arxiv: v1 [math.ap] 4 May 2015

Transcription

1 arxiv: v1 [math.ap] 4 May 2015 MATRIX A EIGHTS, DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES, AND MAPPINGS OF FINITE DISTORTION DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY Abstract. e study degenerate Sobolev saces where the degeneracy is controlled by a matrix A weight. This class of weights was introduced by Nazarov, Treil and Volberg, and degenerate Sobolev saces with matrix weights have been considered by several authors for their alications to PDEs. e rove that the classical Meyers-Serrin theorem, H =, holds in this setting. As alications we rove artial regularity results for weak solutions of degenerate -Lalacian equations, and in articular for maings of finite distortion. 1. Introduction In this aer we study matrix A weights and their alication to PDEs and maings of finite distortion. Scalar Muckenhout A weights have a long history: they were introduced in the 1970s and are central to the study of weighted norm inequalities in harmonic analysis. They have extensive alications in PDEs and other areas. (For details and further references, see [10, 13, 16].) Matrix A weights aremore recent. They were introduced by Nazarov, Treil and Volberg [31, 36, 39] and arose from roblems in stationary rocesses and oerator theory. A matrix weight (x) is a d d semi-definite matrix of measurable functions. It is used to define a weighted L norm on vector-valued functions: ( ) 1/ f L = 1/ (x)f(x) dx. R n The matrix A condition is a natural generalization of the scalar Muckenhout A condition and matrix A weights also share many other analogous roerties of their scalar counterarts. For instance, the Hilbert transform is bounded on L (R) if and only if A. Since their introduction these weights have been considered by a number of authors: see, for instance, [3, 4, 6, 12, 15, 20, 26, 32, 34]. Date: May 2, Mathematics Subject Classification. 30C65,3565,35J70,4235,4237,46E35. Key words and hrases. matrix A, degenerate Sobolev saces, maings of finite distortion. The first author is suorted by the Stewart-Dowart faculty develoment fund at Trinity College and NSF Grant The second author is suorted by NSF Grant The third author is suorted by the NSERC Discovery Grant rogram. 1

2 2 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY In this aer we aly the theory of matrix A weights to the study of degenerate Sobolev saces. More recisely, we consider the sace 1, that consists of all functions in 1,1 loc such that f 1, = f L (v) + f L <. (The weight v could in rincile be arbitrary, but we will show that there exist scalar weights naturally associated with each matrix weight.) Such weighted Sobolev saces are well known to lay an imortant role in the study of degenerate ellitic equations: see [7, 17, 35, 37]. Our main result extends the celebrated H = theorem of Meyers and Serrin [28] to Sobolev saces 1, (): we will show that if A, then smooth functions are dense in 1, (). e give two alications of our results. First, we use them to rove artial regularity results for the degenerate -Lalacian, L A, u = div( A u, u 2 2 A u) = 0, where A is an n n degenerate ellitic matrix. These results extend the work of the first two authors and Naibo [8]; in articular, assuming the matrix A condition allows us to significantly weaken other hyotheses. Second, we aly these results for the degenerate -Lalacian to the roblem of artial regularity of maings of finite distortion. Conditions guaranteeing the continuity of such maings have been studied by many authors: see [18, 21, 25, 27, 38]. Our results aroach the regularity roblem from a significantly different direction. More recisely, we characterize the set of continuity of the maing in terms of a maximal oerator defined using its related inner and outer distortion functions. The remainder of this aer is organized as follows. In Section 2 we gather some reliminary material about scalar weights, articularly the Muckenhout A weights. There is a close relationshi between scalar A and matrix A and the scalar weights lay a significant role in our work. In Section 3 we define matrix weighted saces and give some basic results. None of these ideas are new, but we have ut them a consistent framework and we give roofs for several results that are only imlicit in the literature. In Section 4 we define matrix A weights and rove a number of new results, articularly for matrix A 1. The central theorem is that aroximate identities converge in L, 1 <. e rove this without using the Hardy-Littlewood maximal oerator, relacing it with a smaller averaging oerator. This fact lays an imortant role in the roof of our main result, but it is of indeendent interest and should be useful in other settings. In Section 5 we rove our main result, the generalization of the Meyers-Serrin H = theorem to matrix weighted Sobolev saces. e rove several variations that corresond to well-known results in the scalar (unweighted) case.

3 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 3 The last three sections are alications. In Sections 6 and 7 we aly our results to degenerate -Lalacian equations. In Section 6 we reformulate and extend the results in [8] without using the matrix A condition and instead give our hyotheses in terms of scalar weights. In Section 7 we show that the matrix A condition yields a number of corollaries. Finally, in Section 8 we aly these results to rove artial regularity results for maings of finite distortion. All of our results are based on assuming that the distortion tensor satisfies a matrix A condition. Throughout this aer we will use the following notation. The symbol n will always denote the dimension of the Euclidean sace R n. e will use d to denote the dimension of matrix and vector-valued functions. In general d can be any ositive value, though in alications we will take d = n. e will take the domain of our functions to be an oen, connected set R n. The set need not, a riori, be bounded. Given two values A and, we will write A if there exists a constant c such that A c. e write A if A and A. Constants C, c, etc., whether exlicit or imlicit, can change value at each aearance. Sometimes we will indicate the arameters constants deend on by writing, for instance, C(n, ), etc. If the deendence is not indicated, the constant may deend on the dimension and other arameters that should be clear from context. 2. Scalar weights In this section we gather together, without roof, some basic definitions and results aboutscalara weights. Unlessotherwisenoted, theseresultscanbefoundin[10,13]. Given a domain R n, we define a (scalar) weight w to be non-negative function in L 1 loc (). The measure wdx is a orel measure and we define the weighted L sace, L (w,), to be the anach function sace with norm Given a set E, let w(e) = ( ) 1/ f L (w,) = f(x) w(x)dx. R n E w(x) dx, w(x)dx = 1 w(x) dx. E E E A weight w is doubling if given any cube, w(2) Cw(), where 2 is the cube with the same center as and l(2) = 2l(). For 1 < <, we say that w A () if ( [w] A() = su )( w(x) dx ) / w / (x)dx <,

4 4 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY where the suremum is taken over all cubes. hen = 1, we say w A 1 if for all cubes, w(y)dy [w] A1 essinf w(x). x Remark 2.1. Alternatively, we can define the doubling and A conditions with resect to balls instead of cubes. If = R n, these two definitions are clearly equivalent; similarly, they are equivalent if w is the restriction to of a doubling or an A weight defined on all of R n. However, deending on the geometry of and its boundary these two definitions may not be equivalent. (For a characterization of the restriction roblem for A weights, see [13, Chater IV.5].) Hereafter, given a domain we will assume that our weights are defined on some unsecified set such that and we assume that balls and cubes are interchangeable in the definition of doubling or A on. Moreover, for simlicity, we will write A instead of A (): again, the recise domain will be imlicit. Define the class A by A = 1A. If w A A, then for every cube and measurable set E, ( ) 1/ E w(e) (2.1) [w]1/ A. w() A weight w satisfies the reverse Hölder condition for some s > 1, denoted by w RH s, if ( ) 1/s ( 1 [w] RHs = su w(x) s dx w(x)dx) <. e say that w RH if for all cubes, ess suw(x) [w] RH w(y) dy. x Given a weight w, w A for some if and only if w RH s for some s: i.e., A = A = RH s. 1 < 1<s The reverse Hölder condition yields an estimate that is analogous to(2.1), exchanging the roles of Lebesgue measure and the measure wdx: if w RH s, then for every cube and E, (2.2) w(e) w() [w] RH s ( ) 1/s E.

