Skip to main content
Elsevier Sponsored Documents logoLink to Elsevier Sponsored Documents
. 2014 Dec 15;420(2):1416–1438. doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2014.06.053

Weakly coupled bound state of 2-D Schrödinger operator with potential-measure

Sylwia Kondej , Vladimir Lotoreichik
PMCID: PMC4375677  PMID: 25843975

Abstract

We consider a self-adjoint two-dimensional Schrödinger operator Hαμ, which corresponds to the formal differential expression

Δαμ,

where μ is a finite compactly supported positive Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class and α>0 is the coupling constant. It was proven earlier that σess(Hαμ)=[0,+). We show that for sufficiently small α the condition σd(Hαμ)=1 holds and that the corresponding unique eigenvalue has the asymptotic expansion

λ(α)=(Cμ+o(1))exp(4παμ(R2)),α0+,

with a certain constant Cμ>0. We also obtain a formula for the computation of Cμ. The asymptotic expansion of the corresponding eigenfunction is provided. The statements of this paper extend the results of Simon [41] to the case of potentials-measures. Also for regular potentials our results are partially new.

Keywords: Schrödinger operator, Perturbations by measures, Eigenvalues, Bound states

1. Introduction

Let us consider a non-relativistic quantum particle living in a two-dimensional system and moving under the influence of the potential V:R2R such that there exists δ>0 for which

R2|V(x)|1+δ<andR2|V(x)|(1+|x|δ)<. (1.1)

The closed, densely defined, symmetric and lower-semibounded sesquilinear form

tαV[f,g]:=(f,g)L2(R2;C2)α(Vf,g)L2(R2),domtαV:=H1(R2),

induces the self-adjoint Hamiltonian HαV in L2(R2). The spectrum of HαV cannot be computed explicitly for an arbitrary potential. For this reason spectral estimates and asymptotic expansions of spectral quantities related to HαV attract a lot of attention. Weak coupling asymptotic regime belongs to this line of research. It was shown by Simon in [41] that under the assumptions

R2V(x)0andV0 (1.2)

the operator HαV has at least one bound state for any α>0; moreover in the limit α0+ the corresponding lowest eigenvalue asymptotically behaves as

λ(α)exp([α4πR2V(x)]1),α0+, (1.3)

provided that inequality (1.2) is strict; cf. [41, Theorem 3.4]. The problem we study in this paper, is addressed in a certain respect to a more general class of potentials which, for example, includes so-called singular interactions. To sketch the physical context suppose that a particle is confined by a quantum wire with possibility of tunnelling. Consequently, the whole space R2 is available for the particle. On the other hand, if the wire is very thin, we can make an idealization and assume that the particle is localized in the vicinity of the set ΣR2 of a co-dimension one. The Hamiltonian of such a system can be formally written as

ΔαδΣ,α>0,

where δΣ denotes the Dirac measure supported on Σ, see [18] for the review on such Hamiltonians. More generally, one can speak of

Δαμ,α>0,

where μ is a positive finite Radon measure on R2. In order to give a mathematical meaning to the above formal expression we assume that μ belongs to the generalized Kato class as in Definition 2.1. Under this assumption the embedding of H1(R2) into L2(R2;dμ) is well defined and the following closed, densely defined, symmetric and lower-semibounded sesquilinear form

tαμ[f,g]:=(f,g)L2(R2;C2)αR2f(x)g(x)¯dμ(x),domtαμ:=H1(R2),

induces the uniquely defined self-adjoint operator Hαμ in L2(R2). It is known that σess(Hαμ)=[0,+), see [12, Theorem 3.1]. The following theorem contains all the main results of the paper.

Theorem

Let μ be a compactly supported positive finite Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class and Hαμ be the self-adjoint operator defined above. Then the following statements hold.

  • (i)

    For α>0 sufficiently small σd(Hαμ)=1 . Denote this unique eigenvalue by λ(α)<0 and the corresponding eigenfunction by fαL2(R2) .

  • (ii)
    The asymptotic expansion of λ(α) takes the form
    λ(α)=(Cμ+o(1))exp(4παμ(R2)),α0+,
    where the constant Cμ is given in (3.3) .
  • (iii)
    Set kα=(λ(α))1/2 . Then the corresponding eigenfunction admits the following expansion
    fα()=kα2πR2K0(kα|y|)dμ(y)+O(1lnkα),α0+,
    where K0() is the Macdonald function, the norm of the first summand has non-zero finite limit as α0+ , and the error term is understood in the strong sense.

The reader may note that in the asymptotic expansion of λ(α) the dominating term depends only on the total measure of R2 and does not depend on the distribution character of the measure μ. This stays in consistency with the result of Simon and reflects the property that in the weak coupling regime spectral quantities “forget” about local properties of the potential.

The statements of this paper complement and extend the results of [41] for the generalized class of potentials given by Radon measures. Firstly, the class of perturbations that we admit contains, for example, singular measures as δ-distributions supported on sets of co-dimension one. However, let us note that a class of perturbations supported by sets with a fractional Hausdorff dimension is admissible as well, cf. [3]. Secondly, for regular compactly supported potentials our class is slightly larger than that of [41]. In order to give the reader an idea of that, let us only mention that radially symmetric potential

V(r)=χ(r)r2|ln(r)|γ,

with χ(r) being the characteristic function of the interval [0,1/2] and γ>2, is compactly supported and belongs to the generalized Kato class, however it does not satisfy assumptions (1.1), which are imposed in [41]. One should say that the formula for the constant Cμ given in (3.3) was derived formally by physicists [37] for the case of regular potentials, but without a rigorous mathematical proof. It appears also in the paper [8], but again for a regular class of potentials.

Analogous asymptotic expansions of the bound state with respect to a small parameter appear in various spectral problems. It is worth to mention such results for two-dimensional waveguides with weak local perturbations [13] as well as for coupled waveguides with a small window [38] and also with a semi-transparent window [23]. Recently a “leaky waveguide” with a small parameter breaking the symmetry was considered in [31]. For the similar problems in the one-dimensional case see [10], [29], [36], [41]. The analogous results for quantum graphs were obtained in [16], [17], [35]. See also recent developments for Pauli operators [25]. Our list of references is by no means complete, however many of closely related works are mentioned.

In order to prove the main statements we apply the Birman–Schwinger principle. Precisely saying, we use its generalization for potentials-measures from the generalized Kato class, which is rigorously established in [12], see also [11] and [5], [39] for further modifications. We also use some simple results of perturbation theory of linear operators, where the standard reference is [28], however we require some extensions of the classical results.

Extensions of our results to non-compactly supported finite Kato class measures are also discussed. Using purely variational arguments combined with our main result for compactly supported measures we are able to obtain weak coupling asymptotics of the lowest eigenvalue for a class of non-compactly supported measures, which is in some respects wider also for regular potentials than the one considered in [8], [41]. In particular, in Example 4.1 we construct a regular potential, for which our methods are applicable, but which does not satisfy the second condition in (1.1).

