--- abstract: | We study stable solutions to the equation $(-\Delta)^{1/2} u = f(u)$, posed in a bounded domain of $\mathbb{R}^n$. For nonnegative convex nonlinearities, we prove that stable solutions are smooth in dimensions $n\leq 4$. This result, which was known only for $n=1$, follows from a new interior Hölder estimate that is completely independent of the nonlinearity $f$. A main ingredient in our proof is a new geometric form of the stability condition. It is still unknown for other fractions of the Laplacian and, surprisingly, it requires convexity of the nonlinearity. From it, we deduce higher order Sobolev estimates that allow us to extend the techniques developed by Cabré, Figalli, Ros-Oton, and Serra for the Laplacian. In this way we obtain, besides the Hölder bound for $n\leq 4$, a universal $H^{1/2}$ estimate in all dimensions. Our $L^\infty$ bound is expected to hold for $n\leq 8$, but this has been settled only in the radial case or when $f(u) = \lambda e^u$. For other fractions of the Laplacian, the expected optimal dimension for boundedness of stable solutions has been reached only when $f(u) = \lambda e^u$, even in the radial case. address: - 'X. Cabré ^1,2^ ^1^ ICREA, Pg. Lluis Companys 23, 08010 Barcelona, Spain ^2^ Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Departament de Matemàtiques and IMTech, Av. Diagonal 647, 08028 Barcelona, Spain' - 'T. Sanz-Perela: Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria de Cantoblanco, 28049 Madrid, Spain' author: - Xavier Cabré - 'Tomás Sanz-Perela' title: 'A universal Hölder estimate up to dimension 4 for stable solutions to half-Laplacian semilinear equations' --- Introduction and results ======================== The regularity of stable solutions to semilinear equations $-\Delta u = f(u)$ has been a long-standing problem in elliptic PDEs since the 1970s. Important efforts have been devoted to investigate the optimal dimension up to which stable solutions are bounded. This problem has been recently solved by Cabré, Figalli, Ros-Oton, and Serra @CabreFigalliRosSerra-Dim9, by proving that stable solutions are regular in dimensions $n\leq 9$ for all nonnegative nonlinearities $f$. The result is optimal since there exist examples of singular $H^1$ stable solutions in dimensions $n \geq 10$. For further details, see @CabreFigalliRosSerra-Dim9 [@Dupaigne] and the references therein. The goal of this paper is to study the same question in the fractional setting. We consider the equation $$\label{Eq:SemilinearEquation} {(-\Delta)^{s}}u = f(u) \quad \text{ in } \Omega,$$ where $\Omega$ is a bounded domain of ${{\mathbb{R}}}^n$ and ${(-\Delta)^{s}}$ is the fractional Laplacian, $$\label{Eq:DefFracLap} {(-\Delta)^{s}}w\,(x') := c_{n,{s}} \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}^{n}} \dfrac{w(x') - w(z')}{|x'-z'|^{n + 2{s}}} {\,\mathrm{d}}z' ,\quad {s}\in (0,1),$$ with $ c_{n,{s}}$ being a positive normalizing constant (see @CabreSireI). In this case, the few known results (mainly those contained in the three papers @RosOtonSerra-Extremal [@RosOton-Gelfand; @SanzPerela-Radial] described below) reach the expected optimal dimension for boundedness of stable solutions only when $f(u) = \lambda e^u$, even in the radial case. In such dimension, which was found by Ros-Oton in @RosOton-Gelfand and it is given by condition below, is compared with the available results. Note that is the Euler-Lagrange equation of the functional $$\label{Eq:Energy} E(w) := \dfrac{c_{n,{s}}}{4}\int \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}^{2n} \setminus (\Omega^c)^2} \dfrac{|w(x') - w(z')|^2}{|x'-z'|^{n + 2{s}}} {\,\mathrm{d}}x' {\,\mathrm{d}}z' - \int_\Omega F(w) {\,\mathrm{d}}x',$$ where $F(t) := \int_0^t f(\theta) {\,\mathrm{d}}\theta$ and $\Omega^c := {{\mathbb{R}}}^n\setminus \Omega$. A solution $u:{{\mathbb{R}}}^n \to {{\mathbb{R}}}$ to —or critical point of $E$— is said to be *stable* if the second variation of $E$ at $u$ is nonnegative, i.e., $\frac{{\,\mathrm{d}}^2}{{\,\mathrm{d}}\varepsilon^2}|_{\varepsilon = 0} E(u + \varepsilon \xi) \geq 0$ for all $\xi\in H^{{s}}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ with compact support in $\Omega$. This is equivalent to requiring that $$\label{Eq:Stability} \int_{\Omega} f'(u)\xi^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x' \leq {\left [ {\xi} \right ] }_{H^{{s}}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)}^2 \quad \text{ for all } \ \xi\in H^{{s}}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n) \text{ with compact support in } \Omega.$$ Recall that for ${s}\in (0,1)$ and $U\subset {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$, we define $H^{s}(U) := \{ w \in L^2(U): {\left [ {w} \right ] }_{H^{{s}}(U)} < +\infty\}$, where $$\label{Eq:DefHs} {\left [ {w} \right ] }_{H^{{s}}(U)}^2 := \dfrac{c_{n,{s}}}{2}\int_U \int_U \dfrac{|w(x') - w(z')|^2}{|x'-z'|^{n + 2{s}}} {\,\mathrm{d}}x' {\,\mathrm{d}}z'.$$ Notice that stability is considered among functions which agree with $u$ outside $\Omega$, and therefore *local minimizers* of the energy (i.e., minimizers under small perturbations which do not change the exterior values of $u$) are stable solutions. Our interest lies in nonnegative nonlinearities that grow superlinearly at $+\infty$. In this case, it is easy to see that the energy is unbounded below and hence admits no absolute minimizer. However, as we will see in , there are important instances in which nonconstant stable solutions exist. In this article we study the problem for the half-Laplacian (${s}=1/2$), a case which is of special interest in view of its applications. Indeed, ${(-\Delta)^{1/2}}$ and related first order integro-differential operators appear in the modeling of important physical phenomena, such as the Peierls-Nabarro model for crystal dislocations or the Benjamin-Ono equation in fluid dynamics. This occurs since the half-Laplacian is the Dirichlet to Neumann map associated to the harmonic extension in the half-space. An important illustration of the key role played by the dimension in our problem is given by the function $u(x') = \log |x'|^{-1}$ ($x'\in {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$), which solves ${(-\Delta)^{1/2}}u = \lambda_0 e^u$ in $B_1$ for some constant $\lambda_0 >0$ and belongs to $H^{1/2}(B_1)\cap L^1_{1/2}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ —see below for this last space. Using the fractional Hardy inequality one can check that, in dimensions $n \geq 9$, $u$ is a stable solution. On the other hand, for the equation ${(-\Delta)^{1/2}}u = f(u)$ in $\Omega \subset {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$, with $f \geq 0$ and under the Dirichlet condition $u \equiv 0$ in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^n \setminus \Omega$, it is known that stable solutions are bounded in $\Omega$ - when $n= 1$, if $f$ is convex (Ros-Oton and Serra @RosOtonSerra-Extremal); - when $n \leq 4$, if $f f'' /(f')^2$ has a limit at infinity (Ros-Oton and Serra @RosOtonSerra-Extremal); - when $n \leq 8$, if $f(u) = \lambda e^u$ and $\Omega$ is symmetric and convex with respect to all the coordinate directions (Ros-Oton @RosOton-Gelfand); - when $2 \leq n \leq 8$, if $\Omega= B_1$ (Sanz-Perela @SanzPerela-Radial). In view of these results, it is natural to conjecture that stable solutions to ${(-\Delta)^{1/2}}u = f(u)$ in $\Omega\subset {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$ are always bounded in $\Omega$ whenever $n\leq 8$, not only for $f(u) = \lambda