5 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 5 elow we will need a shar estimate for the reverse Hölder exonent. The following result is taken from Hytönen and Pérez [19]. If w A, it satisfies the Fujii-ilson condition [w] A = su 1 M(wχ )(x)dx <, w() where M is the Hardy-Littlewood maximal oerator, Mf(x) = su f(y) dy χ (x). Then we have that w RH s with [w] RHs 2, where (2.3) s = n+11 [w] A. 3. Matrix weighted saces In this section we define matrix weights and matrix weighted saces, and rove some basic roerties. Recall that the symbol d denotes the dimension of vector functions and matrices: in other words, we will consider vector-valued functions functions f : R d, with f(x) = ( f 1 (x),...,f d (x) ), and matrices A(x) = (a ij (x)) d i,j=1. y Df we mean the n d matrix ( if j ). Given a vector v = (v 1,...,v d ), recall the vector l norms, 1 <, ( d ) 1/ v = v i, i=1 and let v = max( v 1,..., v d ). hen = 2 we will often write v = v 2. e will frequently use the fact that given 1 < q, v q v d 1/ v d 1/ v q. Let M d denote the collection of all real-valued, d d matrices. The norm of a matrix is the oerator norm: A o = su v R d v =1 Av. A matrix function is a ma : M d ; we say that it is measurable if each comonent of is a measurable function.

6 6 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY Let S d denote the collection of all those A M d that are self-adjoint and ositive semi-definite. If A S d, then it has d non-negative eigenvalues, λ i, 1 i d, and we have that A o = max i λ i tra d A o. Moreover, there exists an orthogonal matrix U such that U t AU is diagonal. e denote a diagonal matrix by D(λ 1,...,λ d ) = D(λ i ). If is a measurable matrix function with values in S d, then we can choose the matrices U(x) to be measurable: the following result is from [33, Lemma 2.3.5] Lemma 3.1. Given a matrix function : S d, there exists a d d measurable matrix function U defined on such that U t (x)(x)u(x) is diagonal. If A S d is diagonalized by an orthogonal matrix U and has eigenvalues λ i, for every s > 0 define A s = UD(λ s i )Ut. y Lemma 3.1 we have that given any matrix function : S d, s is a measurable matrix function. For a fixed matrix function we will always imlicitly assume that all of its owers are defined using the same orthogonal matrix U. Furthermore, if it is the case that A is ositive definite we can also define negative owers of A through the orthogonal matrix U. Indeed, a simlecalculationshowsthata 1 = UD(λ 1 i )U t andfors > 0wesetA s = UD(λ s i )U t. y a matrix weight we mean a matrix function : S d such that o L 1 loc (). Equivalently, we may assume that each eigenvalue λ i L 1 loc (), 1 i d. e say that is an invertible matrix weight if is ositive definite a.e.: equivalently, that det(x) 0 a.e. and so 1 exists. Hereafter, if is a matrix weight, we define v(x) = (x) o ; if it is also invertible, we will always let w(x) = 1 (x) 1 o. Proosition 3.2. Given an invertible matrix weight, we have 0 < w(x) v(x) < for a.e. x. Furthermore, satisfies a two weight, degenerate elliticity condition: for all ξ R d, (3.1) w(x) ξ 1/ (x)ξ v(x) ξ. Proof. First note that for a.e. x, 1 = I o (x) o 1 (x) o. Since is a matrix weight, v L 1 loc (); since it is invertible, its eigenvalues are ositive a.e. Hence, we must have that 0 < w(x) v(x) <. To rove the elliticity conditions, we use the definition of matrix norm. The second inequality follows from it immediately: The first follows similarly: 1/ (x)ξ 1/ (x) o ξ = v(x) ξ. ξ = 1/ (x) 1/ (x)ξ 1 (x) o 1/ (x)ξ.

7 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 7 Remark 3.3. Note that if is any matrix weight, the second inequality, still holds. 1/ (x)ξ v(x) ξ, Given, 1 <, and a matrix weight : S d, define the weighted sace L () to be the set of all measurable, vector valued functions f : Rd such that ( 1/ f L () = 1/ (x)f(x) dx) <. In this sace, we identify two functions f,g as equivalent if f g L () = 0. In the secial case when = 2, it is often useful to restate this norm in terms of the inner roduct on R d : ( 1/2 f L 2 () = (x)f(x),f(x) dx). The following lemma is roved in [30, 35]. Lemma 3.4. Given 1 < and a matrix weight : S d, the sace L () is a anach sace. For a matrix weight that is non-invertible on a set of ositive measure, the equivalence classes of functions can be quite large. However, if is invertible, it is straightforward to identify them. Lemma 3.5. Given 1 <, an invertible matrix weight, and f, g L (), then f g L () = 0 if and only if f(x) = g(x) a.e. Proof. Clearly, if f(x) = g(x) a.e., then f g L () = 0. Since is an invertible matrix weight, we can aly Proosition 3.2 to rove the converse. y the elliticity condition, 0 = f g L () f g L (w,), and since w(x) > 0 a.e., it follows that f(x) g(x) = 0 a.e. The set of bounded functions of comact suort, L c (), and smooth functions of comact suort, Cc (), are both dense in L (). These results seem to be known (cf. [15, Theorem 5.1]) but we have not found roofs in the literature. For comleteness we include them here. Proosition 3.6. Given a matrix weight : S d, L c () is dense in L ().

