Normalized ground states for a fractional Choquard

system in R
arXiv:2307.14356v1 [math.AP] 24 Jul 2023

Wenjing Chen∗† and Zexi Wang

School of Mathematics and Statistics, Southwest University, Chongqing, 400715, P.R. China

Abstract
In this paper, we study the following fractional Choquard system


 (−∆)1/2 u = λ1 u + (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))Fu (u, v), in R,



(−∆)1/2 v = λ2 v + (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))Fv (u, v), in R,

 Z Z

 2 2
 |u| dx = a , |v|2 dx = b2 , u, v ∈ H 1/2 (R),
R R

where (−∆)1/2 denotes the 1/2-Laplacian operator, a, b > 0 are prescribed, λ1 , λ2 ∈ R,

Iµ (x) = |x|1µ with µ ∈ (0, 1), Fu , Fv are partial derivatives of F and Fu , Fv have exponential
critical growth in R. By using a minimax principle and analyzing the monotonicity of
the ground state energy with respect to the prescribed masses, we obtain at least one
normalized ground state solution for the above system.
Keywords: Normalized solutions; Fractional Choquard system; Exponential critical
growth.

1 Introduction
This paper deals with the following system

 (−∆)1/2 u = λ u + (I ∗ F (u, v))F (u, v), in R,
1 µ u
(1.1)
 (−∆)1/2 v = λ v + (I ∗ F (u, v))F (u, v), in R,
2 µ v

with the prescribed masses

Z Z
|u|2dx = a2 , |v|2 dx = b2 , u, v ∈ H 1/2 (R), (1.2)
R R
∗
Corresponding author.
†
E-mail address: wjchen@swu.edu.cn (W. Chen), zxwangmath@163.com (Z. Wang)

1
where (−∆)1/2 denotes the 1/2-Laplacian operator, a, b > 0 are prescribed, λ1 , λ2 ∈ R, Iµ (x) =
1
|x|µ
with µ ∈ (0, 1), Fu , Fv are partial derivatives of F and Fu , Fv have exponential subcritical in
the sense of the Trudinger-Moser inequality, see [24, 40, 46].
The interest in studying problem (1.1)-(1.2) originates from the study of the following nonlocal
elliptic equation
(−∆)s u = λu + (Iµ ∗ F (u))f (u), in RN , (1.3)
where s ∈ (0, 1), Iµ = |x|1µ with µ ∈ (0, N), F (u) is the primitive function of f (u), and (−∆)s is
the fractional Laplacian operator defined by
Z
s u(x) − u(y)
(−∆) u(x) := C(N, s) P.V. N +2s
dy, in RN ,
R N |x − y|
for u ∈ C0∞ (RN ), where P.V. means the Cauchy principal value and C(N, s) is some positive
normalization constant, we refer to [19] for more details. The nonlocal equation (1.3) arises in
many interesting physical situations in quantum theory and plays an important role in describing
the finite-range many-body interactions. Equation (1.3) is well known in the literature as the
Choquard equation and was first introduced by Penrose in [41] to investigate the self-gravitational
collapse of a quantum mechanical wave function.
To get solutions of (1.3), one way is to fix λ ∈ R and look for solutions of (1.3) as critical
points of the energy functional Jˆ : H s (RN ) → R (see e.g. [14, 15, 42, 53])
Z Z
ˆ 1 s/2 2 2 1
J(u) = (|(−∆) u| − λ|u| )dx − (Iµ ∗ F (u))F (u)dx
2 RN 2 RN
with Z Z Z
s/2 2 |u(x) − u(y)|2
|(−∆) u| dx = dxdy,
RN RN RN |x − y|N +2s
where H s (RN ) is a Hilbert space with the inner product and norm respectively
Z Z
s/2 s/2
hu, vi = (−∆) u(−∆) vdx + uvdx,
RN RN
Z Z 1/2
kuk = |(−∆)s/2 u|2 dx + |u|2dx .
RN RN
Another interesting way is to prescribe the L2 -norm of the unknown u, and λ ∈ R appears as
a Lagrange multiplier, that is to consider the following problem

s
(−∆)
Z u = λu + (Iµ ∗ F (u))f (u), in RN ,
(1.4)
 |u|2dx = a2 , u ∈ H s (RN ),
RN

for any fixed a > 0. This type of solutions is called normalized solution, and can be obtained by
looking for critical points of the following energy functional
Z Z
¯ = 1 s/2 2 1
J(u) |(−∆) u| dx − (Iµ ∗ F (u))F (u)dx
2 RN 2 RN

2
on the L2 -sphere Z
n o
s N 2 2
S̄(a) := u ∈ H (R ) : |u| dx = a .
RN

In particular, we are interested in looking for ground state solutions, i.e., solutions minimizing J¯
on S̄(a) among all nontrivial solutions, and the associated energy is called ground state energy.
In recent years, there are many works dedicated to study (1.4), see [1, 7, 9, 13, 25–27, 43, 44, 47]
for s = 1 and µ = 0, [5, 17, 28, 33, 50, 51] for s = 1 and µ ∈ (0, N), [34, 38, 52, 54] for s ∈ (0, 1)
and µ = 0, [10, 23, 30–32, 49] for s ∈ (0, 1) and µ ∈ (0, N). In particular, Jeanjean [25] first
showed that a normalized ground state solution does exist for the following equation when f is
L2 -supercritical growth


 −∆u = λu + f (u), in RN ,
Z (1.5)

 |u|2dx = a2 , u ∈ H 1 (RN ).
RN

By using a minimax principle based on the homotopy stable family, Bartsch and Soave [7]
presented a new approach that is based on a natural constraint and proved the existence of
normalized solutions also in this case. Inspired by [7,25], Soave [43] studied (1.5) with combined
nonlinearities f (u) = ω|u|q−2u + |u|p−2u, ω ∈ R, 2 < q ≤ 2 + N4 ≤ p < 2∗ and q < p, where
2∗ = ∞ if N ≤ 2 and 2∗ = N2N −2
if N ≥ 3. The Sobolev critical case p = 2∗ and N ≥ 3 was
considered by Soave [44]. In the case N = 2 and f has exponential critical growth, the existence
of normalized solutions of (1.5) has been discussed by Alves et al. [1]. Besides, Deng and Yu [17],
Chen et al. [10] studied (1.4) with f having exponential critical growth when s = 1 and s = 12 ,
respectively.
Considering the following system with the mass constraints


 (−∆)s u = λ1 u + (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))Fu(u, v), in RN ,



(−∆)s v = λ2 v + (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))Fv (u, v), in RN , (1.6)
 Z Z



 |u|2dx = a2 , |v|2 dx = b2 , u, v ∈ H s (RN ).
RN RN

This system has an important physical significance in nonlinear optics and Bose-Einstein conden-
sation. The most famous case is that of coupled Gross-Pitaevskii equations in dimension N ≤ 3
with Fu (u, v) = µ1 |u|p−2u + r1τ |v|r2 |u|r1−2 u, Fv (u, v) = µ2 |u|q−2u + r2τ |u|r1 |v|r2−2 v, s = 1, µ = 0,
p = q = 4, r1 = r2 = 2, and µ1 , µ2 , τ > 0, which models Bose-Einstein condensation. The
particular case in R3 was investigated in the companion paper [3], and has been further devel-
oped by many scholars, we refer the readers to [2, 4, 6–8, 11, 12, 18, 22, 29, 37, 55] and references
therein. It is worth pointing out that in [18], Deng and Yu first considered normalized solutions
of (1.6) with general nonlinear terms involving exponential critical growth when N = 2, s = 1
and µ = 0. The authors in [11] also studied (1.6) with exponential critical nonlinearities when
N = 4, s = 2 and µ ∈ (0, 4). In addition, by using the Adams function [36], they gave a more
natural growth condition to estimate the upper bound of the ground state energy.

3
 The study of normalized solutions for (1.6) is a hot topic in nonlinear PDEs nowadays. How-
ever, as far as we know, there are only a few papers dealing with such problems with general
nonlinearities besides the ones already mentioned above [11, 18]. Based on these facts, in this
work, we focus on the existence of normalized ground state solutions of problem (1.1)-(1.2).
More precisely, we assume that F satisfies:
|Fz (z)|
(F1 ) For j = 1, 2, Fzj (z) ∈ C(R × R, R), and lim |z|j κ = 0 for some κ > 2 − µ;
|z|→0
(F2 ) Fzj (z) (j = 1, 2) has exponential critical growth at infinity, i.e.,
(
|Fzj (z)| 0, for any α > π,
lim α|z| 2 =
|z|→+∞ e +∞, for any 0 < α < π;

(F3 ) There exists a constant θ > 3 − µ such that 0 < θF (z) ≤ z · ∇F (z) for all z 6= (0, 0);
(F4 ) For any z ∈ R\{0} × R\{0}, 0 < Fzj (z)zj < (2 − µ)F (z), j = 1, 2;
(F5 ) Fz1 (0, z2 ) 6= 0 for all z2 ∈ R\{0} and Fz2 (z1 , 0) 6= 0 for all z1 ∈ R\{0};
(F6 ) For any z ∈ R\{0} × R\{0}, define Fe(z) := z · ∇F (z) − (2 − µ)F (z), then ∇Fe(z) exists
and

(3 − µ)F (ẑ)Fe(z̃) < F (ẑ)z̃ · ∇Fe(z̃) + Fe(ẑ)(Fe(z̃) − F (z̃)), for any ẑ, z̃ ∈ R\{0} × R\{0};
F (z)[z·∇F (z)]
(F7 ) There exists β0 > 0 such that lim inf e2π|z|
2 ≥ β0 .
|z1 |,|z2 |→+∞
Our main result can be stated as follows:

Theorem 1.1. Assume that F satisfies (F1 )-(F7 ), then problem (1.1)-(1.2) has at least one
ground state solution.

