\section{Introduction}

Polar-ring galaxies (PRGs) provide remarkable examples of the non-monotonicity
of the galaxy formation process. Typically, they consist of two large-scale
luminous subsystems: a central galaxy and a ring or a disc which are oriented
nearly orthogonally to the major axis of the central object (see examples in the
\citealt{whit1990} (= PRC) and \citealt{moiseev2011} (= SPRC) catalogues).
In this article, we further use the term ``PRG'' to designate a
class of objects
with near-polar optical structures -- without dividing into polar-disc or polar-ring
galaxies (see, for instance, \citealt{iodice2014}).

In most cases, two subsystems in PRGs differ noticeably by their characteristics.
The central (host) galaxies are typically early-type (E/S0) galaxies, poor in gas
(\citealt{wms1987}; \citealt{ffb2012}; \citealt{rc2015}).
In contrast, the polar structures are generally younger, blue
(e.g., \citealt{rhy1994}; \citealt{iod2002}),
with large amount (several times 10$^9$\,M$_{\odot}$) of HI
(e.g., \citealt{vg1987}; \citealt{vdr2000}).

Various scenarios have been proposed to explain the formation of the two
kinematically and morphologically decoupled structures in PRGs:
the capture of matter from an approached galaxy (\citealt{reshsotn1997,bourcomb2003}),
the merging of galaxies (\citealt{bekki1997,bekki1998,bourcomb2003}),
the misaligned accretion of matter from cosmic filaments
(e.g. \citealt{maccio2006,brook2008}), and some others. Observations show that
several formation mechanisms can apparently be realised.

Galaxies with polar structures are an important class of objects that allows us
to study a wide range of problems, linked with the formation and evolution
of galaxies under external accretion, and to study the properties of their
dark haloes. Unfortunately, PRGs are very rare objects, with a fraction
of $\sim10^{-3}$  of all galaxies in the local Universe
(\citealt{whit1990, resh2011}). Consequently, most recent studies
of PRGs are concentrated mainly on a few relatively nearby and bright galaxies:
NGC\,4650A (e.g., \citealt{cia2014}, \citealt{icc2015}), A0136-0801
(\citealt{sia2015}), NGC\,660 (\citealt{swm2017}), and some others.

There were several attempts to collect large samples of such galaxies.
\citet{whit1990} have presented a photographic
atlas of PRGs and related objects containing 157 galaxies
but, according to further studies, only a small part of the atlas galaxies
appeared to be true PRGs.

The next important step was the catalogue SPRC by \citet{moiseev2011}
based on the results from the Galaxy Zoo project\footnote{http://www.galaxyzoo.org/} \citep{2008MNRAS.389.1179L}. The SPRC
catalogue contains 275 objects split into four groups. The first
two groups comprise ``best candidates'' (70 objects) and
``good candidates'' (115 objects) for PRGs. The remaining objects are
related galaxies (mergers, strong warps) and possible
face-on polar rings. A further study showed that an appreciable fraction
of the SPRC objects are indeed PRGs (fig.\,1 in \citealt{moiseev2015} gives
several examples).

In this work we present a new sample of ``best'' and ``good'' (in the sense of
SPRC) candidates to PRGs. Our sample includes 31 galaxies compiled
from Galaxy Zoo discussion boards.

Throughout this article, we adopt a standard flat $\Lambda$CDM
cosmology with $\Omega_m$=0.3, $\Omega_{\Lambda}$=0.7,
$H_0$=70 km\,s$^{-1}$\,Mpc$^{-1}$. All magnitudes in the paper are given
in the AB-system.

\section{THE SAMPLE AND DATA REDUCTION}

\subsection{The sample}
\label{sample}

To select new candidates to PRGs, we analysed discussion boards\footnote{https://talk.galaxyzoo.org/\#/boards}
of the Galaxy Zoo project. By eye looking
at the morphology of these galaxies (using coloured SDSS snapshots), we finally
selected a sample of 31 objects with a morphology resembling
``classical'' PRGs, like A0136-0801, NGC\,4650A, NGC\,2685 (see \citealt{whit1990}
catalogue). The selected objects show two inclined large-scale structures,
the centres of which nearly coincide.
The full list of galaxies, along with some of their general properties, which are derived
in Sect.~\ref{analysis}, is presented in Table~\ref{tab1}. The reduced
images of all candidates to PRGs are shown in the Appendix~\ref{red_images},
Fig.~\ref{images} (see the description of these images below).

We should notice that our selection is strongly biased
due to the fact that only PRGs with highly-inclined and extended polar
structures (PS) can be
easily found. As mentioned by \citet{whit1990}, PS that has a smaller
diameter than the host galaxy (HG), i.e. a narrow polar-ring, and that has a small
inclination angle with respect to the HG are difficult to detect.
This selected sample of galaxies cannot be complete by any means, and can
only be considered as an extension of the already existing sample of candidates
to this rare class of PRGs \citep[see e.g.][]{moiseev2011}.

Most objects in our sample look typical for PRGs -- they possess an extended
edge-on component which is almost orthogonal to the central galaxy. In two cases,
the galaxies \#\,15 (SDSS\,112850.42-061614.1) and \#\,16
(SDSS\,124513.41-154102.0), the suspected
PSs are moderately inclined to the line-of-sight. The galaxy \#\,15
(SDSS\,112850.42-061614.1) looks very similar to the kinematically-confirmed
polar-ring galaxy SPRC-7 (\citealt{brosch2010}).

