Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 50 references

Embeddings of homogeneous Sobolev spaces on the entire space

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read One inequality settles when Sobolev embeddings exist.

desk verdict A genuine characterization of m-th order gradient embeddings, with explicit optimal spaces; the main weakness is heavy delegation of normability and Orlicz optimality to external sources, not a detected error. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03384 v2 pith:5FT22QAC submitted 2019-08-09 math.FA

Zdeněk Mihula This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.FA MSC 26D1046E3046E3547B38
keywords rearrangement-invariantspacesoptimaltargetspacedomainreductionprincipleweightedHardyinequalityOrliczhomogeneousSobolevfractionalmaximaloperator
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper characterizes exactly when the gradient inequality $\|u\|_{Y(\mathbb{R}^n)}\le C\|\nabla^m u\|_{X(\mathbb{R}^n)}$ can hold, for rearrangement-invariant spaces $X,Y$ and $m

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the reduction principle (Theorem 3.3), which transfers the $n$-dimensional gradient inequality into a one-dimensional Hardy-type inequality with kernel $s^{m/n-1}$. The optimal target norm is $\sigma_m(f)=\|t^{m/n}f^{**}(t)\|_{X'(0,\infty)}$, built from the maximal rearrangement $f^{**}$ and the associate norm of $X$; the optimal domain norm $\tau_m$ is the supremum of the same Hardy expression over all one-dimensional functions equimeasurable with $f$. These operators make the problem tractable: checking the Hardy inequality on $(0,\infty)$ decides the embedding, and the norms literally describe the smallest target and largest domain. In the Orlicz setting, the same principle is implemented through Young functions $A_m$ and $B_m$ defined by integrals of the data, giving the reduction principle of Theorem 6.8.

What would settle it

Exhibit a pair of rearrangement-invariant spaces $X,Y$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$ with $m<n$ for which the one-dimensional inequality (3.5) fails while the gradient inequality (1.3) holds; Theorem 3.3 asserts this is impossible. A concrete check: for $n=2$, $m=1$, $X=L^2$, the theorem predicts no rearrangement-invariant target space exists, so finding any single nontrivial $Y$ satisfying $\|u\|_{Y}\le C\|\nabla u\|_{L^2}$ would refute it. Conversely, showing for some $X$ that condition (3.1) holds but the optimal target $X^m$ is not the smallest valid target would settle the optimality claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is a complete equivalence. Theorem 3.3 states that for $m<n$ and rearrangement-invariant spaces $X,Y$ over $\mathbb{R}^n$, the embedding inequality (1.3) holds if and only if the one-dimensional inequality $\bigl\|\int_t^\infty f(s)s^{m/n-1}\,ds\bigr\|_{Y(0,\infty)}\le C\|f\|_{X(0,\infty)}$ holds for all nonnegative $f$, and also if and only if the dual inequality $\|t^{m/n}g^{**}(t)\|_{X'(0,\infty)}\le C\|g\|_{Y'(0,\infty)}$ holds. For fixed $X$, the smallest target space $X^m$ is defined by the norm $\sigma_m(f)=\|t^{m/n}f^{**}(t)\|_{X'(0,\infty)}$; it exists exactly when condition (3.1) holds. For fixed $Y$, the largest domain space $Y_m$ is defined by a supremum over equimeasurable rearrangements of the same Hardy expression; it exists exactly when condition (3.7) on the fundamental function holds. The paper also proves an iteration principle for optimal targets and gives the analogous optimal Orlicz-space statements, including a four-way reduction principle for Orlicz spaces (Theorem 6.8).

Load-bearing premise

The characterization is complete only to the extent that the external boundedness and optimality results it invokes—normability of $\sigma_m$ and $\tau_m$, the fractional-maximal characterizations, and the Orlicz embedding theorems—are themselves correct; the paper does not reproduce those proofs, and Section 6 explicitly says 'We omit proofs in this section.'

