Characterization of generalized Young measures generated by $\mathcal A$-free measures

Adolfo Arroyo-Rabasa

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 73 references

Characterization of generalized Young measures generated by $\mathcal A$-free measures

T0 review · 2 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 This paper characterizes generalized Young measures generated by A-free measures and their B-gradient counterparts, under constant rank, by a barycenter condition, a Jensen-type inequality against A-quasiconvex integrands, and a wave-cone…

desk verdict A genuinely new and largely convincing characterization of A-free generalized Young measures for arbitrary-order constant-rank operators; the main caveat is that a load-bearing relaxation result is only sketched for the signed integrands actually used in the Hahn–Banach argument. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03186 v4 pith:NZ27RQ5H submitted 2019-08-08 math.AP

Adolfo Arroyo-Rabasa This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 49J4549Q1546G1035B05

keywords A-freemeasuregeneralizedYoungconstantrankoperatorcompensatedcompactnessconcentrationoscillationtwo-stateproblemPDEconstraint

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 proves a complete characterization of generalized Young measures generated by sequences of $\mathcal A$-free measures, for linear homogeneous operators satisfying the constant rank property. A generalized Young measure records both the oscillations and the concentrations of a weakly convergent sequence; the characterization says the record is valid exactly when three conditions hold: the barycenter is itself an $\mathcal A$-free measure, a Jensen-type inequality holds against every $\mathcal A$-quasiconvex integrand with linear growth, and the singular concentration directions lie in the span of the wave cone. The same theorem has a counterpart for $\mathcal B$-gradient measures, where $\mathcal A$-quasiconvexity is replaced by $\mathcal B$-gradient quasiconvexity. This closes the $p=1$ gap left after earlier characterizations for gradients and symmetric gradients, and it supplies the missing duality framework behind compensated compactness when mass concentration is allowed.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery has three parts. The constant-rank property, $\mathrm{rank}\,\mathcal A(\xi)=r$ for all $\xi\neq0$, makes the orthogonal projection onto $(\ker\mathcal A(\xi))^\perp$ an analytic homogeneous multiplier, so the $\mathcal A$-representative of a measure obeys Sobolev estimates of Fonseca-M\"uller type and can be localized with commutator errors. The wave cone $\Lambda_{\mathcal A}=\bigcup_{\xi\neq0}\ker\mathcal A(\xi)$ and its span $W_{\mathcal A}$ encode which Fourier amplitudes can oscillate or concentrate inside the constraint $\mathcal A\mu=0$; at singular points the concentration directions are forced into $W_{\mathcal A}$. The third ingredient is the exact potential theorem for constant-rank operators, $\mathrm{Im}\,\mathcal B(\xi)=\ker\mathcal A(\xi)$, which turns $\mathcal A$-free objects into $\mathcal B$-gradients after removing a compact commutator error, and thereby transfers the characterization from $\mathcal A$-free to $\mathcal B$-gradient Young measures.

What would settle it

The constant-rank assumption is testable through the diagonal-gradient operator $\mathcal A(w_1,w_2)=(\partial_2w_1,\partial_1w_2)$, which violates the constant-rank condition: if one can exhibit a triple $(\nu,\lambda,\nu^\infty)$ satisfying conditions (i)-(iii) of Theorem 1.1 but not generated by any $\mathcal A$-free sequence, the characterization does not extend beyond constant rank, while a proof that no such triple exists would indicate the assumption is only technical.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under the constant-rank assumption, a triple $(\nu,\lambda,\nu^\infty)$ with no boundary concentration is a generalized $\mathcal A$-free Young measure if and only if there is $\mu\in M(\Omega;W)$ with $\mathcal A\mu=0$ and $\mu=\langle\mathrm{id},\nu\rangle L^d+\langle\mathrm{id},\nu^\infty\rangle\lambda$, the inequality $h(\mu_{\mathrm{ac}}(x))\le\langle h,\nu_x\rangle+\langle h^\#,\nu^\infty_x\rangle\lambda_{\mathrm{ac}}(x)$ holds almost everywhere for every upper semicontinuous $\mathcal A$-quasiconvex $h$ with linear growth, and $\mathrm{supp}(\nu^\infty_x)\subset W_{\mathcal A}:=\mathrm{span}\,\Lambda_{\mathcal A}$ at $\lambda^s$-almost every $x$. The same statement with $\mathcal B$-gradient quasiconvexity and barycenter $\mathcal B u$ characterizes generalized $\mathcal B$-gradient Young measures. The proof obtains this by a local tangent-measure criterion, an area-strict approximation theorem for arbitrary bounded open sets, and a convexity result for the class of $\mathcal A$-free Young measures with fixed barycenter, followed by a Hahn-Banach separation argument.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the constant-rank property, that the rank of $\mathcal A(\xi)$ is the same for every nonzero direction $\xi$; if the rank jumps with direction, as for the diagonal-gradient operator described in Section 1.2, the projection and potential theorems that carry the proof are not available and the characterization is not claimed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Every bounded $\mathcal A$-free measure on a bounded open set is the area-strict limit of smooth $\mathcal A$-free functions, with no star-shapedness or Lipschitz boundary condition on the domain.
For full-rank elliptic $\mathcal A$, the only generalized $\mathcal A$-free Young measures are elementary triples $(\delta_w,0,q)$ with $\mathcal Aw=0$; there is no room for oscillations or concentrations.
At the potential level, a generalized $\mathcal B$-gradient Young measure is characterized by $\mathcal B$-gradient quasiconvexity and a barycenter $\mathcal B u$, so $\mathcal B$-gradient and $\mathcal A$-free Young measures differ only by their barycenter structure under the exactness identity.
$L^1$-compensated compactness fails once concentrations are allowed: $\mathcal A$-free sequences can have values approaching a set away from wave-cone connections while failing weak $L^1$ convergence and equi-integrability, as in the two-state problem.
Divergence-free generalized Young measures are constrained only by the divergence-free barycenter condition, because every convex integrand is div-quasiconvex.