This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 contains some preliminaries. In Section 3, we

give the variational framework of problem (1.1)-(1.2). Section 4 is devoted to estimate the upper
bound of the ground state energy. The monotonicity of the ground state energy with respect to
the masses are studied in Section 5. In Section 6, we use the minimax principle to construct a
bounded (P S) sequence. Finally, in Section 7, we give the proof of Theorem 1.1.
Throughout this paper, we will use the notation k · kq := k · kLq (RN ) , q ∈ [1, ∞], Br (x) := {y ∈
R : |y − x| < r} is the open ball of radius r around x, C, Ci , i ∈ N+ denote positive constants
possibly different from line to line.

2 Preliminaries
In this section, we give some preliminaries.

Proposition 2.1. [35, Theorem 4.3] Let 1 < r, t < ∞ and 0 < µ < N with 1r + 1t + Nµ = 2. If
f ∈ Lr (RN ) and h ∈ Lt (RN ), then there exists a sharp constant C(N, µ, r, t) > 0 such that
Z Z
f (x)h(y)
µ
dxdy ≤ C(N, µ, r, t)kf kr khkt . (2.1)
RN RN |x − y|

4
Lemma 2.1. (The fractional Gagliardo-Nirenberg-Sobolev inequality) [20] Let u ∈ H s (RN ) and
p ∈ [2, N2N
−2s
), then there exists a sharp constant C(N, s, p) > 0 such that
Z Z  N(p−2) Z  p2 − N(p−2)
s 4s 4s
p 2
|u| dx ≤ C(N, s, p) |(−∆) u| dx
2 |u|2 dx . (2.2)
RN RN RN

Lemma 2.2. (Full range Adachi-Tanaka-type on H 1/2 (R)) [46, Theorem 1] It holds that
Z (
1 2 < ∞, α < π,
sup 2
(eα|u| − 1)dx (2.3)
u∈H 1/2 (R)\{0},k(−∆)1/4 uk2 ≤1 kuk2 R = ∞, α ≥ π.

Lemma 2.3. [16, Lemma 2.3] Suppose that a1 , a2 , . . . , ak ≥ 0 with a1 + a2 + · · · + ak < 1, then
there exist p1 , p2 , . . . , pk > 1 satisfying p11 + p12 + · · ·+ p1k = 1 such that pi ai < 1 for i = 1, 2, . . . , k.
Moreover, if a1 , a2 , . . . , ak ≥ 0 satisfying a1 + a2 + · · · + ak = 1, then there exist p1 , p2 , . . . , pk > 1
such that p11 + p12 + · · · + p1k = 1 and pi ai = 1 for i = 1, 2, . . . , k.

3 The variational framework

For the fractional Laplacian operator, the special case when s = 1/2 is called the square of the
Laplacian. We recall the definition of the fractional Sobolev space
n Z Z o
1/2 2 |u(x) − u(y)|2
H (R) = u ∈ L (R) : dxdy < ∞ ,
R R |x − y|2
endowed with the standard norm
1 Z 1/2
2 2
kuk1/2 = [u] + |u| dx ,
2π 1/2 R

where the term  Z Z |u(x) − u(y)|2 1/2

[u]1/2 = dxdy
R R |x − y|2
denotes the Gagliardo semi-norm of a function u. Moreover, by [19, Proposition 3.6], we have
Z Z
1/4 2 1 |u(x) − u(y)|2
k(−∆) uk2 = dxdy, for any u ∈ H 1/2 (R).
2π R R |x − y|2

Let X := H 1/2 (R) × H 1/2 (R) with the norm

1 Z Z 1/2
2 1 2
k(u, v)k := [u]1/2 + [v]1/2 + |u| dx + |v|2 dx
2
.
2π 2π R R

Moreover, for any c > 0, we set

n Z o
1/2
S(c) := u ∈ H (R) : |u|2dx = c2 ,
R

5
and
S := S(a) × S(b).
Problem (1.1)-(1.2) has a variational structure and its associated energy functional J : X → R
is defined by
Z
1 1/4 2 1 1/4 2 1
J (u, v) = k(−∆) uk2 + k(−∆) vk2 − (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))F (u, v)dx.
2 2 2 R
By using assumptions (F1 ) and (F2 ), it follows that for any ζ > 0, q > 1 and α > π, there exists
C > 0 such that
2
|Fz1 (z)|, |Fz2 (z)| ≤ ζ|z|κ + C|z|q−1 (eα|z| − 1), for any z = (z1 , z2 ) ∈ R × R,
and using (F3 ), we have
2
|F (z)| ≤ ζ|z|κ+1 + C|z|q (eα|z| − 1), for any z ∈ R × R. (3.1)
By (2.1) and (3.1), we know J is well defined in X and J ∈ C 1 (X , R) with
hJ ′ (u, v), (ϕ, ψ)i
Z Z Z Z
1 [u(x) − u(y)][ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)] 1 [v(x) − v(y)][ψ(x) − ψ(y)]
= 2
dxdy + dxdy
2π R R |x − y| 2π R R |x − y|2
Z Z
− (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))Fu (u, v)ϕdx − (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))Fv (u, v)φdx,
R R

for any (u, v), (ϕ, ψ) ∈ X . Hence, a critical point of J on S corresponds to a solution of problem
(1.1)-(1.2).
To understand the geometry of J |S , for any β ∈ R and u ∈ H 1/2 (R), we define
β
H(u, β)(x) := e 2 u(eβ x), for a.e. x ∈ R.
One can easily check that kH(u, β)k2 = kuk2 for any β ∈ R. As a consequence, for any (u, v) ∈ S,
it holds that H((u, v), β) := (H(u, β), H(v, β)) ∈ S for any β ∈ R, and H((u, v), β1 + β2 ) =
H(H((u, v), β1), β2 ) = H(H((u, v), β2), β1 ) for any β1 , β2 ∈ R. By Lemma 4.1, we find that J
is unbounded from below on S. It is well known that all critical points of J |S belong to the
Pohoz̆aev manifold (see [11, 15, 39])

P(a, b) = (u, v) ∈ S : P (u, v) = 0 ,
where
Z
P (u, v) = k(−∆) 1/4
uk22 + k(−∆) 1/4
vk22 − (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))Fe(u, v)dx,
R

where Fe(z) = z · ∇F (z) − (2 − µ)F (z). This enlightens us to consider the minimization of J on
P(a, b), i.e.,
m(a, b) = inf J (u, v).
(u,v)∈P(a,b)

6
Our task is to show that m(a, b) is a critical level of J |S . As will be shown in Lemma 4.2,
P(a, b) is nonempty, thus any critical point (u, v) of J |S with J (u, v) = m(a, b) is a ground
state solution of problem (1.1)-(1.2).
With a similar argument of [6, Lemma 3.5], we have the following lemma.

Lemma 3.1. Assume that un → u in H 1/2 (R) and βn → β in R as n → ∞, then H(un , βn ) →

H(u, β) in H 1/2 (R) as n → ∞.

Lemma 3.2. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) hold, let {(un , vn )} ⊂ S be a bounded (P S)ma,b sequence of
J |S , up to a subsequence, if (un , vn ) ⇀ (u, v) in X and
Z
 
(Iµ ∗ F (un , vn )) (un , vn ) · ∇F (un , vn ) dx ≤ K0
R

for some K0 > 0, then for any φ ∈ C0∞ (R), we have

Z Z
(Iµ ∗ F (un , vn ))Fun (un , vn )φdx → (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))Fu(u, v)φdx, as n → ∞,
R R

Z Z
(Iµ ∗ F (un , vn ))Fvn (un , vn )φdx → (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))Fv (u, v)φdx, as n → ∞.
R R

and
Z Z
(Iµ ∗ F (un , vn ))F (un , vn )dx → (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))F (u, v)dx, as n → ∞.
R R

Proof. The proof is similar to the one of [11, Lemma 5.1], so we omit it.

4 The estimation for the upper bound of m(a, b)

In this section, by using the condition (F7 ), we estimate the upper bound of m(a, b).

Lemma 4.1. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) hold. Let (u, v) ∈ S be arbitrary but fixed, then we have
(i) J (H((u, v), β)) → 0+ as β → −∞;
(ii) J (H((u, v), β)) → −∞ as β → +∞.

Proof. (i) By a straightforward calculation, we have

Z Z
2 2
|H(u, β)| dx = a , |H(v, β)|2dx = b2 ,
R R

Z Z Z Z
|H(u, β)(x) − H(u, β)(y)|2 |u(x) − u(y)|2
dxdy = eβ dxdy,
R R |x − y|2 R R |x − y|2

7
 Z Z Z Z
|H(v, β)(x) − H(v, β)(y)|2 |v(x) − v(y)|2
dxdy = eβ dxdy,
R R |x − y|2 R R |x − y|2
and Z Z
(ξ−2)β
ξ
|H(u, β)| dx = e 2 |u|ξ dx, for any ξ > 2.
R R
2


Thus there exist β1 << 0 such that k(−∆) H(u, β)k22 + k(−∆)1/4 H(v, β)k22 < 1 for any
2−µ
1/4

β < β1 . Then using Lemma 2.3 with k = 2, we know, for any a1 + a2 < 1, there exists p1 , p2 > 1
satisfying p11 + p12 = 1 such that p1 a1 < 1, p2 a2 < 1. Hence, there exists p1 , p2 > 1 satisfying
1
p1
+ p12 = 1 such that
2p1 2p2
k(−∆)1/4 H(u, β)k22 < 1, k(−∆)1/4 H(v, β)k22 < 1, for any β < β1 .
2−µ 2−µ
Fix α > π close to π and ν > 1 close to 1 such that
2p1 αν 2p2 αν
k(−∆)1/4 H(u, β)k22 < π, k(−∆)1/4 H(v, β)k22 < π, for any β < β1 .
2−µ 2−µ
1 1
Then, for ν
+ ν′
= 1, using (2.1), (2.3), (3.1), the Hölder and Young’s inequality, we have
Z