8 8 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY Proof. First assume that (x) isdiagonal, that is(x) = D(λ i (x)). Fix f L (). Then by the non-negativity of each λ i and the equivalence of norms, d 1/ (x)f(x) 2 dx 1/ (x)f(x) dx = f i (x) λ i (x)dx. Therefore, we have that f i L (λ i,). Since λ i L 1 loc (), λ idx is a regular orel measure, and so L c () is dense in L (λ i,). Hence, given any ǫ > 0, there exists g i L c () such that f i g i L (λ i,) < ǫ. Let g = (g 1,...,g d ). y our choice of the g i s we conclude that f g L () ǫ. Now fix an arbitrary matrix weight and by Lemma 3.1 let D = U t U be its diagonalization. Let f L () and set h = Ut f. Then by the orthogonality of U, i=1 D 1/ h = U t 1/ UU t f = 1/ f. Hence, h L D () and by the revious argument, for any ǫ > 0, there exists g L c () such that h g L D () < ǫ. Using orthogonality again, we have that D 1/ (h g) = U t 1/ U(U t f g) = 1/ (f Ug), and since Ug U o g, Ug L c (). This comletes the roof. As a consequence we have that smooth functions are dense in L (). Proosition 3.7. Given a matrix weight : S d, C c () is dense in L (). Proof. Fix f L () and let ǫ > 0. y Proosition 3.6, there exists g L c () such that f g L () < ǫ/2. Moreover, if we let v(x) = (x) o then v L 1 loc () and g(x) v(x) dx g v(su(g)) <. Thus g L (v,) and, in articular, each comonent function of g belongs to L (v,). Therefore, there exists h C c () such that g h L (v,) < ǫ/2. y Remark3.3, 1/ (g h) v g h, so we canconclude that f h L () < ǫ. 4. Matrix A In this section we define matrix A weights and rove some of their roerties. hen > 1 they are often defined in terms of norms on R d, but here we take as our definition an equivalent condition due to Roudenko [34] that more closely resembles the definition of scalar A weights. Moreover, this aroach also leads naturally to the definition of matrix A 1, which is due to Frazier and Roudenko [12].

9 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 9 Definition 4.1. Given 1 < <, an invertible matrix weight : S d is in matrix A (), denoted by A (), if / is also a matrix weight and ( ) / [] A() = su 1/ (x) 1/ (y) ody dx <, where the suremum is taken over all cubes in R n and where is the dual exonent to. hen = 1, we say that A 1 () if 1 is a matrix weight and [] A1 = su ess su (y) 1 (x) o dy <. x Remark 4.2. As is the case for scalar weights (cf. Remark 2.1), if = R n, then we get an equivalent definition if we relace cubes with balls. e will want to elide between balls and cubes on more general domains. Therefore, as in the scalar case, given any matrix weight on a domain, we will imlicitly assume that it satisfies the matrix A condition on some larger domain and we will suress any reference to the domain, writing A instead of A (). e note in assing that the roblem of characterizing those domains such that every A () is the restriction of a matrix in A (R n ) is oen. Remark 4.3. hen d = 1 and (x) = w(x) is a scalar valued weight, the matrix A condition becomes the A condition as defined in Section 2. The matrix A weights satisfy the same duality relationshi as scalar A weights. This is due to Roudenko [34, Corollary 3.3] when = R n, but the roof given there extends without change to the more general setting. Lemma 4.4. Given 1 < < and a matrix weight, A if and only if / A. ydefinition, if A itisaninvertiblematrixweight, sowehaveassociatedtoit the scalar weights v and w, and satisfies the degenerate elliticity condition (3.1). Moreover, these weights are scalar A weights. Lemma 4.5. Given 1 <, if A, then v(x) = (x) o and w(x) = 1 (x) 1 o are scalar A weights. Remark 4.6. The converse of this lemma is not true: for a counter-examle, see Lauzon and Treil [26]. Proof. First suose that > 1. The fact that v A is due to Goldberg [15, Corollary 2.3]. (Again, his roof assumes = R n, but it extends to the general case without change.) Further, by Lemma 4.4, / A, so by the definition of the oerator norm and what we just roved, w / = 1 / o = / o A.

10 10 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY Therefore, by the duality of scalar A weights (which follows at once from the definition), w A. For the case = 1 we modify an argument from Frazier and Roudenko [12, Lemma 2.1]. To rove that v A 1 we first construct a measurable vector function v such that v(y) = 1 and (y) o (y)v(y) a.e. If = D(λ i ) is diagonal, let v be the constant vector h = (d 1/2,...,d 1/2 ) t. Then D(y)h d 1/2 max i λ i (y) = d 1/2 D(y) o. For a general, let D = UU t be the diagonalization of from Lemma 3.1 and let v(y) = U t (y)h. Then v is measurable and (y)v(y) = U(y)(y)U t (y)h = D(y)h d 1/2 D(y) o = d 1/2 (y) o. Given such a vector function v, we can now estimate as follows. Fix a cube, let x, and set w(y) = (x)v(y). Then (y) o dy (y)v(y) dy = (y) 1 (x)w(y) dy (y) 1 (x) o w(y) dy [] A1 (x) o. To rove that w A 1, we can argue similarly. Fix a cube and x. Arguing as above, construct a vector w = w(x) so that w = 1 and 1 (x) o 1 (x)w. Let v = 1 (x)w. Then for any y, Hence, 1 (x) o 1 (x) o v = 1 (y)(y)v 1 (y) o (y)v. This comletes the roof. 1 (y) 1 o dy (y)v dy = (y) 1 (x)w dy (y) 1 (x) o dy [] A1. The matrix A condition characterizes the matrix weights such that the averaging oerators f f(x)dx are uniformly bounded on L (). (See [15, Proosition 2.1] for the case > 1.) This is also true for more general averaging oerators.

11 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 11 Proosition 4.7. Let be a collection of airwise disjoint cubes in R n. Given 1 < and a matrix weight A, the averaging oerator A f(x) = f(y)dy χ (x) satisfies A f L () [] 1/ A f L (). Proof. To begin, define f 0 on R n \. e first consider the case > 1: since the cubes in are disjoint, by Hölder s inequality and the definition of matrix A, 1/ (x)a f(x) dx 1/ (x)a f(x) dx R n (4.1) = χ (x) 1/ (x) 1/ (y) 1/ (y)f(y)dy dx R n R n = ( [] A ( ) χ (x) 1/ (x) 1/ (y) o / ( dy 1/ (x) 1/ (y) ody 1/ (y)f(y) dy. ) / ) 1/ (y)f(y) dy dx ( ) dx 1/ (y)f(y) dy hen = 1 the roof is almost identical, omitting Hölder s inequality and using Fubini s theorem and the definition of A 1. e now want to rove that for nice functions φ Cc ((0,1)), the convolution oerator f φ f is bounded on L () and that aroximate identities defined using φ converge. e first begin with a lemma. Lemma 4.8. Given 1 < and A, then for any cube and f L () 1 χ f L () C(n,)[] 1/ A f L (). The same inequality is true if we relace the cube with any ball. Proof. Define the cubes { k = +l()k : k Z n }.