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If $X$ satisfies condition (3.1), the optimal target space $X^m$ exists and any valid target $Y$ must contain it; if (3.1) fails, no rearrangement-invariant target exists.
  • If $Y$ satisfies condition (3.7), the optimal domain space $Y_m$ exists and is the largest rearrangement-invariant space from which the gradient inequality maps into $Y$; otherwise no domain exists.
  • Optimal target spaces are stable under iteration: applying the construction twice with orders $k$ and $l$ yields the same space as applying it once with order $k+l$ (Theorem 3.2).
  • In the Orlicz class, the optimal target exists exactly when condition (5.3) holds, but the optimal domain can fail to exist even when Orlicz domains do exist; in that case the valid Orlicz domains form an open family with no largest member (Remark 6.5).
  • For Lorentz-Zygmund data, the paper's formulae give explicit optimal spaces, recovering the classical fact that $L^{p^*,p}$ is the smallest target for $L^p$ in the first-order case.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • One testable extension is to compute optimal target and domain spaces for weighted variants of the spaces, or for quasinormed spaces such as $L^{p,q}$ with $0<p<1$, where the current framework does not apply but the same reduction may be expected to hold after an appropriate renorming.
  • The reduction principle suggests that for numerical or computational checks of Sobolev inequalities, it is enough to test one-dimensional radial profiles, since validity for all functions is equivalent to validity of the Hardy operator acting on rearrangements.
  • The Orlicz 'no optimal domain' phenomenon is likely a general feature of any proper subclass of rearrangement-invariant spaces that excludes the universal optimal domain: one should expect open families of valid domains rather than a largest element whenever the universal optimum falls outside the subclass.
  • The equivalence with boundedness of the fractional maximal operator (Remark 3.4) connects the paper directly to harmonic analysis: optimal Sobolev target spaces are exactly optimal range spaces for the fractional maximal operator, so sharp constants or restricted weak-type estimates for $M_{m/n}$ could be read off from the examples.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies embeddings of homogeneous Sobolev-type spaces into rearrangement-invariant spaces: it seeks necessary and sufficient conditions, in terms of one-dimensional inequalities, for the validity of ||u||_Y <= C ||∇^m u||_X on R^n, with m < n. The main contributions are Theorem 3.1, which gives an optimal target space X^m for a fixed domain space X under condition (3.1); Theorem 3.3, the reduction principle equating (3.4), (3.5), and (3.6); and Theorem 3.5, which gives an optimal domain space Y_m for a fixed target space Y under condition (3.7). Section 5 contains explicit examples for Lorentz--Zygmund and Orlicz spaces, and Section 6 treats optimal embeddings within the class of Orlicz spaces, including a reduction principle, Theorem 6.8. The proofs are largely built on earlier work of the author and collaborators, and several load-bearing statements are cited rather than proved.