Iµ ∗ F (H((u, v), β)) F (H((u, v), β))dx ≤ kF (H((u, v), β))k2 2
2−µ
R
hZ  2  2 i2−µ
2(κ+1)
≤ζkH((u, v), β)k 2(κ+1) + C (eα|H((u,v),β)| − 1)|H((u, v), β)|q 2−µ dx
2−µ R
hZ 2αν
i 2−µ
2(κ+1) |H((u,v),β)|2 ν
≤ζkH((u, v), β)k 2(κ+1) + C (e 2−µ − 1)dx kH((u, v), β)k2q
2qν ′
2−µ R 2−µ
2(κ+1)
≤ζkH((u, v), β)k 2(κ+1)
2−µ
h 1 Z 2p1 αν 2 1
Z
2p2 αν 2
i 2−µ
ν
+C (e 2−µ |H(u,β)|
− 1)dx + (e 2−µ |H(v,β)| − 1)dx kH((u, v), β)k2q
2qν ′
p1 R p2 R 2−µ
2(κ+1)
≤CkH((u, v), β)k 2(κ+1) + CkH((u, v), β)k2q
2qν ′
2−µ 2−µ
 2(κ+1) 2(κ+1) 2−µ (qν ′ +µ−2)β
 2qν ′ 2qν ′  2−µ
′
ν
=Ce(κ+µ−1)β kuk 2−µ
2(κ+1) + kvk 2−µ
2(κ+1) + Ce ν′
2−µ
kuk 2qν 2−µ
′ + kvk 2qν ′ , (4.1)
2−µ 2−µ 2−µ 2−µ

for any β < β1 . Since κ > 2 − µ, q > 1 and ν ′ large enough, it follows that
1
 2(κ+1) 2(κ+1) 2−µ

J (H((u, v), β)) ≥ eβ k(−∆)1/4 uk22 + k(−∆)1/4 vk22 − Ce(κ+µ−1)β kuk 2(κ+1) 2−µ 2−µ
+ kvk 2(κ+1)
2 2−µ 2−µ

(qν ′ +µ−2)β
 2qν ′ 2qν ′  2−µ
′
ν
− Ce ν ′ 2−µ
kuk 2qν 2−µ
′ + kvk 2qν ′ → 0+ , as β → −∞.
2−µ 2−µ

(ii) For any fixed β >> 0, set

Z
1
W(t) := (Iµ ∗ F (tu, tv))F (tu, tv)dx, for any t > 0.
2 R

8
Using (F3 ), one has
dW(t)
dt 2θ
> , for any t > 0.
W(t) t
β
Thus, integrating this over [1, e 2 ], we get
Z Z
β β β β
θβ
(Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v))F (e 2 u, e 2 v)dx ≥ e (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))F (u, v)dx. (4.2)
R R

Hence,
Z
1
1
J (H((u, v), β)) ≤ eβ k(−∆)1/4 uk22 + k(−∆)1/4 vk22 − e(θ+µ−2)β (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))F (u, v)dx.
2 2 R

Since θ > 3 − µ, the above inequality yields that J (H((u, v), β)) → −∞ as β → +∞.
Lemma 4.2. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) and (F6 ) hold. Then for any fixed (u, v) ∈ S, the function
J (H((u, v), β)) reaches its unique maximum with positive level at a unique point β(u,v) ∈ R such
that H((u, v), β(u,v) ) ∈ P(a, b). Moreover, the mapping (u, v) → β(u,v) is continuous in (u, v) ∈ S.
Proof. From Lemma 4.1, there exists β(u,v) ∈ R such that

1 d
P (H((u, v), β(u,v))) = J (H((u, v), β))|β=β(u,v) = 0
2 dβ
and J (H((u, v), β(u,v))) > 0. Next, we prove the uniqueness of β(u,v) . For (u, v) ∈ S and β ∈ R,
we know
1

J (H((u, v), β)) = eβ k(−∆)1/4 uk22 + k(−∆)1/4 vk22
2 Z
1 (µ−2)β β β β β
− e (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v))F (e 2 u, e 2 v)dx.
2 R

Then taking into account that P (H((u, v), β(u,v))) = 0, using (F6 ), we have

d2
J (H((u, v), β))|β=β(u,v)
dβ 2
1

= eβ k(−∆)1/4 uk22 + k(−∆)1/4 vk22
2 Z
(2 − µ)2 (µ−2)β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v)
− e (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v))F (e 2 u, e 2 v)dx
2 R
Z
7 β(u,v) β(u,v)
+ ( − µ)eβ(u,v) (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v))
4 R
 β β(u,v)

β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) 
(u,v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) 
× e 2 u, e 2 v · β(u,v) , β(u,v) dx
∂(e 2 u) ∂(e 2 v)

9
 Z   β β(u,v)

β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) 
1 (u,v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) 
− e(µ−2)β(u,v) Iµ ∗ e 2 u, e 2 v · β(u,v) , β(u,v)
4 R ∂(e 2 u) ∂(e 2 v)
 β β(u,v)

β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) 
(u,v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) 
× e 2 u, e 2 v · β(u,v) , β(u,v) dx
∂(e 2 u) ∂(e 2 v)
Z  β(u,v) β(u,v)
1 (µ−2)β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v)
2 ∂ 2 F (e 2 u, e 2 v)
− e (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v)) (e 2 u) β(u,v)
4 R ∂(e 2 u)2
β(u,v) β(u,v) 
β(u,v)
2 ∂ 2 F (e 2 u, e 2 v)
+ (e 2 v) β(u,v) dx
∂(e 2 v) 2
Z
(2 − µ)(3 − µ) (µ−2)β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v)
=− e (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v))F (e 2 u, e 2 v)dx
2 R
Z
9 β(u,v)
β(u,v) β(u,v)
+ ( − µ)e (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v))
4 R
 β β(u,v)

β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) 
(u,v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) 
× e 2 u, e 2 v · β(u,v) , β(u,v) dx
∂(e 2 u) ∂(e 2 v)
Z   β β(u,v)

β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) 
1 (µ−2)β(u,v) (u,v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) 
− e Iµ ∗ e 2 u, e 2 v · β(u,v) , β(u,v)
4 R ∂(e 2 u) ∂(e 2 v)
 β β(u,v)

β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) 
(u,v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) 
× e 2 u, e 2 v · β(u,v) , β(u,v) dx
∂(e 2 u) ∂(e 2 v)
Z  β 2
β(u,v) β(u,v)
1 (µ−2)β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) (u,v) ∂ F (e 2 u, e 2 v)
− e (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v)) (e 2 u)2 β(u,v)
4 R ∂(e 2 u)2
2
β(u,v) β(u,v) 
β(u,v)
2 ∂ F (e 2 u, e 2 v)
+ (e 2 v) β(u,v) dx
∂(e 2 v)2
Z Z
1 G
=: dxdy < 0,
4 R R |x − y|µ
this prove the uniqueness of β(u,v) (u,v) , where

G =(3 − µ)F (H((u(y), v(y)), β(u(y),v(y)) ))Fe(H((u(x), v(x)), β(u(x),v(x)) ))


− F (H((u(y), v(y)), β(u(y),v(y)) )) × H((u(x), v(x)), β(u(x),v(x)) )
 ∂ Fe(H((u(x), v(x)), β e 
(u(x),v(x)) )) ∂ F (H((u(x), v(x)), β(u(x),v(x)) ))
· ,
∂(H(u(x), β(u(x),v(x)) )) ∂(H(v(x), β(u(x),v(x)) ))
− Fe(H((u(y), v(y)), β(u(y),v(y)) ))

10
 × [Fe(H((u(x), v(x)), β(u(x),v(x)) )) − F (H((u(x), v(x)), β(u(x),v(x)) ))].

From the above arguments, we know the mapping (u, v) → β(u,v) is well defined. Let
{(un , vn )} ⊂ S be a sequence such that (un , vn ) → (u, v) 6= (0, 0) in X as n → ∞. We
only need to prove that, up to a subsequence, β(un ,vn ) → β(u,v) in R as n → ∞.
On the one hand, if up to a subsequence, β(un ,vn ) → +∞ as n → ∞, then by (4.2) and
(u, v) 6= (0, 0), we have

0 ≤ lim e−β(un ,vn ) J (H((un , vn ), β(un ,vn ) ))

n→∞
Z
1h 1/4 2 1/4 2 (θ+µ−3)β(un ,vn )
i
≤ lim k(−∆) un k2 + k(−∆) vn k2 − e (Iµ ∗ F (un , vn ))F (un , vn )dx = −∞,
n→∞ 2 R

which is a contradiction. Hence, {β(un ,vn ) } is bounded from above.

On the other hand, by Lemma 3.1, we know H((un , vn ), β(u,v) ) → H((u, v), β(u,v) ) in X as
n → ∞. Then

J (H((un , vn ), β(un ,vn ) )) ≥ J (H((un , vn ), β(u,v) )) = J (H((u, v), β(u,v) )) + on (1),

and thus

lim inf J (H((un , vn ), β(un ,vn ) )) ≥ J (H((u, v), β(u,v) )) > 0.

n→∞

If up to a subsequence, β(un ,vn ) → −∞ as n → ∞, using (F3 ), we get

1

J (H((un , vn ), β(un ,vn ) )) ≤ eβ(un ,vn ) k(−∆)1/4 un k22 + k(−∆)1/4 vn k22 → 0, as n → ∞,
2
which is impossible. So we get β(un ,vn ) is bounded from below. Up to a subsequence, we assume
that β(un ,vn ) → β0 as n → ∞. Since (un , vn ) → (u, v) in X , then H((un , vn ), β(un ,vn ) ) →
H((u, v), β0) in X as n → ∞. Moreover, by P (H((un , vn ), β(un ,vn ) )) = 0, it follows that
P (H((u, v), β0)) = 0. By the uniqueness of β(u,v) , we get β(u,v) = β0 and the conclusion fol-
lows.

Lemma 4.3. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) hold, then there exists γ > 0 small enough such that
1
1

J (u, v) ≥ k(−∆)1/4 uk22 + k(−∆)1/4 vk22 and P (u, v) ≥ k(−∆)1/4 uk22 + k(−∆)1/4 vk22
4 2
for (u, v) ∈ S satisfying k(−∆)1/4 uk22 + k(−∆)1/4 vk22 ≤ γ.