e^u$ in symmetric domains but for a wider class of nonlinearities and domains. Here the dimension $n=8$ would be optimal, by the explicit stable solution for $n\geq 9$ exhibited above. In this paper we make progress towards the solution of this conjecture by extending some of the techniques developed for the local case in @CabreFigalliRosSerra-Dim9 by Cabré, Figalli, Ros-Oton, and Serra. The following is our main result. It provides a universal interior Hölder estimate for stable solutions $u$ to in dimensions $n\leq 4$, as well as an $H^{1/2}$ bound in every dimension. Both estimates give a control in terms of a very weak norm of $u$, namely the quantity ${\left \| {u} \right \| }_{L^1_{1/2} ({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)}$. Here and through the paper, for ${s}\in (0,1)$ we denote by $L^1_{{s}} ({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ the space of measurable functions for which the norm $$\label{Eq:DefL1s} {\left \| {w} \right \| }_{L^1_{{s}} ({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)} := \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}^n} \dfrac{ |w(x')|}{(1 + |x'|^2)^{\frac{n + 2{s}}{2}}} {\,\mathrm{d}}x'$$ is finite. \[Th:Holder\] Let $n\geq 1$ and $u\in C^2(B_1)\cap L^1_{1/2}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ be a stable solution to $(-\Delta)^{1/2}u = f(u)$ in $B_1 \subset {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$, where $f$ is a nonnegative convex $C^{1,\gamma}$ function for some $\gamma >0$. Then, $$\label{Eq:H1/2} {\left [ {u} \right ] }_{H^{1/2} (B_{1/2})} \leq C {\left \| {u} \right \| }_{L^1_{1/2} ({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)}$$ for some dimensional constant $C$. In addition, $$\label{Eq:Holder} {\left \| {u} \right \| }_{C^\alpha (\overline{B}_{1/2})} \leq C {\left \| {u} \right \| }_{L^1_{1/2} ({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)} \qquad \text{if } 1 \leq n\leq 4,$$ for some dimensional constants $\alpha>0$ and $C$. The most remarkable feature of this result is that estimates and do not depend on the nonlinearity $f$ at all, which is only assumed to be nonnegative and convex. This is a notorious difference with all the available results mentioned above, in which the $L^\infty$ estimates depended on the particular nonlinearity $f$ appearing in the equation. This feature will allow us to establish a Liouville result for entire stable solutions, below. In addition, is the first result in which no prescribed exterior Dirichlet condition is assumed. This will be of great importance in order to include the case $n=1$ (by looking at the solution as defined in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^2$ after adding an artificial variable) since our basic inequality towards the Hölder estimate —which is below— requires[^1] $n\geq 2$. The Hölder interior estimate of for $n\leq 4$ can be combined with the moving planes method to obtain an $L^\infty(\Omega)$ bound for stable solutions to the Dirichlet problem in convex domains $\Omega$ under zero exterior data. Indeed, as proved in @RosOtonSerra-Extremal, one can start the moving planes argument at points on the boundary of a convex domain $\Omega$, obtaining an $L^\infty$ estimate in a neighborhood of $\partial \Omega$. Thus, one concludes the following result. \[Coro:LinftyConvexDiriclet\] Let $1 \leq n \leq 4$ and let $\Omega \subset {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$ be any bounded convex $C^1$ domain. Let $u\in L^\infty(\Omega)\cap H^{1/2}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ be a stable solution to $$\label{Eq:DirichletPb} \beqc{\PDEsystem} {(-\Delta)^{1/2}}u &= & f(u) & \text{in } \Omega ,\\ u &= &0 & \text{in } {{\mathbb{R}}}^n\setminus\Omega, {\end{array} \right.}$$ where $f$ is a nonnegative convex $C^{1,\gamma}$ function for some $\gamma >0$. Then, $$\label{Eq:LinftyConvex} {\left \| {u} \right \| }_{L^\infty(\Omega)} \leq C_\Omega {\left \| {u} \right \| }_{L^1(\Omega)}$$ for some constant $C_\Omega$ depending only on $\Omega$. Also in convex domains $\Omega$, an $H^{s}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ estimate for bounded stable solutions to vanishing outside $\Omega$ is known to hold in every dimension and for all ${s}\in(0,1)$. This was proved by Ros-Oton and Serra in @RosOtonSerra-Extremal using the Pohozaev identity for the fractional Laplacian combined with some regularity estimates near $\partial \Omega$. Instead, our interior $H^{1/2}$ bound does not assume any particular exterior data —and also holds for all dimensions. Although and are stated as a priori estimates for $C^2$ or $L^\infty$ solutions, they also hold for a bigger class of stable solutions. This is discussed in below, where we comment also on the different notions of solution to our semilinear equation. As a main ingredient in the proof of , we establish a new geometric[^2] form of the stability condition, expressed through the harmonic extension[^3] $v$ of $u$ in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+$. It is stated in below, and it is a fractional analogue of a well-known inequality of Sternberg and Zumbrun @SternbergZumbrun1 [@SternbergZumbrun2] for stable solutions to $-\Delta u = f(u)$. Surprisingly (when comparing it with the proof in the local case), to establish we need to further assume that $f$ is convex. \[Th:GeomStabilityFullGradient\_s=1/2\] Let $n \geq 1$ and $u\in C^2(\Omega) \cap L^1_{1/2}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ be a stable solution to $(-\Delta)^{1/2}u = f(u)$ in a domain $\Omega \subset {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$, where $f$ is a nonnegative convex $C^{1,\gamma}$ function for some $\gamma>0$. Let $v$ be the harmonic extension of $u$ in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+$ and define $$\label{Eq:AcalDef} {\mathcal{A}}:= \begin{cases} \left ( \ds \sum_{i,j=1}^{n+1} v_{ij}^2 - \sum_{j=1}^{n+1}\left( \sum_{i=1}^{n+1} v_{ij} \dfrac{v_i }{|\nabla v|} \right)^2 \right)^{1/2} & \text{ if }\, |\nabla v| > 0, \vspace{2mm} \\ \ 0 & \text{ if }\, |\nabla v| = 0 . \end{cases}$$ Then, $$\label{Eq:GeomStabilityFullGradient_s=1/2} \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+ } {\mathcal{A}}^2 \eta ^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x \leq \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+} |\nabla v|^2 |\nabla \eta |^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x$$ for every Lipschitz function $\eta$ with compact support in $\Omega \times [0,+\infty)$. An analogue of for fractional powers ${s}\neq 1/2$ is not known at the moment. In its proof we strongly use that ${s}=1/2$; see for details. We believe that, if available, it would allow extending , in certain dimensions, to all powers ${s}\in (0,1)$. Prior to our work, the inequality of Sternberg and Zumbrun had been extended to the fractional setting by Sire and Valdinoci @SireValdinoci, but in a weaker form than ours. Their inequality involves only horizontal derivatives of $v$: they obtained a similar quantity to ${\mathcal{A}}$ in , but where the indices run only from $1$ to $n$, and not to $n+1$. As a consequence, no one has used it successfully for proving boundedness of stable solutions in bounded domains —although it is the main ingredient in a simple proof of the fractional De Giorgi conjecture in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^2$; see @SireValdinoci. Instead, from our new geometric form of the stability condition we will obtain an $L^2$ estimate for all second derivatives of $v$, including those involving the $y$ variable. This bound will be crucial in the proof of ; see for more details. Before going into the main ideas in our proofs, let us introduce an important class of stable solutions and the known results on their regularity. Extremal solutions. Known results for $\mathbf{{s}\in (0,1)}$ {#Subsec:Extremal} ------------------------------------------------------------- Given a power ${s}\in (0,1)$, consider the problem $$\label{Eq:ExtremalProblem} \beqc{\PDEsystem} {(-\Delta)^{s}}u &= &\lambda f(u) & \text{in } \Omega ,\\ u &= &0 & \text{in } {{\mathbb{R}}}^n\setminus\Omega, {\end{array} \right.