The $L^p$ regularity problem for parabolic operators
Martin Dindoš, Linhan Li, Jill Pipher
TL;DR
This work resolves the parabolic Regularity problem for divergence-form operators with coefficients governed by a parabolic Carleson measure, establishing solvability in an $L^p$ range $(1,p_0)$ for some $p_0>1$ on Lipschitz cylinders. The authors reduce the general operator to a block-form model on $ ext{R}^n_+ imes ext{R}$ and develop new parabolic tools to handle the nonlocal half-derivative in time, including a detailed study of the operator satisfied by $D_t^{1/2}u$ and associated area/non-tangential estimates. Through a duality framework with the adjoint Dirichlet problem, and a careful perturbation analysis, they obtain $L^p$ solvability for the Regularity problem, with a dual perspective on the Dirichlet problem for the adjoint operator. In the small Carleson norm regime, the results yield sharp solvability for a broad class of parabolic operators, extending the elliptic theory to the time-dependent setting and addressing substantial new challenges posed by nonlocal temporal terms. The techniques unify perturbation, block-form reduction, and advanced parabolic harmonic analysis to deliver sharp, robust solvability results for this fundamental boundary value problem.
Abstract
In this paper, we fully resolve the question of whether the Regularity problem for the parabolic PDE $-\partial_tu + \mbox{div}(A\nabla u)=0$ on a Lipschitz cylinder $\mathcal O\times\mathbb R$ is solvable for some $p\in (1,\infty)$ under the assumption that the matrix $A$ is elliptic, has bounded and measurable coefficients and its coefficients satisfy a natural Carleson condition (a parabolic analog of the so-called DKP-condition). We prove that for some $p_0>1$ the Regularity problem is solvable in the range $(1,p_0)$. We note that answer to this question was not known even in the small Carleson case, that is, when the Carleson norm of coefficients is sufficiently small. In the elliptic case the analogous question was only fully resolved recently independently by two groups, with two very different methods: one involving two of the authors and S. Hofmann, the second by M. Mourgoglou, B. Poggi and X. Tolsa. Our approach in the parabolic case is motivated by that of the first group, but in the parabolic setting there are significant new challenges.
