u u 0 ) x 1 u , u ( x , 0 ) = u 0 ( x ) . (1.3)
The nonlinear part ( u u 0 ) x 1 u   of ( 1.3 ) should be small for small t   because of the factor ( u u 0 )   , but the factor x 1 u   still incurs loss of one derivative. The linear part of ( 1.3 ) has a modified first order coefficient.
It is therefore useful to study linear Schrödinger equations of the form
{ t u = i ( x ) u + b 1 ( x ) x u + b 2 ( x ) x u ¯ + c 1 ( x ) u + c 2 ( x ) u ¯ + f ( x , t ) , u ( x , 0 ) = u 0 ( x ) . (1.4)
Solutions u   of ( 1.4 ) gain one derivative compared to f   and 1 / 2   derivative compared to u 0   , on the average in time and modulo spatial weights, under suitable assumptions. More precisely, for s Z +   and N Z +   , N > 1   , the solution of ( 1.4 ) satisfies
0 T R n | J s + 1 / 2 u ( x , t ) | x N d x d t c ( ( 1 + T ) u 0 H s 2 + 0 T R n | J s 1 / 2 f ( x , t ) | x N d x d t ) (1.5)
For the proof of these results for the constant coefficient case ( x ) = Δ   , b 1 = b 2 = 0   see [16, [24, [3, [29, [31, [17, [18). The estimate ( 1.5 ) allows to overcome the loss of one derivative introduced by the nonlinear part of ( 1.3 ) and, more generally, to solve ( 1.1 ).
Consider ( 1.4 ) with ( x ) = Δ   , b 1 = ( i , 0 , . . , 0 )   , b 2 = c 1 = c 2 = f = 0   . The solution of this constant coefficient equation is given via Fourier transform by u ^ ( ξ , t ) = exp ( t ( i | ξ | 2 + ξ 1 ) ) u ^ 0 ( ξ )   .
The multiplier exp ( t ( i | ξ | 2 + ξ 1 ) )   is unbounded for t 0   , so ( 1.4 ) is not wellposed in L 2   in this case. In fact, the following condition, deduced by S. Mizohata [26, has been proven to be necessary for the well-posedness in L 2   of ( 1.4 ) with ( x ) = Δ   , b 2 = 0  
sup x R n , ω S n 1 | 0 Im b 1 ( x + r ω ) ω d r | < . (1.6)
So the decay assumptions on Im b 1   are natural. An application of J s = ( I Δ ) s / 2   to ( 1.4 ) gives a new equation with x a j k ( x )   appearing in the first order coefficient. Well posedness of ( 1.4 ) is of interest for any s   , so decay assumptions on x a j k ( x )   seem also natural.
To justify the decay assumptions on b 2 ( x )   , we use the result in [20. Consider the IVP
{ t u = i x 1 x 2 2 u + b 2 ( x ) x u ¯ , x R 2 , t > 0 , u ( x , 0 ) = u 0 ( x ) (1.7)
with b 2 = ( i , 0 )   . It was shown in [20that the IVP ( 1.7 ) is wellposed, however its solutions gain only 1 / 4   of derivative compared with u 0   instead of the expected 1 / 2   , i.e. ( 1.5 ) holds with f = 0   and 1 / 4   instead of 1 / 2   . Moreover, if we replace x 1 x 2 2   by x 1 2 + x 2 2   the expected gain of 1 / 2   derivatives is obtained. So one has that in the non-elliptic case, decay assumptions on b 2   are also necessary to obtain ( 1.5 ). The main result we obtain concerning ( 1.4 ) is Theorem  5.1.1 in Subsection  5.1 .
When considering the variable coefficient equation in ( 1.1 ) one should study of the bicharacteristic flow, i.e. solutions ( X ( s ; x , ξ ) , Ξ ( s ; x , ξ ) )   of the system
{ d d s X j ( s ; x , ξ ) = 2 k = 1 n a j k ( X ( s ; x , ξ ) ) Ξ k ( s ; x , ξ ) , d d s Ξ j ( s ; x , ξ ) = k , l = 1 n x j a k l ( X ( s ; x , ξ ) ) Ξ k ( s ; x , ξ ) Ξ l ( s ; x , ξ ) , ( X ( 0 ; x , ξ ) , Ξ ( 0 ; x , ξ ) ) = ( x , ξ ) . (1.8)
In the constant coefficient case, = a j k 0 x j x k   , one has that the bicharacteristic flow is ( X ( s ; x , ξ ) , Ξ ( s ; x , ξ ) ) = ( x + 2 s A 0 ξ , ξ ) , A 0 = ( a j k 0 ) j , k = 1 , . . , n .   For = Δ   one gets ( X ( s ; x , ξ ) , Ξ ( s ; x , ξ ) ) = ( x + 2 s ξ , ξ )   and the condition in ( 1.6 ) can be seen as an integrability one along the bicharacteristics. As we will see in this work (Sections 4-5), roughly speaking the operator K   whose symbol is
k ( x , ξ ) = exp ( 0 b ( X ( s ; x , ξ ) , Ξ ( s ; x , ξ ) ) d s ) , with b ( x , ξ ) = Im b 1 ( x ) ξ , (1.9)
will play the role of the “integrating factor” introduced in [11. Such constructions were also previously used in the works [4and [8. The commutator term i [ K K ]   , used to cancel the term b 1 ( x )   , corresponds to differentiation of K   along the bicharacteristic flow. Unfortunately the symbol in ( 1.9 ) is not in a standard class. It satisfies
| x α ξ β k ( x , ξ ) | c α β x | β | ξ | β | . (1.10)
We observe that in the particular constant coefficient elliptic case, = Δ   we have
k ( x , ξ ) = exp ( 0 Im b 1 ( x + s ξ ) ξ d s )
= exp ( 0 Im b 1 ( x + s ξ ^ ) ξ ^ d s ) , ξ ^ = ξ / | ξ | ,
which is related to Mizohata's condition in ( 1.6 ).
In the case where ( x )   is elliptic, the class described in ( 1.10 ) was introduced and studied by W. Craig, T. Kappeler and W. Strauss in [4. However, it should be pointed out that in the non-elliptic case, i.e. ( x )   is just nondegenerate, the geometric assumption (4.2) in [4is not satisfied by symbols of interest -see subsection  3.1 in Section  3 . Moreover, we observe that the Hamiltonian h 2 ( x , ξ ) = j , k a j k ( x ) ξ k ξ j   is preserved under the flow. Then one of the main differences of the flows considered here with those associated to elliptic operators is that ellipticity gives the a priori estimate ν 2 | ξ 0 | 2 | Ξ ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) | 2 ν 2 | ξ 0 | 2 ,   which guarantees that the solutions of the system ( 1.8 ) are globally defined.
We will assume that the bicharacteristic flow is non-trapping, i.e. for each ( x 0 , ξ 0 ) R n × ( R n { 0 } )   and for each μ > 0   there exists s 0 > 0   such that
| X ( s 0 ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) | μ . (1.11)
The non-trapping condition appears naturally, since Ichinose [13showed that a necessary condition for the well-posedness in L 2   of ( 1.1 ) with   elliptic, b 2 0   , c 1 0 ,   c 2 0 ,   and P 0 ,   is that the analog of ( 1.6 ) must hold in this case, with the integration taking place along the bicharacterisitics.
The non-trapping condition also is essential in the works of [4and [8. In fact even when also b 1 0   and f 0   , Doi showed in [9that it is necessary for ( 1.5 ) to hold.
In the ultra-hyperbolic case (i.e. with a merely non-degenerate matrix A   ), under appropriate decay assumptions and asymptotic behavior as | x |   on the coefficients a j k ( x )   , we shall prove that the bicharacteristic flow is globally defined and “uniformly non-trapping”. Moreover in order to keep the structure of the conjugate first order terms, so that after applying the operator K   we can obtain energy estimates, we need the symbol of K   to be even -see Definition  5.2.1 (iv) in Section  5 . Therefore we have to study carefully the bicharacteristic for backward and forward time. In particular when looking at the forward bicharacteristic the more delicate part is when it is not outgoing -see Theorem  4.1.1 of Section  4 . In that region we prove that outside a bounded ball, in the x   variable, it behaves in dyadic annuli as the free flow -see Theorem  4.1.1 in Section  4 for a precise statement.
As in [18, [22, the proof of the nonlinear results relies on two kinds of linear estimates. The first one is concerned with the smoothing effect described in ( 1.5 ) for solutions of the IVP ( 1.4 )
0 T R n | J s + 1 / 2 u ( x , t ) | 2 x N d x d t c ( 1 + T ) sup 0 t T u ( t ) H s 2 + c 0 T R n | f ( x , t ) | 2 d x d t , (1.12)
and
0 T R n | J s + 1 / 2 u ( x , t ) | 2 x N d x d t
c ( 1 + T ) sup 0 t T u ( t ) H s 2 + 0 T R n | J s 1 / 2 f ( x , t ) | 2 x N d x d t
for N > 1   .
The second kind is related with the local well-posedness in L 2   (and in H s   ) of the IVP ( 1.4 ). To establish this result we follow an indirect approach. First we truncate at infinity the operator ( x )   using θ C 0 ( R n )   with θ ( x ) = 1 , | x | 1   , and θ ( x ) = 0 , | x | 2   . For R > 0   we define R ( x ) = θ ( x / R ) ( x ) + ( 1 θ ( x / R ) ) 0 ,   where 0 = a j k 0 x j x k   , A 0 = ( a j k 0 ) j , k = 1 , . . , n   is a (constant) matrix, with the decay assumption a j k ( x ) a j k 0 S ( R n )   , j , k = 1 , . . , n   , (although we will work in the S ( R n )   class, it will be clear from our proofs that the same results hold if we just assume that the corresponding estimate holds for a finite number of seminorms in ( 2.2 ) Section 2). Thus, ( x ) = R ( x ) + R ( x ) .   For R   large enough we consider the bicharacteristic flow ( X R ( s ; x , ξ ) , Ξ R ( s ; x , ξ ) )   associated to the operator R ( x )   and the corresponding integrating factor K R   , i.e. the operator with symbol as in ( 1.9 ) but evaluated in the bicharacteristic flow ( X R ( s ; x , ξ ) , Ξ R ( s ; x , ξ ) )   . To obtain the L 2   local well-posedness of the IVP ( 1.4 ) we show that there exists N 0   depending only on the dimension such that for any M Z +   there exists R 0 = R 0 ( M )   such that for R R 0  
sup 0 t T K R u ( t ) L 2 2 c R N 0 u ( 0 ) L 2 2
+ R M 0 T R n | J 1 / 2 u | 2 x N d x d t + c T R N 0 sup 0 t T u ( t ) L 2 2 .
Next, we deduce several estimates concerning the operator K R   . In particular, for E R = I K ~ R ( K R ) *   , where the symbol of K ~ R   differs from that of K R   only in the sign of the exponent, and ( K R ) *   is the adjoint of K R   , which allows us to treat E R u ( t )   as an error term -see Lemma  5.2.6 in Section  5 . Collecting these results we get that
sup 0 t T u ( t L 2 2 R N 0 u ( 0 ) L 2 2
+ R M 0 T R n | J 1 / 2 u | 2 x N d x d t + c T sup 0 t T u ( t ) L 2 2 ,
which combined with ( 1.12 ) yields the desired estimate, i.e. the local well-posedness in L 2   of the IVP ( 1.4 ) for T   sufficiently small sup 0 t T u ( t ) L 2 2 c ( T ) ( u 0 L 2 2 + 0 T f ( t ) L 2 2 d t ) .   The smoothing effect and local well-posedness in H s   of ( 1.4 ) in the case where   has elliptic variable coefficients will be proven in Section  2 -see Lemma  2.2.2 and Theorem  2.3.1 of that section. This builds on S. Doi's pseudo-differential method in [7, [8and on H. Chihara's diagonalization method for systems [2and uses only classical pseudo-differential operators.
The diagonalization method cannot be used when   is ultrahyperbolic. When   has constant coefficients it is possible to cancel the loss of derivatives using a pseudo-differential transformation which falls under the scope of Calderón-Vaillancourt's theorem -see [22, but this does not seem to extend to the variable coefficient case. Instead one is led to study a new class of symbols and this is done in Section  3 . As we already mentioned the corresponding operators in the elliptic case were studied in [4.
A typical example of the symbols that need to be considered (take n = 2   for simplicity) is a ( x ( ξ 2 , ξ 1 ) / | ξ | ) χ ( ξ ) ,   where χ C   , χ 1   for | ξ | 2   , χ 0   for | ξ | < 1   , and a C 0 ( R )   , in the elliptic case; and a ( x ( ξ 2 , ξ 1 ) / | ξ | ) χ ( ξ ) ,   in the ultrahyperbolic one with χ   and a   as before.
As is explained in [21, the operators of the elliptic case are easily reduced to classical pseudo-differential operators by expressing a   in terms of its Fourier transform and, given τ R ,   using the invertiblechange of variable ξ ξ + τ ( ξ 2 , ξ 1 ) / | ξ |   . In the ultrahyperbolic setting this approach fails since the corresponding mappings are not invertible, and hence the theory, in particular the L 2   boundedness, is more delicate -see Theorem  3.2.1 in Section  3 . The proofs of the rest of the results concerning the calculus of the operators arising from these symbols-Theorem  3.3.1 , Theorem  3.3.2 and Theorem  3.3.3 of the same section, are reduced after some manipulations to the L 2   boundedness.
In Section  4 we study the bicharacteristic flow in the ultrahyperbolic case for ( x )   and its truncated version R ( x )   . There we shall deduce several estimates to be used in establishing the smoothing effect and the local well-posedness of ( 1.4 ) with ( x )   non-elliptic which will be given in Section  5 .
This also relies on the calculus of Section  3 .
Finally, the smoothing effect in ( 1.4 ) is used to solve ( 1.1 ) in Section  6 . Solutions of ( 1.1 ) are fixed points of an integral mapping which is a contraction on a suitable function space in a small time interval, so Banach's contraction mapping principle applies.
The results in the elliptic case, i.e. those in Section  2 , are due to C. Rolvung, and appear in his PhD dissertation [27. The results in the ultrahyperbolic case, for   a C 0   perturbation of a constant coefficient operator 0   also appear in [27.

2 THE LINEAR ELLIPTIC EQUATION

The local well posedness and smoothing effect for linear elliptic equations are considered in this section. This builds on S. Doi`s method involving classical pseudo-differential operators and the sharp Gårding inequality [8as well as on a diagonalization as in [2.