Significance. If the main theorems are correct, this is a substantial contribution to the theory of optimal Sobolev embeddings: the reduction principle is elegant, the optimal spaces are given by explicit formulas in many classical cases, and the paper supplies concrete examples that sharpen Peetre's result and clarify limiting cases. The duality computation in Proposition 4.1 is clean, and the paper gives falsifiable, concrete predictions about optimal spaces. The significance is tempered by the fact that several central assertions, notably the normability of σ_m and τ_m and the Orlicz-space optimality theorems, are imported from other papers without proof, so a reader cannot fully verify the main claims from the present text alone.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3, Theorems 3.1 and 3.5] The normability of the functionals σ_m and τ_m is load-bearing for the entire characterization. For σ_m, the proof says only that 'It can be proved that σ_m is a rearrangement-invariant norm if and only if (3.1) is satisfied (cf. [15, Theorem 5.4] and [20, Theorem 4.4])' and notes that the triangle inequality follows from (2.1). For τ_m, the proof says the normability is 'rather deep' and refers to [20, Theorem 4.1]. If τ_m fails to be a norm, then Y_m is not a rearrangement-invariant space and the optimality statement in Theorem 3.5 is not well defined; the proof of Theorem 3.3 uses Theorem 3.1, so the reduction principle inherits this gap. I request that the full norm proofs, or at least precise statements of the cited theorems with all hypotheses made explicit, be included in the paper.
  2. [Section 5, Theorem 5.2] The optimality half of Theorem 5.2 is asserted but not proved: the text says 'The optimality can be shown along the same lines of [12, Theorem 1.1, pp. 457] and we omit it here.' This is half of a stated theorem and is not a routine check. The omitted argument should be supplied, or the theorem should be marked as conditional on a detailed calculation available elsewhere.
  3. [Section 6, Theorems 6.1, 6.4, and 6.8] The paper states 'We omit proofs in this section because they are lengthy and technical.' The entire Orlicz-space theory rests on this omission. Theorem 6.1 and Theorem 6.4 are described as applications of Theorem 3.3 together with results from [29, Chapter 3] and [30], but the transfer from the one-dimensional Orlicz results to the n-dimensional gradient inequality is not shown. Since the Boyd-index conditions and the non-existence claims are delicate, I cannot verify these theorems from the present text. At minimum, the relevant statements from [29] and [30] should be reproduced and the argument connecting them to Theorem 3.3 should be outlined.
  4. [Section 4, Proposition 4.3 and Section 5, Proposition 5.4] Two auxiliary results used in the main proofs are only partially proved. Proposition 4.3's first inequality is dismissed with 'For the sake of brevity, the details are omitted,' and Proposition 5.4's final case is treated with 'we can proceed similarly, omitting the proof here.' Proposition 4.3 is needed for the iteration principle used in the induction in Theorem 3.1, and Proposition 5.4 supports Theorem 5.3. These gaps, while less central than the issues above, should be closed for the paper to be self-contained.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] The text contains several typographical spacing artifacts, such as 'SP ACES' in the title and 'con siderably' in the abstract; these should be corrected in the final version.
  2. [Section 2] The definition of the Lorentz spaces L^{p,q} lists the admissible parameter ranges, but it would help the reader to state explicitly that the functional ρ_{p,q} is only equivalent to a norm in those cases and that equality cases such as L^{1,1} and L^{∞,∞} are included.
  3. [Section 5, Theorem 5.1] The description of the spaces Y1 and Y2 in Theorem 5.1 is terse; a sentence explaining how these spaces embed into the ambient function-space scale would improve readability.
  4. [Section 6, Remark 6.5] The phrase 'an open set of Orlicz spaces' is informal; a precise statement of what is meant by the absence of an optimal Orlicz domain space is given in Theorem 6.4, but the remark could be tightened.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular reduction: the main equivalence is proved in-paper; reliance on [20]/[29]/[30] is external dependency, not self-referential derivation.

