\section{Introduction}

\subsection{Calibrations for free-discontinuity problems}

Free-discontinuity problems consists in minimizing the energy $E(u,K)$ of a pair composed of a function $u \in C^1(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus K)$ and a set $K$ of dimension $n-1$.
The energy presents a competition between the Dirichlet energy of $u$ in $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus K$ and the surface energy of $K$.
The set $K$ is interpreted as an hypersurface (with possibly singularities) where $u$ jumps between different values.
This notion of pair composed of a function and of its discontinuity set is alternatively formalized by the space SBV (special functions with bounded variations).
The model case of this kind of problem is the Mumford-Shah functional coming from image segmentation.

These problems generally present two kind of Euler-Lagrange equations.
Considering small perturbations of $u$ (with the discontinuity set $K$ being fixed), one obtains that $u$ satisfy a PDE with a boundary condition on each connected component of $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus K$.
As an example, minimizers of the Mumford-Shah functional are harmonic functions satisfying a Neumann boundary condition.
Considering small perturbations of $K$ under diffeormophisms, one obtains an equation that deals with the mean curvature of $K$.
However, these equations do not entirely characterise the minimizers.
We also point out that the minimizer may not be unique.
We summarize these difficulties as a lack of convexity of the functional $E$.

In~\cite{Alberti}, Alberti, Bouchitté, Dal Maso have introduced a sufficient condition for minimality by adapting the calibration method that was known for minimal hypersurfaces.
Here is a simplified summary.
Let us consider a competitor $(u,K)$.
We define the complete graph $\Gamma_u$ of $u$ as the boundary of the subgraph of $u$.
It is the reunion of the graph of $u$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus K$ and of vertical sides above $K$ (the discontinuities of $u$).
We denote by $\nu_{\Gamma_u}$ the normal vector to $\Gamma_u$ pointing into the subgraph of $u$.
A calibration for $(u,K)$ is a divergence-free vector field $\phi \colon \mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R} \to \mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{cal1}
    E(u,K) = \int_{\Gamma_u} \! \phi \cdot \nu_{\Gamma_u} \mathrm{d}\mathcal{H}^{n-1}
\end{equation}
and for all competitor $(v,L)$,
\begin{equation}\label{cal2}
    E(v,L) \geq \int_{\Gamma_v} \! \phi \cdot \nu_{\Gamma_v} \mathrm{d}\mathcal{H}^{n-1}.
\end{equation}
One observes that the Gauss-Green theorem and the divergence-free property imply
\begin{equation}
    \int_{\Gamma_u} \! \phi \cdot \nu_{\Gamma_u} \mathrm{d}\mathcal{H}^{n-1} = \int_{\Gamma_v} \! \phi \cdot \nu_{\Gamma_v} \mathrm{d}\mathcal{H}^{n-1}
\end{equation}
so the existence of such a vector field proves that $(u,K)$ is a minimizer.

In~\cite[Lemma 3.7]{Alberti}, the authors provide four axioms which ensure the properties (\ref{cal1}), (\ref{cal2}) above and it is convenient to take these axioms as a definition of calibrations. Minimality criterias for the Mumford-Shah functional are proved by construction of calibrations in~\cite{Alberti},~\cite{M1},~\cite{M2},~\cite{M3},~\cite{M4}. The principle of calibrations also inspired a fast primal-dual algorithm to minimize the Mumford-Shah functional (\cite{C1}, \cite{C2}).

In general, we don't know if calibrations exist for minimizers of this kind of problem. This question is related to the non-existence of a duality gap (see \cite[Section 3.13]{Alberti}, \cite{C1} and also \cite{Bo}).
There is no general recipe to follow and the construction can be very difficult.
The crack-tip is famous example of minimizer of the Mumford-Shah functional for which a calibration has not been found.

\subsection{The thermal insulation functional}

A free boundary problem related to thermal insulation was recently studied by Caffarelli--Kriventsov (\cite{CK},~\cite{K}) and Bucur--Luckhaus--Giacomini (\cite{BL},~\cite{BG}).
Relaxing the problem in $SBV$, it consists in minimizing
\begin{equation*}
    E(u) = \int \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u} \! (u^-)^2 + (u^+)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1} + \gamma^2 \mathcal{L}^n(\set{u > 0}),
\end{equation*}
where $\beta, \gamma > 0$ and the competitors are functions $u \in SBV(\mathbf{R}^n)$ such that $u=1$ on a given bounded open set $\Omega \subset \mathbf{R}^n$.
Here $J_u$ is the set of all jump points of $u$, that is the points $x$ for which there exist two real numbers $u^- < u^+$ and a (unique) vector $\nu_u(x) \in \mathbf{S}^{n-1}$ such that
\begin{subequations}
    \begin{align}
    &\lim_{r \to 0} \fint_{B_r \cap H^+} \! \abs{u(y) - u^-} \,\mathrm{d} y = 0\\
    &\lim_{r \to 0} \fint_{B_r \cap H^-} \! \abs{u(y) - u^+} \,\mathrm{d} y = 0,
    \end{align}
\end{subequations}
where
\begin{subequations}
    \begin{align}
        H^+ &= \set{y \in \mathbf{R}^n | (y - x) \cdot \nu_u(x) > 0}\\
        H^- &= \set{y \in \mathbf{R}^n | (y - x) \cdot \nu_u(x) < 0}.
    \end{align}
\end{subequations}
The function $u$ can be interpreted as the temperature (which is fixed to $1$ on $\Omega$) and $J_u$ as an isolating layer which has no width and no thermal conductivity.
Note that without loss of generality, we can assume that $0 \leq u \leq 1$.
Indeed, post-composing $u$ with the orthogonal projection onto $[0,1]$ decreases the energy.


Caffarelli--Kriventsov and Bucur--Luckhaus--Giacomini have shown the existence of minimizers in~\cite{CK} and~\cite{BL},\cite{BG}.
They prove a non-degeneracy property: there exists $0 < \delta < 1$ (depending only on $n$ and $\Omega$) such that such that $\mathrm{spt}(u) \subset B(0,\delta^{-1})$ and
\begin{equation}
    u \in \set{0} \cup [\delta,1] \quad \text{$\mathcal{L}^n$-a.e.\ on $\mathbf{R}^n$}.
\end{equation}
They also prove that the jump set $J_u$ is essentially closed, $\mathcal{H}^{n-1}(\overline{J_u} \setminus J_u) = 0$, and that it satisfies uniform density estimates.
In~\cite{K}, it was proven that the jump set is locally the union of the graphs of two $C^{1,\alpha}$ functions provided that it is trapped between two planes which are sufficiently close.
The approaches in these papers highlighted the similarities and the differences between the thermal insulation problem and the Mumford-Shah functional.
In particular, for the thermal insulation problem, one has to deal with an harmonic function satisfying a Robin boundary condition at the boundary rather than a Neumann boundary condition.

In~\cite{LM}, we have shown the higher integrability of the gradient for minimizers of the thermal insulation problem, an analogue of De Giorgi's conjecture for the Mumford-Shah functional, and deduced that the singular part of the free boundary has Hausdorff dimension strictly less than $n-1$.
Variants of this problem have been studied in~\cite{B1},~\cite{B2},~\cite{B3},~\cite{B4}.
A numerical implementation has been proposed in~\cite{BF}.

\subsection{Summary of results}

The purpose of this article is to provide minimality criteria for the thermal insulation functional by construction of calibrations.
The article is divided into two parts.
In the first part, we fix an open set $A$ of $\mathbf{R}^n$ and we consider the functional
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u) = \int_A \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u \cap A} \! (u^+)^2 + (u^-)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1},
\end{equation}
where $u \in SBV(A)$.
In Theorem~\ref{thm_harmonic}, we present a sufficient condition so that a non-negative harmonic function $u \colon A \to \mathbf{R}$ is a minimizer of $E_0$ among all competitors $v \in SBV(A)$ with $\set{v \ne u} \subset \subset A$.
The condition is also necessary in dimension one but likely not in higher dimension.
An anologous questions had been studied for the homogeneous Mumford-Shah functional
\begin{equation}
    F_0(u,A) = \int_A \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \mathcal{H}^{n-1}(J_u)
\end{equation}
by Chambolle without calibrations (\cite[Theorem 3.1(i)]{F}) and Alberti, Bouchitté, Dal Maso with calibrations (\cite[section 4.6]{Alberti}).

In the second part, we come back to the full thermal insulation functional,
\begin{equation}
    E(u) = \int \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u} \! (u^+)^2 + (u^-)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1} + \gamma^2 \mathcal{L}^n(\set{u > 0})
\end{equation}
where $u \in SBV(\mathbf{R}^n)$ is such that $u=1$ on a given bounded open set $\Omega$.
The section starts with an informal discussion about the case $\Omega = B(0,1)$.
The relevant competitors are either the indicator function $\mathbf{1}_{\Omega}$ or an harmonic function supported in a bigger ball.
We can make explicit computations with these competitors to find minimality criterias.
Then we prove and generalize these criterias to other domains $\Omega$ using calibrations.
In Theorem~\ref{thm_indicator1} and~\ref{thm_indicator2}, we prove two sufficient conditions so that $\mathbf{1}_{\Omega}$ is a minimizer.
In Theorem~\ref{thm_u}, we come back back to the case $\Omega = B(0,1)$ and prove a sufficient condition so that an harmonic function supported in a bigger ball is a minimizer.

\textbf{Acknowledgement}. We would like to thank Antoine Lemenant and Antonin Chambolle for helpful discussions about extensions of normal vector fields.

\section{A Dirichlet problem}

\subsection{Statement of the problem and calibrations}

We fix a parameter $\beta > 0$.
Given a Borel set $S \subset \mathbf{R}^n$ and a SBV function $u$ in a neighborhood of $S$, we define
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u,S) = \int_S \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u \cap S} \! (u^+)^2 + (u^-)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1}.
\end{equation}

Let $A$ be an open set and let $u \colon A \to \mathbf{R}$ be a a non-negative harmonic function.
We are interested in finding a sufficient condition so that the following minimality property holds true: for all $v \in SBV(A)$ with $\set{v \ne u} \subset \subset A$, we have
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u,A) \leq E_0(v,A).
\end{equation}
It is equivalent to require that for all open set $B \subset \subset A$, for all $v \in SBV(A)$ with $v = u$ in $A \setminus \overline{B}$, we have
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u,\overline{B}) \leq E_0(v,\overline{B}).
\end{equation}
Therefore, we are led to assume that $A$ is a smooth bounded open set, that $u$ has an extension in a neighborhood $V$ of $\overline{A}$ and find a sufficient condition so that for all $v \in SBV(V)$ with $v = u$ in $V \setminus \overline{A}$, we have
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u,\overline{A}) \leq E_0(v,\overline{A}).
\end{equation}

\begin{thm}\label{thm_harmonic}
   
    Let $A$ be a bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ with Lipschitz boundary
    Let $u \colon A \to \mathbf{R}$ be a non-negative harmonic function which has a $C^1$ extension in open set $V$ containing $\overline{A}$.
    We assume that for some $0 \leq m \leq M$, we have $m \leq u \leq M$ in $A$ and
    \begin{equation}\label{thm_test}
        \int_m^{\delta} \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0 (m^2 + \delta^2),
    \end{equation}
    where
    \begin{equation}
        \beta_0 = \beta \frac{(M - m)}{\sup_A \abs{\nabla u}} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \delta  = \frac{M}{1+\beta_0}.
    \end{equation}
    Then $u$ is a minimizer of $E_0(v,\overline{A})$ among all $v \in SBV(V)$ such that $v=u$ in $V \setminus \overline{A}$.
\end{thm}

\begin{rmk}
    The function
    \begin{equation}
        s \mapsto \beta_0 (m^2 + s^2) - \int_m^s \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t
    \end{equation}
    attains its minimum at $s=\frac{M}{1+\beta_0}$ so (\ref{thm_test}) is equivalent to say that for all $s \in [0,M]$,
    \begin{equation}
        \int_m^s \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0(m^2 + s^2).
    \end{equation}
\end{rmk}

\begin{rmk}
    Let us consider the case where $n=1$, $A = ]0,h[$ (where $h > 0$) and $u$ is an affine function whose graph joins $(0,m)$ and $(h,M)$.
    Then the theorem condition is necessary.
    In this cases $\beta_0 = \beta h$, $\delta = \frac{M}{1+\beta h}$ and the condition (\ref{thm_test}) amounts to
    \begin{equation}
        h^{-1} (M - m)^2 \leq \beta(m^2 + \delta^2) + h^{-1} (M - \delta)^2.
    \end{equation}
    One recognizes that the right-hand side is the Dirichlet energy of $u$.
    The left-hand side is the energy of the jump function whose graph joins $(0,m)$, $(0,\delta)$ and $(h,M)$.
\end{rmk}

\begin{rmk}
    The condition (\ref{thm_test}) is trivially satisfied if $m \geq \delta$, that is,
    \begin{equation}
        m \geq \beta^{-1} \sup_A \abs{\nabla u}.
    \end{equation}
\end{rmk}

\begin{rmk}
    For the homogeneous Mumford-Shah functional,
    \begin{equation}
        F_0(u) = \int_A \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 + \beta \mathcal{H}^{n-1}(J_u),
    \end{equation}
    Chambolle found the condition $(M - m) \sup_A \abs{\nabla u} \leq \beta$ (see~\cite[Theorem 3.1 (i)]{F}).
    This is somewhat analogous to our condition because this can be rewritten
    \begin{equation}
        \int_m^M \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0
    \end{equation}
    where $\beta_0 = \beta \frac{(M - m)}{\sup_A \abs{\nabla u}}$.
   
\end{rmk}

We are going to state the notion of calibrations associated to our problem.
This notion is justified by~\cite[Section 2 and 3]{Alberti}.

\begin{defi}\label{def_calibration1}
   
    Let $A$ be a bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ with Lipschitz boundary, let $V$ be an open set containing $\overline{A}$ and let $u \in SBV(V)$ be such that $0 \leq u \leq M$ on $A$ (for some $M > 0$).
    A calibration for $u$ in $\overline{A} \times [0,M]$ is a Borel map
    \begin{equation
        \phi = (\phi^x,\phi^t) \colon \overline{A} \times [0,M] \to \mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}
    \end{equation}
    which is bounded and approximately-regular in $\overline{A} \times [0,M]$, divergence-free in $A \times ]0,M[$ and such that
    \begin{enumerate}
        \item[(a)] $\phi^t(x,t) \geq \tfrac{1}{4} \abs{\phi^x(x,t)}^2$ for $\mathcal{L}^n$-a.e.\ $x \in \overline{A}$ and every $t \in [0,M]$;
        \item[(b)] $\abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2)$ for $\mathcal{H}^{n-1}$-a.e.\ $x \in \overline{A}$ and every $r,s \in [0,M]$;
        \item[(a')] $\phi^x(x,u) = 2 \nabla u$ and $\phi^t(x,u) = \abs{\nabla u}^2$ for $\mathcal{L}^n$-a.e.\ $x \in \overline{A}$;
        \item[(b')] $\int_{u^-}^{u^+} \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta \left[(u^-)^2 + (u^+)^2\right]\nu_u$ for $\mathcal{H}^{n-1}$-a.e.\ $x \in J_u \cap \overline{A}$.
    \end{enumerate}
\end{defi}

The existence of such a vector field $\phi$ implies that $u$ is a minimizer of $E_0(v,\overline{A})$ among $v \in SBV(V)$ such that $v=u$ in $V \setminus \overline{A}$. This is a consequence of~\cite[Section 3]{Alberti}. Note however that our Dirichlet problem is different because our boundary condition is one-side (a competitor $v$ might jump on $\partial A$).
This is why we define $\phi$ up to $\partial A \times [0,M]$.
We use a minor modification of~\cite[Lemma 2.10]{Alberti} to include the case where $\phi$ is defined only on $\Gamma_u \cap (\overline{A} \times [0,M])$.

\begin{rmk}
    With regard to the function $u$ of Theorem~\ref{thm_harmonic}, we have $J_u = \emptyset$ so we don't need to check (b').
\end{rmk}

We conclude this section with two miscellaneous remarks.

\begin{rmk}[Scaling]
    We detail the scaling properties of $E_0$.
    We write $E_0(u,\beta,A)$ to explicit the parameters $\beta$ in the definition of $E_0$.
    For all $M \in \mathbf{R}$, we have
    \begin{equation}
        E_0(M u, \beta, A) = M^2 E_0(u,\beta, A),
    \end{equation}
    and for all $h > 0$,
    \begin{equation}
        E_0(u_h, \beta h, h^{-1}A) = h^{2-n} E_0(u,\beta,A).
    \end{equation}
    where $u_h(x) = u(h \cdot x)$.
    Thus, for all $h > 0$ and $M \geq 0$,
    \begin{equation}
        E_0(M^{-1} u_h, \beta h, h^{-1}A) = M^{-2} h^{2-n} E_0(u,\beta,A).
    \end{equation}
\end{rmk}



\begin{rmk}[Slope along a jump]\label{rmk_jump}
   
    This Remark is an example of application of~\cite[Lemma 2.5]{Alberti} that we will use repeatedly in the next constructions.
    We consider three $C^1$ functions $\sigma, u,v \colon \mathbf{R}^n \to \mathbf{R}$.
    We work in $\mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}$ and we introduce the hypersurface
    \begin{equation}
        H   = \set{(x,t) \in \mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R} | t = \sigma(x)}
    \end{equation}
    and the vector field
    \begin{equation}
        \phi =
        \begin{cases}
            (2 \nabla u, \abs{\nabla u}^2)   &\text{for $t > \sigma(x)$}\\
            (2 \nabla v, \abs{\nabla v}^2)   &\text{for $t < \sigma(x)$}.
        \end{cases}
    \end{equation}
    A normal vector field to $H$ is $(-\nabla\sigma,1)$ and we have along $H$,
    \begin{equation}
        \phi(x,\sigma(x)^+)
        \cdot
        \begin{pmatrix} -\sigma \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}
        =
        \phi(x,\sigma(x)^-)
        \cdot
        \begin{pmatrix} -\sigma \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}.
    \end{equation}
    if and only if $\nabla \sigma = \tfrac{1}{2}(\nabla u + \nabla v)$.
    Therefore, $\phi$ is divergence-free in the sense of distributions provided that $u,v$ are harmonic and $\sigma = \tfrac{1}{2}(u + v)$ (modulo an additive constant).
\end{rmk}

\subsection{The one dimensional case}\label{subsection_one}

\subsubsection{A short analysis}

We fix constants $a < b$ and $0 \leq m \leq M$.
We consider the functional
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u) = \int \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u} \! (u^+)^2 + (u^-)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1}
\end{equation}
defined over the function $u \in SBV(\mathbf{R})$ such that $u=m$ on $]-\infty,a[$ and $u=M$ on $]b,\infty]$.
By scaling, it suffices to study the case $[a,b]=[0,1]$.