12 12 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY The cubes in k form a artition of R n. Further, we can then divide the cubes {3 k } into 3 n families j of airwise disjoint cubes. ut then for every k Z n and x k, extending f by zero in R n \, we have that 1/ (x) 1 χ f(x) = R 1 1/ (x)f(y)χ (x y)dy n R 1 1/ (x)f(y)χ (x y) dy C(n) 1/ (x)f(y) dy. n 3 k Therefore, 1/ (x) 1 χ f(x) dx C(n,) ( ) 1/ (x)f(y) dy dx R n k Z n k 3 k 3 n ( C(n,) (x)f(y) dy) 1/ dx, j=1 j and we can now argue exactly as in the roof of Proosition 4.7, starting at (4.1), to get the desired estimate for cubes. To rove this for balls, fix a ball, and let be the smallest cube containing. Then, and arguing as above, we get 1/ (x) 1 χ f(x) C(n) 1/ (x)f(y) dy, 3 k and the roof continues as before. Theorem 4.9. Given 1 < and A, let φ C c ((0,1)) be a nonnegative, radially symmetric and decreasing function with φ L 1 (R n ) = 1, and for t > 0 let φ t (x) = t n φ(x/t). Then (4.2) su φ t f L t>0 () C(n,)[] 1/ A f L () for every f L (). As a consequence, we have that for every such f, (4.3) lim t 0 φ t f f L () = 0. Proof. To rove (4.2), consider the function Φ(x) = a k k 1 χ k (x), k=1 where the balls k are centered at the origin, k+1 k for all k, and the a k are non-negative with a k = 1. Extending f by zero as before it will suffice to show

13 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 13 that Φ f L (Rn ) C(n,)[] 1/ A f L ); (Rn inequality (4.2) follows by aroximating φ t from below by a sequence of such functions and alying Fatou s lemma. ut by Minkowski s inequality and Lemma 4.8, Φ f L (Rn ) a k k 1 χ k f L (Rn ) k=1 C(n,)[] 1/ A k=1 a k f L (Rn ) = C(n,)[] 1/ A f L (Rn ). To rove (4.3), fix ǫ > 0. Given f L (), by Proosition 3.7 there exists g Cc () such that f g L () < ǫ. y a classical result we have that φ t g g uniformly, and so by (3.1) for all t sufficiently small, φ t g g L () φ t g g L (v,) < ǫ. Therefore, by (4.2) we have that φ t f f L () φ t g g L () + φ t f φ t g L () + f g L () < ǫ+c f g L () ǫ. Remark In our roof of Theorem 4.9 the restrictions on φ seem artificial when comared to the scalar case, where any non-negative function φ C c can be used. e need our restrictions to allow us to aroximate φ by ste functions like Φ. It is also ossible to rove inequality (4.2) by aealing to the bounds for singular integrals given in [15]. This aroach only works for > 1, but does allow for a larger class of functions φ. Details are left to the interested reader. This was the aroach we used in an early version of this aer; we want to thank S. Treil for suggesting the idea behind the roof we give above. 5. Degenerate Sobolev saces and H = In this section we define a family of degenerate Sobolev saces using the matrix weighted saces L (). As we noted above, such saces have been studied reviously; here we consider them in the articular cases where is either an invertible matrix weight or a matrix A weight. Hereafter, let S n be an invertible matrix weight and let v(x) = (x) o and w(x) = 1 (x) 1 o. For 1 <, define the degenerate Sobolev sace 1, () to be the set of all f 1,1 loc () such that f 1, () = f L (v,) + f L () <.

14 14 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY Viewing this sace as a collection of airs of the form (f, f), it is clear that we may consider 1, () as a linear subsace of the anach sace L (v,) L (): since v L 1 loc (), L (v,) is a anach sace and by Lemma 3.4 so is L (). Clearly, 1, () is non-trivial: for instance, if f C 1, c (), then f (), since by Proosition 3.2, f 1, () ( f + f )v(su(f)) <. Matrix weighted Sobolev saces generalize the scalar weighted Sobolev saces: that is, given a weight u, the sace 1, (u,) of functions in 1,1 loc () such that f 1, (u,) = f L (u,) + f L (u,) <. Every matrix weighted sace 1, () is nested between two scalar weighted saces. y Proosition (3.2), we have that f 1, (w,) f 1, () f 1, (v,); hence, 1, (v,) 1, () 1, (w,). In general, these inclusions are roer as the following examle shows. Examle 5.1. Let = (0,1) (0,1). Fix 1 < < and α (0,1). Define the matrix weight [ ] 1 0 (x,y) = 0 x α y α. Then a straightforward calculation shows that A since it is a diagonal matrix whose entries are the roduct of scalar A 1 weights in each indeendent variable. It is also easy to see that the weights v and w are given by v(x,y) = x α y α, w(x,y) = 1. Clearly, vw L 1 (). Now define two elements of 1,1 loc g(x,y) = cy α 1 +1, where c > 0 is chosen so that [ α 1 ] [ f(x,y) = x and g(x,y) = 0 (): f(x,y) = cxα 1 +1 and 0 y α 1 Since f,g are bounded, f L (v,) and g L (w,). The gradient of f satisfies / f dxdy = f vdxdy = y α dy 0 0 ]. x α 1 dxdy = 1 α <, dx =. x

15 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 15 The oosite holds for g: that is g L () = and g L (w,) = 1 α. Thus, f belongs to 1, ()\ 1, (v,), while g belongs to 1, (w,)\ 1, (). Essential to our results is the requirement that 1, () be a anach sace. This is achieved by imosing size conditions on w 1 as the next theorem demonstrates. Theorem 5.2. Given a domain, 1 < and an invertible matrix weight, suose w / L 1 loc () (if = 1, w 1 L 1, loc ()). Then () is a anach sace. In articular, this is the case if 1 < and A. Proof. e need to show that 1, () is a closed subsace of L (v,) L (). Fix a Cauchy sequence {u k } in 1, (). Then there exists u L (v,) and U L () such that u k u in L (v,) and u k U in L (). e will show that u, U L 1 loc ()andthatu = uinthesenseofdistributionalderivatives. Then u 1,1 loc () with u L (v,) and u L 1, (). Thus u belongs to (). Fix ϕ Cc (); we need to show that U j ϕdx = u j ϕdx, 1 j n. These integrals are finite since u and U are locally integrable. To see this suose first that > 1. Let K = su(ϕ) ; then, since w / L 1 loc (Rn ), we have that U j ϕ dx ϕ U j w 1/ w 1/ dx K w / (K) 1/ ϕ ( U j wdx) 1/ w / (K) 1/ ϕ U L (). e can bound the other integral similarly: since w v a.e., v / L 1 loc () and so u j ϕ dx v / (K) 1/ ϕ u L (v,). hen = 1, we can argue similarly, using the fact that v 1, w 1 L loc (). e now show that these two integrals are equal. ith ϕ and K as before, by the weak differentiability of each u k we have that U j ϕ+u j ϕdx = (U j j u k )ϕdx+ (u u k ) j ϕdx w / (K) 1/ ϕ U u k L () +v / (K) 1/ j ϕ u k u L (v,). oth terms on the right go to zero as k. Thus we have shown that U = u in the sense of distributional derivatives and so u 1,1 loc ().

