← all posts

Picard-Lindelöf Theorem

2025-04-07·7 min read·

We discuss the Picard-Lindelöf theorem on local existence and uniqueness of solutions to first-order ODEs, building up from the completeness of C(K,E) under the supremum norm, the Banach fixed point theorem, and Grönwall's inequality.

Approach

Lemma

Let KK be a compact metric space and (E,∥⋅∥)(E,\|\cdot\|) be a Banach space. Then the space C(K,E)C(K,E) equipped with a supremum norm ∥f∥∞=sup⁡x∈K∥f(x)∥\|f\|_{\infty} = \sup_{x \in K}\|f(x)\| is a Banach space.

Proof.

Let ε>0\varepsilon > 0 be arbitrary and (fn)⊆C(K,E)(f_n) \subseteq C(K,E) be a Cauchy sequence, then there exists N∈NN \in \mathbb{N} such that ∥fn−fm∥∞<ε\|f_n - f_m\|_{\infty} < \varepsilon whenever n,m>Nn,m > N. Fix x∈Kx \in K, then we have

∥fn(x)−fm(x)∥E≤∥fn−fm∥∞<ε.\|f_n(x) - f_m(x)\|_E \leq \|f_n - f_m\|_{\infty} < \varepsilon.

Then (fn(x))(f_n(x)) is Cauchy in EE. Since EE is complete, there exists f(x)∈Ef(x) \in E such that fn(x)→f(x)f_n(x) \to f(x). We claim that fn→ff_n \to f uniformly. Fix n>Nn > N and x∈Kx \in K, then we have

∥fn(x)−f(x)∥E=lim⁡m→+∞∥fn(x)−fm(x)∥≤lim⁡m→+∞∥fn−fm∥∞≤ε.\|f_n(x) - f(x)\|_{E} = \lim_{m \to +\infty}\|f_n(x) - f_m(x)\| \leq \lim_{m \to +\infty}\|f_n - f_m\|_{\infty} \leq \varepsilon.

Then fn→ff_n \to f in EE. In addition, taking m→∞m \to \infty we obtain ∥fn−f∥∞≤ε\|f_n - f\|_\infty \leq \varepsilon for all n≥Nn \geq N. Thus fn→ff_n \to f in the sup norm. To prove f∈C(K,E)f \in C(K,E), fix x0∈Kx_0 \in K, we choose N∈NN \in \mathbb{N} large enough such that

∥f−fn∥∞<ε3for all n>N.\|f - f_n\|_{\infty} < \frac{\varepsilon}{3} \quad \text{for all } n > N.

Since fnf_n is pointwise continuous, then there exists δ>0\delta > 0 such that ∥fn(x)−fn(x0)∥<ε3\|f_n(x) - f_n(x_0)\| < \frac{\varepsilon}{3} whenever d(x,x0)<δd(x,x_0) < \delta. Then we obtain

∥f(x)−f(x0)∥≤∥f(x)−fn(x)∥+∥fn(x)−fn(x0)∥+∥fn(x0)−f(x0)∥≤2∥f−fn∥∞+∥fn(x)−fn(x0)∥<ε.\begin{aligned} \|f(x) - f(x_0)\| &\leq \|f(x) - f_n(x)\| + \|f_n(x) - f_n(x_0)\| + \|f_n(x_0) - f(x_0)\| \\ &\leq 2\|f - f_n\|_\infty + \|f_n(x) - f_n(x_0)\| \\ &< \varepsilon. \end{aligned}

Since x0∈Kx_0 \in K was arbitrary, then f∈C(K,E)f \in C(K,E), which implies that C(K,E)C(K,E) with the supremum norm is a Banach space.

■

Banach Fixed Point Theorem

Theorem (Banach Fixed Point Theorem)

Let (X,d)(X,d) be a complete metric space, q∈[0,1)q \in [0,1) and T:X→XT: X \to X be a mapping on XX satisfying

d(T(x),T(y))≤q d(x,y)for all x,y.d(T(x),T(y)) \leq q\,d(x,y) \quad \text{for all } x,y.

Then TT admits a unique fixed point x∗x^* in XX.

Proof.

Let x0∈Xx_0 \in X be arbitrary and let (xn)(x_n) be the sequence defined by xn=T(xn−1)x_n = T(x_{n-1}) for all n≥1n \geq 1. We first establish the estimate

d(xn+1,xn)≤qnd(x1,x0),for all n∈N.d(x_{n+1}, x_n) \leq q^n d(x_1, x_0), \quad \text{for all } n \in \mathbb{N}.

This follows by induction: the base case n=1n = 1 is immediate. Assuming it holds for nn, then

d(xn+2,xn+1)=d(T(xn+1),T(xn))≤q d(xn+1,xn)≤qn+1d(x1,x0).d(x_{n+2}, x_{n+1}) = d(T(x_{n+1}), T(x_n)) \leq q\,d(x_{n+1}, x_n) \leq q^{n+1}d(x_1,x_0).

