% Options for packages loaded elsewhere
\PassOptionsToPackage{unicode}{hyperref}
\PassOptionsToPackage{hyphens}{url}
\documentclass[
  11pt,
]{article}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage[margin=22mm]{geometry}
\usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
\setcounter{secnumdepth}{-\maxdimen} % remove section numbering
\usepackage{iftex}
\ifPDFTeX
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
  \usepackage{textcomp} % provide euro and other symbols
\else % if luatex or xetex
  \usepackage{unicode-math} % this also loads fontspec
  \defaultfontfeatures{Scale=MatchLowercase}
  \defaultfontfeatures[\rmfamily]{Ligatures=TeX,Scale=1}
\fi
\usepackage{lmodern}
\ifPDFTeX\else
  % xetex/luatex font selection
\fi
% Use upquote if available, for straight quotes in verbatim environments
\IfFileExists{upquote.sty}{\usepackage{upquote}}{}
\IfFileExists{microtype.sty}{% use microtype if available
  \usepackage[]{microtype}
  \UseMicrotypeSet[protrusion]{basicmath} % disable protrusion for tt fonts
}{}
\makeatletter
\@ifundefined{KOMAClassName}{% if non-KOMA class
  \IfFileExists{parskip.sty}{%
    \usepackage{parskip}
  }{% else
    \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}
    \setlength{\parskip}{6pt plus 2pt minus 1pt}}
}{% if KOMA class
  \KOMAoptions{parskip=half}}
\makeatother
\usepackage{graphicx}
\makeatletter
\newsavebox\pandoc@box
\newcommand*\pandocbounded[1]{% scales image to fit in text height/width
  \sbox\pandoc@box{#1}%
  \Gscale@div\@tempa{\textheight}{\dimexpr\ht\pandoc@box+\dp\pandoc@box\relax}%
  \Gscale@div\@tempb{\linewidth}{\wd\pandoc@box}%
  \ifdim\@tempb\p@<\@tempa\p@\let\@tempa\@tempb\fi% select the smaller of both
  \ifdim\@tempa\p@<\p@\scalebox{\@tempa}{\usebox\pandoc@box}%
  \else\usebox{\pandoc@box}%
  \fi%
}
% Set default figure placement to htbp
\def\fps@figure{htbp}
\makeatother
\setlength{\emergencystretch}{3em} % prevent overfull lines
\providecommand{\tightlist}{%
  \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}}
\usepackage{bookmark}
\IfFileExists{xurl.sty}{\usepackage{xurl}}{} % add URL line breaks if available
\urlstyle{same}
\hypersetup{
  hidelinks,
  pdfcreator={LaTeX via pandoc}}

\author{}
\date{}

\begin{document}

\section{Reducing arbitrary boundary data to a boundary
system}\label{reducing-arbitrary-boundary-data-to-a-boundary-system}

An elliptic interior equation may be paired with boundary measurements
that are not elliptic. A reference elliptic boundary problem still gives
a precise reduction: the unknown reference data satisfy a
pseudodifferential system on the boundary, and regularity or solvability
modulo smooth errors for the full problem is equivalent to the
corresponding property of that boundary system.

This lesson proves the reduction without assuming that the comparison
measurements form an elliptic problem. The reference orders \(m_j\) and
comparison orders \(\mu_k\) remain separate, the full Cauchy trace keeps
all \(m\) components, and every smoothing term in the two-sided
parametrix is retained. Exact equations are distinguished from equations
modulo smooth sections.

Start with a measurement that misses a direction. On a cylinder whose
cross-section is a two-dimensional torus, prescribe the values on both
ends as the reference boundary condition. Instead measure only the
derivative in the first torus coordinate. A harmonic mode depending on
the second coordinate can have nonzero boundary values and zero
measurement. The full compact-cylinder calculation below proves exactly
what this loses: higher regularity, smooth-error solvability and closed
range. The general reduction then identifies the boundary operator that
controls these questions for an arbitrary elliptic reference problem.

The progression is: compute the model; retain the full reference inverse
and its errors; derive the comparison system; prove both equivalences;
then locate the exact connections to the wider boundary calculus and
cotangent-space symbol class. The original general statements and their
proofs keep their full order lists and hypotheses.

The named prerequisites are \href{general-boundary-fredholm.pdf}{Solving
an elliptic system from compatible boundary measurements},
\href{generalized-collar-fredholm.pdf}{Fredholm boundary problems with
first-order Calderón defects}, \href{calderon-cauchy-data.pdf}{Cauchy
data from jumps and residues}, and
\href{geometric-microlocal-calculus.pdf}{The calculus of
pseudodifferential operators on a manifold}. We use \(D=-i\partial\) and
restriction Sobolev spaces on a compact smooth manifold with boundary.

\subsection{A compact cylinder with a missing measurement
direction}\label{a-compact-cylinder-with-a-missing-measurement-direction}

Take the original coordinates and densities

\[
 X=\mathbb T^2_y\times[0,1]_t,\qquad
 y_1,y_2\in\mathbb R/(2\pi\mathbb Z),\qquad d y_1\,d y_2\,dt,
 \qquad P=D_t^2+D_{y_1}^2+D_{y_2}^2,
 \qquad D=-i\partial.
 \tag{CM1}
\]

Both bundles are the trivial complex line. Use the full value trace
\(Bu=(u|_{t=0},u|_{t=1})\) as the reference datum, and the comparison
\(Cu=(D_{y_1}u|_{t=0},D_{y_1}u|_{t=1})\). Thus the reference orders are
\(m_0=m_1=0\), the comparison orders are \(\mu_0=\mu_1=1\), and the
interior order is \(m=2\). The two inward normal coordinates are \(t\)
at the lower end and \(1-t\) at the upper end.

For each end \(b=0,1\), keep the Fourier convention

\[
 g_b(y)=\sum_{n\in\mathbb Z^2}g_{b,n}e^{i n\cdot y},\qquad
 g_{b,n}=(2\pi)^{-2}\int_{\mathbb T^2}g_b(y)e^{-i n\cdot y}\,dy,
 \qquad
 \|g_b\|_{H^r(\mathbb T^2)}^2
       =(2\pi)^2\sum_n\langle n\rangle^{2r}|g_{b,n}|^2.
 \tag{CM2}
\]

\textbf{Periodic Fourier and trace foundations.} The Euclidean transform
in \href{prerequisite-bridges.pdf}{Fourier transforms, finite spectra and
convex separation} does not by itself establish the periodic series
being used here. We supply that step with the original torus density.
Direct integration gives \[
 \int_{\mathbb T^2}e^{i(n-k)\cdot y}\,dy=(2\pi)^2\delta_{nk}.
 \tag{CF1}
\] For \(-\pi\leq z\leq\pi\), set \[
 F_N(z)=\frac1{N+1}\left|\sum_{k=0}^Ne^{ikz}\right|^2
       =\sum_{|k|\leq N}\left(1-\frac{|k|}{N+1}\right)e^{ikz},
 \qquad k_N(z_1,z_2)=(2\pi)^{-2}F_N(z_1)F_N(z_2).
 \tag{CF2}
\] This is nonnegative and has integral one. On
\(\delta\leq|z|\leq\pi\), the geometric sum gives
\(F_N(z)\leq((N+1)\sin^2(\delta/2))^{-1}\). Translations are continuous
in periodic \(L^2\): for rectangle indicators the symmetric-difference
area tends to zero, then finite rectangle step functions and their
\(L^2\) density prove the statement for every input. The original
measure and step-function density are proved in
\href{banach-foundation-bridges.pdf}{Banach estimates, quotient spaces
and compact parameter arguments}. Translation preserves the full torus
integral. Cauchy--Schwarz against the probability density \(k_N\) now
gives \[
 \|k_N*g-g\|_2^2
 \leq\int_{\mathbb T^2}k_N(z)\|g(\,\cdot-z)-g\|_2^2\,dz
 \leq\varepsilon^2+
       \frac{8\|g\|_2^2}{(N+1)\sin^2(\delta/2)}
 \tag{CF3}
\] once translations with both \(|z_j|<\delta\) have difference norm at
most \(\varepsilon\). The last constant retains the two coordinate tails
and the bound \(4\|g\|_2^2\) on each translated difference. Thus finite
trigonometric polynomials are dense. Orthogonality (CF1) then proves
Parseval with factor \((2\pi)^2\), and rectangular Fourier partial sums
converge in \(L^2\). For every real \(r\), define the torus Sobolev norm
by (CM2); weighted finite sums are dense in its completion.