Reading between the lines

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

If Theorem 1.1 is pushed one step further, the tangent-cone criterion of Theorem 1.2 suggests the same three conditions may survive up to the boundary once tangent concentrations on $\partial\Omega$ are controlled; the paper only treats $\lambda(\partial\Omega)=0$.
The area-strict approximation theorem implies that relaxation formulas of the type proved for gradients should hold on arbitrary bounded open domains without star-shapedness; this is a consequence of Theorem 1.3 that the paper does not state as a separate relaxation result.
One can test the sharpness of the constant-rank assumption by looking for a non-constant-rank operator where conditions (i)-(iii) hold but generation fails; the diagonal-gradient example in Section 1.2 is the natural first candidate.
The two-state failure suggests that in the presence of concentrations, the relevant invariant is the span of the wave cone rather than the absence of wave-cone connections; a three-state variant with concentrations along a wave-cone-free segment would probe this distinction.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper does what the title says: it removes the first-order and Morrey-bound restrictions from Báia–Matias–Santos and gives dual and tangent/local characterizations plus area-strict density theorems for general constant-rank A-free and B-gradient Young measures. That is a real step forward, and the proof is not just a rehash of the gradient or symmetric-gradient cases. The convexity proof for YA,0(µ,Ω), the separation arguments, and the Besicovitch gluing are substantial and, as far as I can see, correctly assembled. I also give credit for the applications: the failure of L1-compactness examples are informative and correctly tied to the unconstrained singular part.

My main reservation is exactly where the stress-test points: the sufficiency direction of Theorem 1.1 relies on Propositions 9.2 and 9.3, and those rely on the relaxation theorem in Appendix A. The stated Theorem A.1 assumes f ≥ 0, but the separating integrands in Section 9 are not nonnegative. Remark A.1 asserts the result extends to f ∈ E(Ω;W) under (A)–(C), and item 7 says positivity was only used to stop negative boundary concentration, with assumption (c) removing that need. That is plausible, but it is a sketch, not a proof, and the lower bound G[µ] ≥ ∫Q_A f dx + ∫(Q_A f)# d|µ_s| is the one place where signed integrands can genuinely bite. If that bound fails, the contradictions in Propositions 9.2 and 9.3 collapse. I do not see an actual error, but I would want a referee to check this point carefully before recommending acceptance. It is a load-bearing step, not a cosmetic gap.

Other soft spots are minor: the constant-rank hypothesis is essential but explicit, and the citation pattern leans on the author's own prior work, though those results are published and independently checkable. The separation of singular cases in Theorem 9.1 is intricate; I did not verify every estimate, but the structure is coherent.

Who is this for? Anyone working in compensated compactness, L1-relaxation, or microstructure under PDE constraints. It is a serious paper that deserves real refereeing. My recommendation: send it to a knowledgeable referee, and ask that referee specifically to check Remark A.1 and the lower-bound claim for signed integrands.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper characterizes generalized Young measures generated by A-free measures and by B-gradients for linear homogeneous constant-rank operators of arbitrary order. The main results are Theorem 1.1 (duality with A-quasiconvex integrands via Jensen-type inequalities and a wave-cone support condition), Theorem 1.2 (local tangent characterization), and Theorems 1.3 and 1.6 (area-strict approximation of A-free and B-gradient measures). Theorem 1.5 gives the B-gradient analogue. The proof architecture in Sections 7–9 uses a Helmholtz-type decomposition of generating sequences into B-gradients plus a lower-order A-free part, a convexity result for Y_{A,0}(mu, Omega), Hahn–Banach separation against A-quasiconvex integrands, and a relaxation result in Appendix A. The applications in Section 3 show failure of L1-compensated compactness and flexibility of divergence-free Young measures.