2.1 Pseudo-differential Operators

First we will recall some results from the theory of pseudo-differential operators.
The class S m = S 1 , 0 m   of classical symbols of order m R   is defined by
S m = { p ( x , ξ ) C ( R n × R n ) : | p | S m ( j ) < , j N } (2.1)
where
| p | S m ( j ) = sup { ξ m + | α | ξ α x β p ( , ) L ( R n × R n ) : | α + β | j } (2.2)
and ξ = ( 1 + | ξ | 2 ) 1 / 2   .
The pseudo-differential operators Ψ p   associated to the symbol p S m   is defined by
Ψ p f ( x ) = R n e i x ξ p ( x , ξ ) f ^ ( ξ ) d ξ ( 2 π ) n / 2 , f S ( R n ) . (2.3)
For example, a partial differential operator P = | α | N a α ( x ) x α ,   with a α C b ( R n )   is a pseudo-differential operator P = Ψ p   with symbol p ( x , ξ ) = | α | N a α ( x ) ( i ξ ) α .   The fractional differentiation operator J s = Ψ ξ s   is also a pseudo-differential operator. The collection of symbol classes S m , m R   , is in some cases closed under the division and square root operations. This is not the case for polynomials in ξ   and sometimes allows one to construct approximate inverses and square roots of pseudo-differential operators.
The following facts will be used throughout this work and the proofs can be found for example in [25.
Theorem 2.1.1 (Sobolev boundedness) Let m R   , p S m   and s R   . Then Ψ p   extends to a bounded linear operator from H m + s ( R n )   to H s ( R n )   . Moreover, there exist j = j ( n ; m ; s ) N   and c = c ( n ; m ; s )   such that
Ψ p f H s c | p | S m ( j ) f H m + s . (2.4)
Finally for p S 0   and λ ( | x | ) = ( 1 + | x | 2 ) N / 2 = x N   , N > 1   there exists j = j ( n , N )   such that
R n | Ψ p f ( x ) | 2 λ ( | x | ) d x c | p | S 0 ( j ) R n | f ( x ) | 2 λ ( | x | ) d x . (2.5)
The proof of ( 2.5 ) can be seen for example in [22.
Theorem 2.1.2 (Symbolic calculus) Let m 1 , m 2 R   , p 1 S m 1   , p 2 S m 2   . Then there exist p 3 S m 1 + m 2 1   , p 4 S m 1 + m 2 2   , and p 5 S m 1 1   such that
Ψ p 1 Ψ p 2 = Ψ p 1 p 2 + Ψ p 3 , Ψ p 1 Ψ p 2 Ψ p 2 Ψ p 1 = Ψ i { p 1 , p 2 } + Ψ p 4 , ( Ψ p 1 ) * = Ψ p ¯ 1 + Ψ p 5 (2.6)
where { p 1 , p 2 }   denotes the Poisson bracket, i.e.
{ p 1 , p 2 } = j = 1 n ( ξ j p 1 x j p 2 x j p 1 ξ j p 2 ) ,   and such that for any j N   there exist j N   and c 1 = c 1 ( n ; m 1 ; m 2 ; j )   , c 2 = c 2 ( n ; m 1 ; j )   such that
| p 3 | S m 1 + m 2 1 ( j ) + | p 4 | S m 1 + m 2 2 ( j ) c 1 | p 1 | S m 1 ( j ) | p 2 | S m 2 ( j ) | p 5 | S m 1 1 ( j ) c 2 | p 1 | S m 1 ( j ) . (2.7)
Theorem 2.1.3 (Sharp Gårding inequality) Let p S 1   and suppose that there exists R 0   such that Re p ( x , ξ ) 0   for ξ R   . Then there exist j = j ( n )   and c = c ( n ; R )   such that
Re Ψ p f ; f L 2 c | p | S 1 ( j ) f L 2 2 , f S ( R n ) . (2.8)
This result is due to L. Hörmander [12.

2.2 The Bicharacteristic Flow

The basic idea is to apply a pseudo-differential operator K   to the equation ( 1.4 ) of Section 1 in such a way that the commutator i [ K K ]   cancels b 1 ( x ) x   . It turns out that i [ K K ]   corresponds to differentiation along the bicharacteristic flow which will now be introduced.
Let A ( x ) = ( a j k ( x ) )   be a real, and symmetric n × n   matrix of functions a j k C b   . We will assume that
| a j k ( x ) | = o ( | x | 1 ) as | x | , j , k = 1 , . . , n , (2.9)
and that A ( x )   is positive definite, i.e.
ν > 0 x , ξ R n ν 1 | ξ | 2 | j , k = 1 n a j k ( x ) ξ j ξ k | ν | ξ | 2 . (2.10)
Let h 2   be the principal symbol of = x j a j k ( x ) x k   , i.e.
h 2 ( x , ξ ) = j , k = 1 n a j k ( x ) ξ j ξ k . (2.11)
The bicharacteristic flow is the flow of the Hamiltonian vector field
H h 2 = j = 1 n [ ξ j h 2 x j x j h 2 ξ j ] (2.12)
and is denoted by ( X ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) , Ξ ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) )   , i.e.
{ d d s X j ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) = 2 k = 1 n a j k ( X ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) ) Ξ k ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) , d d s Ξ j ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) = k , l = 1 n x j a l k ( X ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) ) Ξ k ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) Ξ l ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) (2.13)
for j = 1 , . . , n   , with
( X ( 0 ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) , Ξ ( 0 ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) ) = ( x 0 , ξ 0 ) . (2.14)
The bicharacteristic flow exists in the time interval s ( δ , δ )   with δ = δ ( x 0 , ξ 0 )   , and δ ( )   depending continuously on ( x 0 , ξ 0 )   .
The bicharacteristic flow preserves h 2   , so ellipticity gives
ν 2 | ξ 0 | 2 | Ξ ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 | 2 ν 2 | ξ 0 | 2 , (2.15)
and hence δ =   .
It will be assumed that the bicharacteristic flow is non-trapped which means that the set { X ( s ; x 0 , ξ 0 ) : s R }   is unbounded in R n   for each ( x 0 , ξ 0 ) R n × R n { 0 }   .
Note that h 2   is homogeneous of degree 2   in ξ   so that
{ X ( s ; x , t ξ ) = X ( t s ; x , ξ ) , Ξ ( s ; x , t ξ ) = t Ξ ( t s ; x , ξ ) . (2.16)
The next result shows that the Hamiltonian vector field is differentiation along the bicharacteristics.
Lemma 2.2.1 Let φ C ( R n × R n )   . Then
( H h 2 φ ) ( x , ξ ) = s [ φ ( X ( s ; x , ξ ) , Ξ ( s ; x , ξ ) ) ] | s = 0 . (2.17)
The following key lemma is due to S. Doi [8(Lemmas 2.3-2.5).
Lemma 2.2.2 Let A ( x )   and its bicharacteristic flow satisfy the assumptions above. Suppose λ L 1 ( [ 0 , ) ) C ( [ 0 , ) )   is strictly positive and nonincreasing. Then there exist c > 0   and a real symbol p S 0   , both depending on h 2   and λ   , such that
H h 2 p = { h 2 , p } ( x , ξ ) λ ( | x | ) | ξ | c , ( x , ξ ) R n × R n . (2.18)
An extension of this result to the case of invertible A ( x )   will be given in Section  5 , Lemma  5.1.1 .

