Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
selgasvirginia@uniovi.es Departamento de Matemáticas, Target signatures are discrete quantities computed from measured scattering data that Universidad de Oviedo, EPIG, C/ could potentially be used to classify scatterers or give information about possible Luis Ortiz Berrocal s/n, 33203 Gijón, Spain defects in the scatterer compared to an ideal object. Here, we study a class of modiﬁed Full list of author information is interior transmission eigenvalues that are intended to provide target signatures for an available at the end of the article inverse ﬂuid–solid interaction problem. The modiﬁcation is based on an auxiliary problem parametrized by an artiﬁcial diﬀusivity constant. This constant may be chosen strictly positive, or strictly negative. For both choices, we characterize the modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues by means of a suitable operator so that we can determine their location in the complex plane. Moreover, for the negative sign choice, we also show the existence and discreteness of these eigenvalues. Finally, no matter the choice of the sign, we analyze the approximation of the eigenvalues from far ﬁeld measurements of the scattered ﬂuid pressure and provide numerical results which show that, even with noisy data, some of the eigenvalues can be determined from far ﬁeld data. Keywords: Fluid–solid interaction, Inverse scattering, Steklov eigenvalues, Modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues Mathematics Subject Classiﬁcation: 35R30, 35P25, 35P05, 65N21, 65N25 1 Introduction Target signatures are discrete data that can be computed from the wave ﬁeld scattered by an unknown target. It has been proposed that these discrete data can be used either to categorize the scatterer by comparing the signature to a dictionary of known signa- tures, or to detect changes in the structure of a scatterer. The ﬁrst target signatures to be proposed were for electromagnetic waves and could be computed from time domain measurements of a radar signal [23]. In recent years, the quest for target signatures for inverse acoustic and electromagnetic scattering has been centered around three eigen- value problems: transmission eigenvalues, Steklov type eigenvalues and modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues. The ﬁrst of these, transmission eigenvalues, arise in the study of the injectivity of the far ﬁeld operator for a bounded penetrable scatterer. However, transmission eigenvalues can only be detected by scanning in frequency and are restricted © The Author(s) 2021. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 0123456789().,–: volV 3 Page 2 of 20 P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 to non-absorbing media. These are practical limitations. For a discussion of these eigen- values, see [10]. In order to obtain signatures that can be determined for absorbing media, and which only require scattering data at a single frequency, Cakoni et al. [4] proposed to use the so-called Steklov eigenvalues for the Helmholtz equation as target signatures. This study was extended to Maxwell’s equations in [5], and to the ﬂuid–solid interaction problem in [20]. For the ﬂuid–solid problem, Steklov type eigenvalues (termed impedance eigenvalues in [20]) can be determined from scattering data, but only a few can be determined from such data. In order to provide a tunable parameter that can help increase the sensitivity of the eigenvalues to changes in the scatterer, Cogar et al. [8] introduced modiﬁed transmission eigenvalues. This idea was recently extended to Maxwell’s equations in [9]. In our paper, we develop the modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues for the ﬂuid– solid interaction problem. Such eigenvalues involve a modiﬁed interior transmission prob- lem (mITP) with a coupling between the ﬂuid and elastic wave ﬁelds, and results in a discrete set of eigenvalues. The properties of these eigenvalues depend on the choice of an artiﬁcial diﬀusivity parameter that can be positive (the natural case [8]) or negative (the metamaterial case [2]). The idea of using a metamaterial was ﬁrst suggested in [2]inthe context of the Helmholtz equation. In particular for the metamaterial case, it is possible to prove monotonicity results for the eigenvalues which may be helpful in characterizing the elastic properties of the scatterer. We point out that only physical data from a standard linear elastic scatterer are used to determine these eigenvalues, regardless of the sign of the artiﬁcial diﬀusivity. Among the main contributions of this paper is to give the ﬁrst study of modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues for the ﬂuid–solid problem. This is also the ﬁrst such study of modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues for a multi-physics problem and shows that this type of eigenvalues can be used in this case. To understand the behavior of the eigenvalues associated with the mITP, we reformulate the mITP ﬁrst by means of an auxiliary boundary operator. We then study the mITP by superposition with a reference case, and this reasoning allows us to make use of the Fredholm alternative. The behavior of modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues depends on the sign of an auxiliary parameter deﬁning the modiﬁed far ﬁeld operator. In particular, when this parameter is negative, we prove an upper bound; and, this allows us to guarantee the existence of a reference case and use it to show the existence of inﬁnitely many discrete eigenvalues. Finally, for either sign choice, we study the approximation of these eigenvalues using a modiﬁed far ﬁeld equation. The outline of this paper is as follows. First, in Sect. 2,wegiveabrief summary of the forward problem, drawing heavily on the presentation in [20]. In Sect. 3,wedeﬁne the modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues, motivating their choice by considering the injectivity of the modiﬁed far ﬁeld operator deﬁned at the start of that section. We also derive theorems concerning the discreteness and distribution of modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues. Next, in Sect. 4 we demonstrate the usual theorems concerning the approximation of modiﬁed transmission eigenvalues using solutions of the far ﬁeld equation. Then, in Sect. 5 we show a few numerical examples to illustrate our theory. Finally, we end with conclusions and comments on further study. P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 Page 3 of 20 3 We perform the analysis for a bounded elastic scatterer in R for m = 2, 3. Generally, bold face quantities denote vectors as well as spaces of vector-valued ﬁelds: For exam- ple, u(x) denotes the displacement of the solid at the point x ∈ R ; besides, if O is a bounded open set, then H (O) stands for the standard Sobolev space of functions with 2 1 1 m L -derivatives, and H (O) = (H (O)) . 