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we complete some mathematical tools useful for further spectral analysis. Namely, we provide a rigorous definition of the Hamiltonian Hαμ, formulate the Birman–Schwinger principle, develop a perturbation method for a particular class of non-analytic operator families and analyze the properties of the operators involved into the Birman–Schwinger principle. In Section 3 we formulate and prove main results of the paper concerning the uniqueness of the bound state in the weak coupling regime, obtain its asymptotics and derive the behavior of the corresponding eigenfunction. Section 4 is devoted to a discussion on non-compactly supported measures.

The following abbreviations are used throughout the body of the paper:

  • we set L2:=L2(R2), L1:=L1(R2), Hk:=Hk(R2) with kZ (norm k) and L2:=L2(R2;C2);

  • the notation S:=S(R2) stands for the Schwartz class, moreover we set S:=S(R2) for the space dual to S, i.e. S is the space of linear continuous functionals on S;

  • we set Lμ2:=L2(R2;dμ), L1(R2;dμ), and Lμ:=L(R2;dμ);

  • for the positive Radon measure μ on R2 we denote μT:=μ(R2).

2. Preliminaries

This section plays an auxiliary role and consists of four subsections. In Section 2.1 we provide necessary facts from [11], [12] on self-adjoint free Laplacians perturbed by Kato-class measures. In Section 2.2 we prove some statements on non-analytic perturbation theory, which are hard to find in the literature. In Sections 2.3, 2.4 we complement known results on the operators related to the Birman–Schwinger principle.

2.1. Self-adjoint Laplacians perturbed by Kato-class measures

We start by recalling the definition of the generalized Kato class of positive Radon measures on R2.

Definition 2.1

A positive Radon measure μ on R2 belongs to the generalized Kato class if

limε0+supxR2Dε(x)|ln(|xy|)|dμ(y)=0,

where Dε(x) is the disc of radius ε>0 with the center at xR2.

Let μ be a positive Radon measure from the generalized Kato class. Then for arbitrarily small ε>0 there exists a constant C(ε)>0 such that

R2|f(x)|2dμ(x)εfL22+C(ε)fL22

holds for every fS; see [12], [42]. For the measure μ the embedding operator Jμ:H1Lμ2 is well-defined as the closure of the natural embedding defined on the Schwartz class, see [12, Section 2]. Consequently, the above inequality has a natural extension, i.e. for arbitrarily small ε>0 there exists a constant C(ε)>0 such that

JμfLμ22εfL22+C(ε)fL22, (2.1)

for all fH1.

Example 2.1

Suppose that the measurable function V:R2[0,+) satisfies the condition

limε0+supxR2Dε(x)|ln(|xy|)|V(y)dy=0.

Then the measure

μV(Ω):=ΩV(x)dx

belongs to the generalized Kato class.

Example 2.2

(See [44, Example 2.3(c)].) Given a family {Γi}i=1N of Lipschitz curves in the plane. Suppose that each curve in the family is parameterized by its arc length γi:[0,|Γi|]R2 and γi([0,|Γi|])=Γi with i=1,2,,N. Assume that for all s,t[0,|Γi|] and every i=1,2,,N the condition |γi(s)γi(t)|1/2|st| holds. So that each curve cannot have cusps and cannot intersect itself, whereas different curves can intersect each other. Now let Γ:=i=1NΓi. Then the Dirac measure supported on Γ belongs to the generalized Kato class.

Let the self-adjoint operator

Δfreef:=Δf,dom(Δfree):=H2,

define the unperturbed Hamiltonian of our system. In fact, Δfree represents closed, densely defined, symmetric and lower-semibounded sesquilinear form

t[f,g]=(f,g)L2,domt=H1. (2.2)

Let μ be a positive Radon measure from the generalized Kato class. By means of μ we define the sesquilinear form

tαμ[f,g]:=t[f,g](αJμf,Jμg)Lμ2,domtαμ:=H1, (2.3)

which in view of (2.1) and KLMN-theorem, cf. [40, Theorem X.17], is closed, densely defined, symmetric and lower-semibounded in L2.

Definition 2.2

Let Hαμ be a self-adjoint operator acting in L2 and defined as the operator associated with tαμ via the first representation theorem, [28, Chapter VI, Theorem 2.1].

Denote R(λ):=(Δfreeλ)1 with λCR+. Then R(λ) is an integral operator with the kernel

G(x,y;λ)=12πK0(λ|xy|),x,yR2,

where K0() is the Macdonald function, see [1, §9.6]. Following the notations of [12] we introduce the integral operator

Rμdx(λ):Lμ2L2,Rμdxf:=R2G(x,y;λ)f(y)dμ(y), (2.4)

and define the “bilateral” embedding of R(λ) to Lμ2 by

Q(λ):=JμRμdx(λ):Lμ2Lμ2. (2.5)

Note that

Q(k2)f:=12πR2K0(k|y|)f(y)dμ(y). (2.6)

The Birman–Schwinger principle has the following form.

Proposition 2.3

(See [11, Lemma 1] , [12] .) Let Rμdx() , Q() and Hαμ be as above. For λR the mapping

hRμdx(λ)h

is a bijection from ker(IαQ(λ)) onto ker(Hαμλ) , and

dimker(IαQ(λ))=dimker(Hαμλ).

We will also use the fact that the essential spectrum is stable under a perturbation by a finite measure.

Proposition 2.4

(See [12, Theorem 3.1] .) Let μ be a positive Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class. Assume that μT< and Hαμ is as in Definition 2.2 . Then

σess(Hαμ)=[0,+)

holds.

Remark 2.5

Note that also more singular perturbations are considered. For example, δ-interactions supported on curves in R3, see e.g. [20], [21], [22], [30], [39], and δ-interactions supported on hypersurfaces, see e.g. [5], [6], [19]. Point δ-interactions in Rd with d=2,3 are also more singular, cf. [4]. These perturbations do not belong to the generalized Kato class and therefore they require different approaches.

2.2. Elements of non-analytic perturbation theory

For later purposes we analyze a family of self-adjoint operators kT(k), kR+, acting in a Hilbert space H and taking the form

T(k):=T0+1lnkT1+O(1ln2k),k0+,

where T0=φ(,φ) with φH such that φ=1, T1 is a bounded self-adjoint operator in H and the error term is understood in the operator norm sense. The family T() is not analytic and consequently we cannot apply directly the results of [28, Chapters II and VII]. In the following theorem we investigate the spectra and the eigenfunctions of T(k) in the limit k0+.

Theorem 2.6

Let kT(k) be defined as above. For sufficiently small k>0 the spectrum σ(T(k))R of T(k) consists of two disjoint components σ0(k) and σ1(k) .