\begin{table*}
 \centering
 \begin{minipage}{180mm}
  \centering
  \parbox[t]{150mm} {\caption{General characteristics of the sample galaxies.
  The columns 4--11 are described in Sect.~\ref{reduction}--\ref{analysis}.}
  \label{tab1}}
  \begin{tabular}{ccccccccccc}
  \hline
  \hline
  \# &  SDSS  & $z$ & $r_\mathrm{as}$           & $M^0_r$ & $(g - r)_0$ & $R_\mathrm{2\sigma}$ & $R_\mathrm{eff}$ & $\Delta$P.A. & $D_\mathrm{r}$ & $D_\mathrm{r}/D_\mathrm{h}$ \\
    &  name  &      & (mag)         &         &  & (kpc) & (kpc)             &  (grad)      & (kpc) & \\
  (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) & (7) & (8) & (9) & (10) & (11) \\
\hline
1 & 001524.31+184624.8 & 0.0186 &  $14.35\pm0.02$ & -20.25 & 0.72 & 9.2 & 3.5 & 86 & 18.4 & 1.20\\
2 & 004914.26+120858.1 & 0.0383 &  $14.57\pm0.05$ & -21.71 & 0.77 & 12.8 & 2.6 & 81 & 24.8 & 1.00\\
3 & 010816.84-082317.6 & 0.0467 &  $15.08\pm0.03$ & -21.60 & 0.82 & 14.8 & 9.2 & 78 & 29.6 & 1.15\\
4 & 013905.96+192559.9 & 0.0880 &  $16.38\pm0.05$ & -21.78 & 0.72 & 13.2 & 4.8 & 87 & 26.4 & 1.16\\
5 & 015828.87+013549.9 & 0.0600 &  $16.60\pm0.06$ & -20.59 & 0.69 & 8.4 & 2.7 & 68 & 14.4 & 0.86\\
6 & 020316.58+293830.4 & (0.038) & $14.83\pm0.04$ & -- & 0.72 & -- & -- & 79 & -- & 0.45\\
7 & 041557.96-051655.8 & 0.0317 &  $15.08\pm0.03$ & -20.83 & 0.86 & 9.8 & 4.6 & 86 & 19.5 & 1.43\\
8 & 074308.88+240206.5 & 0.0880 &  $16.88\pm0.03$ & -21.27 & 0.66 & 26.7 & 8.1 & 88 & 53.4 & 4.06\\
9 & 075131.01+500216.7 & 0.0600 &  $16.37\pm0.08$ & -20.92 & 0.77 & 11.5 & 4.0 & 80 & 22.2 & 1.05\\
10 & 081740.08+042952.3 & 0.1100 & $17.01\pm0.03$ & -21.66 & 0.82 & 14.3 & 6.4 & 81 & 28.5 & 1.26\\
11 & 091522.74+271711.9 & 0.0460 & $14.28\pm0.02$ & -22.28 & 0.63 & 26.7 & 11.1 & 69 & 53.4 & 1.11\\
12 & 091558.60+093455.3 & 0.0450 & $15.92\pm0.05$ & -20.67 & 0.79 & 12.8 & 2.1 & 78 & 25.6 & 1.82\\
13 & 105157.88+085122.0 & 0.0520 & $14.67\pm0.02$ & -22.20 & 0.71 & 19.6 & 11.6 & 84 & 27.9 & 0.71\\
14 & 112301.31+470308.7 & 0.0250 & $14.32\pm0.03$ & -20.86 & 0.75 & 9.0 & 3.5 & 85 & 18.0 & 1.07\\
15 & 112850.42-061614.1 & 0.0202 & $15.85\pm0.03$ & -18.89 & 0.43 & 10.4 & 2.7 & 24 & 20.7 & 2.88\\
16 & 124513.41-154102.0 & 0.0440 & $14.76\pm0.03$ & -21.76 & 0.63 & 18.8 & 6.4 & 70 & 37.6 & 1.52\\
17 & 133040.07+113541.7 & 0.0240 & $15.05\pm0.02$ & -20.07 & 0.67 & 10.1 & 5.6 & 83 & 15.7 & 0.77\\
18 & 135711.99-070430.3 & 0.0275 & $14.17\pm0.01$ & -21.28 & 1.03 & 8.4 & 11.4 & 52 & 7.6 & 0.45\\
19 & 140435.21+555536.8 & (0.128) &$18.22\pm0.09$ & -- & 0.81 & -- & -- & 78 & -- & 1.91\\
20 & 161103.94+140043.6 & 0.0310 & $15.86\pm0.05$ & -19.86 & 0.62 & 6.5 & 2.5 & 64 & 12.9 & 1.28\\
21 & 162434.00+364015.5 & 0.0500 & $16.17\pm0.08$ & -20.59 & 0.80 & 7.4 & 1.8 & 73 & 11.1 & 0.75\\
22 & 165057.26+044931.4 & (0.071) &$16.54\pm0.01$ & -- & 0.52 & -- & -- & 61 & -- & 0.90\\
23 & 175659.49+040143.3 & (0.117) &$17.47\pm0.06$ & -- & 0.60 & -- & -- & 67 & -- & 1.02\\
24 & 204425.23+022322.2 & 0.0595 & $16.28\pm0.04$ & -21.06 & 0.56 & 13.1 & 5.2 & 63 & 17.6 & 0.67\\
25 & 205213.48+034924.3 & (0.034) &$16.22\pm0.06$ & -- & 0.38 & -- & -- & 76 & -- & 0.97\\
26 & 211245.01+092938.0 & 0.0960 & $17.05\pm0.06$ & -21.46 & 0.67 & 13.5 & 3.7 & 72 & 27.2 & 1.30\\
27 & 220419.41+125806.2 & 0.0270 & $14.25\pm0.03$ & -21.20 & 0.79 & 11.6 & 3.6 & 74 & 12.9 & 0.56\\
28 & 221126.92+175348.4 & 0.0200 & $16.60\pm0.04$ & -18.16 & 0.77 & 4.3 & 1.5 & 53 & 8.6 & 1.78\\
29 & 224835.75+072424.8 & (0.082) &$16.74\pm0.06$ & -- & 0.72 & -- & -- & 90 & -- & 0.99\\
30 & 234407.32+253657.7 & 0.0960 & $16.00\pm0.03$ & -22.37 & 0.80 & 18.6 & 8.8 & 88 & 37.2 & 1.50\\
31 & 234756.34+080151.4 & (0.042) &$15.00\pm0.02$ & -- & 0.37 & -- & -- & 73 & -- & 0.62\\

  \hline\\
  \end{tabular}

\end{minipage}

   \parbox[t]{160mm}{ Columns: \\
   (1) designation number in the sample, \\
   (2) SDSS name,  \\
   (3) spectroscopic redshift (SDSS or NED), brackets mark photometric
           redshifts (SDSS),  \\
   (4) asymptotic magnitude in the $r$ band, \\
   (5) absolute magnitude in the $r$ band corrected for the Milky Way
           extinction \citep{schfin2011} and $k$-correction \citep{chil2010},  \\
   (6) $g - r$ color calculated from the corresponding asymptotic magnitudes and corrected for the Milky Way extinction \citep{schfin2011}
           and $k$-correction \citep{chil2010},  \\
   (7) radius of the $2\sigma$-isophote estimated for the stacked $gri$-image, \\
   (8) effective radius in the $r$ band, \\
   (9) apparent angle between the ring and the central galaxy,  \\
   (10) diameter of the suspected ring,  \\
   (11) the ring diameter normalised by the diameter of the host galaxy.   }
   \end{table*}

\subsection{The data reduction}
\label{reduction}

To highlight faint polar structures, which may be present in galaxies,
we used the following technique adopted from \citet{2011A&A...536A..66M}.
The system response curves of the SDSS imaging camera \citep{gunncam1998}
show that the highest values are reached in the filters $g$, $r$ and $i$,
therefore we analysed the galaxy images in these three filters only. The corrected
frames were directly downloaded from the SDSS archive,
Data Release 12 \citep{2015ApJS..219...12A}. Most of the galaxies lie within
one frame, but for those galaxies, which lie at the border of the frame,
additional overlapping frames were downloaded and combined together using
the {\sc swarp} routine \citep{2002ASPC..281..228B}.