2 The forward ﬂuid–solid interaction problem This section follows closely the corresponding introductory material in [20]. For this reason, we only give enough detail to deﬁne the basic notation, and direct the reader to that paper for more details. We ﬁrst recall a standard mathematical formulation of the forward ﬂuid–solid interac- tion problem, cf. [16]. We consider a linear elastic body that occupies a bounded domain m m ⊂ R . A ﬂuid occupies the unbounded domain = R \, which is assumed to be connected. We also assume that the boundary = ∂ is smooth and denote by n the unit normal on outward to . As usual, we denote by (u) = (∂ u + ∂ u ) the strain tensor and by σ (u) = i j j i 2 i,j=1 λ div u I + 2μ(u) the stress tensor, where I is the m × m identity tensor. The elastic coeﬃcients λ, μ ∈ R are the Lamé moduli and are assumed to satisfy (cf. [21]): μ> 0, λ + μ> 0. (2.1) The wavenumber in the ﬂuid is denoted by k = ω/c ∈ R, k > 0, where ω is the angular frequency of the ﬁelds and c is the speed of sound in the ﬂuid. In addition, the mass densities in the ﬂuid (ρ ) and the solid (ρ ) are positive, and the mass density in the ﬂuid f s (ρ ) is constant. We shall consider incident plane waves from the ﬂuid on the solid: i i ıkx·d m p (x) = p (x, d) = e in R , (2.2) m−1 m where d ∈ S ={x ∈ R ; |x|= 1} is the direction of propagation. The standard traction operator is Tu = σ (u) n = λ divun + 2μ(u) n on . Then, the elastodynamic displacement ﬁeld u ∈ H () and the dynamic component of the ﬂuid pressure p ∈ H ( ) solve the following ﬂuid–solid interaction problem: loc ∇· σ (u) + ρ ω u = 0 in , s ⎪ 2 ⎪ p + k p =0in , Tu =−p n on , (2.3) 1 ∂p u · n = on , ρ ω ∂n f ⎪ ∂p ⎪ i s s −(m−1)/2 ⎭ p = p + p and − ıkp = O r as r =|x|→∞. ∂r For a complete description of the derivation of this model see [16]or[21], and the references therein. 3 Page 4 of 20 P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 To deﬁne conditions under which problem (2.3) has a unique solution, we recall that ω is a Jones frequency with Jones mode u ∈ H () whenever u is a non-trivial solution of the following interior problem: ∇· σ (u) + ρ ω u = 0 in , ⎪ (2.4) Tu = 0 on , u · n =0on . Such modes (if any) are discrete. They exist, for example, when is a disk in R or a ball in R . By the Fredholm alternative, problem (2.3) is well-posed when ω is notaJones frequency (see, e.g., [16,21,24]) and from now on we shall assume that ω is not a Jones mode. Because p is a radiating solution of the Helmholtz equation, it has the asymptotic expansion ıkr s ∞ −(m+1)/2 p (x) = p ( x) + O r as r =|x|→∞, (2.5) (m−1)/2 see [10]. Here, the function p , called the far ﬁeld pattern of the scattered ﬁeld, is given by ∂p ∞ s −ıky· p ( x) =−c ıkp (y)n(y) · x + (y) e dS , (2.6) m y ∂n where ıπ/4 if m = 2, 8πk c = if m = 3. 4π s ∞ Given an incident plane wave as in (2.2), we denote by u(·, d), p (·, d)and p (·, d)the associated displacement ﬁeld, scattered wave and far ﬁeld pattern, respectively. 2 m−1 2 m−1 A key tool in inverse scattering is the far ﬁeld operator F : L (S ) → L (S ) deﬁned by (see [10]) ∞ m−1 (Fg)( x) = p ( x, d) g(d)dS for all x ∈ S . (2.7) m−1 ∞ ∞ By the linearity of the forward problem (2.3), Fg = p where p is the far ﬁeld pattern g g of the scattered wave due to the incident ﬁeld given by the Herglotz wave function i ıkx·y i p (x) = e g(y)dS = p (x, y) g(y)dS . (2.8) y y m−1 m−1 S S 3 Modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues In this section, we deﬁne modiﬁed transmission eigenvalues for the ﬂuid–solid problem. In order to relate them to a scattering problem, we propose a modiﬁcation of the far ﬁeld operator F motivated by the corresponding theory for the Helmholtz equation in [8]. P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 Page 5 of 20 3 More precisely, given parameters γ = 0and β ∈ C, we consider the auxiliary transmission 1 m problemofﬁnding h ∈ H (R ) such that loc 2 ⎪ h + βk h =0in , h + k h =0in , e ⎪ + − h − h =0on , (3.1) + − ∂h 1 ∂h − =0on , ⎪ ∂n γ ∂n ∂h i s s −(m−1)/2 h = h + h and − ıkh = O r as r →∞. ∂r Here, h denotes the trace of the ﬁeld from the exterior or the interior of , respectively; ∂h similarly, stands for the normal derivatives taken from the exterior or the interior, ∂n respectively. From now on, we assume that γ = 0 is ﬁxed and β ∈ C is the parameter we may change, and which will ultimately become an eigenvalue. This problem is well-posed when γ> 0 for any β ∈ C ={z ∈ C;Im(z) ≥ 0},see [10]; it is also well-posed in case γ< 0 when γ =−1and β ∈ C ,see [13,29]. i i s We consider an incident plane wave h = p (·, d)asin(2.2), and denote by h (·, d)and h (·, d) the associated scattered wave and its far ﬁeld pattern, respectively. We introduce 2 m−1 2 m−1 F : L (S ) → L (S ) the far ﬁeld operator associated with this auxiliary problem, which is given by ∞ m−1 (F g)( x) = h ( x, d) g(d)dS a.e. d ∈ S . (3.2) β d m−1 2 m−1 We then deﬁne the associated modiﬁed far ﬁeld operator F = F − F : L (S ) → β β 2 m−1 L (S ), that is ∞ ∞ m−1 (F g)( x) = p ( x, d) − h ( x, d) g(d)dS for all x ∈ S . (3.3) β d m−1 We ﬁrst study the injectivity of the modiﬁed far ﬁeld operator F = F − F . This will β β motivate our deﬁnition of modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues. To this end, we 2 m−1 m−1 consider g ∈ L (S ) such that F g = 0in S . To start the study of the modiﬁed far ﬁeld operator, we