}$$ where $\Omega \subset {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$ is a bounded smooth domain, $\lambda > 0$ is a real parameter, and $$\label{Eq:Conditionsf} f\in C^1([0,\infty)), \ f\text{ is nondecreasing, } f(0)>0, \text{ and } \lim_{t \rightarrow +\infty} \dfrac{f(t)}{t} = + \infty .$$ It is known (see @RosOtonSerra-Extremal) that problem admits an increasing family of minimal[^4] stable solutions ${\left \{ u_\lambda \ : \ 0<\lambda<\lambda^\star \right \}}$, with $u_\lambda > 0$ being bounded in $\Omega$, up to a certain finite extremal parameter $\lambda^\star$. For $\lambda > \lambda^\star$ there is no solution to , even in the $L^1$-weak sense.[^5] The pointwise limit of $\{u_\lambda\}$, as $\lambda \nearrow \lambda^\star$, is a stable $L^1$-weak solution of for $\lambda=\lambda^\star$. Such solution, denoted by $u^\star$, is called the *extremal solution* of . A fundamental question is to determine whether it is bounded or not. The main result of our paper can be used (through ) to establish the boundedness of the extremal solution in dimensions $n\leq 4$ for ${s}=1/2$ when $\Omega$ is a convex domain and $f$ is a convex nonlinearity. \[Coro:Extremal\] For some $\gamma >0$, let $f$ be a $C^{1,\gamma}$ convex function satisfying . Let $\Omega\subset {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$ be a bounded convex $C^1$ domain and let $u^\star$ be the extremal solution to for ${s}= 1/2$. If $1 \leq n \leq 4$, then $u^\star \in L^\infty(\Omega)$. The result is established by applying the estimate of , for $\lambda < \lambda^\star$, to the bounded solutions $u_\lambda$. Then, since it is easy to prove that $u^\star\in L^1(\Omega)$, the estimates for $u_\lambda$ are uniform in $\lambda$ and one can take the limit $\lambda \to \lambda^\star $ to deduce the boundedness of $u^\star$. Besides , the available results on the boundedness of the extremal solution for the fractional problem are those contained in @RosOtonSerra-Extremal, @RosOton-Gelfand, and @SanzPerela-Radial. We briefly describe them next. See for a schematic representation of the dimensions achieved in each result. In @RosOtonSerra-Extremal, Ros-Oton and Serra showed that if $f$ is convex then $u^\star$ is bounded whenever $n < 4s$, extending to the nonlocal setting the arguments of Nedev @Nedev. The authors also established the boundedness of the extremal solution in dimensions $n < 10s$ under the more restrictive assumption of $f$ being $C^2$ and $f f'' /(f')^2$ having a limit at infinity; this is an extension of the arguments of Crandall and Rabinowitz @CrandallRabinowitz. The estimates for stable solutions in @RosOtonSerra-Extremal depend on $f$, in contrast with ours, and do not provide any estimate for $n=1$ if ${s}$ is small. The results from @RosOtonSerra-Extremal have been recently extended to the case of systems of two equations by Fazly @Fazly-Extremal. Shortly after @RosOtonSerra-Extremal, Ros-Oton @RosOton-Gelfand obtained an optimal result in the case of the exponential nonlinearity $f(u) = e^u$, extending the arguments of @DavilaDupaigneMontenegro commented below, by showing that $u^\star$ is bounded whenever[^6] $$\label{Eq:OptimalDimensionsGammas} \dfrac{\Gamma^2(\frac{n + 2s}{4})}{\Gamma^2(\frac{n - 2s}{4})} < \dfrac{\Gamma(\frac{n}{2})\Gamma(1+s)}{\Gamma(\frac{n - 2s}{2})}$$ and $\Omega$ is symmetric and convex with respect to all the coordinate directions. In below we represent graphically the dimensions given by . In particular, we see that holds in dimensions $n \leq 7$ for all $s \in (0,1)$, and additionally in dimension $n=8$ for some fractions ${s}$ which include ${s}=1/2$. Condition is optimal since, when fails, $\log |x'|^{-2s}$ is a singular stable solution to ${(-\Delta)^{s}}u = \lambda e^u$ in all of ${{\mathbb{R}}}^n$ for some $\lambda>0$ (see Remark 2.2 of @RosOton-Gelfand). One expects to provide the optimal range for the values of $n$ and ${s}$ in which stable solutions are bounded also for all nonlinearities $f$ (or for a large class of them). Nevertheless, this is not known even in the radial case,[^7] as explained next. The problem in a ball is studied in a recent paper by Sanz-Perela @SanzPerela-Radial. It is proved that in dimensions $2\leq n< 2({s}+2+\sqrt{2({s}+1)})$ the extremal solution to , with $\Omega= B_1$, is bounded. This extends the results of Cabré and Capella @CabreCapella-Radial for the local case, and of Capella, Dávila, Dupaigne, and Sire @CapellaEtAl for another nonlocal operator. The condition on the dimension in this radial case (in blue in ) is slightly worse than the expected optimal one (in green), but it is a significant improvement of $n<10{s}$ (in yellow). In we will explain why @SanzPerela-Radial and the current work do not reach the expected optimal dimensions. A further question of interest is the partial regularity of singular stable solutions. In another very recent work, Hyder and Yang @HyderYang-SingularSet have established that the dimension of the singular set of a stable solution to ${(-\Delta)^{s}}u = e^u$ in $\Omega$ is at most $n-10{s}$. Condition in the case ${s}=1/2$ appeared in the literature for the first time in the paper @DavilaDupaigneMontenegro by Dávila, Dupaigne, and Montenegro. They dealt with a boundary reaction problem which is related to, but different from, our equation ${(-\Delta)^{1/2}}u = \partial_v v = f(v) $ on $\partial {{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+$ (where $v$ is the harmonic extension of $u$ in the half-space). Besides the case $f(u) = \lambda e^u$, @DavilaDupaigneMontenegro also studied power-like nonlinearities, for which a more precise condition on the dimension, now depending on the power $p$, was found. It corresponds to below for ${s}= 1/2$. Entire solutions {#Subsec:EntireSolutions} ---------------- A related issue to our problem is the classification of entire solutions to ${(-\Delta)^{s}}u = f(u)$ in all of ${{\mathbb{R}}}^n$ which are stable or, more generally, have finite Morse index. This problem has been treated very recently in a series of works, in which the condition appears again. For the power case $f(u) = |u|^{p-1}u$, Dávila, Dupaigne, and Wei @DavilaDupaigneWei-LaneEmden give a complete classification of finite Morse index solutions. Namely, they prove that when either $1 < p < (n + 2{s})/(n - 2{s})$, or $p > (n + 2{s})/(n - 2{s})$ and $$\label{Eq:GammasP} \dfrac{\Gamma^2(\frac{n + 2s}{4})}{\Gamma^2(\frac{n - 2s}{4})} < p \dfrac{\Gamma ( \frac{n}{2} - \frac{{s}}{p-1}) \Gamma ( {s}+ \frac{{s}}{p-1}) }{ \Gamma ( \frac{{s}}{p-1}) \Gamma ( \frac{n-2{s}}{2} - \frac{{s}}{p-1}) },$$ every finite Morse index entire solution is identically zero. Note that taking the limit $p\to +\infty$ in , one obtains precisely the expected optimal condition . In the case $f(u) = e^u$, Hyder and Yang @HyderYang-ClassGelfand have recently proved that