We are looking for the minimizer(s), depending on $m$ and $M$.
Here is a summary (without details).
In the case $m = M$, the affine (constant) competitor is the only minimizer and from now on, we assume $m < M$.
First, we try to find the jump competitors which have the least energy.
It is never convenient to do more than one jump.
At each side of the jump, the optimal value of the function corresponds to the Robin condition $\partial_{\nu} u = \beta u$ (where $\nu$ is the inward unit normal vector to the side).
The optimal location of the jump may be $x_0=0$ or some $x_0 \in ]0,1[$.
It cannot be $x_0 = 1$ though and this comes from the fact that $m < M$.
If $m < \frac{M}{1 + \beta}$, the best location is $x_0 = 0$ and the jump is going from $m$ to $\frac{M}{1 + \beta}$.
If $m > \frac{M}{1 + \beta}$, the best location is a certain $x_0 \in ]0,1[$ but then the affine competitor has necessarily a smaller energy.
We conclude that the affine competitor is a minimizer if and only if it is better than the jump at $x = 0$, that is
\begin{equation}\label{test}
    (M - m)^2 \leq \beta m^2 + \left(M - \frac{M}{1+\beta}\right)^2.
\end{equation}
We define $\delta = \frac{M}{1 + \beta}$ and we observe that (\ref{test}) is equivalent to
\begin{equation}\label{test2}
    \int_m^\delta \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta (m^2 + \delta^2).
\end{equation}

Now, we try to guess the calibration in the limit case
\begin{equation}\label{limit_case}
    \int_m^\delta \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta (m^2 + \delta^2).
\end{equation}
Note that we have necessarily $m < \delta$.
There are two minimizers; the first one is the affine function $u$ whose graph joins the points $(0,m)$, $(1,M)$ and the second one is the jump function $v$ whose graph joins the points $(0,m)$, $(0,\delta)$, $(1,M)$.
A nice property of calibrations is that they calibrate all minimizers simultaneously.
We should have $\phi = (2\nabla u,\abs{\nabla u}^2)$ on the graph of $u$, that is $\phi = (2(M-m),(M-m)^2)$ on $t = m + (1-m)x$.
And we should have as well $\phi = (2 \nabla v, \abs{\nabla v}^2)$ on the graph of $v$, that is $\phi = (2(M-\delta),(M-\delta)^2)$ on $t=m + (M-\delta)x$.
Finally, we should have
\begin{equation}
    \int_m^\delta \! \phi^x(0,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta(m^2 + \delta^2).
\end{equation}
A simple solution is to set
\begin{equation}
    \phi = \left(\frac{2(M-t)}{1-x}, \left[\frac{M-t}{1-x}\right]^2\right)
\end{equation}
for $t \geq m + (1 - m)x$.
Next, we try to determine $\phi^x(0,t)$ for $t \in [0,m]$.
We have necessarily
\begin{align}
    \int_0^m \! \phi^x(0,t) \,\mathrm{d} t   &= \int_0^\delta \! \phi^x(0,t) \,\mathrm{d} t - \int_m^\delta \! \phi^x(0,t) \,\mathrm{d} t\\
                                    &\leq \beta \delta^2 - \beta (m^2 + \delta^2)\\
                                    &\leq - \beta m^2\label{rmk2}.
\end{align}
We suggest to set $\phi^x(0,t) = -2\beta t$ on $[0,m]$.
Then we try to extend $\phi$ in a simple way while respecting the axioms of calibrations and we arrive at
\begin{equation}
    \phi =
    \begin{cases}
        \left(\frac{2(M-t)}{1-x}, \left[\frac{M-t}{1-x}\right]^2\right)   &\text{if $m + \tau x \leq t \leq M$}\\
        \left(2(M-m),\left[M-m\right]^2\right)                          &\text{if $m + \sigma x \leq t \leq m + \tau x$}\\
        \left(-2 \beta m, \beta^2 m^2\right)                            &\text{if $m \leq t \leq m + \sigma x$}\\
        \left(-2 \beta t, \beta^2 m^2\right)                            &\text{if $0 \leq t \leq m$.}
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\tau = M - m$ and $\sigma = \frac{1}{2}((M - m) - \beta m)$.
The slope $\sigma$ has been chosen as in Remark~\ref{rmk_jump}.
In the next section, we generalize this construction when there is only an inequality in (\ref{limit_case}).
\begin{figure}[ht]
    \begin{center}
        \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./media/fig_harmonic_4.pdf}
    \end{center}
\end{figure}




\subsubsection{The construction}

\textbf{Context}.
Let $0 \leq m \leq M$ and let $u \colon [0,1] \to \mathbf{R}$ be the affine function such that $u(0) = m$ and $u(1) = M$. We assume that
\begin{equation}
    \int_m^\delta \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta (m^2 + \delta^2),
\end{equation}
where $\delta = \frac{M}{1+\beta}$.
We build a calibration for $u$ in $[0,1] \times [0,M]$.

The construction brings into play an intermediary constant $0 \leq \lambda \leq \beta$ such that
\begin{equation}
    \int_m^\delta \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \lambda m^2 + \beta \delta^2.
\end{equation}
We will also need the conditions $\lambda m \leq M -m$ and $\lambda m \leq \frac{\beta M}{1+\beta}$.
If $m \leq \delta$, these two conditions follows from the fact that $\lambda \leq \beta$.
Otherwise, it suffices to take $\lambda = 0$ for example.
Finally, we define
\begin{equation}
    \phi =
    \begin{cases}
        \left(\frac{2(M-t)}{1-x}, \left[\frac{M-t}{1-x}\right]^2\right)  &\text{if $m + \tau x \leq t \leq M$}\\
        \left(2(M-m), \left[M-m\right]^2\right)                        &\text{if $m + \sigma x \leq t \leq m + \tau x$}\\
        \left(-2 \lambda m, \lambda^2 m^2\right)                      &\text{if $m \leq t \leq m + \sigma x$}\\
        \left(-2 \lambda t, \lambda^2 m^2\right)          &\text{if $0 \leq t \leq m$.}
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\tau = M - m$ and $\sigma = \frac{1}{2}((M-m) - \lambda m)$.
Note that we have $0 \leq \sigma \leq \tau$ because $0 \leq \lambda m \leq M-m$.
The slope $\sigma$ has been chosen as in Remark~\ref{rmk_jump}.

We prove that for all $x$ and all $r \leq s$,
\begin{equation}
    \abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2).
\end{equation}
We have globally
\begin{equation}
    \phi^x \geq -2 \lambda t \geq -2 \beta t
\end{equation}
so it suffices to control $\int_r^s \! \phi^x \,\mathrm{d} t$ from above.
Let us fix $t$.
We are going to see that the function
\begin{equation}
    r \mapsto \beta(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t
\end{equation}
is non-decreasing on $[0,M]$.
If $0 \leq r \leq m$,
\begin{equation}
    \beta(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta r^2 - \lambda r^2 + (\ldots)
\end{equation}
where $(\ldots)$ does not depend on $r$.
The right-hand side is non-decreasing on $[0,m]$ because $\lambda \leq \beta$.
If $m \leq r \leq m + \sigma x$,
\begin{equation}
    \beta(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta r^2 - 2 \lambda m r + (\ldots)
\end{equation}
where $(\ldots)$ does not depend on $r$.
The right-hand side is non-decreasing on $[m,m+\sigma x]$ because $\lambda \leq \beta$.
Finally, the function in non-decreasing on $[m+\sigma x, M]$ because $\phi^x$ is non-negative on this interval.
We conclude that it suffice to show that for all $x$ and $t$,
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta s^2.
\end{equation}
This is trivial if $s \leq m$ so we assume $s > m$.
There exists $x_0$ such that $s = m + (M-m)x_0$.
The function
\begin{equation}
    x \mapsto \int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t
\end{equation}
is non-decreasing on $[x_0,1]$ because the part where $\phi^x \leq 0$ gets bigger at the expense of the part where $\phi^x \geq 0$.
Now, it suffices to show that for all $x$ and $m + (M-m)x \leq s \leq M$,
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta s^2.
\end{equation}
We apply the divergence theorem in the polygone delimited by the cycle $(x,0),(x,s),(1,M)(0,1),(0,0)$.
We get
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = -\frac{(M-s)^2}{1-x} + (M-m)^2 - \lambda m^2 + \lambda^2 m^2 x
\end{equation}
so
\begin{equation}
    \beta s^2 - \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta s^2 + \frac{(M-s)^2}{1-x} - \lambda^2 m^2 x + \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2.
\end{equation}
The function $s \mapsto \beta s^2 + \frac{(M-s)^2}{1-x}$ is minimal for $s=\frac{M}{1+\beta(1-x)}$ and its the minimum value is $\frac{\beta M^2}{1+\beta(1-x)}$.
We have therefore
\begin{equation}
    \beta s^2 - \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \geq \frac{\beta M^2}{1+\beta(1-x)} - \lambda^2 m^2 x + \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2.
\end{equation}
The function $x \mapsto \frac{\beta M}{1+\beta(1-x)} - \lambda^2 m^2 x$ is non-decreasing on $[0,1]$ because $\lambda m \leq \frac{\beta M}{1+\beta}$.
We are thus led to
\begin{equation}
    \beta s^2 - \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \geq \frac{\beta M^2}{1+\beta} + \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2
\end{equation}
As $\frac{\beta M^2}{1+\beta} = \beta \delta^2 + (M-\delta)^2$, the previous quantity can be rewritten
\begin{equation}
    \lambda m^2 + \beta \delta^2 - \int_m^\delta \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t
\end{equation}
and this is non-negative by assumption.

\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm_harmonic}}

\textbf{Context}.
Let $A$ be a bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ with Lipschitz boundary.
Let $u \colon A \to \mathbf{R}$ be a non-negative harmonic function which has $C^1$ extension in a neighborhood of $\overline{A}$.
We assume that for some $0 \leq m \leq M$, we have $m \leq u \leq M$ in $A$ and
\begin{equation}
    \int_m^{\delta} \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0 (m^2 + \delta^2),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
    \beta_0 = \beta \frac{(M - m)}{\sup_A \abs{\nabla u}} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \delta  = \frac{M}{1+\beta_0}.
\end{equation}
We build a calibration for $u$ in $\overline{A} \times [0,M]$.

The construction brings into play an intermediary constant $0 \leq \lambda \leq \beta_0$ such that
\begin{equation}
    \int_m^{\delta} \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \lambda m^2 + \beta_0 \delta^2.
\end{equation}
We also need the conditions $\lambda m \leq M - m$ and $\lambda m \leq \frac{\beta_0 M}{1+\beta_0}$.
If $m \leq \delta$, these two conditions follow from the fact that $\lambda \leq \beta_0$.
Otherwise, it suffices to take $\lambda = 0$ for example.
Finally, we define
\begin{equation}
    \phi = \left(\varphi^x \cdot \frac{\nabla u(x)}{M-m}, \varphi^t \cdot \abs{\frac{\nabla u(x)}{M-m}}^2\right),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
    \varphi =
    \begin{cases}
        \left(2(M-m)\frac{M-t}{M-u}, \left[(M-m)^2\frac{M-t}{M-u}\right]^2\right)   &\text{if $u(x) \leq t \leq M$}\\
        \left(2(M-m),\left[M-m\right]^2\right)                                      &\text{if $\sigma(x) \leq t \leq u(x)$}\\
        \left(-2\lambda m, \lambda^2 m^2\right)                                     &\text{if $m \leq t \leq \sigma(x)$}\\
        \left(-2 \lambda t, \lambda^2 m^2\right)                                    &\text{if $0 \leq t \leq m$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{align}
    \sigma(x)   &= m + \frac{1}{2}(u - m)(1 - \tfrac{\lambda m}{M-m})\\
                &= m + \frac{1}{2} \frac{u-m}{M-m}(M-m - \lambda m).
\end{align}
As $0 \leq \lambda m \leq M - m$, we see that $m \leq \sigma(x) \leq u(x)$.
We prove that for all $x$ and $r \leq s$,
\begin{equation}
    \abs{\int_r^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t} \leq \beta_0 (r^2 + s^2).
\end{equation}
This is a minor variant of the one-dimensional case.
We have globally
\begin{equation}
    \varphi^x \geq -2 \lambda t \geq -2 \beta_0 t
\end{equation}
so it suffices to control $\int_r^s \! \varphi^x \,\mathrm{d} t$ from above.
Let us fix $t$.
We are going to see that the function
\begin{equation}
    r \mapsto \beta_0(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t
\end{equation}
is non-decreasing on $[0,M]$.
If $0 \leq r \leq m$,
\begin{equation}
    \beta_0(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta_0 r^2 - \lambda r^2 + (\ldots)
\end{equation}
where $(\ldots)$ does not depend on $r$.
The right-hand side is non-decreasing on $[0,m]$ because $\lambda \leq \beta_0$.
If $m \leq r \leq \sigma(x)$,
\begin{equation}
    \beta_0(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta_0 r^2 - 2 \lambda m r + (\ldots)
\end{equation}
where $(\ldots)$ does not depend on $r$.
The right-hand side is non-decreasing on $[m,\sigma(x)]$ because $\lambda \leq \beta_0$.
Finally, the function in non-decreasing on $[u(x),M]$ because $\varphi^x$ is non-negative on this interval.
We conclude that it suffice to show that for all $x$ and $s$,
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0 s^2.
\end{equation}
This is trivial if $s \leq m$ so we assume $s > m$.
There exists $x_0$ such that $s = u(x_0)$.
Since $\sigma \leq u$, we have in particular $\sigma(x_0) \leq s$.
For $x$ such that $\sigma(x) \leq s \leq u(x)$, we compute
\begin{align}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t    &= -2 \lambda m^2 - 2 \lambda m (\sigma - m) + 2(M-m)(s-\sigma)\\
    \begin{split}
                                        &= -2 \lambda m - 2 \lambda m (\sigma - m) + 2(M-m)(s-m)\\
                                        &\pushright{+ 2(M-m)(m - \sigma)}
    \end{split}\\
    \begin{split}
                                        &= -2 \lambda m^2 - 2 (\sigma - m)(M-m + \lambda m)\\
                                        &\pushright{+ 2(M-m)(s-m).}
    \end{split}
\end{align}
As $u(x_0) \leq u(x)$ and $0 \leq \lambda m \leq M-m$, we have $\sigma(x_0) \leq \sigma(x)$ and it follows that
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,u) \leq \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x_0,u) \,\mathrm{d}.
\end{equation}
Now, it suffices to show that for all $x$ and $u(x) \leq s \leq m$,
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0 s^2.
\end{equation}
We compute
\begin{multline}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = - \lambda m^2 - 2 \lambda m (\sigma - m) + 2(M-m)(u - \sigma)\\ + \frac{M-m}{M-u}\left((M-u)^2 - (M-s)^2\right).
\end{multline}
By definition
\begin{align}
    \sigma - m  &= \frac{1}{2}\frac{u-m}{M-m}(M-m-\lambda m)\\
    u - \sigma  &= \frac{1}{2}\frac{u-m}{M-m}(M-m+\lambda m)
\end{align}
so
\begin{equation}
    - 2 \lambda m (\sigma - m) + 2(M-m)(u - \sigma) = \frac{u-m}{M-m}((M-m)^2 + \lambda^2 m^2).
\end{equation}
We also write
\begin{align}
    (M-m)(M-u)  &= (M-m)^2 + (M-m)(m-u)\\
                &= (M-m)^2 - (M-m)^2 \frac{u-m}{M-m}
\end{align}
and we arrive at
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = - \lambda m^2 + \lambda^2 m^2 \frac{u-m}{M-m} + (M-m)^2 - \frac{M-m}{M-u}(M-s)^2.
\end{equation}
Therefore
\begin{multline}
    \beta_0 s^2 - \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta_0 s^2 + \frac{M-m}{M-u}(M-t)^2\\- \lambda^2 m^2 \frac{u-m}{M-m} + \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2.
\end{multline}
For a fixed $x$, the function $s \mapsto \beta_0 s^2 + \frac{M-m}{M-u}(M-s)^2$ is minimal for
\begin{equation}
    s = \frac{M}{1+\beta_0 \frac{M-u}{M-m}}
\end{equation}
and its minimum value is
\begin{equation}
    \frac{\beta_0 M^2}{1 + \beta_0 \frac{M-u}{M-m}}.
\end{equation}
We have therefore
\begin{multline}
    \beta_0 s^2 - \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \\\geq \frac{\beta_0 M^2}{1 + \beta_0 \frac{M-u}{M-m}} - \lambda^2 m^2 \frac{u-m}{M-m} + 2 \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2.
\end{multline}
The function
\begin{equation}
    x \mapsto \frac{\beta_0 M^2}{1 + \beta_0 \frac{M-x}{M-m}} - \lambda^2 m^2 \frac{x-m}{M-m}
\end{equation}
is non decreasing on $[m,M]$ because $\lambda m \leq \frac{\beta_0 M}{1+\beta_0}$.
We are thus led to
\begin{equation}
    \beta_0 s^2 - \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \geq \frac{\beta_0 M^2}{1+\beta_0} + \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2
\end{equation}
As $\frac{\beta_0 M^2}{1+\beta_0} = \beta_0 \delta^2 + (M-\delta)^2$, the right-hand side can be rewritten
\begin{equation}
    \lambda m^2 + \beta_0 \delta^2 - \int_m^{\delta} \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t.
\end{equation}

\section{The Thermal Insulation Problem}

\subsection{Definition of the problem and calibrations}\label{ball_computations}

We fix a bounded open set $\Omega \subset \mathbf{R}^n$ with Lipschitz boundary.
We fix parameters $\beta > 0$ and $\gamma > 0$.
Given $u \in SBV(\mathbf{R}^n)$ such that $u=1$ on $\Omega$, we define
\begin{equation}
    E(u) = \int \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u} \! (u^+)^2 + (u^-)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1} + \gamma^2 \mathcal{L}^n(\set{u > 0}).
\end{equation}
We can assume without loss of generality that competitors satisfy $0 \leq u \leq 1$.
It is shown in~\cite{CK} that minimizers have necessarily a compact support so we can also assume without loss of generality that the competitors have a compact support. 

Now, we state the notion of calibration associated to this problem.
Let $u \in SBV(\mathbf{R}^n)$ be such that $u=1$ on $\Omega$, $0 \leq u \leq 1$ and $u$ has a compact support.
A calibration for $u$ is a Borel map
\begin{equation
    \phi = (\phi^x,\phi^t) \colon (\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega) \times \mathbf{R} \to \mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}
\end{equation}
which is bounded and approximately-regular in $(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega) \times [0,1]$, divergence-free in $(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}) \times ]0,1[$ and such that
\begin{enumerate}
    \item[(a)] $\phi^t(x,t) \geq \tfrac{1}{4} \abs{\phi^x(x,t)}^2 - \gamma^2 \mathbf{1}_{]0,1]}(t)$ for $\mathcal{L}^n$-a.e.\ $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ and every $t \in [0,1]$;
    \item[(b)] $\abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2)$ for $\mathcal{H}^{n-1}$-a.e.\ $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ and every $r < s$;
    \item[(a')] $\phi^x(x,u) = 2 \nabla u$ and $\phi^t(x,u) = \abs{\nabla u}^2 - \gamma^2 \mathbf{1}_{]0,1]}(u)$ for $\mathcal{L}^n$-a.e.\ $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$;
    \item[(b')] $\int_{u^-}^{u^+} \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta \left[(u^-)^2 + (u^+)^2\right]\nu_u$ for $\mathcal{H}^{n-1}$-a.e.\ $x \in J_u$.
\end{enumerate}
We say that $u$ is calibrated if such a vector field exists.
This implies that $u$ is a minimizer of $E(v)$ among $v \in SBV(\mathbf{R}^n)$ such that $v=1$ on $\Omega$.

\subsubsection{Informal computations with \texorpdfstring{$\Omega = B(0,1)$}{Ω = B(0,1)}}\label{section_B1}

We present informal computations in the case $\Omega = B_1$ (the open unit ball centred at the origin).
We introduce for $r > 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{def_gamma}
    \Gamma(r) =
    \begin{cases}
        r-1                         &\ \text{if $n=1$}\\
        \ln(r)                      &\ \text{if $n=2$}\\
        \frac{1}{n-2}(1-r^{2-n})    &\ \text{if $n \geq 3$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
Given $x \in \mathbf{R}^n$, we write $r$ for $\abs{x}$.
Thus, $x \mapsto \Gamma(r)$ is an harmonic positive function on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{B_1}$ which is $0$ on $\partial B_1$.

