1992
DOI: 10.1017/s1446788700035060
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bifurcation and stability of positive solutions of a two-point boundary value problem

Abstract: We consider the existence of multiple positive solutions of a nonlinear two-point boundary value problem by modifying a "time map" technique introduced by J. Smoller and A. Wasserman. We count the number of positive solutions and find their Conley indices and thus determine their stabilities.1991 Mathematics subject classification (Amer. Math. Soc): 58 F 14, 34 B 15.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

1992
1992
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The next Lemma 3.1 for 1 < p 2 and Lemma 3.2 for p > 2 are of independent interest. In particular, Lemma 3.1 extends[19, Theorem] for (3.1) from p = 2 to 1 < p 2.…”
mentioning
confidence: 57%
“…The next Lemma 3.1 for 1 < p 2 and Lemma 3.2 for p > 2 are of independent interest. In particular, Lemma 3.1 extends[19, Theorem] for (3.1) from p = 2 to 1 < p 2.…”
mentioning
confidence: 57%
“…This permits us to elucidate the ro( le of the relative values of the multiplicities of such zeros u G in the arising of the corresponding transition layers therefore sharpening previous results in the subject [14]. [21]). We are producing there an &ad hoc' approach to the degeneracy issue which seems more general than the one in [16] and is directly based upon the knowledge of the asymptotic behaviour of ¹(u H ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…Reciprocally, families of solutions +u H , with arbitrary pre-"xed limit positions of such intervals can be constructed by a suitable choice of convergent sequences d G ( )/( and d G ( )/( in (21).…”
Section: Degenerate Zerosmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These and by (7), we obtain that θ (β 2 ) = −β 2 f (β 2 ) ≤ 0 and θ (β 3 ) = −β 3 f (β 3 ) > 0. So we obtain β 3 > C 2 by (10). Since β3 β1 f (u)du > 0 and by (5), θ(β 3 ) = 2F (β 3 ) > 2F (β 1 ) > 0.…”
mentioning
confidence: 71%