Then we determined the radius $R_{2\sigma}$ of the circle which encompasses
the $2\sigma$-level isophote of the stacked $gri$-image (see below) of the galaxy,
which was initially created from the directly downloaded images in the $g$, $r$ and $i$ bands (no sky-background correction).
After that, we created an initial mask using \textsc{sextractor}
\citep{1996A&AS..117..393B} and applied  sigma-clipping to estimate the median
and standard deviation of the background in each band. Although SDSS frames have
been already sky-subtracted, we decided to re-estimate the background near each
galaxy. For this purpose, to each galaxy frame we applied the \textsc{iraf}
\textit{ellipse} routine to create the growth curve. Then we defined an annulus
in which the background was carefully estimated (again, using sigma-clipping)
as having the inner radius $1.50\,R_{2\sigma}$ and the outer radius
$1.80\,R_{2\sigma}$. The area of the annulus in this case is equal to the area
inside the circle which is circumscribed about the galaxy. We double checked
that within this annulus the growth curve is flat. We did not apply the polynomial
fitting of the sky background because the SDSS frames have been already
sky-subtracted and we found no gradient of the sky background. The calculated
background (which appeared to be within 1\% of the background level which was
determined in the SDSS) was then subtracted from each frame.

Asymptotic magnitudes in each band were estimated by extrapolating the
dependence of the gradient $\mathrm{d}m/\mathrm{d}r$ on magnitude to
$\mathrm{d}m/\mathrm{d}r=0$ (by definition, this gives the asymptotic magnitude
of the galaxy, see e.g. \citealt{2015ApJS..219....3M}). The estimated
uncertainties in the magnitudes are a combination of the associated sky error
value, the Poisson error on the incident flux, and the the SDSS calibration
error of 0.8\% \citep{2015ApJS..219...12A}. In addition, we also found the
effective radius of each galaxy, using the created growth curves.

The obtained images in each filter were stacked together using the \textsc{iraf}
task \textit{imcombine}.
This was done in order to improve the signal-to-noise ratio of each individual
image. After that, for all three filters we created individual mask images
which contain contaminating stars and galaxies. This step was done using
the segmentation maps, produced by {\sc sextractor}, which
were then carefully revisited by eye to ensure that all foreground stars
and galaxies had been removed from the galaxy images. However, we decided
not to mask out close, overlapping galaxies (as in the case of
SDSS\,J135711.99-070430.3) since the light from them non-negligibly affects
the surface brightness distribution of the polar-ring galaxy.
After that, to mask all contaminating pixels in the stacked galaxy image,
the masks in all three filters were combined.

In the next step, to make faint features visible, we used a circularly
symmetric Gaussian filter with $\sigma = 2-4$~pix; these values were found
optimal for each galaxy to achieve a good enhancement of a faint ring
structure. Since in the vicinity of the sample galaxies no bright stars
are found on the final images (except for SDSS\,J105157.88+085122.0) and the
galaxies are rather small, we did
not found large gradients of the background. The radius $R_{2\sigma}$ was
re-determined for the final $gri$-images.

In Fig.~\ref{ex_image} we show a typical PRG in our sample, SDSS\,J091558.60+093455.3,
whereas $gri$-images for all sample galaxies are given in the Appendix in Fig.~\ref{images}.
As can be seen, in some galaxies a PS is well prominent, whereas in others it is
quite faint and barely visible.

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm, angle=0, clip=]{pics/eps/12.eps}
\caption{Reduced (stacked) $gri$-image of SDSS\,J091558.60+093455.3. The
contaminating sources have been masked. The scale bar corresponds to 10\arcsec.}
\label{ex_image}
\end{figure}

\subsection{The analysis of the images}
\label{analysis}

To estimate the apparent position angle of the HG and PS,
we applied the following approach. Since in most galaxies in our sample the
PS looks as a rather faint almost orthogonally oriented structure,
the proper way to determine the orientation of the host galaxy and the
polar structure is by fitting the whole galaxy with a two-component model `host + polar structure'.
For this purpose, we used a new version of the \textsc{deca}
package \citep{2014AstBu..69...99M} which was specially designed to perform
automatic and semi-automatic decomposition of galaxy images onto several
structural components. Most galaxies in our sample consist of a HG and a PS which can be both generally described
by a S\'ersic\ function \citep{ser1968}. This approximation is justified
by the following reasons. First, the sample galaxies are rather small,
and, thus, are poorly resolved to be properly fitted with a more complex
model. Second, the polar structure in most galaxies from our
sample is oriented in a way that no contrast ring is seen. But even in the case of SDSS\,J112850.42-061614.1 (where the PS is moderately inclined towards the observer and seen well),
a model with a very small S\'ersic\ index ($n<0.1$) strives to fit the ring
structure by making the central part of the model flat. This method has been
tested successfully on a sample of galaxies with apparent ring structures in
the far-infrared (Mosenkov et al., submitted). Also, since
our aim is to merely estimate the position angles of almost orthogonal
components, this rough fitting scheme allows us to do this very easily.
Another way to find the position angles of the HG and PS would be using
the distribution of the position angle by radius, which has been derived
using the \textsc{iraf} task \textit{ellipse}. However, we found that since
most PS in our sample are barely visible, this approach does not allow us
to robustly determine the difference in the position angles at different radii,
and, thus, clearly discern the HG and PS in the distributions of the position
angle by radius.

In some galaxies additional components (apart from the HG and PS) were fitted with
another S\'ersic\ function to create a realistic model of the HG and PS.
For SDSS\,J135711.99-070430.3,
an additional S\'ersic\ function was used to describe an interacting galaxy.

Finally, we successfully applied \textsc{deca} to the sample galaxies,
using the created stacked $gri$-images and their masks. In Fig.~\ref{ex_decomp}
we show the results of the fitting for SDSS\,J091558.60+093455.3. The difference of
the apparent position angle of the polar structure and the host galaxy ($\Delta$P.A.),
which were retrieved from the \textsc{deca} fitting, are presented in Table\,1.