Significance. Assuming the relaxation input in Appendix A is fully justified, the paper solves a natural and long-standing problem: it extends the Kinderlehrer–Pedregal/Fonseca–Müller program and the BV-gradient characterization of Kristensen–Rindler to arbitrary constant-rank operators, covering both oscillation and concentration. The local tangent characterization and the area-density theorems are independent contributions with clear applications. The constant-rank hypothesis is stated explicitly and is not hidden; Section 1.2 even discusses its failure. The paper is honest about which steps are delegated to earlier work and which are new; nevertheless, one delegated and partly asserted step is load-bearing and currently unsupported.

major comments (2)

[Appendix A, Remark A.1; Eqs. (97)–(98)] The sufficiency direction of Theorem 1.1 rests on applying the relaxation Theorem A.1 to the integrand f = (tilde f_H)^epsilon, where f_H arises from Hahn–Banach separation in (95) and (100) and is not known to be nonnegative. As stated, Theorem A.1 requires f >= 0 and Lipschitz dependence in z. The relaxed version in Remark A.1 replaces this by assumptions (A)–(C), but the critical lower bound G[mu] >= integral Q_A f(x, mu_ac) dx + integral (Q_A f)^#(x, g_mu) d|mu_s| is only asserted. Item 7 says that positivity was used in [6] to prevent negative boundary concentration and that assumption (C) dispenses with this, but no proof is given. Since this lower bound is used in (97)–(98) to contradict the separation inequality, this is a load-bearing missing argument. A revision should either prove the lower bound for signed integrands under (C) or state and prove a complete relaxation theorem under the hypotheses actually used.
[Sections 9.2–9.3, Lemma 9.1 and Eqs. (95)/(100)] The integrand f_H separating the putative Young measure from Y_sing_A(mu) or Y_reg_A(P_0) is an arbitrary element of E(Q;W) and may be signed. The paper uses Lemma 9.1 to infer finiteness of Q_A tilde f_H, but the proof is delegated verbatim to [12, Lemma 5.5], even though [12] was proved under additional assumptions (first-order operators and a Morrey-type bound). If the verbatim transfer is correct, that should be stated explicitly and checked; if it is not, Propositions 4.6 and 4.8 do not suffice to make the relaxation upper bound applicable. The same pattern appears in Proposition 9.3, where the inequality Q_A tilde f_H(0) >= s_H is used without an independent proof that the signed relaxation lower bound holds for tilde f_H. This is not a presentation point: the contradictions in Step 3 of Propositions 9.2 and 9.3 collapse if the signed relaxation statement in Remark A.1 is invalid.

minor comments (4)

[Definition 1.1] The numbering after condition (iv) is off: the second condition labelled (iv) should be (v) (the L1(U) integrability of x -> <|q|, nu_x>), since (iv) already refers to local integrability.
[Section 3.1, Example 3.1] The text has a typo: 'Avj = 0 in the sese of distributions on Omega' should read 'in the sense of distributions on Omega'.
[Section 9.2, Eq. (98)] The expression 'mu_ac(u)' should presumably be 'mu_ac(y)' in the argument of Q_A f; as written it is unclear.
[Section 3.2, Lemma 3.2] In the proof, 'Auj = 0' should be 'Awj = 0' to match the notation of the sequence being constructed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; sufficiency rests on an independent relaxation theorem and a self-contained convexity proof.