  • (i)
    The part σ0(k) is located in the small neighborhood of zero and its diameter can be estimated as
    diamσ0(k)1|lnk|T1+O(1ln2k),k0+.
  • (ii)

    The part σ1(k) consists of exactly one eigenvalue ω(k) of multiplicity one, which depends on k continuously.

  • (iii)
    The normalized eigenfunction φk corresponding to the eigenvalue ω(k) has the following expansion
    φk=φ+O(1lnk),k0+, (2.7)
    in the norm of H .
  • (iv)
    The eigenvalue ω(k) has the asymptotics
    ω(k)=1+1lnk(T1φ,φ)+O(1ln2k),k0+. (2.8)

Proof

(i) Note that σ(T0)={0,1} and that φ is an eigenfunction of the operator T0 corresponding to the eigenvalue 1. The separation of the spectra of T(k) into two parts σ0(k) and σ1(k) for sufficiently small k>0 follows from [28, Theorem V.4.10]. The component σ0(k) is located in the neighborhood of 0 and the component σ1(k) is located in the neighborhood of 1. Note that again by [28, Theorem V.4.10] the diameter of σ0(k) satisfies

diamσ0(k)1|lnk|T1+O(1ln2k),k0+.

(ii) Let Ei(k), i=0,1, be the orthogonal projectors onto the spectral subspaces of the operator T(k) corresponding to σi(k). Then E0(0)=IT0 and E1(0)=T0 hold. Since T(k)T0 tends to 0 for k0+, relying on [15, Theorem 3], we have dimranE1(k)=1 for sufficiently small k>0. Therefore E1(k)=φ˜k(,φ˜k), where φ˜k is the normalized eigenfunction corresponding to the eigenvalue ω(k) of T(k) with multiplicity one. According to [28, Theorem VIII.1.14] the eigenvalue ω(k) depends on k continuously.

(iii) By [34, Proposition 2.1], see also [9], the estimate

dist(σ0(k),σ1(k))E0(k)E1(0)π2T(k)T(0)

holds, which yields the asymptotic property

E1(0)E1(k)E1(0)=O(1lnk),k0+,

where we have used E0(k)=IE1(k). The above expansion implies the following

φφ˜k(φ,φ˜k)=O(1lnk),k0+. (2.9)

A straightforward calculation yields

φφ˜k(φ,φ˜k)2=(φφ˜k(φ,φ˜k),φφ˜k(φ,φ˜k))=1(φ˜k,φ)(φ,φ˜k)(φ,φ˜k)(φ,φ˜k)¯+|(φ,φ˜k)|2=1|(φ˜k,φ)|2.

Combining the above result with the estimate (2.9) we arrive at

1|(φ˜k,φ)|2=O(1ln2k),k0+. (2.10)

Consequently, we obtain

1|(φ˜k,φ)|=O(1ln2k),k0+. (2.11)

Suppose that (r(k),θ(k)) determine the polar representation of (φ˜k,φ), i.e. (φ˜k,φ)=r(k)eiθ(k), where r(k)>0. According to (2.11) we claim that

r(k)=1+O(1ln2k),k0+. (2.12)

Since φ˜k is the normalized eigenfunction of T(k) corresponding to the eigenvalue ω(k) the function

φk:=eiθ(k)φ˜k (2.13)

is as well. Thence, by (2.9) and (2.12) we get

φφk=φeiθ(k)φ˜kφr(k)eiθ(k)φ˜k+r(k)eiθ(k)φ˜keiθ(k)φ˜k=φ(φ,φ˜k)φ˜k+|r(k)1|=O(1lnk),k0+,

which proves the expansion (2.7).

(iv) Moreover, ω(k)σ1(k), as an eigenvalue of T(k) with multiplicity one, admits the representation

ω(k)=(T(k)φk,φk)=(T0φk,φk)+1lnk(T1φk,φk)+O(1ln2k),k0+.

Applying (2.7) and the fact that T1 is bounded, we get

ω(k)=|(φ,φk)|2+1lnk(T1φ,φ)+O(1ln2k),k0+.

Using (2.10) and (2.13) we get the asymptotics of ω() given in (2.8). □

2.3. Properties of the Q()-function

In this subsection we analyze the operator-valued function Q() defined in (2.5). Our aim is to describe certain basic properties of Q() and to derive its asymptotic expansion in the neighborhood of zero. The following lemma provides the first auxiliary tool.

Lemma 2.7

Let μ be a compactly supported positive finite Radon measure on R2 belonging to the generalized Kato class and let CR be a constant. Then the integral operator acting as

Rf:=R2(ln(|y|)+C)f(y)dμ(y)

is bounded in Lμ2 .

Proof

The operator R can be decomposed into the sum of two integral operators:

R1f=R2(ln(|y|))f(y)dμ(y),R2f:=CR2f(y)dμ(y).

According to the definition of the generalized Kato class (Definition 2.1) for any constant A>0 one can find ε>0 such that for every x0suppμ the estimate

Dε(x0)|ln(|x0y|)|dμ(y)A (2.14)

holds. Hence for any x0suppμ we get

R2|ln(|x0y|)|dμ(y)=Dε(x0)|ln(|x0y|)|dμ(y)+R2Dε(x0)¯|ln(|x0y|)|dμ(y)A+max{|ln(|ε|)|,|ln(|diamsuppμ|)|}μT.

Note that the above bound is independent of the choice of x0 and therefore by the Schur criterion [43, Lemma 0.32] and the symmetry of the integral kernel the operator R1 is bounded. Let 1μ stand for the identity function from Lμ2. Note that the integral operator R2 is a rank-one operator C1μ(,1μ)Lμ2. Consequently, R2 is also bounded. Now boundedness of R follows from decomposition R=R1+R2 and boundedness of R1 and R2 separately.  □

After these preliminaries we are ready to analyze the operator-valued function R+kQ(k2). First, let us note that for a given k the operator Q(k2) is bounded in Lμ2. The proof of this fact can be done via repeating the argument from [12, Corollary 2.2]. Now our aim is to expand Q() in a one-sided neighborhood of zero.

Proposition 2.8

Let μ be a compactly supported positive Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class, and the operator-valued function Q() be defined as in (2.5) . Then Q() admits the expansion

Q(k2)=ln(k)P+R+O(k2ln(k)),k0+, (2.15)

in the operator norm, where P is a rank-one operator given by

P:=12π1μ(,1μ)Lμ2 (2.16)

and R is a bounded operator in Lμ2 defined by

Rf:=12πR2(ln|y|CE+ln2)f(y)dμ(y); (2.17)

CE stands for the Euler–Mascheroni constant, 1 i.e. CE=0.57721... .