full rationale

No circular step is present. Theorem 3.3's reduction (3.4) ⇔ (3.5) ⇔ (3.6) is proved inside the paper: (3.5) ⇔ (3.6) follows from associate-norm duality in Proposition 4.1; (3.4) ⇒ (3.5) is obtained by the explicit radial construction in the proof of Theorem 3.1; and the converse direction uses the built space X^m. The optimal target space X^m and optimal domain space Y_m are defined explicitly from X and Y, and their optimality is established by embedding duality rather than assumed in the definitions. No parameter is fitted and no 'prediction' is a renamed input. The only caveat is completeness, which the paper itself flags: several load-bearing technical facts are imported rather than proved here, notably the normability of σ_m ('It can be proved that σ_m is a rearrangement-invariant norm if and only if the condition (3.1) is satisfied (cf. [15, Theorem 5.4] and [20, Theorem 4.4])'), the normability of τ_m ('The fact that τ_m is a rearrangement-invariant norm is rather deep, especially the triangle inequality, and we refer the reader to [20, Theorem 4.1]'), and the whole of Section 6 ('We omit proofs in this section because they are lengthy and technical. The interested reader can trace the key ideas in [29, 30]'). One of these sources, [20], is coauthored by the present author, but its content—boundedness of classical operators on rearrangement-invariant spaces—is independent of the target Sobolev-embedding characterization, and the main reduction itself is proved in the paper. Thus the reliance is dependency rather than circularity; a gap in [20] or [29] would weaken self-containedness, but it would not make the main theorem an input to itself.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities. The derivation assumes the standard machinery of rearrangement-invariant spaces and several external theorems; the main external dependencies are flagged.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Standard rearrangement-invariant space machinery: associate spaces, representation spaces, fundamental functions, dilation boundedness, Hardy-Littlewood inequality (2.2).
    Used throughout Section 2 and in Proposition 4.1 and proofs of Theorems 3.1, 3.5, 3.6.
  • standard math Generalized Polya-Szego principle [13, Lemma 4.1]: for u in V^1_0 X(R^n), u^* is locally absolutely continuous and its derivative is controlled by |∇u| in the rearrangement-invariant norm.
    Essential for the m=1 step in the proof of Theorem 3.1, linking ‖u‖_{X^1} to ‖∇u‖_X.
  • standard math Boundedness of the Hardy-type operator f ↦ t^{l-m/n} ∫_t^∞ f(s) s^{m/n-l-1} ds on every r.i. space over (0,∞), with constant depending on m,n.
    Used in proof of Theorem 3.1 to estimate ‖∇^m u‖_X by ‖f‖_{X(0,∞)} via (4.8)-(4.10).
  • standard math The equivalence, from [15, Theorem 9.5, Corollary 9.8] and [36, Theorem 1.1], that the Hardy inequality (3.5) may be restricted to nonincreasing functions.
    Invoked after Theorem 3.3 to justify the reduction to f^*.
  • standard math The characterization results of [20, Theorems 4.1, 4.4, 4.7] that σ_m and τ_m define r.i. norms and that T_{m/n} boundedness simplifies τ_m.
    These are external theorems, one from a paper coauthored by the present author, carrying the normability and simplification used in Theorems 3.1, 3.5, 3.6 and Section 5.
  • domain assumption Optimal Orlicz-space embedding theorems from [29, Chapter 3] and [30] as used in Section 6.
    Section 6 explicitly omits proofs and derives Theorems 6.1, 6.4, 6.8 from these sources; the thesis [29] may not be widely accessible.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Embeddings of homogeneous Sobolev spaces on the entire space." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5FT22QAC

@misc{pith2026190803384,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Embeddings of homogeneous Sobolev spaces on the entire space},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5FT22QAC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03384}
}
abstract

We completely characterize the validity of the inequality $\|u\|_{Y(\mathbb{R}^n)}\leq C \|\nabla^m u\|_{X(\mathbb{R}^n)}$, where $X$ and $Y$ are rearrangement-invariant spaces, by reducing it to a considerably simpler one-dimensional inequality. Furthermore, we fully describe the optimal rearrangement-invariant space on either side of the inequality when the space on the other side is fixed. We also solve the same problem within the environment in which the competing spaces are Orlicz spaces. A variety of examples involving customary function spaces suitable for applications is also provided.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [29]

    V. Musil. Classical operators of harmonic analysis in Orlicz spaces . PhD thesis, Charles University, Faculty of Mathematics and Phy sics, 2018. URL https://is.cuni.cz/webapps/zzp/detail/150069/

    work page 2018

  2. [30]

    V. Musil. Fractional maximal operator in Orlicz spaces . J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 474(1):94–115, 2019. ISSN 0022-247X. doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa .2019.01.034. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2019.01.034. EMBEDDINGS OF HOMOGENEOUS SOBOLEV SPACES ON THE ENTIRE SPAC E 25

    doi:10.1016/j.jmaa 2019

  3. [12]

    A. Cianchi. Optimal Orlicz-Sobolev embeddings. Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana, 20(2):427–474,

    work page

  4. [20]

    Edmunds, Z

    D.E. Edmunds, Z. Mihula, V. Musil, and L. Pick. Boundedn ess of classical operators on rearrangement-invariant spaces. J. Funct. Anal. , 278(4):108341, 2020. ISSN 0022-1236. doi: 10.1016/j.jfa.2019.108341. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2019.108341

    work page arXiv 2020

  5. [1]