no finite Morse index entire solution exists if holds —Duong and Nguyen @DuongNguyen-liouville had previously reached the condition $n < 10{s}$. Our main result allows to establish a Liouville theorem for stable solutions in dimensions $n\leq4$ for general nonnegative convex nonlinearities. We follow the ideas of Dupaigne and Farina @DupaigneFarina for the local case, which consist of applying a universal Hölder estimate to the blow-downs of a stable solution. \[Coro:Liouville\] Let $u\in C^2({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)\cap L^1_{1/2}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ be a stable solution to $(-\Delta)^{1/2}u = f(u)$ in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^n$, where $f$ is a nonnegative convex $C^{1,\gamma}$ function for some $\gamma >0$. Assume that $$\label{Eq:LowerBoundu} u(x') \geq - c_0 \log (2 + |x'|) \quad \text{ for } x'\in {{\mathbb{R}}}^n,$$ where $c_0 >0$ is a constant. If $1\leq n\leq 4$, then $u$ must be constant. Outline of the proofs {#Subsec:IdeasOfProofs} --------------------- Here we summarize the main ideas in the proofs of . We use the extension problem for the half-Laplacian as a main tool. For this, let us settle our notation. Through all the paper we will denote points in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+ = {{\mathbb{R}}}^n \times (0,+\infty)$ by $x= (x',y)$. Recall that the half-Laplacian of a regular enough function $u:{{\mathbb{R}}}^n \to {{\mathbb{R}}}$ can be computed through its harmonic extension in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+$. Indeed, if $v$ solves $\Delta v = 0$ in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+$ and $v(\cdot,0) = u$, then $- v_y(\cdot,0) = {(-\Delta)^{1/2}}u$. We will denote balls in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^n$ and ${{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}$ by $B_R$ and ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_R$ respectively, while $${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{R}^+ := {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_R \cap {{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+ = {\left \{ x=(x',y)\in {{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+ \ : \ |(x',y)|< R \right \}}$$ will be half-balls in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+$. If $x_0'\in {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$, ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{R}^+(x_0'):=(x_0',0)+{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{R}^+$. In addition, we will use the notation $$r := |x| \quad \text{ and } \quad v_r := \dfrac{x}{r}\cdot \nabla v (x) , \quad \text{ for } x \in {{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+.$$ The general strategy to obtain estimates for stable solutions consists of choosing an appropriate test function in the stability condition , which for ${s}= 1/2$ can be written, using the extension problem, as $$\label{Eq:StabilityExtensionHalfLaplacian} \int_\Omega f'(u) \xi^2 {\,\mathrm{d}x}' \leq \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}_+^{n+1}} |\nabla \xi |^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x$$ for every $\xi \in H^1( {{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+)$ such that its trace in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^n$ has compact support in $\Omega$; see . The choices of test function taken in each of the previously mentioned papers @RosOtonSerra-Extremal [@RosOton-Gelfand; @SanzPerela-Radial] were the following (up to a cut-off): $\xi = h(u)$ for some $h$ depending on $f$ in @RosOtonSerra-Extremal, $\xi = |x'|^{- a}$ for some $a>0$ in @RosOton-Gelfand, and $\xi = |x'|^{-b} (x' \cdot \nabla_{x'} v)$ for some $b>0$ in @SanzPerela-Radial. Instead, we will make use of two new test functions, and below. Our proof of follows the main lines of that in @CabreFigalliRosSerra-Dim9 for the local case, but confronts a delicate issue in a compactness argument (which remains open for ${s}\neq 1/2$). The main arguments in the proof can be summarized in four steps: $ \bullet$ **Step 1.** A key point is to choose $$\label{Eq:TestFunctionRadialDerivative} \xi = r^{1 + (1 - n)/2} v_r \zeta = |x|^{-(n-1)/2} (x\cdot \nabla v) \zeta$$ as test function in the stability condition , where $v$ is the harmonic extension of $u$ and $\zeta$ is a smooth cut-off function. This leads to the following bound (see ): $$\label{Eq:EstimatevrAnnulusHalfLap} \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} r^{1 - n} v_r^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x \leq C \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{3/4}^+ \setminus {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} |\nabla v|^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x \quad \text{ if } 2 \leq n \leq 4.$$ The crucial fact here is that, after this choice of $\xi$, the nonlinearity $f$ no longer appears in the estimates. The condition $2 \leq n \leq 4$ (which for general ${s}$ reads $2{s}< n < 10 {s}$ in below) is not the expected optimal range of dimensions. The reason why our proof does not reach such range is that, although we believe that the choice $\xi |_{\{y= 0\}} = |x'|^{-(n-1)/2}(x' \cdot \nabla_{x'} u)\zeta$ should be optimal, the election of its extension is not. The same issue occurs in the radial case treated in @SanzPerela-Radial, where still another different extension of the test function $\xi |_{\{y= 0\}}$ is chosen. $ \bullet$ **Step 2.** To relate the left and right-hand sides of , we prove that, under a doubling condition on $|\nabla v|^2{\,\mathrm{d}}x$, the quantities $v_r$ and $\nabla v $ are comparable, in $L^2$, in an annulus (see ). This combined with will lead to the geometric-decay bound $$\label{Eq:RadialDecayvrIntro} \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_R^+} r^{1 - n} v_r^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x \leq C R^{2 \alpha} {\left \| {\nabla v} \right \| }^2_{L^2({\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_{3/4})} \quad \text{ if } 2 \leq n \leq 4,$$ for all small enough radii $R$ and for some $\alpha > 0$. In order to establish the comparability of $v_r$ and $\nabla v$ in annuli we proceed as in @CabreFigalliRosSerra-Dim9, using a compactness argument. To carry it on, a control on higher order Sobolev norms of $v$ is needed, and for this it is crucial to use the new stability condition in geometric form, , given in . To establish we choose $$\label{Eq:TestFunctionFullGrad} \xi=|\nabla v|\eta$$ in the stability condition. At some point along the proof, to show the sign of a certain term, we use crucially the convexity and nonnegativeness of $f$. $ \bullet$ **Step 3.** Combining the decay of the weighted radial derivative and a Morrey-type estimate from @CabreQuantitative (), we obtain the Hölder bound $$\label{Eq:HolderEstimateExt} {\left [ {u} \right ] }_{C^\alpha( \overline{B}_{1/2})} \leq C {\left \| {\nabla v} \right \| }_{L^2({\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_{3/4})} \quad \text{ if } 2 \leq n \leq 4.$$ At this point, it will only remain to control the $L^2$ norm of $\nabla v$ by the $L^1_{1/2}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ norm of $u$. This is done in . For this, the key point is to realize that, thanks to , we have a control of the $L^2$ norm of $D^2v$ in terms of a lower order norm of $v$. Using this and two interpolation results from @CabreQuantitative (proved in below), we control the $H^1$ norm of $v$ by its $L^1$ norm and, in turn, by the $L^1_{1/2}$ norm of $u$. This will also lead, through a trace inequality, to the $H^{1/2}$ bound for $u$ in all dimensions. $ \bullet$ **Step 4.