We assume without proof that the only relevant competitors $u$ are of the following form.
Either $u$ is the indicator function of $B_1$.
Either there exists $R > 1$ and $0 < \delta < 1$ such that $u$ is radial continuous on $\overline{B}_R$, $u=1$ on $\overline{B_1}$, $u=\delta$ on $\partial B_R$ and $u = 0$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{B}_R$.
For a fixed $R > 1$, the first Euler-Lagrange equation says that $u$ should be harmonic in $B_R \setminus \overline{B_1}$ and that $\delta=\delta(R)$ should be determined by the Robin boundary condition
\begin{equation}
    -\partial_r u = \beta u \ \text{on $\partial B_R$}.
\end{equation}
We find
\begin{equation}\label{def_delta}
    \delta(R) = \frac{1}{1+\beta R^{n-1} \Gamma(R)}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{def_u}
    u(x)=
    \begin{cases}
        1 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} \leq 1$}\\
        1 - \beta \delta(R) R^{n-1} \Gamma(x) &\ \text{for $1 \leq \abs{x} \leq R$}\\
        0 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} > R$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[ht]
    \begin{center}
        \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./media/fig_delta.pdf}
        \caption{$n=2$, $\beta=3$ and $R=2$}
    \end{center}
\end{figure}

An integration by parts combined with the Dirichlet condition $u=1$ on $\partial B_1$ and the Robin condition $-\partial_r u = \beta u$ on $\partial B_R$ shows that
\begin{equation}
    \int_{B_R \setminus B_1} \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{\partial B_R} \! u^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1} = \beta \int_{\partial B_R} \! u \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1}.
\end{equation}
We conclude that the energy of $u$ is
\begin{equation}
    E = n \omega_n \beta R^{n-1} \delta(R) + \omega_n \gamma^2 R^n.
\end{equation}
Now, we consider $E$ as functions of $R \in [1,+\infty[$ that we try to optimize.
We observe that $n \omega_n R^{n-1} \beta \delta(R)$ is the flux of the vector field $x \mapsto \beta \delta(r) e_r$ through $\partial B_R$.
We compute
\begin{align}
    \mathrm{div}(\delta(r) e_r) &= \delta'(r) + \frac{(n-1)}{r}\delta(r)\\
                                &= - \left(\beta - \frac{(n-1)}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2\label{div_delta}
\end{align}
so
\begin{equation}
    E(R) = E(1) + \int_{B_R \setminus B_1} \! \left[\gamma^2 - \left(\beta^2 - \frac{(n-1) \beta}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2\right] \,\mathrm{d} x,
\end{equation}
where $r$ means $\abs{x}$.
This shows in particular that
\begin{equation}\label{eq_Eprime}
    E'(R) = n \omega_n R^{n-1} \left[\gamma^2 - \left(\beta^2 - \frac{(n-1) \beta}{R}\right) \delta(R)^2\right].
\end{equation}
The critical radii $R > 1$ are characterised by the equations
\begin{equation}
    \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{R}\right) \delta(R)^2 = \gamma^2.
\end{equation}
\begin{rmk}
    As expected, this coincides with the second Euler-Lagrange equation
    \begin{equation}\label{euler2}
        \abs{\nabla u}^2 + \gamma^2 + \beta u^2(H - 2 \beta) = 0
    \end{equation}
    where $H=(n-1) R^{-1}$ is the mean scalar curvature of $\partial B_R$ with respect to $-e_r$ (see~\cite[Definition 7.32]{Ambrosio}, not to be confused with the arithmetic mean of the principal curvatures which is equal to $R^{-1}$).
    A proof of this formula for $C^{1,\alpha}$ surfaces is presented in~\cite[Theorem 15.1]{K}.
\end{rmk}
Depending on the parameters $\beta$, $\gamma$, the function $R \mapsto E(R)$ may not be convex and the condition $E'(R) = 0$ may not suffice to characterize minimizers. See Figure~\ref{fig_E}.

\begin{figure}[ht]
    \begin{center}
        \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{./media/fig_E.pdf}\label{fig_E}
        \caption{$n=2$, $\beta =1$ and $\gamma = 0.34$}
    \end{center}
\end{figure}

\subsubsection{Three sufficient conditions of minimality}

An sufficient condition for $\mathbf{1}_{B(0,1)}$ to be a minimizer is that the function $r \mapsto E(r)$ is non-decreasing on $[1,+\infty[$.
This is equivalent to the fact that for all $r \geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{E_increasing}
    \left(\beta^2 - \frac{(n-1) \beta}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2 \leq \gamma^2.
\end{equation}
In particular, it suffices that $\beta \leq \gamma$.
In the two next theorems, we generalize the sufficient conditions $\beta \leq \gamma$ and (\ref{E_increasing}) to other domains.

\begin{thm}\label{thm_indicator1}
    Let $\Omega$ be a $C^1$ bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ and assume that its outward unit normal vector field has a continuous extension on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ such that $\abs{\nu} \leq 1$ and which is divergence-free on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
    If $\beta \leq \gamma$, then $\mathbf{1}_{\Omega}$ is calibrated.
\end{thm}

\begin{rmk}
If $\Omega$ is a $C^2$ bounded open convex of $\mathbf{R}^2$, the assumption holds true (\cite[Proposition 15]{C4}). 
\end{rmk}

Before stating the second theorem, we generalize the previous function $\Gamma$ to other domains $\Omega$.
The proof of the next Lemma is postponed in Appendix because this is not a new result.
\begin{lem}\label{lem_potential}
    Let $\Omega$ be a non-empty $C^2$ star-shaped bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$.
    There exists a continuous function $\Gamma \colon \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega \to \mathbf{R}$ such that
    \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
        \item $\Gamma$ is harmonic positive on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$;
        \item $\Gamma = 0$ on $\partial \Omega$,
        \item For all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$, $\nabla \Gamma(x) \ne 0$
        \item $\Gamma$ has a $C^1$ extension up to the boundary and for all $x \in \partial \Omega$, there exists $t > 0$ such that $\nabla \Gamma(x) = t \nu(x)$, where $\nu(x)$ is the outward unit normal vector of $\Omega$ at $x$.
    \end{enumerate}
\end{lem}

\begin{thm}\label{thm_indicator2}
    Let $\Omega$ be a non-empty $C^2$ star-shaped bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ and let $\Gamma$ be a function as in Lemma~\ref{lem_potential} (modulo a positive multiplicative constant).
    We define for $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$,
    \begin{equation}
        \nu(x) = \frac{\nabla \Gamma}{\abs{\nabla \Gamma}} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \delta(x) = \frac{1}{1+\beta \abs{\nabla \Gamma}^{-1} \Gamma}
    \end{equation}
    and we assume that $\mathrm{div}(\nu)$ is bounded.
    If for all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$,
    \begin{equation}
        \left(\beta^2 - \beta \mathrm{div}(\nu)\right) \delta^2 \leq \gamma^2,
    \end{equation}
    then $\mathbf{1}_{\Omega}$ is calibrated.
\end{thm}

Finally, we come back to $\Omega = B(0,1)$ and the notations of section~\ref{section_B1}. In particular, we refer to (\ref{def_gamma}) and (\ref{def_delta}) for the definition of $\Gamma$ and $\delta$. We are going to see that if $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$, the Euler-Lagrange equations characterize minimizers. In view of the formula
\begin{equation}
    E'(r) = n \omega_n r^{n-1} \left[\gamma^2 - \left(\beta^2 - \frac{(n-1) \beta}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2\right],
\end{equation}
it suffices to show that the function
\begin{equation}
    r \mapsto -\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2
\end{equation}
is increasing on $[1+\infty[$.
We write
\begin{equation}
    -\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \delta(r) = -\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \frac{(r^{n-1}\delta(r))^2}{r^{2n-2}}.
\end{equation}
If $\beta \geq n - 1$, the function $r \mapsto r^{n-1} \delta(r)$ is decreasing on $[1,+\infty[$ because
\begin{equation}
    (r^{n-1} \delta)' = - r^{n-1} \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2.
\end{equation}
If $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$, the function $r \mapsto -\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \frac{1}{r^{2n-2}}$ is increasing on $[1,+\infty[$ because
    \begin{equation}
        \left[\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \frac{1}{r^{2n-2}}\right]' = -2\frac{(n-1)}{r^{2n-1}} \left(\beta - \frac{n-\tfrac{1}{2}}{r}\right)
    \end{equation}
This proves our claim. In the next theorem, we build a calibration corresponding to this criteria.




\begin{thm}\label{thm_u}
    Let $\Omega$ be the open ball $B(0,1)$.
    We assume that $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$ and that there exists $R \geq 1$ such that
    \begin{equation}
        \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{R}\right)\delta(R)^2 = \gamma^2,
    \end{equation}
    Then the function
    \begin{equation}\label{def_u2}
        u(x)=
        \begin{cases}
            1 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} \leq 1$}\\
            1 - \beta \delta(R) R^{n-1} \Gamma(x) &\ \text{for $1 \leq \abs{x} \leq R$}\\
            0 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} > R$},
        \end{cases}
    \end{equation}
    is calibrated.
\end{thm}

\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm_indicator1}}\label{idea1}

Let $\Omega$ be a $C^1$ bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ (we will add more assumptions as we advance in the construction).
We want to build a calibration for $\mathbf{1}_{\Omega}$.
First, we search for a continuous function $\phi^x \colon (\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega) \times [0,1] \to \mathbf{R}^n$ such that
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
    \item for all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$, $\phi^x(x,0) = 0$;
    \item for all $x \in \partial \Omega$,
        \begin{equation}
            \int_0^1 \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = -\beta \nu(x),
        \end{equation}
        where $\nu$ is the outward unit normal vector field of $\Omega$;
    \item for all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ and for all $0 \leq r \leq s \leq 1$,
        \begin{equation}
            \abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,u) \,\mathrm{d} u} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2).
        \end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
A simple starting point is to define for $x \in \partial \Omega$ and $0 \leq t \leq 1$, $\phi^x = - 2 \beta t \nu(x)$.
Let us assume that $\nu$ has a continuous extension on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ such that $\abs{\nu} \leq 1$.
Then we can extend $\phi^x$ on $(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega) \times [0,1]$ with the formula
\begin{equation}
    \phi^x(x,t) = -2\beta t \nu(x).
\end{equation}
It is clear that that for all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ and for all $r < s$, we have $\abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x} \leq \beta (r^2 + s^2)$ because $\abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \leq 2 \beta t$.
Let us assume furthermore that $\nu$ is divergence-free on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
The function $\phi^t$ is derived by the conditions $\mathrm{div}(\phi) = 0$ and $\phi^t(x,0) = 0$ for $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
This yields simply
\begin{equation}
    \phi^t(x,t) = 0.
\end{equation}
Finally, the condition $\phi^t \geq \frac{1}{4} \abs{\phi^x}^2 - \gamma^2 \mathbf{1}_{]0,1]}(t)$ amounts to
\begin{equation}
    \beta \abs{\nu} \leq \gamma
\end{equation}
and this requires $\beta \leq \gamma$.

\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm_indicator2}}\label{idea2}

Let $\Omega$ be a $C^1$ bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ (we will add more assumptions as we advance in the construction).
We are more careful than in the previous section and we define $\phi$ in two pieces.
However, we still arrange $\phi$ so that it is globally continuous.

The principle is the same as before.
We denote by $\nu$ the outward unit normal vector field of $\Omega$.
The starting point is to define for $x \in \partial \Omega$ and $0 \leq t \leq 1$, $\phi^x(x,t) = -2\beta t \nu(x)$.
Then we extend $\phi^x$ and we derive $\phi^t$ by the conditions $\partial_t \phi^t = - \mathrm{div}_x(\phi^x)$ and $\phi^t(x,0) = 0$ for $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.

We assume that $\nu$ has a continuous extension on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ such that $\abs{\nu} \leq 1$ and $\nu$ is $C^1$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
We also consider a continuous function $\delta \colon \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega \to [0,1]$ such that $\delta = 1$ on $\partial \Omega$, $0 < \delta < 1$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ and $\delta$ is $C^1$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
    \begin{center}
        \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./media/fig_omega.pdf}
    \end{center}
\end{figure}
We define for $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ and $0 \leq t \leq \delta(x)$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x &= -2 \beta t \nu\\
    \phi^t &= \beta t^2 \mathrm{div}(\nu)
\end{align}
and for $\delta(x) < t \leq 1$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x &= -2 (1-t) \frac{\beta \delta \nu}{1-\delta}\\
    \phi^t &= -(1-t)^2 \mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\beta \delta \nu}{1-\delta}\right) - C(x)
\end{align}
where $C(x)$ will be chosen so that $\phi$ is continuous on $(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}) \times [0,1]$.
Note that this is already the case for $\phi^x$.
We find
\begin{equation}
    C(x) = - (1-\delta)^2 \mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\beta \delta \nu}{1-\delta}\right) -\beta \delta^2 \mathrm{div}(\nu).
\end{equation}
However we compute
\begin{equation}\label{div_computation}
    \mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\delta \nu}{1-\delta}\right) = \frac{\mathrm{div}(\delta \nu) - \delta^2 \mathrm{div}(\nu)}{(1-\delta)^2}
\end{equation}
so this simplifies to $C(x) = -\beta \mathrm{div}(\delta \nu)$.
With regard to approximate regularity, the definition of $\phi^t$ on $\partial \Omega \times [0,1]$ does not matter.
Indeed, let $M$ be an hypersurface of $\mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}$.
Then for $\mathcal{H}^n$-a.e.\ $(x_0,t_0) \in M \cap (\partial \Omega \times [0,1])$, the vector $n_0 = (\nu(x_0),0)$ is a normal vector to $M$ at $x$ and $\phi \cdot n_0 = \phi^x$.
In order for $\phi$ to be bounded, it suffices that $\mathrm{div}(\nu)$ and $\mathrm{div}(\delta \nu)$ are bounded.
Finally, the condition $\phi^t \geq \frac{1}{4} \abs{\phi^x}^2 - \gamma^2 \mathbf{1}_{]0,1]}(t)$ amounts to
\begin{subequations}\label{idea2_conditions}
    \begin{align}
        \left(\beta^2 \abs{\nu}^2 - \beta \mathrm{div}(\nu)\right) \delta^2 &\leq \gamma^2\label{sigma1}\\
        - \beta \mathrm{div}(\delta \nu)                                    &\leq \gamma^2\label{sigma2}.
    \end{align}
\end{subequations}
It is tempting to choose $\delta$ and $\nu$ in such a way that
\begin{equation}\label{equal_conditions}
    \left(\beta^2 \abs{\nu}^2 - \beta \mathrm{div}(\nu)\right) \delta^2 = - \beta \mathrm{div}(\delta \nu).
\end{equation}
In that case, $\mathrm{div}(\delta \nu)$ is bounded provided that $\mathrm{div}(\nu)$ is bounded.
According to (\ref{div_computation}), the equality (\ref{equal_conditions}) is equivalent to
\begin{equation}
    \left(\frac{\beta \abs{\delta \nu}}{1-\delta}\right)^2 = -\mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\beta \delta \nu}{1-\delta}\right)
\end{equation}
A natural solution is to assume that $\Omega$ is $C^2$ star-shaped, to consider the function $\Gamma$ of Lemma~\ref{lem_potential} and to choose $\delta$, $\nu$ in such a way that
\begin{equation}
    \frac{\beta \delta \nu}{1-\delta} = \frac{\nabla \Gamma}{\Gamma}.
\end{equation}
We suggest to define
\begin{equation}
    \nu(x) = \frac{\nabla \Gamma}{\abs{\nabla \Gamma}}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
    \delta(x) = \frac{1}{1+\beta \abs{\nabla \Gamma}^{-1} \Gamma}.
\end{equation}
In conclusion, the conditions (\ref{idea2_conditions}) simplify to
\begin{equation}
    \left(\beta^2 - \beta \mathrm{div}(\nu)\right) \delta^2 \leq \gamma^2.
\end{equation}

\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm_u}}\label{idea3}

Let $\Omega$ be the open ball $B(0,1)$.
We assume that $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$ and that there exists $R \geq 1$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq_EL}
    \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{r}\right)\delta(r)^2 = \gamma^2,
\end{equation}
We have seen just before the statement of~\ref{thm_u} that when $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$, the function
\begin{equation}
    r \mapsto -\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2
\end{equation}
is increasing on $[1,+\infty[$. Therefore, (\ref{eq_EL}) implies that for all $r \geq R$,
\begin{equation}
    \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{r}\right)\delta(r)^2 \leq \gamma^2,
\end{equation}
The case $R = 1$ has already been dealt with in Theorem~\ref{thm_indicator2} so we can assume $R > 1$.

We recall the notations.
Given $x \in \mathbf{R}^n$, we write $r$ for $\abs{x}$.
We define for $r \geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{def_gamma2}
    \Gamma(r) =
    \begin{cases}
        r-1                         &\ \text{if $n=1$}\\
        \ln(r)                      &\ \text{if $n=2$}\\
        \frac{1}{n-2}(1-r^{2-n})    &\ \text{if $n \geq 3$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
    \delta(r) = \frac{1}{1+\beta r^{n-1} \Gamma(r)}.
\end{equation}
We define for $x \in \mathbf{R}^n$,
\begin{equation}
    u(x)=
    \begin{cases}
        1 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} \leq 1$}\\
        1 - \beta \delta(R) R^{n-1} \Gamma(r) &\ \text{for $1 \leq \abs{x} \leq R$}\\
        0 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} > R$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
For $r \geq 0$, we write $u(r)$ for the value of $u$ on $\partial B_r$.
Thus, we consider $u$ as a function of the real variable $r \in [0,+\infty[$.
Now, we list a few useful formulas.
For $1 < \abs{x} < R$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{formula_nabla}
    \nabla u = - \beta \delta(R) \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} e_r
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{formula_div}
    \frac{\nabla u}{1-u} = - \frac{\beta \delta}{1-\delta} e_r = - \frac{1}{r^{n-1} \Gamma(r)} e_r.
\end{equation}
With a slight abuse of notations, we consider that $\nabla u$ is defined on $1 \leq \abs{x} \leq R$ by (\ref{formula_nabla}).
We observe that
\begin{equation}
    \mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\nabla u}{1-u}\right) = \left(\frac{\abs{\nabla u}}{1-u}\right)^2.
\end{equation}
or equivalently
\begin{equation}
    -\mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\beta \delta e_r}{1-\delta}\right) = \left(\frac{\beta \delta}{1-\delta}\right)^2.\label{div_delta2}
\end{equation}
According to (\ref{div_computation}), the line (\ref{div_delta2}) is also equivalent to
\begin{equation}
    -\beta\mathrm{div}(\delta e_r) = \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{r}\right)\delta(r)^2.
\end{equation}

We are going to define the calibration.
Although we define $\phi^x$ and $\phi^t$ in parallel, the relevant part is really $\phi^x$.
The function $\phi^t$ is derived by the axioms of calibrations.
We consider a continuous function $\rho \colon [1,R] \to \mathbf{R}$ such that $\delta(R) \leq \rho \leq u$ and which is $C^1$ on $[1,R[$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
    \begin{center}
        \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./media/fig_phi4.pdf}
       
    \end{center}
\end{figure}

We fix $x$ such that $1 \leq \abs{x} \leq R$.
We define for $0 \leq t \leq \delta(R)$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x &= -2 \beta t e_r\\
    \phi^t &= \frac{(n-1)\beta t^2}{r},
\end{align}
for $\delta(R) \leq t < \rho(r)$
\begin{align}
    \phi^x &= -2 \beta \delta(R) e_r\\
    \phi^t &= \frac{2 (n-1) \beta \delta(R) t}{r} - \frac{(n-1) \beta \delta(R)^2}{r}
\end{align}
for $\rho(r) < t \leq u(r)$
\begin{align}
    \phi^x(x,t) &= 2 \nabla u\\
                &= -2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} e_r\\
    \phi^t(x,t) &= \abs{\nabla u}^2 - \gamma^2\\
                &= \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} - \gamma^2
\end{align}
and for $u(r) \leq t \leq 1$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x(x,t) &= 2 (1-t) \frac{\nabla u}{1-u}\\
                &=-2 (1-t) \frac{\beta \delta e_r}{1-\delta}\\
    \phi^t(x,t) &= (1-t)^2 \left(\frac{\abs{\nabla u}}{1-u}\right)^2 - \gamma^2\\
                &= (1-t)^2 \left(\frac{\beta \delta}{1-\delta}\right)^2 - \gamma^2
\end{align}
Next, we fix $x$ such that $\abs{x} \geq R$ and we use the same formula as in Section~\ref{idea2}.
We define for $t \leq \delta(r)$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x &= -2 \beta t e_r\\
    \phi^t &= \frac{(n-1) \beta t^2}{r}
\end{align}
and for $t \geq \delta(r)$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x(x,t) &= -2 (1-t) \frac{\beta \delta e_r}{1-\delta}\\
    \phi^t(x,t) &= (1-t)^2 \left(\frac{\beta \delta}{1-\delta}\right)^2 - \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta (n-1)}{r}\right) \delta^2
\end{align}
When $n = 1$, the function $\rho$ is given by the constant $\delta(R)$. When $n \geq 2$, it is given by the following complicated formula that the reader can ignore for the moment,
\begin{multline}
    \rho(r)  = \frac{\delta(R)}{2} + \frac{\beta \delta(R) r}{2} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right)\\ - \frac{\delta(R) r}{2n}\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{R}\right) \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right).
\end{multline}
Regardless of $\rho$, many properties can be checked.
The vector field $\phi$ is bounded.
It is continuous outside the graph
\begin{equation}
    \set{(x,t) | t=\rho(r),\ 1 \leq r < R}.
\end{equation}
We point out that it is continuous through $\abs{x} = R$ because
\begin{equation}
    \gamma^2 = \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{R}\right) \delta(R)^2
\end{equation}
and because for $\abs{x} = R$, $\nabla u(x) = -\beta \delta(R) e_r$.
The function $\phi$ is divergence free in the interior of each part.
In order for $\phi$ to be divergence-free in $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ (in the sense of distributions), we have to choose $\rho$ in such a way that for all $1 < \abs{x} < R$
\begin{equation}
    \phi(x,\rho(r)^-)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        - \rho'(r) e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}
    =
    \phi(x,\rho(r)^+)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        - \rho'(r) e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
This will imply that $\phi$ is approximately regular on $(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}) \times [0,1]$ by~\cite[Remark 2.6]{Alberti}.
Next, we are going to deal with the the approximately regularity of $\phi$ on on $\partial \Omega \times [0,1]$ as in the previous section.
Let $M$ be an hypersurface of $\mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}$.
For $\mathcal{H}^n$-a.e.\ $(x_0,t_0) \in M \cap (\partial \Omega \times [0,1])$, we have $t_0 \ne \rho(x_0)$ and the vector $n_0 = (\nu(x_0),0)$ is a normal vector to $M$ at $x$.
Thus $\phi \cdot n_0 = \phi^x$ and we conclude by continuity of $\phi^x$ in an neighborhood of $(x_0,t_0)$.

