COMMUNICATIONS ON doi:10.3934/cpaa.

2021180
PURE AND APPLIED ANALYSIS
Volume 21, Number 1, January 2022 pp. 337–354

SUBHARMONIC SOLUTIONS OF BOUNDED COUPLED

HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS WITH SUBLINEAR GROWTH

Fanfan Chen, Dingbian Qian∗ and Xiying Sun

School of Mathematical Sciences, Soochow University
Suzhou 215006, China

Yinyin Wu
Department of Fundamental Courses, Wuxi Institute of Technology
Wuxi 214121, China

(Communicated by Alfonso Ruiz-Herrera)

Abstract. We prove the existence and multiplicity of subharmonic solutions

for bounded coupled Hamiltonian systems. The nonlinearities are assumed to
satisfy Landesman-Lazer conditions at the zero eigenvalue, and to have some
kind of sublinear behavior at infinity. The proof is based on phase plane anal-
ysis and a higher dimensional version of the Poincaré-Birkhoff twist theorem
by Fonda and Ureña. The results obtained generalize the previous works for
scalar second-order differential equations or relativistic equations to higher di-
mensional systems.

1. Introduction. We are interested in the existence and multiplicity of periodic

solutions of the second order coupled system

 ′ ∂P

 (ϕ (x′ )) + g1 (t, x1 ) = (t, x1 , . . . , xN ) ,
 1 1 ∂x1
··· (1.1)


 (ϕ (x′ )) + g (t, x ) =
 ′ ∂P
(t, x1 , . . . , xN ) ,
N N N N
∂xN
where ϕk : (−a, a) → R are strictly increasing diffeomorphisms with ϕk (0) = 0,
a > 0 or a = +∞, gk : R × R → R are continuous, 2π-periodic in their first variable,
k = 1, . . . , N .
System (1.1) can be viewed as a mathematical model of N coupled oscillators.
Typically, the case ϕ√k (s) = s deals with the classical second-order differential equa-
tion, and ϕk (s) = s/ 1 − s2 deals with a relativistic type of operator.
When N = 1, there are many interesting researches on the existence of peri-
odic solutions for system (1.1), one can refer to Garcia-Huidobro, Manásevich and
Zanolin [17], Bereanu and Mawhin [1], Mawhin [20] and the references therein.
In the study of multiple periodic solutions of the second order equation or planar
Hamiltonian systems, Jacobowitz [19] firstly applied the Poincaré-Birkhoff twist

2020 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 34C25; Secondary: 34C15, 46N20.

Key words and phrases. Hamiltonian systems, Coupled system, Subharmonic solutions, sub-
linear growth, Poincaré-Birkhoff theorem.
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 12071327,
No. 11671287).
∗ Corresponding author.

337
338 FANFAN CHEN, DINGBIAN QIAN, XIYING SUN AND YINYIN WU

theorem to prove the existence of infinitely many periodic solutions for superlinear
second order equations (also see Hartman [18] for refined version). Later, many
interesting results with the related researches have been obtained, see, for example,
[4, 25, 6, 23, 22, 24] and the references therein.
At the same time, people were also concerned about the corresponding research
of higher dimensional Hamiltonian systems. Many authors devoted themselves to
generalizing the Poincaré-Birkhoff twist theorem to a higher dimensional type and
study the multiplicity of periodic solutions of the higher dimensional models. In the
book of Moser and Zehnder [21], some possible higher dimensional generalizations
are discussed. See also a recent result of Boscaggin and Ortega [2].
Recently, Fonda and Ureña proved a differential equation version of the higher
dimensional Poincaré-Birkhoff twist theorem [16]. Using this theorem Fonda and
other authors proved a series of results about the multiplicity of periodic solutions
of higher dimensional coupled systems. See [13, 7, 3, 11, 12, 8].
In particular, Fonda and Toader consider the multiplicity of subharmonic solu-
tions of Hamiltonian systems with some kind of sublinear growth in [15]. Consider

 ∂U

 x′1 = f1 (t, y1 ) − (t, x1 , y1 , . . . , xN , yN , ε),

 ∂y


1

 ∂U

 y1′ = −g1 (t, x1 ) + (t, x1 , y1 , . . . , xN , yN , ε),


 ∂x1
··· (1.2)



 ∂U

 x′N = fN (t, yN ) − (t, x1 , y1 , . . . , xN , yN , ε),

 ∂y

 N



 yN′
= −gN (t, xN ) +
∂U
(t, x1 , y1 , . . . , xN , yN , ε).
∂xN
Here, fk , gk : R × R → R are continuous, 2π-periodic in their first variable,
and locally Lipschitz continuous in their second variable, k = 1, . . . , N . U :
R × R2N × R → R is continuous, 2π-periodic in t, continuously differentiable in
(x1 , y1 , . . . , xN , yN ) ∈ R2N , and

U (t, x1 , y1 , . . . , xN , yN , 0) = 0, for every (t, x1 , y1 , . . . , xN , yN ) ∈ [0, 2π] × R2N .

In addition, for every k = 1, ..., N , let the following four assumptions hold.
(A1 ) There exists a constant C > 0 such that

|fk (t, η)| ≤ C(1+|η|), |gk (t, ξ)| ≤ C(1+|ξ|) for every t ∈ [0, 2π] and η, ξ ∈ R.

(A2 ) The functions fk (t, η), gk (t, ξ) are bounded from above for negative ξ, η,
bounded from below for positive ξ, η, and
Z T Z T
lim sup fk (t, η)dt < 0 < lim inf fk (t, η)dt
0 η→−∞ 0 η→+∞
Z T Z T
lim sup gk (t, ξ)dt < 0 < lim inf gk (t, ξ)dt
0 ξ→−∞ 0 ξ→+∞

(A3 ) For every σ > 0 there are R ek (σ) > 0 and a planar sector
n o
ek (σ), θ̂k ≤ θk ≤ θ̆k
Θk = rk (cos θk , sin θk ) : rk ≥ R
 SUBHARMONIC SOLUTIONS OF COUPLED HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS 339

with θ̂k < θ̆k ≤ θ̂k + 2π, for which

 
gk (t, ξ)ξ + fk (t, η)η e
sup : (ξ, η) ∈ Θk , ξ + η ≥ Rk (σ) ≤ σ(θ̆k − θ̂k ).
2 2
ξ2 + η2
(A4 ) Either fk or gk is strictly increasing in its second variable.
Fonda and Toader proved
Theorem 1.1. Suppose that (A1 ), (A2 ), (A3 ) and (A4 ) hold. Let R be a positive real
number and let L1 , . . . , LN be some positive integers. Then there is a positive integer
m∗ with the following property: for every integer m ≥ m∗ , there exists εm > 0 such
that if |ε| ≤ εm the system (1.2) has at least N + 1 distinct 2mπ-periodic solutions
z(t) = (z1 (t), . . . , zN (t)), which satisfy min{|zk (t)| : t ∈ [0, 2mπ]} ≥ R and zk (t)
has exactly 2Lk simple zeros in the interval [0, 2mπ), for every k = 1, . . . , N .
Theorem 1.1 is a nice result on the existence of subharmonic solutions of sub-
linear growth Hamiltonian systems with small coupling terms. In this paper we
focus on some similar results but not just small coupling terms. Note that in a
pioneering paper [5], Ding and Zanolin obtained the existence of subharmonic so-
lutions for scalar sublinear second order equation using the Poincaré-Birkhoff twist
theorem. We will generalize their result to higher dimensional coupled systems with
the Landesman-Lazer conditions.
We pay attention to the coupled Hamiltonian system associated to second order
system (1.1). That is, we consider