Proof

To prove the statement we employ the following expansion of the Macdonald function

K0(x)=ln(x/2)CE+s(x),x0+, (2.18)

where s(x)=O(x2ln(x)), see [1, Eq. (9.6.13)]. In view of (2.6) and the compactness of the support of μ, the operator Q(k2) can be expanded into the sum of the rank-one operator ln(k)P, the operator R and the remaining operator S(k) with the integral kernel s(k|xy|). Since Q(k2), P and R are bounded the operator S(k) is bounded as well. Further, note that for sufficiently small k>0

|s(k|xy|)|Aμk2|ln(k)|,x,ysuppμ,

with some constant Aμ>0, which depends on μ. Thus by Schur criterion the operator S(k) in Lμ2 with the integral kernel s(k|xy|) satisfies

S(k)=O(k2lnk),k0+,

which completes the proof.  □

Remark 2.9

Similar decomposition of the function Q() is employed in [14] for some other purposes in the case of Dirac measure supported by a non-compact curve.

In the next lemma we gather some useful properties of the operator-valued function Q().

Lemma 2.10

Let the operator-valued function Q() be defined as in (2.5) . Then the following statements hold.

  • (i)

    Q(k2)0 for all k>0 .

  • (ii)

    Q(k12)Q(k22) for k1k2 .

  • (iii)
    For any ε>0 there exists sufficiently small k>0 such that the spectrum σ(Q(k2)) decomposes into two disjoint parts
    σ0(Q(k2))(0,R+ε)
    with R as in (2.17) and
    σ1(Q(k2))={γ(k)},
    where γ(k) is the eigenvalue of Q(k2) with multiplicity one.
  • (iv)

    The function γ() is continuous, strictly decaying, and γ(k)+ as k0+ .

Proof

The item (i) follows directly from the non-negativity of the Macdonald function and the representation of the integral kernel of Q(k2) given by (2.6), see also (2.27).

According to [12, Eq. (2.6)] one has that

Rμdx(k˜2)=Rμdx(k2)+(k˜2k2)R(k˜2)Rμdx(k2) (2.19)

for any k,k˜R+. Hence, we arrive at the formula

Q(k˜2)Q(k2)=(k˜2k2)(Rμdx(k˜2))Rμdx(k2); (2.20)

where we combined (2.4) with (2.5), and used that JμR(k˜2)=(Rμdx(k˜2)); cf. [7, Lemma 2.3]. Taking the adjoints in the formula (2.19) we get

(Rμdx(k˜2))=(Rμdx(k2))+(k˜2k2)(Rμdx(k2))R(k˜2).

Inserting the above formula into (2.20) we obtain

Q(k2)Q(k˜2)=(Rμdx(k2))[(k2k˜2)(k˜2k2)2R(k˜2)]Rμdx(k2). (2.21)

Since 0R(k˜2)1/(k˜2), we get if k>k˜

(k2k˜2)(k˜2k2)2R(k˜2)(k2k˜2)(k˜2k2)2k˜2=(k2k˜2)k2k˜20.

The claim of (ii) follows directly from the last estimate and (2.21).

Note that according to Proposition 2.8 the function kT(k), k>0 defined by

T(k):=2πμTlnkQ(k2) (2.22)

determines a realization of the operator family considered in Theorem 2.6 with H=Lμ2, φ=1μμT and T1=2πμTR with R as in (2.17). Thus for sufficiently small k>0 the spectrum of the operator Q(k2) can be separated into two parts as claimed in (iii) and the function γ() is continuous. In view of (ii) the function γ() is non-increasing. Suppose that for some k1<k2 the condition γ(k1)=γ(k2) holds, that implies γ(k)=c>0 for k[k1,k2]. Hence, by Proposition 2.3 we have [k22,k12]σp(H(1/c)μ) which leads to a contradiction since the point spectrum of any self-adjoint operator should be a countable set. This proves strict decay of γ(). Furthermore, employing again (2.22) we conclude that γ(k)=μTlnk2πω(k). Consequently, it follows from (2.8) that γ(k)+ as k0+.  □

2.4. Properties of the Rμdx()-function

In this subsection we investigate some properties of the operator-valued function Rμdx() defined by (2.4). The unitary Fourier transform F:L2L2 is defined as the extension by continuity of the integral transform

(Ff)(p):=12πR2eipxf(x)dx,fL2L1.

It is well-known that F can be further extended by continuity up to the space S, cf. [2, Chapter 1.1.7]. Without a danger of confusion we keep the same notation F:SS for this extension. In the following we will use also the abbreviation Ff=fˆ, fS. Applying again the standard results concerning the Sobolev spaces, see [2, Chapter 1.2.6], we can write

Hk={fS:fˆ(p)(p2+1)k/2L2}, (2.23)

where the norm k in Hk is defined by fk=fˆ(p)(p2+1)k/2L2. We define the functional φμ for φLμ2 as

(φμ)(f):=R2(Jμf)(x)φ(x)¯dμ(x),fH1,

with Jμ as in Section 2.1. Let us show that φμH1. Indeed for any fH1 we get

|(φμ)(f)|R2|(Jμf)(x)||φ(x)|dμ(x)JμfLμ2φLμ2Cf1φLμ2

with some constant C>0, where we applied Hölder inequality in between and used that the embedding Jμ of H1 into Lμ2 is continuous. We have shown that the functional φμ is continuous on H1 and hence φμH1. Further, we define

φˆ(p):=(F(φμ))(p)=12πR2eipxφ(x)dμ(x),φLμ2. (2.24)

The above equivalence stays the extension of the Fourier transform to Lμ2; cf. [27]. In the next lemma we explore basic properties of the above transform.

Lemma 2.11

Let μ be a compactly supported positive finite Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class. Then for any φLμ2 its Fourier transform φˆ given by (2.24) is a bounded and Lipschitz continuous function.

Proof

Let φLμ2. Since the measure μ is finite the inclusion Lμ2Lμ1 holds. The boundedness of φˆ follows from the estimate

φˆL12πφLμ1<.

It remains to show that φˆ is Lipschitz continuous. Let us choose arbitrary p1,p2R2. Applying (2.24) we obtain

|φˆ(p1)φˆ(p2)|12πR2|eip1xeip2x||φ(x)|dμ(x). (2.25)

Using the fact that the function Rteit is Lipschitz continuous we estimate

|eip1xeip2x|=|1ei(p2p1)x|L|x||p2p1| (2.26)

with some constant L>0. Plugging (2.26) into (2.25) and using that μ is compactly supported we get

|φˆ(p1)φˆ(p2)|L|p1p2|

with some constant L>0.  □

Remark 2.12

Using the representation (2.23) of the Sobolev spaces we can extend operator R(k2) to a larger space. To derive this extension we apply

R(k2)=F11|p|2+k2F:L2L2, (2.27)

cf. [2]. Operator 1|p|2+k2F is bounded as the map acting from H1 to L2 and, consequently, it can be extended by continuity to the whole space H1. This means that R(k2) admits the analogous extension. Note that Rμdx(k2)φ with φLμ2 can be identified with the extension of R(k2) defined above applied to φμH1. To see this one can combine (2.24) and (2.27) into an iterated integral. After interchanging the order of integration and applying the integral representation [33, Eq. (19)] we get the claim due to (2.4).