can rewrite this condition by taking, in problems (2.3)and (3.1), both i i i i incident ﬁelds to be the Herglotz wave function with density g,thatis, p = p and h = p . g g ∞ ∞ Indeed, if we denote by p and h the far ﬁeld patterns of the associated scattered waves g g s s ∞ ∞ m−1 p and h , then F g = 0implies that p = h in S . By Rellich’s lemma, this implies g g g g s s that p = h in ; therefore, the transmission conditions satisﬁed by the displacement g g ﬁeld u that solves (2.3) can be rewritten as ∂h Tu =−h n , u · n = on , g g γρ ω ∂n i s where h = h + h . This discussion suggests the following deﬁnition. g g Deﬁnition 1 For a ﬁxed frequency ω and a parameter γ = 0, we say that β ∈ C is a mod- iﬁed interior transmission eigenvalue (mITP eigenvalue) if the following homogeneous 1 1 modiﬁed interior transmission problem has a nontrivial solution (u,h) ∈ H () × H (): 3 Page 6 of 20 P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 ∇· σ (u) + ρ ω u = 0 in , s ⎪ 1 ⎪ 2 ⎪ h + β k h =0in , (3.4) Tu =−hn on , ⎪ 1 ∂h u · n = on . ⎭ γρ ω ∂n Notice that, by comparing Eqs. (2.4)and (3.4), it is clear that any β ∈ C is an mITP eigenvalue when ω is a Jones frequency (no matter the choice of γ = 0). Hence, we continue to assume that ω is not a Jones eigenvalue. 3.1 Modiﬁed transmission eigenvalues for any γ = 0 We next analyze the non-homogeneous counterpart of (3.4): ∇· σ (u) + ρ ω u = f in , s ⎪ h + βk h = f in , 2 ⎬ (3.5) 1 ∂h u · n − = g on , γρ ω ∂n Tu + hn = g on . −1 −1 −1/2 −1/2 where f ∈ H (), f ∈ H (), g ∈ H ()and g ∈ H (). By reasoning in the 2 1 1 2 standard way, we can formulate it in variational form as follows: 1 1 ﬁnd u ∈ H ()and h ∈ H ()s.t. 2 2 σ (u): (v) − ρ ω u · v + ∇h ·∇q − s β k h q dx s γ ⎪ |γ | ⎪ + h v · n − s ρ ω u · n q dS =− f · v + s f q dx γ f x γ 2 (3.6) + g · v − s ρ ω g q dS γ f 1 x ⎪ 1 1 for all v ∈ H (),q ∈ H (), where s = γ/|γ | denotes the sign of γ . Notice that the left-hand side deﬁnes the sesquilin- ear form 2 2 a ((u,h), (v,q)) = σ (u): (v) − ρ ω u · v + ∇h ·∇q − s β k h q dx β s γ |γ | + h v · n − s ρ ω u · n q dS , γ x which is the sum of the following two forms: a((u,h), (v,q)) = σ (u): (v) + u · v + ∇h ·∇q + h q dx |γ | + h v · n − u · n q dS , P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 Page 7 of 20 3 2 2 a ((u,h), (v,q)) =− (1 + ρ ω ) u · v + (1 + s βk ) h q dx β s γ + (1 − s ρ ω )u · n q dS . γ f x 1 1 1 1 The sesquilinear form a(·, ·)iscoercivein(H () × H ()) × (H () × H ()). Indeed, by Korn’s inequality, 2 2 2 2 2 Re a((v,q), (v,q)) = λ|∇ · v| + 2μ |(v)| +|v| + |∇q| +|q| dx |γ | 2 2 ≥ min{1, 2μ} + min 1, 1, 1, |γ | 1 2 1/2 2 Therefore, since the embeddings H () → L ()and H () → L () are compact, we can apply Fredholm theory to deduce that (3.6) is well-posed if, and only if, it admits at most one solution. We summarize this result in the following lemma. Lemma 1 If β ∈ C is not an mITP eigenvalue, then the non-homogeneous modiﬁed interior −1 −1 transmission problem (3.5) is well-posed for data (f ,f ,g , g ) in H () × H () × 2 1 1 2 −1/2 −1/2 H () × H (). We next study mITP eigenvalues and, in particular, we analyze their location in the complex plane. To this end, notice that s Im(β) k 2 1 1 Im a ((u,h), (u, − h)) = |h| dx ∀(u,h) ∈ H () × H () . 2 2 ρ ω ρ ω f f 1 1 In consequence, if β ∈ C \ R and (u,h) ∈ H () × H () solves (3.4), then h = 0; and, under the assumption that ω is not a Jones eigenvalue, also u = 0. Hence, mITP eigenvalues (if any) are real. To further analyze the location of the mITP eigenvalues, we make use of a reference value β ∈ C which is not an mITP eigenvalue (assuming such a point exists). Then, (3.5) is well-posed for this reference value β (see Lemma 1); in particular, we can deﬁne the −1 −1 −1/2 −1/2 1 1 solution operator S : H () × H () × H () × H () → H () × H ()by S (f ,f ,g , g ) = (u,h) , β 2 1 0 1 2 1 1 where (u,h) ∈ H () × H () denotes the solution of (3.5) for the parameter β .By means of this operator, we characterize the mITP eigenvalues as those values β ∈ C \{β } 1 1 for which there is a non-trivial (u,h) ∈ H () × H () such that S (0, (β − β )h, 0, 0) = (u,h) . (3.7) β 0 If this is the case and h = 0, then also u = 0 thanks to the assumption that ω is not 2 2 a Jones eigenvalue. This suggests deﬁning the auxiliary operator T : L () → L () by T f = h where S (0,f, 0, 0) = (u,h). We then characterize the mITP eigenvalues as β β 0 0 those β ∈ C for which there exists a non-trivial h ∈ H () such that (β − β ) T h = h; 0 β 0 3 Page 8 of 20 P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 in other words, β ∈ C is an mITP eigenvalue if, and only if, is an eigenvalue of β − β 2 2 T : L () → L (). 2 2 The reasoning above leads us to study the operator T : L () → L (). Notice that it is linear and bounded, and also compact (thanks to the compactness of the embedding 1 2 2 1 H () → L () and the fact that T : L () → H () is linear and bounded). Also notice that its adjoint is T : To see this, for any f, g ∈ L (), let us take (u ,h ) = f f S (0,f, 0, 0)and (u ,h ) = S (0,g, 0, 0). Using the deﬁnition of the operator T and the β g g β 0 β 0 equations satisﬁed by h and h , we have that f g T f g dx = h h + β k h dx β g 0 g 0 f ∂h 1 1 = − ∇h ·∇h + β k h h dx + h dS . (3.8) f g 0 f g f x γ γ ∂n In addition, the equations satisﬁed by (u ,h )and (u ,h ) guarantee that, for real-valued g g f f parameters ρ , λ and μ, 0 = − σ (u ): (u ) + ρ ω u · u dx + Tu · u dS g s g g x f f f ∂h = − σ (u ): (u ) + ρ ω u · u dx − h dS , f g s f g f x γρ ω ∂n so that ∂h 2 2 h dS = ρ ω − σ (u ): (u ) + ρ ω u · u dx ; f x f f g s f g γ ∂n similarly, ∂h 2 2 h dS = ρ ω − σ (u ): (u ) + ρ ω u · u dx ; g x g s g f f f γ ∂n and therefore ∂h 1 ∂h 1 g f h dS = h dS . x g x γ ∂n γ ∂n Taking this result into (3.8), we conclude that ∂h 1 1 T f g dx = − ∇h ·∇h + β k h h dx + h dS β f g 0 f g g x γ γ ∂n h + β k h h dx = f T g dx . f 0 f g In particular, T is self-adjoint if β is real. Hence, if there exists at least one real number β 0 β which is not a modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalue, then the spectral theorem guarantees that the set of eigenvalues of T is discrete and the only possible