2.3 Linear Elliptic Smoothing Effects

In this subsection we consider the IVP associated to the linear Schrödinger equation
{ t u = i j , k = 1 n x j ( a j k ( x ) x k u ) + b 1 ( x ) x u + b 2 ( x ) x u ¯ + c 1 ( x ) u + c 2 ( x ) u ¯ + f ( x , t ) , u ( x , 0 ) = u 0 ( x ) , (2.19)
where A ( x ) = ( a j k ) j , k = 1 , . . , n   satisfies ( 2.9 )-( 2.10 ) and its bicharacteristic flow satisfies the assumptions in the previous subsection, b l = ( b l 1 , . . , b l n ) ( C b ) n   , l = 1 , 2   and c 1 , c 2 C b   .
Combining the equation in ( 2.9 ) and its complex conjugate we obtain a system in w = ( u , u ¯ ) T  
{ t w = ( i H + B + C ) w + f , w ( x , 0 ) = w 0 ( x ) , (2.20)
where H =
( 0 0 ) , C = ( c 11 c 12 c 21 c 22 ) ,
B = ( B 11 B 12 B 21 B 22 ) ,   with = j , k = 1 n x j ( a j k ( x ) x k ) ,   B l m u ( x , t ) = j = 1 n b l m j ( x ) x j u ( x , t ) , b l m j C b l , m = 1 , 2 , j = 1 , . . , n ,   and c l m = c l m ( x ) C b , l , m = 1 , 2 , f ( x , t ) = ( f ( x , t ) , f ¯ ( x , t ) ) T .   The following well-posedness and smoothing results contain three parts depending on the regularity and the decay of the external force f ( x , t )   .
Theorem 2.3.1 Let w 0 = ( u 0 , u ¯ 0 ) T ( H s ( R n ) ) 2   , s R   . Assume that there exist N > 1   and a constant c 0   such that if λ ( | x | ) = x N   then | Im b l l j ( x ) | c 0 λ ( | x | ) , l , m = 1 , 2 , j = 1 , . . , n , x R n .   Then (a) If f ( L 1 ( [ 0 , T ] : ( H s ( R n ) ) ) 2   then the IVP ( 2.20 ) has a unique solution w C ( [ 0 , T ] : ( H s ( R n ) ) 2 )   satisfying
sup 0 t T w ( t ) ( H s ) 2 c 1 e c 2 T ( w 0 ( H s ) 2 + 0 T f ( t ) ( H s ) 2 d t ) . (2.21)
(b) If f ( L 2 ( [ 0 , T ] : ( H s ( R n ) ) ) 2   then the IVP ( 2.20 ) has a unique solution w C ( [ 0 , T ] : ( H s ( R n ) ) 2 )   satisfying
sup 0 t T w ( t ) ( H s ) 2 2 + 0 T R n | J s + 1 / 2 w ( x , t ) | 2 λ ( | x | ) d x d t c 1 e c 2 T ( w 0 ( H s ) 2 2 + 0 T f ( t ) ( H s ) 2 2 d t ) . (2.22)
(c) If J s 1 / 2 f ( L 2 ( R n × [ 0 , T ] : ( λ ( | x | ) 1 d x d t ) ) 2   then the IVP ( 2.20 ) has a unique solution w C ( [ 0 , T ] : ( H s ( R n ) ) 2 )   satisfying
sup 0 t T w ( t ) ( H s ) 2 2 + 0 T R n | J s + 1 / 2 w ( x , t ) | 2 λ ( | x | ) d x d t c 1 e c 2 T ( w 0 ( H s ) 2 2 + 0 T R n | J s 1 / 2 f ( x , t ) | 2 ( λ ( | x | ) ) 1 d x d t ) . (2.23)
Here c 1   depends on n , s , ν , ( a j k ) j , k = 1 , . . , n , c 0 , ( b l m j ) l , m = 1 , 2 ; j = 1 , . . , n   , and c 2   depends in addition on ( c l m ) l , m = 1 , 2   .
Corollary 2.3.1 Let s R   and u 0 H s ( R n   ) and suppose λ   satisfies the assumptions of Theorem  2.3.1 . Then (a) If f L 1 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) )   , then there exists a unique solution u C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) )   of ( 2.19 ) satisfying sup 0 t T u ( , t ) H s c 1 e c 2 T ( u 0 H s + 0 T f ( , t ) H s d t )   (b) If f L 2 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) )   , then there exists a unique solution u C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) )   of ( 2.19 ) satisfying
sup 0 t T u ( , t ) H s 2 + 0 T R n | J s + 1 / 2 u ( x , t ) | 2 λ ( | x | ) d x d t
c 1 e c 2 T ( u 0 H s 2 + 0 T f ( , t ) H s 2 d t ) ;
(c) If J s 1 / 2 f L 2 ( R n × [ 0 , T ] : ( λ ( | x | ) ) 1 d x d t )   , then there exists a unique solution u C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) )   of ( 2.19 ) satisfying
sup 0 t T u ( , t ) H s 2 + 0 T R n | J s + 1 / 2 u ( x , t ) | 2 λ ( | x | ) d x d t
c 1 e c 2 T ( u 0 H s 2 + 0 T R n | J s 1 / 2 f ( x , t ) | 2 ( λ ( | x | ) ) 1 d x d t ) .
Here c 1   depends on n , s , ν , ( a j k ) j , k = 1 , . . , n , c 0 , ( b lmj ) l , m = 1 , 2 ; j = 1 , . . , n   , and c 2   depends in addition on ( c l m ) l , m = 1 , 2   .
The following a priori estimate is needed for the proof of Theorem  2.3.1 .
Lemma 2.3.1 Let s R   and suppose λ   satisfies the assumptions of Theorem  2.3.1 . Then there exist c 1   depending on n , s   , ν , ( a j k ) j , k = 1 , . . , n   , c 0 ,   and finitely many derivatives of ( b l m j ) l , m = 1 , 2 ; j = 1 , . . , n   , and c 2   depending in addition on finitely many derivatives of ( c l m ) l , m = 1 , 2   such that for all w ( C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s + 2 ( R n ) ) C 1 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s + 2 ( R n ) ) ) 2   the following four estimates hold :
( i ) sup 0 t T w ( t ) ( H s ) 2 c 1 e c 2 T ( w 0 ( H s ) 2
+ 0 T ( t ( i H + B + C ) ) w ( , t ) ( H s ) 2 d t ) ,
( i i ) sup 0 t T w ( t ) ( H s ) 2 c 1 e c 2 T ( w ( , T ) ( H s ) 2
+ 0 T ( t + ( i H + B + C ) * ) w ( , t ) ( H s ) 2 d t ) ,
( i i i ) sup 0 t T w ( t ) ( H s ) 2 2 + 0 T R n | J s + 1 / 2 w ( x , t ) | 2 λ ( | x | ) d x d t
c 1 e c 2 T ( w 0 ( H s ) 2 2 + 0 T ( t ( i H + B + C ) ) w ( , t ) ( H s ) 2 2 d t ) ,
( i v ) sup 0 t T w ( t ) ( H s ) 2 2 + 0 T R n | J s + 1 / 2 w ( x , t ) | 2 λ ( | x | ) d x d t
c 1 e c 2 T w 0 ( H s ) 2 2
+ c 1 e c 2 T 0 T R n | J s 1 / 2 ( t ( i H + B + C ) ) w ( , t ) | 2 ( λ ( | x | ) ) 1 d x d t .
We observe that (ii) follows from (i) by applying (i), with i H + B + C   replaced by ( i H + B + C ) *   , to w ( , T t )   , so it suffices to prove (i), (iii), and (iv) of Lemma  2.3.1 . The idea of the proof is to apply transformations Λ   and K   to the system. Λ   will diagonalize B   and essentially transforms the system into two single equations where the pseudo-differential calculus applies. The idea of this diagonalization came from the work of H. Chihara [2. K   will eliminate the loss of derivatives of the first order terms. This idea is due to S. Doi [7, [8and S. Mizohata [26.
Proof of Lemma  2.3.1 Let w ( C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s + 2 ( R n ) ) C 1 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) ) ) 2   . Set h 2 ( x , ξ ) = j , k = 1 n a j k ( x ) ξ j ξ k , h 1 ( x , ξ ) = i j , k = 1 n x j a j k ( x ) ξ k ,   so that = Ψ h 1 + h 2   . Since ( a j k ( x ) )   is positive definite there exist c = c ( a j k ; x j a j k )   and R = R ( a j k ; x j a j k )   such that | h 1 ( x , ξ ) + h 2 ( x , ξ ) | c | ξ | 2 , | ξ | R .   Choosing φ C 0 ( R n )   with φ ( y ) = 1   if | y | R   and φ ( y ) = 0   if | y | 2 R   we define h ~ ( x , ξ ) = ( h 1 ( x , ξ ) + h 2 ( x , ξ ) ) 1 ( 1 φ ( ξ ) ) and ~ = Ψ h ~ .   So h ~ S 2   and ~ = I + Ψ r 1 ,   where r 1 = r 1 ( ( a j k ) j , k = 1 , . . , n ) S 1   by the symbolic calculus in Theorem  2.1.2 in the sense that for any l N   , | r 1 | S 1 l   depends on the ellipticity constant μ   and on finitely many derivatives of the a j k   's.
We define B d i a g   , B a n t i   with symbols in ( S 1 ) 2 × 2 , S 12 , S 21   with symbols in S 1   and S   with symbol in ( S 1 ) 2 × 2   by
B d i a g = ( B 11 0 0 B 22 ) , B a n t i = ( 0 B 12 B 21 0 ) ,
S 12 = 1 2 i B 12 ~ , S 21 = 1 2 i B 21 ~ ,   S = ( 0 S 12 S 21 0 ) ,   and the diagonalizing transform Λ   with symbol in ( S 0 ) 2 × 2   by Λ = I S .   Then S = S ( n ; ν ; ( a j k ) ; ( b l m j ) )   in the sense above. Letting f = ( t ( i H + B + C ) ) w ,   and applying Λ   , one obtains
t Λ w = i Λ H w + Λ B w + Λ C w + Λ f . (2.24)
We shall show that the system ( 2.24 ) is diagonalized modulo operators with symbols in S 0   . So wewrite
i Λ H + Λ B = i H Λ + ( i Λ H i H Λ ) + B S B = i H Λ + ( i Λ H i H Λ ) + B d i a g + B a n t i S B = ( i H Λ + B d i a g Λ ) + ( B a n t i + i Λ H i H Λ ) + ( B d i a g S S B ) . (2.25)
Since the operator in the first parenthesis is diagonalized and the operator in the last parenthesis has order 0   , it suffices to consider only the operator in the second parenthesis in ( 2.25 ). Thus,
B a n t i + i Λ H i H Λ = B a n t i + i H S i S H =
= ( 0 B 12 B 21 0 ) + ( 0 0 ) ( 0 1 2 B 12 ~ 1 2 B 21 ~ 0 )
( 0 1 2 B 12 ~ 1 2 B 21 ~ 0 ) ( 0 0 )
= ( 0 B 12 1 2 B 12 ~ 1 2 B 12 ~ B 21 1 2 B 21 ~ 1 2 B 21 ~ 0 ) .
We observe that B 12 ~ = B 12 ~ + Ψ r 2   , where r 2 S 0   and B 12 1 2 B 12 ~ 1 2 B 12 ~ = B 12 B 12 ~ 1 2 Ψ r 2 = B 12 Ψ r 1 1 2 Ψ r 2 .   A similar calculus argument handles the term involving B 21   . Therefore, we have that B a n t i + i Λ H i H Λ   has order zero, which allows to conclude that
t Λ w = i H Λ w + B d i a g Λ w + Ψ r 3 w + Λ f , (2.26)
where r 3 ( S 0 ) 2 × 2   and r 3 = r 3 ( n ; ν ; ( a j k ) ; ( b l m j ) ; ( c l m ) ) ,   in the sense that for any j 0 Z +   , | r 3 | ( S 0 ) 2 × 2 ( j 0 )   depends on n , ν   and finitely many of the derivatives of a j k   , b l m j   and c l m   .
By Lemma  2.2.2 there exists a real-valued p S 0   and C > 0   , both depending on ( a j k )   and c 0   , such that
{ h 2 ( x , ξ ) ; p ( x , ξ ) } C c 0 λ ( | x | ) | ξ | C , x , ξ R n , (2.27)
with C = C ( n )   to be determined. Let k ( x , ξ ) = ( e p ( x , ξ ) ( 1 + ( h 2 ( x , ξ ) ) 2 ) s / 4 0 0 e p ( x , ξ ) ( 1 + ( h 2 ( x , ξ ) ) 2 ) s / 4 )   and K = Ψ k   . Note that e ± p ( x , ξ ) ( 1 + ( h 2 ( x , ξ ) ) 2 ) s / 4 S s   and is elliptic, since p S 0   is real and ( 1 + ν 2 | ξ | 4 ) 1 / 4 ( 1 + ( h 2 ( x , ξ ) ) 2 ) 1 / 4 ( 1 + ν 2 | ξ | 4 ) 1 / 4   where ν   is the ellipticity constant of ( a j k )   .
The norm N   on ( H s ) 2   is defined by
( N ( v ) ) 2 = K Λ v L 2 2 + v H s 1 2 . (2.28)
It will be shown that N   is equivalent to the standard H s   -norm.
Let k ~ ( x , ξ ) = ( e p ( x , ξ ) ( 1 + ( h 2 ( x , ξ ) ) 2 ) s / 4 0 0 e p ( x , ξ ) ( 1 + ( h 2 ( x , ξ ) ) 2 ) s / 4 )   and K ~ = Ψ k ~   . Then k ~ ( S s ) 2 × 2   and by the symbolic calculus in Theorem  2.1.2  K ~ K = I + Ψ r 4 ,   for some r 4 ( S 1 ) 2 × 2   , where | r 4 | ( S 1 ) 2 × 2 ( j 0 )   depends on ν , ( a j k )   and c 0   for each j 0 N   . Therefore K ~ K Λ = ( I + Ψ r 4 ) ( I S ) = I ( S Ψ r 4 + Ψ r 4 S ) ,   where S Ψ r 4 + Ψ r 4 S   has order 1   . By the Sobolev boundedness (Theorem  2.1.1 )
v H s 2 2 K ~ K Λ v H s 2 + 2 ( S Ψ r 4 + Ψ r 4 S ) v H s 2
c ( K Λ v L 2 2 + v H s 1 2 ) c v H s 2 ,
for a sufficient large constant c = c ( n , s , ν , ( a j k ) , c 0 , ( b l m j ) )   independent of v   . This shows the equivalence of the norms.