We check the values of $\phi(x,u(x))$. It is clear from the construction that for $1 < \abs{x} < R$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x(x,u) &= 2 \nabla u\\
    \phi^t(x,u) &= \abs{\nabla u}^2 - \gamma^2,
\end{align}
that for $\abs{x} > R$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x(x,u) &= 0 = 2 \nabla u\\
    \phi^t(x,u) &= 0 = \abs{\nabla u}^2
\end{align}
and that for $\abs{x} = R$,
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^{\delta(R)} \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta \delta(R)^2.
\end{equation}
The condition $\phi^t \geq \tfrac{1}{4}\abs{\phi^x}^2 - \gamma^2 \mathbf{1}_{]0,1]}(t)$ holds true because for every $r \geq R$,
\begin{equation}
    \gamma^2 \geq \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2.
\end{equation}
It is left to compute $\rho$ and to check that $\abs{\int_s^t \! \phi^x} \leq \beta(s^2 + t^2)$.

We recall that we are looking for a continuous function $\rho \colon [1,R] \to [0,1]$ such that $\delta(R) \leq \rho \leq u$, which is $C^1$ in $[1,R[$ and such that for $1 < \abs{x} < R$,
\begin{equation}\label{phi_computations}
    \phi(x,\rho(r)^-)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        - \rho'(r) e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}
    =
    \phi(x,\rho(r)^+)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        -\rho'(r) e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
When $n=1$, we can take $\rho$ equals to the constant $\delta(R)$. In this case, one can check that $\phi$ is continuous on $\left(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega\right) \times [0,1]$ and $\abs{\phi^x} \leq 2 \beta t$ so (\ref{phi_computations} and $\abs{\int_r^s \phi^x} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2)$ hold true.
We detail the computation of (\ref{phi_computations}) for $n \geq 2$.
It will be convenient to express the result in divergence form.
We compute
\begin{align}
    \phi(x,\rho^-)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        - \rho' e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}
    &=2 \beta \delta(R) \rho' + \frac{2 (n-1) \beta \delta(R) \rho}{r} - \frac{(n-1) \beta \delta(R)^2}{r}\\
    &= 2 \beta \delta(R) \mathrm{div}(\rho e_r) - \beta \delta(R)^2 \mathrm{div}(e_r)
\end{align}
Next, we compute
\begin{align}
    \phi(x,\rho^+)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        -\rho' e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}
    &=2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \rho' + \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} - \gamma^2\\
    \begin{split}
    &= 2 \beta \delta(R) R^{n-1} \mathrm{div}\left(r^{1-n} \rho e_r\right)\\
    &\pushright{\qquad + \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 R^{2n-2} \mathrm{div}\left(r^{1-n} \Gamma(r) e_r\right) - \gamma^2}
    \end{split}
\end{align}
and we observe that we can write
\begin{equation}
    \gamma^2 = \mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\gamma^2 r}{n} e_r + \frac{c}{r^{n-1}} e_r\right)
\end{equation}
where $c$ is any real constant.
A natural solution is to choose $\rho$ such that
\begin{multline}
    2 \beta \delta(R) \rho - \beta \delta(R)^2\\ = 2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \rho + \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 R^{n-1} \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \Gamma(r) - \frac{\gamma^2 r}{n} + \frac{c}{r^{n-1}}.
\end{multline}
We rewrite this
\begin{multline}
    2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1\right)\rho  = -\beta \delta(R)^2 - \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 R^{n-1} \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \Gamma(r)\\ + \frac{\gamma^2 r}{n} - \frac{c}{r^{n-1}}.
\end{multline}
We choose $c$ in such a way that the left-hand side cancels at $r=R$ (otherwise $\rho$ would have a singularity at $r=R$).
This yields
\begin{multline}
    2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1\right)\rho  = \beta \delta(R)^2 \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}-1\right) \\ + \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 R^{n-1} \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} (\Gamma(R) - \Gamma(r)) - \frac{\gamma^2 r}{n} \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1\right).
\end{multline}
Remember that $\Gamma(R) - \Gamma(r) = r^{2-n} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)$ so
\begin{multline}
    2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1\right)\rho  = \beta \delta(R)^2 \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}-1\right) \\ + \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 r \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right) - \frac{\gamma^2 r}{n} \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1\right).
\end{multline}
We conclude that
\begin{equation}
    \rho(r)  = \frac{\delta(R)}{2} + \frac{\beta \delta(R) r}{2} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right) - \frac{\gamma^2 r}{2n\beta \delta(R)} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right).
\end{equation}
As $\gamma^2 = \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{R}\right) \delta(R)^2$, an alternative expression is
\begin{multline}\label{eq_rho}
    \rho(r)  = \frac{\delta(R)}{2} + \frac{\beta \delta(R) r}{2} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right)\\ - \frac{\delta(R) r}{2n}\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{R}\right) \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right).
\end{multline}
It is clear that $\rho$ is a continuous function of $r \in ]1,R[$ and we also have $\lim_{r \to R} \rho(r) = \delta(R)$ because
\begin{equation}
    \lim_{t \to 1^+} \frac{\Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1} = \frac{1}{n-1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
    \lim_{t \to 1^+} \frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1} = \frac{n}{n-1}.
\end{equation}

We show that $\rho \geq \delta(R)$.
It suffices to show that $\rho$ is decreasing on $[1,R[$.
For $0 \leq r < R$, we write $t = \tfrac{R}{r}$ so that
\begin{multline}
    \rho(r)  = \frac{\delta(R)}{2} + \frac{\beta \delta(R) R t^{n-2}}{2} \left(\frac{t^{n-1}\Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right)\\ - \frac{\delta(R)}{2n}\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{R}\right) t^{-1} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right).
\end{multline}
According to Lemma~\ref{lem_gamma}, the function $t \mapsto \left(\frac{t^{n-1}\Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right)$ is increasing on $]1,+\infty[$.
It is also easy to see that the function $t^{-1} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right)$ is decreasing on $]1,+\infty[$ because
\begin{equation}
    t^{-1} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right) = 1 + t^{-1} \frac{t - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}
\end{equation}
and $t \mapsto t^{n-1}$ is convex.
We deduce that $r \mapsto \rho(r)$ is decreasing on $[1,R[$.

Next, we show that for all $1 \leq r < R$, we have $\rho(r) \leq u(r)$.
Remember that
\begin{equation}
    u   = \delta(R)\left[1 + \beta r \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)\right]
\end{equation}
so we have to show that for all $1 \leq r < R$,
\begin{multline}
    \beta r \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right)\\ - \frac{r}{n}\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{R}\right) \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right) \leq 1 + 2\beta r \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)
\end{multline}
We rewrite this,
\begin{multline}
    \beta r \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right) \left(2 - \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}\right) \\ - \frac{\beta r}{n} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right) \leq 1 -  \frac{n-1}{n}\frac{r}{R} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right).
\end{multline}
It suffices to check that for all $t > 1$,
\begin{align}
    \beta \left(\frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right) \left(2 - t^{n-1}\right) - \frac{\beta}{n} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right) &\leq 0\\
    1 -  \frac{n-1}{n} t^{-1} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right) &\geq 0.
\end{align}
The first point can be simplified as
\begin{equation}
    \left(\frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n} - 1}\right) \left(2 - t^{n-1}\right) \leq \frac{1}{n}
\end{equation}
and this follows from Lemma~\ref{lem_gamma}.
To prove the second point, we observe that $t \mapsto t^{-1} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right)$ is decreasing and that its limit when $t \to 1$ is $\frac{n}{n-1}$.

We finally prove that for all $\abs{x} \geq 1$ and for all $r,s \in [0,1]$, we have $\abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2)$. Since $\phi^x = - \abs{\phi^x} e_r$, it amounts to show that for all $\abs{x} \geq 1$ and for all $s \in [0,1]$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq_int_phix}
    \int_0^s \! \abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta s^2.
\end{equation}
If $\abs{x} \geq R$, inequality (\ref{eq_int_phix}) holds true for all $s \in [0,1]$ because we have $\abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \leq 2 \beta t$ for all $t \in [0,1]$.
Now, we fix $1 \leq \abs{x} < R$ and as usual, we write $r$ for $\abs{x}$.
Inequality (\ref{eq_int_phix}) holds true for all $s \in [0,\rho(r)]$ because we have $\abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \leq 2 \beta t$ for all $t \in [0,\rho(r)]$.
Next, we estimate for $t \in [\rho(r),1]$,
\begin{equation}
    \abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \leq 2 \abs{\nabla u(x)} = 2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}
\end{equation}
whence for $s \in [\rho(r),1]$,
\begin{multline}
    \beta s^2 - \int_0^s \! \abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \,\mathrm{d} t \geq \beta s^2 - \beta \delta(R)^2\\ - 2 \beta \delta(R) (\rho(r) - \delta(R)) - 2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} (s - \rho(r)).
\end{multline}
The right hand side function attains its minimum over $s \in \mathbf{R}$ at $s = \delta(R) \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}$ and its corresponding value is 
\begin{equation}
    2 \beta \delta(R) \rho \left[\left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1\right] - \beta \delta(R)^2 \left[\left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} - 1\right].
\end{equation}
It is non-negative if and only if
\begin{equation}
    \rho(r) \geq \frac{\delta(R)}{2} \left[\left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} + 1\right].
\end{equation}
and given the formula (\ref{eq_rho}) of $\rho$, this means
\begin{multline}
\beta r \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right)\\ - \frac{r}{n}\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{R}\right) \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right) \geq \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}.
\end{multline}
We rewrite this,
\begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate0}
\beta r \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right) }{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n} - 1} - \frac{1}{n}\right) \geq \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n} - 1}\right) - \frac{n-1}{n} \frac{r}{R}.
\end{equation}
We see first that the left-hand side is non-negative. Indeed, for all $t \geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate00}
    \Gamma(t) \geq \frac{1}{n-1} \frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n-1}} \geq \frac{1}{n} \frac{t^n - 1}{t^n},
\end{equation}
where the first inequality comes from Lemma~\ref{lem_gamma} and the second one comes from the fact that whenever $\alpha > \beta > 0$ and $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \frac{1}{\beta} t^{\alpha -\beta} (t^\beta - 1) \geq \frac{1}{\alpha} (t^\alpha - 1).
    \end{equation}
Then, (\ref{eq_gamma_estimate0}) is equivalent to the fact that for all $t > 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate01}
    \beta \left(\frac{t^{2n-2} \Gamma(t)}{t^n - 1} - \frac{1}{n}\right) \geq t^{n-1} \left(\frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n} - 1}\right) - \frac{n-1}{n} t^{-1}
\end{equation}
The inequality holds true if $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$ by the last point of Lemma~\ref{lem_gamma}. In fact, it is necessary for $\beta$ to be greater than or equal to $n - \tfrac{1}{2}$ because dividing the left-hand side by $t - 1$ and taking the limit $t \to 1^+$ yields the value $\frac{n-1}{n} \beta$ whereas the same operation at the right-hand side yields $\frac{n-1}{n} \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right)$. We leave the details to the interested reader.

\begin{appendices}

\section{The function \texorpdfstring{$\Gamma$}{}}\label{appendix_gamma}

We recall and prove Lemma~\ref{lem_potential}. 

\begin{lem
    Let $\Omega$ be a non-empty $C^2$ star-shaped bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$.
    There exists a continuous function $\Gamma \colon \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega \to \mathbf{R}$ such that
    \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
        \item $\Gamma$ is harmonic positive on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$;
        \item $\Gamma = 0$ on $\partial \Omega$,
        \item For all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$, $\nabla \Gamma(x) \ne 0$
        \item $\Gamma$ has a $C^1$ extension up to the boundary and for all $x \in \partial \Omega$, there exists $t > 0$ such that $\nabla \Gamma(x) = t \nu(x)$, where $\nu(x)$ is the outward unit normal vector of $\Omega$ at $x$.
    \end{enumerate}
\end{lem}

\begin{proof}
   
   
   
   
    Without loss of generality, we assume that $0 \in \Omega$ and that $\Omega$ is star-shaped with respect to $0$.
    We detail the case $n \geq 3$.
    According to~\cite[Section 3A, Theorem 3.40]{Fo}, there exists a unique function $p \in C(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega)$ such that
    \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
        \item $p$ is harmonic on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$,
        \item $p$ is harmonic at infinity,
        \item $p=1$ on $\partial \Omega$.
    \end{enumerate}
   
   
   
   
   
    We refer to~\cite[Proposition 2.74]{Fo} for the characterisations of functions which are harmonic at infinity.
    Now we define $\Gamma(x) = 1 - p(x)$ and we review the properties of the Lemma.
    It is clear that $\Gamma$ is harmonic on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ and $\Gamma = 0$ on $\partial \Omega$.
    As $p$ is harmonic at infinity, we have $\lim_{x \to \infty} p(x) = 0$ and thus $\lim_{x \to +\infty} \Gamma(x) = 1$.
    We can then apply the maximum principle to see that $\Gamma > 0$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
    The function $\Gamma$ has a $C^1$ extension up to the boundary thanks to the usual regularity results for Dirichlet problems.
    As $\Gamma$ is constant on $\partial \Omega$, its tangential derivative is $0$ along $\partial \Omega$.
    And according to the Hopf Lemma, the normal derivative (with respect to the outward normal vector) is $> 0$ along $\partial \Omega$.
    This proves that for all $x \in \partial \Omega$, there exists $t > 0$ such that $\nabla \Gamma(x) = t \nu(x)$.
    The fact that $\nabla \Gamma$ never vanishes comes from the fact that $\Omega$ is star-shaped.
    Indeed, the function $w \colon x \mapsto x \cdot \nabla \Gamma(x)$ is harmonic on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ and $\geq 0$ on $\partial \Omega$.
    In addition, we see that $\lim_{x \to +\infty} w(x) = 0$ by applying~\cite[Proposition 2.75]{Fo} to the function $p$.
    We can use the maximum principle to conclude that $w > 0$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$

    In the case $n=2$, we define $p$ as the unique function $p \in C(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega)$ such that
    \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
        \item $p$ is harmonic on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$,
        \item $p$ is harmonic at infinity,
        \item $p(x)=\ln(\abs{x})$ on $\partial \Omega$.
    \end{enumerate}Then we define $\Gamma = \ln(\abs{x}) - p$.
    As $p$ is harmonic at infinity, it is bounded at infinity and thus $\lim_{x \to +\infty} \Gamma(x) = +\infty$.
    The rest of the proof is the same except that $\lim_{x \to +\infty} x \cdot \nabla \Gamma(x) = 1$.
    The case $n=1$ is trivial.
\end{proof}

In the case of the unit ball $\Omega = B(0,1)$, the function $\Gamma$ is given by 
\begin{equation}\label{def_gamma3}
    \Gamma(r) =
    \begin{cases}
        r-1                         &\ \text{if $n=1$}\\
        \ln(r)                      &\ \text{if $n=2$}\\
        \frac{1}{n-2}(1-r^{2-n})    &\ \text{if $n \geq 3$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
We isolate a few useful estimates about this function in the following Lemma.

\begin{lem}\label{lem_gamma}
    Let $n$ be an integer $\geq 2$ and let $\Gamma$ be defined as in (\ref{def_gamma3}).
    \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
        \item For all $s, t \geq 1$, $\Gamma(t) - \Gamma(s) = s^{2-n} \Gamma\left(\frac{t}{s}\right)$.
        \item The function
            \begin{equation}
                t \mapsto \frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1}
            \end{equation}
            is increasing on $]1,+\infty[$.
        \item For all $t \geq 1$,
            \begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate}
                \frac{1}{n-1} \frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n-1}} \leq \Gamma(t) \leq \frac{1}{n} \frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1}}.
            \end{equation}
        \item For all $t > 1$,
            \begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate2}
                \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right) \left(\frac{t^{2n-2} \Gamma(t)}{t^n - 1} - \frac{1}{n}\right) \geq t^{n-1} \left(\frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n} - 1}\right) - \frac{n-1}{n} t^{-1}
            \end{equation}
    \end{enumerate}
\end{lem}

\begin{proof}
    The first point is easy and we pass directly to the second one.
    If $n = 2$, the function
    \begin{equation}
        t \mapsto \frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1} = \frac{t \ln(t)}{t-1}
    \end{equation}
    is increasing because $t \mapsto t \ln(t)$ is convex. If $n \geq 3$, the function
    \begin{equation}
        t \mapsto \frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1} = \frac{1}{n-2} \frac{t^{n-1} - t}{t^{n-1} - 1}
    \end{equation}
    is increasing because
    \begin{equation}
        \frac{t^{n-1} - t}{t^{n-1} - 1} = 1 - \frac{t-1}{t^{n-1} - 1}
    \end{equation}
    and $t \mapsto t^{n-1}$ is convex. Since $\lim_{t \to 1} \frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1} = \frac{1}{n - 1}$,
    we also deduce that for all $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \Gamma(t) \geq \frac{1}{n-1} \frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n-1}}.
    \end{equation}
    Next, we prove that for all $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \Gamma(t) \leq \frac{1}{n} \frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1}}.
    \end{equation}
    We rewrite this condition
    \begin{equation}
        n t^{n-1} \Gamma(t) \leq t^n - 1
    \end{equation}
    and since both sides equals $0$ at $t = 1$, it suffices to show that the derivative of the left-hand side is greater than or equal to the derivative of the left-hand side on $[1,+\infty[$. We are thus led to show that for all $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        n(n-1) t^{n-2} \Gamma(t) + n \leq n t^{n-1},
    \end{equation}
    that is
    \begin{equation}
        \Gamma(t) \leq \frac{1}{n-1} \frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n-2}}.
    \end{equation}
    When $n = 2$, this comes from the concavity of $t \mapsto \ln(t)$. When $n \geq 3$, this comes from the fact that whenever $\alpha > \beta > 0$ and $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \beta^{-1}(t^\beta - 1) \leq \alpha^{-1}(t^\alpha - 1).
    \end{equation}
    We finally show that for all $t > 1$,
    \begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate3}
        \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right) \left(\frac{t^{2n-2} \Gamma(t)}{t^n - 1} - \frac{1}{n}\right) \geq t^{n-1} \left(\frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n} - 1}\right) - \frac{n-1}{n} t^{-1}.
    \end{equation}
    We isolate $\Gamma$ in (\ref{eq_gamma_estimate3}) and we obtain the equivalent condition 
    \begin{equation}
        n \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right) t^{2n-1} \Gamma(t) \geq n t^{2n-1} + \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right) \left(t^{n+1} - 2t^n  - t\right) + \tfrac{1}{2}(n-1).
    \end{equation}
    Since both sides equals $0$ at $t = 1$, it suffices to show that the derivative of the left-hand side is greater than or equal to the derivative of the left-hand side on $[1,+\infty[$. This condition simplifies to the fact that for all $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_computations}
        n \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right) t^{2n - 2} \Gamma(t) \geq n t^{n-1}(t^{n-1} - 1) + \tfrac{1}{2}(t^n - 1).
    \end{equation}
    The condition (\ref{eq_gamma_computations}) holds true when we replace $\Gamma(t)$ by the lower bound
    \begin{equation}
        \Gamma(t) \geq \frac{1}{n-1} \frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n-1}}.
    \end{equation}
    Indeed, the new inequality simplifies to the fact that for all $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \frac{1}{n-1} t^{n-1} (t^{n-1} - 1) \geq \frac{1}{n}(t^n - 1)
    \end{equation}
    and this comes from the fact that whenever $\alpha > \beta > 0$ and $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \frac{1}{\beta} t^{\alpha -\beta} (t^\beta - 1) \geq \frac{1}{\alpha} (t^\alpha - 1).
    \end{equation}
\end{proof}


   

   
   

   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

   

   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   


\end{appendices}


\section{Introduction}

\subsection{Calibrations for free-discontinuity problems}

Free-discontinuity problems consists in minimizing the energy $E(u,K)$ of a pair composed of a function $u \in C^1(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus K)$ and a set $K$ of dimension $n-1$.
The energy presents a competition between the Dirichlet energy of $u$ in $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus K$ and the surface energy of $K$.
The set $K$ is interpreted as an hypersurface (with possibly singularities) where $u$ jumps between different values.
This notion of pair composed of a function and of its discontinuity set is alternatively formalized by the space SBV (special functions with bounded variations).
The model case of this kind of problem is the Mumford-Shah functional coming from image segmentation.