Proof. If γ < 2−µ
2
, then 2
2−µ
k(−∆) 1/4
uk 2
2 + k(−∆) 1/4
vk 2
2 < 1. From (2.2) and (4.1), we obtain
Z


Iµ ∗ F (u, v) F (u, v)dx
R
 2(κ+1) 2(κ+1) 2−µ  2qν ′ 2qν ′  2−µ
2−µ 2−µ 2−µ 2−µ ν′
≤C kuk 2(κ+1) + kvk 2(κ+1) + C kuk 2qν ′ + kvk 2qν ′
2−µ 2−µ 2−µ 2−µ

11
  2(κ+µ−1) 2(κ+µ−1) 2−µ

≤C a2 k(−∆)1/4 uk2 2−µ + b2 k(−∆)1/4 vk2 2−µ

 2(qν ′ +µ−2) 2(qν ′ +µ−2)  2−µ
2 1/4 2−µ 2 1/4 ν′
+ C a k(−∆) uk2 + b k(−∆) vk2 2−µ
2(κ+µ−1) 2(κ+µ−1)

≤C k(−∆)1/4 uk2 + k(−∆)1/4 vk2
2(qν ′ +µ−2) 2(qν ′ +µ−2)

1/4 ν′ 1/4
+ C k(−∆) uk2 + k(−∆) vk2 ν ′
µ−2
µ−2

≤C γ κ+µ−2 + γ q−1+ ν ′ k(−∆)1/4 uk22 + C γ κ+µ−2 + γ q−1+ ν ′ k(−∆)1/4 vk22 .
ν 2−µ
Since κ > 2 − µ, q > 1 and ν ′ = ν−1
large enough, choosing 0 < γ < 2
small enough, we
conclude the result.

Lemma 4.4. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) and (F6 ) hold, then we have


inf k(−∆)1/4 uk2 + k(−∆)1/4 vk2 > 0 and m(a, b) > 0.
(u,v)∈P(a,b)

Proof. By Lemma 4.2, we know P(a, b) is nonempty. Supposed that there exists a sequence
{(un , vn )} ⊂ P(a, b) such that k(−∆)1/4 un k2 + k(−∆)1/4 vn k2 → 0 as n → ∞, then by Lemma
4.3, up to subsequence,
1

0 = P (un , vn ) ≥ k(−∆)1/4 un k22 + k(−∆)1/4 vn k22 ≥ 0,
2
which implies that k(−∆)1/4 un k22 = k(−∆)1/4 vn k22 = 0 for any n ∈ N+ . By (F3 ) and P (un , vn ) =
0, we have
Z Z
 
0 =(2 − µ) (Iµ ∗ F (un , vn ))F (un , vn )dx − (Iµ ∗ F (un , vn )) (un , vn ) · ∇F (un , vn ) dx
R Z R
2−µ
 
≤ −1 (Iµ ∗ F (un , vn )) (un , vn ) · ∇F (un , vn ) dx ≤ 0.
θ R

So un , vn → 0 a.e. in R, which contradicts a, b > 0.

From Lemma 4.2, we know that for any (u, v) ∈ P(a, b),

J (u, v) = J (H((u, v), 0)) ≥ J (H((u, v), β)), for any β ∈ R.

γ
Let γ > 0 be the number given by Lemma 4.3 and eβ = k(−∆)1/4 uk22 +k(−∆)1/4 vk22
, then

k(−∆)1/4 H(u, β)k22 + k(−∆)1/4 H(v, β)k22 = γ.

Applying Lemma 4.3 again, we deduce that

1
γ
J (u, v) ≥ J (H((u, v), β)) ≥ k(−∆)1/4 H(u, β)k22 + k(−∆)1/4 H(v, β)k22 = > 0.
4 4
This completes the proof.

12
 In order to estimate the upper bound of m(a, b), let us consider the following sequence of
nonnegative functions (see [46]) supported in B1 (0) given by
√

 log n, for |x| < n1 ,
1  1
log
̟n (x) = √ √ |x| , for n1 ≤ |x| ≤ 1,
π log n
0, for |x| > 1.

One can check that ̟n ∈ H 1/2 (R). A direct calculation shows that

k(−∆)1/4 ̟n k22 = 1 + o(1),

Z 1 Z −1 Z 1
log n
n n (log |x|)2 (log |x|)2
δn := k̟n k22 = dx + dx + dx
−n1 π −1 π log n 1
n
π log n
4 1 1 1 4 1
= ( − − )= + o( ).
π log n n log n n π log n log n
c̟n
For any c > 0, let ωnc := k̟n k2
, then ωnc ∈ S(c) and

log n(1 + o(1)), for |x| < n1 ,
c c 1
ωn (x) = log |x| (1 + o(1)), for n1 ≤ |x| ≤ 1, (4.3)
2

0, for |x| > 1.

Furthermore, we have
Z Z  √c ̟ (x) − 2
√c ̟n (y)
δn n δn
k(−∆)1/4 ωnc k22 = dxdy
R R |x − y|2
2
c πc2 log n
= k(−∆)1/4 ̟n k22 = (1 + o(1)). (4.4)
δn 4
For any t > 0, let
t2

Φn (t) :=J (tωna (t2 x), tωnb (t2 x)) = k(−∆)1/4 ωna k22 + k(−∆)1/4 ωnb k22
Z 2
1 2(µ−2)
− t (Iµ ∗ F (tωna , tωnb ))F (tωna , tωnb )dx.
2 R

From Lemmas 4.2 and 4.4, we infer that m(a, b) = inf max J (H((u, v), β)) > 0, this together
(u,v)∈S β∈R
with (ωna , ωnb ) ∈ S yields that

m(a, b) ≤ max J (H((ωna , ωnb ), β)) = max Φn (t).

β∈R t>0

Lemma 4.5. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) hold, then for any fixed n ∈ N+ , max Φn (t) > 0 is attained
t≥0
at some tn > 0.

13
 1 1
Proof. For any fixed p1 , p2 > 1 satisfying p1
+ p2
= 1, as t > 0 small enough, one can fix α > π
close to π and ν > 1 close to 1 such that
2p1 αν 2p2 αν
k(−∆)1/4 (tωna )k22 < π, k(−∆)1/4 (tωnb )k22 < π.
2−µ 2−µ
ν
Arguing as (4.1), by (2.3), for ν ′ = ν−1 , we have
Z
2(µ−2)
t (Iµ ∗ F (tωna , tωnb ))F (tωna , tωnb )dx
R
 2(κ+1) 2(κ+1) 2−µ
2(2−µ)
 2qν ′ 2qν ′  2−µ
2(µ−2) a 2−µ b 2−µ 2(µ−2) a 2−µ b 2−µ ν′
≤Ct ktωn k 2(κ+1) + ktωn k 2(κ+1) + Ct t ν ktωn k 2qν ′ + ktωn k 2qν ′
2−µ 2−µ 2−µ 2−µ
 2(κ+1) 2(κ+1) 2−µ 2(2−µ)
 2qν ′ 2qν ′  2−µ
′
2(κ+µ−1) ν
=Ct kωna k 2−µ
2(κ+1) + kωnb k 2−µ
2(κ+1) + Ct 2(q+µ−2)+ ν kωna k 2−µ
2qν ′ + kωnb k 2qν
2−µ
′ .
2−µ 2−µ 2−µ 2−µ

Since κ > 2 − µ, q > 1, and ν close to 1, we have Φn (t) > 0 for t > 0 small enough. For t > 0
large, by (4.2), we obtain
Z Z
2(µ−2) a b a b 2(θ+µ−2)
t (Iµ ∗ F (tωn , tωn ))F (tωn , tωn )dx ≥ t (Iµ ∗ F (ωna , ωnb ))F (ωna , ωnb )dx.
R R

Since θ > 3 − µ, we obtain Φn (t) < 0 for t > 0 large enough. Thus max Φn (t) > 0 is attained at
t≥0
some tn > 0.
Lemma 4.6. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) and (F7 ) hold, then there exists n ∈ N+ large such that
2−µ
max Φn (t) < .
t≥0 4
Proof. First, we have the following estimation
Z 1 Z 1
n n dxdy 23−µ 1 1
µ
= ( )2−µ =: Cµ ( )2−µ .
1
−n 1
−n |x − y| (1 − µ)(2 − µ) n n

By Lemma 4.5, we know max Φn (t) is attained at some tn > 0. So tn satisfies

t≥0

d 

Φn (t) = 0.
dt t=tn

By (F3 ), we have


t2n k(−∆)1/4 ωna k22 + k(−∆)1/4 ωnb k22
Z
2(µ−2)
=(µ − 2)tn (Iµ ∗ F (tn ωna , tn ωnb ))F (tn ωna , tn ωnb )dx
R
Z  ∂F (t ω a , t ω b ) 
n n n n ∂F (tn ωna , tn ωnb )
+ tn2(µ−2) (Iµ ∗ F (tn ωna , tn ωnb )) t ω
n n
a
+ t b
n n dx
ω
R ∂(tn ωna ) ∂(tn ωnb )

14
 Z  ∂F (t ω a , t ω b ) 
θ + µ − 2 2(µ−2) n n n n ∂F (tn ωna , tn ωnb )
≥ tn (Iµ ∗ F (tn ωna , tn ωnb )) t ω
n n
a
+ t b
n n dx.
ω
θ R ∂(tn ωna ) ∂(tn ωnb )
(4.5)
By (F7 ), for any ε > 0. there exists Rε > 0 such that for any |z1 |, |z2 | ≥ Rε ,
2
F (z)[z · ∇F (z)] ≥ (β0 − ε)e2π|z| . (4.6)
Case 1. If lim t2n log n = 0, then lim tn = 0. By (4.4), we have
n→∞ n→∞

t2n

k(−∆)1/4 ωna k22 + k(−∆)1/4 ωnb k22 → 0, as n → ∞.
2
Note that F (tn ωna , tn ωnb ) > 0 by (F3 ), so we have
t2n