** Finally, to obtain the result in dimension $n=1$, we just need to consider the solution as defined in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^2$ after the addition of an artificial variable, and apply the result for $n=2$. In we establish the necessary results to carry out this process. Plan of the article ------------------- In we establish the key estimate of Step 1, which we carry on in the general setting of the equation ${(-\Delta)^{s}}u = f(u)$ with ${s}\in (0,1)$. In we establish the new geometric stability inequality given by , while is devoted to Step 2 described above. Then, in we establish the $H^{1/2}$ estimate of Step 3, leading to the proofs of and in . Finally, in we present some results related to adding an artificial variable. In the appendices we collect some results that are used through the paper, and we recall the proofs of the two interpolation inequalities from @CabreQuantitative needed in . A key weighted radial derivative estimate {#Sec:Step1ForAlls} ========================================= The goal of this section is to prove estimate . Although in this paper we only consider the case ${s}=1/2$, for future reference all the computations in this section are done for the equation ${(-\Delta)^{s}}u = f(u)$ in $B_1$, with ${s}\in (0,1)$. Along this section we will assume that $u\in C^2(B_1)\cap L^1_{s}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ and that it solves (pointwise) the equation ${(-\Delta)^{s}}u = f(u)$ in $B_1$, with $f\in C^{1,\gamma}$ for some $\gamma >0$. In the following remark we comment on these assumptions and discuss some extensions of our results to less regular classes of stable solutions. \[Remark:Regularity\] We can consider three classes of stable solutions to in terms of their regularity: $L^1$-weak solutions —defined in footnote \[Footnote:L1weak\]—, energy solutions —critical points of the functional $E(\cdot)$ in —, and pointwise (or classical) solutions. As mentioned in Remark 2.1 of @RosOtonSerra-Extremal (see @SanzPerela-Approx for nonzero values in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^n \setminus \Omega$), these three notions of solution coincide whenever the solution is bounded and $f$ sufficiently regular.[^8] Thus, our main result holds for bounded $L^1$-weak or energy solutions. When $u$ is not assumed a priori to be bounded, the situation is more delicate. On the one hand, our result leads to the interior Hölder regularity of energy stable solutions or, more generally, $L^1$-weak stable solutions which belong to the energy space associated to $E(\cdot)$. Indeed, it can be proved that any stable solution $u$ in these classes can be approximated by bounded stable solutions $u_k$ (at least when $f$ is increasing and convex and ${s}\geq 1/2$; see @SanzPerela-Approx). Then, the estimates for $u_k$ pass on the limiting function $u$. On the other hand, as in the local case ${s}=1$, our main result does not hold for general $L^1$-weak solutions, as there exist unbounded $L^1$-weak solutions which satisfy the stability hypothesis in the dimensions given by ; see @SanzPerela-Approx. The issue here is that these unbounded $L^1$-weak solutions are not in the energy space associated to $E(\cdot)$. To state the main result of this section, we need to introduce the extension problem for all the fractional powers ${s}\in(0,1)$ of the Laplacian. Recall that if $v$ solves $$\label{Eq:ExtensionProblemDirichlet} \beqc{rcll} \operatorname{div}(y^a \nabla v ) &= & 0 & \text{in } {{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+ ,\\ v\, &= &u & \text{on } \partial {{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+ = {{\mathbb{R}}}^n, {\end{array} \right.}$$ where $a:= 1 - 2{s}$, then $$\label{Eq:DirichletToNeumannRelation} \dfrac{\partial v}{\partial \nu^a} := - \lim_{y \downarrow 0} y^a v_y = \dfrac{1}{d_{s}} {(-\Delta)^{s}}u$$ for a positive constant $d_{s}$ which depends only on ${s}$, and such that $d_{1/2}=1$. The function $v$, which is smooth in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+ $, is called the ${s}$-*harmonic extension* of $u$ and can be expressed in terms of $u$ through convolution with a Poisson kernel —see in our first appendix. Along the paper we will always denote by $v$ the ${s}$-harmonic extension of $u$. \[Prop:EstimatevrAnnulus\] Let $n\geq 1$, ${s}\in (0,1)$, and let $u\in C^2(B_1)\cap L^1_{s}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ be a stable solution to ${(-\Delta)^{s}}u = f(u)$ in $B_1\subset {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$, where $f$ is a $C^{1,\gamma}$ function for some $\gamma >0$. Let $v$ be the ${s}$-harmonic extension of $u$. Then, $$\label{Eq:EstimatevrAnnulus} \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^{1-2{s}} r^{2{s}- n} v_r^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x \leq C \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{3/4}^+ \setminus {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^{1-2{s}} |\nabla v|^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x \quad \quad \text{if } n \in (2{s}, 10{s}),$$ for some constant $C$ depending only on $n$ and ${s}$. This result will follow from making a particular choice of the test function in the stability condition, once this condition is written in the extended space ${{\mathbb{R}}}_+^{n+1}$. Namely, definition is equivalent to requiring $$\label{Eq:StabilityExtension} \int_\Omega f'(u) \xi^2 {\,\mathrm{d}x}' \leq d_{s}\int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}_+^{n+1}} y^a |\nabla \xi |^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x$$ for every $\xi \in H^1( {{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+, y^a)$ whose trace in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^n$ has compact support in $\Omega$. This follows easily from the fact that the constant $d_s$ in , which also appears in the previous relation , is the optimal constant in the trace inequality ${\left [ {\xi(\cdot, 0)} \right ] }_{H^{s}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)}^2 \leq d_{s}{\left [ {\xi} \right ] }_{H^1 ({{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+, y^a)}^2$; see @FranKLenzmannSilvestre [Section 5]. The following lemma is the first step towards . It is proved by taking $\xi = (x \cdot \nabla v )\eta = r v_r \eta$ in the stability condition . The crucial point here is that, after this particular choice, the nonlinearity $f$ no longer appears in the inequality. \[Lemma:Stabilityc=rv\_r\] Let $n\geq 1$, ${s}\in (0,1)$, and let $u\in C^2(B_1)\cap L^1_{s}({{\mathbb{R}}}^n)$ be a stable solution to ${(-\Delta)^{s}}u = f(u)$ in $B_1\subset {{\mathbb{R}}}^n$, where $f$ is a $C^{1,\gamma}$ function for some $\gamma >0$. Let $v$ be the ${s}$-harmonic extension of $u$. Then, for every $\eta \in {\mathrm{Lip}}(\overline{{{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+})$ with compact support in ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ \cup B_1$ it holds $$\label{Eq:Stabilityc=rv_r} \begin{split} {s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+} y^a & \left \{ (n - 2{s})\eta^2 + r(\eta^2)_{r} \right \} |\nabla v|^2 {\,\mathrm{d}x}- 2{s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+} y^a r v_{r} \nabla v \cdot \nabla (\eta^2) {\,\mathrm{d}}x \\ &\quad \leq \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+} y^a r^2 