Ebook Spaces of Measures and Their Applications To Structured Population Models 1St Edition Christian Dull Online PDF All Chapter

Spaces of Measures and their
Applications to Structured Population

Models 1st Edition Christian Düll
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/spaces-of-measures-and-their-applications-to-structur
ed-population-models-1st-edition-christian-dull/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Integrated Population Models: Theory and Ecological

Applications with R and JAGS 1st Edition Michael Schaub
https://ebookmeta.com/product/integrated-population-models-
theory-and-ecological-applications-with-r-and-jags-1st-edition-
michael-schaub/
Laminational Models for Some Spaces of Polynomials of

Any Degree 1st Edition Alexander Blokh
https://ebookmeta.com/product/laminational-models-for-some-
spaces-of-polynomials-of-any-degree-1st-edition-alexander-blokh/
Optimal Control of Dynamic Systems Driven by Vector

Measures: Theory and Applications 1st Edition Ahmed
https://ebookmeta.com/product/optimal-control-of-dynamic-systems-
driven-by-vector-measures-theory-and-applications-1st-edition-
ahmed/
Beyond Sobolev and Besov Regularity of Solutions of

PDEs and Their Traces in Function Spaces Cornelia
Schneider
https://ebookmeta.com/product/beyond-sobolev-and-besov-
regularity-of-solutions-of-pdes-and-their-traces-in-function-
spaces-cornelia-schneider/
Optimization Techniques and their Applications to Mine
Systems 1st Edition Amit Kumar Gorai
https://ebookmeta.com/product/optimization-techniques-and-their-
applications-to-mine-systems-1st-edition-amit-kumar-gorai/
A World without Capitalism Alternative Discourses

Spaces and Imaginaries 1st Edition Christian W. Chun
https://ebookmeta.com/product/a-world-without-capitalism-
alternative-discourses-spaces-and-imaginaries-1st-edition-
christian-w-chun/
The Evolution of Feathers From Their Origin to the

Present 1st Edition Christian Foth Oliver W M Rauhut
https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-evolution-of-feathers-from-
their-origin-to-the-present-1st-edition-christian-foth-oliver-w-
m-rauhut/
Analysis of Composite Laminates: Theories and Their

Applications 1st Edition Dinghe Li
https://ebookmeta.com/product/analysis-of-composite-laminates-
theories-and-their-applications-1st-edition-dinghe-li/
Engineered Ferrites and Their Applications 1st Edition

Pankaj Sharma
https://ebookmeta.com/product/engineered-ferrites-and-their-
applications-1st-edition-pankaj-sharma/
CAMBRIDGE MONOGRAPHS
O N A P P L I E D A N D C O M P U TAT I O NA L
MATHEMATICS
Series Editors
M . A B L O W I T Z , S . D AV I S , J . H I N C H ,
A . I S E R L E S , J . O C K E N D O N , P. O LV E R
36 Spaces of Measures and their Applications

to Structured Population Models
The Cambridge Monographs on Applied and Computational Mathematics series
reflects the crucial role of mathematical and computational techniques in contemporary
science. The series publishes expositions on all aspects of applicable and numerical
mathematics, with an emphasis on new developments in this fast-moving area of
research.
State-of-the-art methods and algorithms as well as modern mathematical descriptions
of physical and mechanical ideas are presented in a manner suited to graduate research
students and professionals alike. Sound pedagogical presentation is a prerequisite. It is
intended that books in the series will serve to inform a new generation of researchers.
A complete list of books in the series can be found at

www.cambridge.org/mathematics.
Recent titles include the following:
20. Greedy approximation, Vladimir Temlyakov

21. Spectral methods for time-dependent problems, Jan Hesthaven, Sigal Gottlieb &
David Gottlieb
22. The mathematical foundations of mixing, Rob Sturman, Julio M. Ottino &
Stephen Wiggins
23. Curve and surface reconstruction, Tamal K. Dey
24. Learning theory, Felipe Cucker & Ding Xuan Zhou
25. Algebraic geometry and statistical learning theory, Sumio Watanabe
26. A practical guide to the invariant calculus, Elizabeth Louise Mansfield
27. Difference equations by differential equation methods, Peter E. Hydon
28. Multiscale methods for Fredholm integral equations, Zhongying Chen,
Charles A. Micchelli & Yuesheng Xu
29. Partial differential equation methods for image inpainting,
Carola Bibiane Schönlieb
30. Volterra integral equations, Hermann Brunner
31. Symmetry, phase modulation and nonlinear waves, Thomas J. Bridges
32. Multivariate approximation, V. Temlyakov
33. Mathematical modelling of the human cardiovascular system, Alfio Quarteroni,
Luca Dede’, Andrea Manzoni & Christian Vergara
34. Numerical bifurcation analysis of maps, Yuri A. Kuznetsov & Hil G.E. Meijer
35. Operator-adapted wavelets, fast solvers, and numerical homogenization,
Houman Owhadi & Clint Scovel
Spaces of Measures and their Applications
to Structured Population Models
C H R I S T I A N D Ü L L
Universität Heidelberg
P I OT R G W I A Z DA
Polska Akademia Nauk (PAN), Warsaw
A N NA M A R C I N I A K - C Z O C H R A
Universität Heidelberg
JA K U B S K R Z E C Z K O W S K I
Uniwersytet Warszawski, Poland
University Printing House, Cambridge CB2 8BS, United Kingdom
One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor, New York, NY 10006, USA
477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia
314–321, 3rd Floor, Plot 3, Splendor Forum, Jasola District Centre,
New Delhi – 110025, India
103 Penang Road, #05–06/07, Visioncrest Commercial, Singapore 238467
Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.

It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of
education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781316519103
DOI: 10.1017/9781009004770
© Christian Düll, Piotr Gwiazda, Anna Marciniak-Czochra and Jakub Skrzeczkowski 2022
This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception
and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published 2022
A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Düll, Christian, author. | Gwiazda, Piotr, author. |
Marciniak-Czochra, Anna, author. | Skrzeczkowski, Jakub, author.
Title: Spaces of measures and their applications to structured population
models / Christian Düll, Piotr Gwiazda, Anna Marciniak-Czochra, Jakub Skrzeczkowski.
Description: Cambridge ; New York, NY : Cambridge University Press, 2022. |
Series: Cambridge monographs on applied and computational mathematics ;
36 | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2021029775 (print) | LCCN 2021029776 (ebook)
| ISBN 9781316519103 (hardback) | ISBN 9781009004770 (epub)
Subjects: LCSH: Population–Mathematical models. | Biology–Mathematical
models. | Radon measures. | Metric spaces. | Lipschitz spaces. |
Functions of bounded variation. | BISAC: MATHEMATICS / General
Classification: LCC HB849.51 .D85 2022 (print) | LCC HB849.51 (ebook) | DDC 304.601/51–dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021029775
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021029776
ISBN 978-1-316-51910-3 Hardback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy
of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication
and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain,
accurate or appropriate.
Contents
Preface page vii

Notation ix
Introduction 1
1 Analytical Setting 10
1.1 Preliminaries 10
1.2 M (S) as a Normed Space 15
1.3 The Positive Cone M + (S) 26
1.4 Relation to the Wasserstein Distance 42
2 Structured Population Models on the State Space R+ 58
2.1 Introduction of a Structured Population Model 58
2.2 Analysis of the Linear Model 63
2.3 The Nonlinear Problem 77
2.4 Uniqueness of a Measure Solution 80
2.5 Splitting Operator Approach 82
2.6 Measure Solutions with Semigroup Splitting Technique 90
2.7 Further Notes and References 99
3 Structured Population Models on Proper Spaces 100
3.1 Two-Parameter Families of Homeomorphisms 101
3.2 Linear Structured Population Model on a Metric Space 108
3.3 The Nonlinear Model 119
3.4 Equivalence of the Generalised Model and the PDE Model 128
3.5 Applications 136
4 Numerical Methods for Structured Population Models 148
4.1 Finite Difference Schemes 148
4.2 Algorithms to Compute Distances Between Measures 150
4.3 The Escalator Boxcar Train Algorithm 155
v
vi Contents
4.4 Particle Method Combined with Splitting

Operator Technique 177
5 Recent Developments and Future Perspectives 186
5.1 Asymptotic Analysis 186
5.2 Differentiability and Optimal Control Problems 195
5.3 Irregular Transport 203
Appendix A Topology, Compactness and Proper Spaces 209

Appendix B Functional Analysis 215
Appendix C Bounded Lipschitz and Hölder Functions 220
Appendix D Results on Approximation with Polynomials 229
Appendix E Differential Geometry 233
Appendix F Measure Theory 235
Appendix G Weaker Topologies on Spaces of Measures 242
Appendix H The Bochner Integral 269
Appendix I Semigroups 272
Appendix J Supplement to Chapter 2 278
Appendix K Technical Proofs from Chapter 3 282
References 289
Index 307
Preface
The idea of this book was developed over several years of joint research
and numerous discussions with colleagues whose focus is in functional
analysis, partial differential equations, transport processes, probability theory
or mathematical modelling.
The development of the mathematical framework for the analysis of
structured population models in measure spaces presented in this book was
supported by many projects, starting with the Emmy Noether Project funded
by the German Research Council (DFG) and by the European Research
Council Starting Grant for Anna Marciniak-Czochra and the International
PhD Programme “Mathematical Methods in Natural Sciences” (Foundation
for Polish Science) coordinated by Piotr Gwiazda. The latter led to several PhD
projects that accelerated the progress of development of analytic and numerical
theory. We express thanks to Agnieszka Ulikowska and Jedrzej
˛ Jabłoński, for
significant contributions.
Many people have contributed to the development of this comprehensive
framework. The range of individuals involved is far too wide to be able to
list them all. In particular, however, we would like to thank our colleagues
and collaborators José A. Carrillo, Rinaldo Colombo, Karolina Kropielnicka,
Sander C. Hille, Marie Doumic, Benoît Perthame, Agnieszka Świerczewska-
Gwiazda, Emil Wiedemann, Tomasz Debiec, ˛ Horst R. Thieme, Azmy
S. Ackleh, Nicolas Saintier and Tomasz Szarek, who inspired us and helped in
clarifying analytical concepts and anchoring them in relevant areas of analysis
and probability theory.
Many aspects of the book have been influenced by insightful questions
and suggestions from the students who worked through the book as a part
of the Master’s course “Spaces of Radon Measures: Functional Analysis and
Applications to PDEs” given at Heidelberg University in the summer term
vii
viii Preface
of 2020. The course was part of the research-oriented teaching programme

of the Heidelberg STRUCTURES Excellence Cluster supported by Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) under Germany’s Excellence Strategy EXC-
2181/1 - 390900948. It attracted mathematics and scientific computing
Master’s students interested in functional analysis and its applications to
partial differential equations, especially in the context of the modelling of
transport and growth processes. Teaching the subject helped significantly to
improve the quality of the book. The students detected and helped us to
remove many errors, asked interesting questions, made careful comments and
frequently demanded clarifying examples. We want to express our gratitude for
help to Joris Edelmann, Alina Feldmann, Lukas Huber, Sumet Khumphairan,
Finn Münnich, Tuan Tung Nguyen, Achita Prasertwaree, Camillo Tissot, Kay
Zaradny and Mikuláš Zindulka.
The final shape of the book has profited from fruitful discussions with
Marek Kimmel and the constructive criticism and suggestions we received
from anonymous reviewers and colleagues from the Heidelberg Group on
Applied Analysis and Modeling in Biosciences, especially Maria V. Barbarossa
and Johannes Kammerer. We also acknowledge the support of our friends
Zuzanna Szymańska and Błażej Miasojedow from Warsaw, who detected
glitches in our numerical pseudo-codes. During preparation of this book,
Piotr Gwiazda and Jakub Skrzeczkowski were supported by the National
Science Center, Poland, through projects nos. 2018/30/M/ST1/00423 and
2019/35/N/ST1/03459, respectively.
Keywords: structured population model, bounded Lipschitz distance, nonneg-

ative Radon measures.
AMS Subject Classification: 26A16, 28A33, 35B30, 35F10, 35L50, 35R02,

65M12.
Notation
General Notation
We use the following notation for sets. Let (S, d) be a metric space. Then
B(S), the Borel σ-algebra of S, i.e. the σ-algebra generated by the open sets
of S.
Br (s) := {x ∈ S | d(x, s) ≤ r }, the open set with radius r and centre s.
N = {1, 2, 3, . . .}.
N0 = {0, 1, 2, . . .}.
R+ = [0, ∞).
R = R ∪ {+∞, −∞}.
Sd , the unit sphere {x ∈ Rd+1 | x = 1}.
In general, we will use a superscript + to indicate nonnegativity.
Special Functions and Spaces

Here we present a selection of spaces and functions that appear several times
throughout the book and whose definition the reader might want to look up
once in a while. Note that special spaces that occur only locally in one section
are not listed here.
1, constant function 1(x) = 1 for all x.

BCα,1 [0, T] × M + (R+ ); X , the space of X-valued, bounded functions
defined on [0, T]×M + (R+ ) that are α-Hölder continuous in t and Lipschitz
continuous in M + (R+ ), see Section 3.5.
BL(S), the space of bounded Lipschitz functions S → R.
BL(S)+∗ , the space of positive linear functionals on BL(S).
ix
x Notation
Cb (S), the space of bounded continuous functions S → R.

Cc (S), the space of continuous functions S → R with compact support in S.
C k (S), the space of k-times continuously differentiable functions S → R.
Cub (S), the space of uniformly continuous and bounded functions S → R.
· ∞
C0 (S) = Cc0 (S) , see Definition 1.3.
C 0 (S), the space of continuous functions S → R.
C 0 ([0, T]; (M + (S), ρF )), the space of continuous maps from the interval [0, T]
to (M + (S), ρF ). A natural metric on such a space is defined in (3.23).
⎧
⎪ 1, x ∈ T
χT , characteristic function of a set T, χT (x) = ⎨ ⎪ 0, x T .
⎩
· B L∗
E = M (S) .
Id, the identity map x → x.
L 1 ([0, T], BL(Rd )), the Bochner space of functions with L 1 regularity in time
and BL regularity in space, cf. (3.1).
p
L , the usual space of functions whose pth power is integrable.
Lip1 (S), the space of 1-Lipschitz functions S → R.
L(X, Y ), the space of bounded linear operators from X to Y .
M (S), the space of finite signed Radon measures.
M + (S), the space of nonnegative finite signed Radon measures.
P (S), the set of probability measures on S.
St,s , a semigroup, see Definition I.4.
W k, p , the usual Sobolev space of k-times weakly differentiable functions with
all derivatives in L p .
Norms and Seminorms

To keep track of the various norms and seminorms that are introduced in the
book, we provide a list for the convenience of the reader.
| · |Lip , Lipschitz constant, see Definition 1.1.
· ∞ , supremum norm, see Definition 1.1.
· BL , bounded Lipschitz norm, see Definition 1.1.
· TV , total variation norm, see Definition 1.19.
· BL∗ , flat (or dual bounded Lipschitz) norm, see Definition 1.22.
ρF (·, ·), the flat metric induced by the flat norm.
W p (·, ·), pth Wasserstein distance, see Definition 1.77.
[·]α , Hölder seminorm, see Definition C.17.
· λ , Bielecki norm, see equation (2.15).
Notation xi
· BCα,1 , see Section 3.5.