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=18cm, angle=0, clip=]{pics/12_decomp.eps}
\caption{
The results of the fitting for SDSS\,J091558.60+093455.3 for a stacked $gri$-image: the stacked $gri$-image (left panel), the best fitting image (middle panel),
and the residual image (right panel) which indicates the relative deviation between
the fit and the image in absolute values, i.e. $| data-model |/model$. The right color bar shows the scaling of the residual image. The masked objects are highlighted by the white colour. The galaxy and model images are given in a logarithmic scale. All images cover a field-of-view of $1\arcmin\times1\arcmin$.}
\label{ex_decomp}
\end{figure*}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm, angle=0, clip=]{pics/gal.eps}
\caption{The results of the ellipse fitting for a stacked $gri$-image of
the galaxy SDSS\,J091558.60+093455.3. The dashed contours are the outermost
isophotes (at $2\sigma$), which were created for the residual images
`galaxy - host' and `galaxy - ring'. The red solid contour shows the fit ellipse
for the HG contour and the blue solid contour represents the fit ellipse
for the PS contour.}
\label{example_iso}
\end{figure}

In addition, we provide the diameters of the host galaxy $D_\mathrm{HG}$ and
the polar structure $D_\mathrm{PS}$ which were derived from the residual image
`galaxy - ring structure' and `galaxy - host', respectively. The outermost isophotes
of each residual image were plotted at the $2\sigma$ background level
(which corresponds to a surface brightness of $\mu_r\approx25.5-26$~mag\,arcsec$^{-2}$)
and then fitted with ellipses with the major axes $D_\mathrm{PS}$ and $D_\mathrm{HG}$
(see Fig.\,\ref{example_iso}).

Fig.\,\ref{cols_maps} provides the $g - i$ color maps for several PRG candidates.
Generally, the sample galaxies are faint and small. Thus, in most cases their
color maps are irregular and noisy. We show in Fig.\,\ref{cols_maps} some
best examples. As one can see in the figure, the HGs look rather red while the
PSs are generally bluer.

\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5cm, angle=0, clip=]{pics/cols/3_gi.eps}
\includegraphics[width=5cm, angle=0, clip=]{pics/cols/12_gi.eps}
\includegraphics[width=5cm, angle=0, clip=]{pics/cols/15_gi.eps}
\includegraphics[width=5cm, angle=0, clip=]{pics/cols/20_gi.eps}
\includegraphics[width=5cm, angle=0, clip=]{pics/cols/23_gi.eps}
\includegraphics[width=5cm, angle=0, clip=]{pics/cols/28_gi.eps}
\caption{The $g - i$ color maps for 6 candidates to PRGs. The images are limited to
a $2\sigma$-level isophote created for their corresponding $gri$-images. The scale
bar in each plot corresponds to 10\arcsec.}
\label{cols_maps}
\end{figure*}

\section{DISCUSSION}

\subsection{General characteristics of PRGs}
\label{char}

In this section we compare characteristics of our sample galaxies with
that of \citet{smirmois2013}. \citet{smirmois2013} presented the
combined sample of ``best candidates'' from the SPRC (70 galaxies) and of
8 kinematically-confirmed PRGs from the SPRC and PRC catalogues with
available SDSS images. The authors carried out measurements of the shape,
sizes, and position angles of the host galaxy and the polar structure.
At present, this is the largest published sample with
the homogeneous estimates of the PRGs geometrical characteristics.
Our method for measuring the PRGs sizes and position angles
(see previous section) provides close results compared to those from
\citet{smirmois2013}.

In Fig.~\ref{char1} (panels \textit{a--c}), we show the comparison of the distributions
by the apparent magnitude, the redshift, and the absolute magnitude
of galaxies from \citet{smirmois2013} and from our Table~\ref{tab1}.
As one can see, both samples demonstrate quite close distributions.
Our PRG candidates show approximately the same apparent magnitudes,
redshifts, and luminosities. Thus, we can consider our sample as a notable
supplement to the sample of already known PRGs selected from the SDSS.

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=11.0cm, angle=-90, clip=]{pics/hist4.eps}
\caption{Histograms of the distributions of PRG candidates by
(a) apparent $r$-band magnitude, (b) redshift, (c) absolute magnitude
for the \citet{smirmois2013} (the blue solid line) and our (the dashed line) sample.
Panel (d) shows the dependence of absolute magnitude of PRGs on their
redshift (the blue points -- data from \citet{smirmois2013}, the crosses -- data
from Table~\ref{tab1}). The dashed lines separate the two subsamples (see the text).}
\label{char1}
\end{figure*}

Fig.~\ref{char1}\textit{d} illustrates the standard observational selection effect --
among distant objects we choose only the brightest. The dashed lines in the figure
distinguish two subsamples: nearby PRGs with $z \leq 0.03$ (the vertical line)
and bright galaxies with $M_r \leq -21$ (the horisontal line). Both subsamples
are almost not intersecting.

\begin{table}
\caption{Average characteristics of PRGs.}
 \label{tab2}
  \begin{tabular}{cccc}
  \hline
  \hline
       & All      & Nearby         & Bright \\
       &          & $z \leq 0.03$ & $M_r \leq -21^m$ \\
\hline
Number & 109             & 26               & 35 \\
$z$    & 0.055$\pm$0.034 & 0.019$\pm$0.009  & 0.073$\pm$0.039 \\
$M_r$  & --20.6$\pm$1.0  & --19.7$\pm$1.1   & --21.6$\pm$0.4  \\
$(g - r)_0$ & +0.73$\pm$0.15 & +0.72$\pm$0.20 & +0.74$\pm$0.12 \\
$i$ ($^\circ$) & 16.4$\pm$14.0 & 25.8$\pm$16.9 & 15.4$\pm$12.4 \\
$D_\mathrm{HG}$ (kpc) & 15.8$\pm$7.9   & 11.2$\pm$5.2  & 22.1$\pm$8.3 \\
$D_\mathrm{PS}$ (kpc) & 23.3$\pm$12.9  & 17.5$\pm$11.2 & 27.0$\pm$10.7 \\
$D_\mathrm{PS}$/D$_\mathrm{HG}$ & 1.60$\pm$0.89 & 1.74$\pm$1.18 & 1.32$\pm$0.64 \\
\hline\\
  \end{tabular}

\end{table}

In Table~\ref{tab2} we compare average characteristics
of PRGs in three sets of data. Designation ``all'' in the table means
a joint sample (the present work + \citealt{smirmois2013}), the ``nearby'' and
``bright'' ones include only galaxies with $z \leq 0.03$ or $M_r \leq -21$,
respectively, from the joint sample. As one can see, typical PRGs are rather bright
galaxies. Their average rest-frame integral color $g - r$ corresponds
well to early-type (S0) galaxies (e.g. \citealt{fukug2007}). Polar
features are large-scale structures with typical sizes $\sim$20--30 kpc
and their orientation is close to orthogonal with respect to the host galaxies.
(The angle $i$ in Table~\ref{tab2} is an apparent angular distance away from
perpendicularity of the host galaxy and the ring: $i = 90^\circ - \Delta$P.A.)
For the majority of PRGs, the diameter of the ring exceeds the
size of the host galaxy: >70\% of PRGs show the ratio $D_\mathrm{PS}/D_\mathrm{HG}$>1.