 ∂P

 x′1 = f1 (t, y1 ), y1′ = −g1 (t, x1 ) + (t, x1 , x2 , · · · , xN ),

 ∂x


1

 x′ = f (t, y ), y ′ = −g (t, x ) + ∂P (t, x , x , · · · , x ),
2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 N
∂x2 (1.3)



 · · ·




x′ = fN (t, yN ), y ′ = −gN (t, xN ) + ∂P (t, x1 , x2 , · · · , xN ).
 N N
∂xN
Suppose that
(H1 ) The functions fk are continuous and strictly increasing in their second
variable, fk (t, 0) = 0 for t ∈ [0, 2π], k = 1, 2, · · · , N . The function P : R × RN → R
is continuous, 2π-periodic in t, continuously differentiable in x1 , . . . , xN . For k =
1, 2, · · · , N , ∃MP > 0, such that
 
 ∂P 
 (t, x , . . . , x ) 
N  ≤ MP , for (t, x1 , . . . , xN ) ∈ [0, 2π] × RN .
 ∂xk 1

(H2 ) The functions gk (t, ξ) are continuous and bounded from above for negative
ξ, bounded from below for positive ξ and
Z 2π Z 2π
lim sup(gk (t, ξ) + MP )dt < 0 < lim inf (gk (t, ξ) − MP )dt,
0 ξ→−∞ 0 ξ→+∞

for k = 1, 2, · · · , N. (1.4)
Write z = (x, y) and denote by z(t; z0 ) the solution of (1.3) with the initial value
z(t0 ; z0 ) = z0 . Moreover, write
z0 = (z1,0 , z2,0 , · · · , zN,0 ), z(t; z0 ) = (z1 (t; z0 ), z2 (t; z0 ), · · · , zN (t; z0 )),
zk,0 = (xk,0 , yk,0 ), zk (t; z0 ) = (xk (t; z0 ), yk (t; z0 )), k = 1, 2, · · · , N.
340 FANFAN CHEN, DINGBIAN QIAN, XIYING SUN AND YINYIN WU

If (xk (t; z0 ), yk (t; z0 )) ̸= (0, 0) for every t ∈ R, the polar coordinate transformation
xk (t; z0 ) = rk (t; z0 ) cos θk (t; z0 ), yk (t; z0 ) = rk (t; z0 ) sin θk (t; z0 )
is well defined.
Theorem 1.2. Suppose that (H1 ), (H2 ) and (A3 ) hold. Let R be a positive real
number and let L1 , . . . , LN be some positive integers. Then there is a positive integer
m∗ with the following property: for every integer m ≥ m∗ , the system (1.3) has at
least N + 1 distinct 2mπ-periodic solutions z(t) = (z1 (t), . . . , zN (t)), which satisfy
min{|zk (t)| : t ∈ [0, 2mπ]} ≥ R and zk (t) has exactly 2Lk simple zeros in the interval
[0, 2mπ), for every k = 1, . . . , N .
Remark 1. In Theorem 1.2, we consider the case of bounded coupling terms which
is different from the small coupling terms in Theorem 1.1. In addition, in [15], in
order to overcome the difficulties caused by coupling, they need quasi-linear growth
conditions in (A1 ) to obtain the existence of 2π-periodic solutions of (1.2) using
topological degree when ε = 0, then change (1.2) to a new system by substitution of
variables. Meanwhile, the uniqueness of solution of initial value problem is required
to ensure the continuous dependence on parameters ε. We remove the assumption
(A1 ) and the uniqueness of solution of initial value problem here. There are many
examples of bounded coupling term P that meet the condition (H1 ), for example,
when N = 2, P (t, x1 , x2 ) = x1 sin √ x22 2 .
1+x1 +x2

Remark 2. Because we discuss the bounded coupling problem, the Landesman-

Lazer conditions in assumption (H2 ) are reasonable compared with (A2 ) in [15].
In the following text, we state some corollaries of Theorem 1.2 or the method
used
√ in this paper applying to system (1.1) in the cases when ϕk (s) = s and ϕk (s) =
s/ 1 − s2 .
Corollary 1. Assume ϕk (s) = s, and let (H1 ) and (H2 ) hold. Moreover, functions
gk satisfy the one-side sublinear growth condition, that is
gk (t, ξ)
lim sup = 0, uniformly for t ∈ [0, 2π].
ξ→+∞ ξ
Then the same conclusion of Theorem 1.2 holds for system (1.1).
Note that in this case, we do not need the quasi-linear growth conditions in (A1 ),
then gk (t, ξ) may be superlinear when ξ ≤ 0. For example, gk (t, ξ) = ak (t)ξ 3 + pk (t)
for ξ ≤ 0 with ak (t), pk (t) are 2π-periodic continuous functions, ak (t) ≥ 0 and
R 2π
0
ak (t)dt > 0.
√
Corollary 2. Assume ϕk (s) = s/ 1 − s2 , and let (H1 ) and (H2 ) hold. Then the
same conclusion of Theorem 1.2 holds for system (1.1).
Remark 3. Comparing to Corollary 1.4 in [15], Corollary 2 do not need the quasi-
linear growth conditions as in (A1 ). But Corollary 2 can not be proved using
Theorem 1.2 directly. Actually it is not easy to check hypothesis (A3 ) without
(A1 ). We note that the role of hypothesis (A3 ) is to show that:
(H3 ) for any small σ > 0, we have Θk as in (A3 ) such that ∆t(Θk ) ≥ σ −1 when
zk (t) ∈ Θk , where ∆t(Θk ) is the time when zk (t) passes through the planar sector
Θk .
 SUBHARMONIC SOLUTIONS OF COUPLED HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS 341

(H3 ) is enough in the proof of Theorem 1.2 (see Section 3, the proof of Lemma
3.1 and the proof of Theorem 1.2). Hence, we just need to check (H3 ) instead of
(A3 ).
We will give proofs for the above corollaries at the end of Section 3. Notice that
in the above corollaries gk would not necessarily satisfy the quasi-linear growth
assumption in (A1 ). Hence, we generalize to higher dimensional systems of related
results obtained in [5, 9, 10, 26] for scalar second order differential equations or
relativistic equations.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we will prove that the
solutions of system (1.3) have spiral properties in every component phase plane, that
is, there are two spiral curves guiding the solutions in the component phase plane,
and forcing them to rotate around the origin as they increase in norm. Then, in
Section 3, we will consider a modified system of (1.3) such that the angular functions
of the solutions of modified system are well defined. Through this modified system,
we will prove Theorem 1.1 and corollaries by using the generalized version of the
higher dimensional Poincaré-Birkhoff twist theorem by Fonda and Ureña.