· BTM , see Section 3.5.
· C k , the usual norm in the space C k , see Appendix D.
·, · X ∗, X , the usual dual pairing between X ∗ and X. We will normally omit the
spaces in the index if it is clear from the context which underlying spaces
are meant.
Introduction
In this book we present a comprehensive analytical framework for structured

population models in the space of Radon measures. These models are often
formulated as transport-type partial differential equations (PDEs) and are
applied to describe the evolution of cell, animal or human populations
that are heterogeneous with respect to a specific structuring variable (state
variable). In this approach, the solution can be interpreted as a state space
distribution of the population. The structuring variable is usually selected
to represent the influence of a physical or biological attribute such as
age, size or gene expression. The resulting models are often referred to as
physiologically structured population models to indicate that they account for
intrinsic properties of the individuals in a population, i.e. intra-population
heterogeneity. By contrast, spatially structured population models address
spatial heterogeneity, which may arise for example from heterogeneity of the
environment.
Previous research has provided many models, with structuring variables
ranging from age (Cushing, 1998) and size to cell maturity (Alarcon et al.,
2011; Doumic et al., 2011; Dyson et al., 2000), phenotypic traits (Ulikowska,
2013) and stage of infection (Martcheva and Pilyugin, 2006; White and Medley,
1998). The approach has also been applied to problems in demography (Calsina
et al., 2016; Farkas, 2008; Perthame, 2007), cell biology (Von Foerster, 1959),
immunology (McKendrick, 1926), epidemiology (Diekmann and Heesterbeek,
2000), ecology (Andersen, 2019; Hartvig et al., 2011; Perthame, 2007) and
environmental economics (Andersen, 2019).
The aim of this book is to establish a mathematical theory of structured
population models in a measure setting. To this end, we provide an analytical
framework based on functional-analytical properties of the space of nonnegative
Radon measures. The theory we present here is one among several possible
1
2 Introduction
approaches, each of which has its own advantages and limitations. As the
proposed framework is designed for a certain class of transport-type PDEs, it is
applicable not only to models of mathematical biology but also to phenomena
such as pedestrian flows or crowd dynamics; see Bellomo et al. (2017, 2019) and
references therein. Another important approach is based on delay and integral
differential equations (DDEs and IDEs), where delays may for example describe
the maturation time from juvenile to adult individuals (Hadeler, 2008; Yuan
and Bélair, 2014) or the duration of immunity (Barbarossa et al., 2017). Such
a formulation of structured population models has led among other things
to inter alia the development of new mathematical methods for linearised
stability analysis and Hopf bifurcations (Calsina et al., 2016; Diekmann et al.,
2007/08; Diekmann and Gyllenberg, 2008). For a comprehensive overview of
the underlying mathematical theory, we refer to Diekmann et al. (1995). A
rigorous connection between the PDE formulation and the delay or integral
formulations can be established by solving the PDE using the method of
characteristics. However, the relationship of the two modelling approaches
on the level of model assumptions and the analysis of a model’s long-term
dynamics is not yet completely understood (Calsina et al., 2016).
Motivating Examples from Mathematical Biology

As a start, we give a short overview of models which are commonly used to
describe structured population dynamics in mathematical biology. The list is not
exhaustive, since this would be beyond the scope of the book, but it provides
a motivation for the theory developed here. The examples below illustrate
which types of structured population model can be studied using the analytical
framework of this book.
Classical Models in the Spirit of the Kermack–McKendrick Model

A basic class of structured population models contains the age-structured
models that were initially proposed to describe the evolution of infection. The
models are attributed to Kermack and McKendrick, who modelled infection
transmission and removal rates as functions changing with the age-since-
infection (Kermack and McKendrick, 1936; McKendrick, 1926). The structured
population equation describing the density of the infected population P(t, a) at
time t and infection age a reads
∂t P + ∂a P + μ(a)P = 0, (1)
Introduction 3
where μ denotes the removal rate. The equation is supplemented by the initial
condition P(0, a) = p(a) and an integral boundary condition of the form
∞
P(t, 0) = m(a) P(t, a) da
0
representing the influx of new infected individuals at time t. Here, the function
m describes the transmission rate of infected individuals with age-since-
infection a.
Equation (1) is usually coupled with a system of ordinary differential
equations describing the dynamics of unstructured populations of susceptibles
and recovered (resistant) individuals. Such models have been applied to study
dynamics of different infectious diseases, see e.g. Brauer et al. (2013), Brauer
and Watmough (2009), Feng et al. (2002), Getto et al. (2008) and Nelson et al.
(2004). An example is given by the following virus infection model:
⎧
⎪
⎪ ∂t T (t) = s − d T (t) − k V (t) T (t),
⎪
⎨ ∂t I (t, a) + ∂a I (t, a) = −κ(a) I (t, a),
⎪
⎪ ∞
⎪ ∂ V (t) = p(a) I (t, a) da − c V (t),
⎩ t 0
where T (t) denotes the population of uninfected cells, V (t) describes the
population of infecting virions and I (t, a) is the population of infected cells of
infection age a. We refer to Getto et al. (2008); Huang et al. (2012) and Nelson
et al. (2004) for more details, especially on the interpretation of the model
parameters s, k, κ(a), p(a) and c. For a review on Kermack–McKendrick
models, we recommend Keyfitz and Keyfitz (1997).
Size-Structured Models
Another class of physiologically structured population models are size-
structured equations that account for nonlinear dynamics of the structuring
variable (Getto et al., 2008). A generic nonlinear size-structured model that
characterises the evolution of a population n at time t and size x takes the form
⎧
⎪
⎪ ∂t n(t, x) + ∂x g(x, n(t, x))n(t, x) = −μ(x, n(t, x)) n(t, x) in [0, T] × R+,
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ g(0, n(t, ·))n(t, 0) = β(x, n(t, ·))n(t, x) dx in [0, T],
⎪
⎪
⎪ R+
⎪
⎪
⎩ n(0, x) = n0 (x),
where the model parameters g, μ and β are state-dependent functions which
describe the evolution of the size of individuals, death and birth rates,
respectively.
Extending the notion of “size” to other internal characteristics of an
individual has led to applications of size-structured models in various contexts
4 Introduction
in ecology and cell biology. One of the most explored ecosystems is the Daphnia
magna population (de Roos et al., 1990; Diekmann et al., 2010; Gurney
and Nisbet, 1985; Jones et al., 1988; Kooijman and Metz, 1984; Thieme,
1988). Other groups of nonlinear age- and size-structured models describe
processes of symmetric or asymmetric cell division (Perthame, 2007) or cell
maturation/differentiation processes (Doumic et al., 2011; Dyson et al., 2000).
For further structured population models, we refer to Auger et al. (2008), de
Roos and Persson (2013), Diekmann et al. (2013), Inaba (2017), Li et al. (2019)
and Tuljapurkar and Caswell (2012) and references therein.
The analysis developed in this book can be applied to a large class of
size-structured population models with model parameters that are sufficiently
regular. In Chapter 2, we consider models that are structured in R+ and in
Chapter 3 we generalise the approach to models with an abstract metric space
as the state space.
Models with State and Space Structures

Structured population models can be extended to additionally account for the
spatial spread of individuals, as in the following example concerning the SIR
epidemic model that was studied in Chekroun and Kuniya (2019, 2020). The
model takes the form
∞
⎧
⎪
⎪ ∂t S(t, x) = d 1 ΔS(t, x) + b − S(t, x) 0 β(a) I (t, a, x) da − μ S(t, x),
⎪
⎨ ∂t I (t, a, x) = −∂a I (t, a, x) + d 2 ΔI (t, a, x) − (μ + γ(a)) I (t, a, x),
⎪
⎪
⎪ ∞
⎩ ∂t R(t, x) = d 3 ΔR(t, x) + 0 γ(a) I (t, a, x) da − μ R(t, x),
equipped with a boundary condition for I which reads

∞
I (t, 0, x) = S(t, x) β(a) I (t, a, x) da.
0
Here, S(t, x) and R(t, x) denote the densities of susceptible and recovered
individuals at time t and position x, while I (t, a, x) is the density of infective
individuals of infection age a. This type of model has been used to study,
for example, the spatio-temporal spread of rabies (Källén et al., 1985), Dengue
epidemics in South America (Takahashi et al., 2005) and Lyme disease (Caraco
et al., 2002; Zhao, 2012). It provides an example of a system of several partial
differential equations that accounts for a complex physiologically structured
spatio-temporal dynamic. Such models, accounting additionally for spatial
transport, are not covered by the theory presented in this book.
6 Introduction
Mathematical Setting
Classically, the analysis of structured population models given by PDEs was
carried out in an L 1 setting (Diekmann, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1991; Iannelli,
1995; Metz and Diekmann, 1986a,b,c; Thieme, 2003; Webb, 1985), the solution
being interpreted as the density of the measure representing a state distribution
of the population. However, as already suggested in Metz and Diekmann
(1986a), this setting is restrictive as it does not account for solutions that are
linear combinations of Dirac measures. These can be interpreted physically as
solutions concentrated at single points, which in the context of physiologically
structured population models describe a homogeneous population in which all
individuals have the same value of the structuring variable. Such solutions are
not only considered as initial conditions in structured population models but
may also emerge in the dynamics (in finite or infinite times) even if the initial
data are regular. The latter allow the description of selection phenomena, as
for example in the class of selection–mutation equations (Ackleh et al., 2016;
Cañizo et al., 2013; Calsina and Cuadrado, 2004; Cuadrado, 2009; Nordmann
et al., 2018), hierarchically size-structured population models (Ackleh and
Ito, 2005) and models of clonal selection (Busse et al., 2016). The underlying
mechanism may result from a discontinuity in the transport term, see e.g. Ackleh
and Ito (2005), or from nonlinear nonlocal interactions, see e.g. Busse et al.
(2016). Such problems also arise in applications to vehicular traffic describing
crowding or aggregation dynamics; see Cacace et al. (2019), Camilli et al.
(2017, 2018) and Section 5.3.
Measures also appear in numerical algorithms used to efficiently compute
solutions of structured population models, in particular using the Escalator
Boxcar Train (EBT) algorithm (see Sections 4.3 and 4.4). In such algorithms,
the exact solution is approximated by a finite combination of Dirac measures
(representing so-called cohorts). This approach allows reduction of the problem
to a system of ordinary differential equations. Unfortunately, as Dirac deltas
are not L 1 functions, a rigorous proof of the convergence of such algorithms is
out of reach in an L 1 setting. The theory of structured population models
in the space of measures has proved to be useful for understanding the
convergence of algorithms. From a practical point of view, such theoret-
ical results guarantee that an applied computation method approaches the
correct solution.
Defining structured population models on measure spaces requires a suitably
chosen functional setting and a corresponding metric. For conservative
problems, a natural choice is to consider solutions in the space of Radon
measures by exploiting a Wasserstein metric, such as
Introduction 7

W1 (μ, ν) = sup f d(μ − ν),
S
where the supremum is taken over all 1-Lipschitz functions f : S → R for

some Polish space S. As Wasserstein metrics scale with the total mass, they
occur naturally in the setting of probability measures. Unfortunately, though,
owing to the wideness of the class of test functions, the supremum can only
be controlled if μ(S) = ν(S), as otherwise W1 (μ, ν) = ∞; see Proposition
1.79. Consequently, Wasserstein metrics cannot be applied in the analysis of
nonconservative problems. This issue, for the case S = R+ , was addressed
in the series of papers Carrillo et al. (2012); Gwiazda et al. (2010) and
Gwiazda and Marciniak-Czochra (2010), where the class of test functions was
restricted to bounded Lipschitz functions (i.e. W 1,∞ ). These papers provide a
complete framework for measure solutions as elements of the space of bounded
nonnegative Radon measures M + (R+ ) endowed with the so-called flat metric
(the dual bounded Lipschitz distance),

ρF (μ, ν) = sup f d(μ − ν). (2)
f ∈W 1,∞, R+
f W 1,∞ ≤1
Since, for every μ, ν ∈ M (R+ ) it holds that ρF (μ, ν) < ∞, the flat metric
becomes a promising candidate for the analysis of non-conservative problems.
Apart from the existence and uniqueness of solutions, another key aspect of
well-posedness theory is continuity with respect to initial conditions and model
functions. In the case of measure solutions, such results cannot be shown in
terms of strong topologies such as the one generated by the total variation
norm, see Examples 2.1 and 2.2. For instance, if μt(1) and μt(2) are two measure
solutions with initial values μ0(1) and μ0(2) then

ρF μt(1), μt(2) ≤ eCt ρF μ0(1), μ0(2)
for some constant C depending on the model functions (see Theorem 2.5).
Modelling with measures is an active field of research. In particular, two
workshops “Modelling with Measures” and “Mathematical Modelling with
Measures: Where Applications, Probability and Determinism Meet” took
place at the Lorentz Center in Leiden in August 2013 and December 2018,
respectively (Ackleh et al., 2020b, 2015c). Organised by Azmy S. Ackleh,
Rinaldo M. Colombo, Paola Goatin, Sander C. Hille and Adrian Muntean,
these events brought researchers together to work on applications of measure
spaces in different contexts of probability theory, functional analysis and their
applications.
8 Introduction
Content of the book