Here is its exact connection to the coordinate Sobolev spaces. A smooth
cutoff \(\chi\) supported in one lifted torus chart satisfies
\(\widehat{\chi g}(\eta)=\sum_n g_n\widehat\chi(\eta-n)\). The weight
inequality is \(\langle\eta\rangle^r\langle n\rangle^{-r}
 \leq2^{|r|/2}\langle\eta-n\rangle^{|r|}\). Put
\(a_\chi(v)=2^{|r|/2}\langle v\rangle^{|r|}|\widehat\chi(v)|\),
\(A_\chi=\sup_\eta\sum_n a_\chi(\eta-n)\) and
\(B_\chi=\int_{\mathbb R^2}a_\chi(v)\,dv\). Both are finite by the
Schwartz estimates: subdivide the integral into unit squares, and bound
the lattice tails by a convergent power sum. Cauchy--Schwarz first
against each kernel row, then summing or integrating the columns, gives
\[
 \|\chi g\|_{H^r(\mathbb R^2)}^2
       \leq(2\pi)^{-4}A_\chi B_\chi\|g\|_{H^r(\mathbb T^2)}^2.
 \tag{CF4}
\] For the converse choose a finite chart partition
\(\sum_{j=1}^J\chi_j=1\), and a compact smooth \(\sigma_j\) equal to one
on the support of each lifted \(u_j=\chi_jg\). Its Fourier values
satisfy \[
 \begin{aligned}
 \widehat u_j(n)&=(2\pi)^{-2}
       \int\widehat\sigma_j(n-\eta)\widehat u_j(\eta)\,d\eta,\\
 g_n&=(2\pi)^{-2}\sum_j\widehat u_j(n),\\
 \|g\|_{H^r(\mathbb T^2)}^2
 &\leq J(2\pi)^{-4}\sum_j A_{\sigma_j}B_{\sigma_j}
                            \|u_j\|_{H^r(\mathbb R^2)}^2.
 \end{aligned}
 \tag{CF5}
\] The same row/column estimate proves the last inequality, retaining
both convolution and coefficient factors. These identities first hold
for smooth inputs and extend by completion; compactly supported
distributions also satisfy the convolution identity. They prove the
asserted Sobolev identification, including negative \(r\).

For the cylinder take the restriction of the product space on
\(\mathbb T^2\times\mathbb R\), with its full norm \[
 \|U\|_{H^s}^2=(2\pi)^2(2\pi)^{-1}
  \sum_n\int_{\mathbb R}(1+|n|^2+\tau^2)^s
                   |\widehat U_n(\tau)|^2\,d\tau,
 \qquad \widehat U_n(\tau)=\int U_n(t)e^{-it\tau}\,dt.
 \tag{CF6}
\] The preceding chart argument applies with the same weight inequality
uniformly in \(\tau\), so this is the coordinate Sobolev space too. For
\(s>j+1/2\), the \(j\)-th normal trace at \(b=0,1\) is
\((2\pi)^{-1}\int e^{ib\tau}(\epsilon_b\tau)^j
\widehat U_n(\tau)\,d\tau\), where \(\epsilon_0=1\) and
\(\epsilon_1=-1\). Cauchy--Schwarz and \(\tau=\langle n\rangle v\) prove
\[
 \|\gamma_j^{(b)}U\|_{H^{s-j-1/2}(\mathbb T^2)}^2
 \leq\frac{J_{s,j}}{2\pi}\|U\|_{H^s}^2,\qquad
 J_{s,j}=\int_{\mathbb R}v^{2j}(1+v^2)^{-s}\,dv<\infty.
 \tag{CF7}
\] For each coefficient the integral is continuous in \(b\), with the
same integrable majorant. An extension vanishing inside the cylinder
therefore has zero inward traces. Taking the infimum over extensions
proves (CF7) for the restriction space. At integer order two the product
Fourier norm is exactly the sum of the squared zeroth derivative norm,
twice every first derivative norm, every pure second derivative norm and
twice every mixed second derivative norm. The bounded original
reflection extension proved in \href{mixed-sobolev-mapping.pdf}{Mixed
symbols on every real two-parameter Sobolev scale} acts only in \(t\),
so applies coefficientwise here with all these weights. Equivalently,
its order-two endpoint formula is \(3u(-t)-2u(-2t)\) at the lower end
and \(3u(2-t)-2u(3-2t)\) at the upper end, with its retained smooth
cutoff. Values and first derivatives match because \(3-2=1\) and
\(-3+4=1\); the full derivative and cutoff estimates of that extension
therefore control the restriction \(H^2\) norm by the ten derivative
norms used below. This completes the periodic foundations of the model.

Put \(a=|n|\). The homogeneous solution with both prescribed values is

\[
 \begin{aligned}
 (K_0g)_n(t)
 &=\frac{\sinh(a(1-t))}{\sinh a}g_{0,n}
       +\frac{\sinh(at)}{\sinh a}g_{1,n},&&a>0,\\
 (K_0g)_0(t)&=(1-t)g_{0,0}+t g_{1,0}.&&
 \end{aligned}
 \tag{CM3}
\]

Direct differentiation gives \(-v_n''+a^2v_n=0\) and the exact two
endpoint values. The zero mode is retained separately. The full inward
first-normal-derivative vector, for \(a>0\), is

\[
 \begin{pmatrix}D_t(K_0g)_n(0)\\D_{1-t}(K_0g)_n(1)\end{pmatrix}
 =i a\begin{pmatrix}\coth a&-\operatorname{csch}a\\
                 -\operatorname{csch}a&\coth a\end{pmatrix}
                  \binom{g_{0,n}}{g_{1,n}},
 \qquad D_{1-t}=+i\partial_t.
 \tag{CM4}
\]

For \(a=0\) the same two derivatives are
\((i(g_{0,0}-g_{1,0}),i(g_{1,0}-g_{0,0}))\). These formulas retain the
normal signs, the off-diagonal interaction and the constant mode.