In the next lemma we provide the Fourier representation of Rμdx(k2).

Lemma 2.13

Let μ be a compactly supported positive finite Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class. The operator Rμdx(k2):Lμ2L2 defined by (2.4) admits the representation

Rμdx(k2)φ=F1φˆ(p)|p|2+k2,φLμ2, (2.28)

where φˆ is given by (2.24) and F1 is the inverse Fourier transform on R2 .

Proof

Combining the statements of Remark 2.12 and (2.24) we get the claim.  □

Having in mind later purposes we investigate in the next proposition the properties of Rμdx(k2) as k0+.

Proposition 2.14

Let μ be a compactly supported positive finite Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class. Let the operator-valued function Rμdx(k2):Lμ2L2 be as in (2.4) . Then for any φLμ2 the following asymptotic expansion holds

k2Rμdx(k2)φL22=π|φˆ(0)|2+O(k),k0+,

where φˆ is the transform of φ defined by (2.24) .

Proof

Let φLμ2 and k>0. Using Lemma 2.13 and applying the fact that F1 is unitary in L2 we obtain

k2Rμdx(k2)φ2L2=k2R2|φˆ(p)|2(|p|2+k2)2dp=R2|φˆ(kt)|2(|t|2+1)2dt. (2.29)

We decompose the last integral of (2.29) onto regions

Bk={tR2:|t|<1k}andBkc=R2Bk¯.

Using boundedness of φˆ we obtain that

Bkc|φˆ(kt)|2(|t|2+1)2dtCBkc1(|t|2+1)2dt=C1k+r(r2+1)2dr=O(k),k0+. (2.30)

Using boundedness and continuity of φˆ, and applying mean-value theorem we arrive at

Bk|φˆ(kt)|2(|t|2+1)2dt=|φˆ(θ(k))|2Bkdt(|t|2+1)2, (2.31)

where θ(k)R2 and |θ(k)|k. Applying the asymptotic behavior

Bkdt(|t|2+1)2=R2dt(|t|2+1)2+O(k)=π+O(k),k0+,

to the formula (2.31) we obtain

Bk|φˆ(kt)|2(|t|2+1)2dt=π|φˆ(θ(k))|2+O(k),k0+.

Lipschitz continuity and boundedness of φˆ, and the inequality ||φˆ(x)|2|φˆ(x)|2|2φˆLμ|φˆ(x)φˆ(x)| combined with the above displayed formula, (2.29), (2.30) and |θ(k)|k imply that

k2Rμdx(k2)φL22=π|φˆ(0)|2+O(k),k0+,

and the claim is proven.  □

3. Weakly coupled bound state

In Section 3.1 we show that for sufficiently small coupling constant α>0 the discrete spectrum of the self-adjoint operator Hαμ consists of exactly one negative eigenvalue of multiplicity one and we compute the asymptotics of this eigenvalue as α0+. Moreover, in Section 3.2 we compute the asymptotics of the corresponding eigenfunction in the same limit.

3.1. Asymptotics of weakly coupled bound state

In this subsection we compute the asymptotics of weakly coupled bound state. The technique we employ here is slightly different than the one applied in [41]. As a benefit it allows to include also regular potentials with stronger singularities.

Theorem 3.1

Let μ be a compactly supported positive finite Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class. Let the self-adjoint operator Hαμ be as in Definition 2.2 . Then for all sufficiently small α>0 the condition

σd(Hαμ)=1

holds and the corresponding unique eigenvalue λ(α)<0 satisfies

λ(α)0forα0+. (3.1)

Proof

We rely on the Birman–Schwinger principle from Proposition 2.3. In order to recover the eigenvalues of Hαμ we will investigate the following condition 1σp(αQ(k2)). Let σi(Q(k2)), i=0,1 be as in Lemma 2.10(iii). The possibility 1/ασ0(Q(k2)) for k>0 small enough is excluded due to Lemma 2.10(iii). On the other hand, 1/ασ1(Q(k2)) is equivalent to the equation

γ(k)=1/α,

which in view of Lemma 2.10(iv) has exactly one solution k(α) for α>0 small enough and moreover k() satisfies

k(α)0+,α0+.

Consequently, λ(α)=k(α)2 gives the unique negative simple eigenvalue of Hαμ and the limiting property (3.1) holds.  □

Our next aim is to derive asymptotics of λ(α) for α0+.

Theorem 3.2

Let μ be a compactly supported positive finite Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class, and let Hαμ be the self-adjoint operator as in Definition 2.2 . Then the eigenvalue corresponding to the weakly coupled bound state of Hαμ admits the following asymptotics

λ(α)=(Cμ+o(1))exp(4παμT),α0+, (3.2)

where

Cμ=exp(4πμT2(R1μ,1μ)Lμ2)=exp(2CE+2ln22μT2(R2R2ln|xy|dμ(x)dμ(y))). (3.3)

Remark 3.3

Note that the error term appearing in (3.2) depends on μ. Therefore, in the following (especially in Section 4) we use the notation oμ(1).

Proof of Theorem 3.2

Let us consider the operator-valued function

T(k):=2πμTlnkQ(k2),k>0, (3.4)

where Q() is defined by (2.5). Comparing the expansion from Proposition 2.8 and the definition (3.4) one can see that the operator-valued function T() reflects the structure assumed in Theorem 2.6; precisely H=Lμ2 and

T0=φμ(,φμ)Lμ2,T1=2πμTR,

where φφμ:=1μμT. Therefore, for sufficiently small k>0 the spectrum of T(k) can be separated into two disjoint parts: σ0(k) located in the neighborhood of 0 and σ1(k) consisting of exactly one simple eigenvalue ω(k) located in the neighborhood of 1 and admitting the asymptotic expansion

ω(k)=1+1lnk(T1φμ,φμ)Lμ2+O(1ln2k),k0+.

Applying the definition of T1 to the last expansion, we arrive at

ω(k)=12πμT2lnk(R1μ,1μ)Lμ2+O(1ln2k),k0+. (3.5)

Suppose that α>0 is sufficiently small, so that σd(Hαμ)=1, cf. Theorem 3.1. Let λ(α)=k2(α) standardly denote the corresponding unique eigenvalue of Hαμ which in view of Theorem 3.1 converges as λ(α)0 for α0+. Combining the Birman–Schwinger principle together with the definition of T() we obtain the following condition

12παμTω(k(α))lnk(α)=1

for the value k(α). Applying to the above equation the asymptotic expansion of ω() given by (3.5) we get

αμTlnk(α)2π+αμT(R1μ,1μ)Lμ2+O(αlnk(α))=1,α0+.