Effective radii of the sample galaxies reach several kiloparsecs
(Table~\ref{tab1}), which is typical for bright early-type galaxies. In the
plane $M_r$--$R_{eff}$ the PRG candidates are located in the area where
the characteristics of previously known PRGs are resided (see fig.\,4 in
\citealt{rc2015}).

Our method of the surface brightness enhancement (Sect.~\ref{reduction}) allowed us to
study faint structures around the PRG candidates. According to numerical
simulations, different formation mechanisms predict different external
morphology of PRGs. For instance, the merger scenario leads to a
faint stellar halo surrounding the PRG, while the accretion scenario does
not (\citealt{bourcomb2003}).
Our study of the PRG images shows that almost half of the objects (14 out of 31)
can be surrounded by a weak ($\mu_r\sim26-26.5$~mag\,arcsec$^{-2}$) envelope (see
several examples in Fig.~\ref{images}:
SDSS\,010816.84-082317.6, SDSS\,041557.96-051655.8,  SDSS\,161103.94+140043.6,
and SDSS\,234407.32+253657.7).
This statistics is very preliminary and is based on insufficiently deep
observational data. But it shows that the merger scenario can make
an appreciable contribution to the formation of PRGs. Future deep
photometric observations of PRGs should clarify this issue.

\subsection{The luminosity--size relation}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=11.0cm, angle=-90, clip=]{pics/diammag.eps}
\caption{Absolute magnitude of the PRG vs. (a) diameter of the HG or
(b) diameter of the PS (the solid circles -- the data from Table~\ref{tab1},
the open circles -- the characteristics of PRGs from \citealt{smirmois2013}).
The dashed line presents the relation for nearby galaxies according to
\citet{bergh2008}. The solid lines in both figures show a linear
approximation for the central galaxies of PRGs.}
\label{sizes}
\end{figure}

In Fig.~\ref{sizes}, we show the luminosity -- size relation for the host galaxies
and for the polar structures. As one can see, the central objects of PRGs show a
tight correlation between the luminosity and diameter (Fig.~\ref{sizes}\textit{a}).
The best fitting
line for our joint sample is $\log$\,$D_\mathrm{HG}$ = --0.163\,$M_r$ -- 2.21 (the solid
line in the figure). The PRGs follow this relation with a r.m.s. scatter
of 0.13. The dashed line in Fig.~\ref{sizes}\textit{a} is the average relation for
nearby galaxies of all morphological types (\citealt{bergh2008}) shifted from the $B$
passband to the $r$ according to \citet{cook2014}.
Interestingly, HGs of PRGs follow this relation well.

The same relation but for the diameter of the polar structure is shown in
Fig.~\ref{sizes}\textit{b}. The PSs follow the relation with approximately
the same angle but it is shifted to higher sizes. At a given total luminosity of
PRGs, polar rings are, on average, larger in comparison with their host galaxies.
It is a natural result, since the direct comparison of the two subsystems gives
$D_\mathrm{PS}/D_\mathrm{HG} > 1$ (see Table~\ref{tab2}).

More interestingly, the PSs
display a notable larger scatter around the average trend (r.m.s. dispersion is
0.20) compared to the hosts (Fig.~\ref{sizes}\textit{a}). The increasing scatter can be
a direct consequence of a secondary origin of polar structures. Polar
features are relatively young and they are formed during non-stationary external
processes (accretion, merging). Therefore, at an early stage of formation,
these structures can be asymmetric and perturbed (see, e.g., \citealt{brook2008}
simulations.) In the course of the subsequent evolution
the secondary subsystems are likely to settle into a narrower luminosity -- size
relation.

\subsection{The distribution of angles between the rings and the central galaxies}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm, angle=-90, clip=]{pics/incl.eps}
\caption{The distribution of PRGs as a function of the angle between
the PS and the perpendicular to the disc of the central galaxy. The dotted
line shows the data for our sample (Table~\ref{tab1}), the dashed histogram --
the \citet{smirmois2013} measurements, the solid line -- all available data.
The dashed curved line illustrates the arbitrary scaled dependence
$\propto$1/sin\,$i$ (see the text for details). }
\label{incl}
\end{figure}

Previous attempts to investigate statistics of apparent angles between the rings
and the host galaxies were based on relatively small samples (\citealt{whit1991},
\citealt{rc2015}). (We prefer to investigate the apparent angle between
these two subsystems, rather than to analyse the spatial angle, as done in
\citealt{smirmois2013}, since in their case we have to know the
intrinsic flattening and the shape of the two components.) But now we
can consider much more data. In Fig.~\ref{incl} we summarise the data from
Table~\ref{tab1} (31 galaxies, the dotted line) and from \citet{smirmois2013}
(78 PRGs, the dashed line). Also, we added 28 measurements from
\citet{whit1991} and constructed the final distribution for 137 PRGs
(the solid histogram). (Our final sample includes, thus, 137 original objects,
without duplicates.)

As one can see in Fig.~\ref{incl}, the majority of PRGs, indeed, show almost orthogonal
outer structures. From the combined sample of 137 objects we conclude that
50\% of the PRGs demonstrate $i \leq 10^{\circ}$, 75\% -- $i \leq 23^{\circ}$,
and 90\% -- $i \leq 35^{\circ}$. If we consider a relatively complete subsample
with $z \leq 0.03$ (26 PRGs from the joint sample
Table~\ref{tab1}  + \citealt{smirmois2013} and 12
galaxies from \citealt{whit1991}), the distribution becomes wider:
50\% of the PRGs with $i \leq 17^{\circ}$, 75\% -- $i \leq 33^{\circ}$, and 90\% --
$i \leq 41^{\circ}$.

Interpretation of the distribution by $i$ is not a trivial task since
it is not a true angle between the central galaxy plane and the plane of the PS
but merely an apparent, projected angle. Moreover, the distribution in
Fig.~\ref{incl} is strongly affected by the observational selection.

For illustrative purposes, we placed in Fig.~\ref{incl} the expected dependence
of the settling time for a gaseous ring on its inclination to the
preferred, stable plane (the blue dashed curve). This settling time
is inversely proportional to cosine of an angle by which the ring is tilted out of
a stable plane (e.g. \citealt{tohline1990}). If we assume that the plane
of the HG defines the preferred plane, this dependence
transforms to 1/$\sin$\,$i$. It is evident from the figure that the observed
distribution does approximately follow this law.  For the rings with
small $i$ (nearly polar), the settling time can be long and we can observe
a lot of such systems in the Universe. For more inclined structures, the rings
ought to settle relatively rapidly and we have less chances to observe such objects.