2. Geometric properties of the solution in component phase planes. We

will prove that the solutions of system (1.3) have spiral properties in every compo-
nent phase plane, which is crucial in our approach. We recall that the Landesman-
Lazer conditions in Assumption (H2 ) can be written in a different form. Following
Lemma 1 in [14], we can find two constants d > 0, δ > 0, and 2π-periodic L1 -
functions ψk± : R → R, such that:
R 2π −
gk (t, ξ) + MP ≤ ψk− (t) for ξ ≤ −d and ψk (t)dt ≤ −δ,
R 0
2π + (2.1)
gk (t, ξ) − MP ≥ ψk+ (t) for ξ ≥ d and 0
ψ k (t)dt ≥ δ,

k = 1, 2, · · · , N .
Lemma 2.1. Suppose that (H1 ) and (H2 ) hold. Then for any k ∈ {1, 2, · · · , N }, let
zk (t) = (xk (t), yk (t)) be the component of the solution z(t) of system (1.3) and fixed
Lk ∈ N, there are a sufficiently large R∗ and two strictly monotonically increasing
−
functions ξk,L k
+
, ξk,L k
: [R∗ , +∞) → R, such that
±
ξk,L k
(s) → +∞ ⇐⇒ s → +∞.
Moreover, let [t0 , tMk ) be the right maximal time interval of zk (t) with rk,0 =
|zk (t0 )| ≥ R∗ . Then we have either
−
ξk,L k
(rk,0 ) ≤ |zk (t)| ≤ ξk,L
+
k
(rk,0 ), t ∈ [t0 , tMk ),
or there exists b
tk,Lk (rk,0 ) < +∞ and tk,Lk (z0 ) ∈ (t0 , b
tk,Lk (rk,0 )] such that
θk (tk,Lk (z0 ); z0 ) − θk (t0 ; z0 ) = −2Lk π.
and
−
ξk,L k
(rk,0 ) ≤ |zk (t)| ≤ ξk,L
+
k
(rk,0 ), t ∈ [t0 , tk,Lk (z0 )].
In addition, if tMk = +∞, only the latter is true.
Remark 4. In [24], the authors proved the similar spiral properties of the solutions
for scalar superlinear second order equation x′′ + f (t, x) = 0, see Lemma 3.1 in that
paper. We give a comparison between the proof of Lemma 3.1 in that paper and
the proof of this Lemma.
342 FANFAN CHEN, DINGBIAN QIAN, XIYING SUN AND YINYIN WU

First of all, the solution of superlinear equation has the rapid twist property,
that is the solution with large norm will complete many clockwise turns around the
origin in one time period 2π. On the other hand, the solution of sublinear equation
has the slow twist property, that is the solution with large norm may need many
time periods, 2mπ more or less to complete one turn, m is dependent on the norm
of initial value. Thus, in the proof of our lemma, we need give an estimation of the
upper bound of the time periods when the solution with large norm will complete
one turn (here, for simplicity, let Lk = 1). The upper bound is b tk,Lk (rk,0 ) in Lemma
2.1 which is dependent on the norm of initial value rk,0 . Meanwhile, we need to
prove the solution with large norm does not pass the origin in that upper bound of
the time. Otherwise, it will lead to a bad evaluation of the rotations.
Secondly, in [24], f (t, x) can be indefinite, the typical example in [11] is a partially
superlinear equation, for example,
x′′ + | sin t|x3 + cos t · x = 0,
where f (t, x)/x ≥ | sin t| + cos t for |x| ≫ 1 and
f (t, x)
lim = +∞, for t ∈ [π/4, π/2].
|x|→+∞ x
One can check the condition (f1 ) in [11]. But f (π, x) = −x which implies
lim sup sgn(x)f (t, x) = +∞, lim inf sgn(x)f (t, x) = −∞.
|x|→∞ |x|→∞

For such superlinear equation, the behaviour of the solution near the transverse axis
of the phase plane is difficult to analyze, see the discussions of (1)-(3) in the proof
of Lemma 3.1 in [24]. But it is relatively easy in sublinear case. Now we can prove
a useful inequality (2.5) using the Landesman-Lazer condition (2.1).
Finally, a specific difficulty in sublinear equation with the Landesman-Lazer con-
dition is that we cannot use Hamiltonian function to obtain the upper bound of the
solutions in D1 and the lower bound of the solutions in D2 . Such Hamiltonian func-
tions can be like Hk± in our next proof, or norm function r2 in the proof of Lemma
3.1, Case 1, in [24], where t1 ≤ 2π, one time period. Therefore, a more delicate
phase plane analysis is needed for sublinear equation with the Landesman-Lazer
condition.
The proof of Lemma 2.1 is as follows.
Proof. For simplicity, we assume Lk = 1 and t0 = 0. Set
Lψk = max{∥ψk− ∥L1 , ∥ψk+ ∥L1 }, m∗k δ > Lψk , (2.2)
where the functions ψk± and δ are introduced in (2.1), m∗k ∈ N.
Let zk (t) = (xk (t), yk (t)) be a component solution of (1.3) satisfying zk,0 =
(0, yk,0 ) and yk,0 large enough. We denote by
D1 = {(xk , yk ) : xk ≥ 0, yk > 0}; D2 = {(xk , yk ) : xk ≥ 0, yk ≤ 0};
D3 = {(xk , yk ) : xk ≤ 0, yk < 0}; D4 = {(xk , yk ) : xk ≤ 0, yk ≥ 0};
Ed+ = {(xk , yk ) : 0 ≤ xk ≤ d}; Ed− = {(xk , yk ) : −d ≤ xk ≤ 0};
Ek,y = {(xk , yk ) : |yk | ≤ Lψk }.
The proof will be divided into the following steps.
Step 1. The estimation of zk (t) ∈ D1 .
 SUBHARMONIC SOLUTIONS OF COUPLED HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS 343

Denote by
gk+ (xk ) = max |gk (t, xk )| + MP , fk− (yk ) = sgn(yk ) min |fk (t, yk )|,
t∈[0,2π] t∈[0,2π]
Z xk Z yk
G+
k (xk ) = gk+ (s)ds, Fk− (yk ) = fk− (s)ds,
0 0
and
Hk− (xk , yk ) = Fk− (yk ) + G+
k (xk ).
Then for zk (t) ∈ D1 , we have
(Hk− (xk (t), yk (t)))′ = fk− (yk (t))yk′ (t) + gk+ (xk (t))x′k (t)
 
− ∂P
= fk (yk (t)) −gk (t, xk (t)) + +
+ gk (xk (t))
∂xk
 
+ gk+ (xk (t)) fk (t, yk (t)) − fk− (yk (t) ≥ 0,
which implies that Hk−p (xk (t), yk (t)) ≥ Hk− (xk (0), yk (0)) for t ≥ 0 and zk (t) ∈ D1 .
Let ζk,Lk (zk,0 ) = min{ x2k + yk2 : Hk− (xk , yk ) = Hk− (zk,0 )}. Then
1,−

1,−
|zk (t)| ≥ ζk,L k
(zk,0 ) for t ∈ [0, tMk ) or t ∈ [0, tk,1 ], (2.3)
where tk,1 ∈ (0, tMk ) such that yk (tk,1 ) = 0 and zk (t) ∈ D1 for t ∈ (0, tk,1 ). See
Figure 1.