We start in Chapter 1 with a presentation of the analytical framework used in the
remainder of the monograph. We provide a characterisation of the functional
space of finite signed Radon measures M (S) defined on a metric space S. For
the space of measures, we discuss possible distances and justify the choice of
the dual bounded Lipschitz distance (the flat norm). The chapter is mainly based
on a selection of results from Gwiazda et al. (2018) and Hille and Worm (2009).
It provides a functional analytic setting for the study of measure solutions of
structured population models with individual states defined on a quite general
metric space. The novelty of Chapter 1 is in showing that a suitable structure of
the metric space S is provided by so-called proper spaces, i.e. spaces in which
every bounded and closed subset is compact. It is a sufficient condition since all
necessary topological properties of the space M (S) can be obtained without
too much technical difficulty. Heuristically speaking, the notion of a proper
metric space allows one to characterise it as sufficiently similar to R that all
the discussed results can easily be extended from R to S. This chapter provides
a comprehensive collection of the results that have been previously scattered
over the literature. It is supplemented by appendices at the end of the book that
include a survey of definitions and results from topology, functional analysis,
function spaces, differential geometry, measure theory, Bochner integrals and
semigroup theory.
Many structured population models are defined on the state space R+ , which
simplifies the analytic setting introduced in Chapter 1. Thus, in Chapter 2 we
present the theory of measure solutions for structured population models for
that case. The material is mainly a recollection of the results of ours from
Carrillo et al. (2014), Gwiazda et al. (2010) and Gwiazda and Marciniak-
Czochra (2010). The aim of that chapter is to discuss a simple example that will
be generalised to an arbitrary proper metric space in the following chapter. As
we work on R+ , many proofs are based on explicit computations, for example,
using the method of characteristics. The chapter concludes with a theoretical
discussion of a splitting technique that allows one to construct solutions of
structured population models by the superposition of two processes, growth and
transport. The main observation in Chapter 2 is that a solution of a structured
population model can be given as a push-forward of the initial data along the
flow of a vector field; see Definition 3.7 for more details. A major advantage of
this perspective is that the notion of a (weak) solution to the transport equation
can be generalised in a way that the concept of differentiability is avoided. This,
in turn, paves the way for a model formulation in abstract proper metric spaces
(S, d) without a linear structure, which is the content of Chapter 3.
Introduction 9
For example, the approach in Chapter 3 is general enough to account for

problems that are defined on graphs such as in Figure 1. Our presentation follows
the treatment of the classical model in Chapter 2, with necessary extensions
to deal with the lack of a vector space structure. With this aim, we exploit the
theory established in Chapter 1 for Radon measures defined on a proper metric
space (S, d). Similar results can be obtained under the weaker assumption of
a Polish metric space. However, as the latter extension is based on lengthy
technical proofs, we present them in Appendix G.5.
As already mentioned, the space of measures is motivated by, among other
things, the analysis of numerical algorithms, which is the topic of Chapter 4. We
start by discussing methods for computing the flat metric and the Wasserstein
distance between measures. Then, we present rigorous proofs of convergence for
the Escalator Boxcar Train algorithm (Section 4.3) and the splitting technique
(Section 4.4).
Chapter 5 is devoted to a brief discussion of recent progress in the theory
of measure solutions of structured population models. The topics presented
include asymptotic analysis, recent developments in optimal control problems
and models with lower regularity coefficients, which appear for instance in
hierarchically size-structured populations. We do not aim here for a detailed
presentation but, rather, to sketch potential directions for further studies.
1
Analytical Setting
The first chapter is devoted to an introduction to the basic concepts and

function spaces used in the remainder of this monograph. Further mathematical
background on the theory of Radon measures and Lipschitz functions is
provided in the appendices.
We start with the functional analytic structure of the space of finite signed
Radon measures M (S) defined on a metric space S. The main difficulty lies in
finding assumptions on the metric space S such that it is fairly general but allows
us to overcome technical difficulties in proofs. We show that a proper metric
space (see Definition A.12) provides an appropriate setting, since it is locally
compact, separable and complete (see Corollary A.16 and Remark A.15). The
extension of results under weaker assumptions on the structure of S but requiring
more technical arguments is deferred to the appendices. Another important issue
in the proposed framework is the choice of the norm appropriate to studying
nonlinear structured population models on M (S). We justify the choice of
the flat norm (the bounded Lipschitz distance) and show the properties of the
resulting functional space. Finally, we discuss briefly other metrics used in the
literature for the space of Radon measures.
1.1 Preliminaries
First, we introduce the space of bounded Lipschitz functions following Dudley
(2002, Proposition 11.2.1). As usual, the space of continuous functions from
X to Y is denoted by C 0 (X, Y ). If Y = R, we omit the second argument and
simply write C 0 (X ). In most cases, we assume that the underlying space is
a metric space (S, d) which is separable and complete. In this case, we say
that (S, d) is Polish. Sometimes we will need the stronger assumption that
all closed and bounded subsets of S are compact. If this is the case, we call
10
(S, d) proper. If (X, · X ) is a normed space and A ⊆ X a subset, then we

denote by A · X the closure of A with respect to the norm · X . In cases
where it is clear which norm is meant, we will omit the norm in the superscript.
In Appendix A we have collected some topological background information
which can be consulted at any time. This is also true for the appendices on
functional analysis (Appendix B), function spaces (Appendices C and D) and
measure theory (Appendices F and G).
Definition 1.1 Let (S, d) be a metric space. The space of bounded Lipschitz
functions is given by
BL(S) = {ψ ∈ C 0 (S) | ψ∞ < ∞, |ψ|Lip < ∞}.
Furthermore, for f ∈ BL(S), there are two equivalent bounded Lipschitz norms:

ψBL(S) := max ψ∞, |ψ|Lip ,
ψBL+ (S) := ψ∞ + |ψ|Lip,
where ψ∞ = supx ∈S |ψ(x)|,
|ψ(x) − ψ(y)|
|ψ|Lip = sup .
xy d(x, y)
Whenever it is clear which underlying space S is meant, we omit S in the index.
In Theorems C.2 and C.3 it is proven that (BL(S), · BL ) is a Banach algebra
for a pointwise product of functions, i.e. for ψ, ϕ ∈ BL(S), it holds that
ψ · ϕBL ≤ 2ψBL · ϕBL .
Definition 1.2 The dual space of BL(S) is denoted by BL(S) ∗ and is given by
BL(S) ∗ := L(BL(S), R),
where L(X, Y ) is the space of all bounded linear operators from X to Y . For
T ∈ BL(S) ∗ the operator norm is defined by
T x
T := sup = sup T x = sup T x.
x0 xBL x BL ≤1 x BL =1
As R is a Banach space, BL(S) ∗ equipped with the operator norm is complete.

Definition 1.3 Let (S, d) be a metric space. We define
· ∞
(i) C0 (S) = Cc0 (S) , where the subscript c denotes compact support.
(ii) Cb (S) = {ψ ∈ C 0 (S) | ψ∞ < ∞}.
Remark 1.4 For S = Rd , the following holds:
C0 (Rd ) = {ψ ∈ C 0 (Rd ) | ψ(x) → 0 for |x| → ∞}.
12 Analytical Setting
Next we introduce the concept of Radon measures. We will work with the
following definitions. For more details we refer to Appendix F or to Bogachev
(2007b, Chapter 7.1) or Folland (1984, Chapter 3).
Definition 1.5 Let (Ω, A) be a measurable space. A map μ : A → R is called
a signed measure on (Ω, A) if
(i) μ(∅) = 0,
(ii) μ(Ω) ∈ (−∞, ∞] or μ(Ω) ∈ [−∞, ∞),
(iii) μ is σ-additive, i.e. for each famliy ( Ai )i ∈N ⊆ A of disjoint sets,
∞
μ Ai = μ( Ai ).
i ∈N i=1
To define an integral with respect to a signed measure, we need a

decomposition of the measure into positive and negative parts.
Theorem 1.6 (Hahn decomposition theorem; Billingsley, 1979, Theorem 32.1)
Let μ be a signed measure on (Ω, A). Then, there exist sets P ∈ A and
N = Ω \ P ∈ A with the following properties:
(i) μ( A) ≥ 0 for any A ∈ A with A ⊆ P.
(ii) μ( A) ≤ 0 for any A ∈ A with A ⊆ N.
The pair (P, N ) is called Hahn decomposition of μ.
Remark 1.7 A Hahn decomposition is not unique, but essentially unique i.e.
for another decomposition ( P̃, Ñ ) of μ, the symmetric differences P P̃ and
N Ñ are strong μ-null sets in the sense that, for any A ∈ A with A ⊆ P P̃ or
A ⊆ N Ñ, it holds that μ( A) = 0.
Theorem 1.8 (Jordan decomposition theorem; Folland, 1984, Theorem 3.4)

Every signed measure μ has a unique decomposition μ = μ+ − μ− into two
nonnegative measures μ+ and μ− . For any Hahn decomposition (P, N ) of μ
this decomposition has the following properties. For A ∈ A
(i) μ+ ( A) = 0 if A ⊆ N and
(ii) μ ( A) = 0 if A ⊆ P.
Remark 1.9 The pair (μ+, μ− ) is called the Jordan decomposition of μ.
Note that, in contrast with the Hahn decomposition, the Jordan decomposition
is unique.
Remark 1.10 Let μ : A → R be a signed measure on (Ω, A) with
corresponding Hahn decomposition Ω = P ∪ N. Then for A ∈ A, the following
properties hold:
(a) μ+ ( A) = μ( A ∩ P) = sup{ μ(B) | B ∈ A, B ⊆ A},

(b) μ ( A) = −μ( A ∩ N ) = − inf{ μ(B) | B ∈ A, B ⊆ A}.
Definition 1.11 Let A ⊆ Ω be open and μ a (signed) measure on (Ω, A). An
integral with respect to μ is defined by

f dμ = f dμ+ − f dμ ,
A A A
where (μ+, μ− ) is a Jordan decomposition of μ provided that at least one of the
integrals A f dμ+ , A f dμ− is finite. In that case, we say that f is integrable
with respect to μ.
For the definition of an integral with respect to a nonnegative measure, we
refer to Evans and Gariepy (2015, Section 1.3) or Folland (1984, Chapter 2).
Definition 1.12 Let A ⊆ Ω be open and μ a measure on (Ω, A). The space
of L 1 functions on A with respect to μ is defined by

L 1 ( A, μ) := f : A → R |ψ| dμ is well defined and finite .
A
In the case A = Ω, we omit A in the notation and write L 1 (μ).

Definition 1.13 (Klenke, 2014, Corollary 7.45) For a measure μ on (Ω, A)
its variation is defined as
| μ( A)| := μ+ ( A) + μ ( A) for all A ∈ A.
Definition 1.14 Let (Ω, A) be a measurable space and let μ be a signed
measure.
(i) μ is called finite if | μ(Ω)| < ∞.
(ii) μ is called σ-finite if there is a sequence of subsets (Ωn )n∈N ⊆ A such
that Ω = n∈N Ωn and | μ(Ωn )| < ∞ for all n ∈ N.
Definition 1.15 Let (S, d) be a metric space with corresponding Borel σ-
algebra B(S). Then a σ-finite measure μ is called
(i) locally finite or a Borel measure, if there exists for each x ∈ S an open
set U x with μ(U) < ∞,
(ii) inner regular, if for each A ∈ B(S)
μ( A) = sup{ μ(K ) | K ⊆ A compact},
(iii) outer regular, if for each A ∈ B(S),
μ( A) = inf{ μ(U) | A ⊆ U open},
(iv) regular, if μ is inner and outer regular,
(v) a Radon measure, if μ is an inner regular Borel measure.
Definition 1.16 Let (S, d) be a metric space. Then, we define the space of
finite signed Radon measures
M (S) = { μ | μ is a finite and signed Radon measure}
and the corresponding cone of nonnegative measures
M + (S) = { μ ∈ M (S) | μ ≥ 0} .
From now on we will use the term “measure” whether it is signed or not. If
a distinction is necessary, we will specify it.
In the next step we introduce two forms of convergence in M (S) in duality
with the classes of functions introduced in Definition 1.3.
Definition 1.17 Let (S, d) be a metric space. A sequence (μn )n∈N ⊂ M (S)
converges
(i) weakly∗ to a measure μ ∈ M (S) if and only if

lim ψ(x) dμn (x) = ψ(x) dμ(x) for all ψ ∈ C0 (S),
n→∞ S S
(ii) narrowly to a measure μ ∈ M (S) if and only if

lim ψ(x) dμn (x) = ψ(x) dμ(x) for all ψ ∈ Cb (S).
n→∞ S S
In probability theory, the latter convergence is also known as the weak

convergence of measures. However, as this book also contains a lot of functional
analysis in which the term weak convergence is already well established and
in general has a slightly different meaning, we have tried to avoid this conflict
by using the term narrow convergence. For further information consider for
example Billingsley (1979).
Remark 1.18 In view of Section 2.1, we say that a map
μ• : [0, T] → M (S), t → μt
is narrowly continuous if μ• is continuous with respect to narrow convergence,

i.e.

lim ψ(x) dμs (x) = ψ(x) dμt (x) for all ψ ∈ Cb (S) and for all t ∈ [0, T].
s→t S S
Similarly, μ• is weakly∗
continuous provided that

lim ψ(x) dμs (x) = ψ(x) dμt (x) for all ψ ∈ C0 (S) and for all t ∈ [0, T].
s→t S S
1.2 M (S) as a Normed Space

Next we want to introduce an appropriate notion of distance on the space of
Radon measures. In the following, we present several possibilities and discuss
their applicability.
Definition 1.19 For a measure μ on (Ω, A), its total variation μTV is
defined as
μTV := | μ(Ω)| = μ+ (Ω) + μ− (Ω),
where μ+ and μ− are measures arising from Theorem 1.8 (Jordan

decomposition).
The theory of Radon measures under the total variation norm is already quite
well developed; see for example Folland (1984, §7.3).
Theorem 1.20 (Elstrodt, 2011, Chapter VII, Theorem 1.14) Let (S, d) be a
metric space. Then (M (S), · TV ) is a Banach space.
Proof We only have to show the completeness. Let (μn )n∈N ⊂ M (S) be
a Cauchy sequence with respect to · TV . Thus, for all ε > 0 there exists
N0 (ε) ∈ N such that μm − μn TV < ε for all n, m ≥ N0 (ε). In particular,
| μm (B) − μn (B)| ≤ μm − μn TV < ε for all B ∈ B(S).
Hence, (μn )n∈N converges uniformly on B(S) to a map μ : B(S) → R by the

completeness of R. The construction of μ shows that the measure is finitely
additive and μ(∅) = 0. We still have to show σ-additivity. For this let ( Ak )k ∈N ⊂
B(S) be a sequence of disjoint sets and A = ∞ k=1 Ak . Fix ε > 0 and set
N := N0 (ε/3). The measure μ N is signed and thus, by the σ-additivity of μ N ,
there exists n0 (ε) ∈ N such that
n
ε
μ N ( A) − μ N ( Ak ) < for all n ≥ n0 (ε).
k=1
3
Hence, for all n ≥ n0 (ε),

n n
μ( A) − μ( Ak ) ≤ μ( A) − μ N ( A) + μ N ( A) − μ N ( Ak )
k=1 k=1
n
n
+ μN Ak − μ Ak < ε.
k=1 k=1
In particular, μ ∈ M (S).
Unfortunately, the total variation norm · TV is in most cases too strong for
applications, as we can see in the following example.
Example 1.21 Consider the sequence of Dirac measures (δ xn )n∈N ⊂ M + (S)
where x n → x in S. Having in mind applications, it would be convenient if
δ xn → δ x . However, this is not the case for the total variation norm, as it
holds that
δ a − δ b TV = δ a (S) + δ b (S) = 2 for all a b.
This example shows also that (M (S), · TV ) is not separable in the case of
uncountable S. Hence, we need to search for a norm on M (S) that guarantees
better topological properties. The following results are based on Bogachev
(2007b) and Hille and Worm (2009, Section 3).
Definition 1.22 Let μ ∈ M (S). We introduce the dual bounded Lipschitz
norm, also called the flat norm:

μBL := sup
∗ ψ dμ ψ ∈ BL(S), ψBL ≤ 1 . (1.1)
S
This norm is sometimes also called the Kantorovich–Rubinstein norm or the

dual Fortet–Mourier norm.
Remark 1.23 We can deduce directly from the above definition the following
properties of the flat norm.
(i) For each λ > 0, it holds that

1
μ BL∗ := sup ψ dμ ψ ∈ BL(S), ψBL ≤ λ .
λ S
(ii) Since for each ψ ∈ BL(S) the function −ψ is also in BL(S), it is not
necessary to apply the absolute value in the definition of ·BL∗ to guarantee
nonnegativity.
Proposition 1.24 The quantity · BL∗ , as given in Definition 1.22, is a norm.
Proof We first show that · BL∗ is well defined. For μ ∈ M (S) and ψ ∈ BL(S)
with ψBL ≤ 1, it holds that