Next, we shall estimate the norm N   to establish the inequalities (i), (iii) and (iv) in Lemma  2.3.1 In the following c j   will denote a constant depending on n , s , ν , ( a j k )   , c 0   and finitely many derivatives of ( b l m j )   and ( c l m )   .
To estimate the second term of ( N ( v ) ) 2   in ( 2.28 ) we write
t w H s 1 2 = t J s 1 w , J s 1 w L 2 = 2 Re J s 1 t w , J s 1 w L 2
= 2 Re J s 1 ( i H w + B w + C w + f ) , J s 1 w L 2
= 2 Re i H J s 1 w , J s 1 w L 2
+ 2 Re ( i [ J s 1 H H J s 1 ] + J s 1 B + J s 1 C ) w , J s 1 w L 2
+ 2 Re J s 1 f , J s 1 w L 2
c 1 ( N ( w ) ) 2 + c 2 min { N ( f ) N ( w ) ; ( λ ( | x | ) ) 1 J s 1 / 2 f , J s 1 / 2 f L 2 } .
Above we have used that H   is self-adjoint and diagonal, that N   and H s   -norm are equivalent, and that λ   is bounded above.
For the first term of ( N ( w ) ) 2   in ( 2.28 ) we write
t K Λ w L 2 2 = t K Λ w , K Λ w L 2 = 2 Re t K Λ w , K Λ w L 2 = 2 Re K t Λ w , K Λ w L 2 = 2 Re K ( i H + B d i a g ) Λ w + Ψ r 3 w + Λ f , K Λ w L 2 = 2 Re K ( i H + B d i a g ) Λ w , K Λ w L 2 + 2 Re K Ψ r 3 w , K Λ w L 2 + 2 Re K Λ f , K Λ w L 2 2 Re K ( i H + B d i a g ) Λ w , K Λ w L 2 + c ( N ( w ) ) 2 + 2 Re K Λ f , K Λ w L 2 = I + c ( N ( w ) ) 2 + I I I , (2.29)
since K Ψ r 3 w L 2 c w H s c ( N ( w ) )   by Sobolev boundedness and norm equivalence.
We should consider the terms I   and I I I   separately. First we have
I = 2 Re K ( i H + B d i a g ) Λ w , K Λ w L 2
= 2 Re ( i H + B d i a g ) K Λ w , K Λ w L 2 + 2 Re i [ K H H K ] Λ w , K Λ w L 2
+ 2 Re [ K B d i a g B d i a g K ] Λ w , K Λ w L 2
2 Re ( B d i a g K + i [ K H H K ] ) Λ w , K Λ w L 2 + c ( N ( w ) ) 2 ,
since H   is self-adjoint and [ K B d i a g B d i a g K ]   is a commutator of diagonal matrices and therefore has order s   . Using the commutator formula of the symbolic calculus on the diagonal matrices K   and H   it follows that i [ K H H K ] = Ψ q + Ψ r 5 ,   where r 5 S s   and q S s + 1   is given by q = ( { e p ( 1 + h 2 2 ) s / 4 ; h 2 + h 1 } 0 0 { e p ( 1 + h 2 2 ) s / 4 ; h 2 h 1 } ) .   Since { e p ( 1 + h 2 2 ) s / 4 ; h 2 + h 1 } = { h 2 ; p } e p ( 1 + h 2 2 ) s / 4 + { e p ( 1 + h 2 2 ) s / 4 ; h 1 } ,   where the last term is in S s   , it follows that q = ( { h 2 ; p } 0 0 { h 2 ; p } ) k + r 6 ,   for some r 6 S s   , and thus i [ K H H K ] = Ψ { h 2 ; p } K + Ψ r 7 ,   with r 7 S s   . Hence,
I = 2 Re K ( i H + B d i a g ) Λ w , K Λ w L 2
2 Re ( B d i a g Ψ { h 2 ; p } ) K Λ w , K Λ w L 2 + c ( N ( w ) ) 2 .
Next we apply the sharp Gårding inequality (Theorem  2.1.3 ) to the diagonal matrix B d i a g Ψ { h 2 ; p }   .
For l = 1 , 2   ,
Re ( i j = 1 n b l l j ( x ) ξ j { h 2 ; p } ) = j = 1 n Im b l l j ( x ) ξ j { h 2 ; p }
c 0 λ ( | x | ) j = 1 n | ξ j | C c 0 λ ( | x | ) | ξ | + c ( n C ) c 0 λ ( | x | ) | ξ | + C .
Choosing C = 1 + n   and using that ( 1 + | ξ | 2 ) 1 / 2 1 + | ξ |   , we obtain Re ( i j = 1 n b l l j ( x ) ξ j { h 2 ; p } ) c 0 λ ( | x | ) ( 1 + | ξ | 2 ) 1 / 2 + c 0 + C ,   and the sharp Gårding inequality yields
2 Re ( B d i a g Ψ { h 2 ; p } ) K Λ w , K Λ w L 2 + c ( N ( w ) ) 2
2 Re c 0 λ ( | x | ) J 1 K Λ w , K Λ w L 2 + c ( N ( w ) ) 2 .
Since ( λ ( | x | ) ) 1 / 2 C b   , one has λ J 1 = Ψ λ ξ = Ψ ( λ ) 1 / 2 ( ξ ) 1 / 2 Ψ ( λ ) 1 / 2 ( ξ ) 1 / 2 + Ψ r 8 ,   with r 8 S 0   and ξ = ( 1 + | ξ | 2 ) 1 / 2   . But Ψ ( λ ) 1 / 2 ( ξ ) 1 / 2 = ( Ψ ( λ ) 1 / 2 ( ξ ) 1 / 2 ) * + Ψ r 9 ,   for some r 9 S 1 / 2   , so 2 Re λ J 1 K Λ w , K Λ w L 2 2 ( λ ) 1 / 2 J 1 / 2 K Λ w L 2 2 + c ( N ( w ) ) 2 .   Recalling that I = K ~ K Λ + Ψ r 1   , r 1 S 1   and using the symbolic calculus on diagonal matrices we obtain that
λ 1 / 2 J s + 1 / 2 w L 2 ( λ 1 / 2 J 1 / 2 ) ( J s K ~ ) ( K Λ ) w L 2 + c N ( w )
( J s K ~ ) ( λ 1 / 2 J 1 / 2 ) ( K Λ ) w L 2 + c N ( w ) c ( ( λ 1 / 2 J 1 / 2 ) ( K Λ ) w L 2 + N ( w ) ) .
So the following estimate for the term I   in ( 2.29 ) is therefore obtained
I = 2 Re K ( i H + B d i a g ) Λ w , K Λ w L 2
c λ ( | x | ) J s + 1 / 2 w , J s + 1 / 2 w L 2 + c ( N ( w ) ) 2 .
The estimate for the term I I I   in ( 2.29 ) will depend on which inequality (i), (ii), (iv) in Lemma  2.3.1 is considered.
To obtain (i) we write, I I I = 2 Re K Λ f , K Λ w L 2 c N ( f ) N ( w ) .   Adding the estimates for the two terms of t ( N ( w ) ) 2   we get t ( N ( w ) ) 2 c ( N ( w ) ) 2 + c N ( f ) N ( w ) ,   so t N ( w ) c N ( w ) + c N ( f ) .   Hence, N ( w ( t ) ) e c t ( N ( w ( 0 ) ) + c 0 t N ( f ( τ ) ) d τ ) ,   which proves part (i) in Lemma  2.3.1 .
To obtain (iii), we use again that I I I c N ( f ) N ( w ) .   Therefore, adding estimates one finds that t ( N ( w ) ) 2 + c λ J s + 1 / 2 w , J s + 1 / 2 w L 2 c ( N ( w ) ) 2 + c N ( f ) N ( w ) .   Integration from 0   to t   yields (iii).
Finally to obtain (iv) we estimate the term I I I   as follows
I I I = 2 Re K Λ f , K Λ w L 2 = 2 Re J 1 / 2 J 1 / 2 K Λ f , K Λ w L 2
= 2 Re J 1 / 2 K Λ f , J 1 / 2 K Λ w L 2 = 2 Re λ 1 / 2 J 1 / 2 K Λ f , λ 1 / 2 J 1 / 2 K Λ w L 2
2 λ 1 / 2 J 1 / 2 K Λ f L 2 λ 1 / 2 J 1 / 2 K Λ w L 2
= 2 λ 1 / 2 ( J 1 / 2 K Λ J s + 1 / 2 ) ( J s 1 / 2 f ) L 2
λ 1 / 2 ( J 1 / 2 K Λ J s 1 / 2 ) ( J s + 1 / 2 w ) L 2
1 ε R n | ( J 1 / 2 K Λ J s + 1 / 2 ) ( J s 1 / 2 f ) | 2 λ 1 d x
+ ε R n | ( J 1 / 2 K Λ J s 1 / 2 ) ( J s + 1 / 2 w ) | 2 λ d x
c ε R n | J s 1 / 2 f | 2 λ 1 d x + c ε R n | J s + 1 / 2 w ) | 2 λ d x ,
where the last estimate follows from Theorem  2.1.1 since J 1 / 2 K Λ J s + 1 / 2   and J 1 / 2 K Λ J s 1 / 2   have order zero. ε   is a small constant to be chosen. Adding estimates we obtain
t ( N ( w ) ) 2 + ( c 1 c 2 ε ) λ J s + 1 / 2 w , J s + 1 / 2 w L 2
c ( N ( w ) ) 2 + ( c 3 ε + c 4 ) λ 1 J s 1 / 2 f , J s 1 / 2 f L 2 .
Then, choosing ε   sufficiently small, integrating from 0   to t   we obtain part (iv) of Lemma  2.3.1 .
Proof of Theorem  2.3.1 Uniqueness :
Assume w ( C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) ) ) 2   is a solution of the system in ( 2.20 ) with f = 0   and w 0 = 0   . Then w ( C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) ) C 1 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s 2 ( R n ) ) ) 2   . From part (i) in Lemma  2.3.1 one concludes that w = 0   .
Existence :Case 1 : f ( S ( R n + 1 ) ) 2   and w 0 ( S ( R n ) ) 2   :
The conjugate linear functional l *   is defined in the linear subspace ( t + ( i H + B + C ) * ) ( C 0 ( R n × [ 0 , T ) ) ) 2 ( L 1 [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) ) ) 2 ,   by l * ( η ) = 0 T f , φ L 2 × L 2 d t + w 0 , φ ( 0 ) L 2 × L 2   for φ ( C 0 ( R n × [ 0 , T ) ) ) 2   and η = ( t + ( i H + B + C ) * ) φ   . This is well defined by the uniqueness part above.
By part (ii) of Lemma  2.3.1 with s   replaced by s   it follows that
| l * ( η ) | 0 T f ( H s ) 2 φ ( H s ) 2 d t + w 0 ( H s ) 2 φ ( 0 ) ( H s ) 2
c 1 e c 2 T ( f ( L 1 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ) ) 2 + w 0 ( H s ) 2 ) η ( L 1 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ) ) 2 .
Using the Hahn-Banach theorem to extend l *   , there exists w ( L ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) ) ) 2   such that
0 T w , ( t + ( i H + B + C ) * ) φ ( H s ) 2 × ( H s ) 2 = 0 T f , φ L 2 × L 2 d t + w 0 , φ ( 0 ) L 2 × L 2 , φ ( C 0 ( R n × [ 0 , T ) ) ) 2 . (2.30)
Thus, ( t ( i H + B + C ) ) w = f   as distributions for 0 < t < T   . From this equation one has that t w ( L ( [ 0 , T ] : H s 2 ( R n ) ) ) 2   since f ( S ( R n + 1 ) ) 2   , so w ( C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s 2 ( R n ) ) ) 2   . Using the equation once more, w ( C 1 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s 4 ( R n ) ) ) 2   , and w ( 0 ) = w 0   by ( 2.30 ).
Since w 0 ( S ( R n ) ) 2   , s   can be replaced by s + 4   in the previous argument and there is a solution w   of ( 2.20 ) to which Lemma  2.3.1 parts (i)-(iv) hold.
Case 2 : w 0 ( H s ( R n ) ) 2   :
Choose a sequence ( v j )   in S ( R n ) ) 2   such that v j w 0   in ( H s ( R n ) ) 2   .
(A) If f ( L 1 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ) ) 2   , choose a sequence ( f j )   in ( S ( R n + 1 ) ) 2   such that f j f   in ( L 1 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) ) ) 2   .
By case 1 there is a solution w j ( C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s + 2 ( R n ) ) ) 2   of ( 2.20 ) with f   and w 0   replaced by f j   and v j   respectively. Using Lemma  2.3.1 , part (i), it follows that ( w j )   is a Cauchy sequence in ( C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) ) 2   and that the limit w   is a solution of ( 2.20 ) satisfying part (i) in Lemma  2.3.1 .
(B) If f ( L 2 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ) ) 2   , choose a sequence ( f j )   in ( S ( R n + 1 ) ) 2   such that f j f   in ( L 2 ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) ) ) 2   . Procceding as in (A), there is a solution w ( C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) ) ) 2   of ( 2.20 ) satisfying (iii) of Lemma  2.3.1 .
(C) Let J s 1 / 2 f ( L 2 ( R n × [ 0 , T ] : d x d t λ ( | x | ) ) ) 2 .   By Theorem  2.1.1 there exists a sequence ( g j )   in ( S ( R n + 1 ) ) 2   , such that g j J s 1 / 2 f   in ( L 2 ( R n × [ 0 , T ] : d x d t λ ( | x | ) ) ) 2   .
Procceding as in (A) with f j   replaced by J s 1 / 2 g j ( S ( R n + 1 ) ) 2   , there is a solution w ( C ( [ 0 , T ] : H s ( R n ) ) ) 2   of ( 2.20 ) satisfying (iv) of Lemma  2.3.1 .
This completes the proof of Theorem  2.3.1 .
Remark 2.3.1 Suppose that the differential operators B 11   and B 22   in the entries of B   in ( 2.20 ) are replaced by pseudo-differential operators Ψ b 11   and Ψ b 22   of order 1   and suppose that C   in ( 2.20 ) is replaced by a 2 × 2   matrix of pseudo-differential operators of order 0   . Then the conclusion of Theorem  2.3.1 still holds if | R e b l l ( x , ξ ) | c 0 λ ( | x | ) ξ , l = 1 , 2 , x , ξ R n .   The reason is that the application of the sharp Gårding inequality in the proof of Lemma  2.3.1 goes through in exactly the same way.
Consequently, if b 1 ( x ) x   in ( 2.20 ) is replaced by Ψ b   with b S 1   and c 1 , c 2   in ( 2.20 ) are replaced by pseudo-differential operators of order 0   , then the conclusion of Corollary  2.3.1 holds if | R e b ( x , ξ ) | c 0 λ ( | x | ) ξ , x , ξ R n .  
This will be useful later.