Figure 1. zk (t) ∈ D1 and zk (t) ∈ D1 ∪ Ek,y

The formula (2.3) gives the lower bound of zk (t) ∈ D1 . Next we discuss the
upper bound of zk (t) ∈ D1 .
− −
When zk (t) ∈ D1 ∩ Ed+ , we have yk (t) ≥ yk,1 , where yk,1 is a positive number
− − −
satisfying Hk (d, yk,1 ) = Hk (zk,0 ). Since the function fk (t, yk ) is strictly increasing
in its second variable and fk (t, 0) = 0, we have
−
x′k (t) = fk (t, yk (t)) ≥ Mk,1 = min fk (t, yk,1 )>0 for 0 ≤ xk (t) ≤ d.
0≤t≤2π
344 FANFAN CHEN, DINGBIAN QIAN, XIYING SUN AND YINYIN WU

Moreover,
Z t Z t
d ≥ xk (t) − xk (0) = x′k (t)dt = fk (t, yk (t))dt ≥ Mk,1 t,
0 0
which implies that
d(Kd + MP )
|yk (t) − yk,0 | ≤ (Kd + MP )t ≤ ,
Mk,1
where Kd = max |gk (t, xk )|.
0≤t≤2π,0≤xk ≤d
In addition, denoting by
′ d(Kd + MP )
Mk,1 = max{fk (t, yk ) : 0 ≤ t ≤ 2π, |yk − yk,0 | ≤ },
Mk,1
we have
′ d
|zk (t)| ≤ |zk,0 | + (Mk,1 + K d + MP ) , for zk (t) ∈ D1 ∩ Ed+ . (2.4)
Mk,1
If 0 < xk (t) < d for t ∈ (0, tMk ), then formulas (2.3) and (2.4) give the lower and
upper bounds of zk (t) for t ∈ (0, tMk ), respectively.
Otherwise, there is t′k,1 ∈ [0, tMk ), such that xk (t′k,1 ) = d. Notice that for xk (t) ≥
d, we have yk′ (t) ≤ −ψk+ (t). It follows that
Z 2mt π+t′k,1 Z t
′
yk (t)−yk (tk,1 ) ≤ − ψk+ (t)dt+ |ψk+ (t)|dt < −mt δ+Lψk , (2.5)
t′k,1 2mt π+t′k,1

t−t′k,1
for t ≥ t′k,1 , where mt = [ 2π ]. Moreover, using (2.2), we have
yk (t) < 0, for t ≥ 2(mk,1 + m∗k + 1)π + t′k,1 . (2.6)
yk (t′k,1 )
where mk,1 = [ δ ] + 1.
Therefore, either zk (t) ∈ D1 for t ∈ [0, tMk ), or tk,1 − t′k,1 ≤ 2(mk,1 + m∗k + 1)π.
In both cases, we have
d(Kd + MP )
0 ≤ yk (t) ≤ yk (t′k,1 ) + Lψk ≤ yk,0 + + Lψk . (2.7)
Mk,1
Thus
d(Kd + MP )
|x′k (t)| ≤ Mk,1
+
= max{fk (t, yk ) : 0 ≤ t ≤ 2π, 0 ≤ yk ≤ yk,0 + + Lψk },
Mk,1
which implies that
d ≤ xk (t) ≤ 2Mk,1
+
(mk,1 + m∗k + 1)π (2.8)
1,+
Combining (2.4), (2.7) and (2.8), there exists ζk,L k
(zk,0 ) such that
1,+
|zk (t)| ≤ ζk,L k
(zk,0 ), for t ∈ [0, tMk ) or t ∈ [0, tk,1 ]. (2.9)
The formulas (2.3) and (2.9) give the lower and upper bounds of zk (t) if zk (t) ∈ D1
for t ∈ [0, tMk ) or t ∈ [0, tk,1 ]. If tMk > Mdk,1 + 2(mk,1 + m∗k + 1)π, there must be a
tk,1 ∈ (0, tMk ) such that yk (tk,1 ) = 0.
For t > tk,1 , since gk (t, xk (t)) may change sign, zk (t) may move from D1 to D2
and come back to D1 again. Similar to the argument for (2.5) we know
Z t
yk (t) ≤ − ψk+ (t)dt < −m′t δ + Lψk , (2.10)
tk,1
 SUBHARMONIC SOLUTIONS OF COUPLED HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS 345

where m′t = [
t−tk,1
2π ]. Then either
|yk (t)| ≤ Lψk , for t ∈ [tk,1 , tMk ), (2.11)
or there exists t′′k,1 > tk,1 , such that
|yk (t)| ≤ Lψk , for t ∈ [tk,1 , t′′k,1 ] and yk (t) < 0 for t > t′′k,1 . (2.12)
Using (H2 ) and (2.2), we have
tMk − tk,1 ≤ 2(m∗k + 1)π or t′′k,1 − tk,1 ≤ 2(m∗k + 1)π,
which implies that
|xk (t)−xk (tk,1 )| ≤ 2(m∗k +1)Mk,1
′′
π, for t ∈ [tk,1 , tMk ) or t ∈ [tk,1 , t′′k,1 ], (2.13)
′′
where Mk,1 = max{fk (t, yk ) : 0 ≤ t ≤ 2π, |yk | ≤ Lψk }.
1,±
Therefore, by (2.3), (2.9), (2.11), (2.12) and (2.13), there exist ξk,L k
(zk,0 ), with
1,±
ξk,L k
(zk,0 ) → +∞ ⇐⇒ rk,0 = |zk,0 | → +∞,
such that
1,−
ξk,L k
1,+
(zk,0 ) ≤ |zk (t)| ≤ ξk,L k
(zk,0 ), for t ∈ [0, tMk ) or t ∈ [0, t′′k,1 ]. (2.14)
In particular, (2.14) shows the estimation of zk (t) ∈ D1 ∪ D2 for t ∈ [0, t′′k,1 ]. More-
over, t′′k,1 < Mdk,1 + (2mk,1 + 4m∗k + 4)π.
′′
Step 2. The estimation of zk (t) ∈ D2 for t ≥ tk,1 .
Denote by
Z yk
+ +
fk (yk ) = max fk (t, yk ), Fk (yk ) = fk+ (s)ds,
t∈[0,2π] 0
and
Hk+ (xk , yk ) = Fk+ (yk ) + G+
k (xk ).
Then for zk (t) ∈ D2 , we have
(Hk+ (xk (t), yk (t)))′ = fk+ (yk (t))yk′ (t) + gk+ (xk (t))x′k (t)
 
∂P
= fk (yk (t)) −gk (t, xk (t)) +
+ +
+ gk (xk (t))
∂xk
 
+ gk+ (xk (t)) fk (t, yk (t)) − fk+ (yk (t) ≤ 0,
which implies that Hk+ (xk (t), yk (t)) ≤ Hk+ (xk (t′′k,1 ), yk (t′′k,1 )) for t ≥ t′′k,1 and zk (t) ∈
p
2,+
D2 . Let ξk,L k
(zk (t′′k,1 )) = max{ x2k + yk2 : Hk+ (xk , yk ) = Hk+ (zk (t′′k,1 ))}. Then
2,+
|zk (t)| ≤ ξk,L k
(zk (t′′k,1 )), for t ∈ [t′′k,1 , tMk ) or t ∈ [t′′k,1 , tk,2 ], (2.15)
where tk,2 ∈ (t′′k,1 , tMk ) such that xk (tk,2 ) = 0 and zk (t) ∈ D2 for t ∈ (t′′k,1 , tk,2 ). See
Figure 2. Note that the upper bound of tk,2 is depended on zk (t′′k,1 ) by using (2.5)
and (2.15).
The formula (2.15) gives the upper bound of zk (t) ∈ D2 for t ≥ t′′k,1 . Next we
consider the lower bound of zk (t) ∈ D2 for t ≥ t′′k,1 . We consider the following two
cases.
Case 1. zk (t) ∈ Ek,x+
for t ∈ (t′′k,1 , tMk ), where Ek,x
+
= {(xk , yk ) ∈ D2 : xk ≥ −yk }.
−
From a discussion similar to (2.10) we know if there exists a constant Jk,1 inde-
pendent of rk,1 , such that
−
− Jk,1 ≤ yk (t) < 0, for zk (t) ∈ Ek,x
+
and t ∈ (t′′k,1 , tMk ), (2.16)
346 FANFAN CHEN, DINGBIAN QIAN, XIYING SUN AND YINYIN WU