Φn (tn ) ≤ k(−∆)1/4 ωna k22 + k(−∆)1/4 ωnb k22 ,
2
which implies that lim Φn (tn ) = 0, and we conclude.
n→+∞
Case 2. If lim t2n log n = l ∈ (0, +∞]. From (4.3)-(4.6), we have
n→∞
 π(a2 + b2 ) log n 
t2n (1 + o(1))
4 Z Z
θ + µ − 2 2(µ−2) K
≥ tn dxdy
θ B 1 (0) B 1 (0) |x − y|µ
n n
2 Z 1 Z 1
(θ + µ − 2)(β0 − ε) 2(µ−2) π(a2 +b2 )t2n log2 n(1+o(1)) dxdy n n
≥ tn e 2
θ 1 1 |x − y|µ
−n −n


Cµ (θ + µ − 2)(β0 − ε)2 2(µ−2) π(a2 +b2 )t2n log n(1+o(1)))
−(2−µ) log n
= tn e 2 ,
θ
where
 ∂F (t ω a (x), t ω b (x)) ∂F (tn ωna (x), tn ωnb (x)) 
n n n n
K := F (tn ωna (y), tn ωnb (y)) tn ω a
n (x) + tn ω b
n (x) .
∂(tn ωna (x)) ∂(tn ωnb (x))
(i) If l = +∞, we get a contradiction from the inequality above. So l ∈ (0, +∞) and lim tn =
n→∞
2(2−µ)

0. In particular, using the inequality above again and letting n → +∞, we have l ∈ 0, π(a2 +b2 ) .
2(2−µ)

(ii) If l ∈ 0, π(a2 +b2 ) , then by (4.4), we get

1
π(a2 + b2 )l 2−µ
lim Φn (tn ) ≤ lim t2n k(−∆)1/4 ωna k22 + k(−∆)1/4 ωnb k22 = < .
n→∞ 2 n→∞ 8 4
2(2−µ)
(iii) If l = π(a2 +b2 )
, by the definition of ωna and ωnb , we can find that

π(a2 + b2 )t2n log n(1 + o(1))

Qn := − (2 − µ) → 0+ , as n → ∞.
2
15
Using the Taylor’s formula, we have

Q2n log2 n
nQn = 1 + Qn log n + + · · · ≥ 1.
2
Thus
π(a2 + b2 )t2n log n Cµ (θ + µ − 2)(β0 − ε)2 2(µ−2)
≥ tn ,
4 θ
letting n → +∞, we get a contradiction. This ends the proof.

5 The monotonicity of a 7→ m(a, b) and b 7→ m(a, b)

To guarantee the weak limit of a (P S)m(a,b) sequence is a ground state solution of problem
(1.1)-(1.2), in this section, we investigate the monotonicity of the functions a 7→ m(a, b) and
b 7→ m(a, b).

Lemma 5.1. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) and (F6 ) hold, then the functions a 7→ m(a, b) and b 7→
m(a, b) are non-increasing on (0, +∞).

Proof. For any given a, b > 0, if â > a and b̂ > b, we prove that m(â, b) ≤ m(a, b) and
m(a, b̂) ≤ m(a, b). By the definition of m(a, b), for any δ > 0, there exists (u, v) ∈ P(a, b) such
that
δ
J (u, v) ≤ m(a, b) + . (5.1)
3
Consider a cut-off function ̺ ∈ C0∞ (R, [0, 1]) such that ̺(x) = 1 if |x| ≤ 1 and ̺(x) = 0 if |x| ≥ 2.
For any ε > 0 small, define

uε (x) := ̺(εx)u(x) ∈ H 1/2 (R)\{0},

then (uε , v) → (u, v) in X as ε → 0+ . From Lemmas 3.1 and 4.2, we have β(uε ,v) → β(u,v) = 0
in R and H((uε , v), β(uε,v) ) → H((u, v), β(u,v) ) = (u, v) in X as ε → 0+ . Fix ε0 > 0 small enough
such that
δ
J (H((uε0 , v), β(uε0 ,v) )) ≤ J (u, v) + . (5.2)
3
Let v ∈ C0∞ (R) satisfy supp(v) ⊂ B1+ 4 (0)\B 4 (0), and set
ε0 ε0

â2 − kuε0 k22

vε0 = v.
kvk22
2
Define sh := uε0 + H(vε0 , h) for any h < 0. Since dist(uε0 , H(vε0 , h)) ≥ ε0
> 0, we obtain
ksh k22 = â2 , i.e., (sh , v) ∈ S(â) × S(b).

16
 We claim that β(sh ,v) is bounded from above as h → −∞. Otherwise, by (F3 ), (4.2) and
(sh , v) → (uε0 , v) 6= (0, 0) a.e. in R as h → −∞, one has

0 ≤ lim e−β(sh ,v) J (H((sh , v), β(sh ,v) ))

n→∞
Z
1h 1/4 2 1/4 2 (θ+µ−3)β(sh ,v)
i
≤ lim k(−∆) sh k2 + k(−∆) vk2 − e (Iµ ∗ F (sh , v))F (sh , v)dx = −∞,
n→∞ 2 R

which leads to a contradiction. Thus β(sh ,v) + h → −∞ as h → −∞, by (F3 ), we get

eβ(sh ,v) +h
J (H((vε0 , 0), β(sh,v) + h)) ≤ k(−∆)1/4 vε0 k22 → 0, as h → −∞. (5.3)
2
We deduce from Lemma 4.2 and (5.1)-(5.3) that

m(â, b) ≤ J (H((sh , v), β(sh,v) )) =J (H((uε0 , v), β(sh ,v) )) + J (H(H((vε0 , 0), h), β(sh,v) ))
=J (H((uε0 , v), β(sh ,v) )) + J (H((vε0 , 0), β(sh ,v) + h))
≤J (H((uε0 , v), β(uε0 ,v) )) + J (H((vε0 , 0), β(sh,v) + h))
≤m(a, b) + δ.

By the arbitrariness of δ > 0, we deduce that m(â, b) ≤ m(a, b) for any â > a. Similarly, we can
prove m(a, b̂) ≤ m(a, b).

Lemma 5.2. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) and (F6 ) hold. Suppose that (1.1) possesses a ground state
solution with λ1 , λ2 < 0, then m(a∗ , b) < m(a, b) for any a∗ > a close to a, and m(a, b∗ ) < m(a, b)
for any b∗ > b close to b.

Proof. For any t > 0 and β ∈ R, one has H((tu, v), β) ∈ S(ta) × S(b) and

eβ 2

J (H((tu, v), β)) = t k(−∆)1/4 uk22 + k(−∆)1/4 vk22
2
Z
e(µ−2)β β β β β
− (Iµ ∗ F (te 2 u, e 2 v))F (te 2 u, e 2 v)dx.
2 R

Then
Z β β
∂J (H((tu, v), β)) β β ∂F (te 2 u, e 2 v) β M
= teβ k(−∆)1/4 uk22 − e(µ−2)β (Iµ ∗ F (te u, e v))
2 2
β e 2 udx =: ,
∂t R ∂(te u)2 t

where

M =hJ ′ (H((tu, v), β)), H((tu, v), β)i − eβ k(−∆)1/4 vk22

Z β β
(µ−2)β β β ∂F (te 2 u, e 2 v) β
+e (Iµ ∗ F (te 2 u, e 2 v)) β e 2 vdx
R ∂(e 2 v)

17
For convenience, we denote τ (t, β) := J (H((tu, v), β)). By Lemma 3.1, H((tu, v), β) → (u, v) in
X as (t, β) → (1, 0). Since λ1 < 0, we have
Z
hJ (u, v), (u, v)i − k(−∆) vk2 + (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))Fv (u, v)vdx = λ1 kuk22 = λ1 a2 < 0.
′ 1/4 2
R

Hence, for δ > 0 small enough, one has

∂τ (t, β)
< 0, for any (t, β) ∈ (1, 1 + δ] × [−δ, δ].
∂t
For any t ∈ (1, 1 + δ] and β ∈ [−δ, δ], using the mean value theorem, we obtain
∂τ (t, β) 
τ (t, β) = τ (1, β) + (t − 1) ·  < τ (1, β).
∂t t=ξ

for some ξ ∈ (1, t). By Lemma 4.2, β(tu,v) → β(u,v) = 0 in R as t → 1+ . For any a∗ > a close to
∗
a, let t̂ = aa , then t̂ ∈ (1, 1 + δ] and β(t̂u,v) ∈ [−δ, δ]. Applying Lemma 4.2 again, we have

m(a∗ , b) ≤ τ (t̂, β(t̂u,v) ) < τ (1, β(t̂u,v) ) = J (H((u, v), β(t̂u,v ))) ≤ J (u, v) = m(a, b).

Analogously, we can prove that m(a, b∗ ) < m(a, b) for any b∗ > b close to b.
From Lemmas 5.1 and 5.2, we immediately have the following result.
Lemma 5.3. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) and (F6 ) hold. Suppose that (1.1) possesses a ground state
solution with λ1 , λ2 < 0, then a 7→ m(a, b) and b 7→ m(a, b) are decreasing on (0, +∞).