3 A NEW CLASS OF SYMBOLS

As it has been shown in [18, 22to obtain local well posedness for nonlinear Schrödinger equations one relies on certain smoothing effects for the associated linear equation with lower order terms (order zero and one). In the previous section we have established these smoothing effects in equations with variable second order elliptic coefficients by using known properties of classical pseudo-differential operators. In an attempt to prove these smoothing effects for the non-elliptic case, one is led (see [4) to the study of certain operators with non-standard symbols. Our goal in this section is to study results concerning the L 2   -boundedness and composition of operators in this class by using geometric arguments. The elliptic case of our results were proved by Craig, Kappeler and Strauss in [4whose statements we follow. The differences between the elliptic and non-elliptic settings are highlighted in Proposition  3.1.2 below, -see also [21.

3.1 Symbol Properties

To begin with, the symbols of interest will be compared to the classical ones defined in ( 2.2 ) Section  2 .
We recall the following spaces
S ( R n ) = { u C ( R n ) : sup x R n x k | x α u ( x ) | < , k N , α N n } , (3.1)
with seminorms
| u | S , m = max k + | α | m x k x α u ( x ) L ( R n ) , (3.2)
and
C b ( R n ) = { u C ( R n ) : sup x R n | x α u ( x ) | < , α N n } , (3.3)
with seminorms
| u | C b , m = max | α | m x α u ( x ) L ( R n ) . (3.4)
The symbol a = a ( x , ξ ) C ( R n × R n )   will satisfy certain estimates and the operator Ψ a   associated with the symbol a   will be defined as Ψ a u ( x ) = R n e i x ξ a ( x , ξ ) u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ ( 2 π ) n / 2 , u S ( R n ) .  
Proposition 3.1.1 (i) Suppose a   is a classical symbol of order m R   , a S 1 , 0 m   , i.e. for α , β N n  
| x α ξ β a ( x , ξ ) | c α , β ξ m | β | , x , ξ R n . (3.5)
Then Ψ a   is a continuous map from S ( R n )   into S ( R n )   .
(ii) Suppose m R   and a   satisfies that for α N n  
| x α a ( x , ξ ) | c α ξ m , x , ξ R n . (3.6)
Then Ψ a   is a continuous map from S ( R n )   into C b ( R n )   .
Proof of Proposition  3.1.1  See [25.
The symbols of interest in this section satisfy estimates of the type
| x α ξ β a ( x , ξ ) | c α β x | β | ξ m | β | . (3.7)
This is better than ( 3.6 ) in part (ii) of Proposition  3.1.1 , but not as good as (i). In particular, we will see (Proposition  3.1.2 , part (iv)) that there exist a   satisfying ( 3.7 ) with m = 0   and v S ( R n )   such that Ψ a v / S ( R n )   .
Let A ( x )   be a real, symmetric and invertible n × n   matrix. Using a coordinate change (a rotation and dilations) in the x   -variable, there are essentially only the elliptic and ultrahyperbolic cases A e = I n and A h = ( I k 0 0 I n k ) , k { 1 , . . , n 1 } .   where I j   is the j × j   unit matrix.
Take χ C ( R n )   with χ ( t ) = 0   for | t | 1   and χ ( t ) = 1   for | t | 2   .
Definition 3.1.1 (i) It will be said that a S ( R n : S 1 , 0 m )   if a C ( R n × R n × R n )   and a   satisfies
| s μ s α x β ξ γ a ( s ; x , ξ ) | c μ α β γ ξ m | γ | , s , x , ξ R n , μ , α , β , γ N n . (3.8)
(ii) For a S ( R n : S 1 , 0 m )   , let
{ ( 1 ) b e ( x , ξ ) = χ ( | ξ | ) a ( P ( x , A e ξ ) ; x , ξ ) , ( 2 ) b h ( x , ξ ) = χ ( | ξ | ) a ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ ) , (3.9)
where P ( y , z ) = y ( y z ) z / | z | 2   for y , z R n , z 0   , is the projection of y   onto the hyperplane perpendicular to z   , (notice that P ( y , z )   is homogeneous of degree 0   in z   ).
Remark 3.1.1 (a) Although we shall work in the class S ( R n : S 1 , 0 m )   , it will be clear that all the results deduced for this class still hold when just a finite number of semi-norms in S   and S 1 , 0 m   are assumed to be finite, i.e. ( 3.8 ) with | μ | + | α | + | β | + | γ | N   for N   large enough.
(b) We observe that if a S ( R n : S 1 , 0 m )   , then ξ α ( ξ β a ( ) ) S ( R n : S 1 , 0 k ) , k = m + | β | | α | ,   and for M N   large enough x M χ ( | ξ | ) a ( P ( x , A l ξ ) ; x , ξ ) = x M b l ( x , ξ ) , with l = e , or l = h ,   is “roughly speaking” a symbol in the class S 1 , 0 m   (when only finitely many ξ   derivatives are taken into account, which is always the case in the sequel).
(c) Finally notice that if a S ( R n : S 1 , 0 m )   and b l   is defined as in ( 3.9 ) then b β   given by b l β = x | β | ξ β b l ( x , ξ ) , with l = e , or l = h ,   is a symbol of the same type and the corresponding bounds in ( 3.8 ) are controlled by those of a   .
(d) The symbols described here will be our basic building blocks in the study of variable coefficients Schrödinger operators, see Section  5 .
The symbols defined in ( 3.9 ) satisfy an estimate of the type given in Proposition  3.1.1 . More precisely, if u S ( R n )   then Ψ b e u S ( R n )   and Ψ b h u C b ( R n )   and is rapidly decreasing away from the characteristic directions, i.e. A x x = 0   . In the characteristics directions, Ψ b h u ( x )   decays as | x | 1 n   as | x |   .
Proposition 3.1.2 Let u S ( R n )   , and a   , b e   and b h   as in definition  3.1.1 (i) If | α + β | k   , then for all x   in R n   | x α x β Ψ b e u ( x ) | c k ( sup | α | k ; | β | k ; | γ | k s k | s α x β ξ γ a ( s ; x , ξ ) | ) | u ^ | S , 2 k + m + n + 1 .   (ii) If c [ 0 , 1 ]   and | α + β | k   , then if | A h x x | | A h x | | x | c   c k | x α x β Ψ b h u ( x ) | c k ( sup | α | k ; | β | k ; | γ | k s k | s α x β ξ γ a ( s ; x , ξ ) | ) | u ^ | S , 2 k + m + n + 1 .   (iii) If a C 0 ( R n : S 1 , 0 m )   with a ( s ; x , ξ ) = 0   if | s | > 1   and | β | k   , then | x β Ψ b h u ( x ) | c k ( sup | α | k ; | β | k ; | γ | k | s α x β ξ γ a ( s ; x , ξ ) | ) | u ^ | S , 2 k + m + n + 1 x 1 n , x R n .   (iv) There exist a S ( R n : S 1 , 0 m )   , in fact, a C 0 ( R n : S 1 , 0 m )   , v S ( R n )   , and c > 0   such that | Ψ b h v ( x ) | c | x | 1 n , with A h x x = 0 , | x | 10  
In the proof of Proposition  3.1.2 we will use the following results.
Proposition 3.1.3 (i) Let α N n   . Then ( ξ ξ ) ξ α = ξ α ( ξ ξ ) | α | ξ α .   (ii) Let T t   denote the transpose of the operator T   , i.e. T u v = u T t v   . Then [ 1 i x ξ ( ξ ξ ) ] t = 1 i x ξ ( ( ξ ξ ) ( n 1 ) I ) ,   and ( ξ ξ ) [ 1 i x ξ ] = 1 i x ξ .   (iii) Let φ   be a differentiable and homogeneous function of degree 0   on R n { 0 }   . Then ( ξ ξ ) φ ( ξ ) = 0 , ξ 0 .   (iv) Let α , β N n   , k N   , b = b e   or b = b h   . Then | ( ξ ξ ) k x α ξ β b ( x , ξ ) | c k ( sup | γ | k | s α x β ξ γ a ( s ; x , ξ ) | ) x | β | ξ m | β | .  
Proof of Proposition  3.1.3 (i) and (ii) are easily verified. As for (iii) we have
( ξ ξ ) [ φ ( ξ | ξ | ) ] = j = 1 n ξ j ξ j [ φ ( ξ | ξ | ) ]
= j = 1 n ξ j k = 1 n ( ξ k φ ) ( ξ | ξ | ) ξ j ( ξ k | ξ | ) = j , k ( ξ k φ ) ( ξ | ξ | ) ξ j ( δ j k | ξ | ξ j ξ k | ξ | 3 )
= k ( ξ k φ ) ( ξ | ξ | ) ξ k | ξ | k ( ξ k φ ) ( ξ | ξ | ) ξ k j ξ j 2 | ξ | 3 = 0 .
(iv) follows from (i), (iii) and Definition  3.1.1 , since P ( x , A ξ )   is homogeneous of degree 0   in ξ   .
Proof of Proposition  3.1.2 For simplicity of the exposition we shall assume that the constants c μ α β γ   which appear in ( 3.8 ) are all smaller than unity for | μ | k   , | α | k   , | β | k   and | γ | k   . Also we shall drop the powers of 2 π   which appear in the definition of Ψ b   .
(i) Let | α + β | k   . We consider three cases:Case 1 : | x | 2   . Here | x α x β Ψ b e u ( x ) | c k | u ^ | S , m + k + n + 1 .   Case 2 : | x | 2   and | P ( x , ξ ) | | x | / 2   . From ( 3.7 ), it suffices to estimate terms of the type
I = e i x ξ ξ α 1 [ ξ β 1 ] x β 2 ξ α 2 [ b e ( x , ξ ) ] ξ α 3 u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ , (3.10)
where α 1 + α 2 + α 3 = α   , and β 1 + β 2 = β   .
Pythagoras' theorem gives | x | 2 = | x ξ | 2 | ξ | 2 + | P ( x , ξ ) | 2 ,   so by hypothesis
| x ξ | = | x | | ξ | 1 | P ( x , ξ ) | 2 | x | 2 | x | | ξ | ( 1 | P ( x , ξ ) | 2 | x | 2 )
| x | | ξ | ( 1 1 4 ) 3 4 | x | | ξ | .
Above we have used that 1 t 1 t   for t [ 0 , 1 ]   . Now we use the identity e i x ξ = ( 1 i x ξ ( ξ ξ ) ) k e i x ξ .   By Proposition  3.1.3 (ii), if k 1 + k 2 + k 3 k   it suffices to estimate terms of the type
I I = e i x ξ ( i x ξ ) k ( ξ ξ ) k 1 [ ξ α 1 [ ξ β 1 ] ] ( ξ ξ ) k 2 x β 2 ξ α 2 b e ( x , ξ ) ( ξ ξ ) k 3 ξ α 3 u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ .
Using Proposition  3.1.3 (iv) it follows that
| I I | c k | ξ | 1 1 | x | k | ξ | k ξ | β 1 α 1 | + m | α 2 | x | α 2 | | u ^ | S , 2 k + m + n + 1 c k | u ^ | S , 2 k + m + n + 1 .
Case 3 : | x | 2   and | x | < 2 | P ( x , ξ ) |   . From ( 3.8 ) and ( 3.10 ) it follows that | I | c k | u ^ | S , m + k + n + 1 ,   which proves (i).
(ii) Let c [ 0 , 1 ]   , | α + β | k   . Suppose that | x | 2 | A h x x | c   with c > 0   , (otherwise the statement is trivial). We consider three cases:
Case 1 : | x | 4 / c   . Hence c k | x α x β Ψ b h u ( x ) | 4 k c k | u ^ | S , k + m + n + 1 .   Case 2 : | x | 4 / c   and | P ( x , A h ξ ) | c | x | / 2   .
Since x = x A h ξ | ξ | 2 A h ξ + P ( x , A h ξ ) ,   by Pythagoras' theorem, | x | 2 | ξ | 2 = | x A h ξ | 2 + | ξ | 2 | P ( x , A h ξ ) | 2 .   The matrix A h   is symmetric, so
| ξ A h x | = | x A h ξ | = | x | | ξ | 1 | P ( x , A h ξ ) | 2 | x | 2
| x | | ξ | ( 1 c 2 4 ) 3 2 | x | | ξ | .
Next we write ξ = ξ A h x | x | 2 A h x + P ( ξ , A h x ) .   By Pythagoras' theorem | P ( ξ , A h x ) | = | ξ | 1 | ξ A h x | 2 | ξ | 2 | x | 2 | ξ | 1 ( 1 c 2 4 ) = c 2 | ξ | .   Using that x ξ = | x | 2 ( ξ A h x ) ( A h x x ) + x P ( ξ , A h x ) ,   from the above estimates and our hypothesis we conclude that
| x ξ | c 3 2 | x | | ξ | | x | | P ( x , A h ξ ) | c 3 2 | x | | ξ | c 2 | x | ξ | c 4 | x | | ξ | (3.11)
Integrating by parts as in case 2 of part (i), (ii) follows.
Case 3 : | x | 4 / c   and | P ( x , A h ξ ) | c | x | / 2   .
From ( 3.9 ) and ( 3.10 ) as in case 3 of the elliptic case it follows that | x β Ψ b h u ( x ) | c k c 0 | u ^ | S , m + k + n + 1 .   (iii) It suffices to show the statement for | x | 10   . Let | β 1 + β 2 | k   and consider terms of the type I = e i x ξ ( i ξ ) β 1 x β 2 b h ( x , ξ ) u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ .   Since | P ( x , A h ξ ) | 1   proceeding as before x = x A h ξ | ξ | 2 A h ξ + P ( x , A h ξ ) ,   and by Pythagoras' theorem | x | 2 | ξ | 2 = | x A h ξ | 2 + | ξ | 2 | P ( x , A h ξ ) | 2 .   The matrix A h   is symmetric, so | ξ A h x | = | x A h ξ | = | x | | ξ | 1 | P ( x , A h ξ ) | 2 | x | 2 | x | | ξ | ( 1 | x | 2 ) .   Next we write ξ = ξ A h x | x | 2 A h x + P ( ξ , A h x ) .   By Pythagoras' theorem | P ( ξ , A h x ) | = | ξ | 1 | ξ A h x | 2 | ξ | 2 | x | 2 | ξ | 1 ( 1 | x | 2 ) 2 | ξ | | x | 1 ,   i.e.
| P ( ξ , A h x ) | | ξ | 2 | x | 1 . (3.12)
Hence ξ   is in a cone Γ x   with vertex at the origin, axis given by A h x   and opening angle θ   where s i n ( θ ) = 2 | x | 1   . In particular, θ 2 | x | 1   , because | x | 10   .
Therefore I = Γ x e i x ξ ( i ξ ) β 1 x β 2 b h ( x , ξ ) u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ   and
| I | c | u ^ | S , k + m + n + 1 Γ x ξ n 1 d ξ
c | u ^ | S , k + m + n + 1 ( | x | 1 ) n 1 R n ξ n 1 d ξ
= c | u ^ | S , k + m + n + 1 | x | n + 1 .
(iv) Choose φ C 0 ( R n )   with φ 0   , φ ( s ) = 1   if | s | 1 / 4   and φ ( s ) = 0   if | s | 1 / 2   . Let a ( s ; x , ξ ) = φ ( s ) ξ m   . Choose v S ( R n )   such that v ^ ( ξ ) = χ ( | ξ | ) ( 1 χ ( | ξ | ) ) 2   with χ ( )   given in Definition  3.1.1 . Then
Ψ b h v ( x ) = e i x ξ φ ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ) ξ m ( χ ( | ξ | ) ) 2 ( 1 χ ( | ξ | ) ) 2 d ξ . (3.13)
Assume that | x | 10   . An argument similar to that used to deduce ( 3.12 ) shows that | P ( ξ , A h x ) | ( 2 ) 1 | ξ | | x | 1 .   Also one has that x ξ = x P ( ξ , A h x )   when A h x x = 0   . Hence | x ξ | ( 2 ) 1 | ξ | 2   on the ξ   support of the integrand in ( 3.13 ). Thus R e Ψ b h v ( x ) cos 2 φ ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ) ξ m χ ( | ξ | ) 2 ( 1 χ ( | ξ | ) ) 2 d ξ .   Let Γ x   be the cone defined by Γ x = { ξ R n : | ξ | 1 | P ( ξ , A h x ) | ( 4 2 | x | ) 1 } .   Suppose ξ Γ x   . Since ξ = ξ A h x | x | 2 A h x + P ( ξ , A h x ) ,   it follows from Pythagoras' theorem that | x A h ξ | = | ξ A h x | = | ξ | | x | 1 | P ( ξ , A h x ) | 2 | x | 2 | ξ | | x | ( 1 1 32 | x | 2 ) .   Now write x = x A h ξ | ξ | 2 A h ξ + P ( x , A h ξ ) ,   and use Pythagoras' theorem to get | P ( x , A h ξ ) | 2 = | x | 2 | x A h ξ | 2 | ξ | 2 | x | 2 | x | 2 ( 1 1 32 | x | 2 ) 2 1 16 .   Therefore
R e Ψ b h v ( x cos ( 2 ) Γ x ξ m ( χ ( | ξ | ) ) 2 ( 1 χ ( | ξ | ) ) 2 d ξ
= cos ( 2 ) c n | x | 1 n R n ξ m ( χ ( | ξ | ) ) 2 ( 1 χ ( | ξ | ) ) 2 d ξ = c c n cos ( 2 ) | x | 1 n ,
where c = R n ξ m ( χ ( | ξ | ) ) 2 ( 1 χ ( | ξ | ) ) 2 d ξ > 0 .   This completes the proof of Proposition  3.1.2 .