These problems generally present two kind of Euler-Lagrange equations.
Considering small perturbations of $u$ (with the discontinuity set $K$ being fixed), one obtains that $u$ satisfy a PDE with a boundary condition on each connected component of $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus K$.
As an example, minimizers of the Mumford-Shah functional are harmonic functions satisfying a Neumann boundary condition.
Considering small perturbations of $K$ under diffeormophisms, one obtains an equation that deals with the mean curvature of $K$.
However, these equations do not entirely characterise the minimizers.
We also point out that the minimizer may not be unique.
We summarize these difficulties as a lack of convexity of the functional $E$.

In~\cite{Alberti}, Alberti, Bouchitté, Dal Maso have introduced a sufficient condition for minimality by adapting the calibration method that was known for minimal hypersurfaces.
Here is a simplified summary.
Let us consider a competitor $(u,K)$.
We define the complete graph $\Gamma_u$ of $u$ as the boundary of the subgraph of $u$.
It is the reunion of the graph of $u$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus K$ and of vertical sides above $K$ (the discontinuities of $u$).
We denote by $\nu_{\Gamma_u}$ the normal vector to $\Gamma_u$ pointing into the subgraph of $u$.
A calibration for $(u,K)$ is a divergence-free vector field $\phi \colon \mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R} \to \mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{cal1}
    E(u,K) = \int_{\Gamma_u} \! \phi \cdot \nu_{\Gamma_u} \mathrm{d}\mathcal{H}^{n-1}
\end{equation}
and for all competitor $(v,L)$,
\begin{equation}\label{cal2}
    E(v,L) \geq \int_{\Gamma_v} \! \phi \cdot \nu_{\Gamma_v} \mathrm{d}\mathcal{H}^{n-1}.
\end{equation}
One observes that the Gauss-Green theorem and the divergence-free property imply
\begin{equation}
    \int_{\Gamma_u} \! \phi \cdot \nu_{\Gamma_u} \mathrm{d}\mathcal{H}^{n-1} = \int_{\Gamma_v} \! \phi \cdot \nu_{\Gamma_v} \mathrm{d}\mathcal{H}^{n-1}
\end{equation}
so the existence of such a vector field proves that $(u,K)$ is a minimizer.

In~\cite[Lemma 3.7]{Alberti}, the authors provide four axioms which ensure the properties (\ref{cal1}), (\ref{cal2}) above and it is convenient to take these axioms as a definition of calibrations. Minimality criterias for the Mumford-Shah functional are proved by construction of calibrations in~\cite{Alberti},~\cite{M1},~\cite{M2},~\cite{M3},~\cite{M4}. The principle of calibrations also inspired a fast primal-dual algorithm to minimize the Mumford-Shah functional (\cite{C1}, \cite{C2}).

In general, we don't know if calibrations exist for minimizers of this kind of problem. This question is related to the non-existence of a duality gap (see \cite[Section 3.13]{Alberti}, \cite{C1} and also \cite{Bo}).
There is no general recipe to follow and the construction can be very difficult.
The crack-tip is famous example of minimizer of the Mumford-Shah functional for which a calibration has not been found.

\subsection{The thermal insulation functional}

A free boundary problem related to thermal insulation was recently studied by Caffarelli--Kriventsov (\cite{CK},~\cite{K}) and Bucur--Luckhaus--Giacomini (\cite{BL},~\cite{BG}).
Relaxing the problem in $SBV$, it consists in minimizing
\begin{equation*}
    E(u) = \int \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u} \! (u^-)^2 + (u^+)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1} + \gamma^2 \mathcal{L}^n(\set{u > 0}),
\end{equation*}
where $\beta, \gamma > 0$ and the competitors are functions $u \in SBV(\mathbf{R}^n)$ such that $u=1$ on a given bounded open set $\Omega \subset \mathbf{R}^n$.
Here $J_u$ is the set of all jump points of $u$, that is the points $x$ for which there exist two real numbers $u^- < u^+$ and a (unique) vector $\nu_u(x) \in \mathbf{S}^{n-1}$ such that
\begin{subequations}
    \begin{align}
    &\lim_{r \to 0} \fint_{B_r \cap H^+} \! \abs{u(y) - u^-} \,\mathrm{d} y = 0\\
    &\lim_{r \to 0} \fint_{B_r \cap H^-} \! \abs{u(y) - u^+} \,\mathrm{d} y = 0,
    \end{align}
\end{subequations}
where
\begin{subequations}
    \begin{align}
        H^+ &= \set{y \in \mathbf{R}^n | (y - x) \cdot \nu_u(x) > 0}\\
        H^- &= \set{y \in \mathbf{R}^n | (y - x) \cdot \nu_u(x) < 0}.
    \end{align}
\end{subequations}
The function $u$ can be interpreted as the temperature (which is fixed to $1$ on $\Omega$) and $J_u$ as an isolating layer which has no width and no thermal conductivity.
Note that without loss of generality, we can assume that $0 \leq u \leq 1$.
Indeed, post-composing $u$ with the orthogonal projection onto $[0,1]$ decreases the energy.


Caffarelli--Kriventsov and Bucur--Luckhaus--Giacomini have shown the existence of minimizers in~\cite{CK} and~\cite{BL},\cite{BG}.
They prove a non-degeneracy property: there exists $0 < \delta < 1$ (depending only on $n$ and $\Omega$) such that such that $\mathrm{spt}(u) \subset B(0,\delta^{-1})$ and
\begin{equation}
    u \in \set{0} \cup [\delta,1] \quad \text{$\mathcal{L}^n$-a.e.\ on $\mathbf{R}^n$}.
\end{equation}
They also prove that the jump set $J_u$ is essentially closed, $\mathcal{H}^{n-1}(\overline{J_u} \setminus J_u) = 0$, and that it satisfies uniform density estimates.
In~\cite{K}, it was proven that the jump set is locally the union of the graphs of two $C^{1,\alpha}$ functions provided that it is trapped between two planes which are sufficiently close.
The approaches in these papers highlighted the similarities and the differences between the thermal insulation problem and the Mumford-Shah functional.
In particular, for the thermal insulation problem, one has to deal with an harmonic function satisfying a Robin boundary condition at the boundary rather than a Neumann boundary condition.

In~\cite{LM}, we have shown the higher integrability of the gradient for minimizers of the thermal insulation problem, an analogue of De Giorgi's conjecture for the Mumford-Shah functional, and deduced that the singular part of the free boundary has Hausdorff dimension strictly less than $n-1$.
Variants of this problem have been studied in~\cite{B1},~\cite{B2},~\cite{B3},~\cite{B4}.
A numerical implementation has been proposed in~\cite{BF}.

\subsection{Summary of results}

The purpose of this article is to provide minimality criteria for the thermal insulation functional by construction of calibrations.
The article is divided into two parts.
In the first part, we fix an open set $A$ of $\mathbf{R}^n$ and we consider the functional
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u) = \int_A \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u \cap A} \! (u^+)^2 + (u^-)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1},
\end{equation}
where $u \in SBV(A)$.
In Theorem~\ref{thm_harmonic}, we present a sufficient condition so that a non-negative harmonic function $u \colon A \to \mathbf{R}$ is a minimizer of $E_0$ among all competitors $v \in SBV(A)$ with $\set{v \ne u} \subset \subset A$.
The condition is also necessary in dimension one but likely not in higher dimension.
An anologous questions had been studied for the homogeneous Mumford-Shah functional
\begin{equation}
    F_0(u,A) = \int_A \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \mathcal{H}^{n-1}(J_u)
\end{equation}
by Chambolle without calibrations (\cite[Theorem 3.1(i)]{F}) and Alberti, Bouchitté, Dal Maso with calibrations (\cite[section 4.6]{Alberti}).

In the second part, we come back to the full thermal insulation functional,
\begin{equation}
    E(u) = \int \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u} \! (u^+)^2 + (u^-)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1} + \gamma^2 \mathcal{L}^n(\set{u > 0})
\end{equation}
where $u \in SBV(\mathbf{R}^n)$ is such that $u=1$ on a given bounded open set $\Omega$.
The section starts with an informal discussion about the case $\Omega = B(0,1)$.
The relevant competitors are either the indicator function $\mathbf{1}_{\Omega}$ or an harmonic function supported in a bigger ball.
We can make explicit computations with these competitors to find minimality criterias.
Then we prove and generalize these criterias to other domains $\Omega$ using calibrations.
In Theorem~\ref{thm_indicator1} and~\ref{thm_indicator2}, we prove two sufficient conditions so that $\mathbf{1}_{\Omega}$ is a minimizer.
In Theorem~\ref{thm_u}, we come back back to the case $\Omega = B(0,1)$ and prove a sufficient condition so that an harmonic function supported in a bigger ball is a minimizer.

\textbf{Acknowledgement}. We would like to thank Antoine Lemenant and Antonin Chambolle for helpful discussions about extensions of normal vector fields.

\section{A Dirichlet problem}

\subsection{Statement of the problem and calibrations}

We fix a parameter $\beta > 0$.
Given a Borel set $S \subset \mathbf{R}^n$ and a SBV function $u$ in a neighborhood of $S$, we define
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u,S) = \int_S \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u \cap S} \! (u^+)^2 + (u^-)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1}.
\end{equation}

Let $A$ be an open set and let $u \colon A \to \mathbf{R}$ be a a non-negative harmonic function.
We are interested in finding a sufficient condition so that the following minimality property holds true: for all $v \in SBV(A)$ with $\set{v \ne u} \subset \subset A$, we have
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u,A) \leq E_0(v,A).
\end{equation}
It is equivalent to require that for all open set $B \subset \subset A$, for all $v \in SBV(A)$ with $v = u$ in $A \setminus \overline{B}$, we have
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u,\overline{B}) \leq E_0(v,\overline{B}).
\end{equation}
Therefore, we are led to assume that $A$ is a smooth bounded open set, that $u$ has an extension in a neighborhood $V$ of $\overline{A}$ and find a sufficient condition so that for all $v \in SBV(V)$ with $v = u$ in $V \setminus \overline{A}$, we have
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u,\overline{A}) \leq E_0(v,\overline{A}).
\end{equation}

\begin{thm}\label{thm_harmonic}
   
    Let $A$ be a bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ with Lipschitz boundary
    Let $u \colon A \to \mathbf{R}$ be a non-negative harmonic function which has a $C^1$ extension in open set $V$ containing $\overline{A}$.
    We assume that for some $0 \leq m \leq M$, we have $m \leq u \leq M$ in $A$ and
    \begin{equation}\label{thm_test}
        \int_m^{\delta} \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0 (m^2 + \delta^2),
    \end{equation}
    where
    \begin{equation}
        \beta_0 = \beta \frac{(M - m)}{\sup_A \abs{\nabla u}} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \delta  = \frac{M}{1+\beta_0}.
    \end{equation}
    Then $u$ is a minimizer of $E_0(v,\overline{A})$ among all $v \in SBV(V)$ such that $v=u$ in $V \setminus \overline{A}$.
\end{thm}

\begin{rmk}
    The function
    \begin{equation}
        s \mapsto \beta_0 (m^2 + s^2) - \int_m^s \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t
    \end{equation}
    attains its minimum at $s=\frac{M}{1+\beta_0}$ so (\ref{thm_test}) is equivalent to say that for all $s \in [0,M]$,
    \begin{equation}
        \int_m^s \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0(m^2 + s^2).
    \end{equation}
\end{rmk}

\begin{rmk}
    Let us consider the case where $n=1$, $A = ]0,h[$ (where $h > 0$) and $u$ is an affine function whose graph joins $(0,m)$ and $(h,M)$.
    Then the theorem condition is necessary.
    In this cases $\beta_0 = \beta h$, $\delta = \frac{M}{1+\beta h}$ and the condition (\ref{thm_test}) amounts to
    \begin{equation}
        h^{-1} (M - m)^2 \leq \beta(m^2 + \delta^2) + h^{-1} (M - \delta)^2.
    \end{equation}
    One recognizes that the right-hand side is the Dirichlet energy of $u$.
    The left-hand side is the energy of the jump function whose graph joins $(0,m)$, $(0,\delta)$ and $(h,M)$.
\end{rmk}

\begin{rmk}
    The condition (\ref{thm_test}) is trivially satisfied if $m \geq \delta$, that is,
    \begin{equation}
        m \geq \beta^{-1} \sup_A \abs{\nabla u}.
    \end{equation}
\end{rmk}

\begin{rmk}
    For the homogeneous Mumford-Shah functional,
    \begin{equation}
        F_0(u) = \int_A \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 + \beta \mathcal{H}^{n-1}(J_u),
    \end{equation}
    Chambolle found the condition $(M - m) \sup_A \abs{\nabla u} \leq \beta$ (see~\cite[Theorem 3.1 (i)]{F}).
    This is somewhat analogous to our condition because this can be rewritten
    \begin{equation}
        \int_m^M \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0
    \end{equation}
    where $\beta_0 = \beta \frac{(M - m)}{\sup_A \abs{\nabla u}}$.
   
\end{rmk}

We are going to state the notion of calibrations associated to our problem.
This notion is justified by~\cite[Section 2 and 3]{Alberti}.

\begin{defi}\label{def_calibration1}
   
    Let $A$ be a bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ with Lipschitz boundary, let $V$ be an open set containing $\overline{A}$ and let $u \in SBV(V)$ be such that $0 \leq u \leq M$ on $A$ (for some $M > 0$).
    A calibration for $u$ in $\overline{A} \times [0,M]$ is a Borel map
    \begin{equation
        \phi = (\phi^x,\phi^t) \colon \overline{A} \times [0,M] \to \mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}
    \end{equation}
    which is bounded and approximately-regular in $\overline{A} \times [0,M]$, divergence-free in $A \times ]0,M[$ and such that
    \begin{enumerate}
        \item[(a)] $\phi^t(x,t) \geq \tfrac{1}{4} \abs{\phi^x(x,t)}^2$ for $\mathcal{L}^n$-a.e.\ $x \in \overline{A}$ and every $t \in [0,M]$;
        \item[(b)] $\abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2)$ for $\mathcal{H}^{n-1}$-a.e.\ $x \in \overline{A}$ and every $r,s \in [0,M]$;
        \item[(a')] $\phi^x(x,u) = 2 \nabla u$ and $\phi^t(x,u) = \abs{\nabla u}^2$ for $\mathcal{L}^n$-a.e.\ $x \in \overline{A}$;
        \item[(b')] $\int_{u^-}^{u^+} \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta \left[(u^-)^2 + (u^+)^2\right]\nu_u$ for $\mathcal{H}^{n-1}$-a.e.\ $x \in J_u \cap \overline{A}$.
    \end{enumerate}
\end{defi}

The existence of such a vector field $\phi$ implies that $u$ is a minimizer of $E_0(v,\overline{A})$ among $v \in SBV(V)$ such that $v=u$ in $V \setminus \overline{A}$. This is a consequence of~\cite[Section 3]{Alberti}. Note however that our Dirichlet problem is different because our boundary condition is one-side (a competitor $v$ might jump on $\partial A$).
This is why we define $\phi$ up to $\partial A \times [0,M]$.
We use a minor modification of~\cite[Lemma 2.10]{Alberti} to include the case where $\phi$ is defined only on $\Gamma_u \cap (\overline{A} \times [0,M])$.

\begin{rmk}
    With regard to the function $u$ of Theorem~\ref{thm_harmonic}, we have $J_u = \emptyset$ so we don't need to check (b').
\end{rmk}

We conclude this section with two miscellaneous remarks.

\begin{rmk}[Scaling]
    We detail the scaling properties of $E_0$.
    We write $E_0(u,\beta,A)$ to explicit the parameters $\beta$ in the definition of $E_0$.
    For all $M \in \mathbf{R}$, we have
    \begin{equation}
        E_0(M u, \beta, A) = M^2 E_0(u,\beta, A),
    \end{equation}
    and for all $h > 0$,
    \begin{equation}
        E_0(u_h, \beta h, h^{-1}A) = h^{2-n} E_0(u,\beta,A).
    \end{equation}
    where $u_h(x) = u(h \cdot x)$.
    Thus, for all $h > 0$ and $M \geq 0$,
    \begin{equation}
        E_0(M^{-1} u_h, \beta h, h^{-1}A) = M^{-2} h^{2-n} E_0(u,\beta,A).
    \end{equation}
\end{rmk}



\begin{rmk}[Slope along a jump]\label{rmk_jump}
   
    This Remark is an example of application of~\cite[Lemma 2.5]{Alberti} that we will use repeatedly in the next constructions.
    We consider three $C^1$ functions $\sigma, u,v \colon \mathbf{R}^n \to \mathbf{R}$.
    We work in $\mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}$ and we introduce the hypersurface
    \begin{equation}
        H   = \set{(x,t) \in \mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R} | t = \sigma(x)}
    \end{equation}
    and the vector field
    \begin{equation}
        \phi =
        \begin{cases}
            (2 \nabla u, \abs{\nabla u}^2)   &\text{for $t > \sigma(x)$}\\
            (2 \nabla v, \abs{\nabla v}^2)   &\text{for $t < \sigma(x)$}.
        \end{cases}
    \end{equation}
    A normal vector field to $H$ is $(-\nabla\sigma,1)$ and we have along $H$,
    \begin{equation}
        \phi(x,\sigma(x)^+)
        \cdot
        \begin{pmatrix} -\sigma \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}
        =
        \phi(x,\sigma(x)^-)
        \cdot
        \begin{pmatrix} -\sigma \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}.
    \end{equation}
    if and only if $\nabla \sigma = \tfrac{1}{2}(\nabla u + \nabla v)$.
    Therefore, $\phi$ is divergence-free in the sense of distributions provided that $u,v$ are harmonic and $\sigma = \tfrac{1}{2}(u + v)$ (modulo an additive constant).
\end{rmk}

\subsection{The one dimensional case}\label{subsection_one}

\subsubsection{A short analysis}

We fix constants $a < b$ and $0 \leq m \leq M$.
We consider the functional
\begin{equation}
    E_0(u) = \int \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u} \! (u^+)^2 + (u^-)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1}
\end{equation}
defined over the function $u \in SBV(\mathbf{R})$ such that $u=m$ on $]-\infty,a[$ and $u=M$ on $]b,\infty]$.
By scaling, it suffices to study the case $[a,b]=[0,1]$.

We are looking for the minimizer(s), depending on $m$ and $M$.
Here is a summary (without details).
In the case $m = M$, the affine (constant) competitor is the only minimizer and from now on, we assume $m < M$.
First, we try to find the jump competitors which have the least energy.
It is never convenient to do more than one jump.
At each side of the jump, the optimal value of the function corresponds to the Robin condition $\partial_{\nu} u = \beta u$ (where $\nu$ is the inward unit normal vector to the side).
The optimal location of the jump may be $x_0=0$ or some $x_0 \in ]0,1[$.
It cannot be $x_0 = 1$ though and this comes from the fact that $m < M$.
If $m < \frac{M}{1 + \beta}$, the best location is $x_0 = 0$ and the jump is going from $m$ to $\frac{M}{1 + \beta}$.
If $m > \frac{M}{1 + \beta}$, the best location is a certain $x_0 \in ]0,1[$ but then the affine competitor has necessarily a smaller energy.
We conclude that the affine competitor is a minimizer if and only if it is better than the jump at $x = 0$, that is
\begin{equation}\label{test}
    (M - m)^2 \leq \beta m^2 + \left(M - \frac{M}{1+\beta}\right)^2.
\end{equation}
We define $\delta = \frac{M}{1 + \beta}$ and we observe that (\ref{test}) is equivalent to
\begin{equation}\label{test2}
    \int_m^\delta \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta (m^2 + \delta^2).
\end{equation}

Now, we try to guess the calibration in the limit case
\begin{equation}\label{limit_case}
    \int_m^\delta \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta (m^2 + \delta^2).
\end{equation}
Note that we have necessarily $m < \delta$.
There are two minimizers; the first one is the affine function $u$ whose graph joins the points $(0,m)$, $(1,M)$ and the second one is the jump function $v$ whose graph joins the points $(0,m)$, $(0,\delta)$, $(1,M)$.
A nice property of calibrations is that they calibrate all minimizers simultaneously.
We should have $\phi = (2\nabla u,\abs{\nabla u}^2)$ on the graph of $u$, that is $\phi = (2(M-m),(M-m)^2)$ on $t = m + (1-m)x$.
And we should have as well $\phi = (2 \nabla v, \abs{\nabla v}^2)$ on the graph of $v$, that is $\phi = (2(M-\delta),(M-\delta)^2)$ on $t=m + (M-\delta)x$.
Finally, we should have
\begin{equation}
    \int_m^\delta \! \phi^x(0,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta(m^2 + \delta^2).
\end{equation}
A simple solution is to set
\begin{equation}
    \phi = \left(\frac{2(M-t)}{1-x}, \left[\frac{M-t}{1-x}\right]^2\right)
\end{equation}
for $t \geq m + (1 - m)x$.
Next, we try to determine $\phi^x(0,t)$ for $t \in [0,m]$.
We have necessarily
\begin{align}
    \int_0^m \! \phi^x(0,t) \,\mathrm{d} t   &= \int_0^\delta \! \phi^x(0,t) \,\mathrm{d} t - \int_m^\delta \! \phi^x(0,t) \,\mathrm{d} t\\
                                    &\leq \beta \delta^2 - \beta (m^2 + \delta^2)\\
                                    &\leq - \beta m^2\label{rmk2}.
\end{align}
We suggest to set $\phi^x(0,t) = -2\beta t$ on $[0,m]$.
Then we try to extend $\phi$ in a simple way while respecting the axioms of calibrations and we arrive at
\begin{equation}
    \phi =
    \begin{cases}
        \left(\frac{2(M-t)}{1-x}, \left[\frac{M-t}{1-x}\right]^2\right)   &\text{if $m + \tau x \leq t \leq M$}\\
        \left(2(M-m),\left[M-m\right]^2\right)                          &\text{if $m + \sigma x \leq t \leq m + \tau x$}\\
        \left(-2 \beta m, \beta^2 m^2\right)                            &\text{if $m \leq t \leq m + \sigma x$}\\
        \left(-2 \beta t, \beta^2 m^2\right)                            &\text{if $0 \leq t \leq m$.}
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\tau = M - m$ and $\sigma = \frac{1}{2}((M - m) - \beta m)$.
The slope $\sigma$ has been chosen as in Remark~\ref{rmk_jump}.
In the next section, we generalize this construction when there is only an inequality in (\ref{limit_case}).
\begin{figure}[ht]
    \begin{center}
        \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./media/fig_harmonic_4.pdf}
    \end{center}
\end{figure}




\subsubsection{The construction}

\textbf{Context}.
Let $0 \leq m \leq M$ and let $u \colon [0,1] \to \mathbf{R}$ be the affine function such that $u(0) = m$ and $u(1) = M$. We assume that
\begin{equation}
    \int_m^\delta \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta (m^2 + \delta^2),
\end{equation}
where $\delta = \frac{M}{1+\beta}$.
We build a calibration for $u$ in $[0,1] \times [0,M]$.