6 Palais-Smale sequence
In this section, using the minimax principle based on the homotopy stable family of compact
subsets of S (see [21] for more details), we construct a (P S)m(a,b) sequence on P(a, b) for J |S .
Proposition 6.1. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) and (F6 ) hold, then there exists a (P S)m(a,b) sequence
{(un , vn )} ⊂ P(a, b) for J |S .
Following by [48], we recall that the tangent space of S at (u, v) is defined by
n Z o
T(u,v) := (ϕ, ψ) ∈ X : (uϕ + vψ)dx = 0 .
R

To prove Proposition 6.1, we borrow some arguments from [6, 7] and consider the functional
I : S → R defined by

I(u, v) = J (H((u, v), β(u,v) )),

where β(u,v) ∈ R is the unique number obtained in Lemma 4.2 for any (u, v) ∈ S. By Lemma
4.2, we know that β(u,v) is continuous as a mapping for any (u, v) ∈ S. However, it remains
unknown that whether β(u,v) is of class C 1 . Inspired by [45, Proposition 2.9], we have

18
Lemma 6.1. Assume that (F1 ) − (F3 ) and (F6 ) hold, then the functional I : S → R is of class
C 1 and
hI ′ (u, v), (ϕ, ψ)i
Z Z Z Z
eβ(u,v) |u(x) − u(y)||ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)| eβ(u,v) |v(x) − v(y)||ψ(x) − ψ(y)|
= 2
dxdy + dxdy
2π R R |x − y| 2π R R |x − y|2
Z β(u,v) β(u,v)
− e(µ−2)β(u,v) (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v))
R
 β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) 
β(u,v) β(u,v)
 ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) 
× e 2 ϕ, e 2 ψ β(u,v) , β(u,v)
∂(e 2 u) ∂(e 2 v)
′
=hJ (H((u, v), β(u,v) )), H((ϕ, ψ), β(ϕ,ψ) )i
for any (u, v) ∈ S and (ϕ, ψ) ∈ T(u,v) .
Proof. Let (u, v) ∈ S and (ϕ, ψ) ∈ T(u,v) , for any |t| small enough, by Lemma 4.2,
I(u + tϕ, v + tψ) − I(u, v)
=J (H((u + tϕ, v + tψ), s(u+tϕ,v+tψ) )) − J (H((u, v), s(u,v)))
≤J (H((u + tϕ, v + tψ), s(u+tϕ,v+tψ) )) − J (H((u, v), s(u+tϕ,v+tψ) ))
1 h i
= eβ(u+tϕ,v+tψ) k(−∆)1/4 (u + tϕ)k22 − k(−∆)1/4 uk22 + k(−∆)1/4 (v + tψ)k22 − k(−∆)1/4 vk22
2 Z
1 (µ−2)β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) h β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) β(u+tϕ,v+tψ)
− e (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 (u + tϕ), e 2 (v + tψ)))
2 R
β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) β(u+tϕ,v+tψ)
× F (e 2 (u + tϕ), e 2 (v + tψ))
β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) i
− (Iµ ∗ F (e u, e 2 v))F (e 2 u, e 2 2 v) dx
eβ(u+tϕ,v+tψ) h 2
= t k(−∆)1/4 ϕk22 + t2 k(−∆)1/4 ψk22
2Z Z Z Z
2t |u(x) − u(y)||ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)| 2t |v(x) − v(y)||ψ(x) − ψ(y)| i
+ dxdy + dxdy
2π R R |x − y|2 2π R R |x − y|2
Z
e(µ−2)β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) β(u+tϕ,v+tψ)
− (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 (u + tϕ), e 2 (v + tψ)))
2 R
h β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) β(u+tϕ,v+tψ)

i
× e 2 tϕ, e 2 tψ · Fz1 | β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) , Fz2 | β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) dx
z1 =e 2 (u+ξt tϕ) z2 =e 2 (v+ξt tψ)
Z
e(µ−2)s(u+tϕ,v+tψ) β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) β(u+tϕ,v+tψ)
− (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v))
2 R
h β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) β(u+tϕ,v+tψ)

i
× e 2 tϕ, e 2 tψ · Fz1 | β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) , Fz2 | β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) dx,
z1 =e 2 (u+ξt tϕ) z2 =e 2 (v+ξt tψ)

where ξt ∈ (0, 1). On the other hand,

I(u + tϕ, v + tψ) − I(u, v)

19
 ≥J (H((u + tϕ, v + tψ), s(u,v) )) − J (H((u, v), s(u,v) ))
eβ(u,v) h 2
≥ t k(−∆)1/4 ϕk22 + t2 k(−∆)1/4 ψk22
2 Z Z Z Z
2t |u(x) − u(y)||ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)| 2t |v(x) − v(y)||ψ(x) − ψ(y)| i
+ dxdy + dxdy
2π R R |x − y|2 2π R R |x − y|2
Z
e(µ−2)β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v)
− (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 (u + tϕ), e 2 (v + tψ)))
2 R
h β(u,v) β(u,v)

i
× e 2 tϕ, e 2 tψ · Fz1 | β(u,v) , Fz2 | β(u,v) dx
z1 =e 2 (u+ξt tϕ) z2 =e 2 (v+ξt tψ)
Z
e(µ−2)s(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v)
− (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v))
2 R
h β(u,v) β(u,v)

i
× e 2 tϕ, e 2 tψ · Fz1 | β(u,v) , Fz2 | β(u,v) dx,
z1 =e 2 (u+ξt tϕ) z2 =e 2 (v+ξt tψ)

where ζt ∈ (0, 1). By Lemma 4.2, lim β(u+tϕ,v+tψ) = β(u,v) , from the above inequalities, we
t→0
conclude
I(u + tϕ, v + tψ) − I(u, v)
lim
t→0 t
β(u,v) Z Z Z Z
e |u(x) − u(y)||ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)| eβ(u,v) |v(x) − v(y)||ψ(x) − ψ(y)|
= 2
dxdy + dxdy
2π R R |x − y| 2π R R |x − y|2
Z β(u,v) β(u,v)
(µ−2)β(u,v)
−e (Iµ ∗ F (e 2 u, e 2 v))
R
 β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) β(u,v) 
β(u,v) β(u,v)
 ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) ∂F (e 2 u, e 2 v) 
× e 2 ϕ, e 2 ψ β(u,v) , β(u,v) .
∂(e 2 u) ∂(e 2 v)
Using Lemma 4.2 again, we find that the Gâteaux derivative of I is continuous linear in (ϕ, ψ)
and continuous in (u, v). Therefore, by [48, Proposition 1.3], we obtain I is of class C 1 . Changing
variables in the integrals, we prove the rest.
Lemma 6.2. Assume that (F1 )-(F3 ) and (F6 ) hold. Let F be a homotopy stable family of
compact subsets of S without boundary and set

mF := inf max I(u, v).

A∈F (u,v)∈A

If mF > 0, then there exists a (P S)mF sequence {(un , vn )} ⊂ P(a, b) for J |S .

Proof. Let {An } ⊂ F be a minimizing sequence of mF . We define the mapping η : [0, 1]×S → S,
that is η(t, (u, v)) = H((u, v), tβ(u,v) ). By Lemmas 3.1 and 4.2, η(t, (u, v)) is continuous in
[0, 1] × S and satisfies η(t, (u, v)) = (u, v) for all (t, (u, v)) ∈ {0} × S. Thus by the definition of
F (see [21, Definition 3.1]), one has

Qn := η(1, An ) = {H((u, v), β(u,v)) : (u, v) ∈ An } ⊂ F .

20
Obviously, Qn ⊂ P(a, b) for any n ∈ N+ . Since I(H((u, v), β)) = I(u, v) for any (u, v) ∈ S and
β ∈ R, then

max I(u, v) = max I(u, v) → mF , as n → ∞,

(u,v)∈Qn (u,v)∈An

which implies that {Qn } ⊂ F is another minimizing sequence of mF . Since G1 (u) := kuk22 − a2 ,
G2 (v) := kvk22 − b2 are of class C 1 , and for any (u, v) ∈ S, we have hG′1 (u), ui = 2a2 > 0,
hG′2 (v), vi = 2b2 > 0. Therefore, by the implicit function theorem, S is a C 1 -Finsler man-
ifold. By [21, Theorem 3.2], we obtain a (P S)mF sequence {(ûn , v̂n )} ⊂ S for I such that
lim dist((ûn , v̂n ), Qn ) = 0. Let
n→+∞

(un , vn ) := H((ûn , v̂n ), β(ûn ,v̂n ) ),

we prove that {(un , vn )} ⊂ P(a, b) is the desired sequence. We claim that there exists C > 0
such that e−β(un ,vn ) ≤ C for any n ∈ N+ . Indeed, we have

−β(un ,vn ) k(−∆)1/4 ûn k22 + k(−∆)1/4 v̂n k22

e = .
k(−∆)1/4 un k22 + k(−∆)1/4 vn k22

Since {(un , vn )} ⊂ P(a), by Lemma 4.4, we know that there exists a constant C > 0 such that
k(−∆)1/4 un k22 + k(−∆)1/4 vn k22 ≥ C for any n ∈ N+ . Since Qn ⊂ P(a, b) for any n ∈ N+ and for
any (u, v) ∈ P(a, b), one has J (u, v) = I(u, v), then

max J (u, v) = max I(u, v) → mF , as n → +∞.

(u,v)∈Qn (u,v)∈Qn

This fact together with Qn ⊂ P(a, b) and (F3 ) yields that {Qn } is uniformly bounded in X , thus
from lim dist((ûn , v̂n ), Qn ) = 0, we obtain sup k(ûn , v̂n )k2 < +∞. This prove the claim.
n→∞ n≥1
Since {(un , vn )} ⊂ P(a, b), one has J (un , vn ) = I(un , vn ) = I(ûn , v̂n ) → mF as n → ∞. For
any (ϕ, ψ) ∈ T(un ,vn ) , we have
Z β(û ,v̂ )
n n
β(û ,v̂ )
n n

ûn e− 2 ϕ(e−β(ûn,v̂n ) x) + v̂n e− 2 ψ(e−β(ûn ,v̂n ) x) dx
ZR Z
β(ûn ,v̂n )
β(û ,v̂ )
n n
β(ûn ,v̂n )
β(û ,v̂ )
n n

= ûn (e y)e 2 ϕ(y) + v̂n (e y)e 2 ψ(y) dy = (un ϕ + vn ψ)dx = 0,
R R

which implies that H((ϕ, ψ), −β(ûn ,v̂n ) ) ∈ T(un ,vn ) S. Also,
− β(ûn ,v̂n ) β(û ,v̂ )
n n 2
(e 2 ϕ(e−β(ûn ,v̂n ) x), e− 2 ψ(e−β(ûn ,v̂n ) x))


=e−β(ûn ,v̂n ) k(−∆)1/4 ϕk22 + k(−∆)1/4 ψk22 + kϕk22 + kψk22


≤C k(−∆)1/4 ϕk22 + k(−∆)1/4 ψk22 + kϕk22 + kψk22
≤ max{1, C}kϕ, ψk2.