3.2 L 2   -boundedness

Now we are ready to establish the L 2   -boundedness of our ultrahyperbolic operators.
Theorem 3.2.1 Suppose a S ( R n : S 1 , 0 m )   (see Definition  3.1.1 , ( 3.8 )-( 3.9 )). Then there exists c = c ( m )   and N = N ( n )   such that Ψ b h u L 2 c max μ + | α + β + γ | N s μ ξ m + | γ | s α x β ξ γ a L u H m , u S ( R n ) .  
The proof of this theorem in the 2-dimensional case ( n = 2   ) is more involved than in the higher dimensional case. As it was pointed out in Proposition  3.1.2 (iv) one can not expect enough decay in cones around the characteristic directions (i.e. A h x x = 0   ). In fact, for n = 2   the estimate | x | 1   is critical and after some decomposition in frequency and space we need to use Cotlar-Stein lemma to glue the pieces together.
Proof of Theorem  3.2.1 If a S ( R n : S 1 , 0 m )   , then ξ m a S ( R n : S 1 , 0 0 )   with
max μ + | α + β + γ | N s μ ξ | γ | s α x β ξ γ [ ξ m a ] L
c m max μ + | α + β + γ | N s μ ξ m s α x β ξ γ a L .
Furthermore, J m   is an isometry of H m   onto L 2   , so it can be assumed that m = 0   .
Next, we use an argument similar to that in [21Section 3 (which in the case of the elliptic operators gives a straightforward proof of the L 2   -continuity). This is based on a simple change of variables -see ( 3.14 ) below. In order to do it we make the following decomposition. Let { φ j } j N   be a smooth partition of unity on R   subordinate to the covering R = ( 1 , 1 ) j = 1 { t R : 2 j 2 < | t | < 2 j }   i.e. satisfying 0 φ j ( x ) 1 , 1 = j = 0 φ j   , supp φ 0 ( 1 , 1 )   and supp φ j { t R : 2 j 2 < | t | < 2 j }   .
Since the intervals in the covering have length at least 1   , it can be assumed that | d k d t k φ j ( t ) | c k , t R , k N .   Let φ C ( R )   with φ ( t ) = 1   for t 1   , φ ( t ) = 0   for t 2   and 0 φ 1   .
Denote by a ^   the Fourier transform of a   in the s   -variable. Thus, σ N 1 σ β 1 a ^ ( σ ; x , ξ ) L c max N 2 + | β 2 | 2 N 1 + n + 1 s N 2 s β 2 a L .   Now using that σ P ( x , A h ξ ) = x P ( σ , A h ξ )   we have
Ψ b h u ( x ) = e i x ξ a ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ
= ( e i x ( ξ + P ( σ , A h ξ ) ) a ^ ( σ ; x , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ ) d σ
= j = 0 ( e i x ( ξ + P ( σ , A h ξ ) ) φ j ( | σ | ) a ^ ( σ ; x , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) ( 1 φ ( δ | ξ | 2 j + 1 ) ) u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ ) d σ
+ j = 0 ( e i x ( ξ + P ( σ , A h ξ ) ) φ j ( | σ | ) a ^ ( σ ; x , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) φ ( δ | ξ | 2 j + 1 ) u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ ) d σ
= I + I I ,
where δ > 0   is a small constant to be chosen. In I   we make the change of variables
η = ξ + P ( σ , A h ξ ) = ξ + ( σ σ A h ξ | ξ | 2 A h ξ ) . (3.14)
Then ( η ξ ) = I k = 1 n σ k | ξ | M k ( ξ ) ,   where M k   is a matrix whose entries are homogeneous of degree 0   in ξ   . The determinant function is continuous on R n 2   , so 1 2 | det ( η ξ ) | 2 ,   by fixing δ > 0   sufficiently small, we recall that | σ | 2 j , δ | ξ | 2 j + 1   . This gives
I = j = 0 φ j ( | σ | ) e i x η a ^ ( σ ; x , ξ ( η ) ) χ ( | ξ ( η ) | )
( 1 φ ( δ 2 j 1 | ξ ( η ) | ) ) u ^ ( ξ ( η ) ) | det ( η ξ ) | 1 d η d σ .
Combining Minkowski's integral inequality and the L 2   -boundedness of S 1 , 0 0   pseudo-differential operators we get I L x 2 c max μ + | α + β + γ | N s μ ξ | γ | s α x β ξ γ a L u L 2 j = 0 φ j ( | σ | ) σ n + 1 d σ ,   where j = 0 φ j ( | σ | ) σ n + 1 d σ < .   As for I I   , let a j k ( s ; x , ξ ) = φ k ( | s | ) e i σ s φ j ( | σ | ) a ^ ( σ ; x , ξ ) d σ , j , k N .   Then
I I = j , k = 0 e i x ξ a j k ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) φ ( δ 2 j 1 | ξ | ) u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ = j , k = 0 Ψ j k u ( x ) , (3.15)
where Ψ j k   is a pseudo-differential operator with symbol a j k ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) φ ( δ 2 j 1 | ξ | ) .   First, by Cauchy-Schwarz, | Ψ j k u ( x ) | c 2 j n / 2 a j k L u L 2 ,   so
χ B 2 k + 10 ( 0 ) Ψ j k u L 2 c 2 ( j + k ) n / 2 a j k L u L 2 . (3.16)
Next, we shall estimate ( 1 χ B 2 k + 10 ( 0 ) ) Ψ j k u L 2   by using Cotlar-Stein lemma which can be stated as follows.
Cotlar-Stein lemma.
Let { Ψ l } l = 0   be a sequence of bounded operators on L 2   and let { γ ( l ) } l = 0   be a sequence of positive numbers with l = 0 γ ( l ) <   . Suppose Ψ l 1 * Ψ l 2 , Ψ l 1 Ψ l 2 * ( γ ( l 2 l 1 ) ) 2 , l 1 , l 2 N , l 1 l 2 .   Then l = 0 Ψ l u   converges in L 2   for any u L 2   and l = 0 Ψ l u L 2 l = 0 γ ( l ) u L 2 .   For a proof of this lemma we refer to [30.
For fixed j , k 0   , let A l = { x R n : 2 k + l + 10 < | x | 2 k + l + 11 } , l N ,   and define Ψ l = Ψ l j k   by Ψ l u ( x ) = χ A l ( x ) Ψ j k u ( x ) , u S ( R n ) , l N .   Then l = 0 Ψ l u   converges to ( 1 χ B 2 k + 10 ( 0 ) ) Ψ j k u   uniformly on compact subsets of R n   . In particular in the distribution sense. By Cauchy-Schwarz Ψ l u L 2 c 2 ( j + k + l ) n / 2 a j k L u L 2 , u S ( R n ) ,   so Ψ l   is bounded on L 2   for l N   .
In order to apply Cotlar-Stein lemma, it suffices to consider Ψ l 1 Ψ l 2 *   for l 1 l 2   , because ( Ψ l 2 Ψ l 1 * ) * = Ψ l 1 Ψ l 2 *   and Ψ l 1 * Ψ l 2 = 0   for l 1 l 2   .
Let u S ( R n )   . Since
Ψ l * u ( x ) = e i ( x y ) ξ a ¯ j k ( P ( y , A h ξ ) ; y , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) φ ( δ 2 j 1 | ξ | ) χ A l ( y ) u ( y ) d y d ξ
= e i x ξ ( e i y ξ a ¯ j k ( P ( y , A h ξ ) ; y , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) φ ( δ 2 j 1 | ξ | ) χ A l ( y ) u ( y ) d y ) d ξ
it follows that
Ψ l 1 * v , Ψ l 2 * u = e i y ξ a ¯ j k ( P ( y , A h ξ ) ; y , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) φ ( δ 2 j 1 | ξ | ) χ A l 1 ( y ) v ( y )
e i z ξ a j k ( P ( z , A h ξ ) ; z , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) φ ( δ 2 j 1 | ξ | ) χ A l 2 ( z ) u ¯ ( z ) d ξ d z d y ,
for all v , u S ( R n )   . So Ψ l 1 Ψ l 2 * u ( y ) = K l 1 l 2 ( y , z ) u ( z ) d z ,   where
K l 1 l 2 ( y , z ) = χ A l 1 ( y ) χ A l 2 ( z ) e i ( y z ) ξ a j k ( P ( y , A h ξ ; y , ξ )
a ¯ j k ( P ( z , A h ξ ) ; z , ξ ) χ 2 ( | ξ | ) φ 2 ( δ 2 j 1 | ξ | ) d ξ .
It is convenient to fix the following terminology.
Definition 3.2.1 Γ   is the cone of angle θ ( 0 , 1 / 2 )   if there exists e 0 R n { 0 }   such that Γ = { x R n : | x | 1 | P ( x , e 0 ) | θ } .   Notice that | Γ A l | c θ n 1 2 n ( k + l )   .
Choose a collection { Γ m 1 }   of cones of angle at most 2 l 1 / 16   such that R n = m 1 Γ m 1 .   Let Γ m 1 * = { z R n : | z | 1 | P ( z , x ) | 2 l 1 16 for some x Γ m 1 } .   Then Γ m 1 *   is a cone of angle at most 2 l 1 / 4   , and it can be assumed that the collection { Γ m 1 * }   is locally finite on R n { 0 }   by choosing { Γ m 1 }   appropriately. Let S m 1 = Γ m 1 A l 1 , S m 1 * = Γ m 1 * A l 2 .  
Claim 3.2.1 :If x S m 1   , z A l 2   and a j k ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ ) a j k ( P ( z , A h ξ ) ; z , ξ ) 0   , then z S m 1 *   .
Proof of claim  3.2.1 : The goal is to show that z S m 1 *   . By assumption, | P ( x , A h ξ ) | , | P ( z , A h ξ ) | 2 k .   Since x = x A h ξ | ξ | 2 A h ξ + P ( x , A h ξ ) ,   by Pythagoras' theorem | x A h ξ | | x | | ξ | 1 | P ( x , A h ξ ) | 2 | x | 2 | x | | ξ | ( 1 2 2 l 1 20 ) .   Similarly, | z A h ξ | | z | | ξ | ( 1 2 2 l 2 20 ) .   Now we use the identity x z = | ξ | 2 ( x A h ξ ) ( z A h ξ ) + P ( x , A h ξ ) P ( z , A h ξ ) ,   to obtain | x z | | x | | z | ( 1 2 2 l 1 20 ) ( 1 2 2 l 2 20 ) 2 2 k .   But z = z x | x | 2 x + P ( z , x ) ,   so
| P ( z , x ) | 2 = | z | 2 ( z x ) 2 | x | 2 | z | 2 | z | 2 ( 1 2 2 l 1 19 ) + | x | 2 2 2 k + 1
2 2 l 1 19 | z | 2 + 2 2 l 1 19 2 2 l 1 16 | z | 2 ,
and therefore z Γ m 1 *   . This proves claim  3.2.1 .
Claim 3.2.2 : sup x , z R n | K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) | c a j k L 2 2 n j 2 l 2 ( n 1 ) .  
Proof of claim  3.2.2 We recall that
K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) = χ A l 1 ( x ) χ A l 2 ( z ) e i ( x z ) ξ a j k ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ )
a ¯ j k ( P ( z , A h ξ ) ; z , ξ ) χ 2 ( | ξ | ) φ 2 ( δ 2 j 1 | ξ | ) d ξ .
Suppose z A l 2   (otherwise K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) = 0   ) and a ¯ j k ( P ( z , A h ξ ) ; z , ξ ) 0   so that | P ( z , A h ξ ) | 2 k   .
Then | ξ A h z | = | z A h ξ | | z | | ξ | ( 1 2 2 l 2 20 ) ,   as in the proof of claim  3.2.1 . Since ξ = ξ A h z | z | 2 A h z + P ( ξ , A h z ) ,   one has | P ( ξ , A h z ) | 2 = | ξ | 2 | ξ A h z | 2 | z | 2 | ξ | 2 | ξ | 2 ( 1 2 2 l 2 20 ) 2 | ξ | 2 2 2 l 2 19 ,   which shows that ξ   belongs to a cone Γ z   of angle 2 l 2 9   . Hence | K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) | a j k L 2 | Γ z { δ | ξ | 2 j + 2 } | c a j k L 2 2 n j 2 l 2 ( n 1 ) .   This yields claim  3.2.2 .