Figure 2. zk (t) ∈ D2

−
then tMk ≤ Tk , where Tk is a constant only depend on Jk,1 . Moreover,
−
|x′k (t)| ≤ Mk,2
J
= max{fk (t, yk ) : 0 ≤ t ≤ 2π, −Jk,1 ≤ yk ≤ 0},
which implies xk (t) ≥ xk (t′′k,1 ) − Mk,2
J
Tk . Note that |yk (t′′k,1 )| ≤ Lψk , then
|zk (t)| ≥ xk (t) ≥ rk,1 − |yk (t′′k,1 )| − Mk,2
J
.
2,−
Thus, there exists ζk,L k
(zk (t′′k,1 )) with
2,−
ζk,L k
(zk (t′′k,1 )) → +∞ ⇐⇒ rk,1 = |zk (t′′k,1 )| → +∞,
such that
2,−
|zk (t)| ≥ ζk,L k
(zk (t′′k,1 )), for t ∈ [t′′k,1 , tMk ). (2.17)
Otherwise, if (2.16) is not true, letting αk (zk (t′′k,1 )) = sup{−yk (t) : zk (t) ∈ Ek,x
+
},
we have
αk (zk (t′′k,1 )) → +∞ ⇐⇒ rk,1 → +∞. (2.18)
From (2.18), we have t(rk,1 ) ∈ (t′′k,1 , tMk ) such that
− yk (t(rk,1 )) → +∞ ⇐⇒ rk,1 → +∞. (2.19)
Notice that x′k (t) < 0 for zk (t) ∈ Ek,x
+
, thus
|zk (t)| > xk (t) ≥ xk (t(rk,1 )) ≥ −yk (t(rk,1 )), for t ∈ [t′′k,1 , t(rk,1 )].
Moreover,
|zk (t)| > −yk (t) ≥ −yk (t(rk,1 )) − Lψk , for t ∈ [t(rk,1 ), tMk ).
Therefore, using (2.19), we can let 2,−
ζk,L k
(zk (t′′k,1 ))
≤ −yk (t(rk,1 )) − Lψk to obtain
(2.17).
Case 2. There exists t′k,2 ∈ (t′′k,1 , tMk ) such that xk (t′k,2 ) = −yk (t′k,2 ) and zk (t) ∈
Ek,x for t ∈ (t′′k,1 , t′k,2 ].
+

In this case we claim that

− yk (t′k,2 ) → +∞ ⇐⇒ rk,1 → +∞. (2.20)
 SUBHARMONIC SOLUTIONS OF COUPLED HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS 347

−
If not, there exists a constant independent of rk,1 , we still denote it as Jk,1 such
that
−
−Jk,1 ≤ yk (t) < 0, for zk (t) ∈ Ek,x
+
and t ∈ (t′′k,1 , t′k,2 ],
we can use similar argument for Case 1 to obtain xk (t′k,2 ) ≥ xk (t′′k,1 )−Mk,2
J
Tk . That
− ′ ′′
is Jk,1 ≥ −yk (tk,2 ) ≥ xk (tk,1 ) − Mk,2 Tk . Note that
J

xk (t′′k,1 ) ≥ |zk (t′′k,1 )| − Lψk = rk,1 − Lψk → +∞ as rk,0 → +∞.

This leads to a contradiction,
Relation (2.20) is similar to (2.19), so we can use similar argument for Case 1 to
2,−
obtain a lower bound, we still denote it as ζk,L k
(zk (t′′k,1 )), such that
2,−
|zk (t)| ≥ ζk,L k
(zk (t′′k,1 )), for t ∈ [t′′k,1 , t′k,2 ]. (2.21)
2,−
Moreover, ζk,L k
(zk (t′′k,1 )) → +∞ ⇐⇒ rk,1 → +∞.
−
Furthermore, we consider the situation when zk (t) ∈ Ek,x = {(xk , yk ) ∈ D2 :
xk ≤ |yk |}. When xk (t) ≥ d, we have
|zk (t)| ≥ −yk (t) ≥ −yk (t′k,2 ) − Lψk , for t ≥ t′k,2 . (2.22)
Suppose that there exists ∈ t′′k,2 (t′k,2 , tMk )
such that xk (t′′k,2 )
= d. Without losing
generality, let yk ≤ −1 for 0 ≤ xk (t) ≤ d. Denoting by Mk,2 = min{|fk (t, yk )| : 0 ≤
t ≤ 2π, yk ≤ −1}, we have
d ≥ xk (t′′k,2 ) − xk (t) ≥ Mk,2 (t − t′′k,2 ), for 0 ≤ xk (t) ≤ d, (2.23)
which implies that
d(Kd + MP )
|yk (t) − yk (t′′k,2 )| ≤ , for |yk (t′′k,2 )| ≫ 1, (2.24)
Mk,2
where Kd = max0≤t≤2π,0≤xk ≤d |gk (t, xk )| as defined in Step 1.
2,−
Therefore, using (2.21), (2.22), (2.23) and (2.24), we have ξk,L k
(zk (t′′k,1 )) ≤
ζk,Lk (zk (t′′k,1 )), such that
2,−

2,−
|zk (t)| ≥ ξk,L k
(zk (t′′k,1 )), for t ∈ [t′′k,1 , tMk ) or t ∈ [t′′k,1 , tk,2 ], (2.25)
Moreover, ξk,L 2,−
k
(zk (t′′k,1 )) → +∞ ⇐⇒ rk,1 → +∞.
Inequalities (2.17), (2.18) and (2.25) give the lower and upper bounds of |zk (t)|
for t ∈ [t′′k,1 , tMk ) or t ∈ [t′′k,1 , tk,2 ].
Note that the discussions in Step 1 and Step 2 are true for not only initial time
1,±
t0 = 0 but also for all initial time t0 ∈ [0, 2π]. That is we can write ξk,L k
(zk,0 )
1,±
as ξk,L k
(r k,0 ) which means the bounds depended only on r k,0 = |z k,0 |. Also, write
1,± ′′ 1,±
ξk,Lk (zk (tk,1 )) as ξk,Lk (rk,1 ) which means the bounds depended only on all rk,1 =
|zk (t′′k,1 )| satisfying (2.12) and (2.14).
Step 3. Similarly, we can discuss the cases of zk (t) ∈ D3 and D4 . In conclusion,
we can find tk,3 , t′′k,3 , tk,4 with the similar properties of tk,1 , t′′k,1 , tk,2 , respectively.
That is, tk,3 < t′′k,3 < tk,4 , yk (tk,3 ) = 0, xk (tk,4 ) = 0 and
xk (t) ≤ 0, yk (t) ≤ Lψk , for t ∈ [tk,2 , tMk ) or t ∈ [tk,2 , t′′k,3 ],
xk (t) ≤ 0, yk (t) > 0, for t ∈ [t′′k,3 , tMk ) or t ∈ [t′′k,3 , tk,4 ].
3,± 4,±
Moreover, there are ξk,L k
(rk,2 ) and ξk,L k
(rk,3 ) such that
3,−
ξk,L k
3,+
(rk,2 ) ≤ |zk (t)| ≤ ξk,L k
(rk,2 ), for t ∈ [tk,2 , tMk ) or t ∈ [tk,2 , t′′k,3 ], (2.26)
348 FANFAN CHEN, DINGBIAN QIAN, XIYING SUN AND YINYIN WU