21
By Lemma 6.1, for any (ϕ, ψ) ∈ T(un ,vn ) , we deduce that
 ′  



hJ (un , vn ), (ϕ, ψ)i = J ′ H((ûn , v̂n ), β(ûn ,v̂n ) ) , H H((ϕ, ψ), −β(ûn ,v̂n ) ), β(ûn ,v̂n ) 

E
 ′ 
= I (ûn , v̂n ), H((ϕ, ψ), −β(ûn ,v̂n ) ) 
≤kI ′ (ûn , v̂n )k∗ · kH((ϕ, ψ), −β(ûn ,v̂n ) )k
 √
≤ max 1, C kI ′ (ûn , v̂n )k∗ · kϕ, ψk,

where (X ∗ , k · k∗ ) is the dual space of (X , k · k). Hence we can deduce that

 √
kJ ′ (un , vn )k∗ ≤ max 1, C kI ′ (ûn , v̂n )k∗ → 0, as n → ∞,

which implies that {(un , vn )} is a (P S)mF sequence for J |S . This ends the proof.
Proof of Proposition 6.1. Note that the class F of all singletons included in S is a homotopy
stable family of compact subsets of S without boundary. By Lemma 6.2, we know that if
mF > 0, then there exists a (P S)mF sequence {(un , vn )} ⊂ P(a, b) for J |S . By Lemma 4.4, we
know m(a, b) > 0, so if we can prove that mF = m(a, b), then we complete the proof.
In fact, by the definition of F , we have

mF = inf max I(u, v) = inf I(u, v) = inf I(H((u, v), β(u,v) )) = inf J (H((u, v), β(u,v) )).
A∈F (u,v)∈A (u,v)∈S (u,v)∈S (u,v)∈S

For any (u, v) ∈ S, it follows from H((u, v), β(u,v) ) ∈ P(a, b) that J (H((u, v), β(u,v))) ≥ m(a, b),
so mF ≥ m(a, b). On the other hand, for any (u, v) ∈ P(a, b), by Lemma 4.2, we deduce
that β(u,v) = 0 and J (u, v) = J (H((u, v), 0)) ≥ inf J (H((u, v), β(u,v))), which implies that
(u,v)∈S
m(a, b) ≥ mF .
For the sequence {(un , vn )} obtained in Proposition 6.1, by (F3 ), we know that {(un , vn )} is
bounded
′ in X . Up to a subsequence, we assume that (un , vn ) ⇀ (u, v) in X . Furthermore,
by J S (un , vn ) → 0 as n → +∞ and the Lagrange multiplier rule, there exist two sequences
{λ1,n }, {λ2,n } ⊂ R such that
Z Z Z Z
1 [un (x) − un (y)][ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)] 1 [vn (x) − vn (y)][ψ(x) − ψ(y)]
2
dxdy + dxdy
2π R R |x − y| 2π R R |x − y|2
Z Z
− (Iµ ∗ F (un , vn ))Fun (un , vn )ϕdx − (Iµ ∗ F (un , vn ))Fvn (un , vn )φdx
Z R R

= (λ1,n un ϕ + λ2,n vn ψ)dx + on (1)k(ϕ, ψ)k (6.1)

R

for any (ϕ, ψ) ∈ X .

Lemma 6.3. Assume that (F1 )-(F4 ) and (F6 ) hold, then {λ1,n } and {λ2,n } are bounded in R.

22
Proof. Using (un , 0) and (0, vn ) as test functions in (6.1), we have
Z
2 1/4 2
λ1,n a = k(−∆) un k2 − (Iµ ∗ F (un , vn ))Fun (un , vn )un dx + on (1) (6.2)
R

and Z
2 1/4
λ2,n b = k(−∆) vn k22 − (Iµ ∗ F (un , vn ))Fvn (un , vn )vn dx + on (1). (6.3)
R

By (F3 )-(F4), P (un, vn ) = 0, and the boundedness of {(un , vn )}, we get {λ1,n } and {λ2,n } are
bounded in R. Up to a subsequence, we assume that λ1,n → λ1 and λ2,n → λ2 in R as n → ∞.

Lemma 6.4. Assume that (F1 )-(F7 ) hold, then up to a subsequence and up to translations in
R, ua 6= 0 and vb 6= 0.

Proof. We claim that

 Z 
Λ := lim sup sup (|un |2 + |vn |2 )dx > 0.
n→+∞ y∈R Br (y)

Otherwise, we obtain un , vn → 0 in Lp (R) for any p > 2 by the Lions’ vanishing lemma [48,
Lemma 1.21]. From J (un , vn ) = m(a, b) + on (1), P (un , vn ) = 0 and (F3 ), we have
Z
1 θ+µ−3  
J (un , vn ) − P (un , vn ) ≥ (Iµ ∗ F (un , vn )) (un , vn ) · (∇F (un , vn )) dx + on (1).
2 2θ R

By θ > 3 − µ, up to a subsequence, we get

Z
  2θm(a, b)
(Iµ ∗ F (un , vn )) (un , vn ) · (∇F (un , vn )) dx ≤ =: K0 . (6.4)
R θ+µ−3
From Lemma 3.2, we can see
Z
(Iµ ∗ F (un , vn ))F (un , vn )dx = on (1).
R

Thus, by Lemma 4.6, we have

2−µ
lim sup k(−∆)1/4 un k22 + k(−∆)1/4 vn k22 ≤ 2m(a, b) < .
n→∞ 2
2


Up to a subsequence, we assume that sup 2−µ k(−∆)1/4 un k22 + k(−∆)1/4 vn k22 < 1. From (4.1),
n∈N+
ν
for ν ′ = ν−1
, we have
 2(κ+1) 2(κ+1) 2−µ  2qν ′ 2qν ′  2−µ
ν′
kF (un , vn )k2 2 ≤ C kun k 2(κ+1)
2−µ 2−µ
+ kvn k 2(κ+1) 2−µ
+ C kun k 2qν ′ + kv k 2−µ
n 2qν ′ → 0, as n → +∞.
2−µ 2−µ 2−µ 2−µ 2−µ

23
By a similar argument as above, we infer that k(un , vn ) · ∇F (un , vn )k 2 → 0 as n → ∞. Hence,
2−µ
we obtain
Z
 
(Iµ ∗ F (un , vn )) (un , vn ) · ∇F (un , vn ) dx = on (1).
R

Since P (un , vn ) = 0, we have k(−∆)1/4 un k22 + k(−∆)1/4 vn k22 = on (1), Rthen m(a, b) = 0, which is a
contradiction. According to Λ > 0, there exists {yn } ⊂ R such that B1 (yn ) (|un |2 + |yn |2 )dx > Λ2 ,
R
i.e., B1 (0) (|un (x − yn )|2 + |vn (x − yn )|2 )dx > Λ2 . Then up to a subsequence and up to translations
in R, (un , vn ) ⇀ (ua , vb ) 6= (0, 0) in X . By (6.1), (6.4), Lemmas 3.2 and 6.3, we can see that
(ua , vb ) is a weak solution of (1.1). Assume that ua = 0, then by (F3 ) and (F5 ), we know vb = 0.
Similarly, vb = 0 implies that ua = 0. This ends the proof.
Lemma 6.5. Assume that (F1 )-(F7 ) hold, then λ1 , λ2 < 0.
Proof. Combining (6.2), (6.3) with P (un , vn ) = 0, we have
Z
2 1/4 2
 
−λ1,n a = k(−∆) vn k2 + (Iµ ∗ F (un , vn )) (2 − µ)F (un, vn ) − Fvn (un , vn )vn dx + on (1)
R

and
Z
2 1/4
 
−λ2,n b = k(−∆) un k22 + (Iµ ∗ F (un , vn )) (2 − µ)F (un , vn ) − Fun (un , vn )un dx + on (1).
R

Thanks to ua 6= 0 and vb 6= 0, by using (F3 )-(F4 ) and Fatou lemma, we obtain lim inf −λ1,n > 0
n→∞
and lim inf −λ2,n > 0, namely, lim sup λ1,n < 0 and lim sup λ2,n < 0. By Lemma 6.3, {λ1,n }
n→∞ n→∞ n→∞
and {λ2,n } are bounded in R, up to a subsequence, we can assume that λ1,n → λ1 < 0 and
λ2,n → λ2 < 0 in R as n → ∞.

7 Proof of the result

Proof of Theorem 1.1. Under the assumptions of Theorem 1.1, from (6.1), (6.4), Lemmas
3.2, 6.3, 6.5, we know u is a weak solution of (1.1) with λ1 , λ2 < 0 and P (u, v) = 0. Using the
Brézis-Lieb lemma [48, Lemma 1.32], we get

kun k22 = kun − ua k22 + kua k22 + on (1), kvn k22 = kvn − vb k22 + kvb k22 + on (1).

Let a1 := kua k2 > 0, b1 := kvb k2 > 0, and a1,n := kun − ua k2 , b1,n := kvn − vb k2 , then
a2 = a21 + a21,n + on (1) and b2 = b21 + b21,n + on (1). On the one hand, using (F3 ), P (u, v) = 0 and
Fatou lemma, we have
Z
1 1  
J (u) =J (u) − P (u) = (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))(u, v) · ∇F (u, v) − (3 − µ)(Iµ ∗ F (u, v))F (u, v) dx
2 2 R
Z
1  
≤ lim inf (Iµ ∗ F (u, v))(u, v) · ∇F (u, v) − (3 − µ)(Iµ ∗ F (u, v))F (u, v) dx
n→∞ 2 R

24
 1
= lim inf (J (un , vn ) − P (un , vn )) = m(a, b).
n→∞ 2
On the other hand, it follows from Lemma 5.1 that J (u, v) ≥ m(a1 , b1 ) ≥ m(a, b). Thus
J (u, v) = m(a1 , b1 ) = m(a, b). By Lemma 5.3, we obtain a = a1 and b = b1 . This implies
(u, v) is a ground state solution of problem (1.1)-(1.2).