Now to estimate Ψ l 1 Ψ l 2 * u L 2   we consider two separate cases. Case 1: l 1 l 2 l 1 + 10   .
Then
Ψ l 1 Ψ l 2 * u L 2 2 = | K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) u ( z ) d z | 2 d x m 1 S m 1 | S m 1 * K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) u ( z ) d z | 2 d x
m 1 | S m 1 | | S m 1 * | sup x , z | K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) | 2 χ S m 1 * u L 2 2
c 2 l 1 ( n 1 ) 2 n ( k + l 1 ) 2 l 1 ( n 1 ) 2 n ( k + l 2 ) a j k L 4 2 2 n j 2 l 2 ( n 1 ) m 1 χ S m 1 * u L 2 2
c 2 2 n ( k + j ) 2 ( 2 n ) ( l 1 + l 2 ) a j k L 4 u L 2 2 .
The first inequality above follows from claim  3.2.1 , the second inequality from Cauchy-Schwarz, the third inequality from claim  3.2.2 , and the fourth inequality from the local finiteness of { S m 1 * }   .
Therefore,
Ψ l 1 Ψ l 2 * c 2 n ( k + j ) 2 ( 2 n ) ( l 1 + l 2 ) / 2 a j k L 2 , for l 1 l 2 l 1 + 10 . (3.17)
Before turning to the remaining case l 2 l 1 + 11   , it is useful to split A l 2   in sectors S m 2   where m 2   roughly speaking measures how noncharacteristic the directions in S m 2   are. More precisely, let
S m 2 = { z A l 2 : ( m 2 1 ) 2 l 2 | A h z z | | z | 2 m 2 2 l 2 } , m 2 = 1 , 2 , . . , 2 l 2 1 ,
S l 2 * = { z A l 2 : 1 2 | A h z z | | z | 2 1 } .
Then A l 2 = S l 2 * 2 l 2 1 m 2 = 1 S m 2   . The next result will be used to estimate the volume of S m 2   . Recall that A h = ( I k 0 0 I n k ) , k { 1 , . . , n 1 } ,   where I j   is the j × j   unit matrix.
Proposition 3.2.1 Suppose that 0 < ε a 1 / 2   , ε 1 / 16   . Let S a , ε = { z R n : | z | 1 and a ε | A h z z | | z | 2 a } .   Then | S a , ε | c n , k ε ,   where c n , k   is independent of a   .
Proof of Proposition  3.2.1 Let m j   denote the Lebesgue measure in R j   . Write S a , ε = S a , ε + S a , ε ,   where S a , ε ± = { z R n : | z | 1 and a ε ± | A h z z | | z | 2 a } .   Let z + = ( z 1 , . . , z k )   , z = ( z k + 1 , . . , z n )   . By Fubini's theorem m n ( S a , ε + ) = | z | 1 m k ( S a , ε + ( z ) ) d m n k ( z ) ,   where
S a , ε + ( z ) = { z + R k : ( z + , z ) S a , ε + }
= { z + R k : | z + | 2 + | z | 2 1 , a ε | z + | 2 | z | 2 | z + | 2 + | z | 2 a } .
By straightforward calculation, | z + | 2 | z | 2 | z + | 2 + | z | 2 [ a ε , a ] | z + | 2 [ 1 + ( a ε ) 1 ( a ε ) | z | 2 , 1 + a 1 a | z | 2 ] .   Let f ( t ) = 1 + t 1 t , t ( , 1 ) .   Then f ( t ) = 2 ( 1 t ) 2 ,   so sup [ 0 , 1 / 2 ] | f ( t ) | = 8   . By the fundamental theorem of calculus, | 1 + ( a ε ) 1 ( a ε ) 1 + a 1 a | 8 ε ,   so 1 + ( a ε ) 1 ( a ε ) 1 + a 1 a 8 ε .   Also,
1 + a 1 a 8 ε = 1 + a 1 a 1 8 ε 1 a 1 + a
1 + a 1 a ( 1 8 ε 1 a 1 + a ) 1 + a 1 a ( 1 8 ε ) .
It follows that S a , ε + ( z ) { z + R k : 1 + a 1 a ( 1 8 ε ) | z + | | z | 1 + a 1 a } ,   and hence m k ( S a , ε + ( z ) ) c k ( 1 + a 1 a ) k / 2 | z | k ε c k 3 k / 2 | z | k ε .   Therefore,
m n ( S a , ε + ) = | z | 1 m k ( S a , ε + ( z ) ) d m n k ( z )
c k ε | z | 1 | z | k d m n k ( z ) c n , k ε .
Replacing k   by n k   in the above argument for S a , ε +   , one gets m n ( S a , ε ) c n , k ε .   This proves Proposition  3.2.1 .
Claim 3.2.3 :Let m 2 { 1 , 2 , . . , 2 l 2 1 }   . Then | S m 2 | c 2 ( n 1 ) l 2 + n k .  
Proof of claim  3.2.3  This follows by Proposition  3.2.1 and homogeneity.
Claim 3.2.4 :Suppose l 2 l 1 + 11   , x A l 1   , z A l 2   , 10 m 2 2 l 2   , | A h z z | | z | 2 ( m 2 1 ) 2 l 2 ,   and a j k ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ ) a j k ( P ( z , A h ξ ) ; z , ξ ) 0 .   Then | ( z x ) ξ | c m 2 2 k | ξ |   .
Proof of claim  3.2.4  The identity z = z A h ξ | ξ | A h ξ + P ( z , A h ξ )   and Pythagoras' theorem give | ξ A h z | = | z A h ξ | = | z | | ξ | 1 P ( z , A h ξ ) | z | 2 | z | | ξ | ( 1 2 2 l 2 20 ) .   Also
ξ = ξ A h z | z | 2 A h z + P ( ξ , A h z ) , (3.18)
so | P ( ξ , A h z ) | 2 = | ξ | 2 | ξ A h z | 2 | z | 2 | ξ | 2 | ξ | 2 ( 1 2 2 l 2 20 ) 2 | ξ | 2 2 2 l 2 19 .   Using again ( 3.18 ) z ξ = | z | 2 ( ξ A h z ) ( A h z z ) + z P ( ξ , A h z ) ,   and therefore
| z ξ | | z | | ξ | ( 1 2 2 l 2 20 ) ( m 2 1 ) 2 l 2 | z | | ξ | 2 l 2 9
2 k + 10 | ξ | ( 1 2 2 l 2 20 ) ( m 2 1 ) 2 k + 2 | ξ | 2 k + 9 | ξ | m 2 .
Another application of ( 3.18 ) gives A h ξ ξ = | z | 2 ( ξ A h z ) ( A h ξ A h z ) + A h ξ P ( ξ , A h z ) .   Here A h ξ A h z = ξ z   , so
| A h ξ ξ | | z | 2 | z | | ξ | ( 1 2 2 l 2 20 ) 2 k + 9 | ξ | m 2 | ξ | 2 2 l 2 9
| ξ | 2 ( 1 2 2 l 2 20 ) 2 l 2 2 m 2 | ξ | 2 2 l 2 9 2 l 2 3 m 2 | ξ | 2 .
Finally, ( z x ) ξ = ( z x ) A h ξ | ξ | 2 ( A h ξ ξ ) + ξ P ( z , A h ξ ) ξ P ( x , A h ξ ) .   Here | ( z x ) A h ξ | | z A h ξ | | x | | ξ | | z | | ξ | ( 1 2 2 l 2 20 ) | x | | ξ | 1 2 | z | | ξ | ,   so | ( z x ) ξ | 1 2 | z | | ξ | m 2 2 l 2 3 2 k + 1 | ξ | m 2 2 k + 6 | ξ | 2 k + 1 | ξ | m 2 2 k + 5 | ξ | .   This proves claim  3.2.4 .
Claim 3.2.5 : Suppose l 2 l 1 + 11   , 10 m 2 2 l 2   and | A h z z | | z | 2 ( m 2 1 ) 2 l 2 .   Then | K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) | c m 2 2 2 ( n 2 ) j 2 k ( n 1 ) l 2 max N 2 ( ξ ξ ) N a j k L 2 , x R n .  
Proof of claim  3.2.5  For x A l 1   and z A l 2   (otherwise K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) = 0   ), it follows from claim  3.2.4 and parts (ii) and (iii) of Proposition  3.1.3 that
| K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) | = | e i ( x z ) ξ ( ( 1 i ( x z ) ξ ξ ξ ) 2 ) t |
[ a j k ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ ) a ¯ j k ( P ( z , A h ξ ) ; z , ξ ) χ 2 ( | ξ | ) φ 2 ( δ 2 j 1 | ξ | ) ] d ξ
c m 2 2 2 ( n 2 ) j 2 k ( n 1 ) l 2 max N 2 ( ξ ξ ) N a j k L 2 ,
since the integrand is 0   for ξ   not in the cone with angle 2 l 2 9   (see the proof of claim  3.2.1 ). This proves claim  3.2.5 .
With these results Ψ l 1 Ψ l 2 * u L 2   can be estimated in the remaining case. Case 2: l 2 l 1 + 11   .
Ψ l 1 Ψ l 2 * u L 2 2 m 1 S m 1 | A l 2 K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) u ( z ) d z | 2 d x .   Writing A l 2 = S l 2 * + m 2 = 1 9 S m 2 + m 2 = 10 2 l 2 1 S m 2 ,   and then Ψ l 1 Ψ l 2 * u L 2 11 ( I 1 + I 2 + I 3 ) ,   where
I 1 = m 1 S m 1 ( S l 2 * | K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) u ( z ) | d z ) 2 d x ,
I 2 = m 1 S m 1 m 2 = 1 9 ( S m 2 | K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) u ( z ) | d z ) 2 d x ,
I 3 = m 1 S m 1 | m 2 = 10 2 l 2 1 S m 2 | K l 1 l 2 ( x , z ) u ( z ) | d z | 2 d x .
Using claims  3.2.1 and  3.2.5 with m 2 = 2 l 2 1   (integration by parts),
| I 1 | c 2 n k + l 1 2 n k + n l 2 ( n 1 ) l 1 2 2 ( n 2 ) j 4 k 2 l 2 ( n 1 ) 4 l 2
max N 2 ( ξ ξ ) N a j k L 4 m 1 χ S m 1 * u L 2 2
c 2 2 ( n 2 ) j 2 k ( 2 n 4 ) 2 ( 2 n ) l 1 2 ( 2 n ) l 2 max N 2 ( ξ ξ ) N a j k L 4 u L 2 2 .
Using claims  3.2.2 and  3.2.3 (size)
| I 2 | c 2 n k + l 1 2 n k + ( n 1 ) l 2 2 2 n j 2 l 2 ( n 1 ) a j k L 4 m 1 χ S m 1 * u L 2 2
c 2 2 n ( k + j ) 2 l 1 l 2 ( n 1 ) a j k L 4 u L 2 2 .
Using claim  3.2.3 (size) and  3.2.5 with m 2 { 10 , 11 , . . . 2 l 2 1 }   (integration by parts), and the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality on the sum in m 2   ,
| I 3 | c 2 n k + l 1 ( m 2 = 10 2 l 2 1 1 m 2 2 ) ( m 2 = 10 2 l 2 1 m 2 2 2 n k + l 2 ( n 1 ) m 2 4 )
2 2 ( n 2 ) j 4 k 2 l 2 ( n 1 ) max N 2 ( ξ ξ ) N a j k L 4 m 1 χ S m 1 * u L 2 2
c 2 2 ( n 2 ) j 2 k ( 2 n 4 ) 2 l 1 l 2 ( n 1 ) max N 2 ( ξ ξ ) N a j k L 4 u L 2 2 .
Combining the above estimates for I 1 , I 2   and I 3   , one obtains for l 1 + 11 l 2  
Ψ l 1 Ψ l 2 * L 2 c 2 n ( k + j ) max N 2 ( ξ ξ ) N a j k L 2 2 ( l 1 l 2 ) / 2 2 l 2 n 2 2 . (3.19)
By ( 3.17 ), ( 3.19 ) is valid for all l 1 l 2   . Notice that from ( 3.17 ) and ( 3.19 ) we conclude that the estimates are much better for n > 2   than for n = 2   . In fact it is just in dimension n = 2   where Cotlar-Stein lemma is necessary.
Taking γ ( l ) = 2 l / 4   it follows from Cotlar-Stein lemma that l = 0 Ψ l u   converges in L 2   for any u S ( R n )   . As it was previously noted, l = 0 Ψ l u   converges to ( 1 χ B 2 k + 10 ) Ψ j k u   in the distribution sense, so ( 1 χ B 2 k + 10 ) Ψ j k u L 2 c 2 n ( k + j ) / 2 max N 2 ( ξ ξ ) N a j k L 2 u L 2 , u S ( R n ) .   Combining with ( 3.16 ) Ψ j k u c 2 n ( k + j ) / 2 max N 2 ( ξ ξ ) N a j k L 2 u L 2 .   Finally, one can use the following fact which is easily verified using standard Fourier transform arguments.
Lemma 3.2.1 For any N 1 , N 2 N   there exists N 3 N   such that 2 N 1 ( j + k ) ( ξ ξ ) N 2 a j k L c N 1 max k + | α | N 3 s k ( ξ ξ ) N 2 s α a L .  
Using Lemma  3.2.1 with N 1 n / 2 + 1   one obtains I I L x 2 max k + | α | N 1 ; N 2 s k ( ξ ξ ) 1 N s α a L u L x 2 ,   where I I   was defined in ( 3.15 ), and the proof of Theorem  3.2.1 is completed.