Here is a direct completed-space justification. Every nonzero integer
frequency \(n\in\mathbb Z^2\) in (CM3) has \(a=|n|\geq1\). Write

\[
 p_a(t)=\frac{e^{-at}-e^{-a(2-t)}}{1-e^{-2a}},\qquad
 p_a^{(j)}(t)=
 \frac{(-a)^j e^{-at}-a^j e^{-a(2-t)}}{1-e^{-2a}},\quad j=0,1,2.
 \tag{CM5}
\]

The denominator and reflected exponential are both kept. The inequality
\(|v-w|^2\leq2|v|^2+2|w|^2\) and direct integration give

\[
 \begin{aligned}
 \int_0^1|p_a^{(j)}|^2dt
 &\leq\frac{2a^{2j}}{(1-e^{-2a})^2}
       \left(\frac{1-e^{-2a}}{2a}
                     +\frac{e^{-2a}-e^{-4a}}{2a}\right)\\
 &=a^{2j-1}\frac{1+e^{-2a}}{1-e^{-2a}}
       \leq (\coth1)a^{2j-1}.
 \end{aligned}
 \tag{CM6}
\]

There are exactly ten derivatives \(\partial_y^\alpha\partial_t^j\) with
\(|\alpha|+j\leq2\). For each nonzero mode their squared bound has power
at most \(a^3\). For the zero mode, \(1-t\) and \(t\) each have the sum
of squared zeroth, first and second derivative norms \(1/3+1+0=4/3\).
Apply the same two-term inequality to the two end contributions and use
the full torus Plancherel factor. Then

\[
 \sum_{|\alpha|+j\leq2}
      \|\partial_y^\alpha\partial_t^jK_0g\|_{L^2(X)}^2
 \leq20(\coth1)(2\pi)^2\sum_n\langle n\rangle^3
                          (|g_{0,n}|^2+|g_{1,n}|^2).
 \tag{CM7}
\]

Consequently Fourier partial sums converge in \(H^2(X)\) for every
\(g\in H^{3/2}(\mathbb T^2)\oplus H^{3/2}(\mathbb T^2)\). Continuity of
the value and normal trace maps in (CF7) passes (CM3)--(CM4) to their
proper Sobolev spaces. Also \(PK_0g=0\), since \(P:H^2\to L^2\) is
continuous. A homogeneous \(H^2\) solution with zero value traces is
zero: its Fourier coefficients satisfy the same one-dimensional
equation, and integration by parts yields
\(\int_0^1(|v_n'|^2+a^2|v_n|^2)dt=0\). At \(a=0\) the resulting constant
must also have zero endpoint values. This proves uniqueness.

The forcing lift has an equally explicit full kernel. If
\(t_< =\min(t,r)\) and \(t_>=\max(t,r)\), put

\[
 \begin{aligned}
 G_a(t,r)&=\frac{\sinh(a t_<)\sinh(a(1-t_>))}{a\sinh a},&&a>0,\\
 G_0(t,r)&=t_<(1-t_>),\\
 (V_0f)_n(t)&=\int_0^1G_{|n|}(t,r)f_n(r)\,dr.
 \end{aligned}
 \tag{CM8}
\]

At \(t=r\), the jump of \(\partial_tG_a\) is minus one: the numerator of
that jump is
\(-\sinh(ar)\cosh(a(1-r))-\cosh(ar)\sinh(a(1-r))=-\sinh a\). The
zero-mode jump is also minus one. Thus
\((-\partial_t^2+a^2)G_a=\delta_r\), with both Dirichlet values zero.
For \(a\geq1\), the energy identity and Cauchy--Schwarz give

\[
 \|v_n\|_2\leq a^{-2}\|f_n\|_2,\qquad
 \|v_n'\|_2\leq a^{-1}\|f_n\|_2,\qquad
 \|v_n''\|_2\leq2\|f_n\|_2.
 \tag{CM9}
\]

For example the first bound follows from
\(a^2\|v_n\|_2^2\leq |(f_n,v_n)|\); inserting it into
\(\|v_n'\|_2^2+a^2\|v_n\|_2^2=(f_n,v_n)\) proves the second. The
equation \(v_n''=a^2v_n-f_n\) proves the third. For the zero mode,
\(\int G_0(t,r)dr=t(1-t)/2\leq1/8\) and the analogous bound in the other
variable give the kernel operator norm at most \(1/8\) by
Cauchy--Schwarz with the nonnegative kernel. The energy identity then
gives \(\|v_0'\|_2\leq\|f_0\|_2/\sqrt8\), and \(v_0''=-f_0\). Each of
the ten derivatives used in (CM7) has norm at most \(2\|f_n\|_2\) in a
nonzero mode; the three nonvanishing zero-mode derivatives obey the
stated smaller bounds. Hence

\[
 \sum_{|\alpha|+j\leq2}
       \|\partial_y^\alpha\partial_t^j V_0f\|_2^2
          \leq40(2\pi)^2\sum_n\|f_n\|_{L^2(0,1)}^2
          =40\|f\|_{L^2(X)}^2.
 \tag{CM10}
\]

Smooth Fourier truncation and density pass the kernel equation and zero
traces to all \(L^2\) inputs. Thus \(u=V_0f+K_0g\) is the exact
reference inverse at \(H^2\), with no remainder for this chosen inverse.
The general reference parametrix below keeps its actual smoothing
errors.

Since \(C\) differentiates only the value traces, this exact reference
inverse has reduced boundary operator

\[
 M_0g=(D_{y_1}g_0,D_{y_1}g_1),\qquad
 (M_0g)_{b,n}=n_1g_{b,n}.
 \tag{CM11}
\]

For one end and any real \(r\), its map is \(D_{y_1}:H^r\to H^{r-1}\).
Its exact range and closure are

\[
 \begin{aligned}
 \operatorname{ran}D_{y_1}
 &=\left\{h\in H^{r-1}:h_{(0,n_2)}=0\ \text{for all }n_2,
     \ \sum_{n_1\ne0}\langle n\rangle^{2r}
                         |h_n/n_1|^2<\infty\right\},\\
 \overline{\operatorname{ran}D_{y_1}}
 &=\{h\in H^{r-1}:h_{(0,n_2)}=0\ \text{for all }n_2\}.
 \end{aligned}
 \tag{CM12}
\]

Necessity follows by taking Fourier coefficients. For sufficiency set
\(g_n=h_n/n_1\) when \(n_1\ne0\), and zero otherwise. The displayed sum
puts \(g\) in \(H^r\) and gives the required image. For the closure,
each coefficient is a continuous functional on \(H^{r-1}\), whereas
finite Fourier sums with \(n_1\ne0\) belong to the range and are dense
in the displayed subspace. The kernel contains every mode with
\(n_1=0\), and the target modulo the closure contains every such mode as
an independent class.

The range is not closed. Indeed the vectors

\[
 v_N(y)=\frac{e^{i(y_1+Ny_2)}}{2\pi\langle(1,N)\rangle^r},\qquad
 \|v_N\|_{H^r}=1,\qquad
 \|D_{y_1}v_N\|_{H^{r-1}}=\langle(1,N)\rangle^{-1}\longrightarrow0
 \tag{CM13}
\]

lie in the orthogonal complement of the kernel. A closed range would
make the restriction from that complement a bounded bijection onto the
range. The Banach inverse theorem, proved in
\href{banach-foundation-bridges.pdf}{Banach estimates, quotient spaces
and compact parameter arguments}, would bound these unit vectors by a
fixed multiple of their image norms, contradicting (CM13). The same
conclusions hold for the two-end direct sum. They also apply to the full
comparison problem at its base spaces:
\(A_B:H^2(X)\to L^2(X)\oplus(H^{3/2}\oplus H^{3/2})\) is a bounded
isomorphism with the actual inverse constructed in (CM3)--(CM10). Its
zero-Dirichlet forcing lift has zero comparison traces, so \[
 A_C A_B^{-1}(f,g)
       =A_C(V_0f+K_0g)=(f,M_0g).
 \tag{CM15}
\] Thus the kernel of the full map is isomorphic to \(\ker M_0\), and
its target modulo the closure of its range is isomorphic to the
corresponding boundary quotient in (CM12). Its range is not closed,
because the product range \(L^2(X)\oplus\operatorname{ran}M_0\) is not
closed. This gives the exact interior/boundary relation, rather than
drawing an inference from the boundary symbol alone.