Using this and the triangle inequality, for all m>nm > n we obtain

d(xm,xn)≤∑k=nm−1d(xk+1,xk)≤∑k=nm−1qkd(x1,x0)≤qn1−qd(x1,x0).d(x_m, x_n) \leq \sum_{k=n}^{m-1} d(x_{k+1}, x_k) \leq \sum_{k=n}^{m-1} q^k d(x_1,x_0) \leq \frac{q^n}{1-q}d(x_1,x_0).

Let ε>0\varepsilon > 0 be arbitrary, then one can choose N∈NN \in \mathbb{N} large enough such that qn1−qd(x1,x0)<ε\frac{q^n}{1-q}d(x_1,x_0) < \varepsilon. Thus (xn)(x_n) is a Cauchy sequence, and since XX is complete, then xnx_n converges to some x∗∈Xx^* \in X and we obtain

x∗=lim⁡n→+∞xn=lim⁡n→+∞T(xn−1)=T(x∗),x^* = \lim_{n\to+\infty} x_n = \lim_{n\to+\infty} T(x_{n-1}) = T(x^*),

where the last equality follows from continuity of TT. Thus x∗x^* is a fixed point in XX. To prove the uniqueness, suppose p1≠p2p_1 \neq p_2 are two fixed points in XX, then we have

d(p1,p2)=d(T(p1),T(p2))≤q d(p1,p2)<d(p1,p2),d(p_1,p_2) = d(T(p_1),T(p_2)) \leq q\,d(p_1,p_2) < d(p_1,p_2),

which is a contradiction, as desired.

■

Grönwall Inequality

Theorem (Grönwall Inequality)

Let u:[t0,T]→[0,∞)u: [t_0,T] \to [0,\infty) be a continuous function, C,L≥0C, L \geq 0 and we have

u(t)≤C+L∫t0tu(s) dsfor all t∈[t0,T].u(t) \leq C + L\int_{t_0}^t u(s)\,ds \quad \text{for all } t \in [t_0,T].

Then we have the estimate

u(t)≤CeL(t−t0)for all t∈[t0,T].u(t) \leq Ce^{L(t-t_0)} \quad \text{for all } t \in [t_0,T].
Proof.

Let v(t)=C+L∫t0tu(s) dsv(t) = C + L\int_{t_0}^t u(s)\,ds, then we have u(t)≤v(t)u(t) \leq v(t) and v′(t)=Lu(t)≤Lv(t)v'(t) = Lu(t) \leq Lv(t). Consider w(t)=e−L(t−t0)v(t)w(t) = e^{-L(t-t_0)}v(t), differentiating ww yields

w′(t)=e−L(t−t0)(v′(t)−Lv(t))≤0.w'(t) = e^{-L(t-t_0)}(v'(t) - Lv(t)) \leq 0.

Thus w(t)≤w(t0)=v(t0)=Cw(t) \leq w(t_0) = v(t_0) = C, we obtain

u(t)≤v(t)≤CeL(t−t0).u(t) \leq v(t) \leq Ce^{L(t-t_0)}.

Hence we are done.

■

Picard–Lindelöf Theorem

Theorem (Picard–Lindelöf)

Consider the Cauchy problem

{x(t0)=x0,x′(t)=F(t,x(t)).(1)\begin{cases} x(t_0) = x_0, \\ x'(t) = F(t, x(t)). \end{cases} \tag{1}

Let U⊆R×RnU \subseteq \mathbb{R} \times \mathbb{R}^n be a closed set and F:U→RnF: U \to \mathbb{R}^n be a continuous function in tt, locally Lipschitz in xx, i.e. for every compact set K⊆UK \subseteq U, there exists a local constant L>0L > 0 such that

∥F(t,x)−F(t,y)∥≤L∥(t,x)−(t,y)∥\|F(t,x) - F(t,y)\| \leq L\|(t,x) - (t,y)\|

for all (t,x),(t,y)∈K(t,x),(t,y) \in K. Then there exists an interval II containing t0t_0 and a unique solution x∈C1(I,Rn)x \in C^1(I, \mathbb{R}^n).

Proof.

Let a,r∈Ra, r \in \mathbb{R} such that r>0r > 0 and W=[t0−a,t0+a]×B(x0,r)‾⊆UW = [t_0 - a, t_0 + a] \times \overline{B(x_0,r)} \subseteq U. Since WW is closed and bounded, it is compact. Then FF is bounded on WW.

Let M=sup⁡(t,x)∈W∥F(t,x)∥M = \sup_{(t,x) \in W}\|F(t,x)\|, b=rb = r, h=min⁡{bM,12L,a}h = \min\left\{\frac{b}{M}, \frac{1}{2L}, a\right\} and I=[t0−h,t0+h]I = [t_0 - h, t_0 + h]. We define the metric space (X,∥⋅∥∞)(X, \|\cdot\|_{\infty})

X={x∈C(I,Rn)∣∥x−x0∥∞≤b}.X = \{x \in C(I, \mathbb{R}^n) \mid \|x - x_0\|_\infty \leq b\}.