full rationale

The derivation is not circular. Theorem 1.1 is a genuine duality theorem: its necessity is imported from the prior work [6] (which the paper cites for conditions (ii)-(iii) in Section 9.4), and its sufficiency is proved in Sections 8 and 9 by constructing A-free recovery sequences. The convexity theorem Theorem 9.1 is proved from scratch by a Besicovitch tiling and gluing argument; it does not assume the Jensen inequalities of Theorem 1.1. Propositions 9.2 and 9.3 use Hahn-Banach separation plus the relaxation Theorem A.1, which is a prior result from [6] by the same first author; that relaxation theorem has its own stated assumptions (nonnegative integrand, Lipschitz in z) and does not include the target Young-measure characterization, so it is independent evidence rather than a circular reduction. The only load-bearing input worth flagging is Remark A.1, which extends Theorem A.1 to signed integrands and asserts that the positivity of f is only used to prevent concentration of negative mass on the boundary, with |mu|(partial Omega)=0 allowing one to dispense with it; this is sketched rather than fully proved, so if the relaxed lower bound failed, the Hahn-Banach contradictions in Section 9 would collapse. That is a correctness/completeness risk, not a claim that reduces by construction to its own input. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors to force a choice, and the constant-rank assumption is an explicit hypothesis rather than a hidden ansatz. Hence the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The proof uses the constant rank assumption as its core structural hypothesis, standard theorems on A-free measure structure and rank-one convex rigidity, and an auxiliary relaxation result from the author's earlier work, all of which are external published results rather than outputs of this paper.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption Constant rank property for the operators A and B: rank A(ξ) = r for all ξ ∈ R^d \ {0} (equation 8).
Assumed throughout (Section 1.3) and explicitly discussed in Section 1.2. It is necessary for the Fonseca-Müller projection estimates (Lemma 5.2), localization estimates (5.2), and Raita's potential theorem (11), which underpin the proofs of Theorems 1.1-1.6.
standard math Structure theorem for A-free measures from De Philippis-Rindler [22, Theorem 1.1].
Used in the necessity of condition (iii) and in Proposition 9.4 to identify singular tangent Young measures; provides rigidity of A-free measures.
standard math Rigidity result for positively 1-homogeneous rank-one convex functions (Kirchheim-Kristensen [39, Lemma 2.5]).
Used in Lemma 3.2 and Proposition 4.5(d) to bound upper recession functions and show convexity on the wave cone directions.
standard math Relaxation lower bound for A-free integral functionals from [6, Theorem 1.2(i)].
Cited in Appendix A (Theorem A.1 and remark) for the lower semicontinuity envelope used in the separation proof of Propositions 9.2 and 9.3.
standard math Standard geometric measure theory background: Preiss tangent measures, Besicovitch covering, Radon-Nikodym decomposition, Morrey embedding, Mihlin multiplier theorem.
Employed throughout Sections 4 and 5 for Lebesgue points, blow-ups, and Sobolev estimates; these are established background results.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Characterization of generalized Young measures generated by $\mathcal A$-free measures." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NZ27RQ5H

@misc{pith2026190803186,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Characterization of generalized Young measures generated by $\mathcal A$-free measures},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NZ27RQ5H}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03186}
}

abstract

We give two characterizations, one for the class of generalized Young measures generated by $\mathcal A$-free measures, and one for the class generated by $\mathcal B$-gradient measures $\mathcal Bu$. Here, $\mathcal A$ and $\mathcal B$ are linear homogeneous operators of arbitrary order, which we assume satisfy the constant rank property. The characterization places the class of generalized $\mathcal A$-free Young measures in duality with the class of $\mathcal A$-quasiconvex integrands by means of a well-known Hahn--Banach separation property. A similar statement holds for generalized $\mathcal B$-gradient Young measures. Concerning applications, we discuss several examples that showcase the rigidity or the failure of $\mathrm{L}^1$-compensated compactness when concentration of mass is allowed. These include the failure of $\mathrm{L}^1$-estimates for elliptic systems and the failure of $\mathrm{L}^1$-rigidity for the two-state problem. As a byproduct of our techniques we also show that, for any bounded open set $\Omega$, the inclusions \[ \mathrm{L}^1(\Omega) \cap \ker \mathcal A \hookrightarrow \mathcal M(\Omega) \cap \ker \mathcal A, \] \[ \{\mathcal B u\in \mathrm{C}^\infty(\Omega)\} \hookrightarrow \{\mathcal B u\in \mathcal M(\Omega)\}, \] are dense with respect to area-functional convergence of measures

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.03186 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Qualitative sketch of the construction when there exists a tangent measure τ ∈ Tan(Λ, x) which does not charge points (cf. Step 1a). Notice that by construction the measures wj = w x j := 1Q1 x uj + 1Q2 x vj are A-free on Qx for all j ∈ N. Moreover, the wj ’s can be extended by µ outside Qx and particular this extension preserves the A-free constraint. Moreover, in virtue of (85)-(86) and the locality of the weak-∗ … view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Qualitative representation of the construction when δ0 ∈ Tan(Λ, x). The blue (green) area represents the region where most of the mass of λ1 (of λ2) is concentrated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p054_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Generic shape of the approximation set D from Lemma B.1 (d = 3); composed by the first open cube approximation S1 ⊂ Q, the second-step 2- dimensional relatively open caps S2 ⊂ ∂S1, and the last-step 1-dimensional relatively open caps S3 ⊂ ∂S2. Lemma B.1. Let λ be a probability measure on the unit open cube Q ⊂ R d and assume that λ does not charge points in Q, that is, λ({x}) = 0 for all x ∈ Q. Let θ ∈ (0, 1), then … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages

[6]

Lower semicontinuity and relaxation of linear-growth integral functionals under PDE constraints

A. Arroyo-Rabasa, G. De Philippis, and F. Rindler, Lower semicontinuity and relaxation of linear-growth integral functionals under PDE constrain ts, to appear in Adv. Calc. Var. (2017), available at 1701.02230

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[12]