16 16 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY Finally, note that if > 1 and A, then by Lemma 4.5, w A and so w / A and thus is locally integrable. hen = 1, it follows from the fact that w A 1 that w is locally bounded away from zero and so w 1 is locally bounded. This comletes the roof. The imortance of the matrix A condition is that it lets us rove, as is the case in the classical Sobolev saces, that smooth functions are dense in 1, (). Define H 1, () to be the closure of C () 1, 1, () in (). Theorem 5.3. Given a domain, if 1 < and A, then 1, 1, () = H (). Remark 5.4. The assumtion that A is shar for the conclusion of Theorem 5.3 to hold. To show this, we sketch [29, Examle 3.9] for the case = 2. There, the authors consider the matrix ( ) x 2γ 0 A = 0 1 for x = [ 1, 1] 3 3 [ 1, 1] with γ > 0. It is clear that A A for 0 < γ < 1/2 while A / A 2 for γ > 1/2. In the latter case, the function u(x) = x α with α (max{ 1, 1 2γ },0) is shown to be a member of H 1,2 2 2 A () while its gradient u = (α x α 1 x,0) is not an L 1 1,2 loc () function and hence u / A (). Proof. e will show that 1, 1, () H () since the reverse inclusion holds by definition. The roof is an adation of the classic roof that H = : see [1, 28]. e willshowthatgivenanyf 1, ()andanyǫ > 0, thereexistsg C () 1, () such that f g 1, () < ǫ. For each j N, define the bounded sets j = {x : x < j,dist(x, ) > 1/j}. Let 0 = 1 = and define the sets A j = j+1 \ j 1. These sets are an oen cover of, each A j is comact, and given x, x A j for only a finite number of indices j. e can therefore form a artition of unity subordinate to this cover: there exists ψ j Cc (A j) such that for all x, 0 ψ j (x) 1 and ψ j (x) = 1. j=1 Since f 1,1 loc (), ψ jf 1,1 loc (). Furthermore, since (ψ jf) = ψ j f +f ψ j a.e. in (see [14, Section 7.3]), we have that 1/ (ψ j f) ψ j 1/ f + f 1/ ψ j

17 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 17 ψ j 1/ f + ψ j f v 1/, and so ψ j f 1, (). Fix a non-negative, radially symmetric and decreasing function φ Cc ((0,1)) with φdx = 1. Then the convolution φ t (ψ j f)(x) = φ t (x y)ψ j (y)f(y)dy A j is only non-zero if for some y A j, x y < t. Hence, for j 3, if we fix t = t j, 0 < t j < (j+1) 1 (j+2) 1, this will hold only if (j +2) 1 < dist(x, ) (j 2) 1. Therefore, su(φ tj (ψ j f)) j+2 \ j 2 = j. e will fix the recise value of t j below. Define g(x) = φ tj (ψ j f)(x). j=1 Since φ is smooth, each summand is in C (). Further, given x, it is contained in a finite number of the j, so only a finite number of terms are non-zero. Thus the series converges locally uniformly and g C (). Finally, fix ǫ > 0; we claim that for the aroriate choice of t j we have f g 1, () < ǫ. To rove this, we consider each art of the norm searately. Since v A, thearoximateidentity {φ t } t>0 converges inl (v,). (See[37, Theorem 2.1.4].) Therefore, for each j there exists t j such that ǫ f g L (v,) ψ j f φ tj (ψ j f) L (v,) 2 = ǫ j+1 2. j=1 The argument for the second art of the norm is similar. Since ψ j f 1,1 loc (), φ tj (ψ j f) = (φ tj ψ j f). Fix j; then by Theorem 4.9 there exists t j such that ( ψ j f φ tj (ψ j f) ) L () = (ψ j f) φ tj (ψ j f) L () < ǫ 2 j+1. Therefore, (f g) L () j=1 j=1 ( ψ j f φ tj (ψ j f) ) L () j=1 ǫ 2 j+1 = ǫ 2. Thus, we have shown that f g 1, () < ǫ and our roof is comlete. As a corollary to Theorem 5.3 we can rove that when = R n, smooth functions of comact suort are dense.

18 18 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY Corollary 5.5. If 1 < and A, then C c (Rn ) is dense in 1, (Rn ). Proof. Fix ǫ > 0 and f 1, (Rn ). y Theorem 5.3 there exists h C () 1, (Rn ) such that f h 1, (Rn ) < ǫ/2. Therefore, to comlete the roof we will construct g Cc (Rn ) such that (5.1) g h 1, (Rn ) < ǫ/2. For each k 2, let ν k C c (R n ) be such that su(ν k ) (0,2k), 0 ν k 1, ν k (x) = 1 for x (0,k), and ν k 1/k. Let g k = hν k. Then g k C c (R n ), g k h, and g k h ointwise as k. Since h L (v,r n ), by the dominated convergence theorem, lim k g k h L (v,r n ) = 0. Similarly, since g k = ν k h+h ν k, g k h as k. Furthermore, by (3.1), 1/ (x) g k (x) ν k 1/ (x) h(x) + h 1/ (x) ν k (x) 1/ (x) h(x) + ν k (x) h(x) v(x) 1/ (x) h(x) + h(x) v(x). Since h 1, (Rn ), the final term is in L 1 (R n ), so again by the dominated convergence theorem lim g k h L k (Rn ) = 0. Therefore, for k sufficiently large, if we let g = g k, we get inquality (5.1) as desired. y modifying the roof of Theorem 5.3 we can also show that functions that are smooth u the boundary are dense in 1, () rovided has some boundary regularity. Given a bounded domain, let S 1, () denote the closure of C () in 1, (). Theorem 5.6. Let be a bounded domain such that is locally a Lischitz grah. Then for 1 < and A, S 1, 1, () = (). Proof. The roof of this result in the classical case (see, for instance, Evans and Gariey [11, Section 4.2]) is an adatation of the roof that H =. In our setting, we can use the same modifications to adat the roof of Theorem 5.3 and we leave the details to the reader. Here, we note that the heart of the changes is roving that, given a fixed vector a R n, φ t f( +at) converges to f in 1, (). To modify the argument given above, it will suffice to rove that su φ t f( +at) L t>0 () C f L ().