Since II is compact and Rn\mathbb{R}^n is complete, the above lemma gives that C(I,Rn)C(I,\mathbb{R}^n) is Banach. Since X⊆C(I,Rn)X \subseteq C(I,\mathbb{R}^n) is closed, then XX is also a Banach space. Integrating both sides of the second equation of (1)(1) yields

x(t)=x0+∫t0tF(s,x(s)) ds.x(t) = x_0 + \int_{t_0}^t F(s, x(s))\,ds.

Let T:X→C(I,Rn)T: X \to C(I, \mathbb{R}^n) be the operator defined by T[x](t)=x0+∫t0tF(s,x(s)) dsT[x](t) = x_0 + \int_{t_0}^t F(s, x(s))\,ds. We claim that TT is invariant. Indeed, we have

∥T[x]−x0∥∞=sup⁡t∈I∥∫t0tF(s,x(s)) ds∥≤∫t0t0+h∥F(s,x(s))∥ ds≤Mh≤b.\|T[x] - x_0\|_\infty = \sup_{t \in I}\left\|\int_{t_0}^t F(s,x(s))\,ds\right\| \leq \int_{t_0}^{t_0+h}\|F(s,x(s))\|\,ds \leq Mh \leq b.

Thus T[x]∈XT[x] \in X. Furthermore, we aim to prove that TT is a contraction. Since WW is compact, then there exists L>0L > 0 such that FF is Lipschitz with constant LL on WW. Consider the following estimate

∥(Tx)(t)−(Ty)(t)∥=∥∫t0tF(s,x(s))−F(s,y(s)) ds∥≤∫t0t∥F(s,x(s))−F(s,y(s))∥ ds≤L∫t0t∥x(s)−y(s)∥ ds≤Lh∥x−y∥∞≤12∥x−y∥∞.\begin{aligned} \|(Tx)(t) - (Ty)(t)\| &= \left\|\int_{t_0}^t F(s,x(s)) - F(s,y(s))\,ds\right\| \\ &\leq \int_{t_0}^t \|F(s,x(s)) - F(s,y(s))\|\,ds \\ &\leq L\int_{t_0}^t \|x(s) - y(s)\|\,ds \\ &\leq Lh\|x - y\|_\infty \\ &\leq \frac{1}{2}\|x - y\|_\infty. \end{aligned}

Taking the supremum over t∈It \in I yields ∥Tx−Ty∥∞≤12∥x−y∥∞\|Tx - Ty\|_\infty \leq \frac{1}{2}\|x - y\|_\infty. Thus TT is a contraction. Applying the Banach Fixed Point theorem, then there exists a unique x∗∈Xx^* \in X such that T[x∗]=x∗T[x^*] = x^*, or equivalently,

x∗(t)=x0+∫t0tF(s,x∗(s)) ds.x^*(t) = x_0 + \int_{t_0}^t F(s, x^*(s))\,ds.

Then F(s,x∗(s))F(s, x^*(s)) is continuous, the fundamental theorem of calculus implies that

ddtx∗(t)=F(t,x∗(t)).\frac{d}{dt}x^*(t) = F(t, x^*(t)).

Hence x∗x^* is a solution in C1(I,Rn)C^1(I,\mathbb{R}^n) of (1)(1). To prove the uniqueness, suppose x1,x2∈C1(I,Rn)x_1, x_2 \in C^1(I,\mathbb{R}^n) are solutions of (1)(1). Since both satisfy the integral equation, using the similar estimate we obtain

∥x1(t)−x2(t)∥=∥(Tx1)(t)−(Tx2)(t)∥≤L∫t0t∥x1(s)−x2(s)∥ ds.\|x_1(t) - x_2(t)\| = \|(Tx_1)(t) - (Tx_2)(t)\| \leq L\int_{t_0}^t \|x_1(s) - x_2(s)\|\,ds.

If t<t0t < t_0, the integral ∫t0t=−∫tt0\int_{t_0}^t = -\int_t^{t_0} is nonpositive while the left side is nonnegative, so both sides must vanish, which implies ∥x1(t)−x2(t)∥=0\|x_1(t) - x_2(t)\| = 0, i.e. x1(t)=x2(t)x_1(t) = x_2(t). If t≥t0t \geq t_0, apply the Grönwall inequality for the function u(t)=∥x1(t)−x2(t)∥u(t) = \|x_1(t) - x_2(t)\| with C=0C = 0, we obtain u(t)≤0u(t) \leq 0 for all t≥t0t \geq t_0, thus u(t)=0u(t) = 0. Therefore x1(t)=x2(t)x_1(t) = x_2(t) for all t∈It \in I, it follows that the solution x∗x^* in C1(I,Rn)C^1(I,\mathbb{R}^n) is unique.

■

References

[1] H. Brezis, Functional Analysis, Sobolev Spaces and Partial Differential Equations, Springer (2011).

[2] G. Teschl, Ordinary Differential Equations and Dynamical Systems, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, Vol. 140, American Mathematical Society (2012).

2025-04-07

comments

loading...

leave a note