ψ(x) dμ(x) ≤ ψ∞ 1 d| μ|(x) ≤ | μ(S)| = μTV < ∞.
S S
Since the right-hand side is independent of ψ, we can apply the supremum over
ψ and obtain μBL∗ ≤ μTV .
It remains to show that · BL∗ defines a norm. Obviously, · BL∗ is a
seminorm. To see that it is actually a norm, let μBL∗ = 0. Then S ψ dμ = 0
for all ψ ∈ BL(S) with ψBL ≤ 1. Following Remark 1.23, for arbitrary n ∈ N
we can improve the upper bound of the norm by applying

1
ψ dμ = 0 for all ψ ∈ BL(S), ψBL ≤ n.
n S

Thus S ψ dμ = 0 for all ψ ∈ BL(S) with ψBL ≤ n for all n ∈ N.
By Proposition C.11, the indicator function of every closed or open set is the
pointwise limit of bounded Lipschitz continuous functions f n with f n ∞ ≤ 1
and | f n |Lip = n, so f n ∈ BL(S) and f n BL ≤ n. Hence, we have by the
dominated convergence theorem that μ(T ) = 0 for all open or closed subsets
T ⊆ S:

μ(T ) = χT dμ = lim f n (x) dμ(x) = lim f n (x) dμ(x) = lim 0 = 0.
S S n→∞ n→∞ S n→∞
It follows that μ(T ) = 0 for all Borel sets T ⊆ S and that μ is therefore the zero
measure. In particular, · BL∗ defines a norm.
Remark 1.25 Let μ ∈ M (S). In the above proof we saw that μBL∗ ≤ μTV .
In particular, the total variation norm defines a stronger norm than the flat norm.
Proposition 1.26 Let (S, d) be a proper metric space. Then the space of
test functions in the definition of the flat norm (1.1) can be narrowed to
BL(S) ∩ Cc0 (S). In particular,

μBL = sup
∗ ψ dμ ψ ∈ BL(S) ∩ Cc0 (S), ψBL ≤ 1 .
S
Proof If S has a bounded diameter then properness implies that S is compact

as S ⊆ S is closed. Thus, BL(S) ⊆ Cc0 (S) and the assertion follows. In the case
where S is unbounded, fix ε > 0 and μ ∈ M (S). According to Lemma G.23,
there is a compact set K such that | μ|(S \ K ) ≤ ε. Consider the open set
2
B = x ∈ S dist(x, K ) < .
ε
Owing to Proposition C.10 we can find a Lipschitz continuous function η K
such that 0 ≤ η K ≤ 1, η K = 1 on K and η K = 0 on S \ B. Furthermore,
2
|η K |Lip ≤ ≤ ε.
d(S \ B, K )
Let ψ be a fixed function in BL(S) with ψBL ≤ 1. Then,

ψ dμ = ψ dμ + ψ dμ ≤ ε + ψ dμ = ε + η K ψ dμ. (1.2)
S S\K K K K
Moreover,

η K ψ dμ − η K ψ dμ = η K ψ dμ ≤ | μ|(S \ K ) ≤ ε.
K B B\K
Therefore, estimate (1.2) implies that

ψ dμ ≤ 2ε + η K ψ dμ = 2ε + η K ψ dμ
S B S
as η K vanishes outside B. Note that by construction ψη K ∈ BL(S) with compact
support in B ⊆ B and
η K ψ∞ ≤ 1, |η K ψ|Lip ≤ 1 + ε.
We conclude that

μ BL∗ ≤ 2ε + sup ψ dμ ψ ∈ BL(S) ∩ Cc0 (S), ψBL ≤ 1 + ε .
S
We can normalise ψ to obtain

ψ
μBL∗ ≤ 2ε + (1 + ε) sup dμ ψ ∈ BL(S) ∩ Cc0 (S), ψBL ≤ 1 + ε
S 1 + ε

≤ 2ε + (1 + ε) sup ψ dμ ψ ∈ BL(S) ∩ Cc0 (S), ψBL ≤ 1 .
S
Since ε > 0 is arbitrary, the conclusion follows.
Example 1.27 Consider the sequence of Dirac measures (δ xn )n∈N ⊂ M + (S)
where x n → x in S. In contrast with Example 1.21, now it holds that
δ xn − δ x BL∗ = sup |ψ(x n ) − ψ(x)| ≤ d(x n, x) → 0 as n → ∞.
ψ ∈BL(S)
ψ BL ≤1
Now, we aim at the characterisation of M (S) as a subspace of BL(S) ∗ .

Definition 1.28 Each μ ∈ M (S) defines a linear functional Iμ on BL(S) via

Iμ (ψ) := ψ dμ.
S
Proposition 1.29 Let μ ∈ M (S). Then Iμ as given in Definition 1.28 is a
bounded linear functional on BL(S).
Proof Let f ∈ BL(S) with f BL ≤ 1. Then

|Iμ ( f )| = f dμ ≤ sup ψ dμ = μBL∗ , (1.3)
S ψ BL ≤1 S
where we have used that the absolute value is not necessary when we take the
supremum over all ψ ∈ BL(S).
Lemma 1.30 Let (S, d) be a metric space. Then the linear map I : M (S) →
BL(S) ∗ , μ → Iμ is injective.
Proof Let μ, ν ∈ M (S) with Iμ = Iν . Then in particular, Iμ−ν (ψ) = Iμ (ψ) −
Iν (ψ) vanishes for all ψ ∈ BL(S). Hence, μ − νBL∗ = 0 and thus μ = ν.
Remark 1.31 According to Lemma 1.30 M (S) is continuously embedded
into BL(S) ∗ and we can identify μ ∈ M (S) with Iμ ∈ BL(S) ∗ .
We would like to learn more about the structure of M (S) under the flat norm.
For this it is useful to have a closer look at the values of Dirac measures.
Lemma 1.32 Let (S, d) be a metric space. Let x, y ∈ S. Then δ x BL∗ = 1 and
δ x − δ y BL∗ = min{2, d(x, y)}.
Proof We have
δ x BL∗ = sup {ψ(x) | ψ ∈ BL(S), ψBL ≤ 1} ≤ sup ψBL = 1.
ψ BL ≤1

Furthermore, δ x BL∗ ≥ S 1 dδ x = 1(x) = 1, and hence δ x BL∗ = 1.
Now let x, y ∈ S be fixed and without loss of generality assume x y,
otherwise the statement holds trivially. Furthermore, let ψ ∈ BL(S) with
ψBL ≤ 1. Then
|δ x (ψ) − δ y (ψ)| = |ψ(x) − ψ(y)| ≤ min{|ψ|Lip d(x, y), 2 ψ∞ }
= min{d(x, y), 2}. (1.4)
Hence, δ x − δ y BL∗ ≤ min{d(x, y), 2}. Now we will construct a function that
actually realises this upper bound. Consider
⎧
⎪ min{−1 + d(x, z), 1}, d(x, y) < 2,
⎪
ψ(z) = ⎨
⎪ min{−1 + 2d(x, z) , 1}, (1.5)
⎪ d(x, y) ≥ 2.
⎩ d(x, y)
Since the case distinction in (1.5) depends only on d(x, y) and not on z, we can
handle each case separately.
Case 1: d(x, y) < 2 First note that, ψ∞ ≤ 1. Furthermore,

|ψ(a) − ψ(b)| = |min{−1 + d(x, a), 1} − min{−1 + d(x, b), 1}| .
• If d(x, a), d(x, b) ≤ 2 then
|ψ(a) − ψ(b)| = |d(x, a) − d(x, b)| ≤ d(a, b).
• If d(x, a) ≤ 2 and d(x, b) ≥ 2 then
|ψ(a) − ψ(b)| = 2 − d(x, a) ≤ 1 − d(x, a) + (−1) + d(x, b) ≤ d(a, b).
• If d(x, a), d(x, b) ≥ 2 then

|ψ(a) − ψ(b)| = |1 − 1| = 0 ≤ d(a, b).
In particular, we have proven that ψBL ≤ 1. Hence,
|δ x (ψ) − δ y (ψ)| = | − 1 − (−1 + d(x, y))| = d(x, y) = min{2, d(x, y)},
so δ x − δ y BL∗ ≥ min{2, d(x, y)} which proves the claim for this case.
Case 2: d(x, y) ≥ 2 Obviously, ψ∞ ≤ 1 and the proof that |ψ|Lip ≤ 1 is

similar to that for case 1. Thus, ψBL ≤ 1 and
|δ x (ψ) − δ y (ψ)| = | − 1 − 1| = 2 = min{2, d(x, y)},
so δ x − δ y BL∗ ≥ min{2, d(x, y)} in this case also.
Corollary 1.33 Let (S, d) be a metric space. Then in general the map
S → BL(S) ∗ , x → δ x is not an isometry.
Remark 1.34 Let a, b ≥ 0 and x, y ∈ S. Then we can generalise Lemma
1.32 to
aδ x − bδ y BL ∗ = min{a, b} min{2, d(x, y)} + d(a, b)
using the triangle inequality as an upper bound and the test function (1.5) to
realise the upper bound.
Next, we investigate completeness of M (S). To do so, we introduce uniformly
discrete metric spaces (Kalton, 2016).
Definition 1.35 Let (S, d) be a metric space and A ⊆ S. The set A is called
uniformly discrete, if
inf d(x, y) > 0.
xy
x,y ∈ A
Equivalently, there exists ε > 0 such that d(x, y) > ε for all x y, x, y ∈ A.
Theorem 1.36 Let (S, d) be a metric space. Then, the following equivalence
holds:
· BL∗
(i) M (S) = M (S).
(ii) S is uniformly discrete.
· BL∗
Proof (i) ⇒ (ii). If M (S) = M (S) then (M (S), · BL∗ ) is a Banach
space. Consider the identity map Id : (M (S), · TV ) → (M (S), · BL∗ ).
Obviously, Id is linear and bijective. Furthermore, Id is bounded since
· BL∗ ≤ · TV by Remark 1.25. Hence, all assumptions for Theorem B.10
(inverse mapping) are fulfilled and the inverse of Id is linear and bounded.
We assume by way of contradiction that S is not uniformly discrete. Thus,

there exist x n, yn ∈ S such that 0 < d(x n, yn ) < 1/n. We set μn = δ xn − δ yn .
Then μn TV = 2 but by Lemma 1.32 μn BL∗ = min{2, d(x n, yn )} < 1/n for
all n ∈ N. Hence,
1
2 = μn TV = Id−1 (μn )TV ≤ μn BL∗ < ,
n
which yields a contradiction to the boundedness of Id−1 . So S has to be
uniformly discrete.
(ii) ⇒ (i). Let S be uniformly discrete. Thus, there exists ε > 0 such that
d(x, y) > ε for all x, y ∈ S, x y. Let μ ∈ M (S) with corresponding Hahn
decomposition (see Theorem 1.6) S = P ∪ N and Jordan decomposition (see
Theorem 1.8) μ = μ+ − μ . Consider the following function ψ : S → R, where
⎧
⎪ ε
⎪
⎪
⎪ min ,1 , x ∈ P,
2
ψ(x) = ⎨
⎪
⎪
⎪ ε
⎪ − min , 1 , x ∈ N .
⎩ 2
Then ψ∞ ≤ 1 and a case distinction for the possible values of ψ easily reveals
that
|ψ(x) − ψ(y)| ε
|ψ|Lip = sup ≤ = 1,
xy d(x, y) ε
so ψBL ≤ 1. In addition,

ε ε ε
ψ dμ = min , 1 dμ − min , 1 dμ = min , 1 (μ(P) − μ(N ))
S P 2 N 2 2
ε +
= min , 1 μ (P) − μ (P) − (μ+ (N ) − μ (N )
2
ε ε
= min , 1 μ+ (P) + μ− (N ) = min , 1 (μ+ (S) + μ− (S))
2 2
ε
= min , 1 μTV .
2
Here we have used that μ+ (N ) = 0 = μ− (P) by Theorem 1.8. In particular,
taking the supremum, we see that
1
μTV ≤ μBL∗
ε
min 2, 1
and the norms · TV and · BL∗ are equivalent on M (S). Thus, using
Theorem 1.20,
· BL∗ · TV
M (S) = M (S) = M (S).
Now, following Gwiazda et al. (2018, Theorem 4.19), we show that the space
(M (S), · BL∗ ) is separable.
Theorem 1.37 Let (S, d) be a separable metric space. Then the metric space
(M (S), · BL∗ ) is separable.
Proof The separability of (S, d) implies that there exists a sequence (x i )i ∈N
dense in S. For ε > 0 consider the family of sets {Bε (x i )}i ∈N and define

i−1
Ui,ε := Bε (x i ) \ Bε (x j ).
j=1
The Ui,ε are disjoint Borel sets with ∞i=1 Ui,ε = S by construction. We now
construct a countable and dense subset of M (S) in several steps.
Step 1: Approximation of a single measure μ Let μ ∈ M (S) and set

∞
με = μ(Ui,ε )δ xi .
i=1
Since supx ∈Ui, ε d(x i, x) ≤ ε, it holds for ψ ∈ BL(S) with ψBL ≤ 1 that

ψ d(μ − με )
S
∞ ∞
ε
= ψ d(μ − μ ) = ψ(x) dμ − ψ(x i ) dμ
i=1 Ui, ε i=1 Ui, ε Ui, ε
∞ ∞
= (ψ(x) − ψ(x i )) dμ ≤ |ψ(x) − ψ(x i )| d| μ|
i=1 Ui, ε i=1 Ui, ε
∞ ∞
≤ | μ|(Ui,ε ) sup |ψ(x) − ψ(x i )| ≤ | μ|(Ui,ε ) sup d(x i, x)
i=1 x ∈Ui, ε i=1 x ∈Ui, ε
∞
≤ ε| μ|(Ui,ε ) = | μ|(S) ε.
i=1
Taking the supremum over all such ψ, we obtain μ− με BL∗ ≤ μTV ε = C1 ε.
Step 2: Rational approximation of με Since Q is dense in R we can choose

qi ∈ Q such that |qi − μ(Ui,ε )| < /i 2 . Hence, it is possible to replace the

measure με by a rational approximation η = ∞ i=1 qi δ xi . Indeed, let ψ ∈ BL(S)
with ψBL ≤ 1; then
∞ ∞
ε π2
ψ d(με − η) = ψ(x i )(μ(Ui,ε ) − qi ) ≤ 1 2 = ε.
S i=1 i=1
i 6
Taking the supremum over all such ψ yields με − η BL∗ ≤ C2 ε.
Step 3: Finite approximation of η We approximate the measure η by its finite

n
partial sum νn = i=1 qi δ xi . Since ∞
i=1 | μ(Ui,ε )| = | μ(S)| < ∞, there is an
N ∈ N such that
∞
| μ(Ui,ε )| ≤ | μ(S)| ε for all n ≥ N .
i=n+1
Let ψ ∈ BL(S) with ψBL ≤ 1; then

∞ n ∞ ∞
ψ d(η − νn ) = ψ(x i )qi − ψ(x i )qi = ψ(x i )qi ≤ 1|qi |
S i=1 i=1 i=n+1 i=n+1
∞ ε
≤ | μ(Ui,ε )| +
i=n+1
i2
∞
π2
≤ | μ(Ui,ε )| + ε ≤ | μ(S)| ε + C4 ε.
i=n+1
6
So we see that η − νn BL∗ ≤ C5 ε by applying the supremum.