3.3 Composition results

First a few facts concerning oscillatory integrals will be listed. For details and further results, see [25, section 1.6.
Definition 3.3.1 Let m R   , τ 0   . Then A τ m   is the class of functions φ C ( R y n × R ξ n )   satisfying | y α ξ β φ ( y , ξ ) | c α , β ξ m y τ .   The class A   of amplitude functions is defined by A = m R τ 0 A τ m .  
Definition 3.3.2 Let a A   . Then O s e i y ξ a ( y , ξ ) d y d ξ = lim ε 0 e i y ξ a ( y , ξ ) χ ~ ( ε y , ε ξ ) d y d ξ ,   if χ ~ S ( R y n × R ξ n )   and χ ~ ( 0 , 0 ) = 1   .
The oscillatory integral in Definition  3.3.2 is well-defined because of the following lemma which allows one to integrate by parts and use Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem.
Lemma 3.3.1 Let χ ~ S ( R y n )   with χ ~ ( 0 ) = 1   . Then
( i ) χ ~ ( ε y ) 1 in R n uniformly on compact sets ,
( i i ) y α [ χ ~ ( ε y ) ] 0 in R n uniformly for α N n { 0 } ,
( i i i ) α N n c α > 0 s.t.
| y α [ χ ~ ( ε y ) ] | c α ε σ y σ | α | , y R n , 0 σ | α | , 0 < ε < 1 .
Theorem 3.3.1 Let a ( s ; x , ξ ) S ( R n ; S 1 , 0 m )   , α N n   and φ S ( R n )   . Suppose N m + | α |   , N N   .
Let
c 1 ( x , ξ ) = | β | < N i | β | β ! φ ( x ) ξ β [ ( i ξ ) α ] x β b h ( x , ξ ) , (3.20)
and
c 2 ( x , ξ ) = | β | < N i | β | β ! ξ β b h ( x , ξ ) x β φ ( x ) ( i ξ ) α . (3.21)
Let
E 1 = φ x α Ψ b h Ψ c 1 , (3.22)
and
E 2 = Ψ b h φ x α Ψ c 2 . (3.23)
Then there exist N 1 N   and c > 0   such that for any u S ( R n )   and for j = 1 , 2  
E j u L 2 c max | α | + | β | N 1 x α x β φ L max | γ 1 + γ 2 + γ 3 + γ 4 | N 1 s γ 4 ξ m + | γ 3 | s γ 1 x γ 2 ξ γ 3 a L u L 2 . (3.24)
Proof of Theorem  3.3.1 For simplicity of the exposition we shall drop all the powers of 2 π   which appear in the definition of the operators Ψ b   .
Let u S ( R n )   . Then
E 1 u ( x ) = φ ( x ) x α e i x ξ b h ( x , ξ ) u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ
φ ( x ) e i x ξ | β | < N i | β | β ! ξ β [ ( i ξ ) α ] x β b h ( x , ξ ) u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ .
Notice that x α [ e i x ξ b h ( x , ξ ) ] = β α ( α β ) i | α β | ξ α β e i x ξ x β b h ( x , ξ ) ,   and that if β α   i | α | β ! ξ β [ ( i ξ ) α ] = i | α β | β ! α ! ( α β ) ! ξ α β = i | α β | ( α β ) ξ α β ,   then E 1 u ( x ) = φ ( x ) e i x ξ N | β | , β α ( α β ) i | α β | ξ α β x β b h ( x , ξ ) u ^ ( ξ ) d ξ .   If m > 0   , then E 1 = 0   .
If m 0   , N | β |   , and β α   , then φ ( x ) ξ α β x β b h ( x , ξ ) S 1 , 0 0 .   Hence, there exists c > 0   and N 1 N   such that ( 3.24 ) holds for j = 1   .Let us go back to E 2   . We shall assume that φ C 0 ( R n )   and vanish outside B R ( 0 )   . Then we shall obtain bounds of the form of powers of R   . Thus by introducing a partition of unity with respect to dyadic x   -annuli and summing the corresponding operators one obtains the case φ S ( R n )   .
Write E 2 u ( x ) = ( 1 χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | ) ) E 2 u ( x ) + χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | ) E 2 u ( x ) = I + I I .   To estimate I   it suffices to consider classical symbols. Indeed, integrating by parts with respect to y   in the second term
I = ( 1 χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | ) ) O s ( e i ( x y ) ξ b h ( x , ξ ) φ ( y ) y α u ( y ) e i ( x y ) ξ | β | < N i | β | β ! ξ β b h ( x , ξ ) x β φ ( x ) y α u ( y ) ) d y d ξ . (3.25)
By Taylor's formula
φ ( y ) = | β | < N 1 β ! x β φ ( x ) ( y x ) β
+ N | β | = N 1 β ! ( y x ) β 0 1 x β φ ( θ y + ( 1 θ ) x ) ( 1 θ ) N 1 d θ .
Using ( y x ) β e i ( x y ) ξ = i | β | ξ β [ e i ( x y ) ξ ] ,   and integrating by parts with respect to ξ   in the first term of I   in  3.25 
I = N ( 1 χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | ) ) 0 1 O s e i ( x y ) ξ | β | = N i | β | β ! ξ β b h ( x , ξ )
x β φ ( θ y + ( 1 θ ) x ) ( 1 θ ) N 1 y α u ( y ) d y d ξ d θ .
For each θ [ 0 , 1 ]   , the multiple symbol N ( 1 χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | ) ) | β | = N i | β | β ! ξ β b h ( x , ξ ) x β φ ( θ y + ( 1 θ ) x ) ( 1 θ ) N 1 ,   is in S 1 , 0 m N   uniformly in θ   . Since m N + | α | 0   , there exist c > 0   and N 1 N   such that ( 3.24 ) holds with E j u   replaced by I. In II, note that χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | ) x β φ ( x ) = 0   , so that
I I = ( 1 ) | α | χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | )
O s e i ( x y ) ξ β α ( α β ) ( i ξ ) β b h ( x , ξ ) y α β φ ( y ) u ( y ) d y d ξ ,
by integration by parts with respect to y   . Therefore, it suffices to consider the pseudo-differential operator Ψ I I   given by
Ψ I I u ( x ) = χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | )
O s e i ( x y ) ξ ξ β a ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) φ ( y ) u ( y ) d y d ξ ,
for β α   . Choose M N   such that 2 M m | α | n + 1   . Integrating by parts with respect to ξ   and using | x y | | x | / 2 R > 0   ,
Ψ I I u ( x ) = χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | ) e i ( x y ) ξ ( 1 ) M | x y | 2 M Δ ξ M [ ξ β a ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) ] φ ( y ) u ( y ) d y d ξ , (3.26)
where the integral converges absolutely. Indeed,
| Δ ξ M [ ξ β a ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) ] | c x 2 M ξ n 1 max | γ 1 + γ 2 | 2 M ξ m + | γ 2 | s γ 1 ξ γ 2 a L .
Therefore, letting | a | ( 2 M ) = max | γ 1 + γ 2 | 2 M ξ m + | γ 2 | s γ 1 ξ γ 2 a L ,   one has | Ψ I I u ( x ) | c R n / 2 φ L | a | ( 2 M ) u L 2 .   Define χ R ( | x | ) = χ ( | x | / R )   . Then by Cauchy-Schwarz ( 1 χ c 0 R ) Ψ I I u L 2 c R n φ L | a | ( 2 M ) u L 2 ,   where the constant c 0   will be fixed below (see ( 3.29 )). Now we turn to the estimate of
χ c 0 R Ψ I I u L 2 . (3.27)
We shall use that
1 | x y | 2 M = 1 | | x | 2 2 ( x y ) + | y | 2 | M = 1 | x | 2 M 1 | 1 2 ( x | x | y | x | ) + | y | 2 | x | 2 | M = 1 | x | 2 M ( 1 j = 1 ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 P j ( x | x | ) Q j ( y | x | ) ) 1 , (3.28)
where P j , Q j   are monomials of degree no bigger than 2 M   with deg Q j 0   for j = 1 , 2 , . . . , ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1   . Since | x | > c 0 R   and | y | < R   it follows that | P j ( x | x | ) | a j , | Q j ( y | x | ) | b j ( | y | | x | ) d e g Q j b j c 0 d e g Q j ,   so | P j ( x | x | ) Q j ( y | x | ) | a j b j c 0 d e g Q j .   We take
c 0 2 ( 2 n + 2 ) M max { | a j b j | : j = 1 , . . , ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 } (3.29)
and rewrite ( 3.28 ) as
1 | x | 2 M 1 1 j P j ( x | x | ) Q j ( y | x | ) = 1 | x | 2 M ( k = 0 ( j = 1 ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 P j ( x | x | ) Q j ( y | x | ) ) k ) = 1 | x | 2 M k = 0 j 1 . . j k = 1 ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 k i = 1 P j i ( x | x | ) Q j i ( y | x | ) | x | deg Q j i | x | deg Q j i . (3.30)
We observe that | x | deg Q j i Q j i ( y | x | )   depends just on y   and if | y | < R   then | | x | deg Q j i Q j i ( y | x | ) | b j i R deg Q j i .   So returning to the estimate ( 3.27 ) and using the argument in ( 3.26 ) it follows
χ c 0 R Ψ I I u L 2 = χ c 0 R k = 0 j 1 . . j k = 1 ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 k i = 1 ( 1 ) M P j i ( x | x | ) | x | deg Q j i
e i ( x y ) ξ 1 | x | 2 M Δ ξ M ( ξ β a ( ; , ) χ ( | ξ | ) ) Q j i ( y | x | ) | x | deg Q j i φ ( y ) u ( y ) d y d ξ L 2 .
Using that b ~ ( x , ξ ) = χ c 0 R ( | x | ) 1 | x | 2 M Δ ξ M ( ξ β a ( P ( x , A h ξ ) ; x , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) )   is a symbol which falls under the scope of Theorem  3.2.1 -see Remark  3.1.1 (c), it follows that
e i x ξ b ~ ( x , ξ ) ( e i y ξ Q j i ( y ) φ ( y ) u ( y ) d y ) d ξ L x 2
c e i y ξ Q j i ( y ) φ ( y ) u ( y ) d y L ξ 2
c b j i R deg Q j i u L 2 .
Also
χ c 0 R k = 0 j 1 . . j k = 1 ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 k i = 1 ( 1 ) M P j i ( x | x | ) | x | deg Q j i L k = 0 j 1 . . j k = 1 ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 k i = 1 a j i ( c 0 R ) deg Q j i .
Combining the last two estimates we conclude that
χ c 0 R Ψ I I u L 2
c k = 0 j 1 . . j k = 1 ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 k i = 1 a j i b j i R deg Q j i ( c 0 R ) deg Q j i u L 2 c k = 0 j 1 . . j k = 1 ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 k i = 1 a j i b j i c 0 deg Q j i u L 2
c k = 0 ( j = 1 ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 a j i b j i c 0 ) k u L 2 k = 0 1 2 k u L 2 c u L 2
and the proof of Theorem  3.3.1 is completed.
Theorem 3.3.2 Let a S ( R n : S 1 , 0 m )   and let b h   be defined as ( 3.9 ), N N   , N m   . Let c ( x , ξ ) = | α | < N i | α | α ! x α ξ α b ¯ h ( x , ξ )   and E = Ψ b h * Ψ c   . Let φ S ( R n )   . Then there exists N 1 = N 1 ( n ) N   such that for u S ( R n )  
φ E u L 2 c max | β | N 1 x N 1 x α φ L max β 4 + | β 1 + β 2 + β 3 | N 1 s β 4 ξ m + | β 3 | s β 1 x β 2 ξ β 3 a L u L 2 (3.31)
Proof of Theorem  3.3.2 We shall prove the Theorem for φ C 0 ( R n )   with support in B R ( 0 )   . Introducing a partition of unity and summing the corresponding terms we get the desired result.
Thus,
φ ( x ) E u ( x ) = O s e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) { b ¯ h ( y , ξ ) | α | < N i | α | α ! x α ξ α b ¯ h ( x , ξ ) } u ( y ) d y d ξ
= O s e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) ( 1 χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) )
{ b ¯ h ( y , ξ ) | α | < N i | α | α ! x α ξ α b ¯ h ( x , ξ ) } u ( y ) d y d ξ
+ O s e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | )
{ b ¯ h ( y , ξ ) | α | < N i | α | α ! x α ξ α b ¯ h ( x , ξ ) } u ( y ) d y d ξ
= I + I I .
First consider I   . By a Taylor expansion of order N   ,
b h ( y , ξ ) = | α | < N 1 α ! ( y x ) α x α b h ( x , ξ )
+ | α | = N N α ! ( y x ) α 0 1 ( 1 θ ) N 1 x α b h ( θ y + ( 1 θ ) x , ξ ) d θ .
Since ( y x ) α e i ( x y ) ξ = i | α | ξ α e i ( x y ) ξ   , integration by parts with respect to ξ   gives
I = O s e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) ( 1 χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) ) N i N
| α | = N 1 α ! 0 1 ( 1 θ ) N 1 x α ξ α b ¯ h ( θ y + ( 1 θ ) x , ξ ) d θ u ( y ) d y d ξ .
Because of the compact support in x   and y   , the multiple symbol φ ( x ) ( 1 χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) ) N i N | α | = N 1 α ! ( 1 θ ) N 1 x α ξ α b ¯ h ( θ y + ( 1 θ ) x , ξ )   is in S 1 , 0 m N S 1 , 0 0   uniformly in θ   , so an estimate of the type ( 3.31 ) holds with φ E u   replaced by I   . A factor R N   appears due to the differentiation with respect to ξ   of the quantity P ( θ y + ( 1 θ ) x , A h ξ )   .
Next we consider I I   . Choose M N   such that m 2 M n 1   . If φ ( x ) χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) 0 ,   then | x y | R   so by integration by parts with respect to ξ  
I I = e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) ( 1 ) M | x y | 2 M Δ ξ M b ¯ h ( y , ξ ) u ( y ) d y d ξ
e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) ( 1 ) M | x y | 2 M
| α | < N i | α | α ! x α Δ ξ M ξ α b ¯ h ( x , ξ ) u ( y ) d y d ξ ,
where the integrals converge absolutely by the choice on M   . The multiple symbol in the second term above is in S 1 , 0 m 2 M S 1 , 0 0   because of the factor φ ( x )   , so the corresponding pseudo-differential operator is L 2   -bounded as in ( 3.31 ).
Therefore, it remains to show the L 2   -boundedness of the operator
Ψ ¯ I I u ( x ) = e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | )
( 1 ) M | x y | 2 M Δ ξ M [ a ¯ ( P ( y , A h ξ ) ; y , ξ ) χ ( | ξ | ) ] u ( y ) d y d ξ .
But Ψ ¯ I I   is the adjoint of the operator Ψ I I   defined in ( 3.26 ) in the proof of Theorem  3.3.1 (with β = 0   and φ   replaced by φ ¯   ). Since Ψ I I   was there proved to be bounded in L 2   , so is Ψ ¯ I I   , and the operator norms are equal.
This proves Theorem  3.3.2 .
Theorem 3.3.3 Let a 1 S ( R n : S 1 , 0 m 1 )   , a 2 S ( R n : S 1 , 0 m 2 )   , and let b 1 , b 2   be the corresponding symbols given in ( 3.9 ), Definition  3.1.1 , with A = A h   . Suppose N N   , N m 1 + m 2   and let c ( x , ξ ) = | α | < N i | α | α ! ξ α [ b 1 ( x , ξ ) x α b ¯ 2 ( x , ξ ) ] .   Let φ S ( R n )   . Then there exist c = c ( N )   and N 1 N   such that for any u S ( R n )  
φ ( Ψ b 1 Ψ b 2 * Ψ c ) u L 2 max | β | N 1 x N 1 x β φ L max β 4 + | β 1 + β 2 + β 3 | N 1 s β 4 ξ m 1 + | β 3 | s β 1 x β 2 ξ β 3 a 1 L max β 4 + | β 1 + β 2 + β 3 | N 1 s β 4 ξ m 2 + | β 3 | s β 1 x β 2 ξ β 3 a 2 L u L 2 . (3.32)
Proof of Theorem  3.3.3 As in the proof of Theorem  3.3.2 we shall assume that φ C 0 ( R n )   with support in B R ( 0 )   .
Introducing a partition of unity and summing the corresponding terms we get the desired result.
We have,
φ ( Ψ b 1 Ψ b 2 * Ψ c ) u ( x ) = O s e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) [ b 1 ( x , ξ ) b ¯ 2 ( y , ξ ) c ( x , ξ ) ] u ( y ) d y d ξ
= O s e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) ( 1 χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) ) [ b 1 ( x , ξ ) b ¯ 2 ( y , ξ ) c ( x , ξ ) ] u ( y ) d y d ξ
+ O s e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) [ b 1 ( x , ξ ) b ¯ 2 ( y , ξ ) c ( x , ξ ) ] u ( y ) d y d ξ
= I + I I .
First we consider I   . By a Taylor expansion of order N   ,
b 2 ( y , ξ ) = | α | < N 1 α ! ( y x ) α x α b 2 ( x , ξ )
+ | α | = N N α ! ( y x ) α 0 1 ( 1 θ ) N 1 x β b 2 ( θ y + ( 1 θ ) x , ξ ) d θ .
Since ( y x ) α e i ( x y ) ξ = i | α | ξ α e i ( x y ) ξ   , integration by parts with respect to ξ   gives
I = e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) ( 1 χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) )
| α | = N N α ! i | α | 0 1 ( 1 θ ) N 1 ξ α [ b 1 ( x , ξ ) x α b ¯ 2 ( θ y + ( 1 θ ) x , ξ ) ] d θ u ( y ) d y d ξ .
Because of the compact support in x   and y   , the multiple symbol φ ( x ) ( 1 χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) ) | α | = N N α ! i | α | ξ α [ b 1 ( x , ξ ) x α b ¯ 2 ( θ y + ( 1 θ ) x , ξ ) ]   is in S 1 , 0 m 1 + m 2 N S 1 , 0 0   with seminorms uniformly bounded in θ [ 0 , 1 ]   , so the estimate ( 3.32 ) holds with the left hand side replaced by I L x 2   . A factor R N 1   appears from differentiation with respect to ξ   of the quantity P ( θ y + ( 1 θ ) x , A h ξ )   , θ [ 0 , 1 ]   .
Next consider I I   . Note that if φ ( x ) χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) 0   , then | x y | R   . Therefore, choosing M N   such that m 1 + m 2 2 M n 1   and integrating by parts with respect to ξ  
I I = e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) ( 1 ) M | x y | 2 M Δ ξ M [ b 1 ( x , ξ ) b ¯ 2 ( y , ξ ) ] u ( y ) d y d ξ e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( x ) χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | y | ) ( 1 ) M | x y | 2 M Δ ξ M c ( x , ξ ) u ( y ) d y d ξ , (3.33)
where the integrals converge absolutely.
The multiple symbol in the second term in ( 3.33 ) is in S 1 , 0 n 1 S 1 , 0 0   , so an estimate of the type( 3.32 ) holds.
The adjoint of the operator corresponding to the first term in ( 3.33 ) has multiple symbol φ ¯ ( y ) χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | ) ( 1 ) M | x y | 2 M Δ ξ M [ b ¯ 1 ( y , ξ ) b 2 ( x , ξ ) ] .   Replacing φ ¯   by φ   and b ¯ 1 ( y , ξ )   by ξ β   one obtains a symbol similar to that of the operator Ψ I I   in ( 3.26 ) in the proof of Theorem  3.3.1 , so we just need to sketch the proof.
Thus, we define
Ψ u ( x ) = e i ( x y ) ξ φ ¯ ( y ) χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | )
( 1 ) M | x y | 2 M ( | γ 1 | + | γ 2 | = 2 M c γ 1 γ 2 ξ γ 1 b ¯ 1 ( y , ξ ) ξ γ 2 b 2 ( x , ξ ) ) u ( y ) d y d ξ .
Next consider φ ~ C 0   which vanishes outside the ball of radius 3 R / 2   and such that φ ~ φ = φ   . Then define b ~ γ 1 ( y , ξ ) = φ ~ ( y ) ξ | γ 1 | m 1 ξ γ 1 b ¯ 1 ( y , ξ ) ,   and b ~ γ 2 ( x , ξ ) = χ ( ( 2 R ) 1 | x | ) | x | 2 M ξ m 1 | γ 1 | ξ γ 2 b 2 ( x , ξ ) .   Using the notation introduced in the proof of Theorem  3.3.1 , see ( 3.28 )-( 3.30 ), we have 1 | x y | 2 M = 1 | x | 2 M k = 0 j 1 . . j k = 1 ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 k i = 1 P j i ( x | x | ) Q j i ( y | x | ) .   Hence as in ( 3.28 )-( 3.30 ) we can reduce ourselves to study χ ( ( c 0 R ) 1 | x | ) Ψ u L 2   for c 0   large enough.
Then we have
χ ( ( c 0 R ) 1 | x | ) Ψ u L 2
c k = 0 j 1 . . j k = 1 ( 2 n + 2 ) M 1 | γ 1 | + | γ 2 | = 2 M χ ( ( c 0 R ) 1 | x | ) k i = 1 P j i ( x | x | ) 1 | x | deg Q j i
e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( y ) Q j i ( y ) b ~ γ 1 ( y , ξ ) b ~ γ 2 ( x , ξ ) u ( y ) d y d ξ L x 2 .
Then from Remark  3.1.1 (b)
e i ( x y ) ξ φ ( y ) Q j i ( y ) b ~ γ 1 ( y , ξ ) b ~ γ 2 ( x , ξ ) u ( y ) d y d ξ L x 2
= e i x ξ b ~ γ 2 ( x , ξ ) ( F ( y , ξ ) d y ) d ξ L x 2
F ( y , ξ ) d y L ξ 2 ,
with F ( y , ξ ) = e i y ξ φ ( y ) Q j i ( y ) b ~ γ 1 ( y , ξ ) u ( y ) .   Now observe that if a ( z , η ) = b ~ γ 1 ( η , z ) ,   then | z α η β a ( z , η ) | c α β η | β | R | α | + | β | .   Hence a S 1 , 0 0   and therefore F ( y , ξ ) d y L ξ 2 c R deg Q j i + N u L 2   for some large N   which just depends on the dimension.Gathering the above information with the argument used in the proof of Theorem  3.3.1 one completes the proof.

4 THE BICHARACTERISTIC FLOW

In this section we study the bicharacteristic flows associated to the second order ultrahyperbolic variable coefficient operator ( x )   and its truncated version R ( x )   , see ( 4.12 )-( 4.13 ) below. Assuming a non-trapping condition (basic assumption) for the flow generated by ( x )   we prove in subsection  4.1 that the bicharacteristic flow is “uniformly non-trapping” with respect to the parameter R   . The analysis of the flow is moredelicate when the trajectory is not outgoing 1   , -see Theorem  4.1.1 below. In that case we prove that outside a bounded ball (the same for all R   large enough) it behaves in the x   variable as the free flow, but just in dyadic annuli see Theorem  4.1.1 ( v) for a precise statement. On the other hand in the outgoing case, the trajectories are in fact perturbations of the free ones, as is proved by Craig, Kappeler, and Strauss in [4whose arguments we follow. The end of subsection  4.1 is devoted to prove that the non-trapping condition is stable under small perturbation in the coefficients.
In subsection  4.2 we deduce several estimates for the continuous dependence upon the initial data of the flows associated to the operators R ( x )   (with respect the parameter R   ). The arguments in [4are again very helpful. The estimates in subsections  4.1 and  4.2 will be used in the next section to deduce several properties of the integrating factor K R   .
One of the main differences of the flow in the non-elliptic setting with respect to the elliptic one studied in Section  2 is that the Hamiltonian in the elliptic case h 2 ( x , ξ ) = j , k a j k ( x ) ξ k ξ j   is preserved under the flow. So ellipticity gives the a priori estimate -see ( 2.15 ) in Section  2 , ν 2 | ξ 0 | 2