accumulation point is zero. We summarize these results in the following lemma. Lemma 2 The set of mITP eigenvalues is either the whole real line R, or a discrete subset of R with no ﬁnite accumulation point (or empty). Computational examples suggest that mITP eigenvalues exist and are discrete. P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 Page 9 of 20 3 3.2 Modiﬁed transmission eigenvalues when γ< 0 In this subsection, we assume that γ< 0 is ﬁxed and we will see that, in particular, this hypothesis allows us to show that mITP eigenvalues exist. First, we show that the (real) mITP eigenvalues are bounded above. To this end, let us suppose that, on the contrary, there exists a sequence of positive eigenvalues {β } ⊂ R j j∈N that approaches ∞ as j →∞. We consider a sequence of associated eigenfunctions 1 1 {(u ,h )} normalized in H () × H (). Since these are eigenfunctions, it holds that j j j∈N 1 1 1 a ((u ,h ), (v, q)) = 0 for all (v,q) ∈ H () × H (); in other words, β j j ρ ω β k σ (u ): (v) − ρ ω u · v − ∇h ·∇q + h q dx j s j j j 2 2 γρ ω ρ ω f f (3.9) + h v · n + u · n q dS = 0 j j x 1 1 for all (v,q) ∈ H () × H (). In particular, u · n = h on ,sothat(3.9) for j j γρ ω (v,q) = (u ,h )reads as j j β k 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 − |h | dx = λ|∇ · u | + 2μ|(u )| − ρ ω |u | − |∇h | dx j j j s j j 2 2 ρ ω γρ ω f f + |h | dS . (3.10) j x γρ ω Notice that the right-hand side is bounded uniformly in j ∈ N (because of the normaliza- tion of the eigenfunctions {(u ,h )} ), whereas β →+∞; thus, we deduce that h → 0 j j j∈N j j in L (). Let {(u ,h )} be a subsequence (which for simplicity we identify with the whole j j j∈N 1 1 2 2 sequence) that converges weakly in H () ×H () and strongly in L () ×L () to some 1 1 (u,h) ∈ H () × H (). Recall that we have already shown that h = 0in . Moreover, by 1 1 taking the limit in (3.9) we deduce that (u,h) ∈ H () × H () solves (3.4)with h = 0in ; in consequence, our assumption on ω not being a Jones mode guarantees that u = 0 1 1 in . Summing up, {(u ,h )} converges to zero weakly in H () × H () and strongly j j j∈N 2 2 2 2 in L () × L (). Notice that (3.10) and the strong convergence in L () × L ()implies that 1 2 2 2 2 2 0 ≤ λ|∇ · u | + 2μ|(u )| − |∇h | dx + |h | dS j j j j x 2 2 γρ ω γρ ω f f β k 2 2 2 2 2 = ρ ω |u | − |h | dx ≤ ρ ω |u | dx → 0 , s j j s j ρ ω and, in particular, ||∇ · u || 2 → 0, ||(u )|| 2 m×m → 0and ||∇h || 2 → 0. Hence, j j j L () L () L () ||u || 1 → 0and ||h || 1 → 0, which contradicts that the sequence {(u ,h )} had j j j j j∈N H () H () 1 1 been normalized in H () × H (). Lemma 3 When γ< 0, the set of mITP eigenvalues is a subset of R and is bounded above (or empty). The previous result guarantees that there are real numbers that are not eigenvalues. In consequence, Lemma 2 may be modiﬁed as follows in the case when γ< 0. 3 Page 10 of 20 P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 Lemma 4 The set of mITP eigenvalues is either empty or a discrete subset of R with no ﬁnite accumulation point. We next show that there is at least one positive mITP eigenvalue. To this end, let us denote by {(u ,h )} an orthonormal basis of j j j∈N 1 1 H() ={(v,q) ∈ H () × H (); v · n = q on } that consists of eigenfunctions associated with mITP eigenvalues {β } ⊂ R. Notice that j j∈N a ((u ,h ), (−u , h )) = 0means β j j j 2 j ρ ω −β k 2 2 2 2 2 2 |h | dx = − λ|∇ · u | − 2μ|(u )| + ρ ω |u | − |∇h | dx . j j j s j j 2 2 ρ ω γρ ω f f In particular, if all the eigenvalues were negative, we would have that 2 2 2 2 2 0 ≤ − λ|∇ · v| − 2μ|(v)| + ρ ω |v| − |∇q| dx , (3.11) γρ ω for any (v,q) ∈ H(). This leads to contradiction under suitable assumptions on the material parameters, in particular if λ, μ are large enough compared to ρ ω according to Korn’s inequality: To show it, we notice that for any v ∈ H ()itholds that 2 2 2 2 2 C min{1, 2μ}||v|| ≤ min{1, 2μ}|v| < λ|∇ · v| + 2μ|(v)| dx , P 0, 1, where C > 0 is the Poincaré constant: C ||q|| ≤|q| for all q ∈ H () ; (3.12) P 0, 1, 2 2 1 therefore, if ρ ω ≤ C min{1, 2μ}, for any v ∈ H (), we have that P 0 2 2 2 2 ρ ω |v| dx < λ|∇ · v| + 2μ|(v)| dx , (3.13) and then for any v ∈ H ()weknowthat(v, 0) ∈ H() does not fulﬁll (3.11). Summariz- ing, we have shown the following result. Lemma 5 Consider a solid whose material parameters λ and μ are large enough with respect to ρ ω . Then, there exists at least one positive mITP eigenvalue. We next look for a physical meaning of the largest mITP eigenvalue. To this end, we 1 1 ﬁrst deﬁne E : H () × H () → R by 2 2 2 E(v,q) = σ (v): (v) − ρ ω |v| − |∇q| dx + 2Re q v · n dS . s x γρ ω Notice that, under suitable conditions on the material parameters λ and μ, we have that E(v,q) is bounded below for (v,q) ∈ H() such that q = 0. To see this, if it was not ||q|| 0, bounded, there would exist a normalized sequence {(v ,q )} ⊂ H() such that j j j∈N E(v ,q ) ≤−j||q || . (3.14) j j j 0, P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 Page 11 of 20 3 We emphasize that E is linear continuous and the eigenfunctions {(u ,h )} are nor- j j j∈N malized. Therefore, {E(v ,q )} is bounded uniformly in j ∈ N, and it follows that j j j∈N ||q || → 0, that is, q → 0 strongly in L (). Moreover, we may take a subsequence that j 0, j 1 1 2 2 converges weakly in H () × H () and strongly in L () × L () to some (v,q) ∈ H(); recall that we have already shown that q = 0in . Since the norm of the weak limit is not greater that the limit inferior of the norm, we have that 2 2 σ (v): (v)dx = λ|∇ · v| + 2μ|(v)| dx ≤ lim inf σ (v ): (v )dx, − |∇q| dx j j j∈ N γρ ω ≤− lim inf |∇q | dx. γρ ω j∈ N The continuity of the trace implies the weak convergence of v · n = q to v · n = q in j j 1/2 H (), so that 2 2 |q| dS ≤ lim inf |q | dS . x j x j∈ N From (3.14) rewritten as 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 σ (v ): (v )− |∇q | dx+ |q | dS ≤ ρ ω |v | dx−j||q || , j j j j x s j j 0, 2 2 γρ ω γρ ω f f and the fact that, because of the strong convergence of v toward v in L (), 2 2 2 2 2 2 lim inf ρ ω |v | dx = lim ρ ω |v | dx = ρ ω ||v|| , s j s j s 0, j∈ N j∈N we have that ⎛ ⎞ 1 2 2 2 2 2 ⎝ ⎠ lim inf σ (v ): (v ) − |∇q | dx + |q | dS ≤ ρ ω ||v|| . j j j j x s 0, 2 2 j∈ N γρ ω γρ ω f f Therefore, 1 2 2 2 2 2 σ (v): (v) − |∇q| dx + |q| dS ≤ ρ ω ||v|| . x s 0, 2 2 γρ ω γρ ω f f In particular, 2 2 2 2 2 λ|∇ · v| + 2μ|(v)| dx + |v · n| dS ≤ ρ ω ||v|| . x s 0, γρ ω This leads to a contradiction if λ and μ are large enough compared to ρ ω ,see (3.13) above. Summing up, we have just shown that, for large enough λ and μ, there exists E(v,q) = inf . (v,q)∈H(),q=0 ||q|| 0, 3 Page 12 of 20 P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 We next look for an estimate for the largest mITP eigenvalue β by using the above max deﬁned . To this end, we start by considering any mITP eigenvalue β and denote by (u,h) ∈ H() an associated eigenfunction of its. As in (3.10), from the fact that it is an eigenfunction we have that βk 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 − |h| dx = λ|∇ · u| + 2μ|(u)| − ρ ω |u| − |∇h| dx 2 2 ρ ω γρ ω f f + |h| dS . γρ ω This is equivalently rewritten using the deﬁnition of E and the transmission conditions βk as − ||h|| = E(u,h). Also notice that h = 0 because, otherwise, u would also 0, ρ ω ρ ω cancel under the assumption that ω is not a Jones mode. Therefore, −β ≥ ,or equivalently, in terms of the largest mITP eigenvalue β ,wehave max ρ ω β ≤− . max We next show that this bound is indeed optimal. To this end, let us reason as usual in the derivation of the Courant min–max principle (cf. [3, Th. 6.13] and references therein): We consider {(u ,h )} an orthonormal basis of H() that consists of eigenvectors associated j j j∈N with mITP eigenvalues {β } ⊂ R. We rewrite a ((u ,h ), (v,q)) = 0as j j∈N β j j β k −A((u ,h ), (v,q)) = h qdx , j j ρ ω where A((u,h), (v,q)) = − σ (u): (v) + ρ ω u · v + ∇h ·∇q dx − 2Re h q dS . γρ ω Since {(u ,h )} is an orthonormal basis of H(), we deduce that for any (v,q) = j j j∈N a (u ,h ) ∈ H()itholds j j j j∈N β k 2 2 −A((v,q), (v,q)) = |a | ||h || . j j 2 L () ρ ω j∈N Hence, −A((v,q), (v,q)) β k max − = sup = . 2 2 ρ ω ||q|| (v,q)∈H(),q=0 2 L () We state this result in the following lemma. Lemma 6 Suppose that the material parameters λ and μ satisfy (2.1) and μ is large enough 2 2 with respect to ρ ω , that is, ρ ω ≤ C min{1, 2μ}. Then, the largest mITP eigenvalue is s s ρ ω β =− . max k P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 Page 13 of 20 3 4 Determination of modiﬁed interior transmission eigenvalues from far ﬁeld data Let us consider again the general situation γ = 0 (positive or negative). The aim of this section is to show that we can approximate the mITP eigenvalues from far ﬁeld data by solving approximately several modiﬁed far ﬁeld equations for some points inside the 2 m−1 2 m−1 target. For this strategy to make sense, we need F : L (S ) → L (S ) to be injective and to have dense range. We can repeat the usual reasoning (cf. [2,8]) to deduce that F 2 m−1 is injective and has dense range in L (S )aslongas β is notanmITPeigenvaluewhose 2 m−1 eigenmode has the form (u ,h ) for some g ∈ L (S ). g g Let denote the fundamental solution of the Helmholtz equation with source point at z so that, for x = z, (1) ⎨ H (k |x − z|)if m = 2 , 4 0 (x) = exp(ik |x − z|) z 1 if m = 3 . 4π |x − z| Since is a radiating solution of the Helmholtz equation, it has a far ﬁeld pattern, and this is given by: exp(iπ/4) ∞ m−1 x) = √ exp(−ik x · z), x ∈ S . 8πk The algorithm for identifying mITP eigenvalues is based on solving approximately a discrete version of the modiﬁed far ﬁeld equation F g = , (4.1) β z where z ∈ is an auxiliary point chosen as part of the algorithm. Next, we examine the 2 m−1 role of the parameter β in the behavior of (approximate) solutions g ∈ L (S )ofthe modiﬁed far ﬁeld equations (4.1) for points z inside the target . 4.1 Behavior at values of β which are not mITP eigenvalues 2 m−1 Let us consider any point z ∈ and then seek g ∈ L (S ) that solves approximately ∞ ∞ ∞ m−1 F g = p − h = a.e. in S . g g z By Rellich’s lemma, this happens if, and only if, s s p − h = a.e. in ; z e g g + + ∂p ∂h g g z + + in particular, p − h = and − = on . Thanks to the transmission g g ∂n ∂n ∂n conditions for the ﬁelds u and p in (2.3), together with those for h in (3.1), g g g ∂h 1 1 ∂ g z u · n − = and t(u ) =−h n − n on . g g z 2 2 γρ ω ∂n ρ ω ∂n f f − − 1 Thus, in the domain we are looking for u = u ∈ H ()and h = h ∈ H () such that ∇· σ (u) + ρ ω u = 0 in , s ⎪ 1 ⎪ − 2 − h + β k h =0in , − (4.2) 1 ∂h 1 ∂ u · n − = on , 2 2 ⎪ γρ ω ∂n ρ ω ∂n f f − ⎭ t(u) + h n =− n on . z 3 Page 14 of 20 P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 Assuming that β is not an mITP eigenvalue, the problem above is well-posed and has a − 1 n 1 unique solution (u,h ) ∈ H () ×H (), see Lemma 1; however, the unique solution of − − 2 m−1 this problem is not necessarily of the form u = u and h = h with g ∈ L (S ). Fur- 2 n−1 thermore, in the exterior domain , we are looking for a suitable function g ∈ L (S ) 1 + + 1 + to build p = p ∈ H ( )and h = h ∈ H ( ). To this end, we take p = h + in g e e z loc , where h solves + 2 + h + k h =0in , ⎪ + − h = h on , + − ∂h 1 ∂h (4.3) = on , ∂n γ ∂n +,s ∂h ⎪ + i +,s +,s −(m−1)/2 ⎭ h = h + h and − ikh = O r as r →∞. ∂r This problem seems to have too many constraints, but we emphasize that the incident i i +,s i ﬁeld h is not given, but we choose both h and h . In particular, for the incident ﬁeld h , let us not require it to be a Herglotz function and allow it to be just an admissible incident i 1 i 2 i ﬁeld, that is, h ∈ H () such that h + k h = 0in . Accordingly, (4.3) consists of i 1 +,s 1 ﬁnding h ∈ H ()and h ∈ H ( ) such that loc i 2 i h + k h =0in , +,s 2 +,s ⎪ h + k h =0in , ⎪ i +,s − h + h = h on , (4.4) i s,+ − ∂h ∂h 1 ∂h + = on , ∂n ∂n γ ∂n ⎪ +,s ⎪ ∂h +,s −(m−1)/2 − ikh = O r as r →∞ ∂r This problem is a well-posed transmission problem, although once again we emphasize +,s i i +,s that its unique solution is not necessarily of the form h = h and h = h with g g 2 m−1 g ∈ L (S ). Summing up, let us deﬁne the space of generalized incident ﬁelds by 1 2 H () ={q ∈ H (); q + k q = 0in }. inc Then, we have seen that, for any z ∈ and when β ∈ C is not an mITP eigenvalue, there i i exists some p = h ∈ H () for which the far ﬁeld patterns of the associated scattered inc ﬁelds that solve (2.3)and (3.1)satisfy ∞ ∞ ∞ p − h = . We can formalize this behavior in terms of the far ﬁeld operator F by an appropriate factorization. More precisely, we consider the well-deﬁned and bounded operator G : 2 m−1 i ∞ H () → L (S ), where Gp = p represents the far ﬁeld pattern of the scattered inc i 2 m−1 wave that solves (2.3) for the incident ﬁeld p . Similarly, G : H () → L (S ), where β inc i ∞ G h = h represents the far ﬁeld pattern of the scattered wave that solves (3.1) for i 2 m−1 the incident ﬁeld h . In addition, we deﬁne H : L (S ) → H ()thatmapseach inc function g into the associated Herglotz wave function Hg = p with kernel g.Then, 2 m−1 2 m−1 F = (G − G ) ◦ H : L (S ) → H () → L (S ). With this notation, what we have β β inc just shown is that is in the range of (G − G ). z P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 Page 15 of 20 3 4.2 Behavior at values of β which are mITP eigenvalues If β ∈ R is an mITP eigenvalue, by Deﬁnition 1 we know that there exists (u ,h ) ∈ β β 1 1 H () × H () that is a non-trivial solution of ∇· σ (u ) + ρ ω u = 0 in , β s β h + β k h =0in , β β ⎬ 1 ∂h u · n = on , β ⎪ 2 ⎪ γρ ω ∂n ⎪ t(u ) =−h n on . β β Notice that, by deﬁning h = h in and reasoning as for the previous case (see i + 1 comments below (4.3)), we know that there also exist h ∈ H ()and h ∈ H ( ) inc e β β loc such that + + h + k h =0in , ⎪ β β ⎪ + − h = h on , β β + − ∂h ∂h β β = on , ∂n γ ∂n +,s ∂h + i +,s +,s −(n−1)/2 h = h + h and − ikh = O r as r →∞. β β β β ∂r i i + We then take p = h ∈ H ()and p = h in , and notice that (u ,p ) ∈ inc β e β β β β β 1 1 1 H () × H ( ) solves (2.3)and h ∈ H ( ∪ )satisﬁes(3.1). e β e loc loc Let us assume that for a given point z ∈ there exists p ∈ H () such that (G − inc i ∞ G )p = . Reasoning as for the previous case, we can deduce that the associated ﬁelds 1 − 1 u ∈ H ()and h ∈ H () satisfy the equations of (4.2). Therefore, by combining the variational formulation (3.6) for v = u and q = h (associated with null data functions β β f , f , g and g ), with that for v = u and q = h (that corresponds to the data functions 2 1 1 2 1 ∂ f = 0, f = 0, g = and g =− n), we have that 2 1 z 1 2 ρ ω ∂n 1 ∂ u · n − h dS = 0 . z β β x γρ ω ∂n Using the transmission conditions on satisﬁed by (u ,h ), this is equivalent to β β ∂h ∂ β z − h dS = 0 . z β x ∂n ∂n The left-hand side of this equation is the integral representation of h for points z inside . Therefore, if this condition is fulﬁlled for a subset of with nonzero measure, then h vanishes in such domain and, in consequence, also in the whole domain . Under the assumption on ω not being a Jones frequency, it follows that also u = 0 vanishes in . This contradicts that (u ,h ) is a non-trivial mode associated with the modiﬁed interior β β transmission eigenvalue β. Summarizing, we have shown the following theorem. Theorem 1 If β ∈ C is not an mITP eigenvalue, then for almost any z ∈ , it holds that is in the range of (G − G ). On the contrary, if β ∈ C is an mITP eigenvalue and B ⊂ has nonzero measure, then it is not possible that is in the range of (G − G ) for a.e. z ∈ B. 3 Page 16 of 20 P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 5 Numerical examples The numerical experiments we will now provide give preliminary evidence that some target signatures may be computed from the far ﬁeld data. For a given experiment, there is a limit to the number of mITP eigenvalues we can detect from noisy data. Our results demonstrate the sensitivity of the detected mITP eigenvalues to some of the material parameters of the solid. The general outline of the numerical tests is as follows: 1. We choose a scatterer (in our tests, the unit disk or unit square), and the ﬂuid and solid properties. 2. We solve the forward problem using a coupled ﬁnite element and spectral boundary element method [22]. The same code is used to compute the solution of the auxil- iary scattering problem for a discrete set of β in the interval where we seek mITP eigenvalues. These codes produce a discrete approximation to the far ﬁelds of each problem at equally spaced points on S . 3. In order to detect the family of mITP eigenvalues from the above far ﬁeld data, the modiﬁed far ﬁeld equation (4.1) is discretized using the trapezoidal rule with nodes at the far ﬁeld data points. The discretized version of equation (4.1) is solved by Tikhonov regularization for several choices of auxiliary source points z located (randomly) in an open region that is known a priori to lie within the target. 4. We plot the average (averaged over the points z)ofthe L -norm of g against β. Theorem 1 suggests that peaks in this graph should indicate the presence of an mITP eigenvalue. 5. To compare the peaks in the graphs against the mITP eigenvalues, we compute these eigenvalues by solving the eigenvalue problem (3.4) with a straightforward eigenvalue code developed in Netgen [28]. Next, we give some more details about the numerical tests provided here: We ﬁrst consider the unit disk (centered at the origin and with unit radius) and the parameters ω = 2and ρ = ρ = 1; for this case, we choose the points z ∈ D to be 20 randomly f s located points in [−0.5, 0.5] . To investigate non-smooth geometries, we also consider the unit square [−0.5, 0.5] and then take the same parameters except the wavenumber; indeed, in this situation, we choose ω = 1 (in order to keep the same ratio between the target size and the wavelength) and we relocate the 20 random points under study to [−0.25, 0.25] (so they lie inside the target). We take 64 incident plane waves, whose angles of incidence are {2jπ/64; j = 0, 1, ... , 63}. We compute the far ﬁeld data associated with each incident wave by a combination of spectral BEM and FEM (cf. [22]), and add pointwise 2% uniformly distributed noise to the synthetic data (to help avoid inverse crimes). We ﬁnally solve the equation (4.1) using Tikhonov regularization with the small −3 ﬁxed regularization parameter 10 . 