v_{r}^2 |\nabla \eta|^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x . \end{split}$$ Throughout the proof we will use the notation $v_i = \partial_i v = \partial_{x_i} v$, $v_y = v_{n+1}$, and $x_{n+1} = y$. The key idea is to take $\xi = \textbf{c} \eta$ in the stability condition , with $\textbf{c} = x \cdot \nabla v= r v_r $, and use that $\textbf{c}$ satisfies an appropriate equation for the linearized operator $d_{s}\partial_{\nu^a} - f'(u)$ (see below). To carry out this program we need to prove some regularity for $\textbf{c}$. In what follows, we will use that, for every $R<1$, the functions $v$, $y^a \partial_y v$, $\nabla_{x'}v$, and $y^a \partial_y \nabla_{x'} v$ are continuous in $\overline{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_R^+}$, that $D^2_{x'}v$ is bounded in ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_R^+$, and that $v\in H^1({\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_R^+, y^a)$. All these statements are proved in . Regarding $\textbf{c}$, we next show two properties of this function. First, note that $\textbf{c}$ is continuous up to $\{y=0\}$ and $\textbf{c}(\cdot, 0) = x'\cdot \nabla_{x'}u$ in $B_R \subset \{y=0\}$ for $R<1$. Indeed, $\textbf{c} = x'\cdot \nabla_{x'} v + y v_y$ and, since $\nabla_{x'}v$ and $y^a v_y$ are continuous up to $\{y = 0\}$ in ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R$, the claim follows using that $|y v_y| = |y^a v_y y^{1-a}| \leq C y^{2{s}} \to 0$ as $y\downarrow 0$. Second, we show that $\textbf{c} \in H^1 ({\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R, y^a)$ for all $R<1$, and as a consequence $\xi = \textbf{c} \eta\in H^1 ({\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R, y^a)$ and thus it is an admissible test function for the stability condition —since $\eta$ is $C^1$ and has compact support in ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_1 \cup B_1$. To see that $\textbf{c} \in H^1 ({\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R, y^a)$, recall that $v \in H^1 ({\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R, y^a)$ for $R<1$, and thus $\textbf{c} \in L^2 ({\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R, y^a)$. Hence, we only need to check that $\nabla \textbf{c} \in L^2 ({\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R, y^a)$. For $i= 1,\ldots,n$, we have $$\textbf{c}_{x_i} = v_{x_i} + x'\cdot \nabla_{x'} v_{x_i} + y v_{x_i y}.$$ Clearly the first two terms belong to $L^2 ({\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R, y^a)$ since $\nabla_{x'}v$ and $D^2_{x'} v$ are bounded in ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R$ and $y^a$ is integrable near $0$. For the last term we use that $y^a v_{x_i y}$ is continuous up to $\{y=0\}$ to obtain that $|v_{x_i y}| \leq C y^{-a}$ for some constant $C$, and thus $ y^a |y v_{x_i y}|^2 \leq C y^{2-a} = C y^{1 + 2{s}}$, which yields the desired integrability. Finally, for the vertical derivative of $\textbf{c}$ we use the equation $\Delta v + a v_y / y = 0$ to obtain $$\label{Eq:FluxcFory>0} \textbf{c}_{y} = x'\cdot \nabla_{x'} v_{y} + v_{y} + y v_{y y} = x'\cdot \nabla_{x'} v_{y} + (1- a) v_{y} - y \Delta_{x'} v,$$ and using similar arguments as the previous ones, we see that all the terms belong to $L^2 ({\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R, y^a)$. Note also that, since $y^a v_y$, $y^a \nabla_{x'} v_{y}$, and $y^{2 - 2{s}}\Delta_{x'} v$ are continuous up to $\{y=0\}$ (in ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R$), leads to the flux $y^a \textbf{c}_y$ being continuous and well defined up to $B_R \subset \{ y = 0\}$. We can now take $\xi = \textbf{c} \eta$ in the stability condition to get $$\label{Eq:StabilityConditionCEtaWeak} \int_{B_1} f'(u) \textbf{c}^2 \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}x}' \leq d_{s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_1} y^a \nabla \textbf{c} \cdot \nabla (\textbf{c} \eta^2) {\,\mathrm{d}}x + d_{s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_1} y^a \textbf{c}^2 |\nabla \eta |^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x.$$ We claim that $$\label{Eq:IntegrationByPartsC} d_{s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_1} y^a \nabla \textbf{c} \cdot \nabla (\textbf{c} \eta^2) {\,\mathrm{d}}x = \int_{B_1} \left( f'(u)\textbf{c} + 2{s}f(u) \right) \textbf{c} \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x'.$$ To see this, we first show that $$\label{Eq:EquationsForC} \operatorname{div}(y^a \nabla \textbf{c}) = 0 \, \textrm{ in } {{\mathbb{R}}}_+^{n+1} \quad \textrm{ and } \quad d_{s}\dfrac{\partial \textbf{c}}{\partial \nu^a} - f'(u)\textbf{c} = 2{s}f(u) \, \textrm{ in } B_1 .$$ The first identity is obtained after a simple computation using that $\Delta v + a v_y / y = 0$: $$\begin{aligned} y^{-a} \operatorname{div}(y^a \nabla \textbf{c}) &= \Delta (x \cdot \nabla v) + \dfrac{a}{y}( x\cdot \nabla v)_y\\ &= x \cdot \nabla \left(-a \dfrac{v_y}{y}\right) + 2 \Delta v + \dfrac{a}{y} (v_y + x\cdot \nabla v_y)\\ &= -a x \cdot \nabla \left( \dfrac{v_y}{y}\right) + \Delta v + \dfrac{a}{y} x\cdot \nabla v_y = a y \dfrac{v_y}{y^2} + \Delta v = 0. \end{aligned}$$ To show the second one, recall that from , for $y>0$ we have $$-y^a \textbf{c}_y = x' \cdot (- y^a \partial_y \nabla_{x'}v) + 2{s}(-y^a v_y) + y^{2 - 2{s}} \Delta_{x'} v.$$ Now, the desired identity follows after taking the limit $y\downarrow 0$ in the above expression, by using ($b$), that $d_{s}\partial_{\nu^a} v = f(u)$ in $B_1$, and that $\Delta_{x'} v$ is bounded —and thus $|y^{2 - 2{s}} \Delta_{x'} v|\leq C y^{2 - 2{s}} \to 0$ as $y\downarrow 0$. We have established . To prove , we integrate by parts in ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R \cap \{ y > \delta \}$ (a set where $\textbf{c}$ is smooth) and use the first identity in to obtain $$\label{Eq:IntegrationByPartsCProof} d_{s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_R \cap \{ y > \delta \} } y^a \nabla \textbf{c} \cdot \nabla (\textbf{c} \eta^2) {\,\mathrm{d}}x = - d_{s}\int_{B_R} \delta^a \textbf{c}_y(x',\delta) \textbf{c} (x',\delta) \eta^2 (x',\delta) {\,\mathrm{d}}x'.$$ Taking the limit $\delta \to 0$ and using that $ \textbf{c}$ and $y^a \textbf{c}_y$ are continuous up to $\{y=0\}$ (as proved before), from we conclude . Combining with we get $$-2{s}\int_{B_1} \dfrac{f(u)}{d_{s}}\textbf{c} \eta^2{\,\mathrm{d}}x' \leq \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+} y^a \textbf{c}^2 |\nabla \eta |^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x.$$ Next, we rewrite the left-hand side of this inequality after an integration by parts (now using that $d_{s}\partial_{\nu^a} v = f(u)$ in $B_1$ and that $v$ is ${s}$-harmonic), obtaining $$\label{Eq:Stabilityc=rv_rProof1} -2{s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+} y^a (\nabla v \cdot \nabla \textbf{c} )\eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}x}-2{s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+} y^a \textbf{c} \nabla v \cdot \nabla (\eta^2) {\,\mathrm{d}x}\leq \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+} y^a \textbf{c}^2 |\nabla \eta |^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x .$$ We treat the first integral in this inequality by using the same idea as in the proof of the Pohozaev identity, to get rid of second order derivatives of $v$. Note first that $$\label{Eq:GradvGradc} \nabla v \cdot \nabla \textbf{c} = \sum_{j=1}^{n+1} v_j \partial_j \sum_{i=1}^{n+1} x_i v_i = \sum_{j=1}^{n+1} v_j^2 + \sum_{j=1}^{n+1} \sum_{i=1}^{n+1} x_i v_j v_{ij}= |\nabla v|^2 + x \cdot \dfrac{\nabla|\nabla v|^2}{2}.