If we put everything together we have, for n large enough,
μ − νn BL∗ ≤ μ − με BL∗ + με − η ε BL∗ + η ε − νn BL∗ ≤ C ε.
The computations above yield that the set of measures

⎧
⎪
n ⎫
⎪
⎨ qi δ xi | n ∈ N, qi ∈ Q ⎬
⎪ ⎪
⎩ i=1 ⎭
is dense in M (S) with respect to · BL∗ . Furthermore, it is also countable by
the countability of Q. Hence, (M (S), · BL∗ ) is separable.
Corollary 1.38 Let (S, d) be a separable metric space. Then (M + (S), · BL∗ )
is separable.
Proof This follows from the proof of Theorem 1.37 and the fact that if μ ∈
M + (S), so are με , η and νn . In particular, the set
⎧
⎪
n ⎫
⎪
⎨ q δ n ∈ N, q ∈ Q+
⎬
⎪ i x i i ⎪
⎩ i=1 ⎭
is countable and dense in M + (S).
We also see the following in the proof of Theorem 1.37:
Corollary 1.39 Let (S, d) be a separable metric space. Then the linear span
lin{δ s }s ∈S is dense in M (S) with respect to the flat norm. In particular,
· BL∗ · BL∗
lin{δ s }s ∈S = M (S) .
· BL∗
Corollary 1.40 Let (S, d) be a separable metric space. Then M (S) is
also separable, as a closure of a separable metric space.
Theorem 1.41 Let (S, d) be a separable metric space. Then it holds that

· BL∗ ∗
M (S) = BL(S).
Proof Consider a linear space D ⊆ M (S) spanned by (δ s )s ∈S as a Hamel

basis:
⎧
⎪
n ⎫
⎪
D = lin{δ s | s ∈ S} = ⎨
⎪ α k δ s k n ∈ N, α k ∈ R, s k ∈ S ⎬
⎪
⎩ k=1 ⎭
∗
and let D be its dual space, i.e. the space of linear functionals bounded with
respect to the operator norm corresponding to · BL∗ . We claim that each
functional T ∈ D∗ can be identified with a function ψ ∈ BL(S).
Indeed, for ψ ∈ BL(S) we define Tψ via

Tψ (μ) = ψ dμ for all μ ∈ D.
S
Clearly, Tψ is linear. We now show the boundedness of the functional. Let
ψBL =: C < ∞. Then for μ ∈ D,

ψ
|Tψ (μ)| = ψ dμ = C dμ ≤ C sup ϕ dμ = C μBL∗ .
S SC ϕ BL ≤1 S
In particular, Tψ ∈ D∗ .
On the other hand, consider a functional T ∈ D∗ . The structure of D and the
linearity of the functional imply that T is already uniquely defined by its values
on Dirac measures. We identify T with the function
ψ : S → R, s → T (δ s )
and claim that ψ ∈ BL(S). Assume ψ was not bounded. Without loss of
generality we can assume that there exists a sequence such that limn→∞ ψ(s n ) =
∞. But then
lim T (δ sn ) = lim ψ(s n ) = ∞,
n→∞ n→∞
which contradicts the boundedness of the functional. If ψ is not Lipschitz

continuous we can assume without loss of generality that there exists a sequence
such that
ψ(s1n ) − ψ(s2n )
lim =∞
n→∞ d(s1n, s2n )
and d(s1n, s2n ) < 2. We define the sequence of measures (μn )n∈N with
δ sn1 − δ sn2
μn = .
d(s1n, s2n )
Then, owing to the linearity of T,

T (δ sn1 ) − T (δ sn2 ) ψ(s1n ) − ψ(s2n )
T (μn ) = = →∞
d(s1n, s2n ) d(s1n, s2n )
by assumption. However, according to Lemma 1.32 we have for all n ∈ N,
min{2, d(s1n, s2n )} d(s1n, s2n )
μn BL∗ = = = 1,
d(s1n, s2n ) d(s1n, s2n )
which provides a contradiction to the boundedness of T. Hence, we have shown
that we can identify D ∗ with BL(S).
By Corollary 1.39 it holds that
· BL∗ · BL∗
D = M (S) ,
· BL∗
so in particular D is dense in M (S) . Thus, we can
extend thelinear and
· BL∗ ∗
bounded functionals on D uniquely to functionals in M (S) . Indeed,
· BL∗
let T ∈ D∗ and μ ∈ M (S) with approximating sequence μn → μ. Then
we set
· BL∗
T̃ : M (S) → R, T̃ (μ) = lim T (μn ).
n→∞
The linearity of T̃ is clear. For its boundedness consider

|T̃ (μ)| = lim |T (μn )| ≤ C μn BL∗ → C μBL∗ .
n→∞
If we can show that T̃ is

independent of the approximating sequence (μn )n∈N
· BL∗ ∗
then the extension T̃ ∈ M (S) . So let νn → μ be another approximating
sequence with limit limn→∞ T (νn ) = T (μ). Then T̃ | D = ψ = T | D and thus
the linear and bounded functionals coincide on a dense subspace. By continuity
they are identical and the extension is independent of μn . We identify T̃ with
ψ and this completes the proof.
· BL∗
Corollary 1.42 Let S be uncountable and separable. Then M (S)
· BL∗
(BL(S)) ∗ . In particular, M (S) is not reflexive.

· BL∗ ∗
Proof According to Theorem 1.41, we have M (S) = BL(S).
· BL ∗
∗∗
Applying the dual space operator again yields M (S) = (BL(S)) ∗ .
Furthermore, every normed space can be embedded canonically into its bidual
· BL∗
space. Hence, M (S) ⊆ (BL(S)) ∗ . However, this inclusion has to be strict,
· BL∗
i.e. M (S) (BL(S)) ∗ . Indeed, (BL(S)) ∗ is nonseparable as the dual
space to the nonseparable space BL(S) for an uncountable set S, by Proposition

· BL∗
C.5. On the other hand, Corollary 1.40 states that M (S) is separable.
· BL∗
Remark 1.43 It is obvious that M (S) is complete as a closed subspace
of the Banach space (BL(S)) ∗ .
1.3 The Positive Cone M + (S)

Now we restrict ourselves to the space of nonnegative measures M + (S) – the
so-called positive cone. This section is mainly based on Gwiazda and
Marciniak-Czochra (2010, Chapter 2) and Gwiazda et al. (2018, Chapter 4). The
choice of the above-mentioned space often appears in the context of biologically
motivated models in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3.
Importantly, the positive cone does not possess a linear structure as there are
no additive inverses and thus M + (S) is not a vector space. To emphasise the
fact that we lose the structure of a normed space by restricting to the positive
cone, we write (M + (S), ρF ), where
ρF (μ, ν) = μ − νBL∗ (1.6)
is the (flat) metric induced by · BL∗ . On the other hand, the structure of the
cone allows us to find more structural similarities with the well-studied space
of probability measures.
Remember that S is a metric space with a fixed metric d. All topological
concepts for M (S) and M + (S) are to be understood with respect to the flat
norm associated with d unless we explicitly state something different.
Proposition 1.44 Let μ, ν ∈ M + (S). Then
(i) μBL∗ = μ(S) = μTV ,

(ii) μ + νBL∗ = μBL∗ + νBL∗ ,
(iii) if μ ≤ ν then μBL∗ ≤ νBL∗ where the partial ordering “≤” is defined
in Proposition F.18. In particular, the map μ → μBL∗ is increasing.
Proof To show (i), note that on the one hand it holds that

μBL ≤ sup ψ∞ 1 dμ ≤ μ(S) = μTV,
∗
ψ BL ≤1 S
whereas, on the other hand,

μBL∗ ≥ 1 dμ = μ(S) = μTV .
S
Statement (ii) follows directly from (i) and (iii) is clear from the definition of
· BL∗ .
Proposition 1.45 Let (S, d) be a Polish space. Then M + (S) is a closed subset
of M (S) with respect to · BL∗ .
Proof Let (μn )n∈N ⊂ M + (S) be a sequence converging to μ ∈ M (S) with
respect to the flat norm, i.e.

lim ψ dμn = ψ dμ for all ψ ∈ BL(S) with ψBL ≤ 1.
n→∞ S S

Hence, S ψ dμ ≥ 0 for all ψ ∈ BL(S) with ψ ≥ 0 and ψBL ≤ 1. Using
Remark 1.23, we can drop the restriction ψBL ≤ 1 and obtain

ψ dμ ≥ 0 for all ψ ∈ BL(S), ψ ≥ 0. (1.7)
S
By Proposition C.11, we can approximate the indicator function of every open
or closed set T ⊆ S by nonnegative bounded Lipschitz functions, so μ(T ) ≥ 0
for all T ⊆ S open or closed, by dominated convergence. However, if we want
to prove μ ∈ M + (S), we need μ(B) ≥ 0 for all Borel sets B.
According to Theorem 1.8 (Jordan decomposition), there exist μ+, μ− ∈
M + (S) with μ = μ+ − μ− . Let ε > 0 and B ∈ B(S) be a Borel set. By Theorem
F.15, both μ+ and μ− are regular and thus there exists an open set Bo ⊆ S and
a compact set Bc ⊆ S such that
• B ⊆ Bo and μ+ (Bo \ B) ≤ ε,
• Bc ⊆ B and μ (B \ Bc ) ≤ ε.
We use Proposition C.10 with A = S \ Bo and B = Bc to construct a bounded
Lipschitz continuous function η : S → [0, 1] such that η ≡ 1 on Bc and η ≡ 0
on S \ Bo (this is possible as the sets A and B are closed and disjoint). Hence,
by (1.7),

μ(B) ≥ μ(B) − η dμ
S
= μ(B) − η dμ+ − η dμ+ + η dμ + η dμ
Bo S\Bo Bc S\B c

≥ μ+ (B) − μ− (B) − η dμ+ + η dμ−
Bo Bc
≥ μ+ (B) − μ− (B) − μ+ (Bo ) + μ− (Bc )
= −μ+ (Bo \ B) − μ (B \ Bc ) ≥ −2ε.

Since this holds for every ε > 0, we have μ(B) ≥ 0 and hence μ ∈ M + (S).
A careful look at the proof of Proposition 1.45 reveals that we can drop
the assumption of convergence with respect to · BL∗ if we assume narrow
convergence instead.
Proposition 1.46 Let (S, d) be a Polish space. Then M + (S) is a closed subset
of M (S) with respect to narrow convergence.
Proof Let (μn )n∈N ⊂ M + (S) be a sequence and μ ∈ M (S) with μn → μ
narrowly. In particular,

lim ψ dμn = ψ dμ for all ψ ∈ Cb (S).
n→∞ S S
Similarly to the proof of Proposition 1.45, we conclude that μ(T ) ≥ 0 for all
B ∈ B(S) open or closed. From this point on, the proof is exactly the same.
Next, we aim to show that narrow convergence is metrizable with the flat
norm. For this, we need some preliminary results on the properties of the narrow
limit.
Theorem 1.47 Let (S, d) be a metric space and consider the measures
μ, μ1, μ2, . . . ∈ M + (S) such that μn − μBL∗ → 0. Furthermore, let ψ : S → R
be bounded. Then the following implications hold true.

(i) If ψ is lower semicontinuous, then lim inf n→∞ S ψ dμn ≥ S ψ dμ.

(ii) If ψ is upper semicontinuous, then lim supn→∞ S ψ dμn ≤ S ψ dμ.

(iii) If ψ is continuous, then S ψ dμn → S ψ dμ.
(iv) If U ⊆ S is an open subset, then lim inf n→∞ μn (U) ≥ μ(U).
(v) If V ⊆ S is a closed subset, then lim supn→∞ μn (V ) ≤ μ(V ).
(vi) If T ⊆ S is a Borel set with μ(∂T ) = 0, then μ(T ) = limn→∞ μn (T ).
Proof We start by proving (i). Let ψ : S → R be bounded and lower
semicontinuous. By Proposition C.13, there exists an increasing sequence
(ψm )m∈N of bounded Lipschitz continuous functions ψm : S → R such that
ψm → f pointwise and inf ψ ≤ ψm ≤ ψ for all m ∈ N. Since μn ∈ M + (S) we
have, for all m, n ∈ N,

ψ dμn ≥ ψm dμn .
S S
Hence, using μn → μ we obtain, for all m ∈ N,

lim inf ψ dμn ≥ lim inf ψm dμn = ψm dμ.
n→∞ S n→∞ S S
Furthermore, we have ψm → ψ pointwise and inf ψ ≤ ψm ≤ ψ. Thus, by
dominated convergence we can take the limit m → ∞, which yields (i).
To show (ii), we notice that if ψ : S → R is upper semicontinuous, then

ϕ = −ψ is lower semicontinuous and the statement follows from (i). Similarly,
if ψ is a continuous function, ψ is both lower and upper semicontinuous and
thus statement (iii) is obtained from (i) and (ii).
For U ⊆ S open, χU is lower semicontinuous and, for V ⊆ S closed, χV is
upper semicontinuous, respectively. Hence, (iv) and (v) follow from (i) and (ii).
We conclude by showing (vi). Let T 0 denote the interior of T. Then by (iv),
(v) and μ(∂T ) = 0,
μ(T ) = μ(T 0 ) ≤ lim inf un (T 0 ) ≤ lim sup un (T ) ≤ μ(T ) = μ(T ).

n→∞ n→∞
So μ(T ) = limn→∞ μn (T ).
In particular, assertion (iii) of Theorem 1.47 implies the following.
Corollary 1.48 Let (S, d) be a metric space. Furthermore, let μ, μ1, μ2, . . . ∈
M + (S) with limn→∞ μn − μBL∗ = 0. Then μn → μ narrowly for n → ∞.
Next, we introduce the concept of tightness, which allows us to control

uniformly the tails of the sequence of measures. For more examples and
conditions equivalent to tightness we refer to appendix sections G.4 and G.6.
Definition 1.49 A set N ⊆ M (S) is called tight if for each ε > 0 there exists
a compact set K ⊆ S such that
| μ|(S \ K ) < ε for all μ ∈ N .
In particular, a sequence (μn )n∈N ⊂ M (S) is tight, if N := { μn | n ∈ N} is

tight. A single measure μ is called tight, if { μ} is tight.
Remark 1.50 Let (μn )n∈N ⊂ M + (S) be tight and μ ∈ M + (S). The inner
regularity of μ implies its tightness and thus { μ} ∪ { μn | n ∈ N} is also tight.
Proposition 1.51 (Gwiazda and Marciniak-Czochra, 2010, Proposition 2.12)