The construction brings into play an intermediary constant $0 \leq \lambda \leq \beta$ such that
\begin{equation}
    \int_m^\delta \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \lambda m^2 + \beta \delta^2.
\end{equation}
We will also need the conditions $\lambda m \leq M -m$ and $\lambda m \leq \frac{\beta M}{1+\beta}$.
If $m \leq \delta$, these two conditions follows from the fact that $\lambda \leq \beta$.
Otherwise, it suffices to take $\lambda = 0$ for example.
Finally, we define
\begin{equation}
    \phi =
    \begin{cases}
        \left(\frac{2(M-t)}{1-x}, \left[\frac{M-t}{1-x}\right]^2\right)  &\text{if $m + \tau x \leq t \leq M$}\\
        \left(2(M-m), \left[M-m\right]^2\right)                        &\text{if $m + \sigma x \leq t \leq m + \tau x$}\\
        \left(-2 \lambda m, \lambda^2 m^2\right)                      &\text{if $m \leq t \leq m + \sigma x$}\\
        \left(-2 \lambda t, \lambda^2 m^2\right)          &\text{if $0 \leq t \leq m$.}
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\tau = M - m$ and $\sigma = \frac{1}{2}((M-m) - \lambda m)$.
Note that we have $0 \leq \sigma \leq \tau$ because $0 \leq \lambda m \leq M-m$.
The slope $\sigma$ has been chosen as in Remark~\ref{rmk_jump}.

We prove that for all $x$ and all $r \leq s$,
\begin{equation}
    \abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2).
\end{equation}
We have globally
\begin{equation}
    \phi^x \geq -2 \lambda t \geq -2 \beta t
\end{equation}
so it suffices to control $\int_r^s \! \phi^x \,\mathrm{d} t$ from above.
Let us fix $t$.
We are going to see that the function
\begin{equation}
    r \mapsto \beta(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t
\end{equation}
is non-decreasing on $[0,M]$.
If $0 \leq r \leq m$,
\begin{equation}
    \beta(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta r^2 - \lambda r^2 + (\ldots)
\end{equation}
where $(\ldots)$ does not depend on $r$.
The right-hand side is non-decreasing on $[0,m]$ because $\lambda \leq \beta$.
If $m \leq r \leq m + \sigma x$,
\begin{equation}
    \beta(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta r^2 - 2 \lambda m r + (\ldots)
\end{equation}
where $(\ldots)$ does not depend on $r$.
The right-hand side is non-decreasing on $[m,m+\sigma x]$ because $\lambda \leq \beta$.
Finally, the function in non-decreasing on $[m+\sigma x, M]$ because $\phi^x$ is non-negative on this interval.
We conclude that it suffice to show that for all $x$ and $t$,
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta s^2.
\end{equation}
This is trivial if $s \leq m$ so we assume $s > m$.
There exists $x_0$ such that $s = m + (M-m)x_0$.
The function
\begin{equation}
    x \mapsto \int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t
\end{equation}
is non-decreasing on $[x_0,1]$ because the part where $\phi^x \leq 0$ gets bigger at the expense of the part where $\phi^x \geq 0$.
Now, it suffices to show that for all $x$ and $m + (M-m)x \leq s \leq M$,
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta s^2.
\end{equation}
We apply the divergence theorem in the polygone delimited by the cycle $(x,0),(x,s),(1,M)(0,1),(0,0)$.
We get
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = -\frac{(M-s)^2}{1-x} + (M-m)^2 - \lambda m^2 + \lambda^2 m^2 x
\end{equation}
so
\begin{equation}
    \beta s^2 - \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta s^2 + \frac{(M-s)^2}{1-x} - \lambda^2 m^2 x + \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2.
\end{equation}
The function $s \mapsto \beta s^2 + \frac{(M-s)^2}{1-x}$ is minimal for $s=\frac{M}{1+\beta(1-x)}$ and its the minimum value is $\frac{\beta M^2}{1+\beta(1-x)}$.
We have therefore
\begin{equation}
    \beta s^2 - \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \geq \frac{\beta M^2}{1+\beta(1-x)} - \lambda^2 m^2 x + \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2.
\end{equation}
The function $x \mapsto \frac{\beta M}{1+\beta(1-x)} - \lambda^2 m^2 x$ is non-decreasing on $[0,1]$ because $\lambda m \leq \frac{\beta M}{1+\beta}$.
We are thus led to
\begin{equation}
    \beta s^2 - \int_0^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \geq \frac{\beta M^2}{1+\beta} + \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2
\end{equation}
As $\frac{\beta M^2}{1+\beta} = \beta \delta^2 + (M-\delta)^2$, the previous quantity can be rewritten
\begin{equation}
    \lambda m^2 + \beta \delta^2 - \int_m^\delta \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t
\end{equation}
and this is non-negative by assumption.

\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm_harmonic}}

\textbf{Context}.
Let $A$ be a bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ with Lipschitz boundary.
Let $u \colon A \to \mathbf{R}$ be a non-negative harmonic function which has $C^1$ extension in a neighborhood of $\overline{A}$.
We assume that for some $0 \leq m \leq M$, we have $m \leq u \leq M$ in $A$ and
\begin{equation}
    \int_m^{\delta} \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0 (m^2 + \delta^2),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
    \beta_0 = \beta \frac{(M - m)}{\sup_A \abs{\nabla u}} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \delta  = \frac{M}{1+\beta_0}.
\end{equation}
We build a calibration for $u$ in $\overline{A} \times [0,M]$.

The construction brings into play an intermediary constant $0 \leq \lambda \leq \beta_0$ such that
\begin{equation}
    \int_m^{\delta} \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \lambda m^2 + \beta_0 \delta^2.
\end{equation}
We also need the conditions $\lambda m \leq M - m$ and $\lambda m \leq \frac{\beta_0 M}{1+\beta_0}$.
If $m \leq \delta$, these two conditions follow from the fact that $\lambda \leq \beta_0$.
Otherwise, it suffices to take $\lambda = 0$ for example.
Finally, we define
\begin{equation}
    \phi = \left(\varphi^x \cdot \frac{\nabla u(x)}{M-m}, \varphi^t \cdot \abs{\frac{\nabla u(x)}{M-m}}^2\right),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
    \varphi =
    \begin{cases}
        \left(2(M-m)\frac{M-t}{M-u}, \left[(M-m)^2\frac{M-t}{M-u}\right]^2\right)   &\text{if $u(x) \leq t \leq M$}\\
        \left(2(M-m),\left[M-m\right]^2\right)                                      &\text{if $\sigma(x) \leq t \leq u(x)$}\\
        \left(-2\lambda m, \lambda^2 m^2\right)                                     &\text{if $m \leq t \leq \sigma(x)$}\\
        \left(-2 \lambda t, \lambda^2 m^2\right)                                    &\text{if $0 \leq t \leq m$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{align}
    \sigma(x)   &= m + \frac{1}{2}(u - m)(1 - \tfrac{\lambda m}{M-m})\\
                &= m + \frac{1}{2} \frac{u-m}{M-m}(M-m - \lambda m).
\end{align}
As $0 \leq \lambda m \leq M - m$, we see that $m \leq \sigma(x) \leq u(x)$.
We prove that for all $x$ and $r \leq s$,
\begin{equation}
    \abs{\int_r^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t} \leq \beta_0 (r^2 + s^2).
\end{equation}
This is a minor variant of the one-dimensional case.
We have globally
\begin{equation}
    \varphi^x \geq -2 \lambda t \geq -2 \beta_0 t
\end{equation}
so it suffices to control $\int_r^s \! \varphi^x \,\mathrm{d} t$ from above.
Let us fix $t$.
We are going to see that the function
\begin{equation}
    r \mapsto \beta_0(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t
\end{equation}
is non-decreasing on $[0,M]$.
If $0 \leq r \leq m$,
\begin{equation}
    \beta_0(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta_0 r^2 - \lambda r^2 + (\ldots)
\end{equation}
where $(\ldots)$ does not depend on $r$.
The right-hand side is non-decreasing on $[0,m]$ because $\lambda \leq \beta_0$.
If $m \leq r \leq \sigma(x)$,
\begin{equation}
    \beta_0(r^2 + s^2) - \int_r^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta_0 r^2 - 2 \lambda m r + (\ldots)
\end{equation}
where $(\ldots)$ does not depend on $r$.
The right-hand side is non-decreasing on $[m,\sigma(x)]$ because $\lambda \leq \beta_0$.
Finally, the function in non-decreasing on $[u(x),M]$ because $\varphi^x$ is non-negative on this interval.
We conclude that it suffice to show that for all $x$ and $s$,
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0 s^2.
\end{equation}
This is trivial if $s \leq m$ so we assume $s > m$.
There exists $x_0$ such that $s = u(x_0)$.
Since $\sigma \leq u$, we have in particular $\sigma(x_0) \leq s$.
For $x$ such that $\sigma(x) \leq s \leq u(x)$, we compute
\begin{align}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t    &= -2 \lambda m^2 - 2 \lambda m (\sigma - m) + 2(M-m)(s-\sigma)\\
    \begin{split}
                                        &= -2 \lambda m - 2 \lambda m (\sigma - m) + 2(M-m)(s-m)\\
                                        &\pushright{+ 2(M-m)(m - \sigma)}
    \end{split}\\
    \begin{split}
                                        &= -2 \lambda m^2 - 2 (\sigma - m)(M-m + \lambda m)\\
                                        &\pushright{+ 2(M-m)(s-m).}
    \end{split}
\end{align}
As $u(x_0) \leq u(x)$ and $0 \leq \lambda m \leq M-m$, we have $\sigma(x_0) \leq \sigma(x)$ and it follows that
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,u) \leq \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x_0,u) \,\mathrm{d}.
\end{equation}
Now, it suffices to show that for all $x$ and $u(x) \leq s \leq m$,
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta_0 s^2.
\end{equation}
We compute
\begin{multline}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = - \lambda m^2 - 2 \lambda m (\sigma - m) + 2(M-m)(u - \sigma)\\ + \frac{M-m}{M-u}\left((M-u)^2 - (M-s)^2\right).
\end{multline}
By definition
\begin{align}
    \sigma - m  &= \frac{1}{2}\frac{u-m}{M-m}(M-m-\lambda m)\\
    u - \sigma  &= \frac{1}{2}\frac{u-m}{M-m}(M-m+\lambda m)
\end{align}
so
\begin{equation}
    - 2 \lambda m (\sigma - m) + 2(M-m)(u - \sigma) = \frac{u-m}{M-m}((M-m)^2 + \lambda^2 m^2).
\end{equation}
We also write
\begin{align}
    (M-m)(M-u)  &= (M-m)^2 + (M-m)(m-u)\\
                &= (M-m)^2 - (M-m)^2 \frac{u-m}{M-m}
\end{align}
and we arrive at
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = - \lambda m^2 + \lambda^2 m^2 \frac{u-m}{M-m} + (M-m)^2 - \frac{M-m}{M-u}(M-s)^2.
\end{equation}
Therefore
\begin{multline}
    \beta_0 s^2 - \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta_0 s^2 + \frac{M-m}{M-u}(M-t)^2\\- \lambda^2 m^2 \frac{u-m}{M-m} + \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2.
\end{multline}
For a fixed $x$, the function $s \mapsto \beta_0 s^2 + \frac{M-m}{M-u}(M-s)^2$ is minimal for
\begin{equation}
    s = \frac{M}{1+\beta_0 \frac{M-u}{M-m}}
\end{equation}
and its minimum value is
\begin{equation}
    \frac{\beta_0 M^2}{1 + \beta_0 \frac{M-u}{M-m}}.
\end{equation}
We have therefore
\begin{multline}
    \beta_0 s^2 - \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \\\geq \frac{\beta_0 M^2}{1 + \beta_0 \frac{M-u}{M-m}} - \lambda^2 m^2 \frac{u-m}{M-m} + 2 \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2.
\end{multline}
The function
\begin{equation}
    x \mapsto \frac{\beta_0 M^2}{1 + \beta_0 \frac{M-x}{M-m}} - \lambda^2 m^2 \frac{x-m}{M-m}
\end{equation}
is non decreasing on $[m,M]$ because $\lambda m \leq \frac{\beta_0 M}{1+\beta_0}$.
We are thus led to
\begin{equation}
    \beta_0 s^2 - \int_0^s \! \varphi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t \geq \frac{\beta_0 M^2}{1+\beta_0} + \lambda m^2 - (M-m)^2
\end{equation}
As $\frac{\beta_0 M^2}{1+\beta_0} = \beta_0 \delta^2 + (M-\delta)^2$, the right-hand side can be rewritten
\begin{equation}
    \lambda m^2 + \beta_0 \delta^2 - \int_m^{\delta} \! 2(M-t) \,\mathrm{d} t.
\end{equation}

\section{The Thermal Insulation Problem}

\subsection{Definition of the problem and calibrations}\label{ball_computations}

We fix a bounded open set $\Omega \subset \mathbf{R}^n$ with Lipschitz boundary.
We fix parameters $\beta > 0$ and $\gamma > 0$.
Given $u \in SBV(\mathbf{R}^n)$ such that $u=1$ on $\Omega$, we define
\begin{equation}
    E(u) = \int \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{J_u} \! (u^+)^2 + (u^-)^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1} + \gamma^2 \mathcal{L}^n(\set{u > 0}).
\end{equation}
We can assume without loss of generality that competitors satisfy $0 \leq u \leq 1$.
It is shown in~\cite{CK} that minimizers have necessarily a compact support so we can also assume without loss of generality that the competitors have a compact support. 

Now, we state the notion of calibration associated to this problem.
Let $u \in SBV(\mathbf{R}^n)$ be such that $u=1$ on $\Omega$, $0 \leq u \leq 1$ and $u$ has a compact support.
A calibration for $u$ is a Borel map
\begin{equation
    \phi = (\phi^x,\phi^t) \colon (\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega) \times \mathbf{R} \to \mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}
\end{equation}
which is bounded and approximately-regular in $(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega) \times [0,1]$, divergence-free in $(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}) \times ]0,1[$ and such that
\begin{enumerate}
    \item[(a)] $\phi^t(x,t) \geq \tfrac{1}{4} \abs{\phi^x(x,t)}^2 - \gamma^2 \mathbf{1}_{]0,1]}(t)$ for $\mathcal{L}^n$-a.e.\ $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ and every $t \in [0,1]$;
    \item[(b)] $\abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2)$ for $\mathcal{H}^{n-1}$-a.e.\ $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ and every $r < s$;
    \item[(a')] $\phi^x(x,u) = 2 \nabla u$ and $\phi^t(x,u) = \abs{\nabla u}^2 - \gamma^2 \mathbf{1}_{]0,1]}(u)$ for $\mathcal{L}^n$-a.e.\ $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$;
    \item[(b')] $\int_{u^-}^{u^+} \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta \left[(u^-)^2 + (u^+)^2\right]\nu_u$ for $\mathcal{H}^{n-1}$-a.e.\ $x \in J_u$.
\end{enumerate}
We say that $u$ is calibrated if such a vector field exists.
This implies that $u$ is a minimizer of $E(v)$ among $v \in SBV(\mathbf{R}^n)$ such that $v=1$ on $\Omega$.

\subsubsection{Informal computations with \texorpdfstring{$\Omega = B(0,1)$}{Ω = B(0,1)}}\label{section_B1}

We present informal computations in the case $\Omega = B_1$ (the open unit ball centred at the origin).
We introduce for $r > 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{def_gamma}
    \Gamma(r) =
    \begin{cases}
        r-1                         &\ \text{if $n=1$}\\
        \ln(r)                      &\ \text{if $n=2$}\\
        \frac{1}{n-2}(1-r^{2-n})    &\ \text{if $n \geq 3$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
Given $x \in \mathbf{R}^n$, we write $r$ for $\abs{x}$.
Thus, $x \mapsto \Gamma(r)$ is an harmonic positive function on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{B_1}$ which is $0$ on $\partial B_1$.