5.1 Numerical results for γ> 0 In Fig. 1, we compare the mITP eigenvalues recovered by the steps describe above against those computed by solving (3.4) using our Netgen code. The parameter γ is taken to be 2 both for the unit circle and the unit square, and we choose μ = 0.5and λ = 1. In each case at least four eigenvalues are detected, although some of these are slightly displaced P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 Page 17 of 20 3 1500 2000 0 0 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 Parameter - Parameter - 2 ∞ Fig. 1 Average of the L -norms of approximate solutions of the far ﬁeld equations F g = against β. β z Red crosses on the horizontal axis show the location of mITP eigenvalues found by a ﬁnite element discretization of (3.4). Left: for the unit circle. Right: for the square. Here, μ = 0.5, λ = 1and γ = 2 7 =0.5 6 =1.0 7 =0.4 6 =0.8 7 =0.6 6 =1.2 0 0 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Parameter - Parameter - Fig. 2 Here, we consider the unit disk and plot the average of the L -norms of approximate solutions of the far ﬁeld equations F g = for diﬀerent values of μ and λ: red stands for the reference values μ = 0.5 β z and λ = 1.0. In the left-hand side ﬁgure, green and blue represent μ = 0.4and μ = 0.6, respectively; whereas in the right-hand side ﬁgure green and blue represent λ = 0.8and λ = 1.2, respectively. Here, γ = 2, and we choose to focus on the eigenvalue near β = 0.6; a similar behavior is observed for other eigenvalues compared to the Netgen eigenvalue (specially when they are large and in the case of the square). We next investigate the sensitivity of mITP eigenvalues with respect to changes in the elasticity parameters. More precisely, in Figs. 2 and 3 we show the behavior of the solutions of the far ﬁeld equations for the circle and the square for diﬀerent values of μ and λ, respectively. It is clear that mITP eigenvalues are sensitive to changes in the parameters. It is not known if the monotonic dependence shown in these examples is a general characteristic of mITP eigenvalues. 5.2 Numerical results for γ< 0 Now, the parameter γ is taken to be −2 both for the unit circle and the unit square. In Fig. 4, we compare the recovered mITP eigenvalues against those computed by solving (3.4) with our Netgen code. In each case at least four eigenvalues are detected, although some of these are again slightly displaced compared to the Netgen eigenvalue. As for the case γ> 0, we also investigate the sensitivity of mITP eigenvalues with respect to changes in the elasticity parameters: In Figs. 5 and 6, we show the behavior of Averaged norm of g Averaged norm of g Averaged norm of g Averaged norm of g 3 Page 18 of 20 P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 =0.5 =1.0 =0.4 =0.8 =0.6 =1.2 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Parameter Parameter Fig. 3 Here, we consider the square domain with γ = 2 and plot the average of the L -norms of approximate solutions of the far ﬁeld equations F g = for diﬀerent values of μ and λ for the square: β z red stands for the reference values μ = 0.5and λ = 1.0. In the left-hand side ﬁgure, green and blue represent μ = 0.4and μ = 0.6, respectively; whereas in the right-hand side ﬁgure green and blue represent λ = 0.8 and λ = 1.2, respectively 800 3000 400 1500 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 Parameter Parameter 2 ∞ Fig. 4 Average of the L -norms of approximate solutions of the far ﬁeld equations F g = against β. β z Red crosses on the horizontal axis show the location of mITP eigenvalues found by a ﬁnite element discretization of (3.4). Left: for the unit circle. Right: for the square. Here, μ = 0.5, λ = 1and γ =−2 the solutions of the far ﬁeld equations for the circle and the square for diﬀerent values of μ and λ, respectively. As happened for the opposite sign case, the mITP eigenvalues are sensitive to changes in the parameters. 6Conclusion We have shown that mITP eigenvalues can be detected from far ﬁeld data. One issue remaining is that we have not veriﬁed the existence of mITP eigenvalues when γ> 0, although they have been observed by directly solving the eigenvalue problem, and from the behavior of the modiﬁed far ﬁeld equation. For γ< 0, the theory is more complete, and eigenvalues are known to exist. Since the case γ< 0 also shows sensitivity to changes in bulk λ and μ, it seems that this case is appropriate for further investigation. We remark that the natural and metamaterial cases studied here are by no means the only possible modiﬁcations for introducing a reference medium. For example, we could try to use a ﬁctitious solid in with a parameter in the lower order term (similar to β in our natural and metamaterial cases) that can be used to generate an eigenvalue problem. In this paper, we chose to use the Helmholtz equation in to avoid having to solve auxiliary Average norm of g Averaged norm of g Average norm of g Averaged norm of g P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 Page 19 of 20 3 250 250 =0.5 =1.0 =0.4 =0.8 =0.6 =1.2 200 200 150 150 100 100 50 50 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 Parameter Parameter Fig. 5 Here, γ =−2 and we consider the unit disk. We plot the average of the L -norms of approximate solutions of the far ﬁeld equations F g = for diﬀerent values of μ and λ: red stands for the reference β z values μ = 0.5and λ = 1.0. In the left-hand side ﬁgure, green and blue represent μ = 0.4and μ = 0.6, respectively; whereas in the right-hand side ﬁgure green and blue represent λ = 0.8and λ = 1.2, respectively. Here, we choose to focus on the eigenvalue near β = 0.87; a similar behavior is observed for other eigenvalues 550 550 =0.5 =1.0 500 =0.4 500 =0.8 =0.6 =1.2 450 450 400 400 350 350 300 300 250 250 200 200 150 150 100 100 50 50 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 Parameter Parameter Fig. 6 Here, γ =−2 and we consider the square domain. We plot the average of the L -norms of approximate solutions of the far ﬁeld equations F g = for diﬀerent values of μ and λ: red stands for β z the reference values μ = 0.5and λ = 1.0. In the left-hand side ﬁgure, green and blue represent μ = 0.4and μ = 0.6, respectively; whereas in the right-hand side ﬁgure green and blue represent