and
4,−
ξk,L k
2,+
(rk,3 ) ≤ |zk (t)| ≤ ξk,L k
(rk,3 ), for t ∈ [t′′k,3 , tMk ) or t ∈ [t′′k,3 , tk,4 ]. (2.27)
Set
± 4,± 3,± 2,± 1,±
ξk,L k
(rk,0 ) = ξk,L k
◦ ξk,L k
◦ ξk,L k
◦ ξk,L k
(rk,0 ).
Then, combining Step 1, Step 2, (2.26) and (2.27), either
−
ξk,L k
(rk,0 ) ≤ |zk (t)| ≤ ξk,L
+
k
(rk,0 ), for t ∈ [0, tMk ),
or there exists tk,Lk (z0 ) = tk,4 ∈ [0, tMk ), such that zk (t) intersects xk = 0 at
t = tk,Lk (z0 ) and zk (t) completes one clockwise turn around the origin when t ∈
[0, tk,Lk (z0 )]. Moreover,
−
ξk,L k
(rk,0 ) ≤ |zk (t)| ≤ ξk,L
+
k
(rk,0 ), for t ∈ [0, tk,Lk (z0 )].
±
Finally, it is clear that ξk,L k
(rk,0 ) can be chosen as strictly increasing functions with
respect to rk,0 and
±
ξk,L k
(rk,0 ) → +∞ ⇐⇒ rk,0 → +∞.
In addition, write btk,Lk (rk,0 ) as the supremum of all tk,Lk (z0 ) with rk,0 = |z0 | and
the initial time t0 ∈ [0, 2π].
For Lk ≥ 2 and general zk,0 = (xk,0 , yk,0 ), the conclusion can be proved by
similar discussions.

3. The existence of periodic solutions. If there are only assumptions (H1 ),

(H2 ) and (A3 ), the solution of the system (1.3) may pass through the origin in
some component phase plane, which leads to a bad evaluation of the rotations and
brings difficulties for the application of the Poincaré-Birkhoff theorem. Thus we
need to consider a modified system of (1.3).
Let

 0, 0 ≤ s ≤ 1 or s ≥ 1/α + π − 1,


α sin(s − 1), 1 ≤ s ≤ 1 + π/2,
κ(s) =

 α, 1 + π/2 ≤ s ≤ 1/α + π/2 − 1,


α sin(s − 1/α + 1), 1/α + π/2 − 1 ≤ s ≤ 1/α + π − 1
Rλ
and K(λ) = 0 κ(s)ds, where α is a parameter such that
√ 1
αN Mp < √ . (3.1)
2 2+π
Denoting Rα = 1/α + π − 1, we have
Z 1+ π2 Z α1 + π2 −1 Z α1 +π−1  
1
K(Rα ) = 0+ α sin(s−1)ds+ αds + α sin s− +1 ds
1 1+ π α + 2 −1
1 π α
  2

1
=0+α+α − 2 + α = 1.
α
which implies that K(λ) = 0, for λ ∈ [0, 1]; 0 ≤ K(λ) ≤ 1, for λ ∈ [1, Rα ] and
K(λ) = 1, for λ ≥ Rα . Moreover, 0 ≤ K′ (λ) ≤ α.
Recall that the system (1.3) has the Hamiltonian
X
N
H(t, x, y) = (Fk (t, yk ) + Gk (t, xk )) − P (t, x1 , x2 , · · · , xN ),
k=1
 SUBHARMONIC SOLUTIONS OF COUPLED HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS 349

where
Z yk Z xk
Fk (t, yk ) = fk (t, s)ds, Gk (t, xk ) = gk (t, s)ds, k = 1, · · · , N.
0 0

We consider the following modified system

  

 e YN 2

 x′k =
∂ H
= fk (t, yk )+fk− (yk )K′ Gk (t, xk )−P
x
(K(x2j + Fj− (yj )))− k  ,



 ∂y k 2
  j=1,j̸=k

e Y
N
x2k 

 ′
−
∂H
−2x K ′
− 2 −

 y k = = k G k (t, x k ) P (K(x j + F j (y j )))−

 ∂xk 2

 j=1,j̸=k
QN
 −
−K [gk (t, xk ) − xk ] − xk + ∂xk j=1 (K(x2j + Fj (yj )))
∂P

(3.2)
with the Hamiltonian H(x, e y) = H∗ (x, y) − HP (x, y), where
XN  
  x2
H∗ (x, y) = Fk (t, yk )+K(x2k +Fk− (yk ))Gk (t, xk )+ 1−K(x2k +Fk− (yk )) k ,
2
k=1
QN
HP (x, y) = P j=1 (K(x2j + Fj− (yj ))) and K(·) is as previously defined.
For k ∈ {1, . . . , N }, when x2k + Fk− (yk ) ≥ Rα , the k-component equation is of
the form
∂P Y
N
x′k = fk (t, yk ), yk′ = −gk (t, xk ) + (K(x2j + Fj− (yj ))). (3.3)
∂xk
j=1,j̸=k

∗ −
Hence, Lemma 2.1 also holds for system (3.2) when |zk (t)| ≥ Rα ≥ ξk,L k
(R∗ ), where
∗ −
Rα = max{|(xk , yk )| : xk + Fk (yk ) ≤ Rα , k = 1, . . . , N }.
2

When x2k + Fk− (yk ) ≤ 1, the k-component equation is of the form

x′k = fk (t, yk ), yk′ = −xk .
Thus, the k-component component equation is independent. Using some simple
phase plane analysis we can prove that if zk,0 ̸= (0, 0), then zk (t; z0 ) ̸= (0, 0) for
every t ∈ Izk , where Izk is the maximum existence interval of zk (t; z0 ). Therefore,
the argument function θk (t; z0 ) is well defined.
Furthermore, using | ∂x ∂P
k
(t, x1 , . . . , xN )| ≤ MP , we have
p p
|P (t, x1 , . . . , xN )| ≤ N Mp 1/α+1+π for t ∈ R, |xk | ≤ Rα , k = 1, 2, . . . , N. (3.4)
Combining (3.1) and (3.4), we get
  r
  √
 ′ 2 Y
N
 α 1 1
K (xk +F − (yk ))P − 
(K(xj + Fj (yj ))) < √
2
· + 1 + π < . (3.5)
 k
α 2
 j=1,j̸=k  2 2+π

Thus, when xk = 0 and yk ̸= 0, (3.5) gives

∂He Y
N
yk = yk fk (t, yk ) + yk fk− (yk )K′ (x2k + Fk− (yk ))P (K(x2j + Fj− (yj )))
∂yk
j=1,j̸=k
1
≥ yk fk (t, yk ) > 0.
2
350 FANFAN CHEN, DINGBIAN QIAN, XIYING SUN AND YINYIN WU

Consequently, for any k-component solution zk (t; z0 ) of (3.2) with zk,0 ̸= (0, 0), we
obtain
θk′ (t; z0 ) < 0, for xk (t; z0 ) = 0 and yk (t; z0 ) ̸= 0,
which implies that non-trivial component solutions can never perform counter-
clockwise rotation at yk -axis. More precisely, we conclude that for any t2 > t1 > t0 ,
θk (t2 ; z0 ) − θk (t1 ; z0 ) < π. (3.6)
Then, we have
Lemma 3.1. (i) Suppose that (H1 ) and (H2 ) hold. Then for any given positive
−
integer Lk and sufficiently large rk,0 , there exists rk,0 (Lk , rk,0 ) > 0 such that if the
component zk (t; z0 ) satisfies that
−
|zk (t0 ; z0 )| ≥ rk,0 and |zk (t1 ; z0 )| ≤ rk,0 (Lk , rk,0 ),
then the argument component θk (t1 ; z0 ) − θk (t0 ; z0 ) ≤ −2Lk π;
(ii) Suppose that (H1 ), (H2 ) and (A3 ) hold. Then every solution of the Cauchy
problem associated with system (3.2) is globally defined. Moreover, the solutions of
(3.2) have the elastic property, that is, for any given positive constants T > 0 and
sufficiently large rk,0 , there exists rk,0 +
(T ) > 0 such that the inequality |zk (t0 ; z0 )| ≥
rk,0 (T ) implies |zk (t; z0 )| ≥ rk,0 , for |t − t0 | ≤ T .
+

Proof. (i) This is a direct inference of Lemma 2.1 and (3.6).