    Acerbi and G

    E. Acerbi and G. Mingione. Regularity results for a class of functionals with non-standard growth. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 156(2):121–140, 2001. ISSN 0003-9527. doi: 10.1007/ s002050100117. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s002050100117

    work page doi:10.1007/s002050100117 2001

  6. [2]

    Adams and J.J.F

    R.A. Adams and J.J.F. Fournier. Sobolev spaces, volume 140 of Pure and Applied Math- ematics (Amsterdam). Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, second edition, 200 3. ISBN 0-12-044143-8

    work page

  7. [3]

    Alberico, A

    A. Alberico, A. Cianchi, L. Pick, and L. Slav ´ ıkov´ a. Sha rp Sobolev type embeddings on the entire Euclidean space. Commun. Pure Appl. Anal. , 17(5):2011–2037, 2018. ISSN 1534-0392. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2018096. URL https://doi.org/10.3934/cpaa.2018096

    work page doi:10.3934/cpaa.2018096 2011

  8. [4]

    Alves, G.M

    C.O. Alves, G.M. Figueiredo, and J.A. Santos. Strauss an d Lions type results for a class of Orlicz-Sobolev spaces and applications. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal., 44(2):435–456, 2014. ISSN 1230-3429. doi: 10.12775/TMNA .2014.055. URL https://doi.org/10.12775/TMNA.2014.055

    doi:10.12775/tmna 2014

Show all 50 references
  1. [5]

    Benkirane and A

    A. Benkirane and A. Elmahi. An existence theorem for a str ongly nonlinear elliptic problem in Orlicz spaces. Nonlinear Anal. , 36(1):11–24, 1999. ISSN 0362-546X. doi: 10.1016/ S0362-546X(97)00612-3. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/S0362-546X(97)00612-3

    1999 doi

  2. [6]

    Bennett and R

    C. Bennett and R. Sharpley. Interpolation of operators , volume 129 of Pure and Applied Mathematics. Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA, 1988. ISBN 0-12-088730- 4

    1988

  3. [7]

    Berezhno ˘ ı

    E.I. Berezhno ˘ ı. Sharp estimates for operators on cones in ideal spaces. Trudy Mat. Inst. Steklov., 204(16):3–34, 1993. ISSN 0371-9685

    1993

  4. [8]

    D.W. Boyd. The Hilbert transform on rearrangement-inva riant spaces. Canad. J. Math., 19:599–616, 1967. ISSN 0008-414X. doi: 10.4153/CJM-1967 -053-7. URL https://doi.org/10.4153/CJM-1967-053-7

    1967 doi

  5. [9]

    D.W. Boyd. Indices for the Orlicz spaces. Pacific J. Math. , 38:315–323, 1971. ISSN 0030-

    1971

  6. [10]

    Br´ ezis and S

    H. Br´ ezis and S. Wainger. A note on limiting cases of Sob olev embeddings and convolu- tion inequalities. Commun. Part. Diff. Eq. , 5(7):773–789, 1980. ISSN 0360-5302. URL https://doi.org/10.1080/03605308008820154

    1980 doi

  7. [11]

    Brudny ˘ ı

    Ju.A. Brudny ˘ ı. Rational approximation and imbeddingtheorems. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR , 247(2):269–272, 1979. ISSN 0002-3264

    1979

  8. [13]

    Cianchi and L

    A. Cianchi and L. Pick. Sobolev embeddings into BMO, VMO , and L∞. Ark. Mat. , 36: 317–340, 1998. ISSN 0004-2080

    1998

  9. [14]

    Cianchi and L

    A. Cianchi and L. Pick. Optimal Sobolev trace embedding s. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 368(12):8349–8382, 2016. ISSN 0002-9947. doi: 10.1090/t ran/6606. URL https://doi.org/10.1090/tran/6606

    2016 doi

  10. [15]

    Cianchi, L

    A. Cianchi, L. Pick, and L. Slav ´ ıkov´ a. Higher-order Sobolev embeddings and isoperimetric inequalities. Adv. Math. , 273:568–650, 2015. ISSN 0001-8708. doi: 10.1016/j.aim.2 014.12