Ba ´ ıa, J

M. Ba ´ ıa, J. Matias, and P. M. Santos,Characterization of generalized Young measures in the A -quasiconvexity context, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 62 (2013), no. 2, 487–521. MR 3158518

work page 2013
[1]

Acerbi and N

E. Acerbi and N. Fusco, Semicontinuity problems in the calculus of variations , Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 86 (1984), no. 2, 125–145. MR 751305

work page 1984
[2]

D. R. Adams and L. I. Hedberg, Function spaces and potential theory , Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, vol. 314, Springer-Verla g, Berlin, 1996. MR 1411441

work page 1996
[3]

Alberti, Rank one property for derivatives of functions with bounded variation, Proc

G. Alberti, Rank one property for derivatives of functions with bounded variation, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 123 (1993), no. 2, 239–274, DOI 10.1017/S030821050002566X. MR1215412

doi:10.1017/s030821050002566x 1993
[4]

J. J. Alibert and G. Bouchitt´ e, Non-uniform integrability and generalized Young measures , J. Convex Anal. 4 (1997), no. 1, 129–147. MR 1459885

work page 1997
[5]

Ambrosio and G

L. Ambrosio and G. Dal Maso, On the relaxation in BV (Ω; Rm) of quasi-convex integrals , J. Funct. Anal. 109 (1992), no. 1, 76–97. MR 1183605

work page 1992
[7]

Arroyo-Rabasa, Relaxation and optimization for linear-growth convex inte gral functionals under PDE constraints , J

A. Arroyo-Rabasa, Relaxation and optimization for linear-growth convex inte gral functionals under PDE constraints , J. Funct. Anal. 273 (2017), no. 7, 2388–2427. MR 3677829

work page 2017

Show all 73 references

[8]

, An elementary approach to the dimension of measures satisfy ing a ﬁrst-order linear pde constraint, to appear in Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. (2019)

2019
[9]

Arroyo-Rabasa, G

A. Arroyo-Rabasa, G. De Philippis, J. Hirsch, and F. Rind ler, Dimensional estimates and rectiﬁability for measures satisfying linear PDE constrai nts, Geom. Funct. Anal. 29 (2019), no. 3, 639–658. MR 3962875

2019
[10]

Arroyo-Rabasa, G

A. Arroyo-Rabasa, G. De Philippis, J. Hirsch, F. Rindle r, and Anna Skorobogatova, An integrability estimate for measures satisfying a diﬀerent ial constraint, in preparation (2021). CHARACTERIZATION OF A-FREE YOUNG MEASURES 71

2021
[11]

Ba ´ ıa, M

M. Ba ´ ıa, M. Chermisi, J. Matias, and P. M. Santos, Lower semicontinuity and relaxation of signed functionals with linear growth in the context of A -quasiconvexity, Calc. Var. Partial Diﬀerential Equations 47 (2013), no. 3-4, 465–498. MR 3070552

2013
[13]

Ba ´ ıa, S

M. Ba ´ ıa, S. Kr¨ omer, and M. Kruˇ z ´ ık,Generalized W 1,1-Young measures and relaxation of problems with linear growth , SIAM J. Math. Anal. 50 (2018), no. 1, 1076–1119, DOI 10.1137/16M1103464. MR 3763090

2018 doi
[14]

J. M. Ball and R. D. James, Fine phase mixtures as minimizers of energy , Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 100 (1987), no. 1, 13–52. MR 906132

1987
[15]

J. M. Ball and F. Murat, W 1,p-quasiconvexity and variational problems for multiple int egrals, J. Funct. Anal. 58 (1984), no. 3, 225–253. MR 759098

1984
[16]

A. C. Barroso, I. Fonseca, and R. Toader, A relaxation theorem in the space of functions of bounded deformation , Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (4) 29 (2000), no. 1, 19–49. MR1765537

2000
[17]

Brezis, Functional analysis, Sobolev spaces and partial diﬀerenti al equations, Universitext, Springer, New York, 2011

H. Brezis, Functional analysis, Sobolev spaces and partial diﬀerenti al equations, Universitext, Springer, New York, 2011. MR 2759829

2011
[18]

Chipot and D

M. Chipot and D. Kinderlehrer, Equilibrium conﬁgurations of crystals , Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 103 (1988), no. 3, 237–277. MR 955934

1988
[19]

Conti, A

S. Conti, A. Garroni, and A. Massaccesi, Modeling of dislocations and relaxation of func- tionals on 1-currents with discrete multiplicity , Calc. Var. Partial Diﬀerential Equations 54 (2015), no. 2, 1847–1874. MR 3396435

2015
[20]

Dacorogna, Weak continuity and weak lower semicontinuity of nonlinear functionals, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol

B. Dacorogna, Weak continuity and weak lower semicontinuity of nonlinear functionals, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 922, Springer-Verlag, B erlin-New York, 1982

1982
[21]