Let (S, d) be a metric space and let (μn )n∈N ⊂ M (S) be a tight sequence. Then
there exists s0 ∈ S such that

lim sup 1 d| μn |(x) = 0.
R→∞ n∈N S\B R (s0 )
Proof For k ∈ N consider Kk ⊆ S compact such that | μn |(S \ Kk ) ≤ k1

for all n ∈ N. Without loss of generality, (Kk )k ∈N is an increasing sequence
of sets, i.e. Kk ⊆ Kk+1 . Choose s0 ∈ K1 arbitrary; hence s0 ∈ Kk for all k.
Furthermore, the boundedness of the sets Kk implies that there exists Rk > 0
such that Kk ⊆ BRk (s0 ). In particular,
1
sup | μn |(S \ BRk (s0 )) ≤ sup | μn |(S \ Kk ) ≤ .
n∈N n∈N k
The statement follows for k → ∞ since (Rk )k ∈N is an increasing sequence.
Remark 1.52 If (S, d) is a proper metric space, then the other direction also
holds true. See Proposition G.46.
The following theorem from Ambrosio et al. (2000, 1.59) is a direct
consequence of the Banach–Alaoglu Theorem B.13.
Theorem 1.53 (De La Vallée Poussin) Let (S, d) be locally compact and
separable. Let (μn )n∈N ⊂ M (S) with supn∈N μn TV < ∞. Then (μn )n∈N has
a weakly∗ converging subsequence with limit measure μ ∈ M (S). If (μn )n∈N ⊂
M + (S), then μ ∈ M + (S).
Proof Let (μn )n∈N ⊆ M (S) with C := supn∈N μn TV < ∞. Without loss of
generality, we can assume that C ≤ 1. Otherwise, we consider the normalised
sequence νn := μn /C. Clearly, (νn )n∈N has a weakly∗ converging subsequence
if and only if (μn )n∈N has.
According to Theorem F.25 (Riesz representation), there exist linear
functionals L n = L μn ∈ C0 (S) ∗ with L n C0 (S)∗ = μn TV ≤ 1. Theorem B.13
(Banach–Alaoglu) states that the set B := {L ∈ C0 (S) ∗ | L ≤ 1} is
compact with respect to the weak∗ topology. Hence, there exists L ∈ B and
∗
a subsequence (L nk )k ∈N of (L n )n∈N such that L nk L. In particular, for
·, · := ·, · C0 (S)∗, C0 (S) ,
L nk , ψ → L, ψ for all ψ ∈ C0 (S). (1.8)
Again applying Theorem F.25 (Riesz representation) yields that there exists
μ ∈ M (S) such that L = L μ . We conclude the proof using (1.8) and the
explicit form of the correspondence between M (S) and C0 (S) ∗ :

f dμnk = L μn k , f → L, f = f dμ for all f ∈ C0 (S).
S S
So μnk → μ ∈ M (S) weakly∗ .If (μn )n∈N ⊂ M + (S), we have to prove that
+
μ ∈ M (S). By inner regularity, it is sufficient to show that μ(K ) ≥ 0 for any
K ⊆ S compact. According to Lemma G.12 there exists an increasing sequence
of functions (ψm )m∈N ∈ Cc0 (S) converging to χ K . Then

μ(K ) = lim ψm dμ = lim lim ψm dμnk ≥ 0.
m→∞ S m→∞ k→∞ S
Lemma 1.54 (Koralov and Sinai, 2007, Lemma 8.11) Let (S, d) be complete
and let F ⊆ M + (S). Then F is tight if and only if for each ε > 0 and each
r > 0 there exists a finite family of open sets Br (ai ), i = 1, . . . , m, such that

m
μ S \ Br (ai ) < ε for all μ ∈ F .
i=1
Proof We first show the direction ⇒. Let ε > 0 and fix r > 0. As F is tight,
there exists a compact set K ⊆ S such that
μ(S \ K ) < ε for all μ ∈ F .
As a compact set, K is totally bounded and thus there exists a finite family of
open balls Br (ai ), i = 1, . . . , m, covering K. Hence,

m
μ S \ Br (ai ) ≤ μ(S \ K ) < ε for all μ ∈ F .
i=1
For the other direction let ε > 0. Then by assumption for each k ∈ N there
(k)
exists a finite family of open balls B1/k (ai ), i = 1, . . . , mk , such that
μ (S \ Ak ) ≤ 2−k ε for all μ ∈ F ,

mk (k) ∞
where Ak = i=1 B1/k (ai ). We define A := k=1 Ak . Then, for μ ∈ F ,

∞
mk
∞
mk
μ(S \ A) =μ S \ (k)
B1/k (ai ) = μ S \ (k)
B1/k (ai )
k=1 i=1 k=1 i=1
∞
mk ∞
≤ μ S \ (k)
B1/k (ai ) ≤ ε 2−k = ε.
k=1 i=1 k=1
By construction, A is totally bounded and thus A is compact, as S is complete.

Since μ(S \ A) ≤ μ(S \ A) we choose A in the definition of tightness to conclude
that F is tight.
Theorem 1.55 (Prokhorov, 1956) Let (S, d) be Polish and F ⊆ M + (S) with
supμ ∈ F μ(S) < ∞. Then the following statements are equivalent.
(i) F is tight.
(ii) The closure of F with respect to narrow convergence is sequentially
compact.
Remark 1.56 The important implication (i) ⇒ (ii) also holds in general
metric spaces, i.e. without the assumptions of separability and completeness.
However, we decided to include the elegant proof from Da Prato and Zabczyk
(2014, Theorem 2.3), which is based on Theorem B.13 (Banach–Alaoglu), or,