\section{CONCLUSIONS}

In our work we presented a new sample of 31 candidates for polar-ring galaxies.
The galaxies were selected on the basis of their morphology from the SDSS.
Our list of PRGs is a valuable addition to the SPRC catalogue (Fig.~\ref{char1}).

From the analysis of general characteristics of PRGs we derived the following
main conclusions:

-- The host galaxies of PRGs follow the luminosity--size relation for normal
galaxies. The polar structures show similar relation but with a larger
scatter (Fig.~\ref{sizes}). This enhanced scatter may be a consequence of a secondary
origin of polar rings.

-- A nearly polar orientation dominates among the rings of PRGs: approximately
half of all PRGs demonstrate extended structures within 20$^{\circ}$
from perpendicularity (Fig.~\ref{incl}).

On the basis of the surface brightness enhancement we tried to detect
faint structures around the PRG candidates. The obtained results are
uncertain (Sect.~\ref{char}). Possible existence of outer stellar envelopes
around PRGs is a subject of our future study.

A gradual increase of discovered polar-ring galaxies makes it possible to
pose new interesting questions about the nature and origin of these unique objects.
One can hope that these galaxies will be put soon into the general
picture of the formation and evolution of galaxies.

\section*{Acknowledgements}

We thank anonymous referee for helpful constructive comments that improved
the paper.

Aleksandr Mosenkov expresses gratitude for the grant of the Russian Foundation for
Basic Researches number mol\_a 18-32-00194.

This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED)
which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute
of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration.

Funding for the SDSS has been provided by the Alfred
P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the
National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy,
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Japanese
Monbukagakusho, the Max Planck Society, and
the Higher Education Funding Council for England. The
SDSS Web Site is http://www.sdss.org/.


\section{introduction}
The famous Brunn-Minkowski inequality states that for any two convex bodies $K, L\subset \mathbb{R}^n,$ we have $$V(K+L)^{\frac{1}{n}}\geq V(K)^{\frac{1}{n}}+V(L)^{\frac{1}{n}},$$
where $K+L=\{x+y: x\in K, y\in L\}$ denotes the Minkowski sum. Using the support function
$h_K$ (resp. $h_L$) of $K$ (resp. $L$) the Minkowski combination $(1-\lambda)K+\lambda L$ is also given by
$$(1-\lambda)K+\lambda L=\bigcap_{x\in S^{n-1}}\{z\in \mathbb{R}^n: x\cdot z\leq (1-\lambda)h_K(x)
+\lambda h_L(x)\}. $$

In 1960s, the Minkowski combination of convex bodies was generalised by Firey \cite{F} to the so called
$L_p$-Minkowski combination when $p>1$:   $(1-\lambda)\cdot K+_p\lambda\cdot L$ is defined as the convex body with support function $h_{K,L,p}=\left((1-\lambda)h_K^p+\lambda h_L^p\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}.$
However, when $p\in (0,1),$ $h_{K,L,p}$ is not a support function for any convex body in general.
In an important paper \cite{BLYZ}, Boroczky et al. found a natural generalisation of $L_p$-Minkowski sum as follows
$$(1-\lambda)\cdot K+_p\lambda\cdot L:=\bigcap_{x\in S^{n-1}}\{z\in \mathbb{R}^n: x\cdot z\leq \left((1-\lambda)h^p_K(x)
+\lambda h^p_L(x)\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\}.$$ In the same paper, they also established the planar $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski inequalities ($0<p<1)$) for origin-symmetric convex bodies, which is stronger than the classical Brunn-Minkowski inequality.
 The higher dimensional case remains as an extremely important open problem in the field.

The first breakthrough toward the $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski inequality for $p<1$ was made by Kolesnikov and Milman in   \cite{KM}, where they established the following local $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski inequality for $p\in (p_0, 1)$ with $p_0=1-\frac{c}{n^{\frac{3}{2}}}$ for some universal constant $c.$ To introduce their result,
let $\mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}:=\{K\in \mathcal{K}_e\big | h_K\in C^2(S^{n-1}), \det(\nabla^2h_K+h_K\delta_{ij})>0 \},$ and let $\mathcal{K}_e$ denote the class of convex bodies which is origin-symmetric.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{KM} Kolesnikov, Milman]\label{km1} There exists a constant $0<p_0<1$ depending only on the dimension, such that
if $p\in (p_0, 1)$,  and if $K_0, K_1\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}$ satisfying:
$$(1-\lambda)\cdot K_0+_p\lambda\cdot K_1\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}\ \forall \lambda\in[0,1],$$ then the following inequality holds
\begin{equation}\label{lpbm}
V\left((1-\lambda)\cdot K_0+_p \lambda\cdot K_1\right)\geq \left((1-\lambda)V(K_0)^{\frac{p}{n}}+\lambda V(K_1)^{\frac{p}{n}}\right)^{\frac{n}{p}}\ \forall \lambda\in[0,1].
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}

\begin{remark}
In \cite{KM}, an estimate of $p_0$ on the dimension $n$ is given. Indeed, they showed that
$p_0=1-\frac{c}{n^{\frac{3}{2}}}$ for some universal constant $c.$

\end{remark}

As an application of this local $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski inequality, Kolesnikov and Milman proved a local uniqueness result for $L_p$ Minkowski problem.
\begin{theorem}\label{km2}[Local uniqueness \cite{KM} Kolesnikov, Milman]
 For any fixed $K\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e},$ there exists a small $C^2$ neighborhood of $K$, denoted by $N_K$, such that if $K_1, K_2\in N_K\cap \mathcal{K}_e$ and $h_{K_1}^{1-p}dS_{K_1}=  h_{K_2}^{1-p}dS_{K_2}$ for some $p\in(p_0, 1),$ then $K_1=K_2.$
 \end{theorem}

Building up on the above local uniqueness result, we adapt the PDE method (such as a priori estimates, Schauder theory and Leray-Schauder degree theory) to extend the local result of Kolesnikov and Miman's to a global one. Moreover, our approach can be viewed as a local to global principle, namely, if one can prove a local uniqueness result as in Theorem \ref{km2} for $p\in [0,1)$ (need that $N_K$ can be chosen the same for all $q$ near a given $p$),
 then the global $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski inequality for $p\in [0,1)$ follows from our method. Note that when $p=0,$ the inequality refers to the so
 called Log-Brunn-Minkowski inequality.