(ii) If there is a solution z(t) which is defined in [t0 , Mz ) with Mz < +∞, then
there is a component solution zk (t) of z(t) and tk,n ∈ [t0 , Mz ), n = 1, . . . , such that
|zk (tk,n )| → +∞, as n → ∞. (3.7)
Using (i) and (3.7), we have a subsequence tk,nl ∈ [t0 , Mz ), such that |zk (tk,nl )| →
+∞ as l → ∞, and
θk (tk,nl+1 ; z0 ) − θk (tk,nl ; z0 ) ≤ −2π, l = 1, . . . ,
which implies that zk (t) completes at least one clockwise turn in [tk,nl , tk,nl+1 ].
Moreover, using Lemma 2.1 and (3.7), we have [t′k,nl , t′k,nl+1 ] ⊂ [tk,nl , tk,nl+1 ] such
that zk (t) completes one clockwise turn in [t′k,nl , t′k,nl+1 ] and
|zk (t)| → +∞, uniformly for t ∈ [t′k,nl , t′k,nl+1 ], as n → ∞.
q
Notice that when x2k + Fk− (yk ) ≥ Rα , the k-component equation is of the form
(3.3). The assumption (A3 ) or (H3 ) implies that, choosing σ = 1, ∆t(Θk ) ≥ σ −1 = 1
for zk (t) being sufficiently large, where ∆t(Θk ) is the time when zk (t) passes through
the planar sector Θk . Then t′k,nl+1 − t′k,nl ≥ 1 for l being sufficiently large. This
contradicts Mz < +∞. Therefore, z(t) is defined in [t0 , +∞). Similarly, we can
prove that z(t) is defined in (−∞, t0 ].
We can use similar discussion to prove the elastic property from Lemma 2.1 and
assumption (A3 ) or (H3 ).
To complete the proof of Theorem 1.2, we will apply a higher dimensional version
of the Poincaré-Birkhoff theorem for Poincaré maps of Hamiltonian systems recently
obtained in [16] (see also in [13]). Precisely, let 0 < Rk− < Rk+ , k = 1, . . . , N and
consider the N -annulus in R2N defined as
   
Ω = B R+ \BR− × · · · × B R+ \BR−
1 1 N N
 SUBHARMONIC SOLUTIONS OF COUPLED HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS 351

where BR± are open balls of radius Rk± , k = 1, . . . , N . Let z(t) = (z1 (t), . . . , zN (t))
k
be the solution of (3.2), and define
θk (t0 + 2mπ) − θk (t0 )
rotk,m (zk (t)) := − .
2π
As a consequence of Theorem 5 in [13], we have
Theorem 3.2. Assume that every solution z(t) of (3.2), departing from z(0) ∈ ∂Ω,
is defined on [0, 2mπ] and satisfies
zk (t) ̸= (0, 0), for t ∈ [0, 2mπ].
Assume moreover that there are Lk ∈ N, k = 1, . . . , N , such that
rotk,m (zk (t)) > Lk , for |zk (0)| = Rk− ; rotk,m (zk (t)) < Lk , for |zk (0)| = Rk+ .
Then, the Hamiltonian system (3.2) has at least N +1 distinct 2mπ-periodic solutions
z i (t) such that z i (0) ∈ Ω and rotk,m (zki (t)) = Lk , i = 1, . . . , N + 1.
Now we give the proof of Theorem 1.2. Firstly, using Lemma 2.1 and Lemma
3.1, we can choose Rk− such that
−
min {rk,0 (Lk + 1, Rk− ), ξk,L
−
k +1
(Rk− )} ≥ Rα
∗
. (3.8)
k=1,...,N

Moreover, let m∗ (L1 , . . . , LN ) ∈ N satisfy 2m∗ π ≥ b

tk,Lk +1 (Rk− ), k = 1, . . . , N ,
b
where tk,Lk +1 (·) is defined as in Lemma 2.1. Then, for k = 1, . . . , N , if the solu-
tion z(t) of (3.2) satisfies |zk (0)| = Rk− , using Lemma 2.1, there is tk,Lk +1 (z0 ) ∈
(0, b
tk,Lk +1 (Rk− )] such that
θk (tk,Lk +1 (z0 ); z0 ) − θk (0; z0 ) = −2(Lk + 1)π.
Combining (3.6), we have
θk (2m∗ π; z0 ) − θk (0; z0 ) < −2(Lk + 1)π + π < −2Lk π,
which implies that
rotk,m∗ (zk (t)) > Lk , for |zk (0)| = Rk− .
Next, taking σ = Lk /(2m∗ π), we can choose Rk+ being sufficiently large, such that if
ek (σ) for t ∈ [0, 2m∗ π] by
z(t) is a solution of (3.2) and |zk (0)| = Rk+ , then |zk (t)| ≥ R
the elastic property showed in Lemma 3.1. Hence, using assumption (A3 ) or (H3 ),
the time needed to cross the angular sector Θk is greater than 1/σ = 2m∗ π/Lk .
That is
θk (2m∗ π; z0 ) − θk (0; z0 ) > −2Lk π,
which implies that
rotk,m∗ (zk (t)) < Lk , for |zk (0)| = Rk+ .
Applying Theorem 3.2, we obtain at least N + 1 distinct 2m∗ π-periodic solutions
∗ ∗
z i,m (t) of (3.2), such that z i,m (0) ∈ Ω and
∗
rotk,m∗ (zki,m (t)) = Lk , i = 1, . . . , N + 1.
i,m∗ ∗
Note that z (0) ∈ Ω, if there is tk ∈ (0, 2m π] such that
∗
zki,m (tk ) ̸∈ {x2k + Fk− (yk ) ≥ Rα },
we use (3.8) and Lemma 3.1 (i) to get
∗ ∗
θki,m (tk ) − θki,m (0) ≤ −2(Lk + 1)π,
352 FANFAN CHEN, DINGBIAN QIAN, XIYING SUN AND YINYIN WU

then
∗ ∗
θki,m (2m∗ π) − θki,m (0) ≤ −(2Lk + 1)π
∗
by using (3.6). This is a contradiction with rotk,m∗ (zki,m (t)) = Lk . Hence,
∗
zki,m (t) ∈ {x2k + Fk− (yk ) ≥ Rα }, for all t ∈ R, k = 1, . . . , N
∗
which implies z i,m (t) are 2m∗ π-periodic solutions of (1.3), i = 1, . . . , N + 1.
For any positive integer m > m∗ , we can use discussions similar to the above to
get
rotk,m (zk (t)) > Lk , for |zk (0)| = Rk− .
Moreover, using assumption (A3 ) or (H3 ), we can choose Rk+ being larger, such that

rotk,m (zk (t)) < Lk , for |zk (0)| = Rk+ .