We assume without proof that the only relevant competitors $u$ are of the following form.
Either $u$ is the indicator function of $B_1$.
Either there exists $R > 1$ and $0 < \delta < 1$ such that $u$ is radial continuous on $\overline{B}_R$, $u=1$ on $\overline{B_1}$, $u=\delta$ on $\partial B_R$ and $u = 0$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{B}_R$.
For a fixed $R > 1$, the first Euler-Lagrange equation says that $u$ should be harmonic in $B_R \setminus \overline{B_1}$ and that $\delta=\delta(R)$ should be determined by the Robin boundary condition
\begin{equation}
    -\partial_r u = \beta u \ \text{on $\partial B_R$}.
\end{equation}
We find
\begin{equation}\label{def_delta}
    \delta(R) = \frac{1}{1+\beta R^{n-1} \Gamma(R)}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{def_u}
    u(x)=
    \begin{cases}
        1 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} \leq 1$}\\
        1 - \beta \delta(R) R^{n-1} \Gamma(x) &\ \text{for $1 \leq \abs{x} \leq R$}\\
        0 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} > R$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[ht]
    \begin{center}
        \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./media/fig_delta.pdf}
        \caption{$n=2$, $\beta=3$ and $R=2$}
    \end{center}
\end{figure}

An integration by parts combined with the Dirichlet condition $u=1$ on $\partial B_1$ and the Robin condition $-\partial_r u = \beta u$ on $\partial B_R$ shows that
\begin{equation}
    \int_{B_R \setminus B_1} \! \abs{\nabla u}^2 \,\mathrm{d} x + \beta \int_{\partial B_R} \! u^2 \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1} = \beta \int_{\partial B_R} \! u \,\mathrm{d} \mathcal{H}^{n-1}.
\end{equation}
We conclude that the energy of $u$ is
\begin{equation}
    E = n \omega_n \beta R^{n-1} \delta(R) + \omega_n \gamma^2 R^n.
\end{equation}
Now, we consider $E$ as functions of $R \in [1,+\infty[$ that we try to optimize.
We observe that $n \omega_n R^{n-1} \beta \delta(R)$ is the flux of the vector field $x \mapsto \beta \delta(r) e_r$ through $\partial B_R$.
We compute
\begin{align}
    \mathrm{div}(\delta(r) e_r) &= \delta'(r) + \frac{(n-1)}{r}\delta(r)\\
                                &= - \left(\beta - \frac{(n-1)}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2\label{div_delta}
\end{align}
so
\begin{equation}
    E(R) = E(1) + \int_{B_R \setminus B_1} \! \left[\gamma^2 - \left(\beta^2 - \frac{(n-1) \beta}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2\right] \,\mathrm{d} x,
\end{equation}
where $r$ means $\abs{x}$.
This shows in particular that
\begin{equation}\label{eq_Eprime}
    E'(R) = n \omega_n R^{n-1} \left[\gamma^2 - \left(\beta^2 - \frac{(n-1) \beta}{R}\right) \delta(R)^2\right].
\end{equation}
The critical radii $R > 1$ are characterised by the equations
\begin{equation}
    \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{R}\right) \delta(R)^2 = \gamma^2.
\end{equation}
\begin{rmk}
    As expected, this coincides with the second Euler-Lagrange equation
    \begin{equation}\label{euler2}
        \abs{\nabla u}^2 + \gamma^2 + \beta u^2(H - 2 \beta) = 0
    \end{equation}
    where $H=(n-1) R^{-1}$ is the mean scalar curvature of $\partial B_R$ with respect to $-e_r$ (see~\cite[Definition 7.32]{Ambrosio}, not to be confused with the arithmetic mean of the principal curvatures which is equal to $R^{-1}$).
    A proof of this formula for $C^{1,\alpha}$ surfaces is presented in~\cite[Theorem 15.1]{K}.
\end{rmk}
Depending on the parameters $\beta$, $\gamma$, the function $R \mapsto E(R)$ may not be convex and the condition $E'(R) = 0$ may not suffice to characterize minimizers. See Figure~\ref{fig_E}.

\begin{figure}[ht]
    \begin{center}
        \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{./media/fig_E.pdf}\label{fig_E}
        \caption{$n=2$, $\beta =1$ and $\gamma = 0.34$}
    \end{center}
\end{figure}

\subsubsection{Three sufficient conditions of minimality}

An sufficient condition for $\mathbf{1}_{B(0,1)}$ to be a minimizer is that the function $r \mapsto E(r)$ is non-decreasing on $[1,+\infty[$.
This is equivalent to the fact that for all $r \geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{E_increasing}
    \left(\beta^2 - \frac{(n-1) \beta}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2 \leq \gamma^2.
\end{equation}
In particular, it suffices that $\beta \leq \gamma$.
In the two next theorems, we generalize the sufficient conditions $\beta \leq \gamma$ and (\ref{E_increasing}) to other domains.

\begin{thm}\label{thm_indicator1}
    Let $\Omega$ be a $C^1$ bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ and assume that its outward unit normal vector field has a continuous extension on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ such that $\abs{\nu} \leq 1$ and which is divergence-free on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
    If $\beta \leq \gamma$, then $\mathbf{1}_{\Omega}$ is calibrated.
\end{thm}

\begin{rmk}
If $\Omega$ is a $C^2$ bounded open convex of $\mathbf{R}^2$, the assumption holds true (\cite[Proposition 15]{C4}). 
\end{rmk}

Before stating the second theorem, we generalize the previous function $\Gamma$ to other domains $\Omega$.
The proof of the next Lemma is postponed in Appendix because this is not a new result.
\begin{lem}\label{lem_potential}
    Let $\Omega$ be a non-empty $C^2$ star-shaped bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$.
    There exists a continuous function $\Gamma \colon \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega \to \mathbf{R}$ such that
    \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
        \item $\Gamma$ is harmonic positive on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$;
        \item $\Gamma = 0$ on $\partial \Omega$,
        \item For all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$, $\nabla \Gamma(x) \ne 0$
        \item $\Gamma$ has a $C^1$ extension up to the boundary and for all $x \in \partial \Omega$, there exists $t > 0$ such that $\nabla \Gamma(x) = t \nu(x)$, where $\nu(x)$ is the outward unit normal vector of $\Omega$ at $x$.
    \end{enumerate}
\end{lem}

\begin{thm}\label{thm_indicator2}
    Let $\Omega$ be a non-empty $C^2$ star-shaped bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ and let $\Gamma$ be a function as in Lemma~\ref{lem_potential} (modulo a positive multiplicative constant).
    We define for $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$,
    \begin{equation}
        \nu(x) = \frac{\nabla \Gamma}{\abs{\nabla \Gamma}} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \delta(x) = \frac{1}{1+\beta \abs{\nabla \Gamma}^{-1} \Gamma}
    \end{equation}
    and we assume that $\mathrm{div}(\nu)$ is bounded.
    If for all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$,
    \begin{equation}
        \left(\beta^2 - \beta \mathrm{div}(\nu)\right) \delta^2 \leq \gamma^2,
    \end{equation}
    then $\mathbf{1}_{\Omega}$ is calibrated.
\end{thm}

Finally, we come back to $\Omega = B(0,1)$ and the notations of section~\ref{section_B1}. In particular, we refer to (\ref{def_gamma}) and (\ref{def_delta}) for the definition of $\Gamma$ and $\delta$. We are going to see that if $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$, the Euler-Lagrange equations characterize minimizers. In view of the formula
\begin{equation}
    E'(r) = n \omega_n r^{n-1} \left[\gamma^2 - \left(\beta^2 - \frac{(n-1) \beta}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2\right],
\end{equation}
it suffices to show that the function
\begin{equation}
    r \mapsto -\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2
\end{equation}
is increasing on $[1+\infty[$.
We write
\begin{equation}
    -\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \delta(r) = -\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \frac{(r^{n-1}\delta(r))^2}{r^{2n-2}}.
\end{equation}
If $\beta \geq n - 1$, the function $r \mapsto r^{n-1} \delta(r)$ is decreasing on $[1,+\infty[$ because
\begin{equation}
    (r^{n-1} \delta)' = - r^{n-1} \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2.
\end{equation}
If $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$, the function $r \mapsto -\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \frac{1}{r^{2n-2}}$ is increasing on $[1,+\infty[$ because
    \begin{equation}
        \left[\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \frac{1}{r^{2n-2}}\right]' = -2\frac{(n-1)}{r^{2n-1}} \left(\beta - \frac{n-\tfrac{1}{2}}{r}\right)
    \end{equation}
This proves our claim. In the next theorem, we build a calibration corresponding to this criteria.




\begin{thm}\label{thm_u}
    Let $\Omega$ be the open ball $B(0,1)$.
    We assume that $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$ and that there exists $R \geq 1$ such that
    \begin{equation}
        \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{R}\right)\delta(R)^2 = \gamma^2,
    \end{equation}
    Then the function
    \begin{equation}\label{def_u2}
        u(x)=
        \begin{cases}
            1 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} \leq 1$}\\
            1 - \beta \delta(R) R^{n-1} \Gamma(x) &\ \text{for $1 \leq \abs{x} \leq R$}\\
            0 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} > R$},
        \end{cases}
    \end{equation}
    is calibrated.
\end{thm}

\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm_indicator1}}\label{idea1}

Let $\Omega$ be a $C^1$ bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ (we will add more assumptions as we advance in the construction).
We want to build a calibration for $\mathbf{1}_{\Omega}$.
First, we search for a continuous function $\phi^x \colon (\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega) \times [0,1] \to \mathbf{R}^n$ such that
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
    \item for all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$, $\phi^x(x,0) = 0$;
    \item for all $x \in \partial \Omega$,
        \begin{equation}
            \int_0^1 \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = -\beta \nu(x),
        \end{equation}
        where $\nu$ is the outward unit normal vector field of $\Omega$;
    \item for all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ and for all $0 \leq r \leq s \leq 1$,
        \begin{equation}
            \abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,u) \,\mathrm{d} u} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2).
        \end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
A simple starting point is to define for $x \in \partial \Omega$ and $0 \leq t \leq 1$, $\phi^x = - 2 \beta t \nu(x)$.
Let us assume that $\nu$ has a continuous extension on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ such that $\abs{\nu} \leq 1$.
Then we can extend $\phi^x$ on $(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega) \times [0,1]$ with the formula
\begin{equation}
    \phi^x(x,t) = -2\beta t \nu(x).
\end{equation}
It is clear that that for all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ and for all $r < s$, we have $\abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x} \leq \beta (r^2 + s^2)$ because $\abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \leq 2 \beta t$.
Let us assume furthermore that $\nu$ is divergence-free on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
The function $\phi^t$ is derived by the conditions $\mathrm{div}(\phi) = 0$ and $\phi^t(x,0) = 0$ for $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
This yields simply
\begin{equation}
    \phi^t(x,t) = 0.
\end{equation}
Finally, the condition $\phi^t \geq \frac{1}{4} \abs{\phi^x}^2 - \gamma^2 \mathbf{1}_{]0,1]}(t)$ amounts to
\begin{equation}
    \beta \abs{\nu} \leq \gamma
\end{equation}
and this requires $\beta \leq \gamma$.

\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm_indicator2}}\label{idea2}

Let $\Omega$ be a $C^1$ bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$ (we will add more assumptions as we advance in the construction).
We are more careful than in the previous section and we define $\phi$ in two pieces.
However, we still arrange $\phi$ so that it is globally continuous.

The principle is the same as before.
We denote by $\nu$ the outward unit normal vector field of $\Omega$.
The starting point is to define for $x \in \partial \Omega$ and $0 \leq t \leq 1$, $\phi^x(x,t) = -2\beta t \nu(x)$.
Then we extend $\phi^x$ and we derive $\phi^t$ by the conditions $\partial_t \phi^t = - \mathrm{div}_x(\phi^x)$ and $\phi^t(x,0) = 0$ for $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.

We assume that $\nu$ has a continuous extension on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$ such that $\abs{\nu} \leq 1$ and $\nu$ is $C^1$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
We also consider a continuous function $\delta \colon \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega \to [0,1]$ such that $\delta = 1$ on $\partial \Omega$, $0 < \delta < 1$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ and $\delta$ is $C^1$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
    \begin{center}
        \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./media/fig_omega.pdf}
    \end{center}
\end{figure}
We define for $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ and $0 \leq t \leq \delta(x)$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x &= -2 \beta t \nu\\
    \phi^t &= \beta t^2 \mathrm{div}(\nu)
\end{align}
and for $\delta(x) < t \leq 1$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x &= -2 (1-t) \frac{\beta \delta \nu}{1-\delta}\\
    \phi^t &= -(1-t)^2 \mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\beta \delta \nu}{1-\delta}\right) - C(x)
\end{align}
where $C(x)$ will be chosen so that $\phi$ is continuous on $(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}) \times [0,1]$.
Note that this is already the case for $\phi^x$.
We find
\begin{equation}
    C(x) = - (1-\delta)^2 \mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\beta \delta \nu}{1-\delta}\right) -\beta \delta^2 \mathrm{div}(\nu).
\end{equation}
However we compute
\begin{equation}\label{div_computation}
    \mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\delta \nu}{1-\delta}\right) = \frac{\mathrm{div}(\delta \nu) - \delta^2 \mathrm{div}(\nu)}{(1-\delta)^2}
\end{equation}
so this simplifies to $C(x) = -\beta \mathrm{div}(\delta \nu)$.
With regard to approximate regularity, the definition of $\phi^t$ on $\partial \Omega \times [0,1]$ does not matter.
Indeed, let $M$ be an hypersurface of $\mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}$.
Then for $\mathcal{H}^n$-a.e.\ $(x_0,t_0) \in M \cap (\partial \Omega \times [0,1])$, the vector $n_0 = (\nu(x_0),0)$ is a normal vector to $M$ at $x$ and $\phi \cdot n_0 = \phi^x$.
In order for $\phi$ to be bounded, it suffices that $\mathrm{div}(\nu)$ and $\mathrm{div}(\delta \nu)$ are bounded.
Finally, the condition $\phi^t \geq \frac{1}{4} \abs{\phi^x}^2 - \gamma^2 \mathbf{1}_{]0,1]}(t)$ amounts to
\begin{subequations}\label{idea2_conditions}
    \begin{align}
        \left(\beta^2 \abs{\nu}^2 - \beta \mathrm{div}(\nu)\right) \delta^2 &\leq \gamma^2\label{sigma1}\\
        - \beta \mathrm{div}(\delta \nu)                                    &\leq \gamma^2\label{sigma2}.
    \end{align}
\end{subequations}
It is tempting to choose $\delta$ and $\nu$ in such a way that
\begin{equation}\label{equal_conditions}
    \left(\beta^2 \abs{\nu}^2 - \beta \mathrm{div}(\nu)\right) \delta^2 = - \beta \mathrm{div}(\delta \nu).
\end{equation}
In that case, $\mathrm{div}(\delta \nu)$ is bounded provided that $\mathrm{div}(\nu)$ is bounded.
According to (\ref{div_computation}), the equality (\ref{equal_conditions}) is equivalent to
\begin{equation}
    \left(\frac{\beta \abs{\delta \nu}}{1-\delta}\right)^2 = -\mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\beta \delta \nu}{1-\delta}\right)
\end{equation}
A natural solution is to assume that $\Omega$ is $C^2$ star-shaped, to consider the function $\Gamma$ of Lemma~\ref{lem_potential} and to choose $\delta$, $\nu$ in such a way that
\begin{equation}
    \frac{\beta \delta \nu}{1-\delta} = \frac{\nabla \Gamma}{\Gamma}.
\end{equation}
We suggest to define
\begin{equation}
    \nu(x) = \frac{\nabla \Gamma}{\abs{\nabla \Gamma}}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
    \delta(x) = \frac{1}{1+\beta \abs{\nabla \Gamma}^{-1} \Gamma}.
\end{equation}
In conclusion, the conditions (\ref{idea2_conditions}) simplify to
\begin{equation}
    \left(\beta^2 - \beta \mathrm{div}(\nu)\right) \delta^2 \leq \gamma^2.
\end{equation}

\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm_u}}\label{idea3}

Let $\Omega$ be the open ball $B(0,1)$.
We assume that $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$ and that there exists $R \geq 1$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq_EL}
    \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{r}\right)\delta(r)^2 = \gamma^2,
\end{equation}
We have seen just before the statement of~\ref{thm_u} that when $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$, the function
\begin{equation}
    r \mapsto -\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2
\end{equation}
is increasing on $[1,+\infty[$. Therefore, (\ref{eq_EL}) implies that for all $r \geq R$,
\begin{equation}
    \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{r}\right)\delta(r)^2 \leq \gamma^2,
\end{equation}
The case $R = 1$ has already been dealt with in Theorem~\ref{thm_indicator2} so we can assume $R > 1$.

We recall the notations.
Given $x \in \mathbf{R}^n$, we write $r$ for $\abs{x}$.
We define for $r \geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{def_gamma2}
    \Gamma(r) =
    \begin{cases}
        r-1                         &\ \text{if $n=1$}\\
        \ln(r)                      &\ \text{if $n=2$}\\
        \frac{1}{n-2}(1-r^{2-n})    &\ \text{if $n \geq 3$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
    \delta(r) = \frac{1}{1+\beta r^{n-1} \Gamma(r)}.
\end{equation}
We define for $x \in \mathbf{R}^n$,
\begin{equation}
    u(x)=
    \begin{cases}
        1 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} \leq 1$}\\
        1 - \beta \delta(R) R^{n-1} \Gamma(r) &\ \text{for $1 \leq \abs{x} \leq R$}\\
        0 &\ \text{for $\abs{x} > R$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
For $r \geq 0$, we write $u(r)$ for the value of $u$ on $\partial B_r$.
Thus, we consider $u$ as a function of the real variable $r \in [0,+\infty[$.
Now, we list a few useful formulas.
For $1 < \abs{x} < R$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{formula_nabla}
    \nabla u = - \beta \delta(R) \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} e_r
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{formula_div}
    \frac{\nabla u}{1-u} = - \frac{\beta \delta}{1-\delta} e_r = - \frac{1}{r^{n-1} \Gamma(r)} e_r.
\end{equation}
With a slight abuse of notations, we consider that $\nabla u$ is defined on $1 \leq \abs{x} \leq R$ by (\ref{formula_nabla}).
We observe that
\begin{equation}
    \mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\nabla u}{1-u}\right) = \left(\frac{\abs{\nabla u}}{1-u}\right)^2.
\end{equation}
or equivalently
\begin{equation}
    -\mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\beta \delta e_r}{1-\delta}\right) = \left(\frac{\beta \delta}{1-\delta}\right)^2.\label{div_delta2}
\end{equation}
According to (\ref{div_computation}), the line (\ref{div_delta2}) is also equivalent to
\begin{equation}
    -\beta\mathrm{div}(\delta e_r) = \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{r}\right)\delta(r)^2.
\end{equation}

We are going to define the calibration.
Although we define $\phi^x$ and $\phi^t$ in parallel, the relevant part is really $\phi^x$.
The function $\phi^t$ is derived by the axioms of calibrations.
We consider a continuous function $\rho \colon [1,R] \to \mathbf{R}$ such that $\delta(R) \leq \rho \leq u$ and which is $C^1$ on $[1,R[$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
    \begin{center}
        \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./media/fig_phi4.pdf}
       
    \end{center}
\end{figure}

We fix $x$ such that $1 \leq \abs{x} \leq R$.
We define for $0 \leq t \leq \delta(R)$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x &= -2 \beta t e_r\\
    \phi^t &= \frac{(n-1)\beta t^2}{r},
\end{align}
for $\delta(R) \leq t < \rho(r)$
\begin{align}
    \phi^x &= -2 \beta \delta(R) e_r\\
    \phi^t &= \frac{2 (n-1) \beta \delta(R) t}{r} - \frac{(n-1) \beta \delta(R)^2}{r}
\end{align}
for $\rho(r) < t \leq u(r)$
\begin{align}
    \phi^x(x,t) &= 2 \nabla u\\
                &= -2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} e_r\\
    \phi^t(x,t) &= \abs{\nabla u}^2 - \gamma^2\\
                &= \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} - \gamma^2
\end{align}
and for $u(r) \leq t \leq 1$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x(x,t) &= 2 (1-t) \frac{\nabla u}{1-u}\\
                &=-2 (1-t) \frac{\beta \delta e_r}{1-\delta}\\
    \phi^t(x,t) &= (1-t)^2 \left(\frac{\abs{\nabla u}}{1-u}\right)^2 - \gamma^2\\
                &= (1-t)^2 \left(\frac{\beta \delta}{1-\delta}\right)^2 - \gamma^2
\end{align}
Next, we fix $x$ such that $\abs{x} \geq R$ and we use the same formula as in Section~\ref{idea2}.
We define for $t \leq \delta(r)$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x &= -2 \beta t e_r\\
    \phi^t &= \frac{(n-1) \beta t^2}{r}
\end{align}
and for $t \geq \delta(r)$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x(x,t) &= -2 (1-t) \frac{\beta \delta e_r}{1-\delta}\\
    \phi^t(x,t) &= (1-t)^2 \left(\frac{\beta \delta}{1-\delta}\right)^2 - \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta (n-1)}{r}\right) \delta^2
\end{align}
When $n = 1$, the function $\rho$ is given by the constant $\delta(R)$. When $n \geq 2$, it is given by the following complicated formula that the reader can ignore for the moment,
\begin{multline}
    \rho(r)  = \frac{\delta(R)}{2} + \frac{\beta \delta(R) r}{2} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right)\\ - \frac{\delta(R) r}{2n}\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{R}\right) \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right).
\end{multline}
Regardless of $\rho$, many properties can be checked.
The vector field $\phi$ is bounded.
It is continuous outside the graph
\begin{equation}
    \set{(x,t) | t=\rho(r),\ 1 \leq r < R}.
\end{equation}
We point out that it is continuous through $\abs{x} = R$ because
\begin{equation}
    \gamma^2 = \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{R}\right) \delta(R)^2
\end{equation}
and because for $\abs{x} = R$, $\nabla u(x) = -\beta \delta(R) e_r$.
The function $\phi$ is divergence free in the interior of each part.
In order for $\phi$ to be divergence-free in $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ (in the sense of distributions), we have to choose $\rho$ in such a way that for all $1 < \abs{x} < R$
\begin{equation}
    \phi(x,\rho(r)^-)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        - \rho'(r) e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}
    =
    \phi(x,\rho(r)^+)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        - \rho'(r) e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
This will imply that $\phi$ is approximately regular on $(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}) \times [0,1]$ by~\cite[Remark 2.6]{Alberti}.
Next, we are going to deal with the the approximately regularity of $\phi$ on on $\partial \Omega \times [0,1]$ as in the previous section.
Let $M$ be an hypersurface of $\mathbf{R}^n \times \mathbf{R}$.
For $\mathcal{H}^n$-a.e.\ $(x_0,t_0) \in M \cap (\partial \Omega \times [0,1])$, we have $t_0 \ne \rho(x_0)$ and the vector $n_0 = (\nu(x_0),0)$ is a normal vector to $M$ at $x$.
Thus $\phi \cdot n_0 = \phi^x$ and we conclude by continuity of $\phi^x$ in an neighborhood of $(x_0,t_0)$.