Given a convex body $K,$ denote by $h_K, S_K, V_K$ its support function, surface area measure and cone volume measure respectively. If $K$ is smooth, then it is well known that $dS_K= \det(\nabla^2h_K+h_K\delta_{ij})dx$ and that
$dV_K= h_K\det(\nabla^2h_K+h_K\delta_{ij})dx.$

\begin{theorem}\label{main1}[Uniqueness for $L_p$ Minkowski problem]
There exists a positive number $p_0>0$ such that for $p\in (p_0, 1),$
for any even positive function $f\in C^{\alpha}(S^{n-1}),$ there exists a unique convex body $K\in \mathcal{K}_e$
satisfying $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=fdx.$
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
Since $K\in \mathcal{K}_e,$ $f$ is positive, and $f\in C^{\alpha}(S^{n-1}),$ by the standard regularity theory we know that
if $K$ is a solution of $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=fdx,$ then $K\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}.$
\end{remark}
Using Theorem \ref{main1} we can prove the following $L_p$ Minkowski inequality for general convex bodies when
$p\in (p_0, 1).$

\begin{theorem}\label{main2}[$L_p$ Minkowski inequality]
Suppose $p\in (p_0, 1).$
For any $K, L\in \mathcal{K}_e$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{lpm1}
\left(\int_{S^{n-1}}\left(\frac{h_L}{h_K}\right)^p d\bar{V}_K\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\geq \left(\frac{V(L)}{V(K)}\right)^{\frac{1}{n}}.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
Here $\bar{V}_K:=\frac{V_K}{V(K)}$ is the normalised cone volume measure of $K.$
In \cite[Lemma 3.1]{BLYZ}, it is proved that $L_p$ Minkowski inequality is equivalent to the $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski inequality.
\begin{theorem}\label{main3}[$L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski inequality]
Suppose $p\in (p_0, 1).$ For any $K, L\in \mathcal{K}_e$ we have that
\begin{equation}\label{lpbm}
V\left((1-\lambda)\cdot K+_p \lambda\cdot L\right)\geq V(K)^{1-\lambda}V(L)^\lambda.
\end{equation}
for any $\lambda\in [0,1].$
\end{theorem}

\begin{remark}
It is proved in \cite[Section 3]{BLYZ} that the inequality \eqref{lpbm} has an equivalent form
$$V\left((1-\lambda)\cdot K+_p \lambda\cdot L\right)\geq \left((1-\lambda)V(K)^{\frac{p}{n}}+\lambda V(L)^{\frac{p}{n}}\right)^{\frac{n}{p}}.$$
It is also well known that the $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski inequality does not hold in general without evenness condition when $p\in(0,1).$
\end{remark}

For $p=0,$ namely the logarithmic Minkowski problem we also have the following results.
Denote by $N_\epsilon=\{K\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}: \|h_K-1\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq \epsilon\}$ a small $C^{2,\alpha}$ neighborhood of $S^{n-1}.$

\begin{theorem}\label{main4}
There exists $\epsilon>0$ depending only on the dimension $n,$ such that if $L\in \mathcal{K}_e,$ $ K\in N_\epsilon,$ and $V_L=V_K,$ then $L=K$
\end{theorem}

Using an argument of Boroczky et al. \cite[section 6, 7]{BLYZ}, we have the following result.
\begin{corollary}\label{main5}
There exists $\epsilon>0$ depending only on the dimension $n,$ such that if $L\in \mathcal{K}_e,$ $ K\in N_\epsilon,$
then
\begin{equation}
\int_{S^{n-1}}\log \frac{h_L}{h_K}d\bar{V}_k\geq \frac{1}{n}\log \frac{V(L)}{V(K)},
\end{equation}
with equality if and only if $K$ and $L$ are dilates.
\end{corollary}

The paper is organised as follows. Section 2 is devoted to the proof of the uniqueness result, Theorem \ref{main1}. In section 3, we establish Theorem \ref{main2} and Theorem \ref{main3} by using variational method and Theorem \ref{main1}. In the last section, we adapt the approach to study the uniqueness of logarithmic Minkowski problem and log-Minkowski inequality.

\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{main1}}

First let us outline the main steps for proving Theorem \ref{main1}.
\begin{itemize}
\item 1. If a convex body $K\in \mathcal{K}_e$ solves $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=f$ for some $\frac{1}{C_1}<f<C_1,$ we will prove that
$\frac{1}{C}<h_K<C$ for some constant $C$ depending only on $C_1$ and the dimension $n.$
This is done in Lemma \ref{c0}.

\item 2. Using compactness argument, Schauder estimate, and Theorem \ref{km2} we show that
if $L\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}$ is a unique solution of $h_L^{1-p}dS_L=f_Ldx.$ Then for $f$ sufficiently close
to $f_L$ in $C^\alpha$ norm, $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=fdx$ also has a unique solution in $\mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}.$
This is the content of Lemma \ref{localunique}.

\item 3. If for some positive $f_L\in C^\alpha(S^{n-1})$, $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=f_Ldx$ has multiple solutions $L_1, L_2, \cdots.$ First, we show that $\|h_{L_1}-h_{L_2}\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\geq d_{L_1,L_2}$ for some $d_{L_1,L_2}>0$ depending only on $L_1, L_2.$
Then, for $f$ sufficiently close to $f_L$ in $C^\alpha$ norm, using degree theory we may find convex bodies $K_1, K_2\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}$ such that $h_{K_i}^{1-p}dS_{K_i}=fdx, i=1, 2$ and that
$\|h_{K_i}-h_{L_i}\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}<\frac{1}{2}d_{L_1,L_2}\ i=1,2,$ which implies $K_1, K_2$ are distinct. This is accomplished
through Lemma \ref{dicho}, \ref{ac}, \ref{newsolution}.