    2015 doi

  11. [16]

    endpoint

    M. Cwikel and E. Pustylnik. Weak type interpolation nea r “endpoint” spaces. J. Funct. Anal. , 171(2):235–277, 2000. ISSN 0022-1236. URL https://doi.org/10.1006/jfan.1999.3502

    2000

  12. [17]

    Donaldson

    T. Donaldson. Nonlinear elliptic boundary value probl ems in Orlicz-Sobolev spaces. J. Differential Equations , 10:507–528, 1971. ISSN 0022-0396. doi: 10.1016/0022-039 6(71) 90009-X. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0396(71)90009-X

    1971 doi

  13. [18]

    Edmunds, P

    D.E. Edmunds, P. Gurka, and L. Pick. Compactness of Hard y-type integral operators in weighted Banach function spaces. Studia Math. , 109(1):73–90, 1994. ISSN 0039-3223

    1994

  14. [19]

    Edmunds, R

    D.E. Edmunds, R. Kerman, and L. Pick. Optimal Sobolev im beddings involving rearrangement-invariant quasinorms. J. Funct. Anal. , 170(2):307–355, 2000. ISSN 0022-

    2000

  15. [21]

    Evans, B

    W.D. Evans, B. Opic, and L. Pick. Interpolation of opera tors on scales of generalized Lorentz-Zygmund spaces. Math. Nachr. , 182:127–181, 1996. ISSN 0025-584X. URL https://doi.org/10.1002/mana.19961820108

    1996 doi

  16. [22]

    Evans, B

    W.D. Evans, B. Opic, and L. Pick. Real interpolation wit h logarithmic functors. J. Inequal. Appl. , 7(2):187–269, 2002. ISSN 1025-5834. URL https://doi.org/10.1155/S1025583402000127

    2002 doi

  17. [23]

    Gagliardo

    E. Gagliardo. Propriet` a di alcune classi di funzioni i n pi` u variabili. Ricerche Mat. , 7: 102–137, 1958. ISSN 0035-5038

    1958

  18. [24]

    Gogatishvili, B

    A. Gogatishvili, B. Opic, and L. Pick. Weighted inequal ities for Hardy-type operators involving suprema. Collect. Math. , 57(3):227–255, 2006. ISSN 0010-0757

    2006

  19. [25]

    K. Hansson. Imbedding theorems of Sobolev type in poten tial theory. Math. Scand., 45(1): 77–102, 1979. ISSN 0025-5521. URL https://doi.org/10.7146/math.scand.a-11827

    1979 doi

  20. [26]

    Kerman and L

    R. Kerman and L. Pick. Optimal Sobolev imbeddings. Forum Math. , 18 (4):535–570, 2006. ISSN 0933-7741. doi: 10.1515/FORUM.20 06.028. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/FORUM.2006.028

    2006 doi

  21. [27]

    URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2014.12.027

    2014 doi

  22. [28]

    V.G. Maz’ya. Sobolev spaces with applications to elliptic partial differ ential equations , volume 342 of Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamen tal Principles of Mathematical Sciences] . Springer, Heidelberg, 2011. ISBN 978-3-642-15563-5. doi : 10.1007/978-3-6...

    2011 doi

  23. [31]

    Krasnosel’ski ˘ ı and Ja.B

    M.A. Krasnosel’ski ˘ ı and Ja.B. Ruticki ˘ ı.Convex functions and Orlicz spaces . Translated from the first Russian edition by Leo F. Boron. P. Noordhoff Ltd ., Groningen, 1961

    1961

  24. [32]

    Nirenberg

    L. Nirenberg. On elliptic partial differential equation s. Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa (3) , 13:115–162, 1959

    1959

  25. [33]

    R. O’Neil. Convolution operators and L(p, q ) spaces. Duke Math. J. , 30:129–142, 1963. ISSN 0012-7094. URL http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.dmj/1077374532

    1963

  26. [34]

    Opic and L

    B. Opic and L. Pick. On generalized Lorentz-Zygmund spa ces. Math. Inequal. Appl., 2(3):391–467, 1999. ISSN 1331-4343. doi: 10.7153/mia-02 -35. URL https://doi.org/10.7153/mia-02-35