λ = 0.8and λ = 1.2, respectively. The zoom is made on the eigenvalue near β = 0.7; a similar behavior is observed in other eigenvalues problems involving the time harmonic elastic wave equation. But this is more a matter of convenience than necessity, and the use of an elastic reference medium will be the object of a future investigation. Acknowledgements The research of P.M. is partially supported by the US Air Force Oﬃce of Scientiﬁc Research (AFOSR) under grant number FA9550-20-1-0024. The visit of V.S. in the University of Delaware was funded by the program Movilidades de Excelencia of the University of Oviedo, and her research is partially supported by the project MTM2017-87162-P of MINECO. Funding Peter Monk Partially supported by the US Air Force Oﬃce of Scientiﬁc Research (AFOSR) under Grant No. FA9550-20-1-0024. Virginia Selgas Visit to the University of Delaware funded by the program Movilidades de Excelencia of the University of Oviedo, and research partially supported by the project MTM2017-87162-P of MINECO. Author details 1 2 Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark 19716, USA, Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad de Oviedo, EPIG, C/ Luis Ortiz Berrocal s/n, 33203 Gijón, Spain. Received: 22 January 2021 Accepted: 13 November 2021 Average norm of g Average norm of g Average norm of g Average norm of g 3 Page 20 of 20 P. Monk , V. Selgas Res Math Sci (2022) 9:3 References 1. Agranovich, M.S., Amosov, B.A., Levitin, M.: Spectral problems for the Lamé system with spectral parameter in boundary conditions on smooth or nonsmooth boundary. Russ. J. Math. Phys. 6, 247–281 (1999) 2. Audibert, L., Cakoni, F., Haddar, H.: New sets of eigenvalues in inverse scattering for inhomogeneous media and their determination from scattering data. Inverse Probl. 30, 125001 (2015) 3. Cakoni, F., Colton, D.: Qualitative Methods in Inverse Scattering Theory. Springer, New York (2006) 4. Cakoni, F., Colton, D., Meng, S., Monk, P.: Stekloﬀ eigenvalues in inverse scattering. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 76(4), 1737–1763 (2016) 5. Camaño, J., Lackner, C., Monk, P.: Electromagnetic Stekloﬀ eigenvalues in inverse Scattering. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 49, 4376–4401 (2017) 6. Cogar, S.: A modiﬁed transmission eigenvalue problem in inverse scattering by a partially coated crack. Inverse Probl. 34, 115003 (2018) 7. Cogar, S., Colton, D., Leung, Y.-J.: The inverse spectral problem for transmission eigenvalues. Inverse Probl. 33(5), 055015 (2017) 8. Cogar, S., Colton, D., Meng, S., Monk, P.: Modiﬁed transmission eigenvalues in inverse scattering theory. Inverse Probl. 33(12), 125002 (2017) 9. Cogar, S., Monk, P.: Modiﬁed electromagnetic transmission eigenvalues in inverse scattering theory. In preparation (2020) 10. Colton, D., Kress, R.: Inverse Acoustic and Electromagnetic Scattering Theory, 4th edn, Springer, New York (2019) 11. Colton, D., Monk, P.: A new method for solving the inverse scattering problem for acoustic waves in an inhomogeneous medium. Inverse Probl. 5, 1013–1026 (1989) 12. Colton, D., Monk, P.: A new method for solving the inverse scattering problem for acoustic waves in an inhomogeneous medium II. Inverse Probl. 6, 935–947 (1990) 13. Costabel, M., Stephan, E.: A direct boundary integral equation method for transmission problems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 106, 367–413 (1985) 14. Elschner, J., Hsiao, G.C., Rathsfeld, A.: An inverse problem for ﬂuid–solid interaction. Inverse Probl. Imag. 2, 83–119 (2008) 15. Friedlander, L.: Some inequalities between Dirichlet and Neumann eigenvalues. Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal. 116, 153–160 (1991) 16. Hsiao, G.C., Kleinman, R.E., Roach, G.F.: Weak solutions of ﬂuid–solid interaction problems. Math. Nachr. 218, 139–163 (2000) 17. Kress, R.: Linear Integral Equations. Springer, Berlin (1989) 18. Kupradze, V.D., Gegelia, T.G., Basheleishvili, M.O., Burchuladze, T.V.: Three-Dimensional Problems of the Mathematical Theory of Elasticity and Thermoelasticity. Nauka, Moscow (1976); English transl., North-Holland, Amsterdam (1979) 19. Levitin, M., Marletta, M.: A simple method of calculating eigenvalues and resonances in domains with inﬁnite regular ends. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. Sect. A Math. 138A, 1043–1065 (2008) 20. Levitin, M., Monk, P., Selgas, V.: Impedance eigenvalues for inverse scattering in a ﬂuid–solid interaction problem. In preparation (2021) 21. Luke, C.J., Martin, P.A.: Fluid–solid interaction: acoustic scattering by a smooth elastic obstacle. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 55, 904–922 (1995) 22. Márquez, A., Meddahi, S., Selgas, V.: A new BEM-FEM coupling strategy for two-dimensional ﬂuid–solid interaction problems. J. Comput. Phys. 199, 205–220 (2004) 23. Melrose, R.B.: Geometric Scattering Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995) 24. Monk, P., Selgas, V.: An inverse ﬂuid–solid interaction problem. Inverse Probl. Imag. 3(2), 173–198 (2009) 25. Monk, P., Selgas, V.: Near ﬁeld sampling type methods for the inverse ﬂuid–solid interaction problem. Inverse Probl. Imag. 5, 465–483 (2011) 26. Morse, P.M., H. Feshbach, H.: Methods of Theoretical Physics, part II. McGraw-Hill, New York (1953) 27. Natroshvili, D., Kharibegashvili, S., Tediashvili, Z.: Direct and inverse ﬂuid–structure interaction problems. Rend. Mat. Appl. (VII) 20, 57–92 (2000) 28. Schöberl, J.: Netgen/Ngsolv. https://ngsolve.org (2020) 29. Nguyen, H.-M.: Limiting absorption principle and well-posedness for the Helmholtz equation with sign changing coeﬃcients. J. Math. Pures Appl. 106, 342–374 (2016) Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional aﬃliations.
Research in the Mathematical Sciences – Springer Journals
Published: Mar 1, 2022
Keywords: Fluid–solid interaction; Inverse scattering; Steklov eigenvalues; Modified interior transmission eigenvalues; 35R30; 35P25; 35P05; 65N21; 65N25
You can share this free article with as many people as you like with the url below! We hope you enjoy this feature!
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.