to be more specific, Theorem 1.53. For more details on the general version
of the theorem, see Theorem G.28. The proof that (ii) ⇒ (i) is adapted from
Koralov and Sinai, 2007, Theorem 8.9.
Proof We start by proving (i) ⇒ (ii). As a first step, we assume that S is
compact. Let (μn )n∈N ⊂ F be a sequence. According to Theorem 1.53, there
exists μ ∈ M + (S) and a subsequence (μnk )k ∈N such that μnk → μ weakly∗ .
As S is compact we have using basic analysis
· ∞
Cb (S) = C 0 (S) = Cc (S) = Cc (S) = C0 (S),
so in fact μnk → μ narrowly.
In the general case, we take an increasing sequence of compact sets
(Km )m∈N ⊆ S such that
1
μ(S \ Km ) ≤ for all μ ∈ F .
m
Without loss of generality, Km Km+1 for all m ∈ N. Let (μn )n∈N ⊆ F be a
sequence. We restrict the measures μn to K1 and by the first step above we can
extract a narrowly converging subsequence (μnk )k ∈N with limit measure μ̂1 ∈
M + (K1 ). By a similar argument, we get a subsubsequence, again denoted by
(μnk )k ∈N , and a limit μ̂2 ∈ M + (K2 ) such that μnk → μ̂2 narrowly. Iterating this
argument yields a subsequence (μnk )k ∈N and limit measures μ̂m ∈ M + (Km )
such that
μnk |Km → μ̂m narrowly for k → ∞.
This procedure is called a diagonalisation argument and its details are usually
not elaborated in the literature. Where it occurs in the rest of the book, we will
also skip the details.
For m ∈ N, we have
μ̂m (Km ) = lim μnk (Km ) ≤ lim μnk (S) ≤ C, (1.9)
k→∞ k→∞
so the uniform bound C also applies to our limits. We define the measure μ̂ by
μ̂( A) = lim μ̂m ( A ∩ Km ) for all A ∈ B(S).
m→∞
This construction is well defined, as by uniqueness of the narrow limit (see
Corollary G.10) we have for l > m,
μ̂m = μ̂l |Km .
We claim that μ̂ ∈ M + (S). Indeed, from (1.9) we see that
μ̂(S) = lim μ̂m (S ∩ Km ) = lim μ̂m (Km ) ≤ lim C = C,
m→∞ m→∞ m→∞
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
“I’ll take that box!”
The coins jingled. Happy laughter responded to happy smiles. Wine
flowed. At the river laundry the surface of the stream was billowy
white with the suds from well-washed clothing. With a drum for a
chair, the barber was busy with his razor. At another place shower-
baths completed the work of renovation. New faces emerged, fresh-
skinned and wide-eyed. The exuberant joy of youth burst forth into
gay cries and bodily freedom. Visits were exchanged. The smoking
kitchens were sending out delicious odors. The non-coms were kept
busy hunting for their men who had disappeared, flown away.
By noon, however, the troop was again in order. In the square the
soldiers were in line, with arms polished and garments clean. The
roll was called. Their appearance was noted, their losses of
equipment were made good. The report was read. We learned that
such an one was cited for bravery, that the general was pleased, that
we would remain eight days without molestation.
Then the gayety increased. We organized to make the most of our
vacation. Some men with a bright idea arranged a theatre and
prepared a concert. Two sawhorses supported the stage, which we
trimmed with leaves. We draped the flag of the mairie overhead. The
programme was quickly arranged, as we had a considerable talent in
the regiment.
On the day appointed for the performance chairs were placed for the
higher officers, the chief of the battalion, and the captains. The
privates noisily disposed of themselves as chance permitted. There
were spectators roosting on the wheels of carts, others perched on
straw-stacks; wherever a body could hold its equilibrium, there was a
body. An improvised orchestra opened the entertainment. Then
several singers followed with comic songs. The applause was
tumultuous, as high spirits mounted higher. We forgot the war, at that
moment, and its suffering and privation. A ballad touched our deeper
sentiment. A monologue was punctuated with laughter. The hilarious
faces of the spectators told of their pleasure—the joy of living, with
youth and health. We relaxed our tense nerves, and became human
beings again. There were no more shells, no more mud, no more
guard duty, no more fatigue. The tragedy had paused; and, if one
had not heard the growling rage of the cannon bent upon its work of
death and destruction, one would have believed that there could be
no more pleasant existence.
On other days there were games in the open air. Like children freed
from school the men ran in the meadows, tussled in a game of
prisoner’s base, or played leap-frog. The suppleness of body, the
litheness of movement, were such as to inspire admiration. These
were no longer soldiers, but graceful athletes, with agile muscles and
solid torso. Under the trees gently waving in the breeze, with the
clear sky of France above a charming countryside, the scene evoked
the picture of the athletic games of antiquity. Not even the group of
philosophers was lacking, walking up and down and arguing.
Thus the hours ran on, peaceful and all too short. The troop took a
fresh breath, renewed its spirit, calmed excited nerves, found new
courage and a magnificent enthusiasm. The cruel remembrance of
dark hours, of horrible spectacles, of losses, became dim. We found
again a vibrant love of life. The soul-sickness which had grown upon
us at the parapets, under the shells, melted away in the new
environment, in the joy of a recreation dearly won.
The week of vacation was completed. They were new men,
refreshed and invigorated, who fell into line when the hour arrived. In
the darkness we retraced the road by which we had come. We were
returning to the battle, we were re-entering the tunnels, the dugouts,
the redans, the trenches, the parallels. Now we were the relief, in our
turn. We took our place. We brought back with us arms, food,
replenished cartridge-boxes, new men to fill the vacancies in our
ranks. More than that, we brought back valor, patience, faith, and a
spirit reborn.
We entered again the domain of death, again we began the agony.
IX
THE BATTLE OF CHAMPAGNE
A YEAR had passed. The Marne and the Yser had gone into history.
We knew that enormous preparations were in progress behind our
lines. They are always known. The symptoms are perfectly visible.
The artillery is massed, the various operations are pushed more
vigorously, new precautions are taken.
Vague rumors are afloat. Every one wishes to appear informed, and
the strangest forecasts, the most absurd reports are passed from
mouth to mouth, originating no one knows where.
“We are going clear to the Rhine, this time!”
“What! do you think? As far as the Meuse, and already——”
“The cavalry is massed at the rear; and if the cavalry passes, the line
is already smashed. Then, mon vieux, how far do you think we’ll
go?”
The war was changing its aspect. Germany, checked at the Marne,
seemed to have an unsuspected force. Her regiments were renewed
continuously. They seemed to spring from the ground, an uncounted
host, capable of breaking over any barrier. Unprepared France, in
accepting the combat, profited by the period of “digging in,” to cast
big guns and manufacture shells. A colossal effort galvanized her
hope. People repeated the famous words of Joffre: “Je les
grignote.”[F]
We were confident: Germany could not win. She would be beaten as
soon as we could collect guns and ammunition in sufficient
quantities. Some words of the generals came down to the ranks.
Gallieni had said: “They are in the trenches—they are lost!”
We believed it, we were sure of it. The humblest cook, in his smoky
abri, spattered with his sauces, his blackened face beaming with
smiles, had no more doubt of it than the major-general in his
automobile.
Many furloughs had been granted. Each man had been allowed to
visit his family, and had spread assurance of success in return for
the festivities his friends had prepared for him. No doubts found
lodgment in the minds of the people. On tenter-hooks the country
awaited victory. Trembling old mothers believed it, tearful wives put
faith in it, fathers felt convinced of it. At last we would be avenged,
we would punish the enemy’s infamous arrogance, we would
chastise him, we would crush him. We were going to crunch him by
an enormous pressure, overthrow his system of trenches, advance,
break his line; and then, with one burst of valor, we would hurl him
back whence he came—into his deep forests, as far as the Rhine;
perhaps still farther, to his lair. Every one knew the good news,
counted on it, awaited it with impatience.
People liked the bearing of the soldiers. All were delighted to see
them so robust, so hardened; more alert than at the beginning, more
viril, more manly. The warrior’s helmet graced his forehead like an
aureole. The men were fêted and showered with tokens of affection.
Long trains brought them home—so ardent, and young, and
splendid; shouting their joy in the stations, passing through towns
with the air of a victor. How the women admired them! They were
treated (in advance) as liberators. Those sober people who still were
apprehensive of the outcome, who reckoned up the future and
calculated the chances, were looked upon with a reproachful eye.
This time it was certain: we would pass!
The opening came the 20th of September. A furious storm of artillery
saluted the dawn, and set the thunder rolling. It was a prodigious
simoon. The sky cracked with the terrible, hot breath; the earth itself
bubbled. A deluge of red-hot iron fell. It was more than a noise: it
was a tempest, a gigantic roaring, the forge of Vulcan in full action;
an entire sector of the front bursting into flame. What a fantastic
tornado! All calibers of shells shrieked together. No single voice of
cannon could be distinguished in the concert. They were blended in
one roll, as if a god had sounded the charge on a gigantic drum. The
avalanche of steel fell on the enemy’s breastworks, spattered over
the intervening space, let loose billows of smoke, dust, and flames.
The very earth seemed to cry out to heaven, as it was pounded to
powder and scorched by the fire. Entire sections of trench walls
leaped into the air; a giant plough turned over the tunnels. A heavy
cloud formed, grew thicker, rolled over the battle-field. The passing
hours augmented the uproar. No sooner did the climax appear to be
reached than the tumult increased afresh.
Massed near the field of carnage, the bivouacked troops were in
readiness. Each company had its rôle, and each was ready. Each
knew at what hour to join the dance. They were going to pierce
through, they would pass! Comrades exchanged encouragement
and last promises. All hoped to survive, and pursue the routed foe in
a sweeping victory.
Our regiment, like others, awaited the call. It had no active part in the
festivity, but was present. This was for us a poignant grief. In our
sector, not a sound. The cannon were as silent as if every living thing
had become a mere spectator of the drama. As the roaring
increased in volume from minute to minute, we listened. We divined
the scene. We could follow it in the clouds, and in the sounds carried
by the breeze. We were like curious, listening neighbors who hear
the people next door quarrel and fight. The Germans opposite us
remained silent also, and listened, like ourselves.
Battle of Champagne! It had not yet a name. It held all the hope of
France, a single, united, colossal Will. For five days France could
only listen to the panting of an army in travail, and held her breath.
The 25th of September, at 9.15 in the morning, the first line left the
trenches; bounded forward, hurled themselves on the enemy.
Another line followed, and another, and another. Less than an hour
later, everywhere, even well back at the rear, messages of victory
came. The telephone passed on the joyful news, distributed it to the
end of its lines. In our ranks, where we awaited our turn with arms at
rest, we breathed with high-swelling hope. We defied the enemy, that
day. We looked at his lines, marked his location. To-morrow,
perhaps, we would be where he was to-day. We would command his
crushed-in shelter, his hiding-places opened by the shells; we would
be the victors, and he would be driven before us. Oh, yes, we were
quite sure. Already, with pricked-up ears, we could perceive the
advance. Our cannon pierced his lines. It roared elsewhere than was
usual; already, opposite us, the German had turned.
And yet—no! The accursed race has the tricks of a cowardly beast.
To the chivalrous courage which offers itself for an open test of
prowess, the Boche opposes stealthy ambush, burrowing in the
ground. For the noble élan of our men, for their impetuous passion,
for their valor, the Teutonic sneak sets a snare: close to the ground,
about a foot high or less, a fine copper-wire was concealed in the
grass, and electrified. Our heroes were ensnared in that web. In vain
their assaults were renewed. In vain they accomplished a hundred
exploits. Close to the earth the traitorous wire caught their ankles,
sent the electric shock through their legs, threw them down and
burned them.
But we—we were still ignorant of all this, and we awaited our turn. In
the falling night we saw the neighboring sky light up. The enemy’s
fear was read in the number of his rockets. He was afraid of our
sortie, of our onslaught and the outcome.
Ah! Those hours! Those days, those four days of superhuman effort!
In what a fever we passed them! At any moment we could become
participants, and yet we remained there, inert, champing our bits. We
talked, that we might shake off our impatience; that we might hear
words, though their import went unnoticed. We talked without
knowing what we said, merely to hear ourselves say something. We
waited for our cue: nothing came! Near us our comrades were
fighting in a veritable furnace; they were living the apotheosis of
supreme minutes, living the glory of combat, amidst an uproar of
shells: in suffering of the flesh and in the beauty of sublime
Adventure. We envied them. We mounted to the extreme edge of the
embankments, to the parapets of the trenches, that we might see
farther and follow more closely the movement of the drama; that we
might breathe the odor of battle and grasp its splendor. We looked at
the fire-reddened sky, where a hundred lightnings flashed and a
hundred thunders rolled. We desired, with all our souls, to enter the
strife, and at last force back the intrenched enemy—intrenched in
our land, in our soil.
Since then many a battle has been fought. We have had Verdun, we
have had the Somme, we have had the Aisne, we have had almost
each day a unique page of history. Most certainly; but it was at this
time that we learned our lesson. We learned that patience is the
weapon par excellence in a war such as this; whereas, at that time
we still conserved intact the old faith in French ardor. It was the first
shock following the Marne, after the defense of the Yser. It was the
first hope of breaking through. We were near it, so near we could
almost touch it, but we did not attain it. We were ready for death
itself, but the sacrifice was unavailing. The sacks loaded for the
forward march, the filled cartridge-cases, weighed heavily and more
heavily when we knew that the line remained where it had been, that
the breach was not sufficient, that an insignificant wire had stopped
our onslaught and protected the German.
Nevertheless, the results were worth the effort. We counted our
prisoners by hundreds, we gathered from them much information.
Yes; but the gain was as nothing, so great had been our hopes. We
were bound to accept another hibernation, dig in the earth again, dig
oftener and longer; look forward to a war of greater duration, more
murderous; recommence the effort, accept not months, but years.
The war ceased to be a human struggle. The mass of material
became appalling. It was no longer a shock of arms, but an industrial
clash: the machine substituted for the valor of a man, the contrivance
become demoniac. Cannon were made in enormous calibers. Old
pieces were replaced by huge-throated monsters, and one guessed
that the wily German, girt for supreme effort, was preparing
something more, which would make the early part of the war seem
like child’s play.
This is why the present war is impossible of narration. It is no longer
a battle of a certain date. It is not, as in former times, a moment in
history, the clash of two wills, the shock of two armed bodies of men.
It is a period in a century. It involves, not two peoples, but the world.
It is not a turning-point, but a transformation. It is almost a state of
society: “C’est la guerre.”
Later, in an unforeseen epoch, in the year ——, it will be taught the
children as two dates: the war began August 2, 1914; it ended ——.
All the tragedy, all our cries, our furies, our agonies, our suffering and
death—all this, without name, blurred and indistinct, will be
contained between two numbers, and will mark two eons: that before
the War, that after the War. We will have fought and we will have
wept; our bodies will have been broken and our hearts will have
bled, without our being able to say, “It happened as I have told it,” for
we will not know just how it happened. We will be obliged to call to
mind the first day when grenades were used; the day torpedoes
came to light; the advent of the four-hundreds. Facts will be mixed in
our troubled memories. We will no longer recall all that happened to
us. To be more explicit, to create a truer picture, we will say:
“At the Marne, we used rifles.”
“In Champagne, we threw bombs.”
“At Verdun—such cannon!”
“On the Somme the shells flew so thick they met in mid-air.”
“And then—and then, America came!”
X
VERDUN
THOSE who have not been actively engaged in the war cannot form
any conception of it. When they hear a combatant speak of it, they
say:
“Then you fight all the time?” “No.” Whereupon they think: “Then in
the firing-line one is not really in much danger.”
Ah, not so fast, good people! In this war, this new, present-day war,
the vigilance is continuous, the hand-to-hand struggle is not. Shells
fall unceasingly, but the open battle, the assault, is not without
interruption. Fortunately.
Thus it was that after the German check, after the Crown of Nancy
had withstood the foe’s attack, since the Marne in fact, the sector at
Verdun remained quiet.
It was a particularly good point. Here and there a sprinkle of shells,
then nothing more. There was fighting everywhere else, in Flanders,
in Artois, in Champagne, even in the Woëvre district, but not at
Verdun. The sector was so calm, that the only guard left there
consisted of Territorials, mostly older men. They worked without too
much effort, these fathers of families; without much disturbance,
doing general work of repairs about the fortifications, pipe in mouth,
almost at peace in the midst of war. In the winter of 1915 they
shivered a little with the cold; but the forest was near by, wood was
abundant, and the cold caused no great suffering. In the evening,
down in the deep trenches, in the well-heated huts, or in the powerful
forts, such as Douaumont, Vaux, Vachereauville, they basked in the
heat as on a sunny day. They looked at the falling snow and the
landscape sleeping under its white blanket. They swept the snow
with branches of trees, blew on their fingers a little, accepted their
slight discomfort in patience.
December passed, unusually cold; then January came, bringing the
new year. One more year gone, one less to come! Soon the beautiful
days would come, the spring, and—who knows?—perhaps peace.
Germany was tired of it all, near the end of her resources, and would
give in. Every one had his own definite idea on the subject.
According to one, peace would come before the end of June.
Another thought the war would last well toward the end of July. No
one imagined that the following winter——
February entered. At the listening-posts one received a surprise: one
noticed signs of life and activity among the enemy.
“They are unloading iron.”
“They are doing a lot of talking.”
Bah! The Boches were putting their affairs in order. For more than a
year the opposing lines had been looking at each other without any
great exchange of blows. They felt quite well acquainted. The fellows
opposite were taking good care of their own bones. Some said they
were only the Landsturm, who were hibernating over there.
In the town of Verdun the usual life continued. The cafés were so
crowded they turned people away; concerts and theatres were in full
swing; everywhere there was great animation, on account of the
presence of troops in increased numbers. One could not find a
vacant room to rent, and the price of provisions soared. All the towns
and even villages, where so many troops were spending their
money, were infected with this fever of success, of easy money, of
the riches which rolled in. Verdun was no exception to the rule. The
citadel was choked with troops: officers and privates, drinking and
laughing. To be sure, when the war goes well, there is no need to be
austere.
February reserved its own surprise. The short month, which amounts
to nothing at all, so short that it seems crippled, this one-armed
month, displayed in this particular year the malice of a dwarf.
Suddenly the German line burst into flame. It was like a spark on a
train of powder. Twelve hundred cannon, perhaps more, crashed in
chorus.
“Alerte! To arms!”
Ah! Yes! Ground, hacked, mutilated, overrun, those easy-going
papas, the Territorials, fought the best they could; but the Argonne
was the accomplice of the Boche. The drive became irresistible. With
the shell-power of this massed artillery, the lines were broken and
obliterated. Under the storm of shells the trenches were levelled. It
was not an artillery battle, nor merely a violent attack. It was rather
an avalanche of explosives. The molten torrent, crackling with
sparks, fantastic, inhuman, swept all before it. All the massed Krupp
guns in diabolic fury spat their clots of flaming blood. The torn,
disembowelled earth leaped into the air and fell in dust. A bitter
smoke filled the air, dense on the plain and dense on the mountain
summit. Douaumont became a forge, Vaux was a fiery cyclone.
Thavannes was a scarlet glow, le Mort Homme was a continuous
roar, and Verdun heard the approaching thunder in apprehensive
dread.
At the call for reinforcements the regiments came in all haste, to bare
their breasts to the cannon. Fiercely the units clung to their ground,
placed their batteries, intrenched themselves, and offered stubborn
resistance. The enemy still advanced. The adversary was not an
army division but all Germany, with the dynasty, the Crown Prince,
the old Haseleer at their head. The defenders were again faced by
the terrible order, “Conquer or die,” as on the Marne and the Yser.
Once more that game was played. Once more it had the upper hand.
Destiny, impassive, looked on.
Three kilometres of retreat brought the French to the Côte de Poivre.
The Boche had orders to take, at all costs, the “strongest citadel of
France.” That success would mean the death of our country. It meant
all France exposed to the foe, Paris captured, Defeat. It meant Crime
triumphant, history violated, supremacy of brutal might, humanity’s
bonds reforged. It meant the flower of the Revolution crushed and
Liberty in chains. It meant the Kaiser’s boot on the neck of the world.
“Do you wish aid?” came the message from England, already
preparing to send succor. France responded proudly: “No! I can hold
my ground.”
And she held it. The world knows it.
An innumerable host, coated in dirty gray like a repulsive animal,
rushed on in its heavy, obstinate bravery; as an infuriated bull with
lowered head madly charges his foe, so the German brute in his
blind rage hurled himself toward us. In the path of the Hunnish Horde
stood French valor. They Shall Not Pass! Nor did they. But—what
a struggle!
All the slopes which form the heights of the Meuse and are the
ramparts of Gaul, resounded as a monster forge. There Vulcan had
set up his furnaces. Such a battle is too great to be recounted. It is
the story of Thavannes, whose immense tunnel of approach
sheltered a whole battalion at a time. It is the story of the fall of
Douaumont; then the siege of indomitable Vaux, dauntless, resisting,
panting, quivering like a drum. There the shells fall at the rate of ten
per minute. Raynal is commanding there: that is enough. Ten times
the German hurled his force against the fortifications, and ten times
he fell back, baffled. The garrison stood its ground in a furnace of the
damned. New men entered by a breach, followed a narrow path,
found the postern gate, and leaped in. For every man who came,
came a shell. Overhead twenty airplanes circled about, directing the
fire, like vultures above the eagle’s nest; while the cannon on the
surrounding heights converged their fire.
Vaux! Heroic name, name never to be forgotten! Vaux, a rock burned
by acids, by powder, by the fires of hell. Vaux held out five days, six
days—eight days! The sky at night was a hot glow. The earth was
one continuous roar of explosions, enveloped in billows of smoke. In
that inferno men fought unto death. Trenches, shelters, stone, and
earthworks were wiped away by the shells; the battle left the
protection of the ground and swung into free space.
The regiments were brought from the rear. They were supplied with
food and ammunition by a whole army of camions, which looked like
an immense serpent twisting along the road. Beyond Verdun the
men entered directly into the furnace. Their units melted in the very
act of going to the relief of their comrades at the firing-line. No
matter! They advanced, leaping from one shell-hole to another, up to
the lines where the survivors of the preceding regiments still held the
assailant at a distance. They were one man against ten. Of a
hundred who set out, only fifty arrived. They felt the reassurance
given by the strength of Vaux. Vaux hammered by blows—but Vaux
still living, still French, withstanding the tempest and defying the
German. One felt there the heart of steel in the fortress of rock. In
addition to the battle all about was the spectacle of a mass of
masonry holding an army in check.
Vaux fell. Only thirst ended its resistance. The enemy, stupefied to
count the handful of heroes who had thus held them at bay, rendered
the captives the highest honors. The Commandant Raynal kept his
sword; the Crown Prince, in humility before such glory, was glad to
pay him homage, and asked to be presented.
Vaux fell, but Verdun was not taken. There huge shells fell
unceasingly. The German loves the easy targets: a cluster of
houses, a town, is an object hard to miss. In the town, then, the
storm swept the streets. Entire quarters went down in dust. Like
Rheims, like Soissons, like Ypres, like Liége, Verdun was the victim
of the Huns. People took refuge in the citadel, in its enormous
subterranean chambers of massive masonry. There, where the stone
corridors were damp as cellars, night and day both soldiers and
civilians found shelter. There young mothers nursed their babes,
there people of all conditions lived as best they could; there,
underground, helter-skelter, all piled together. They could hear the
shells of the Hun falling on the city, the houses crumbling, the
wounded shrieking.
All France and all the world had their eyes on Verdun the inviolable;
on Verdun surrounded by flames, in the vortex of action; on Verdun,
which did not weaken. Without respite, the Teutonic masses were
hurled to the assault. Like a sea of mud they poured upon the
outposts of the city. They were beaten down by grenades, shells,
machine-guns, fire, shot, and powder; and They did not pass!
All about were scenes most thrilling. It would be impossible to
recount them all. We must choose only one or two.
One day, then, of date unrecorded (Verdun held out eight months!), a
troop going up to the fortress of Thavannes found the railway below
and followed it. They came to the tunnel and entered, although it was
already much encumbered. In vain did the gendarme on guard try to
oppose their passage: the newcomers were too many. They
numbered about six hundred. Above them the battle raged. They
were intending to stop for breath, then go on up the slope and take
their posts, where Death awaited them.
No! They will never go so far. They seek a reprieve for an instant in
the tunnel, but Death comes to meet them. In the long black cavern
are piles of ammunition in transit. There are soldiers, and wounded
men, and mules, and general confusion. Some one, man or beast
(no one knows which), hits a case of explosives. In the dark tube
there is a flash, an uproar, a cloud of smoke: four hundred bodies lie
mangled and scorched, as when the fire-damp explodes in the depth
of a mine. The living make their way out as best they can, leaving
the dead and wounded. The two hundred who escape reform their
line, mount the hill, enter the real furnace: this other episode did not
count. It was an extra, for good measure. The accident could not
prevent the fulfilment of the task before them. What were left of the
battalion went where their order sent them. Four hundred fell on the
way. Too bad. Orders are orders: they are carried out by the
remnant....
This is only one instance in a thousand.
We all had a great curiosity to see the famous precincts where the
strife raged so violently. It was almost with joy, therefore, that we
received our call. The day the order arrived the news ran quickly
through the ranks: “We are going over there, boys!” “Over there”
meant Verdun. That was understood. We hastened to get ready; we
arranged knapsacks; put our affairs in order. The vans were loaded,
the horses hitched. In the canteens we drank to Victory, to the
Return, to Good Luck. Eyes glistened behind the smoke of pipes,
and we jostled and laughed. Even those who feared the terrible
adventure and dreaded death concealed their uneasiness and
cloaked it with smiles. On the other hand, many danced for joy,
happy to have a part in the fight, to be in full action.
All together, pell-mell, happy and unhappy, we were punctually on
the spot appointed for the automobiles to receive us when evening
arrived. The entire convoy waited behind a hill. The drivers, muffled
up in pelts, chatted while waiting for us. They looked fantastic in the
dim light. Only two or three lanterns winked and blinked in the night.
One was dimly aware of a file of conveyances lined up along the
edge of the road, like great beasts asleep; the going to and fro of the
officers of the convoy, and their colloquy with the colonel. It was all
more felt than seen. One could distinguish only shadows; one heard
the tramp of men, the dull murmur of low-voiced talking, sometimes
an exclamation or a stifled oath.
Then orders were transmitted by cyclists. The first battalion set out.
Hurriedly each section climbed into the autos. These ought to have
carried twenty men each, but twenty-five and even thirty were piled
in, somehow, with their arms, their luggage, their knapsacks, their
side-bags, their canteens. As soon as a company was loaded in the
captain gave the order to go. One by one the cars fell into line. The
motors coughed and plunged forward like a dog unleashed. Then ten
more machines received a new company, and departed in their turn.
They also were swallowed up by the night.
When my turn came, by some chance I was assigned to an auto with
the officers, where we were much less crowded than in the large
vehicles of the privates. I therefore expected to gain some further
information concerning our destination. In this I was disappointed, as
the officers knew very little about it; besides, from the time the motor
started and the auto was on its way no further conversation was
possible. We could not hear each other, even when nearly shouting,
and we had enough to do in resisting the bumps which threw us
against each other. We inhaled the dust: a thick, heavy dust, raised
by the wheels. It soon covered us completely. One could feel it
coating his face, and small grains of sand rolled between one’s
fingers. We could not see, for the curtains were drawn down tightly,
and it was very dark. We travelled as in an interminable tunnel, with
no light whatever, with no knowledge of what we were passing or of
the country we were traversing. Sometimes there were sudden
stops. The quickly set brakes brought us to a standstill with a jerk.
We asked the driver: “What is the matter? Where are we?” He
scarcely answered, for he knew no more than we. His order was to
follow the auto in front of him, and to keep his machine twenty
metres behind, that he might avoid a collision in case of a too-
sudden stop. He followed his orders, and knew nothing more. He did
not even know the road we were travelling. The car which led the
procession carried the chief officer of the convoy. Probably he was
the only man besides our colonel who knew our destination.
Thus we journeyed four hours before dawn. As the pale light invaded
our rolling apartment little by little, we saw how completely we were
covered with dust. We were white from head to feet, like a miller
dredged in his flour. Our clothing was white, our hair, our faces, our
arms. We appeared grotesquely like veritable old men. We looked
each other over and laughed. Then, as there was nothing more to
fear from the dust, a lieutenant raised a curtain. We found ourselves
on a winding road in a charming, gently-rolling country. Small trees
formed tiny groves on the hillsides, and the whole landscape was
quite different from that we had just left.
Suddenly the captain made a gesture. He had perceived an airplane,
soaring directly over us in a most disquieting manner. It was flying
too high for us to distinguish, even with glasses, whether it was
French or German; but its manœuvres were suspicious. It had
command of the road, and seemed to be preparing to fire on the
convoy. In fact, that was exactly what happened, a few minutes later,
when the flyer suddenly came lower and opened fire with his
mitrailleuse. The automobiles increased their speed and lengthened
the distance from one to another. Nevertheless, the aviator could
move much faster than could we, and he circled above us like a
vulture over his prey. Fortunately, he had no bombs, and his aim was
too uncertain to inflict much damage. As it was, he wounded several
men, and would have wounded many more if the special guns for the
purpose had not opened fire on him, or if three French planes had
not appeared on the horizon. At sight of them he made a hasty
escape, amid our shouts and jeers. Our wounded were rapidly cared
for by a surgeon, and shortly after were placed in the first field-
hospital encountered on the road, amid the ruins of a village. This
village gave us the first knowledge of our whereabouts. We were
entering the valley of the Woëvre, and Verdun lay beyond the hills.
The roll of the cannon had become audible.
After a short halt we set out again. This time we entered the field of
action. It was evidenced by the constantly increasing number of
convoys encountered. Long lines of camions were climbing toward
the battle, loaded with munitions or food; or, like our own, with men.
The road became very wide, encroaching some distance into the
fields. Some soldiers, in the stream of conveyances, threw pebbles
under our wheels without as much as lifting their eyes to look at us:
they had seen so much already that the spectacle of troops going
under fire interested them not at all.
With our advance the scene changed rapidly. We saw some autos
overturned in a ditch and burning. Some dead horses stretched their
rigid legs in the air. Under some tents men bustled about with
stretchers, instruments, and boxes. These were the temporary
dressing-stations, where the men wounded on the route were cared
for: any who had met with accidents from vehicles, as well as those
who had been hit by shell-splinters—for we had entered the zone of
projectiles, and stray splinters reached even that far. The scene
became indescribable. It was a mob, where one felt nevertheless a
discipline, a sense of regulated, methodical order. We were in the
side-wings of the battle, in the midst of its movable stage-settings,
among the stage-hands, machinists, electricians, and
supernumeraries, whose activities are unseen by the public, but who
make it possible for the performance to go on and be brilliant. Long
trains of horse-drawn caissons followed each other at full speed.
Field-ambulances, marked with large red crosses, slipped into the
moving stream. Vehicles of every sort, gray with dust or mud-
bespattered, rumbled, creaked, rolled along, stopped, started, stuck
in the ruts, freed themselves. The moving line looked like the folds of
a fabulous serpent.
The voice of the cannon increased in power and volume. It was like
hearing an orchestra of inferno. The ear received only a tremendous,
continuous roar, like the rolling of thunder which never ceases.
We could see the earth tossed high like a geyser when a shell
struck. We breathed the pungent odor of the battle. We were getting
into it now. Most of the houses were demolished. The buildings still
standing all bore the marks of war, with great ragged holes in walls
and roof, with stains of powder and fire. Enough of them remained in
close rows to indicate the streets leading into the town. We crossed
the Meuse and found ourselves in the city. It appeared deserted. We
looked curiously up and down the streets, without finding any sign of
life whatever, except an occasional hurrying soldier, a cyclist, or an
automobile racing at full speed between the silent houses. We made
some détours, crossed squares, and skirted gardens. The whole city
lay open to our view; and above the roofs the massive silhouette of
the citadel spread its protecting wings.
The locking of wheels gave us a jolt: we had arrived. Glad to tread
the ground once more, we leaped down and entered an abandoned
factory, where we were to camp. The windows had long since lost
their glass, but the roof remained. It was a fragile protection against
shells, but quite adequate against wind and rain. Along the walls was
stacked dirty straw, broken to crumbs by the many sleeping troops.
That was our bed. It would be for many their last sleep before the
sleep of death, for the orders came immediately: we would mount to
the first lines at nightfall.
The march into the battle was at first simple. We advanced in the
descending shadows, we left the town behind. Before us the
heavens were streaked with the light of explosives. We marched by
sections, in silence. We marched straight ahead, with heart beating
quickly, mouth dry, brain a blank. In spite of myself, I set my teeth
and gripped my hands. We could not distinguish the road we trod,
but were dimly aware sometimes of trees stripped bare, of low ruins,
of puddles of water, of general débris. We simply followed the man in
front, scarcely turning the head when a flock of shells fell at the right,
or left, or ahead. We only knew we were in the zone where they fell.
We heard the hoarse shriek of the projectiles high in the air, and the
chorus of cannon re-echoed in each breast. We no longer felt the
chill of the night air. We knew not if we breathed. The farther we
went, the more difficult did the walking become. We stumbled over
the uneven ground, ploughed up by the shells; but we were not yet in
the place of torment, and the missiles spared us. We passed many
moving shadows: couriers, orderlies, estafettes, officers, wounded,
we knew not what. They were only dark objects moving about in the
night, outlined by the glow of the projectiles; instantly swallowed
again by the shadows and giving place to others. We knew nothing
about them. We knew only one great fact: that we were always
advancing toward the fire; we were approaching the first lines, where
the conflagration raged at white heat.
Then—we were in the midst of the shells. The frenzy was on. The
wounded cried out. We held together the best we could. We entered
chaos. Whirlwinds of explosives enveloped us. They were above,
around, beneath. The very earth leaped up and lashed our faces and
hands. Violent gusts of hot wind shook us. We ran. We joined some
other comrades. We could not proceed in lines, but moved in groups.
There were no longer any usable trenches. They were torn open,
crushed in, filled up, making any advance in them impossible.
Therefore we marched in the open, and we advanced. We would
leap into a shell-crater, catch our breath for a second, look out for
another hole, and hurl ourselves into it as quickly as possible. The
rain of steel enveloped everything, in a tumult unbelievable. We
scarcely knew if we lived; we certainly thought no more about death.
The fixed, absolute, imperious idea, the only surviving thing in our
consciousness, was to arrive at our destination, where we could give
our service. We felt that we were near the spot and must attain it.
We often lost our way. The officers looked for the road, asked the
direction, shouted orders. We understood as best we could. We ran
at full speed, threw ourselves flat on the ground, sprang up and ran
again. We knew only one thing: we must succeed in reaching our
appointed post, we must reach the firing-line: we could not stop, we
could not rest, until we found the location of the regiment we were
sent to relieve.
For three hours we plunged across the jagged fields. The ground
rose and fell and rose again. Sometimes, behind a pile of earth, we
found some men. We shouted some questions. They knew nothing
to tell us, as they were not of the regiment which we sought. They
were out of breath, like ourselves; or they were wounded, or they
had just been relieved, or they had just arrived and were themselves
seeking their post, or they were hopelessly lost and joined in with us.
If they were officers, they questioned us:
“What regiment?” “Where are you going?” “What division?” “What
army?” “Have you seen such and such a regiment?” “No.” “Yes, at
the right.” “Over at the left.” “Make room there!”
Some ambulances charged past. We saw some first-aid stations in
full operation, with wounded shrieking all about. Some couriers, out
of breath, shouted instructions: “Go straight on. Your regiment is two
hundred metres from here, near the canal.”
Finally we arrived, under such a hail of bullets, machine fire, and
shrapnel that we were not even conscious of danger. We found
some men, half buried in holes, who went away and left us. They
melted into the night.
We had reached our post on the firing-line, in an unknown plain,
which seemed to be flooded with dead bodies, as a fallow field is a
riot of corn-flowers and nettles. We had no idea how we had
succeeded in reaching the spot.
There was nothing more to do but fight and in our turn, wait for the
Relief, or for Death.