De Philippis, L

G. De Philippis, L. Palmieri, and F. Rindler, On the two-state problem for general diﬀerential operators . part B, Nonlinear Anal. 177 (2018), no. part B, 387–396, DOI 10.1016/j.na.2018.03.015. MR 3886580

2018 doi
[22]

De Philippis and F

G. De Philippis and F. Rindler, On the structure of A-free measures and applications , Ann. Math. 184 (2016), no. 3, 1017–1039. MR 3549629

2016
[23]

De Philippis and F

G. De Philippis and F. Rindler, Characterization of generalized Young measures generated by symmetric gradients , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 224 (2017), no. 3, 1087–1125. MR 3621818

2017
[24]

De Simone, Energy minimizers for large ferromagnetic bodies , Arch

A. De Simone, Energy minimizers for large ferromagnetic bodies , Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 125 (1993), no. 2, 99–143. MR 1245068

1993
[25]

R. J. DiPerna and A. J. Majda, Oscillations and concentrations in weak solutions of the incompressible ﬂuid equations , Comm. Math. Phys. 108 (1987), no. 4, 667–689. MR 877643

1987
[26]

Federer, Geometric measure theory, Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 153, Springer-Verlag New York Inc., New York, 1969

H. Federer, Geometric measure theory, Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 153, Springer-Verlag New York Inc., New York, 1969. MR 0257325

1969
[27]

Fonseca and M

I. Fonseca and M. Kruˇ z ´ ık,Oscillations and concentrations generated by A-free mappings and weak lower semicontinuity of integral functionals , ESAIM Control Optim. Calc. Var. 16 (2010), no. 2, 472–502

2010
[28]

Fonseca and S

I. Fonseca and S. M¨ uller, A-quasiconvexity, lower semicontinuity, and Young measure s, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 30 (1999), no. 6, 1355–1390. MR 1718306

1999
[29]

Fonseca, G

I. Fonseca, G. Leoni, and S. M¨ uller, A -quasiconvexity: weak-star convergence and the gap , Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e Anal. Non Lin´ eaire21 (2004), no. 2, 209–236. MR 2021666

2004
[30]

Fonseca and S

I. Fonseca and S. M¨ uller, Relaxation of quasiconvex functionals in BV (Ω , Rp) for integrands f (x, u, ∇u), Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 123 (1993), no. 1, 1–49. MR 1218685

1993
[31]

Garroni and V

A. Garroni and V. Nesi, Rigidity and lack of rigidity for solenoidal matrix ﬁelds , Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 460 (2004), no. 2046, 1789–1806, DOI 10.1098/rspa.2003.1249. MR 2067561

2004
[32]

Guerra and B

A. Guerra and B. Rait ¸˘ a, On the necessity of the constant rank condition for Lp estimates, arXiv e-prints (2020), arXiv:2007.00484, available at 2007.00484

2020 arXiv
[33]

Gustafson, A generalized Poincar´ e inequality for a class of constant coeﬃcient diﬀerential operators, Proc

D. Gustafson, A generalized Poincar´ e inequality for a class of constant coeﬃcient diﬀerential operators, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 139 (2011), no. 8, 2721–2728, DOI 10.1090/S0002-9939- 2011-10607-5. MR 2801612

2011 doi
[34]

H¨ ormander,The analysis of linear partial diﬀerential operators

L. H¨ ormander,The analysis of linear partial diﬀerential operators. I , Classics in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003. Distribution theory and Fo urier analysis; Reprint of the second (1990) edition [Springer, Berlin; MR1065993 (91m:35001a) ]. MR 1996773

1990
[35]

Hudson, An existence result for discrete dislocation dynamics in th ree dimensions, arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.00304 (2018), available at arXiv:1806.00304

T. Hudson, An existence result for discrete dislocation dynamics in th ree dimensions, arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.00304 (2018), available at arXiv:1806.00304

2018 arXiv
[36]

R. D. James and D. Kinderlehrer, Frustration and microstructure: an example in mag- netostriction, Progress in partial diﬀerential equations: calculus of va riations, applications (Pont-` a-Mousson, 1991), 1992, pp. 59–81. MR 1194189 72 A. ARROYO-RABASA

1991
[37]

Kinderlehrer and P

D. Kinderlehrer and P. Pedregal, Characterizations of Young measures generated by gradi- ents, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 115 (1991), no. 4, 329–365. MR 1120852

1991
[38]

, Gradient Young measures generated by sequences in Sobolev s paces, J. Geom. Anal. 4 (1994), no. 1, 59–90. MR 1274138

1994
[39]

Kirchheim and J

B. Kirchheim and J. Kristensen, On rank one convex functions that are homogeneous of degree one, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 221 (2016), no. 1, 527–558. MR 3483901

2016
[40]

Kristensen, Lower semicontinuity in spaces of weakly diﬀerentiable fun ctions, Math