19 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 19 ut if we fix t > 0, φ t f(x+at) = ( ) x y t n φ +a f(y)dy = ψ f(x), t where ψ is a ositive, radially decreasing function centered at a. Such ψ can be aroximated by functions of the form Φ(x) = a k k 1 χ k (x), k=1 where the balls k are nested and centered at a. ith such functions Φ, the roof of Theorem 4.9 goes through without change. 6. Degenerate -Lalacian equations e now consider the alications of matrix weighted Sobolev saces to the study of degenerate ellitic equations. In this section we generalize some results from [8] for arbitrary matrix weights; in Section 7 we will aly these results in the secial case when we assume the matrix A condition. Throughout this section, let be a bounded domain in R n. In [8] the authors studied the artial regularity of solutions to the divergence form degenerate -Lalacian (6.1) L A, u = div( A u, u 2 2 A u) = 0, where 1 < < and A S n satisfies the elliticity condition w(x) 2/ ξ 2 Aξ,ξ v(x) 2/ ξ 2, where the weights v, w are assumed to be locally integrable. In the terminology introduced above, we have that Ais a matrix weight. e want to recast this equation so that our results can be restated in terms of the degenerate Sobolev saces defined in Section 5. If we define the matrix weight by A 1/2 = 1/, then (6.1) becomes (6.2) L, u = div( 1/ u 2 2/ u) = 0 with elliticity condition (6.3) w(x) ξ 1/ (x)ξ v(x) ξ. Hereafter, we will assume that is an invertible matrix weight and we will generally assume that v = o and w = 1 1 o. Since v and w are the largest and smallest eigenvalues of, this choice is in some sense otimal. As in [8], we introduce the notion of -admissible airs of weights on. Following the convention introduced above in Remarks 2.1 and 4.2, given a air of scalar weights (w,v) on, we will assume that they are in fact defined and locally integrable on a larger domain such that and that balls and cubes are interchangeable in

20 20 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY the definition of doubling and A weights on. Note that as a consequence of this assumtion, v, w L 1 (). Definition 6.1. Given 1 < <, a domain and a air of weights (w,v), we say that the air is -adimissible on if: (1) w v; (2) w A ; (3) v is doubling; (4) (w,v) satisfies the balance condition: there exists q > such that for every ball and 0 < r < 1, ( v(r) ) 1/q ( w(r) ) 1/. (6.4) r v() w() If is an invertible matrix weight, then by Proosition 3.2 we have that (1) holds. Since > 1, if we further assume A, then (2) and (3) hold by Lemma 4.5. Therefore, the critical condition is the balance condition (4). e will consider this assumtion more carefully in Section 7. Given the assumtion that (w,v) are a -admissible air, then by Theorem 5.2 we have 1, () is comlete and we can take the solution sace of (6.2) to be S1, (). More recisely (againfollowing [8]) we define a weak solution of (6.2) to be a function u S 1, () such that for all ϕ C c (), 1/ u 2 1/ u, 1/ ϕ dx = 0. Note that if we only assume u 1, (), then the above integral is well defined even if ϕ 1, (). Indeed, if we aly the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and then Hölder s inequality, we get 1/ u 2 1/ u, 1/ ϕ dx 1/ u 1 1/ ϕ dx u 1 L () ϕ L (). As a consequence, we could define weak solutions u to be functions in 1, (). However, to rove the results given below, we need the stronger assumtion that u S 1, (). However, if A and has Lischitz boundary (e.g., if is a ball), then by Theorem 5.6 we have that S 1, 1, 1, () = H () = (), so we can take our solution sace to be either of these larger saces. e will use this fact in Section 7 below. The following results are from[8]. For brevity, in the next result let S 1,,0 () denote the closure of Cc 1, () in ().

21 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 21 Theorem 6.2 ([8] Theorem 3.11). Let 1 < < and let S n be an invertible matrix such that (w,v) is a -admissible air. Then given any ψ S 1, () there exists a weak solution u S 1, () of L,u = 0 such that u ψ S 1,,0 (). Remark 6.3. In the original statement of this result there is an assumtion that a global Sobolev inequality holds. This was necessary there because they were considering more general equations defined with resect to Hörmander vector fields. Since (6.2) is defined with resect to the gradient, this assumtion always holds. See the discussion in [8, Section 3]. Theorem 6.4 ([8] Theorem 3.16). If is a ball and u S 1, (2) is a weak solution of L, u = 0, then u is bounded on. Theorem 6.5 ([8] Theorem 3.17). If is a ball and u S 1, (2) is a non-negative weak solution of L, u = 0, then u satisfies the following Harnack inequality: (6.5) suu ex ( Cµ() 1/) inf u where µ() = v() w(). To state our next result, we introduce an auxiliary oerator: a weighted maximal oerator. Given scalar weights (w,v), for x define the maximal oerator M (w,v)(x) = su v() w(), where the suremum is taken over all balls centered at x. Since v L 1 (), it follows from a esicovitch covering lemma argument (cf. Journé [24, Chater 1]) that w({x : M (w,v)(x) > λ}) C n λ v(). In articular, the set {x : M (w,v)(x) = } has measure zero. Theorem 6.6. Given 1 < < and an invertible matrix weight S n, suose that (w,v) is a -admissible air. If u S 1, () is a weak solution of L,u = 0, then u is continuous on the set F (w,v) = {x : M (w,v)(x) < }. In articular, u is continuous almost everywhere in. Proof. Our roof follows closely the roofs in [8, Theorems 4.4 and 4.5], so here we only sketch the main ideas. Note that by the above discussion we have that F (w,v) =. Fix x F (w,v) and let = (x,r) be a ball such that 2 = (x,2r). Since u S 1, () it is clearly in S 1, (2) and is a solution to L,u = 0 on 2. So by Theorem 6.4 u is

22 22 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY bounded on. Therefore, if we let M and m be uer and lower bounds for u on, we can aly the Harnack inequality (6.5) to M u and u m to conclude that osc u (x, 1 2 ) ex( Cµ( 1 2 )1/) 1 ex ( Cµ( 1 2 )1/) +1 osc u(x,), where osc u (x,) = su u inf u is the oscillation of u on. Since µ( 1 ) = v(1) 2 2 w( 1 ) M (w,v)(x), 2 we have that ex ( Cµ( 1)1/) 1 2 ex ( Cµ( 1)1/) +1 ex ( CM (w,v)(x) 1/) 1 ex ( CM 2 (w,v)(x) 1/) +1 = γ(x). Moreover, F (w,v) = {x : γ(x) < 1}. ecause γ(x) < 1 we may erform Moser iteration (see [14, Lemma 8.23]) to show there exists 0 < s(x) < such that osc u (x,α) c(x)α s(x) osc u (x,), 0 < α < 1. It follows from this inequality that u agrees a.e. with a function that is continuous on F (w,v). 7. The balance condition In this section we consider the artial regularity of solutions of the degenerate - Lalacian equation L, u = 0 with the additional assumtion that A. Since A imlies (by Lemma 4.5) w,v A, we have that conditions (1), (2) and (3) of Definition 6.1 hold. However, the balance condition (6.4) does not follow automatically from the matrix A condition, as the next examle shows. Examle 7.1. e modify Examle 5.1. For ease of comutation we will consider the balance condition for cubes instead of balls, but it is clear that they are interchangeable in this setting. Let = = (0,1) (0,1). Fix 1 < < 2, q > and /2 < α < 1. e again define [ ] 1 0 (x,y) = 0 x α y α. Then as before A and w(x,y) = 1, v(x,y) = x α y α. Furthermore, ( ) 1/q ( ) 1/ v(r) r r 2 2α q w(r) +1, = r 2. v() w() Therefore, the balance condition holds only if 2 2α +1 2 q.