    1999 doi

  27. [35]

    Musil and R

    V. Musil and R. O , lhava. Interpolation theorem for Marcinkiewicz spaces wit h applications to Lorentz gamma spaces. Math. Nachr. , 292(5):1106–1121, 2019. ISSN 0025-584X. doi: 10.1002/mana.201700452. URL https://doi.org/10.1002/mana.201700452

    2019 doi

  28. [36]

    D. Peˇ sa. Reduction principle for a certain class of ker nel-type operators. Accepted for publication in Mathematische Nachrichten. arXiv:1908.06 313 [math.F A]

    1908

  29. [37]

    L. Pick, A. Kufner, O. John, and S. Fuˇ c ´ ık.Function spaces. Vol. 1, volume 14 of De Gruyter Series in Nonlinear Analysis and Applications . Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin, extended edition, 2013. ISBN 978-3-11-025041-1; 978-3-11-025042- 8

    2013

  30. [38]

    Rao and Z.D

    M.M. Rao and Z.D. Ren. Theory of Orlicz spaces , volume 146 of Monographs and Textbooks in Pure and Applied Mathematics . Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1991. ISBN 0-8247- 8478-2

    1991

  31. [39]

    J. Peetre. Espaces d’interpolation et th´ eor` eme de So boleff. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) , 16(1):279–317, 1966. ISSN 0373-0956. URL http://www.numdam.org/item?id=AIF_1966__16_1_279_0

    1966

  32. [40]

    S.L. Sobolev. Some Applications of Functional Analysis in Mathematical P hysics, volume 90 of Translations of Mathematical Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1991. ISBN 0-8218-4549-7

    1991

  33. [41]

    Trudinger

    N.S. Trudinger. On imbeddings into Orlicz spaces and so me applications. J. Math. Mech. , 17:473–483, 1967

    1967

  34. [42]

    Vuillermot

    P-A. Vuillermot. A class of Orlicz-Sobolev spaces with applications to varia- tional problems involving nonlinear Hill’s equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 89 (1):327–349, 1982. ISSN 0022-247X. doi: 10.1016/0022-247 X(82)90105-6. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-247X(82)90105-6

    1982 doi

  35. [43]

    S.L. Sobolev. On a theorem of functional analysis. Mat. Sb. , 46:471–496, 1938

    1938

  36. [44]

    V.V. Zhikov. Averaging of functionals of the calculus o f variations and elasticity theory. Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. , 50(4):675–710, 877,

  37. [45]

    W.P. Ziemer. Weakly Differentiable Functions: Sobolev Spaces and Functi ons of Bounded Variation, volume 120 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics . Springer-Verlag New York, 1989. ISBN 978-0-387-97017-2. Zdenˇek Mihula, Charles University, F aculty of Mathematics and P hysics, Depa...

    1989

  38. [47]

    Vyb ´ ıral

    J. Vyb ´ ıral. Optimal Sobolev embeddings on Rn. Publ. Mat. , 51(1):17– 44, 2007. ISSN 0214-1493. doi: 10.5565/PUBLMAT 51107 02. URL https://doi.org/10.5565/PUBLMAT_51107_02

    2007 doi

  39. [1236]

    URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jfan.1999.3508

    doi: 10.1006/jfan.1999.3508. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jfan.1999.3508

    1999

  40. [1986]

    doi: 10.1070/im1987v029n01abeh000 958

    ISSN 0373-2436. doi: 10.1070/im1987v029n01abeh000 958. URL https://doi.org/10.1070/im1987v029n01abeh000958

    doi

  41. [2004]

    doi: 10.4171/RMI/396

    ISSN 0213-2230. doi: 10.4171/RMI/396. URL https://doi.org/10.4171/RMI/396. EMBEDDINGS OF HOMOGENEOUS SOBOLEV SPACES ON THE ENTIRE SPAC E 24

    doi

  42. [8730]

    URL http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.pjm/1102970044

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.