The latter is equivalent to

lnk(α)=2παμT+2πμT2(R1μ,1μ)Lμ2+o(1),α0+, (3.6)

which yields

λ(α)=k(α)2=(Cμ+o(1))e4παμT,α0+,

with Cμ as in (3.3).  □

As a special case one gets the following statement.

Corollary 3.4

Let ΣR2 be a finite piecewise C1 curve being an open arc or a loop. Let L stand for the length of Σ and suppose that Σ is defined in the natural parametrization via the mapping σ:[0,L]R2 . Let μΣ be the Dirac measure supported on Σ and let HαμΣ be the self-adjoint operator as in Definition 2.2 . Then the eigenvalue corresponding to the weakly coupled bound state of HαμΣ admits the following asymptotics

λ(α)=(CμΣ+o(1))exp(4παL),α0+,

with

CμΣ=exp(2CE+2ln22L2(0L0Lln|σ(s)σ(s)|dsds)).

Example 3.1

We will test the above theorem on a special model. Namely, let μ be defined via the Dirac measure supported on the circle Cr of radius r; precisely

μ(Ω)=l(ΩCr), (3.7)

where l() is the one-dimensional measure defined by the length of the arc. This example was already studied in [24], where the authors compute negative spectrum of Hαμ (with μ as above) using separation of variables.

In order to recover the asymptotic behavior of the eigenvalue of Hαμ with α small and μ defined by (3.7), we will compute the constant Cμ given in (3.3). According to [32, Lemma 3.2] one has

(Q(k2)1μ,1μ)Lμ2=2πr20|J0(y)|2y(kr)2+y2dy, (3.8)

where J0() is the Bessel function of order 0. Applying [26, Eq. (6.535)] in the above formula we arrive at

(Q(k2)1μ,1μ)Lμ2=2πr2I0(kr)K0(kr). (3.9)

Using the asymptotic expansions [1, 9.6.12, 9.6.13]

I0(x)=1+O(x2),x0+,
K0(x)=(ln(x/2)+CE)+O(x2lnx),x0+,

of I0() and K0() in the neighborhood of zero, we obtain

I0(kr)K0(kr)=lnkr2CE+O(k),k0+. (3.10)

Combining Eqs. (3.9) and (3.10) we get

(Q(k2)1μ,1μ)Lμ2=2πr2(lnkr2CE+O(k)),k0+. (3.11)

The decomposition stated in Proposition 2.8 yields

(R1μ,1μ)Lμ2=(Q(k2)1μ,1μ)Lμ2+2πr2lnk+O(k2lnk),k0+. (3.12)

In fact, the left hand side of (3.12) does not depend on k. Consequently, inserting (3.11) into (3.12) and taking the limit k0+ we get

(R1μ,1μ)Lμ2=2πr2(lnr2CE).

In view of (3.3) this implies that Cμ=4r2exp(2CE) and finally

λ(α)=4r2e2CEe2αr(1+o(1)),α0+,

which is consistent with a result of [24, Section 2.1] up to the factor exp(2CE). Note that this factor can be also obtained by the method applied in [24].

Remark 3.5

Following the approach of [12] one can introduce a sign changing weight in γL(R2) and consider more general operators defined via quadratic forms

qαγμ[f]:=fL22αR2γ(x)|f(x)|2dμ(x),domqαγμ=H1.

Then we may expect that the existence of a negative eigenvalue of Hαγμ depends on sign of I:=R2γ(x)dμ(x). If I>0 then Hαγμ admits a negative eigenvalue with analogous asymptotics as (3.2) with I playing a role of μT in the exponent. The asymptotics could be different if I=0. However, the analysis of sign changing case needs either an extension of Theorem 2.6 for non-self-adjoint operators or modifying the formulation of the Birman–Schwinger principle stated in Proposition 2.3. We postpone this for further studies.

3.2. Asymptotics of the eigenfunction corresponding to the weakly coupled bound state

As we have shown in the previous section the operator Hαμ has exactly one negative eigenvalue for sufficiently small α>0. The aim of this section is to recover the asymptotic behavior of the corresponding eigenfunction in the limit α0+.

Theorem 3.6

Let μ be a compactly supported positive finite Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class. Let λ(α)<0 be the unique eigenvalue of Hαμ in the limit α0+ and set kα:=λ(α) . Then the corresponding eigenfunction has the form

fα()=kα2πR2K0(kα|y|)dμ(y)+O(1lnkα),α0+,

where the error term is understood in the sense of L2 -norm; moreover the L2 -norm of fα has non-zero finite limit as α0+ .

Proof

In the proof of this theorem we rely on Proposition 2.3. For non-trivial ϕαker(IαQ(kα2)) the function

gα():=Rμdx(kα2)ϕα=12πR2K0(kα|y|)ϕα(y)dμ(y), (3.13)

reproduces the eigenfunction of Hαμ. Similarly as in the proof of Theorem 3.2 we conclude that ϕα is an eigenfunction of the operator

T(kα)=2πμTln(kα)Q(kα2)

corresponding to the eigenvalue 2πμTln(kα)α. Recall that the family R+kT(k) is a realization of the operator family considered in Theorem 2.6 with H=Lμ2, φ:=1μμT, T0:=φ(,φ), T1:=2πμTR and R as in (2.17). Hence, by Theorem 2.6(iii) we obtain that ϕα can be chosen in the form

ϕα=1μ+ςα,where ςαLμ2=O(1lnkα) as α0+. (3.14)

By Proposition 2.14 we obtain

kα2Rμdx(kα2)1μ2L2=μT24π+O(kα),α0+, (3.15)

where we used that 1ˆμ(0)=12πμT. Hölder inequality yields

|ςˆα(0)|12πςαLμ112πςαLμ2μT. (3.16)

Hence, using Proposition 2.14, (3.14) and (3.16) we get

kα2Rμdx(kα2)ςα2L2=O(1ln2kα),α0+. (3.17)

According to (3.13), (3.14), (3.15) and (3.17)

fα:=kαRμdxϕα

is an eigenfunction of Hαμ and satisfies

fαL2μT2π,as α0+,

moreover

fα()=kα2πR2K0(kα|y|)dμ(y)+O(1lnkα),α0+,

holds, and the claim is proven.  □

As a special case one gets the following statement.

Corollary 3.7

Let ΣR2 be a finite piecewise C1 curve being an open arc or a loop. Let L stand for the length of Σ and suppose that Σ is defined in the natural parametrization via the mapping σ:[0,L]R2 . Let μΣ be the Dirac measure supported on Σ and let HαμΣ be the self-adjoint operator as in Definition 2.2 . Let λ(α)<0 be the unique eigenvalue of Hαμ in the limit α0+ and set kα:=λ(α) . Then the corresponding eigenfunction has the form

fα()=kα2πΣK0(kα|y|)dσ(y)+O(1lnkα),α0+,

where σ is the natural Lebesgue measure on Σ, the error term is understood in the sense of L2 -norm; moreover the L2 -norm of fα has non-zero finite limit as α0+ .