J. Kristensen, Lower semicontinuity in spaces of weakly diﬀerentiable fun ctions, Math. Ann. 313 (1999), no. 4, 653–710. MR 1686943

1999
[41]

Kristensen and B

J. Kristensen and B. Rait ¸˘ a,Oscillation and concentration in sequences of PDE constrai ned measures, arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.09190 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[42]

Kristensen and F

J. Kristensen and F. Rindler, Characterization of generalized gradient Young measures g en- erated by sequences in W 1,1 and BV , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 197 (2010), no. 2, 539–598. MR2660519

2010
[43]

, Relaxation of signed integral functionals in BV , Calc. Var. Partial Diﬀerential Equa- tions 37 (2010), no. 1-2, 29–62. MR 2564396

2010
[44]

Marcellini, Approximation of quasiconvex functions, and lower semicon tinuity of multiple integrals, Manuscripta Math

P. Marcellini, Approximation of quasiconvex functions, and lower semicon tinuity of multiple integrals, Manuscripta Math. 51 (1985), no. 1-3, 1–28. MR 788671

1985
[45]

Mattila, Geometry of sets and measures in Euclidean spaces , Cambridge Studies in Ad- vanced Mathematics, vol

P. Mattila, Geometry of sets and measures in Euclidean spaces , Cambridge Studies in Ad- vanced Mathematics, vol. 44, Cambridge University Press, C ambridge, 1995. MR 1333890

1995
[46]

C. B. Morrey Jr., Quasi-convexity and the lower semicontinuity of multiple i ntegrals, Paciﬁc J. Math. 2 (1952), 25–53. MR 54865

1952
[47]

MR 0202511

, Multiple integrals in the calculus of variations , Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 130, Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York, 1966. MR 0202511

1966
[48]

M¨ uller, Homogenization of nonconvex integral functionals and cell ular elastic materials , Arch

S. M¨ uller, Homogenization of nonconvex integral functionals and cell ular elastic materials , Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 99 (1987), no. 3, 189–212. MR 888450

1987
[49]

, Rank-one convexity implies quasiconvexity on diagonal mat rices, Internat. Math. Res. Notices 20 (1999), 1087–1095. MR 1728018

1999
[50]

1713, Springer, Berlin, 1999, pp

, Variational models for microstructure and phase transitio ns, Calculus of varia- tions and geometric evolution problems (Cetraro, 1996), Le cture Notes in Math., vol. 1713, Springer, Berlin, 1999, pp. 85–210, DOI 10.1007/BFb009267 0. MR 1731640

1996 doi
[51]

Murat, Compacit´ e par compensation, Ann

F. Murat, Compacit´ e par compensation, Ann. Sc. Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. 5 (1978), no. 3, 489–507

1978
[52]

, Compacit´ e par compensation: condition n´ ecessaire et suﬃsante de continuit´ e faible sous une hypoth` ese de rang constant , Ann. Sc. Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. 8 (1981), no. 1, 69–102

1981
[53]

Murat and L

F. Murat and L. Tartar, Optimality conditions and homogenization , Nonlinear variational problems (Isola d’Elba, 1983), 1985, pp. 1–8

1983
[54]

Preiss, Geometry of measures in Rn: distribution, rectiﬁability, and densities , Ann

D. Preiss, Geometry of measures in Rn: distribution, rectiﬁability, and densities , Ann. of Math. (2) 125 (1987), no. 3, 537–643. MR 890162

1987
[55]

Rait ¸˘ a,Constant rank operators: lower semi-continuity and L1-estimates, Ph.D

B. Rait ¸˘ a,Constant rank operators: lower semi-continuity and L1-estimates, Ph.D. Thesis, 2018

2018
[56]

, L 1-estimates for constant rank operators , arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.10057 (2018), available at arXiv:1811.10057

2018 arXiv
[57]

, Potentials for A-quasiconvexity, Calc. Var. Partial Diﬀerential Equations 58 (2019), no. 3, Art. 105, 16. MR 3958799

2019
[58]

Rindler, Lower semicontinuity for integral functionals in the space of functions of bounded deformation via rigidity and Young measures , Arch

F. Rindler, Lower semicontinuity for integral functionals in the space of functions of bounded deformation via rigidity and Young measures , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 202 (2011), no. 1, 63–113. MR 2835863

2011
[59]

, Lower semicontinuity and Young measures in BV without Alber ti’s rank-one theo- rem, Adv. Calc. Var. 5 (2012), no. 2, 127–159. MR 2912698

2012
[60]

, A local proof for the characterization of Young measures gen erated by sequences in BV, J. Funct. Anal. 266 (2014), no. 11, 6335–6371. MR 3192455

2014
[61]

J. R. Schulenberger and C. H. Wilcox, Coerciveness inequalities for nonelliptic systems of partial diﬀerential equations , Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) 88 (1971), 229–305. MR 313887