Hence, using a similar discussion as above, we obtain at least N + 1 distinct 2mπ-

periodic solutions z i,m (t) of (1.3) with rotk,m (zki,m (t)) = Lk , , i = 1, . . . , N + 1.
Theorem 1.2 is thus proved.
Finally, we give the proofs of Corollary 1 and Corollary 2. It is only required to
check (A3 ) or (H3 ).
(i) For any σ > 0, σ ≪ 1, let θ̂k = −σ/2, θ̆k = σ/2, R ek (σ) satisfies that

gk (t, ξ) σ2 ek (σ)
R
≤ , for ξ≥ and t ∈ [0, 2π].
ξ 2 1+σ

Thus, when (ξ, η) ∈ Θk = {rk (cos θk , sin θk ) : rk ≥ Rek (σ), θ̂k ≤ θk ≤ θ̆k }, we have
| sin θk | ≤ σ/2 and gk (t, ξ)ξ ≤ σ ξ /2 which implies that
2 2

gk (t, ξ)ξ + η 2 σ2 σ2
2 2
≤ + < σ 2 = σ(θ̆k − θ̂k ).
ξ +η 2 4
This checks the assumption √ (A3 ). p
(ii) Recall ϕk (s) = s/ 1 − s2 , then |x′k | = ϕ−1 2
k (yk ) = yk / 1 + yk < 1. Let θ̂k =
π/2, θ̆k = −3π/2. If θk (t0 ) = π/2, θk (t1 ) = −3π/2, which means zk (t) completes
one clockwise turn in [t0 , t1 ]. Using Lemma 2.1, we have t′1 ∈ (t0 , t1 ) such that
−
xk (t′1 ) > 0, yk (t′1 ) = 0, which implies that xk (t′1 ) ≥ ξk,1 (|zk (t0 )|). Moreover, we
have t′0 ∈ (t′1 , t1 ) such that xk (t′0 ) = xk (t′1 )/2. Then
Z xk (t′1 ) −
1 xk (t′1 ) ξk,1 (|zk (t0 )|)
t1 − t 0 ≥ t′1 − t′0 = −1
dx k ≥ ≥ .
xk (t′0 ) ϕ (yk ) 2 2

Hence, for any σ > 0, let R ek (σ) = (ξ − )−1 (2/σ). Then θk (t0 ) = π/2, θk (t1 ) =
k,1
−3π/2 and rk (t0 ) = |zk (t0 )| ≥ R ek (σ) imply t1 − t0 ≥ 1/σ, which verifies the
assumption (H3 ). Corollary 2 is thus proved.

Acknowledgments. We would like to thank the referees, who made many useful
comments and suggestions for improvements of this paper, in particular for sug-
gesting us improve the proof and comment on the spiral properties of solutions of
coupled Hamiltonian systems with sublinear growth.
 SUBHARMONIC SOLUTIONS OF COUPLED HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS 353

REFERENCES

[1] C. Bereanu and J. Mawhin, Existence and multiplicity results for some nonlinear problems
with singular-Laplacian, J. Differ. Equ., 243 (2007), 536–557.
[2] A. Boscaggin and R. Ortega, Monotone twist maps and periodic solutions of systems of Duffing
type, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 157 (2014), 279–296.
[3] A. Calamai and A. Sfecci, Multiplicity of periodic solutions for systems of weakly coupled
parametrized second order differential equations, Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl., 24 (2017),
1–17.
[4] T. Ding and F. Zanolin, Periodic solutions of Duffing’s equations with superquadratic poten-
tial, J. Differ. Equ., 97 (1992), 328–378.
[5] T. Ding and F. Zanolin, Subharmonic solutions of second order nonlinear equations: A time-
map approach, Nonlinear Anal., 20 (1993), 509–532.
[6] A. Fonda, Positively homogeneous Hamiltonian systems in the plane, J. Differ. Equ., 200
(2004), 162–184.
[7] A. Fonda, M. Garrione and P. Gidoni, Periodic perturbations of Hamiltonian systems, Adv.
Nonlinear Anal., 5 (2016), 367–382.
[8] A. Fonda and P. Gidoni, An avoiding cones condition for the Poincaré-Birkhoff theorem, J.
Differ. Equ., 262 (2017), 1064–1084.
[9] A. Fonda and M. Ramos, Large-amplitude subharmonic oscillations for scalar second-order
differential equations with asymmetric nonlinearities, J. Differ. Equ., 109 (1994), 354–372.
[10] A. Fonda, Z. Schneider and F. Zanolin, Periodic oscillations for a nonlinear suspension bridge
model, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 52 (1994), 113–140.
[11] A. Fonda and A. Sfecci, Multiple periodic solutions of Hamiltonian systems confined in a box,
Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., 37 (2017), 297–301.
[12] A. Fonda and A. Sfecci, Periodic solutions of a system of coupled oscillators with one-sided
superlinear retraction forces, Differ. Integral Equ., 25 (2012), 993–1010.
[13] A. Fonda and A. Sfecci, Periodic solutions of weakly coupled superlinear systems, J. Differ.
Equ., 260 (2016), 2150–2162.
[14] A. Fonda and R. Toader, Periodic solutions of radially symmetric perturbations of Newtonian
systems, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc, 140 (2012), 1331–1341.
[15] A. Fonda and R. Toader, Subharmonic solutions of Hamiltonian systems displaying some kind
of sublinear growth, Adv. Nonlinear Anal., 8 (2019), 583–602.
[16] A. Fonda and A. J. Ureña, A higher dimensional Poincaré-Birkhoff theorem for Hamiltonian
flows, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire, 34 (2017), 679–698.
[17] M. Garcia-Huidobro, R. Manásevich and F. Zanolin, Strongly nonlinear second-order ODEs
with unilateral conditions, Differ. Integral Equ., 8 (1993), 1057–1078.
[18] P. Hartman, On boundary value problems for second order differential equations, J. Differ.
Equ., 26 (1977), 37–53.
[19] H. Jacobowitz, Periodic solutions of x′′ + f (x, t) = 0 via the Poincaré-Birkhoff theorem, J.
Differ. Equ., 20 (1976), 37–52.
[20] J. Mawhin, Resonance problems for some non-autonomous ordinary differential equations, in
Stability and Bifurcation Theory for Non-Autonomous Differential Equations, Lecture Notes
in Mathematics, 2065, Springer Verlag, 2013.
[21] J. Moser and E. Zehnder, Notes on Dynamical Systems, Courant Institute of Mathematical
Sciences, New York University, 2005.
[22] D. Qian, L. Chen and X. Sun, Periodic solutions of superlinear impulsive differential equations:
a geometric approach, J. Differ. Equ., 258 (2015), 3088–3106.
[23] D. Qian and P. J. Torres, Periodic motions of linear impact oscillators via the successor map,
SIAM J. Math. Anal., 36 (2005), 1707–1725.
[24] D. Qian, P. J. Torres and P. Wang, Periodic solutions of second order equations via rotation
numbers, J. Differ. Equ., 266 (2019), 4746–4768.
[25] C. Rebelo and F. Zanolin, Multiplicity results for periodic solutions of second order ODEs
with asymmetric nonlinearities, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 348 (1996), 2349–2389.
[26] X. Sun, Q. Liu, D. Qian and N. Zhao, Infinitely many subharmonic solutions for nonlinear
equations with singular ϕ-Laplacian, Commun. Pure Appl. Anal., 19 (2020), 279–292.

Received April 2021; 1st revision July 2021; 2nd revision September 2021; early
access October 2021.
354 FANFAN CHEN, DINGBIAN QIAN, XIYING SUN AND YINYIN WU

E-mail address: ffanchen@yeah.net

E-mail address: dbqian@suda.edu.cn
E-mail address: sunxiying@suda.edu.cn
E-mail address: wuyy@wxit.edu.cn