4. Remarks on non-compactly supported finite measures

In this section we show that the asymptotics of the type (3.2) holds also for some non-compactly supported finite Kato class measures. Precisely, we derive a lower and an upper bound for the lowest eigenvalue in the weak coupling constant regime. Furthermore, we show that the results obtained here allow to recover an information on the weak coupling constant asymptotics in cases for which previously known results are not applicable.

Theorem 4.1

Let μ be a finite positive Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class (not necessarily compactly supported). Let the self-adjoint operator Hαμ be as in Definition 2.2 . Then for each α>0 the operator Hαμ has at least one negative eigenvalue. Moreover, for any sufficiently small ε>0 there exist αε>0 and C(ε)>0 such that for α(0,αε) the lowest eigenvalue λ(α)<0 of Hαμ satisfies the estimate

λ(α)C(ε)exp(4πα(μTε)),α(0,αε).

Proof

In view of Proposition 2.4 one has σess(Hαμ)=[0,+). Let us fix r>0 and take the restriction μr of the measure μ onto the disc Dr(0):={(x,y)R2:x2+y2<r2}. Consequently, infσ(Hαμr)infσ(Hαμ). Thus the operator Hαμ has at least one negative eigenvalue for all α>0, because the operator Hαμr has and because σess(Hαμ)=[0,+).

Observe that for any sufficiently small ε>0 there exists a sufficiently large r(ε)>0 such that μTμr(ε)(R2)=ε. Set C(ε):=Cμr(ε)+supα(0,αε)rμr(ε)(α), where Cμr(ε) and rμr(ε)(α):=oμr(ε)(1) are determined by (3.2) and (3.3). Finally, Theorem 3.2 implies the statement.  □

Remark 4.2

The following two aspects should be mentioned.

  • (a)

    It is not claimed in Theorem 4.1 that for any non-compactly supported finite measure from the generalized Kato class the operator Hαμ has exactly one bound state for all sufficiently small α>0.

  • (b)
    Assume that μ satisfies
    |R2R2ln(|xy|)dμ(x)dμ(y)|<. (4.1)
    Then C(ε)>0 in the previous theorem can be chosen for sufficiently small α>0 arbitrarily close to Cμ defined by (3.3).

Hypothesis 4.1

Assume that μ is a finite Kato class measure on R2 , which is not necessarily compactly supported. Suppose that {μn}n=1 are compactly supported finite measures from the generalized Kato class such that μn(R2)=μT for all nN and that μ=n=1anμn , where an>0 ( nN ) and n=1an=1 . Assume also that

C:=n=1anCμn<andn=1anrμn(α)=o(1),α0+, (4.2)

where rμn(α):=oμn(1) and Cμn are defined by (3.2) and (3.3) , respectively.

Remark 4.3

If the family {μn}n=1 in Hypothesis 4.1 consists of infinitely many (possibly rotated and translated) copies of compactly supported measures from a finite set, then the conditions of Hypothesis 4.1 are naturally satisfied.

Theorem 4.4

Let μ be a finite positive Radon measure on R2 from the generalized Kato class satisfying Hypothesis 4.1 , where C is as in (4.2) . Let the self-adjoint operator Hαμ be as in Definition 2.2 . Let λ(α)<0 be the lowest eigenvalue of Hαμ . Then

λ(α)(C+o(1))exp(4παμT),α0+.

Proof

Let us pick a function fH1. Plugging this function into the form tαμ in (2.3) and estimating with the aid of Theorem 3.2, we get

tαμ[f,f]=fL22αJμfLμ22=n=1an(fL22αJμnfLμn22)n=1an(Cμn+rμn(α))e4παμTfL22=(C+o(1))e4παμTfL22,

and the claim follows by variational principles.  □

Remark 4.5

Note that with the aid of Theorem 4.1, Theorem 4.4 one can obtain information on the asymptotics of the lowest eigenvalue also in those cases, where the results of [8], [41] are not applicable. For instance, we do not need the second condition in (1.1) for regular potentials. However, it should be said that for our class of non-compactly supported measures we are able only to recover the first term in the asymptotic expansion, covering [41] and not [8]. Also, in general, verifying the conditions of Hypothesis 4.1 is not very easy, except an important case indicated in Remark 4.3.

Example 4.1

Let us split the plane into squares {Πn}n=1 with the unit side i.e. R2=n=1Πn¯ and ΠnΠm= for nm. We denote by χΠn() the characteristic function of Πn. Then the potential

V(x):=n=11nln2(n+1)χΠn(x),

belongs to the generalized Kato class and the corresponding measure μV is finite since μV(R2)=n=11nln2(n+1)<. The potential V does not satisfy the second condition in (1.1) and thus the results of [8], [41] are not applicable, but the measure μV satisfies Hypothesis 4.1 with an=1nln2(n+1)μV(R2) and μn being defined as

μn(Ω):=μV(R2)Area(ΩΠn),

which is in fact for different nN the same measure (up to translations). By Proposition 2.4 one has that σess(HαμV)=[0,+), and by Theorem 4.1 the operator HαμV has at least one negative eigenvalue for all α>0. Let λ(α)<0 be the lowest eigenvalue of HαμV. Employing Theorem 4.1, Theorem 4.4 we arrive at

(C+o(1))exp(4παμT)λ(α)C(ε)exp(4πα(μTε)),α(0,αε),

for arbitrarily small ε>0 with some constants αε,C,C(ε)>0 as in the utilized theorems.

Example 4.2

Consider a half-line in R2 defined by Σ:={(s,0):sR+}. For any nN define the unit segment Σn:=[n1,n), i.e. Σ=n=1Σn. Assume that the potential-measure takes the form

μ:=n=111+n1+εδΣn,ε>0,

where δΣn standardly denotes the Dirac δ-function supported on Σn. Therefore, μ(R2)=n=111+n1+ε< and, consequently, σess(Hαμ)=[0,). Introduce

μn:=μ(R2)δΣnandan:=1(1+n1+ϵ)μ(R2).

Let λ(α)<0 the lowest eigenvalue of Hαμ. Applying Theorem 4.1, Theorem 4.4 we obtain that

(C+o(1))exp(4παμT)λ(α)C(ε)exp(4πα(μTε)),α(0,αε), (4.3)

for arbitrarily small ε>0 with some constants αε,C,C(ε)>0 as in the utilized theorems. Consider now the measure

μ˘=11+|s+1|1+εδΣ.

Using the inequality

JμfLμ2Jμ˘fLμ˘2,fH1,

and employing the argument used in the proof of Theorem 4.4 we conclude that the expression (C+o(1))exp(4παμT) yields a lower bound for the lowest eigenvalue of Hαμ˘. Moreover, changing μT by μ˘T=μ˘(R2) in the upper bound in (4.3) we get a corresponding upper bound of the lowest eigenvalue for the measure μ˘.