This also gives actual failures of the two general properties. For
\(2<s_0\leq s_1\), take

\[
 g_0(y)=\sum_{N\geq1}N^{-s_0}e^{iNy_2},\qquad g_1=0.
 \tag{CM14}
\]

The squared \(H^{3/2}\) sum converges because its large-\(N\) power is
\(3-2s_0<-1\). The \(H^{s_0-1/2}\) sum diverges with power minus one.
Equation (CM7) gives \(u=K_0g\in H^2\), with \(Pu=0\) and \(Cu=0\). If
\(u\) belonged to \(H^{s_0}\), the value trace theorem would put \(g_0\)
in the space just shown impossible. Thus \(\mathrm{Reg}_X(s_0,s_1)\)
fails, as does its boundary counterpart. At \(s_0=2\) the regularity
assertion is its base hypothesis.

For any \(s_1\geq2\), choose the comparison datum
\(h_0(y)=\sum_{N\geq1}N^{-s_1}e^{iNy_2}\), \(h_1=0\), and \(f=0\). Its
squared target sum in \(H^{s_1-3/2}\) has power minus three, so it is
admissible. Its coefficients do not decrease faster than every power, so
it is not smooth. Every \(M_0g\) is zero in these frequencies. Therefore
\(M_0g-h\) cannot be smooth, for any boundary distribution \(g\). Nor
can \(Cu-h\) be smooth for an interior solution: the same Fourier
coefficients of each \(D_{y_1}\) trace are zero. Smooth-error
solvability fails for the exact comparison problem. These are
consequences of the retained measurement and its precise missing
frequencies, not a change of interior ellipticity.

\subsection{1. The reference problem and the comparison
measurements}\label{the-reference-problem-and-the-comparison-measurements}

Let \(X\) be a compact smooth manifold with boundary \(Y\). Let
\(E,F\to X\) be complex bundles of the same finite rank, and let

\[
 P:C^\infty(X,E)\longrightarrow C^\infty(X,F)
 \tag{BDR1}
\]

be an elliptic differential operator of order \(m\geq1\). Choose an
elliptic reference boundary system \(\mathbf B=(B_1,\ldots,B_J)\). Its
rows have transversal order below \(m\) and total orders \(m_j\):

\[
 B_j u=\sum_{r=0}^{m-1}\mathcal B_{jr}\gamma_r u,
 \qquad \gamma_r u=(D_t^ru)|_Y,
 \qquad \operatorname{ord}\mathcal B_{jr}\leq m_j-r.
 \tag{BDR2}
\]

The complementing condition is assumed for \((P,\mathbf B)\). The
integers \(m_j\) need not be below \(m\).

Now choose comparison rows \(\mathbf C=(C_1,\ldots,C_K)\), with targets
\(H_k\to Y\), transversal order below \(m\), and total orders \(\mu_k\):

\[
 C_k u=\sum_{r=0}^{m-1}\mathcal C_{kr}\gamma_r u
       =C_k^c\gamma u,
 \qquad
 \operatorname{ord}\mathcal C_{kr}\leq\mu_k-r,
 \qquad
 \gamma u=(\gamma_0u,\ldots,\gamma_{m-1}u).
 \tag{BDR3}
\]

No complementing condition is imposed on \((P,\mathbf C)\). The problem
under study is

\[
 Pu=f,\qquad C_ku=h_k\quad(1\leq k\leq K),
 \tag{BDR4}
\]

and the auxiliary reference datum will be \(g_j=B_ju\).

For every real \(s\), put

\[
 \begin{aligned}
 \mathcal C^s
   &=\bigoplus_{r=0}^{m-1}H^{s-r-1/2}(Y,E|_Y),\\
 \mathcal D_B^s
   &=\bigoplus_{j=1}^{J}H^{s-m_j-1/2}(Y,G_j),\\
 \mathcal D_C^s
   &=\bigoplus_{k=1}^{K}H^{s-\mu_k-1/2}(Y,H_k).
 \end{aligned}
 \tag{BDR5}
\]

Thus \(\mathcal B=(\mathcal B_{jr})\) and \(C^c=(\mathcal C_{kr})\) have
the bounded mappings

\[
 \mathcal B:\mathcal C^s\longrightarrow\mathcal D_B^s,
 \qquad
 C^c:\mathcal C^s\longrightarrow\mathcal D_C^s.
 \tag{BDR6}
\]

These formulas make the two order lists visible. They also cover
negative target exponents and arbitrarily large total orders.

\subsection{2. The complete reference
parametrix}\label{the-complete-reference-parametrix}

\textbf{Editorial correction of the extension used here.} Section 4 of
\href{calderon-cauchy-data.pdf}{Cauchy data from jumps and residues}
extends the original operator \(P\) elliptically to an open neighborhood
\(\widehat X\) of \(X\). Use that extension and a proper transmission
parametrix \(T\), on a relatively compact working neighborhood, with

\[
 TP=I+R_E,\qquad PT=I+R_F,
 \qquad R_E,R_F\in\Psi^{-\infty}.
 \tag{BDR7}
\]

Let \(e^+\) be zero extension and \(r^+\) interior restriction. If
\(P=\sum_{a=0}^mP_aD_t^a\) in the collar, define

\[
 \begin{aligned}
 P^cU
 &=\frac1i\sum_{a=1}^mP_a
       \sum_{r=0}^{a-1}U_{a-1-r}\otimes D_t^r\delta_0,\\
 V&=r^+Te^+,
 \qquad K=r^+TP^c.
 \end{aligned}
 \tag{BDR8}
\]

The Calderón operator \(Q\) is fixed by the exact trace identity

\[
 \gamma K=Q,\qquad
 Q_{r\ell}\in\Psi_{\mathrm{cl}}^{r-\ell},\qquad
 Q^2-Q\in\Psi^{-\infty}.
 \tag{BDR9}
\]

The complementing condition for \(\mathbf B\) gives matrices \(S\) and
\(S''\) with

\[
 \mathcal BS\equiv I,\qquad QS\equiv S,\qquad
 S\mathcal B+S''\equiv I,\qquad S''Q\equiv0,
 \tag{BDR10}
\]

where \(\equiv\) means equality modulo a matrix with smooth kernel, and

\[
 S_{rj}\in\Psi_{\mathrm{cl}}^{r-m_j},\qquad
 S''_{r\ell}\in\Psi_{\mathrm{cl}}^{r-\ell}.
 \tag{BDR11}
\]

Set

\[
 L_0=(I+KS''\gamma)V,\qquad
 L(f,g)=L_0f+KSg.
 \tag{BDR12}
\]

At every \(s\geq m\), the mapping statements are

\[
 \begin{aligned}
 V&:\bar H^{s-m}(X^\circ,F)\longrightarrow\bar H^s(X^\circ,E),\\
 S&:\mathcal D_B^s\longrightarrow\mathcal C^s,\\
 K&:\mathcal C^s\longrightarrow\bar H^s(X^\circ,E),\\
 L&:\bar H^{s-m}(X^\circ,F)\oplus\mathcal D_B^s
       \longrightarrow\bar H^s(X^\circ,E).
 \end{aligned}
 \tag{BDR13}
\]

Nothing in (BDR13) evaluates an arbitrary distribution at the boundary:
\(\gamma\) occurs only after \(V\), which has already gained \(m\)
derivatives.

For \(u\in\bar H^m(X^\circ,E)\), the complete left identity is

\[
 u=L_0Pu+KSBu+\mathcal Ru,
 \qquad
 \mathcal R:\bar H^m(X^\circ,E)\longrightarrow C^\infty(X,E).
 \tag{BDR14}
\]

One exact formula retaining the source of this remainder is

\[
 \mathcal R
 =K\bigl(\mathcal R_Y\gamma-S''\gamma R_E^+\bigr)-R_E^+,
 \qquad
 \mathcal R_Y=I-S\mathcal B-S''(I-Q),
 \qquad R_E^+=r^+R_Ee^+.
 \tag{BDR15}
\]

\textbf{Editorial correction of the smoothing argument.} The individual
summands \(I\), \(S\mathcal B\) and \(S''(I-Q)\) need not be smoothing.
The exact regrouping is \[
 \mathcal R_Y=(I-S\mathcal B-S'')+S''Q.
 \tag{BDR15a}
\] Both the parenthesized error \(I-S\mathcal B-S''\) and the product
\(S''Q\) have smooth kernels by (BDR10), so their sum \(\mathcal R_Y\)
has a smooth kernel. Meanwhile \(R_E^+\) maps interior \(L^2\) inputs
continuously to sections smooth up to the boundary. For
\(u\in\bar H^m\), the trace \(\gamma u\) has the stated boundary Sobolev
orders, so \(\mathcal R_Y\gamma u\) is smooth; \(S''\gamma R_E^+u\) is
also smooth. The all-order Poisson estimate for \(K\), followed by
Sobolev embedding at every high order, proves the mapping of
\(\mathcal R\) in (BDR14), retaining both terms inside \(K\) and the
final \(-R_E^+\). No elliptic extension of the original \(P\) to a
closed double is required in this proof.

The interior row of the right identity is

\[
 PL(f,g)=f+K_1f+K_2g,
 \tag{BDR16}
\]

where, with \(H=r^+R_FP^c\),

\[
 K_1=R_F^++HS''\gamma V,\qquad
 K_2=HS,\qquad R_F^+=r^+R_Fe^+.
 \tag{BDR17}
\]

Both \(K_1\) and \(K_2\) map their indicated Sobolev inputs continuously
into smooth interior sections. In particular, \(K_2\) has a kernel
smooth in its boundary input and interior output variables.

The reference boundary row is also retained:

\[
 BL(f,g)=g+K_3f+K_4g,
 \tag{BDR18}
\]

where \(K_3:L^2(X,F)\to C^\infty(Y,\bigoplus_jG_j)\) is continuous and
\(K_4\) has a smooth kernel on \(Y\times Y\).

\subsection{3. The boundary pseudodifferential
system}\label{the-boundary-pseudodifferential-system}

Define the reduced comparison operator

\[
 M=C^cQS:\mathcal D_B^s\longrightarrow\mathcal D_C^s.
 \tag{BDR19}
\]

Its \((k,j)\) entry has order \(\mu_k-m_j\). Indeed every summand has
the unreduced order

\[
 \operatorname{ord}\bigl(\mathcal C_{kr}Q_{r\ell}S_{\ell j}\bigr)
 \leq(\mu_k-r)+(r-\ell)+(\ell-m_j)
 =\mu_k-m_j.
 \tag{BDR20}
\]

This calculation keeps all three factors and does not identify \(m_j\)
with \(\mu_k\).

Let \(u\in\bar H^m\), put \(f=Pu\), \(g=Bu\), and \(h=Cu\). Apply \(C\)
to (BDR14). Since \(C=C^c\gamma\) and \(\gamma K=Q\), one obtains the
exact identity

\[
 C^cQSg
 =h-CL_0f-C\mathcal Ru.
 \tag{BDR21}
\]

In the original factors this reads

\[
 C_k^cQSg
 =h_k-C_k(I+KS''\gamma)Vf-C_k\mathcal Ru,
 \qquad V=r^+Te^+,\quad K=r^+TP^c.
 \tag{BDR22}
\]

The last term is smooth on \(Y\). If \(f\in\bar H^{s-m}\), then (BDR13)
gives

\[
 CL_0f\in\mathcal D_C^s.
 \tag{BDR23}
\]

The second identity in (BDR10) gives a smoothing matrix \(R_S=QS-S\).
Composition with the finite-order row \(C^c\) remains smoothing, so

\[
 M-C^cS=C^c(QS-S)=C^cR_S\in\Psi^{-\infty}.
 \tag{BDR24}
\]

Thus \(C^cS\) may replace \(M\) in a statement made modulo smooth
sections. It may not replace \(M\) in an exact equation without also
retaining the smoothing correction.

\subsection{4. The coupled ansatz and its exact
scope}\label{the-coupled-ansatz-and-its-exact-scope}

For \(s\geq m\), take \(\widetilde f\in\bar H^{s-m}(X^\circ,F)\),
\(g\in\mathcal D_B^s\), and set

\[
 u=L(\widetilde f,g)
   =(I+KS''\gamma)V\widetilde f+KSg.
 \tag{BDR25}
\]

Equations (BDR16) and (BDR19) give, without suppressing either right
error,

\[
 \begin{aligned}
 Pu&=\widetilde f+K_1\widetilde f+K_2g,\\
 Cu&=CL_0\widetilde f+Mg.
 \end{aligned}
 \tag{BDR26}
\]

Consequently this particular ansatz solves (BDR4) exactly if and only if
its parameters solve the coupled system

\[
 \boxed{
 \begin{aligned}
 \widetilde f+K_1\widetilde f+K_2g&=f,\\
 Mg&=h-CL_0\widetilde f.
 \end{aligned}}
 \tag{BDR27}
\]

The first equation implies

\[
 \widetilde f-f=-K_1\widetilde f-K_2g\in C^\infty(X,F).
 \tag{BDR28}
\]

The transmission mapping of \(V\), followed by (BDR12), sends a smooth
forcing term to a section smooth up to \(Y\). Hence

\[
 CL_0\widetilde f-CL_0f=CL_0(\widetilde f-f)\in C^\infty(Y,\textstyle\bigoplus_kH_k).
 \tag{BDR29}
\]

This is the precise reason that \(f\) may replace \(\widetilde f\) on
the boundary right side modulo smooth terms.

The ansatz does not claim that every exact solution lies in the exact
range of \(L\). What is true for every solution is the complete
modulo-smooth representation

\[
 u-L(Pu,Bu)=\mathcal Ru\in C^\infty(X,E).
 \tag{BDR30}
\]

Therefore (BDR27) is an exact characterization of solutions produced by
the ansatz, while (BDR30) says that the ansatz captures every solution
modulo a smooth section. Possible finite-dimensional obstructions in the
first equation have not been erased.

\subsubsection{The full reference and comparison
block}\label{the-full-reference-and-comparison-block}

The source's block notation has a concrete connection to the present
maps. Retain the original spaces \(\mathcal U^s=\bar H^s(X^\circ,E)\),
\(\mathcal F^s=\bar H^{s-m}(X^\circ,F)\), and both graded boundary
spaces from (BDR5). Write

\[
 A_B=\binom P B:\mathcal U^s\longrightarrow
             \mathcal F^s\oplus\mathcal D_B^s,
 \qquad
 A_C=\binom P C:\mathcal U^s\longrightarrow
             \mathcal F^s\oplus\mathcal D_C^s,
 \qquad
 L_B=\begin{pmatrix}L_0&KS\end{pmatrix}.
 \tag{BCM1}
\]

All three maps are bounded when \(s\geq m\), by (BDR6), (BDR13) and the
strict normal trace thresholds. Equations (BDR14), (BDR16) and (BDR18)
give the complete products

\[
 \begin{aligned}
 L_BA_B&=I-\mathcal R,\\
 A_BL_B&=\begin{pmatrix}I+K_1&K_2\\K_3&I+K_4\end{pmatrix},\\
 A_CL_B&=\begin{pmatrix}I+K_1&K_2\\CL_0&M\end{pmatrix},
       \qquad M=C^cQS.
 \end{aligned}
 \tag{BCM2}
\]

Each entry has its displayed domain and target; in particular the
boundary-input column is retained. Applying the last matrix to
\((\widetilde f,g)\) is exactly (BDR27). Applying
\(L_BA_B=I-\mathcal R\) to an arbitrary \(u\) is exactly (BDR30). This
proves their connection before taking any quotient by smooth sections.
In that quotient the first two products are inverse maps, and the
comparison problem becomes the triangular map with rows \((I,0)\) and
\((CL_0,M)\); the exact products remain (BCM2).

\href{https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0403059v3}{Melo, Schick and Schrohe,
Introduction, equation (1)} provide the typed interior/boundary block
used for this comparison. Our equation column has zero boundary input
bundle; its reference inverse has the actual Poisson column \(KS\).
Their composition rule is stated for a single order and class. Here the
original lists \(m_j\) and \(\mu_k\) remain separate, and (BDR20) proves
the exact order of every entry of \(M\). No order-changing substitution
or proof of the entire boundary algebra is inferred from (BCM2).

\subsection{5. Equivalence of regularity
gains}\label{equivalence-of-regularity-gains}

Fix real exponents

\[
 m\leq s_0\leq s_1.
 \tag{BDR31}
\]

Consider the following two assertions.

\textbf{Interior assertion \(\mathrm{Reg}_X(s_0,s_1)\).} Every
\(u\in\bar H^m(X^\circ,E)\) satisfying

\[
 Pu\in\bar H^{s_1-m}(X^\circ,F),
 \qquad Cu\in\mathcal D_C^{s_1}
 \tag{BDR32}
\]

belongs to \(\bar H^{s_0}(X^\circ,E)\).

\textbf{Boundary assertion \(\mathrm{Reg}_Y(s_0,s_1)\).} Every
\(g\in\mathcal D_B^m\) satisfying

\[
 Mg=C^cQSg\in\mathcal D_C^{s_1}
 \tag{BDR33}
\]

belongs to \(\mathcal D_B^{s_0}\).

\textbf{Regularity reduction theorem.} The two assertions are
equivalent.

Assume first \(\mathrm{Reg}_X(s_0,s_1)\), and take \(g\) as in (BDR33).
Put

\[
 u=KSg.
 \tag{BDR34}
\]

The mappings in (BDR13) put \(u\) in \(\bar H^m\). Equations (BDR16) and
(BDR18), with \(f=0\), give

\[
 Pu=K_2g\in C^\infty(X,F),\qquad
 Cu=Mg\in\mathcal D_C^{s_1},\qquad
 Bu=g+K_4g.
 \tag{BDR35}
\]

The interior assertion yields \(u\in\bar H^{s_0}\). Therefore
\(Bu\in\mathcal D_B^{s_0}\); because \(K_4g\) is smooth, the last
identity in (BDR35) proves

\[
 g=Bu-K_4g\in\mathcal D_B^{s_0}.
 \tag{BDR36}
\]

This proves \(\mathrm{Reg}_Y(s_0,s_1)\).

Conversely assume \(\mathrm{Reg}_Y(s_0,s_1)\), and take \(u\) as in
(BDR32). Set \(f=Pu\), \(h=Cu\), and \(g=Bu\). The trace theorem at the
base exponent gives \(g\in\mathcal D_B^m\). Equations (BDR21) and
(BDR23) imply

\[
 Mg=h-CL_0f-C\mathcal Ru\in\mathcal D_C^{s_1}.
 \tag{BDR37}
\]

The boundary assertion gives \(g\in\mathcal D_B^{s_0}\). Since
\(s_1\geq s_0\), also \(f\in\bar H^{s_0-m}\). Applying (BDR13) to the
exact left identity (BDR14) yields

\[
 u=L(f,g)+\mathcal Ru\in\bar H^{s_0}(X^\circ,E).
 \tag{BDR38}
\]

This proves the converse and the theorem. The final bundle in (BDR38) is
\(E\), the bundle of the unknown; \(F\) is the target of \(Pu\).

\subsection{6. Equivalence of solvability modulo smooth
errors}\label{equivalence-of-solvability-modulo-smooth-errors}

Under (BDR31), consider two more assertions.

\textbf{Interior assertion \(\mathrm{Sol}_X(s_0,s_1)\).} For every

\[
 f\in\bar H^{s_1-m}(X^\circ,F),\qquad
 h\in\mathcal D_C^{s_1},
 \tag{BDR39}
\]

there is \(u\in\bar H^{s_0}(X^\circ,E)\) such that

\[
 Pu-f\in C^\infty(X,F),\qquad
 Cu-h\in C^\infty(Y,\textstyle\bigoplus_kH_k).
 \tag{BDR40}
\]

\textbf{Boundary assertion \(\mathrm{Sol}_Y(s_0,s_1)\).} For every
\(h\in\mathcal D_C^{s_1}\), there is \(g\in\mathcal D_B^{s_0}\) such
that

\[
 Mg-h\in C^\infty(Y,\textstyle\bigoplus_kH_k).
 \tag{BDR41}
\]

\textbf{Smooth-error solvability theorem.} The two assertions are
equivalent.

Assume \(\mathrm{Sol}_Y(s_0,s_1)\). Given \((f,h)\) as in (BDR39), form
the interior lift

\[
 u_f=L_0f=(I+KS''\gamma)Vf\in\bar H^{s_1}(X^\circ,E),
 \qquad h'=h-Cu_f\in\mathcal D_C^{s_1}.
 \tag{BDR42}
\]

Choose \(g\in\mathcal D_B^{s_0}\) with \(Mg-h'\) smooth, and set

\[
 u=u_f+KSg.
 \tag{BDR43}
\]

Since \(s_1\geq s_0\), both terms lie in \(\bar H^{s_0}\). The two rows
of (BDR26) give

\[
 Pu-f=K_1f+K_2g\in C^\infty(X,F),\qquad
 Cu-h=Mg-h'\in C^\infty(Y,\textstyle\bigoplus_kH_k).
 \tag{BDR44}
\]

Thus \(\mathrm{Sol}_X(s_0,s_1)\) holds.

Conversely assume \(\mathrm{Sol}_X(s_0,s_1)\), and fix
\(h\in\mathcal D_C^{s_1}\). Apply it with \(f=0\). There is
\(u\in\bar H^{s_0}\) such that \(Pu\) and \(Cu-h\) are smooth. Put

\[
 g=Bu\in\mathcal D_B^{s_0}.
 \tag{BDR45}
\]

The exact reduction identity (BDR21) now gives

\[
 Mg-h=(Cu-h)-CL_0(Pu)-C\mathcal Ru
 \in C^\infty(Y,\textstyle\bigoplus_kH_k).
 \tag{BDR46}
\]

Indeed \(Pu\) is smooth, so the all-order mapping of \(L_0\) makes
\(CL_0(Pu)\) smooth; the last term is smooth by (BDR14). This proves
\(\mathrm{Sol}_Y(s_0,s_1)\).

The theorem asserts solvability modulo smooth errors. It does not assert
exact surjectivity, a finite-dimensional cokernel, or a closed range for
\((P,\mathbf C)\). Any such conclusion needs an additional theorem
connecting smooth-error solvability with the topology of the relevant
range.

\subsection{7. Endpoints, order checks, and a nonelliptic
model}\label{endpoints-order-checks-and-a-nonelliptic-model}

At \(s_0=m\), the claimed gain in both regularity assertions is exactly
their base assumption. At \(s_1=s_0\), every occurrence of a Sobolev
embedding in the proof becomes the identity map. No strict inequality
between the two exponents was used.

For a boundary row of total order \(\mu_k\), the trace estimate is

\[
 \|C_ku\|_{H^{s-\mu_k-1/2}}
 \leq C\sum_{r=0}^{m-1}
       \|\gamma_ru\|_{H^{s-r-1/2}},
 \qquad s\geq m.
 \tag{BDR47}
\]

This remains valid when \(\mu_k\geq m\), because the target exponent is
allowed to be negative. The same observation applies independently to
every \(m_j\).

A frozen scalar model shows why no ellipticity of \(\mathbf C\) should
be inserted. Let \(m=2\), let the tangential covariable be
\(\eta=(\eta_1,\eta_2)\), and take

\[
 p(\eta,D_t)=D_t^2+|\eta|^2,\qquad
 B=\gamma_0,\qquad C=D_{y_1}\gamma_0.
 \tag{BDR48}
\]

For \(\eta\ne0\), the decaying normal solution with Dirichlet datum
\(g\) is \(e^{-|\eta|t}g\). Hence the principal reduced boundary
operator is

\[
 \sigma(M)(\eta)g=\eta_1g.
 \tag{BDR49}
\]

It vanishes at every nonzero covector with \(\eta_1=0\). The reduction
theorem still applies: it identifies regularity and smooth-error
solvability of the full comparison problem with those of this
nonelliptic tangential operator. It does not manufacture the missing
transverse control.

\begin{figure}
\centering
\pandocbounded{\includegraphics[keepaspectratio,alt={The reference elliptic problem splits arbitrary data into an interior lift and a boundary correction. The comparison rows act on their sum, leaving the boundary system M equals C superscript c Q S and explicit smoothing remainders.}]{../figures/arbitrary_boundary_data_reduction.png}}
\caption{The reference elliptic problem splits arbitrary data into an
interior lift and a boundary correction. The comparison rows act on
their sum, leaving the boundary system M equals C superscript c Q S and
explicit smoothing remainders.}
\end{figure}

The upper route in the figure is the exact ansatz (BDR25)--(BDR27). The
lower route is the left identity (BDR14), which supplies the converse
statements modulo its displayed smooth remainder. The two routes meet at
the same reduced boundary operator \(M\).

\subsection{8. Exercises with complete
solutions}\label{exercises-with-complete-solutions}

\textbf{Exercise 1.} Verify the order of the \((k,j)\) entry of
\(C^cS\).

\textbf{Solution.} The \(r\)-th summand has order

\[
 \operatorname{ord}(\mathcal C_{kr}S_{rj})
 \leq(\mu_k-r)+(r-m_j)=\mu_k-m_j.
 \tag{BDR50}
\]

It therefore maps \(H^{s-m_j-1/2}\) to \(H^{s-\mu_k-1/2}\), exactly as
required.

\textbf{Exercise 2.} Derive (BDR21) without replacing \(QS\) by \(S\).

\textbf{Solution.} Apply \(C=C^c\gamma\) to (BDR14). The boundary
correction contributes

\[
 C(KSg)=C^c\gamma KSg=C^cQSg=Mg.
 \tag{BDR51}
\]

Moving the other two terms to the right gives (BDR21). No
quotient-algebra equality was used.

\textbf{Exercise 3.} In the proof that \(\mathrm{Reg}_X\) implies
\(\mathrm{Reg}_Y\), explain why \(Bu-g\) is smooth for \(u=KSg\).

\textbf{Solution.} Put \(f=0\) in the exact right boundary identity
(BDR18):

\[
 BKSg-g=K_4g\in C^\infty(Y,\textstyle\bigoplus_jG_j).
 \tag{BDR52}
\]

This uses the retained boundary error, rather than treating
\(BS\equiv I\) as equality.

\textbf{Exercise 4.} Prove the sufficiency direction of the smooth-error
theorem using the unshifted forcing \(f\).

\textbf{Solution.} Define \(u_f=L_0f\), shift the desired boundary datum
to \(h'=h-Cu_f\), choose \(g\) by \(\mathrm{Sol}_Y\), and set
\(u=u_f+KSg\). Then

\[
 (Pu-f,Cu-h)=(K_1f+K_2g,\,Mg-h'),
 \tag{BDR53}
\]

whose first component is smooth by (BDR17) and whose second is smooth by
the choice of \(g\).

\textbf{Exercise 5.} Explain the failure of ellipticity in (BDR49)
without claiming failure at every covector.

\textbf{Solution.} At a covector with \(\eta_1\ne0\), multiplication by
\(\eta_1\) is invertible. At a nonzero covector \((0,\eta_2)\), it is
zero. Thus

\[
 \sigma(M)(0,\eta_2)=0\quad(\eta_2\ne0),
 \tag{BDR54}
\]

which is enough to disprove ellipticity while retaining the exact
directions where the symbol is invertible.

\subsection{9. Reading notes and scope}\label{reading-notes-and-scope}

The operators \(T,P^c,V,K,Q,S,S''\), the full left identity, both rows
of the right identity, and their Sobolev mappings are proved in
\href{general-boundary-fredholm.pdf}{Solving an elliptic system from
compatible boundary measurements}. The first-order-defect variant and
its lower-order error estimates are proved in
\href{generalized-collar-fredholm.pdf}{Fredholm boundary problems with
first-order Calderón defects}. This lesson uses the ordinary smoothing
reference construction because the present conclusions are explicitly
modulo smooth sections.

Two local solvability notions for a properly supported scalar
pseudodifferential operator require care. Local solvability at a compact
set permits forcing from a finite-codimensional subspace of
\(C^\infty\). Microlocal solvability over the full cosphere above that
set asks for a distributional solution modulo a smooth error for every
forcing in one finite Sobolev class. The proof here does not use an
equivalence between these two notions. The finite codimension belongs to
the smooth forcing space; it does not say that a fixed Sobolev
realization of \((P,\mathbf C)\) has closed range or finite-dimensional
cokernel. Applying the later theorem to this coupled boundary system
would require an additional system realization and the corresponding
range estimates.

The exact topological carrier supplied by the current course is the
doubled symbol \(\widehat p\). On the closed double it determines \[
 [\pi^*\widehat E,\pi^*\widehat F,
   \widehat p|_{S^*\widehat X}]
 \in K^0(B^*\widehat X,S^*\widehat X)
 \cong K_c^0(T^*\widehat X),
\] while \href{split-doubling-boundary-index.pdf}{Doubling a boundary
problem and computing its index} proves
\(\operatorname{ind}(P,B)=\operatorname{sind}(\widehat p)\). Identifying
this analytic index with a characteristic-class topological formula
requires the complete later index-formula calculation; that formula is
not used in this lesson.

\subsubsection{The exact cotangent-space
class}\label{the-exact-cotangent-space-class}

We specify the group and prove the correspondence in the displayed
symbol class above. This concerns the already constructed closed double,
not an ellipticity claim for the comparison rows \(C\). Let
\(Z=\widehat X\) and use the same chosen cotangent norm to form the
closed unit disk bundle \(B^*Z\) and its sphere bundle \(S^*Z\). The
relative symbol presentation of \(K^0(B^*Z,S^*Z)\) uses triples
\((V,W,a)\), where \(V,W\) are smooth complex bundles over the disk and
\(a:V|_{S^*Z}\to W|_{S^*Z}\) is an isomorphism. Impose the following
relations on the free abelian group of such triples: bundle isomorphism,
direct-sum addition, continuous homotopy of the boundary isomorphism,
and zero for a boundary isomorphism that extends over the whole disk.
This states the relative group being used, including its neutral
objects.

The compact-support symbol presentation of \(K_c^0(T^*Z)\) uses smooth
complex bundle pairs over \(T^*Z\) with an isomorphism outside a compact
set, with the same four relations. Homotopies are required to be
invertible outside one common compact set for the whole parameter
interval. Enlarging the exceptional compact set leaves the same class.
We construct inverse maps between these presentations.

First, every smooth bundle on either disk or cotangent bundle is
isomorphic to the pullback of its zero-section restriction. Choose a
connection by a locally finite bundle-chart partition, and transport
along \(t\mapsto (y,t\xi)\), \(0\leq t\leq1\). In a bundle frame the
transport equation is

\[
 \frac{dU(t;y,\xi)}{dt}
    =-\sum_a\xi_a A_a(y,t\xi)U(t;y,\xi),\qquad U(0;y,\xi)=I.
 \tag{KC1}
\]

Use the matrix-entry integral and parameter differentiation proved in
\href{stable-prerequisite-bridges.pdf}{Polynomial and contour interfaces
for stable boundary models}. The required ordered solution is
constructed here. On each compact parameter chart with coefficient norm
at most \(M\), the \(j\)-th ordered integral has norm at most
\(M^j/j!\). Differentiating any fixed finite number of parameters gives
a polynomial in \(j\) times the same factorial majorant, with the
appropriate bounds for the coefficient derivatives. These series
converge uniformly on that compact chart. Substitution in the integral
equation proves (KC1); the fundamental theorem gives its derivative. The
inverse series solves \(W'=W\sum_a\xi_a A_a(y,t\xi)\), \(W(0)=I\), so
direct differentiation gives \(WU=I\). For uniqueness, the difference of
two solutions has zero initial value. Iterating its integral equation
bounds its norm by its maximum norm times \(M^j/j!\) for every \(j\),
which tends to zero. Thus it vanishes. Uniqueness of this linear
equation makes the local transport maps agree under the original
transition matrices. Thus (KC1) gives a smooth global bundle
isomorphism. No trivialization of the bundle over \(Z\) is assumed. All
bundles and transports may be handled simultaneously over a compact
homotopy parameter.

Use these isomorphisms to express both bundles in a triple as
\(\pi^*V_0,\pi^*W_0\). A relative boundary map \(a(y,\omega)\) defines
the compact-support triple by the exact exterior map

\[
 a_{\mathrm{ext}}(y,\xi)=a(y,\xi/|\xi|),\qquad |\xi|\geq1,
 \quad
 F[\pi^*V_0,\pi^*W_0,a]
       =[\pi^*V_0,\pi^*W_0,a_{\mathrm{ext}}].
 \tag{KC2}
\]

Conversely, an exterior symbol \(b(y,\xi)\) is invertible for
\(|\xi|\geq R\) for some \(R>0\), since \(Z\) is compact. Set

\[
 G[\pi^*V_0,\pi^*W_0,b]
       =[\pi^*V_0,\pi^*W_0,b_R],\qquad
 b_R(y,\omega)=b(y,R\omega),\quad |\omega|=1.
 \tag{KC3}
\]

The same rule applies to continuous boundary symbols. Different
admissible radii give the path \(b(y,((1-t)R_0+tR_1)\omega)\); all its
matrices remain invertible. For different choices of the radial
transport, use the family of connections \((1-t)\nabla_0+t\nabla_1\) and
(KC1). It gives a continuous family of bundle isomorphisms intertwining
the original boundary maps, so it leaves the defined classes unchanged.

Both rules preserve isomorphisms and direct sums. They preserve
homotopies by compactness of the parameter and a common radius. They
preserve the neutral relation as well: an isomorphism extending over the
disk extends to the whole cotangent bundle by keeping its boundary value
constant along every exterior ray; its values agree at the seam
\(|\xi|=1\). In the other direction, a globally defined isomorphism
restricts under \(\xi=R\eta\), \(|\eta|\leq1\), to an isomorphism over
the disk. Hence \(F\) and \(G\) are well-defined group homomorphisms.

For a relative triple, \(GF\) is its original boundary map, choosing any
\(R\geq1\) in (KC3). For a compact-support triple, keep its full
exterior map and use the homotopy

\[
 b_t(y,\xi)=b\left(y,
           \left(1-t+t\frac R{|\xi|}\right)\xi\right),
 \qquad |\xi|\geq R,\quad 0\leq t\leq1.
 \tag{KC4}
\]

Its radial argument is \((1-t)|\xi|+tR\geq R\), so no exceptional point
is crossed. It starts at the original \(b\) and ends at the radially
constant map obtained from \(FG\), on the same exterior region.
Enlarging the compact set permits exactly this comparison. Therefore
both composites are the identity, proving

\[
 F:K^0(B^*Z,S^*Z)\xrightarrow{\ \simeq\ }K_c^0(T^*Z),
 \qquad G=F^{-1}.
 \tag{KC5}
\]

Apply this to \(V_0=\widehat E\), \(W_0=\widehat F\) and
\(a=\widehat p|_{S^*Z}\). The original degree-one homogeneity is
retained: \(\widehat p(y,\xi)=|\xi|\widehat p(y,\xi/|\xi|)\). Its exact
exterior comparison with (KC2) is the invertible path

\[
 \left((1-t)|\xi|+t\right)\widehat p(y,\xi/|\xi|),
             \qquad |\xi|\geq1,\quad0\leq t\leq1.
 \tag{KC6}
\]

Thus the displayed relative triple above corresponds to the
compact-support class of the full original symbol. This is a proved map
between the two presentations, not a working replacement of the symbol
or of its analytic operator. The analytic equality with the boundary
index is the separate complete DI22--DI42 proof in
\href{split-doubling-boundary-index.pdf}{Doubling a boundary problem and
computing its index}. No characteristic-class index formula is asserted
by (KC5).

The larger Boutet de Monvel calculus uses the block \[
 \begin{pmatrix}P_++G&K\\T&S\end{pmatrix},
\] where \(G\) is singular Green, \(K\) is potential or Poisson, \(T\)
is trace, and \(S\) is a boundary pseudodifferential operator.
\href{https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0403059}{Melo, Schick and Schrohe's
original-author source} records this block, its order/class composition
rule, and its two principal symbols. The column used in this course is
the exact special case with zero boundary input bundle, \(G=K=S=0\), and
retained rows \((P_+,T)\). The full singular Green, potential, adjoint,
composition and closure theory remains an external enlargement.

The further-study note about the \(\bar\partial\)-Neumann problem states
a further-study topic, without a theorem or endpoint to import. The
present reduction can expose a tangential comparison system; it does not
supply the subelliptic estimates or complex geometric hypotheses needed
to solve that system. The mathematical question is the exact estimate
for the resulting boundary system under its own complex geometric
hypotheses.

The compact-cylinder calculation, full block products and radial bundle
maps above are independent teaching derivations. The freely accessible
comparison is Melo, Schick and Schrohe, \emph{A K-Theoretic Proof of
Boutet de Monvel's Index Theorem for Boundary Value Problems},
arXiv:math/0403059v3, Introduction, equation (1), with its transmission
condition and separate order/class convention. The complete current
course proofs establish the reference parametrix used here.
\href{https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.01919v2}{Bandara, Goffeng and
Saratchandran, \emph{Realisations of elliptic operators on compact
manifolds with boundary}}, §3.1, gives a modern Calderón comparison at
arbitrary differential order; its maximal graph trace space is a further
construction, not an identification with the value-trace spaces in this
lesson. No external source expression is imported.

Written and dedicated to the public domain by Codex under CC0 1.0.

\end{document}