We check the values of $\phi(x,u(x))$. It is clear from the construction that for $1 < \abs{x} < R$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x(x,u) &= 2 \nabla u\\
    \phi^t(x,u) &= \abs{\nabla u}^2 - \gamma^2,
\end{align}
that for $\abs{x} > R$,
\begin{align}
    \phi^x(x,u) &= 0 = 2 \nabla u\\
    \phi^t(x,u) &= 0 = \abs{\nabla u}^2
\end{align}
and that for $\abs{x} = R$,
\begin{equation}
    \int_0^{\delta(R)} \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t = \beta \delta(R)^2.
\end{equation}
The condition $\phi^t \geq \tfrac{1}{4}\abs{\phi^x}^2 - \gamma^2 \mathbf{1}_{]0,1]}(t)$ holds true because for every $r \geq R$,
\begin{equation}
    \gamma^2 \geq \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{r}\right) \delta(r)^2.
\end{equation}
It is left to compute $\rho$ and to check that $\abs{\int_s^t \! \phi^x} \leq \beta(s^2 + t^2)$.

We recall that we are looking for a continuous function $\rho \colon [1,R] \to [0,1]$ such that $\delta(R) \leq \rho \leq u$, which is $C^1$ in $[1,R[$ and such that for $1 < \abs{x} < R$,
\begin{equation}\label{phi_computations}
    \phi(x,\rho(r)^-)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        - \rho'(r) e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}
    =
    \phi(x,\rho(r)^+)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        -\rho'(r) e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
When $n=1$, we can take $\rho$ equals to the constant $\delta(R)$. In this case, one can check that $\phi$ is continuous on $\left(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega\right) \times [0,1]$ and $\abs{\phi^x} \leq 2 \beta t$ so (\ref{phi_computations} and $\abs{\int_r^s \phi^x} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2)$ hold true.
We detail the computation of (\ref{phi_computations}) for $n \geq 2$.
It will be convenient to express the result in divergence form.
We compute
\begin{align}
    \phi(x,\rho^-)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        - \rho' e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}
    &=2 \beta \delta(R) \rho' + \frac{2 (n-1) \beta \delta(R) \rho}{r} - \frac{(n-1) \beta \delta(R)^2}{r}\\
    &= 2 \beta \delta(R) \mathrm{div}(\rho e_r) - \beta \delta(R)^2 \mathrm{div}(e_r)
\end{align}
Next, we compute
\begin{align}
    \phi(x,\rho^+)
    \cdot
    \begin{pmatrix}
        -\rho' e_r \\ 1
    \end{pmatrix}
    &=2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \rho' + \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} - \gamma^2\\
    \begin{split}
    &= 2 \beta \delta(R) R^{n-1} \mathrm{div}\left(r^{1-n} \rho e_r\right)\\
    &\pushright{\qquad + \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 R^{2n-2} \mathrm{div}\left(r^{1-n} \Gamma(r) e_r\right) - \gamma^2}
    \end{split}
\end{align}
and we observe that we can write
\begin{equation}
    \gamma^2 = \mathrm{div}\left(\frac{\gamma^2 r}{n} e_r + \frac{c}{r^{n-1}} e_r\right)
\end{equation}
where $c$ is any real constant.
A natural solution is to choose $\rho$ such that
\begin{multline}
    2 \beta \delta(R) \rho - \beta \delta(R)^2\\ = 2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \rho + \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 R^{n-1} \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \Gamma(r) - \frac{\gamma^2 r}{n} + \frac{c}{r^{n-1}}.
\end{multline}
We rewrite this
\begin{multline}
    2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1\right)\rho  = -\beta \delta(R)^2 - \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 R^{n-1} \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \Gamma(r)\\ + \frac{\gamma^2 r}{n} - \frac{c}{r^{n-1}}.
\end{multline}
We choose $c$ in such a way that the left-hand side cancels at $r=R$ (otherwise $\rho$ would have a singularity at $r=R$).
This yields
\begin{multline}
    2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1\right)\rho  = \beta \delta(R)^2 \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}-1\right) \\ + \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 R^{n-1} \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} (\Gamma(R) - \Gamma(r)) - \frac{\gamma^2 r}{n} \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1\right).
\end{multline}
Remember that $\Gamma(R) - \Gamma(r) = r^{2-n} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)$ so
\begin{multline}
    2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1\right)\rho  = \beta \delta(R)^2 \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}-1\right) \\ + \beta^2 \delta(R)^2 r \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right) - \frac{\gamma^2 r}{n} \left(\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1\right).
\end{multline}
We conclude that
\begin{equation}
    \rho(r)  = \frac{\delta(R)}{2} + \frac{\beta \delta(R) r}{2} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right) - \frac{\gamma^2 r}{2n\beta \delta(R)} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right).
\end{equation}
As $\gamma^2 = \left(\beta^2 - \frac{\beta(n-1)}{R}\right) \delta(R)^2$, an alternative expression is
\begin{multline}\label{eq_rho}
    \rho(r)  = \frac{\delta(R)}{2} + \frac{\beta \delta(R) r}{2} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right)\\ - \frac{\delta(R) r}{2n}\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{R}\right) \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right).
\end{multline}
It is clear that $\rho$ is a continuous function of $r \in ]1,R[$ and we also have $\lim_{r \to R} \rho(r) = \delta(R)$ because
\begin{equation}
    \lim_{t \to 1^+} \frac{\Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1} = \frac{1}{n-1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
    \lim_{t \to 1^+} \frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1} = \frac{n}{n-1}.
\end{equation}

We show that $\rho \geq \delta(R)$.
It suffices to show that $\rho$ is decreasing on $[1,R[$.
For $0 \leq r < R$, we write $t = \tfrac{R}{r}$ so that
\begin{multline}
    \rho(r)  = \frac{\delta(R)}{2} + \frac{\beta \delta(R) R t^{n-2}}{2} \left(\frac{t^{n-1}\Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right)\\ - \frac{\delta(R)}{2n}\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{R}\right) t^{-1} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right).
\end{multline}
According to Lemma~\ref{lem_gamma}, the function $t \mapsto \left(\frac{t^{n-1}\Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right)$ is increasing on $]1,+\infty[$.
It is also easy to see that the function $t^{-1} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right)$ is decreasing on $]1,+\infty[$ because
\begin{equation}
    t^{-1} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right) = 1 + t^{-1} \frac{t - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}
\end{equation}
and $t \mapsto t^{n-1}$ is convex.
We deduce that $r \mapsto \rho(r)$ is decreasing on $[1,R[$.

Next, we show that for all $1 \leq r < R$, we have $\rho(r) \leq u(r)$.
Remember that
\begin{equation}
    u   = \delta(R)\left[1 + \beta r \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)\right]
\end{equation}
so we have to show that for all $1 \leq r < R$,
\begin{multline}
    \beta r \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right)\\ - \frac{r}{n}\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{R}\right) \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right) \leq 1 + 2\beta r \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)
\end{multline}
We rewrite this,
\begin{multline}
    \beta r \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right) \left(2 - \left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}\right) \\ - \frac{\beta r}{n} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right) \leq 1 -  \frac{n-1}{n}\frac{r}{R} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right).
\end{multline}
It suffices to check that for all $t > 1$,
\begin{align}
    \beta \left(\frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right) \left(2 - t^{n-1}\right) - \frac{\beta}{n} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right) &\leq 0\\
    1 -  \frac{n-1}{n} t^{-1} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right) &\geq 0.
\end{align}
The first point can be simplified as
\begin{equation}
    \left(\frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n} - 1}\right) \left(2 - t^{n-1}\right) \leq \frac{1}{n}
\end{equation}
and this follows from Lemma~\ref{lem_gamma}.
To prove the second point, we observe that $t \mapsto t^{-1} \left(\frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1} - 1}\right)$ is decreasing and that its limit when $t \to 1$ is $\frac{n}{n-1}$.

We finally prove that for all $\abs{x} \geq 1$ and for all $r,s \in [0,1]$, we have $\abs{\int_r^s \! \phi^x(x,t) \,\mathrm{d} t} \leq \beta(r^2 + s^2)$. Since $\phi^x = - \abs{\phi^x} e_r$, it amounts to show that for all $\abs{x} \geq 1$ and for all $s \in [0,1]$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq_int_phix}
    \int_0^s \! \abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \,\mathrm{d} t \leq \beta s^2.
\end{equation}
If $\abs{x} \geq R$, inequality (\ref{eq_int_phix}) holds true for all $s \in [0,1]$ because we have $\abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \leq 2 \beta t$ for all $t \in [0,1]$.
Now, we fix $1 \leq \abs{x} < R$ and as usual, we write $r$ for $\abs{x}$.
Inequality (\ref{eq_int_phix}) holds true for all $s \in [0,\rho(r)]$ because we have $\abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \leq 2 \beta t$ for all $t \in [0,\rho(r)]$.
Next, we estimate for $t \in [\rho(r),1]$,
\begin{equation}
    \abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \leq 2 \abs{\nabla u(x)} = 2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}
\end{equation}
whence for $s \in [\rho(r),1]$,
\begin{multline}
    \beta s^2 - \int_0^s \! \abs{\phi^x(x,t)} \,\mathrm{d} t \geq \beta s^2 - \beta \delta(R)^2\\ - 2 \beta \delta(R) (\rho(r) - \delta(R)) - 2 \beta \delta(R) \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} (s - \rho(r)).
\end{multline}
The right hand side function attains its minimum over $s \in \mathbf{R}$ at $s = \delta(R) \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}$ and its corresponding value is 
\begin{equation}
    2 \beta \delta(R) \rho \left[\left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1\right] - \beta \delta(R)^2 \left[\left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} - 1\right].
\end{equation}
It is non-negative if and only if
\begin{equation}
    \rho(r) \geq \frac{\delta(R)}{2} \left[\left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} + 1\right].
\end{equation}
and given the formula (\ref{eq_rho}) of $\rho$, this means
\begin{multline}
\beta r \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right)\\ - \frac{r}{n}\left(\beta - \frac{n-1}{R}\right) \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^n - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}\right) \geq \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1}.
\end{multline}
We rewrite this,
\begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate0}
\beta r \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{2n-2} \Gamma\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right) }{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n} - 1} - \frac{1}{n}\right) \geq \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} \left(\frac{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n-1} - 1}{\left(\tfrac{R}{r}\right)^{n} - 1}\right) - \frac{n-1}{n} \frac{r}{R}.
\end{equation}
We see first that the left-hand side is non-negative. Indeed, for all $t \geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate00}
    \Gamma(t) \geq \frac{1}{n-1} \frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n-1}} \geq \frac{1}{n} \frac{t^n - 1}{t^n},
\end{equation}
where the first inequality comes from Lemma~\ref{lem_gamma} and the second one comes from the fact that whenever $\alpha > \beta > 0$ and $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \frac{1}{\beta} t^{\alpha -\beta} (t^\beta - 1) \geq \frac{1}{\alpha} (t^\alpha - 1).
    \end{equation}
Then, (\ref{eq_gamma_estimate0}) is equivalent to the fact that for all $t > 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate01}
    \beta \left(\frac{t^{2n-2} \Gamma(t)}{t^n - 1} - \frac{1}{n}\right) \geq t^{n-1} \left(\frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n} - 1}\right) - \frac{n-1}{n} t^{-1}
\end{equation}
The inequality holds true if $\beta \geq n - \tfrac{1}{2}$ by the last point of Lemma~\ref{lem_gamma}. In fact, it is necessary for $\beta$ to be greater than or equal to $n - \tfrac{1}{2}$ because dividing the left-hand side by $t - 1$ and taking the limit $t \to 1^+$ yields the value $\frac{n-1}{n} \beta$ whereas the same operation at the right-hand side yields $\frac{n-1}{n} \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right)$. We leave the details to the interested reader.

\begin{appendices}

\section{The function \texorpdfstring{$\Gamma$}{}}\label{appendix_gamma}

We recall and prove Lemma~\ref{lem_potential}. 

\begin{lem
    Let $\Omega$ be a non-empty $C^2$ star-shaped bounded open set of $\mathbf{R}^n$.
    There exists a continuous function $\Gamma \colon \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega \to \mathbf{R}$ such that
    \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
        \item $\Gamma$ is harmonic positive on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$;
        \item $\Gamma = 0$ on $\partial \Omega$,
        \item For all $x \in \mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$, $\nabla \Gamma(x) \ne 0$
        \item $\Gamma$ has a $C^1$ extension up to the boundary and for all $x \in \partial \Omega$, there exists $t > 0$ such that $\nabla \Gamma(x) = t \nu(x)$, where $\nu(x)$ is the outward unit normal vector of $\Omega$ at $x$.
    \end{enumerate}
\end{lem}

\begin{proof}
   
   
   
   
    Without loss of generality, we assume that $0 \in \Omega$ and that $\Omega$ is star-shaped with respect to $0$.
    We detail the case $n \geq 3$.
    According to~\cite[Section 3A, Theorem 3.40]{Fo}, there exists a unique function $p \in C(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega)$ such that
    \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
        \item $p$ is harmonic on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$,
        \item $p$ is harmonic at infinity,
        \item $p=1$ on $\partial \Omega$.
    \end{enumerate}
   
   
   
   
   
    We refer to~\cite[Proposition 2.74]{Fo} for the characterisations of functions which are harmonic at infinity.
    Now we define $\Gamma(x) = 1 - p(x)$ and we review the properties of the Lemma.
    It is clear that $\Gamma$ is harmonic on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ and $\Gamma = 0$ on $\partial \Omega$.
    As $p$ is harmonic at infinity, we have $\lim_{x \to \infty} p(x) = 0$ and thus $\lim_{x \to +\infty} \Gamma(x) = 1$.
    We can then apply the maximum principle to see that $\Gamma > 0$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$.
    The function $\Gamma$ has a $C^1$ extension up to the boundary thanks to the usual regularity results for Dirichlet problems.
    As $\Gamma$ is constant on $\partial \Omega$, its tangential derivative is $0$ along $\partial \Omega$.
    And according to the Hopf Lemma, the normal derivative (with respect to the outward normal vector) is $> 0$ along $\partial \Omega$.
    This proves that for all $x \in \partial \Omega$, there exists $t > 0$ such that $\nabla \Gamma(x) = t \nu(x)$.
    The fact that $\nabla \Gamma$ never vanishes comes from the fact that $\Omega$ is star-shaped.
    Indeed, the function $w \colon x \mapsto x \cdot \nabla \Gamma(x)$ is harmonic on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$ and $\geq 0$ on $\partial \Omega$.
    In addition, we see that $\lim_{x \to +\infty} w(x) = 0$ by applying~\cite[Proposition 2.75]{Fo} to the function $p$.
    We can use the maximum principle to conclude that $w > 0$ on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega$

    In the case $n=2$, we define $p$ as the unique function $p \in C(\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \Omega)$ such that
    \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
        \item $p$ is harmonic on $\mathbf{R}^n \setminus \overline{\Omega}$,
        \item $p$ is harmonic at infinity,
        \item $p(x)=\ln(\abs{x})$ on $\partial \Omega$.
    \end{enumerate}Then we define $\Gamma = \ln(\abs{x}) - p$.
    As $p$ is harmonic at infinity, it is bounded at infinity and thus $\lim_{x \to +\infty} \Gamma(x) = +\infty$.
    The rest of the proof is the same except that $\lim_{x \to +\infty} x \cdot \nabla \Gamma(x) = 1$.
    The case $n=1$ is trivial.
\end{proof}

In the case of the unit ball $\Omega = B(0,1)$, the function $\Gamma$ is given by 
\begin{equation}\label{def_gamma3}
    \Gamma(r) =
    \begin{cases}
        r-1                         &\ \text{if $n=1$}\\
        \ln(r)                      &\ \text{if $n=2$}\\
        \frac{1}{n-2}(1-r^{2-n})    &\ \text{if $n \geq 3$}.
    \end{cases}
\end{equation}
We isolate a few useful estimates about this function in the following Lemma.

\begin{lem}\label{lem_gamma}
    Let $n$ be an integer $\geq 2$ and let $\Gamma$ be defined as in (\ref{def_gamma3}).
    \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
        \item For all $s, t \geq 1$, $\Gamma(t) - \Gamma(s) = s^{2-n} \Gamma\left(\frac{t}{s}\right)$.
        \item The function
            \begin{equation}
                t \mapsto \frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1}
            \end{equation}
            is increasing on $]1,+\infty[$.
        \item For all $t \geq 1$,
            \begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate}
                \frac{1}{n-1} \frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n-1}} \leq \Gamma(t) \leq \frac{1}{n} \frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1}}.
            \end{equation}
        \item For all $t > 1$,
            \begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate2}
                \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right) \left(\frac{t^{2n-2} \Gamma(t)}{t^n - 1} - \frac{1}{n}\right) \geq t^{n-1} \left(\frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n} - 1}\right) - \frac{n-1}{n} t^{-1}
            \end{equation}
    \end{enumerate}
\end{lem}

\begin{proof}
    The first point is easy and we pass directly to the second one.
    If $n = 2$, the function
    \begin{equation}
        t \mapsto \frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1} = \frac{t \ln(t)}{t-1}
    \end{equation}
    is increasing because $t \mapsto t \ln(t)$ is convex. If $n \geq 3$, the function
    \begin{equation}
        t \mapsto \frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1} = \frac{1}{n-2} \frac{t^{n-1} - t}{t^{n-1} - 1}
    \end{equation}
    is increasing because
    \begin{equation}
        \frac{t^{n-1} - t}{t^{n-1} - 1} = 1 - \frac{t-1}{t^{n-1} - 1}
    \end{equation}
    and $t \mapsto t^{n-1}$ is convex. Since $\lim_{t \to 1} \frac{t^{n-1} \Gamma(t)}{t^{n-1} - 1} = \frac{1}{n - 1}$,
    we also deduce that for all $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \Gamma(t) \geq \frac{1}{n-1} \frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n-1}}.
    \end{equation}
    Next, we prove that for all $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \Gamma(t) \leq \frac{1}{n} \frac{t^n - 1}{t^{n-1}}.
    \end{equation}
    We rewrite this condition
    \begin{equation}
        n t^{n-1} \Gamma(t) \leq t^n - 1
    \end{equation}
    and since both sides equals $0$ at $t = 1$, it suffices to show that the derivative of the left-hand side is greater than or equal to the derivative of the left-hand side on $[1,+\infty[$. We are thus led to show that for all $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        n(n-1) t^{n-2} \Gamma(t) + n \leq n t^{n-1},
    \end{equation}
    that is
    \begin{equation}
        \Gamma(t) \leq \frac{1}{n-1} \frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n-2}}.
    \end{equation}
    When $n = 2$, this comes from the concavity of $t \mapsto \ln(t)$. When $n \geq 3$, this comes from the fact that whenever $\alpha > \beta > 0$ and $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \beta^{-1}(t^\beta - 1) \leq \alpha^{-1}(t^\alpha - 1).
    \end{equation}
    We finally show that for all $t > 1$,
    \begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_estimate3}
        \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right) \left(\frac{t^{2n-2} \Gamma(t)}{t^n - 1} - \frac{1}{n}\right) \geq t^{n-1} \left(\frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n} - 1}\right) - \frac{n-1}{n} t^{-1}.
    \end{equation}
    We isolate $\Gamma$ in (\ref{eq_gamma_estimate3}) and we obtain the equivalent condition 
    \begin{equation}
        n \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right) t^{2n-1} \Gamma(t) \geq n t^{2n-1} + \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right) \left(t^{n+1} - 2t^n  - t\right) + \tfrac{1}{2}(n-1).
    \end{equation}
    Since both sides equals $0$ at $t = 1$, it suffices to show that the derivative of the left-hand side is greater than or equal to the derivative of the left-hand side on $[1,+\infty[$. This condition simplifies to the fact that for all $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}\label{eq_gamma_computations}
        n \left(n - \tfrac{1}{2}\right) t^{2n - 2} \Gamma(t) \geq n t^{n-1}(t^{n-1} - 1) + \tfrac{1}{2}(t^n - 1).
    \end{equation}
    The condition (\ref{eq_gamma_computations}) holds true when we replace $\Gamma(t)$ by the lower bound
    \begin{equation}
        \Gamma(t) \geq \frac{1}{n-1} \frac{t^{n-1} - 1}{t^{n-1}}.
    \end{equation}
    Indeed, the new inequality simplifies to the fact that for all $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \frac{1}{n-1} t^{n-1} (t^{n-1} - 1) \geq \frac{1}{n}(t^n - 1)
    \end{equation}
    and this comes from the fact that whenever $\alpha > \beta > 0$ and $t \geq 1$,
    \begin{equation}
        \frac{1}{\beta} t^{\alpha -\beta} (t^\beta - 1) \geq \frac{1}{\alpha} (t^\alpha - 1).
    \end{equation}
\end{proof}


   

   
   

   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

   

   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   


\end{appendices}