$$ We now claim that $$\label{Eq:IntegrationByPartsPohozaev} - \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ } y^a \left(x \cdot \nabla|\nabla v|^2\right) \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x = (n + 2 - 2{s}) \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ }y^a |\nabla v|^2 \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x + \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ } y^a |\nabla v|^2 r (\eta^2)_r {\,\mathrm{d}}x.$$ To see this, we proceed as before (integrating by parts on ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_1 \cap \{ y > \delta \}$, where all the functions are smooth) to obtain $$\begin{split} - \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ \cap \{ y > \delta \} } y^a \left(x \cdot \nabla|\nabla v|^2\right) \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x &= \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ \cap \{ y > \delta \}} \operatorname{div}(y^a x) |\nabla v|^2 \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x \\ & \quad \quad + \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ \cap \{ y > \delta \} } y^a |\nabla v|^2 r (\eta^2)_r {\,\mathrm{d}}x \\ & \quad \quad + \int_{ B_1} \delta^{a + 1} \big(|\nabla_{x'} v(x', \delta)|^2+ |v_y(x', \delta)|^2 \big) \eta^2(x', \delta) {\,\mathrm{d}}x'. \end{split}$$ Now, using that $\nabla_{x'} v$ and $y^a v_y$ are continuous up to $\{y=0\}$ (locally in $B_1$, but recall that $\eta$ has compact support in $B_1$), we have $$\delta^{a + 1} \big(|\nabla_{x'} v(x', \delta)|^2+ |v_y(x', \delta)|^2 \big) \leq C \delta^{2 - 2{s}} + C'\delta^{1-a}|\delta^a v_y (x', \delta)|^2 \leq C(\delta^{2 - 2{s}} + \delta^{2{s}}),$$ and thus is obtained after letting $\delta\to 0$ and using that $\operatorname{div}(y^a x) = (n + 1 + a)y^a = (n + 2 - 2{s})y^a$. From and we get $$\begin{split} - \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ } y^a (\nabla v \cdot \nabla \textbf{c}) \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}x}&= - \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ } y^a |\nabla v|^2 \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x - \dfrac{1}{2}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ } y^a \left(x \cdot \nabla|\nabla v|^2\right) \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x \\ &= \dfrac{n-2{s}}{2} \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ } y^a |\nabla v|^2 \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x +\dfrac{1}{2} \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ } y^a |\nabla v|^2 r (\eta^2)_r {\,\mathrm{d}}x. \end{split}$$ Combining this with we conclude the proof. The second identity in can be established directly "downstairs", that is, without using the extension. Indeed, since $\textbf{c}$ is the ${s}$-harmonic extension of $ x' \cdot \nabla_{x'} u$, it holds $ d_{s}\partial_{\nu^a} \textbf{c} = {(-\Delta)^{s}}(x' \cdot \nabla_{x'} u)$. Then, the second expression in follows from the identity $${(-\Delta)^{s}}(x' \cdot \nabla_{x'} w) = x' \cdot \nabla_{x'} \{ {(-\Delta)^{s}}w \} + 2{s}{(-\Delta)^{s}}w,$$ (which holds for all functions $w$) by taking $w=u$. The identity can be proved easily using the definition of the fractional Laplacian, or using that $x' \cdot \nabla_{x'} w (x') = \frac{{\,\mathrm{d}}}{{\,\mathrm{d}}h}|_{h=1} w(hx')$ and the scaling properties of ${(-\Delta)^{s}}$. From the inequality of and choosing $\eta = r^{(2{s}-n)/2} \zeta$ (properly regularized near the origin), with $\zeta$ being a cut-off function, we can establish . \[Proof of \] For $\varepsilon \in (0,1/2)$, we take the Lipschitz function $$\eta = \begin{cases} \varepsilon^{-\alpha/2} & \text{ in } {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_\varepsilon^+,\\ r^{-\alpha/2} \zeta & \text{ in } {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+ \setminus {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_\varepsilon^+, \end{cases}$$ where $0\leq \alpha \leq n-2{s}$ is to be chosen later and $\zeta = \zeta(r)$ is a cut-off function satisfying $\zeta = 1$ for $r\leq 1/2$ and $\zeta = 0$ for $r\geq 3/4$. We use this choice of $\eta$ in . To let $\varepsilon \to 0$ in the resulting inequality, we use the dominated convergence theorem taking into account that $y^a |\nabla v|^2 = y^a (|\nabla_{x'} v|^2+ v_y^2)\leq C(y^{1 - 2{s}} + y^{2{s}- 1})$ in ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }^+_{3/4}$ —by ($b$)— and that $-\alpha \geq 2{s}- n$. We conclude that $I_1 + I_2 \leq I_3$, where $$I_1 := {s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+} y^a \left \{ (n - 2{s})r^{-\alpha}\zeta^2 + r (r^{-\alpha}\zeta^2)_r \right \} |\nabla v|^2 {\,\mathrm{d}x},$$ $$I_2 := -2 {s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+} y^a r v_r \nabla v \cdot \nabla (r^{-\alpha}\zeta^2 ) {\,\mathrm{d}}x,$$ and $$I_3 := \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_1^+} y^a r^2 v_r^2 |\nabla (r^{-\alpha/2}\zeta )|^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x.$$ Now, we compute each of the previous integrals separately, using that $\zeta \equiv 1$ in ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+$ —and thus $\nabla \zeta \equiv 0$ in ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+$. First, note that $$\begin{aligned} I_1 &= {s}(n - 2{s}- \alpha)\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^a r^{-\alpha}|\nabla v|^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x \\ & \quad \quad+ {s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{3/4}^+ \setminus {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^a r^{-\alpha}|\nabla v|^2 \big ((n - 2{s}- \alpha) \zeta^2 + r (\zeta^2)_r \big ){\,\mathrm{d}}x. \end{aligned}$$ For $I_2$ we have $$\begin{aligned} I_2 &= 2\alpha {s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^a r^{-\alpha} v_r^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x + 2{s}\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{3/4}^+ \setminus {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^a r^{-\alpha} \big ( \alpha v_r^2 \zeta^2 - r v_r \nabla v \cdot \nabla (\zeta^2)\big ){\,\mathrm{d}}x. \end{aligned}$$ Last, since $ |\nabla (r^{-\alpha/2}\zeta )|^2 = (\alpha^2/4) r^{- \alpha - 2} \zeta^2 + r^{-\alpha} |\nabla \zeta|^2 - \alpha r^{-\alpha - 1} \zeta \zeta_r$, we get $$\begin{aligned} I_3 &= \dfrac{\alpha^2}{4} \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^a r^{- \alpha} v_r^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x + \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{3/4}^+ \setminus {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^a r^{-\alpha} v_r^2 \left ( \dfrac{\alpha^2}{4} \zeta^2 + r^2|\nabla \zeta|^2 - \alpha r \zeta \zeta_r \right ){\,\mathrm{d}}x. \end{aligned}$$ Next, we estimate the three previous integrals over ${\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{3/4}^+ \setminus {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+$, noticing that the integrands can be bounded by $C y^a |\nabla v|^2$, with $C$ depending only on $n$, ${s}$, and $\alpha$. Hence, from the inequality $I_1 + I_2 \leq I_3$ we get $${s}(n - 2{s}- \alpha)\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^a r^{-\alpha}|\nabla v|^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x +\alpha {\left ( {2{s}- \dfrac{\alpha}{4}}\right )} \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^a r^{-\alpha} v_r^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x \leq C \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{3/4}^+ \setminus {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^a |\nabla v|^2{\,\mathrm{d}}x.