References
[1] C.O. Alves, C. Ji and O.H. Miyagaki, Normalized solutions for a Schrödinger equation with
critical growth in RN , Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations., 61 (2022): 18.
[2] T. Bartsch and L. Jeanjean, Normalized solutions for nonlinear Schrödinger systems, Proc.
Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A., 148 (2018): 225-242.
[3] T. Bartsch, L. Jeanjean and N. Soave, Normalized solutions for a system of coupled cubic
Schrödinger equations on R3 , J. Math. Pures Appl., 106 (2016): 583-614.
[4] T. Bartsch, H.W. Li and W.M. Zou, Existence and asymptotic behavior of normalized
ground states for Sobolev critical Schrödinger systems, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equa-
tions., 62 (2023): 9.
[5] T. Bartsch, Y.Y. Liu and Z.L. Liu, Normalized solutions for a class of nonlinear Choquard
equations, Partial Differ. Equ. Appl., 1 (2020): 34.
[6] T. Bartsch and N. Soave, Multiple normalized solutions for a competing system of
Schrödinger equations, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations., 58 (2019): 22.
[7] T. Bartsch and N. Soave, A natural constraint approach to normalized solutions of nonlinear
Schrödinger equations and systems, J. Funct. Anal., 272 (2017): 4998-5037.
[8] T. Bartsch, X.X. Zhong and W.M. Zou, Normalized solutions for a coupled Schrödinger
system, Math. Ann., 380 (2021): 1713-1740.
[9] B. Bieganowski and J. Mederski, Normalized ground states of the nonlinear Schrödinger
equation with at least mass critical growth, J. Funct. Anal., 280 (2021): 108989.
[10] W.J. Chen, Q. Sun and Z.X. Wang, Normalized solutions for a fractional Choquard-type
equation with exponential critical growth in R, arXiv preprint, (2023): arXiv.2307.06602.
[11] W.J. Chen and Z.X. Wang, Normalized ground states for a biharmonic Choquard system
in R4 , arXiv preprint, (2022): arXiv.2306.02963.
[12] Z. Chen, W,M. Zou, Normalized solutions for nonlinear Schrodinger systems with linear
couples, J Math. Anal. Appl., 499(1)(2021), 125013.
[13] Z. Chen, W,M. Zou, Existence of normalized positive solutions for a cass of nonhomogeneous
elliptic equations, J Geom Anal 33(2023), 147.

25
[14] R. Clemente, J.C. de Albuquerque and E. Barboza, Existence of solutions for a fractional
Choquard-type equation in R with critical exponential growth, Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 72
(2021): 16.

[15] P. d’Avenia, G. Siciliano and M. Squassina, On fractional Choquard equations, Math. Mod-
els Methods Appl. Sci., 25 (2015): 1447-1476.

[16] S.B. Deng and X.L. Tian, On a nonhomogeneous Kirchhoff type elliptic system with the
singular Trudinger-Moser growth, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., 42 (2022): 4761-4786

[17] S.B. Deng and J.W. Yu, Normalized solutions for a choquard equation with exponential
growth in R2 , Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 74 (2023): 103.

[18] S.B. Deng and J.W. Yu, Normalized solutions for Schrödinger systems in dimension two,
arXiv preprint, (2022): arXiv.2210.02331.

[19] E. Di Nezza, G. Palatucci and E. Valdinoci, Hitchhiker′ s guide to the fractional Sobolev
spaces, Bull. Sci. Math., 136 (2012): 521-573.

[20] R.L. Frank, E. Lenzmann and L. Silvestre, Uniqueness of radial solutions for the fractional
Laplacian, Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 69 (2016): 1671-1726.

[21] N. Ghoussoub, Duality and Perturbation Methods in Critical Point Theory, volume 107
of Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993. With
appendices by David Robinson.

[22] T.X. Gou and L. Jeanjean, Multiple positive normalized solutions for nonlinear Schrödinger
systems, Nonlinearity., 31 (2018): 2319-2345.

[23] X.M. He, V. Rădulescu and W.M. Zou, Normalized ground states for the critical fractional
Choquard equation with a local perturbation, J. Geom. Anal., 32 (2022): 252.

[24] S. Iula, A. Maalaoui and L. Martinazzi, A fractional Moser-Trudinger type inequality in

one dimension and its critical points, Differ. Integral Equ., 29 (2016): 455-492.

[25] L. Jeanjean, Existence of solutions with prescribed norm for semilinear elliptic equations,
Nonlinear Anal., 28 (1997): 1633-1659.

[26] L. Jeanjean and S.S. Lu, A mass supercritical problem revisited, Calc. Var. Partial Differ-
ential Equations., 59 (2020): 174.

[27] X.F. Li, Existence of normalized ground states for the Sobolev critical Schrödinger equation
with combined nonlinearities, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations., 60 (2021): 169.

[28] X.F. Li, Standing waves to upper critical Choquard equation with a local perturbation:
multiplicity, qualitative properties and stability, Adv. Nonlinear Anal., 11 (2022): 1134-
1164.

26
[29] H.W. Li, W.M. Zou, Normalized ground states for semilinear elliptic systems with critical
and subcritical nonlinearities, J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 23(2021), 43.

[30] M. Li, J.C. He, H.Y. Xu and M.H. Yang, The existence and asymptotic behaviours of nor-
malized solutions for critical fractional Schrödinger equation with Choquard term, Discrete
Contin. Dyn. Syst., 43 (2023): 821-845.

[31] G.B. Li and X. Luo, Existence and multiplicity of normalized solutions for a class of frac-
tional Choquard equations, Sci. China Math., 63 (2020): 539-558.

[32] G.B. Li, X. Luo and T. Yang, Normalized solutions for the fractional Schrödinger equation
with a focusing nonlocal perturbation, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 44 (2021): 10331-10360.

[33] G.B. Li and H.Y. Ye, The existence of positive solutions with prescribed L2 -norm for non-
linear Choquard equations, J. Math. Phys., 55 (2014): 121501.

[34] Q.Q. Li and W.M. Zou, The existence and multiplicity of the normalized solutions for
fractional Schrödinger equations involving Sobolev critical exponent in the L2 -subcritical
and L2 -supercritical cases, Adv. Nonlinear Anal., 11 (2022): 1531-1551.

[35] E.H. Lieb and M. Loss, Analysis, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 14, Amer. Math.
Soc, Providence, RI, 2001.

[36] G.Z. Lu and Y.Y. Yang, Adams’ inequalities for bi-Laplacian and extremal functions in
dimension four, Adv. Math., 220 (2009): 1135-1170.

[37] X. Luo, J.C. Wei, X.L. Yang and M.D. Zhen, Normalized solutions for Schrödinger system
with quadratic and cubic interactions, J. Differential Equations, 314 (2022): 56-127.

[38] H.J. Luo and Z.T. Zhang, Normalized solutions to the fractional Schrödinger equations with
combined nonlinearities, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations., 59 (2020): 143.

[39] V. Moroz and J. Van Schaftingen, Existence of groundstates for a class of nonlinear
Choquard equations, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 367 (2015): 6557-6579.

[40] T. Ozawa, On critical cases of Sobolev’s inequalities, J. Funct. Anal., 127 (1995): 259-269.

[41] R. Penrose, On gravity’s role in quantum state reduction, Gen. Relativity Gravitation., 28
(1996): 581-600.

[42] Z.F. Shen, F.S. Gao and M.B. Yang, Ground states for nonlinear fractional Choquard
equations with general nonlinearities, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 39 (2016): 4082-4098.

[43] N. Soave, Normalized ground states for the NLS equation with combined nonlinearities, J.
Differential Equations., 269 (2020): 6941-6987.

[44] N. Soave, Normalized ground states for the NLS equation with combined nonlinearities: the
Sobolev critical case, J. Funct. Anal., 279 (2020): 108610.

27
[45] A. Szulkin and T. Weth, Ground state solutions for some indefinite variational problems,
J. Funct. Anal., 257 (2009): 3802-3822.

[46] F. Takahashi, Critical and subcritical fractional Trudinger-Moser-type inequalities on R,

Adv. Nonlinear Anal., 8 (2019): 868-884.

[47] J.C. Wei and Y.Z. Wu, Normalized solutions for Schrödinger equations with critical Sobolev
exponent and mixed nonlinearities, J. Funct. Anal., 283 (2022): 109574.

[48] M. Willem, Minimax Theorems, Progress in Nonlinear Differential Equations and their
Applications, 24, Birkhäuser Bosten Inc, Boston, ISBN 0-8176-3913-9 (1996).

[49] T. Yang, Normalized solutions for the fractional Schrödinger equation with a focusing non-
local L2 -critical or L2 -supercritical perturbation, J. Math. Phys., 61 (2020): 051505.

[50] S. Yao, H.B. Chen, V. Rădulescu and J.T. Sun, Normalized solutions for lower critical
Choquard equations with critical Sobolev perturbation, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 54 (2022):
3696-3723.

[51] S. Yuan, S.T. Chen and X.H. Tang, Normalized solutions for Choquard equations with
general nonlinearities, Electron. Res. Arch., 28 (2020): 291-309.

[52] P.H. Zhang and Z.Q. Han, Normalized solutions to a kind of fractional Schrödinger equation
with a critical nonlinearity, Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 73 (2022): 149.

[53] W. Zhang and X. Wu, Nodal solutions for a fractional Choquard equation, J. Math. Anal.
Appl., 464 (2018): 1167-1183.

[54] M.D. Zhen and B.L. Zhang, Normalized ground states for the critical fractional NLS equa-
tion with a perturbation, Rev. Mat. Complut., 35 (2022): 89-132.

[55] M.D. Zhen, B.L. Zhang and V. Rădulescu, Normalized solutions for nonlinear coupled
fractional systems: low and high perturbations in the attractive case, Discrete Contin.
Dyn. Syst. 41 (2021): 2653-2676.

28