Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-c8zdz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T23:40:48.221Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Corrigendum to: Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions for the p-Laplace operator: What is in between?

Part of: Nonlinear operators and their properties Parabolic equations and systems Elliptic equations and systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2019

Ralph Chill  and
Mahamadi Warma
Ralph Chill
Affiliation:
TU Dresden, Fakultät Mathematik, Institut für Analysis, 01062 Dresden (Germany) (ralph.chill@tu-dresden.de)
Mahamadi Warma
Affiliation:
University of Puerto Rico, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Department of Mathematics (Rio Piedras Campus), PO Box 70377, San Juan PR 00936-8377 (USA) (mahamadi.warma1@upr.edu; mjwarma@gmail.com)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The implication $(i)\Rightarrow (ii)$ of Theorem 2.1 in our article [1] is not true as it stands. We give here two correct statements which follow from the original proof.

Keywords

Local functionalsintegral representationsubgradientsRobin boundary conditionsnonlinear semigroupsdomination of semigroups

MSC classification

Primary: 35J65: Nonlinear boundary value problems for linear elliptic equations
Secondary: 35K55: Nonlinear parabolic equations 47H20: Semigroups of nonlinear operators

Information

Type
Correction
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh Section A: Mathematics , Volume 149 , Issue 6 , December 2019 , pp. 1689 - 1691
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1Chill, R. and Warma, M., Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions for the p-Laplace operator: what is in between?, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 142 (2012), no. 5, 975–1002.Google Scholar