23 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 23 However, by our choice of, q and α, 2 2α q +1 < 2 +1 = 2. Given this examle, we want to determine sufficient conditions on, or more recisely on v and w, for the balance condition to hold. Intuitively, the above examle fails because our choice of α is too close to 1: the function x α is in A 1, but it only satisfies the reverse Hölder inequality for small values of s > 1. Our main result, which is a generalization of [8, Theorems 4.8, 4.9], shows that a sufficiently large reverse Hölder exonent yields the balance condition. Theorem 7.2. Given 1 < <, suose 1 < s,t <, w A t and v RH s where (7.1) 0 < t n = 1 s. Then (w, v) satisfies the balance condition (6.4). Proof. Since w A t there exists ǫ > 0 such that w A t ǫ (see [10]). In articular, by (7.1), 0 < n (t ǫ) 1 < n s. Define n/s q = (t ǫ)n/ 1 ; then we have that q >. Fix 0 < r < 1 and a ball. y inequality (2.1), ( (7.2) r n r )t ǫ ( (t ǫ) w(r) ) 1/. = C w() Moreover, by inequality (2.2), ( v(r) (7.3) r v() ) 1/q Cr ( r ) 1/(s q) = Cr n s q +1. If we combine (7.2) and (7.3) we immediately get the balance inequality (6.4). Remark 7.3. A close examination of the roof shows that it is enough to assume that 1 < s,t < satisfy (7.4) 0 < t n 1 s However, since the A t and RH s classes are nested (i.e., if u < t, then A u A t, and if q > s, RH q RH s ), equality in (7.4) is the interesting case.

24 24 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY Theorem 7.2 seems to require a stronger condition on both v and w. However, deending on the size of relative to the dimension n, we can shift the stronger condition to one weight or the other. e first consider small: in this case we require a stronger condition on v. Corollary 7.4. Suose 1 < < n and A. If v RH n, then (w,v) satisfy n the balance condition (6.4). Proof. Since A, we have w A. Therefore, if we let s = n, then n r = n / and so n 1 = n 1 = n = n n s. Therefore, by Theorem 7.2 the balance condition holds. hen is large, we can shift the stronger hyothesis to w. The following two corollaries are immediate consequences of Theorem 7.2. Corollary 7.5. Suose n, A and w A t, where n < t n + 1 s and s > 1 is such that v RH s. Then the air (w,v) satisfies the balance condition (6.4). Remark 7.6. Since v A we know that v RH s for some s > 1, so there exists some t > 1 for which the hyotheses hold. Indeed, by (2.3), we can give a shar estimate for t: 1 t + 2 n+12 [v] A n. To state the next result, let A q = >q A. Note that this class is strictly larger than A q. Corollary 7.7. If n, A and w A /n, then the air (w,v) satisfies the balance condition (6.4). As a consequence of Theorem 7.2 and its corollaries, we get the following artial regularity result. Theorem 7.8. If 1 < <, A, and w, v satisfy the hyotheses of any of the above results, and if u is a weak solutions to L, u = 0, then u is continuous on the set F (w,v) = {M (w,v)(x) < }. Remark 7.9. Theorem 7.8 is the best ossible: that is, there exists satisfying the hyotheses such that a solution to L, u = 0 is discontinuous on the comlement of F (w,v). See Examle 8.9 below.

25 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES Maings of finite distortion In this section we aly our results on the artial regularity of solutions of the degenerate -Lalacian to maings of finite distortion. Hereafter, let R n be a domain that is not necessarily bounded. A vector function f : R n is a maing of finite distortion (MFD) if (1) f 1,1 loc (,Rn ); (2) the Jacobian J f (x) = detdf(x) > 0 a.e., and J f L 1 loc (); (3) there exists K(x) < a.e. such that Df(x) n o K(x)J f (x). As we noted in the Introduction, the regularity of MFDs has been studied by a number of authors. A classical result due to Vodo janov and Gol dšteĭn [38] is that if f 1,n (), then f is continuous. Generally seaking, most results in this area show that if f 1,n (), continuity follows if ex(k) satisfies some kind of integrability condition. Our results are quite different as we only rove artial regularity; they are similar in sirit, though not in detail, to the work of Manfredi [27]. To state our results, we first give some basic definitions and results on MFDs; for comlete information, including roofs, see [17, 22]. The smallest function K such that the (3) holds is called the outer distortion of f and is denoted K O : i.e., Df(x) n o = K O(x)J f (x). Since it is always the case that Df(x) o J f (x), we must have that K O (x) 1 a.e. Similarly, we define the inner distortion, denoted K I, to be the smallest distortion function of the inverse differential matrix: Df 1 (x) n o = K I (x)j f 1(x) = K I (x)j f (x) 1. The inner and outer distortion functions are related by the inequalities K O K n 1 I and K I K n 1 O. Finally, if we define the maximal distortion K M by then we have that K M (x) = max ( K I (x),k O (x) ), K I K M K n 1 I and K O K M K n 1 O. e now show that a maing of finite distortion is a solution to a degenerate -Lalacian equation. Define the distortion tensor of f to be the symmetric matrix G(x) = J f (x) 2/n Df(x) t Df(x). Hereafter, let = G n/2. Then we have that (8.1) 1 (x) o = Df(x)t Df(x) n/2 o J f (x) = K O (x)

26 26 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY and (8.2) (x) o = Df(x) 1 (Df(x) 1 ) t n/2 o J f(x) = K I (x). In articular, by inequality (3.1), K O (x) 1 ξ n 1/n ξ n K I (x) ξ n. Let f = (f 1,...,f n ). Then by definition, f i 1,1 loc (). Suose (K 1 O,K I) is an n-admissible air. Then given any ball, we have that f i 1,n (). e first show that f i L n (). Given a matrix A, let [A] i denote its i-th column. Then, treating f i as a column vector, we have that Df 1 (Df 1 ) t f i = Df 1 e i = [Df 1 ] i and [Df(x) 1 ] i f i = 1. Therefore, 1/n f i n dx = G 1 f i, f i n/2 dx = J f (x)dx <. To show that f i L n (K I,), we use the fact that since (K 1 O,K I) is an n-admissible air, we have a two-weight oincare inequality (see [5]): 1 K I () It follows that f i (f i ) n K I dx r()n K 1 O () r()n K 1 O () ( f i L n () f i L 1 () + f i n K 1 O dx 1/n f i n dx = r()n K 1 O () J f dx) 1/n. J f (x)dx. Finally, we have that if f 1,n 1 loc (,R n ), then the comonent functions, f i are weak solutions of L,n u = div( 1/n u n 2 2/n u) = 0. See [22, Chater 15] for details. From these observations we see that given an MFD f, we have that the comonent functions f i, 1 i n, satisfy a degenerate -Lalacian equation L,n u = 0, where the matrix satisfies the natural elliticity conditions with bounds given by the distortion functions. In other words, these functions fall within the framework of our results in the revious two sections. This leads to the following artial regularity result for maings of finite distortion.