Acknowledgments

V.L. gratefully acknowledges financial support by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), project P 25162-N26 and thanks University of Zielona Góra for the invitation in Winter 2013, where a part of this work was done.

Submitted by A. Cianchi

Footnotes

1

This constant can be computed as CE=limn(k=1n1kln(n)).

References

  • 1.Abramowitz M., Stegun I. U.S. Government Printing Office; Washington, D.C.: 1964. Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Adams D., Hedberg L. Springer; 1991. Function Spaces and Potential Theory. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Albeverio S., Koshmanenko V. On Schrödinger operators perturbed fractal potentials. Rep. Math. Phys. 2000;45:307–326. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Albeverio S., Gesztesy F., Høgh-Krohn R., Holden H. 2nd edition. AMS Chelsea Publishing; Providence, RI: 2005. Solvable Models in Quantum Mechanics. appendix by P. Exner. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Behrndt J., Langer M., Lotoreichik V. Schrödinger operators with δ and δ-potentials supported on hypersurfaces. Ann. Henri Poincare. 2013;14:385–423. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Behrndt J., Exner P., Lotoreichik V. Schrödinger operators with δ and δ-interactions on Lipschitz surfaces and chromatic numbers of associated partitions. arXiv:1307.0074
  • 7.BelHadjAli H., Ben Amor A., Brasche J. Large coupling convergence: overview and new results. Oper. Theory Adv. Appl. 2011;211:73–117. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Bentosela F., Cavalcanti R.M., Exner P., Zagrebnov V.A. Anomalous electron trapping by localized magnetic fields. J. Phys. A. 1999;32:3029–3039. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Bhatia R., Davis C., McIntosh A. Perturbation of spectral subspaces and solution of linear operator equations. Linear Algebra Appl. 1983;52/53:45–67. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Blankenbecler R., Goldberger M.L., Simon B. The bound states of weakly-coupled long-range one-dimensional quantum Hamiltonians. Ann. Phys. 1977;108:69–78. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Brasche J.F. Dirichlet Forms and Stochastic Processes. de Gruyter; Berlin: 1995. On the spectral properties of singular perturbed operators. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Brasche J.F., Exner P., Kuperin Yu.A., Šeba P. Schrödinger operators with singular interactions. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1994;184:112–139. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Bulla W., Gesztesy F., Renger W., Simon B. Weakly coupled bound states in quantum waveguides. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 1997;125:1487–1495. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Cisło J., Kondej S. Upper bound for the number of bound states induced by the curvature of singular potential. Rep. Math. Phys. 2011;68:225–240. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Dancis J., Davis Ch. An interlacing theorem for eigenvalues of selfadjoint operators. Linear Algebra Appl. 1987;88/89:117–122. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Ekholm T., Enblom A., Kovařík H. Schrödinger operators on regular metric trees with long range potentials: weak coupling behavior. J. Differential Equations. 2010;248:850–865. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Exner P. Weakly coupled states on branching graphs. Lett. Math. Phys. 1996;38:313–320. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Exner P. Analysis on Graphs and Its Applications. vol. 77. 2008. Leaky quantum graphs: a review; pp. 523–564. (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math.). [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Exner P., Jex M. Spectral asymptotics of a strong δ interaction on a planar loop. J. Phys. A. 2013;46:345201. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Exner P., Kondej S. Curvature-induced bound states for a δ-interaction supported by a curve in R3. Ann. Henri Poincare. 2002;3:967–981. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Exner P., Kondej S. Strong-coupling asymptotic expansion for Schrödinger operators with a singular interaction supported by a curve in R3. Rev. Math. Phys. 2003;16:559–582. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Exner P., Kondej S. Hiatus perturbation for a singular Schrödinger operator with an interaction supported by a curve in R3. J. Math. Phys. 2008;49:1–19. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Exner P., Krejčiřík D. Waveguides coupled through a semitransparent barrier: a Birman–Schwinger analysis. Rev. Math. Phys. 2001;13:307–334. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Exner P., Tater M. Spectra of soft ring graphs. Special section on quantum graphs. Waves Random Media. 2004;14:47–60. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Frank R.L., Morozov S., Vugalter S. Weakly coupled bound states of Pauli operators. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations. 2011;40:253–271. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Gradshteyn I.S., Ryzhik I.M. Elsevier/Academic Press; Amsterdam: 2007. Table of Integrals, Series, and Products. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Karwowski W., Koshmanenko V., Ota S. Schrödinger operator perturbed by operators related to null sets. Positivity. 1998;2:77–99. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kato T. Springer-Verlag; Berlin: 1995. Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Klaus M. On the bound state of Schrödinger operators in one dimension. Ann. Phys. 1977;108:288–300. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Kondej S. Resonances induced by broken symmetry in a system with a singular potential. Ann. Henri Poincare. 2012;13:1451–1467. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Kondej S., Krejčiřík D. Spectral analysis of a quantum system with a double line singular interaction. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 2013;49 [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Kondej S., Vaz J. Fractional Schrödinger operator with delta potential localized on circle. J. Math. Phys. 2012;53 11 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Kondej S., Veselic I. Lower bounds on the lowest spectral gap of singular potential Hamiltonians. Ann. Henri Poincare. 2007;8:109–134. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Kostrykin V., Makarov K.A., Motovilov A.K. Perturbation of spectra and spectral subspaces. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 2007;359:77–89. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Kovařík H. Weakly coupled Schrödinger operators in regular metric trees. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 2007/08;39:1135–1149. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Landau L.D., Lifshitz E.M. vol. 3. Pergamon Press Ltd.; London–Paris: 1958. Quantum Mechanics: Non-relativistic Theory. (Course of Theoretical Physics). [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Patil S.H. Ground-state energy of two-dimensional weakly coupled Hamiltonians. Phys. Rev. A. 1980;80:2400–2402. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Popov I.Yu. Asymptotics of bound state for laterally coupled waveguides. Rep. Math. Phys. 1999;43:427–437. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Posilicano A. A Krein-like formula for singular perturbations of self-adjoint operators and applications. J. Funct. Anal. 2001;183:109–147. [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Reed M., Simon B. Academic Press; New York–London: 1975. Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics II. Fourier Analysis, Self-Adjointness. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Simon B. The bound state of weakly coupled Schrödinger operators in one and two dimensions. Ann. Phys. 1976;97:279–288. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Stollmann P., Voigt J. Perturbation of Dirichlet forms by measures. Potential Anal. 1996;5:109–138. [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Teschl G. American Mathematical Society; Providence: 2009. Mathematical Methods in Quantum Mechanics. With Applications to Schrödinger Operators. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Vogt H. A lower bound on the first spectral gap of Schrödinger operators with Kato class measures. Ann. Henri Poincare. 2009;10:395–414. [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES