Solution

ID: past-exam-of-the-calculus-of-variations-course-of-the-university-of-oxford/2009/3/b/iii/solution

Zero is a strict weak local minimizer, but is not a strong local minimizer. The derivative integrand has expansion , so for small it is at least . Concavity gives for every real . Therefore, when is small,
using . This proves strict weak minimality.
For the strong claim, let . Its amplitude tends to zero and its derivative is almost everywhere, so the derivative integrand is the constant . The other integrand term is at most . Hence
This disproves strong minimality. The same obstruction is detected by the Weierstrass necessary condition, since the supporting-tangent inequality at slope zero fails at .

New to topics? Read the docs here!