Ebook Spaces of Measures and Their Applications To Structured Population Models 1St Edition Christian Dull Online PDF All Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ebook Spaces of Measures and Their Applications To Structured Population Models 1St Edition Christian Dull Online PDF All Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Spaces of Measures and their

Applications to Structured Population

Integrated Population Models: Theory and Ecological

Laminational Models for Some Spaces of Polynomials of

Optimal Control of Dynamic Systems Driven by Vector

Beyond Sobolev and Besov Regularity of Solutions of

A World without Capitalism Alternative Discourses

The Evolution of Feathers From Their Origin to the

Analysis of Composite Laminates: Theories and Their

Engineered Ferrites and Their Applications 1st Edition

36 Spaces of Measures and their Applications

A complete list of books in the series can be found at

Recent titles include the following:

20. Greedy approximation, Vladimir Temlyakov

Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.

Preface page vii

4.4 Particle Method Combined with Splitting

Appendix A Topology, Compactness and Proper Spaces 209

of 2020. The course was part of the research-oriented teaching programme

Keywords: structured population model, bounded Lipschitz distance, nonneg-

AMS Subject Classiﬁcation: 26A16, 28A33, 35B30, 35F10, 35L50, 35R02,

In general, we will use a superscript + to indicate nonnegativity.

Special Functions and Spaces

1, constant function 1(x) = 1 for all x.

Cb (S), the space of bounded continuous functions S → R.

Norms and Seminorms

 · BCα,1 , see Section 3.5.

In this book we present a comprehensive analytical framework for structured

Motivating Examples from Mathematical Biology

Classical Models in the Spirit of the Kermack–McKendrick Model

Models with State and Space Structures

equipped with a boundary condition for I which reads

where the supremum is taken over all 1-Lipschitz functions f : S → R for

Content of the book

For example, the approach in Chapter 3 is general enough to account for

The ﬁrst chapter is devoted to an introduction to the basic concepts and

(S, d) proper. If (X,  · X ) is a normed space and A ⊆ X a subset, then we

As R is a Banach space, BL(S) ∗ equipped with the operator norm is complete.

To deﬁne an integral with respect to a signed measure, we need a

Theorem 1.8 (Jordan decomposition theorem; Folland, 1984, Theorem 3.4)

(a) μ+ ( A) = μ( A ∩ P) = sup{ μ(B) | B ∈ A, B ⊆ A},

In the case A = Ω, we omit A in the notation and write L 1 (μ).

M (S) = { μ | μ is a ﬁnite and signed Radon measure}

and the corresponding cone of nonnegative measures

(i) weakly∗ to a measure μ ∈ M (S) if and only if

(ii) narrowly to a measure μ ∈ M (S) if and only if

In probability theory, the latter convergence is also known as the weak

Remark 1.18 In view of Section 2.1, we say that a map

is narrowly continuous if μ• is continuous with respect to narrow convergence,

1.2 M (S) as a Normed Space

 μTV := | μ(Ω)| = μ+ (Ω) + μ− (Ω),

where μ+ and μ− are measures arising from Theorem 1.8 (Jordan

| μm (B) − μn (B)| ≤  μm − μn TV < ε for all B ∈ B(S).

Hence, (μn )n∈N converges uniformly on B(S) to a map μ : B(S) → R by the

Hence, for all n ≥ n0 (ε),

This norm is sometimes also called the Kantorovich–Rubinstein norm or the

Proof If S has a bounded diameter then properness implies that S is compact

Therefore, estimate (1.2) implies that

Now, we aim at the characterisation of M (S) as a subspace of BL(S) ∗ .

Case 1: d(x, y) < 2 First note that, ψ∞ ≤ 1. Furthermore,

• If d(x, a), d(x, b) ≥ 2 then

Case 2: d(x, y) ≥ 2 Obviously, ψ∞ ≤ 1 and the proof that |ψ|Lip ≤ 1 is

We assume by way of contradiction that S is not uniformly discrete. Thus,

· BCα,1 , see Section 3.5.

(S, d) proper. If (X, · X ) is a normed space and A ⊆ X a subset, then we

μTV := | μ(Ω)| = μ+ (Ω) + μ− (Ω),

| μm (B) − μn (B)| ≤ μm − μn TV < ε for all B ∈ B(S).

Case 1: d(x, y) < 2 First note that, ψ∞ ≤ 1. Furthermore,

Case 2: d(x, y) ≥ 2 Obviously, ψ∞ ≤ 1 and the proof that |ψ|Lip ≤ 1 is

Let ψ ∈ BL(S) with ψBL ≤ 1; then

So we see that η − νn BL∗ ≤ C5 ε by applying the supremum.

μ − νn BL∗ ≤ μ − με BL∗ + με − η ε BL∗ + η ε − νn BL∗ ≤ C ε.

(i) μBL∗ = μ(S) = μTV ,