$$ Note that $\alpha (2{s}- \alpha/4) > 0$ whenever $\alpha \in (0, 8{s})$. Thus, if we take $\alpha = n - 2{s}$, since the proposition assumes $n\in (2{s}, 10{s})$ we finally obtain the desired estimate $$\int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^a r^{2{s}- n} v_r^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x \leq C \int_{{\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{3/4}^+ \setminus {\mathchoice {\mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\ds \mathlarger{\euscr{B}}} {\scalebox{0.85}{\ensuremath {\euscr{B}}}} {\euscr{B}} }_{1/2}^+} y^a |\nabla v|^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x$$ with a constant $C$ depending only on $n$ and ${s}$. A new geometric form of the stability condition {#Sec:GeomStability} =============================================== In this section we establish , which gives a new geometric form of the stability condition. As a corollary, we will obtain an $L^2$ estimate for the full Hessian of the harmonic extension $v$ of a stable solution $u$. This last result, stated in below, will be crucial in the following sections. \[Proof of \] We take $\xi = \textbf{c} \eta$ in the stability condition , where $\eta$ is a Lipschitz function with compact support in $\Omega \times [0,+\infty)$ (as in the statement of the theorem) and $\textbf{c}$ is a function (to be chosen later) in $ C^1_{\mathrm{loc}}(\Omega\times [0,+\infty))$, smooth in ${{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+$, and such that $\textbf{c}\,\Delta \textbf{c} \in C_{\mathrm{loc}}(\Omega\times [0,+\infty))$. Notice that, as a consequence, $\xi \in H^1(\Omega\times [0,+\infty))$. We obtain $$\label{Eq:StabilityConditionCEtaWeakHalf} \int_{\Omega} f'(u) \textbf{c}^2 \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}x}' \leq \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+} \nabla \textbf{c} \cdot \nabla (\textbf{c} \eta^2) {\,\mathrm{d}}x + \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+} \textbf{c}^2 |\nabla \eta |^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x.$$ We now integrate by parts the first term on the right-hand side. For the integration by parts to be fully justified, we perform it in $\{y > \delta\}$ (where $\textbf{c}$ is smooth) and then we let $\delta \to 0$, using dominated convergence and the continuity of $\textbf{c}\,\textbf{c}_y$ and $\textbf{c}\,\Delta \textbf{c}$. We get $$\label{Eq:StabilityConditionCEta_s=1/2} \int_{\Omega} \left (\textbf{c}\,\textbf{c}_y + f'(u) \textbf{c}^2 \right ) \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x' \leq \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+} ( \textbf{c}^2 |\nabla \eta |^2 - \textbf{c} \, \Delta \textbf{c} \, \eta^2 ) {\,\mathrm{d}}x .$$ We wish to take $\textbf{c}$ to be $ |\nabla v|$ in the previous inequality. Nevertheless, since this function may not be $C^1$ (if $\nabla v$ vanishes somewhere), we consider instead the smooth function $$\textbf{c}_\varepsilon := (|\nabla v|^2 + \varepsilon^2)^{1/2},$$ for $\varepsilon > 0$, which is locally $C^1$ in $\Omega \times [0,+\infty)$ since $v \in C^2_{\mathrm{loc}}(\Omega \times [0,+\infty))$ by ($c$). Moreover, an easy computation using that $v$ is harmonic shows that $$\label{Eq:cLaplacec} \textbf{c}_\varepsilon \, \Delta \textbf{c}_\varepsilon = \sum_{i,j=1}^{n+1} v_{ij}^2 - \sum_{j=1}^{n+1}\left( \sum_{i=1}^{n+1} v_{ij} \dfrac{v_i }{\textbf{c}_\varepsilon} \right)^2 \geq {\mathcal{A}}^2 \quad \text{ in } {{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+.$$ In particular, $\textbf{c}_\varepsilon \, \Delta \textbf{c}_\varepsilon \in C_{\mathrm{loc}}(\Omega\times [0,+\infty))$ —since $v\in C^2_{\mathrm{loc}}(\Omega\times [0,+\infty))$. As a consequence, we can choose $\textbf{c}$ in to be $\textbf{c}_\varepsilon$ and conclude, taking into account , $$\label{Eq:StabilityFullGradProof} \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+} {\mathcal{A}}^2 \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x + \int_{\Omega} \left (\textbf{c}_\varepsilon\, \partial_y \textbf{c}_\varepsilon + f'(u) \textbf{c}_\varepsilon^2 \right ) \eta^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x' \leq \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+} \textbf{c}_\varepsilon^2 |\nabla \eta |^2 {\,\mathrm{d}}x .$$ Next, we claim that $$\label{Eq:GeomStabProof1LHS} \textbf{c}_\varepsilon\, \partial_y \textbf{c}_\varepsilon + f'(u) \textbf{c}_\varepsilon^2 \geq \varepsilon^2 f'(u) \quad \text{ in } \Omega \subset \{y= 0\}.$$ Once this is proved, the result will follow by letting $\varepsilon\to 0$. To establish , we first compute, for $y>0$, $$\label{Eq:GeomStabProof2LHS} \textbf{c}_\varepsilon\, \partial_y \textbf{c}_\varepsilon = \sum_{i=1}^{n+1} v_i \, v_{i y} = \nabla_{x'} v \cdot \nabla_{x'} v_y + v_y \, v_{yy}.$$ Now, on the one hand note that $-\partial_y \nabla_{x'}v = f'(u) \nabla_{x'}u$ in $\Omega $ by ($b$). Multiplying this identity by $\nabla_{x'}v$ we get $$\nabla_{x'} v \cdot \nabla_{x'} v_y = -f'(u)|\nabla_{x'} u|^2 \quad \text{ in } \Omega.$$ On the other hand, since $v_{yy} = - \Delta_{x'}v$ and $\Delta_{x'}v$ is continuous up to $\{y= 0\}$, we see that $$\lim_{y\downarrow 0} v_{yy} = - \Delta_{x'}u = (-\Delta_{x'})^{1/2} (-\Delta_{x'})^{1/2} u = (-\Delta_{x'})^{1/2} f(u)\quad \text{ in } \Omega.$$ Using the previous identities together with $-v_y = f(u)$ in $\Omega$, leads to $$\textbf{c}_\varepsilon\, \partial_y \textbf{c}_\varepsilon = -f'(u)|\nabla_{x'} u|^2 -f(u) (-\Delta_{x'})^{1/2} f(u)\quad \text{ in } \Omega.$$ As a consequence, noticing that $f'(u) \textbf{c}_\varepsilon^2 = f'(u) |\nabla_{x'} u|^2 + f'(u) f(u)^2 + \varepsilon^2 f'(u)$ in $\Omega$, we have $$\begin{aligned} \textbf{c}_\varepsilon\, \partial_y \textbf{c}_\varepsilon + f'(u) \textbf{c}_\varepsilon^2 &= -f(u) (-\Delta_{x'})^{1/2} f(u) + f'(u) f(u)^2 + \varepsilon^2 f'(u)\\ & = f(u) \left \{ f'(u) (-\Delta_{x'})^{1/2} u - (-\Delta_{x'})^{1/2} f(u) \right\} + \varepsilon^2 f'(u). \end{aligned}$$ Finally, using that $f(t_1)-f(t_2) \leq f'(t_1) (t_1- t_2)$ for all $t_1,t_2 \in {{\mathbb{R}}}$ (since $f$ is convex), we see that $(-\Delta_{x'})^{1/2} f(u) \leq f'(u)( -\Delta_{x'})^{1/2} u$. Hence, since $f$ is nonnegative, the claim follows. \[Remark:s=1/2\] In the previous proof, we have used strongly that ${s}=1/2$, both in the choice of the test function $\xi = |\nabla v |\eta$ and when using that $-\Delta = {(-\Delta)^{1/2}}\circ {(-\Delta)^{1/2}}$. It is not clear to us how to extend the previous arguments to other powers ${s}\in (0,1)$. On the one hand, $|\nabla v|$ is not an appropriate test function anymore, at least when ${s}<1/2$ (indeed, since $v_y$ behaves as $-y^{2{s}- 1}f(v)$ near $\{y=0\}$, $|\nabla v|$ may be singular at almost all points in $\{y=0\}$). On the other hand, one would say that the analogue decomposition of $-\Delta$ for powers ${s}\neq 1/2$ should be $-\Delta = {(-\Delta)^{s}}\circ (-\Delta)^{1-{s}}$, but its is not clear which information on $(-\Delta)^{1-{s}}$ is to be used. From we can now obtain an $H^1$ estimate for the gradient of the harmonic extension of a stable solution. The estimate is independent of the nonlinearity $f$, a fact that will be crucial in the following sections. Note that the norms are now computed on the intersection of ${{\mathbb{R}}}^{n+1}_+$ with balls not necessarily
{'source': 'arXiv_out/2110'}