1971
[62]

, A coerciveness inequality for a class of nonelliptic operat ors of constant deﬁcit , Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) 92 (1972), 77–84. MR 316867

1972
[63]

E. M. Stein, Harmonic analysis: real-variable methods, orthogonality , and oscillatory in- tegrals, Princeton Mathematical Series, vol. 43, Princeton Univer sity Press, Princeton, NJ,
[64]

E. M. Stein and G. and W eiss, Introduction to Fourier analysis on Euclidean spaces , Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1971. Prince ton Mathematical Series, No. 32. MR0304972 CHARACTERIZATION OF A-FREE YOUNG MEASURES 73

1971
[65]

V ˇSver´ ak,On regularity for the Monge-Ampere equation without convex ity assumptions , Preprint, Heriot-W att University (1991)

1991
[66]

Tartar, Compensated compactness and applications to partial diﬀer ential equations , Non- linear anal

L. Tartar, Compensated compactness and applications to partial diﬀer ential equations , Non- linear anal. mech. Heriot-Watt Symposium, Vol. IV, 1979, pp . 136–212

1979
[67]

nonlinear partial diﬀer

, The compensated compactness method applied to systems of co nservation laws , Syst. nonlinear partial diﬀer. equations (Oxford, 1982), 1983, p p. 263–285

1982
[68]

Tartar, Some remarks on separately convex functions , Microstructure and phase transition, IMA Vol

L. Tartar, Some remarks on separately convex functions , Microstructure and phase transition, IMA Vol. Math. Appl., vol. 54, Springer, New York, 1993, pp. 1 91–204. MR 1320538

1993
[69]

Triebel, Theory of function spaces, Modern Birkh¨ auser Classics, Birkh¨ auser/Springer Basel AG, Basel, 2010

H. Triebel, Theory of function spaces, Modern Birkh¨ auser Classics, Birkh¨ auser/Springer Basel AG, Basel, 2010. MR 3024598

2010
[70]

L. C. Young, Generalized curves and the existence of an attained absolut e minimum in the calculus of variations , C. R. Soc. Sci. Varsovie, Cl. III 30 (1937), 212–234

1937
[71]

, Generalized surfaces in the calculus of variations , Ann. Math. 43 (1942), 84–103

1942
[72]

II , Ann

, Generalized surfaces in the calculus of variations. II , Ann. Math. 43 (1942), 530–544 (English)

1942
[1993]

Murphy, Monographs i n Harmonic Analysis, III

With the assistance of Timothy S. Murphy, Monographs i n Harmonic Analysis, III. MR1232192

Pith tools

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

[1] [6]

Lower semicontinuity and relaxation of linear-growth integral functionals under PDE constraints

A. Arroyo-Rabasa, G. De Philippis, and F. Rindler, Lower semicontinuity and relaxation of linear-growth integral functionals under PDE constrain ts, to appear in Adv. Calc. Var. (2017), available at 1701.02230

work page Pith review arXiv 2017

[2] [12]

Ba ´ ıa, J

M. Ba ´ ıa, J. Matias, and P. M. Santos,Characterization of generalized Young measures in the A -quasiconvexity context, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 62 (2013), no. 2, 487–521. MR 3158518

work page 2013

[3] [1]

Acerbi and N

E. Acerbi and N. Fusco, Semicontinuity problems in the calculus of variations , Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 86 (1984), no. 2, 125–145. MR 751305

work page 1984

[4] [2]

D. R. Adams and L. I. Hedberg, Function spaces and potential theory , Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, vol. 314, Springer-Verla g, Berlin, 1996. MR 1411441

work page 1996

[5] [3]

Alberti, Rank one property for derivatives of functions with bounded variation, Proc

G. Alberti, Rank one property for derivatives of functions with bounded variation, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 123 (1993), no. 2, 239–274, DOI 10.1017/S030821050002566X. MR1215412

doi:10.1017/s030821050002566x 1993

[6] [4]

J. J. Alibert and G. Bouchitt´ e, Non-uniform integrability and generalized Young measures , J. Convex Anal. 4 (1997), no. 1, 129–147. MR 1459885

work page 1997

[7] [5]

Ambrosio and G

L. Ambrosio and G. Dal Maso, On the relaxation in BV (Ω; Rm) of quasi-convex integrals , J. Funct. Anal. 109 (1992), no. 1, 76–97. MR 1183605

work page 1992

[8] [7]

Arroyo-Rabasa, Relaxation and optimization for linear-growth convex inte gral functionals under PDE constraints , J

A. Arroyo-Rabasa, Relaxation and optimization for linear-growth convex inte gral functionals under PDE constraints , J. Funct. Anal. 273 (2017), no. 7, 2388–2427. MR 3677829

work page 2017