27 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 27 Theorem 8.1. Given an MFD, f 1,n 1 loc (,R n ) S 1,n (), suose (K 1 O,K I) is an n-admissible air. Then f is continuous almost everywhere on. More recisely, given any ball, then f is continuous on the set {x : M (K 1 O,K I)(x) < }. Proof. Fix a ball. The comonent functions of f belong to S 1, () and are weak solutions of L, u = 0. Therefore, by Theorem 6.6 each of the comonent functions is continuous on the set (8.3) F (K O,K I ) = {x : M (K 1 O,K I)(x) < }. Since F (K O,K I ) = and is the countable union of balls, we have that f is continuous almost everywhere on. FollowingouraroachinSection7,wenowconsiderthehyothesisthat(K 1 O,K I) is an n-admissible air given the additional assumtion that = G n/2 A n. (Equivalently, we may assume n /n = G n /2 A n. This is articularly useful when n = 2.) In this case, by Lemma 4.5 and the identities (8.1) and (8.2), we have that conditions (1) and (2) of Definition 6.1 hold, so the main roblem is determining additional assumtions so that the balance condition (6.4) holds. Our first result is just a restatement of Theorem 7.2 in this setting. Corollary 8.2. Suose f is an MFD and = G n/2 A n. Suose further that K 1 O A t and K I RH s, where 0 < t 1 = 1 s. Then f is continuous a.e. on and the set of continuity is given by (8.3). Since in our setting = n, we can aly Corollaries 7.5 and 7.7. For brevity we will only consider the latter and leave the restatement of the former to the interested reader. Corollary 8.3. Suose f 1,n 1 loc (,R n ) is an MFD, = G n/2 A n, and 1/K O A 1 = >1A. Then f is continuous a.e. on and the set of continuity is given by (8.3). As a consequence of Corollary 8.3 we give two results which imlicitly require the outer distortion to be exonentially integrable. For the first result, note that a weight w is such that w, w 1 A 1 if and only if log(w) is in the closure of L in MO; in articular, the latter inclusion holds if log(w) VMO. (See [13,. 474].)

28 28 DAVID CRUZ-URIE, SFO, KAE MOEN, AND SCOTT RODNEY Corollary 8.4. Suose f 1,n 1 loc (,R n ), = G n/2 A n, and log(k O ) is in the closure of L in MO. Then f is continuous a.e. on and the set of continuity is given by (8.3). Forthesecondresult, weusethefactthatifbisafunctionsuchthatb,1/b MO, then b A 1. (See [23].) Since K O 1, we always have that K 1 O L () MO. Corollary 8.5. Suose f 1,n 1 loc (,R n ), = G n/2 A n, and K O MO. Then f is continuous a.e. on and the set of continuity is given by (8.3). e now want to give some artial regularity theorems that are related to the results in [8]. The major imrovement here is that by assuming that is in matrix A n we no longer have to assume that a weak solution is in the closure of the smooth functions. To state our results we first note that in Theorem 6.6, while we imlicitly assumed that v = o and w = 1 1 o, we never used this in the roof. All we used was the fact that (w,v) is a -admissible air, and the elliticity condition (6.3) holds. Further, note that using the relationshis relating them, we can give elliticity conditions for = G n/2 in terms of the distortion functions K M, K O and K I : (8.4) (8.5) (8.6) K M (x) 1 ξ n 1/n ξ n K M (x) ξ n K O (x) 1 ξ n 1/n ξ n K O (x) n 1 ξ n K I (x) 1 n ξ n 1/n ξ n K I (x) ξ n. To state our results we will need a local version of the Hardy-Littlewood maximal oerator. Given a ball and a locally integrable function f define M f(x) = su f(y) dy χ (x), where the suremum is over all balls. Theorem 8.6. Given an MFD f 1,n 1 loc (,R n ), suose = G n/2 A n, and K M A 2 RH 2. Then f is continuous almost everywhere on. More recisely, given any ball, f is continuous on the set {x : M (K M )(x) < }. Proof. Since we have the elliticity condition (8.4), to aly Theorem 6.6 we need to show that (K 1 M,K M) is an n-admissible air. Since K M A 2, K 1 M A 2, and so conditions (1) and (2) in Definition 6.1 hold. Since K M A 2 RH 2, we have that KM 2 A 3 (see [9, Theorem 2.2]), which by the duality of A weights imlies that K 1 M A 3/2. e can therefore aly Theorem 7.2 with t = 3/2 and s = 2 to conclude that (K 1 M,K M) satisfy the balance condition (6.4). Moreover, by Hölder s inequality, we have that for any ball, M (K 1 M,K M)(x) M (K M )(x) 2,

29 MATRIX A EIGHTS FOR DEGENERATE SOOLEV SPACES 29 so {x : M (K M )(x) < } {x : M (K 1 M,K M)(x) < }. The desired conclusion now follows from Theorem 6.6. Theorem 8.7. Given an MFD f 1,n 1 loc (,R n ), suose = G n/2 A n, and K I A n RH n. Then f is continuous almost everywhere on : given any ball, f is continuous on the set {x : M (K I )(x) < }. Proof. e roceed as in the roof of Theorem 8.6: given the elliticity condition(8.6), it will suffice to show that (K 1 n I,K I ) is an n admissible air. Since K I A n RH n, we have that KI n A n +1, which in turn imlies that K 1 n I = (K n I ) 1 n A 1+ 1 n. Hence conditions (1) and (2) hold. Moreover, if we take t = n and s = n in Theorem 7.2, we see that the weights satisfy the balance condition. Finally, M (K 1 n I,K I )(x) M (K I )(x) n. Theorem 8.8. Given an MFD f, suose = G n/2 A n, and K n 1 O A n RH n. Then f is continuous almost everywhere on : given any ball, f is continuous on the set {x : M,n 1 (K O )(x) < }, where M,n 1 (K I ) = M (K n 1 O )1/(n 1). Proof. First, by our assumtion K O L n 1 loc (), we do not need to assume a riori that f 1,n 1 loc (,R n ). Indeed, since J f (x) is locally integrable, if, then Df o n 1 dx = = ( ( Df 1/n 1/n n 1 o dx Df 1/n n 1 o 1/n n 1 o dx Df 1/n o n 1 K1/n O dx ) 1/n ( ) 1/n Df 1/n n odx K n 1 O dx ) 1/n ( 1/n J f (x)dx K n 1 O dx) <.