\item 4. Finally, suppose for some positive $f_1\in C^\alpha(S^{n-1}),$ the problem
$h_K^{1-p}dS_K=f_1dx$ has multiple solutions.
Let $$a:=\inf\{t\in[0,1]\big| h_K^{1-p}dS_K=(1-t+tf_1)dx\ \text{has multiple solutions in}\ \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}\}.$$
It was proved in \cite{BCD} that the solution of $L_p$-Minkowski problem ($p\geq 0$) with constant density  is unique.
Therefore, by step 2 we see that $a>0.$
Let $f_L:=1-a+af_1,$ then by the definition of $a$ and step 2, we see that $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=f_Ldx$ has
multiple solutions. On the other hand, by step 3, we have that $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=fdx$ has multiple solutions for
$f$ sufficiently close to $f_L$ in $C^\alpha$ norm, in particular for $ f=1-t+tf_1$ with $t<a$ and sufficiently close to $a.$ This contradicts to the definition of $a$ again.
\end{itemize}

To prove Theorem \ref{main1} we first establish the following lemmas.
\begin{lemma}\label{c0}
Suppose $K\in \mathcal{K}_e$ satisfies $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=fdx,$ where $1/C_1<f<C_1$ for some positive constant $C_1.$ Then $1/C<h_K<C$ for some constant $C$ depending only on $C_1$ and $n.$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Suppose not, then there  exists a sequence of convex body $L_k\in \mathcal{K}_e$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{mineq}
\frac{1}{C_1}dx<h_{L_k}^{1-p}dS_{L_k}<C_1dx
\end{equation}
 and
 that $\|h_{L_k}\|_{L^\infty}\rightarrow \infty.$
By John's Lemma, for each $k$ there exists an ellipsoid $E_k$ centred at the origin, with principal directions $e_{k,1},\cdots, e_{k,n}$ and principal radii $r_{k,1},\cdots, r_{k,n}$
such that
\begin{equation}\label{john1}
E_k\subset L_k\subset n^{3/2}E_k.
\end{equation}
Without loss of generality, we may assume $r_{k,1}\geq r_{k,2}\geq\cdots\geq r_{k,n}.$

By \eqref{mineq} we have that
$$\frac{1}{C_1}\int_{S^{n-1}}h_{L_k}^p= \int_{S^{n-1}}h_{L_k}dS_{L_k}=V(L_k)\approx r_{k,1}\cdots r_{k,n}.$$
By the order of $r_{k,i}$ we have that $\frac{1}{C_2}r_{k,n}^p\leq \int_{S^{n-1}}h_{L_k}^p\leq C_2r_{k,1}^p$ for some constant $C_2$ depending only on $C_1.$
 It follows that  $r_{k,1}\rightarrow \infty, r_{k,n}\rightarrow 0$ as $k\rightarrow \infty$ and  that
 \begin{equation}\label{ineqadd}
 \frac{V(L_k)}{r_{k,n}^p}\geq C_3,
 \end{equation}
for some positive constant $C_3$ depending only on $C_1$ and dimension $n.$

Passing to a subsequence we may assume
\begin{equation}\label{asym}
0\leq \lim_{k\rightarrow \infty}\frac{r_{k,i}}{r_{k,i-1}}=a_i\leq 1\ \text{for}\ i=2,\cdots, n.
\end{equation}
Define $a_0=1.$ Since  $r_{k,1}\rightarrow \infty, r_{k,n}\rightarrow 0$ we have that there exists $i\in\{1,2,\cdots, n\}$ such that $a_i=0.$
Let $s=min\{i-1:  a_i=0, 1\leq i\leq n\}.$ Now, $$r_{k,1}\approx r_{k,2}\approx\cdots\approx r_{k,s}>>r_{k,s+1}\geq\cdots \geq r_{k,n}.$$

Let $$\Omega_k:=\{x\in \partial L_k: |x\cdot e_{k,i}|\leq \frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}, i=1, 2,\cdots, s\}.$$ Denote by $G:\partial L_k\rightarrow S^{n-1}$ the Gauss map.
For any $x\in \Omega_k, 1\leq i\leq s$ by \eqref{john1} we have that $$dist(x+\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}e_{k,i}, L_k)\leq C\sqrt{r_{k,s+1}^2+\cdots+r_{k,n}^2}<<r_{k,s}.$$
Hence, there exists $z\in L_k$ such that $|x+\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}e_{k,i}-z|<< Cr_{k,s}.$
Now, since $G(x)$ is the unit outer normal of $L_k$ at $x,$ by convexity we have that
$G(x)\cdot (z-x)\leq 0.$
Hence, $$G(x)\cdot (z-x-\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}e_{k,i}+\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}e_{k,i})\leq 0$$
which leads to
$$G(x)\cdot (\frac{z-x-\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s} e_{k,i}}{ \frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}} +e_{k,i})\leq 0.$$
Since the term $\frac{z-x-\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}e_{k,i}}{ \frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}}\rightarrow 0$ as $k\rightarrow \infty,$ we have that for any small $\delta>0$ there exists $N$ such that
$G(x)\cdot e_{k,i}<\delta$ for $k>N.$ By replacing $e_{k,i}$ with $-e_{k,i}$ in the above argument, we see that
$G(x)\cdot e_{k,i}>-\delta.$ Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{small1}
|G(x)\cdot e_{k,i}|<\delta\ \text{for}\ x\in\Omega_k, k>N, i=1,\cdots, s.
\end{equation}

Then, by \eqref{small1} we have that $|G(\Omega_k)|\leq \delta.$ Hence by \eqref{mineq},
$$\int_{G(\Omega_k)}h_{L_k}^{1-p}dS_{L_k}\leq C_1\delta.$$
On the other hand,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_{G(\Omega_k)}h_{L_k}^{1-p}dS_{L_k}&\geq& C\mathcal{H}^{n-1}(\Omega_k)r_{k,n}^{1-p}\\
&\approx& Cr_{k,1}^sr_{k,s+1}\cdots r_{k,n-1}r_{k,n}^{1-p}\\
&\approx& C\frac{V_k}{r_{k,n}^p}\\
&\geq& CC_3
\end{eqnarray*}
for some positive constants $C, C_3$ independent of $p,$ where the last inequality is due to \eqref{ineqadd}.  We thus get a contradiction provided $\delta$ very small.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}\label{localunique}
Let $L\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}.$ Suppose $h_L\in C^{2,\alpha}(S^{n-1}).$  Denote $f_L=h_L^{1-p}\det(\nabla^2h_L+h_L\delta_{ij}).$
If $L$ is the only solution to $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=f_Ldx.$ Then, there exists $\epsilon_L>0,$ such that for $q\in (p_0,1),$ $h_K^{1-q}dS_K=fdx$ has a unique solution in $\mathcal{K}_e$ provided $f$ is even,
$\|f-f_L\|_{C^\alpha(S^{n-1})}\leq \epsilon_L$ and $|q-p|\leq \epsilon_L.$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Suppose $P$ is a solution of $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=fdx.$
First we show that $\|h_P-h_L\|_{L^\infty}$ can be as small as we want provided $\epsilon_L$ is sufficiently small.
Suppose not, there exists $\delta_0>0,$ a sequence of $q_k\rightarrow p,$ a sequence  of convex bodies $L_k\in \mathcal{K}_e,$ even functions $f_k\rightarrow f_L$ in
$C^\alpha$ norm
such that
$h_{L_k}^{1-q_k}dS_{L_k}=f_kdx,$ and that $\|h_{L_k}-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\geq \delta_0.$
By Lemma \ref{c0} we have that $\|h_{L_k}\|_{L^\infty}\leq C.$
Then, by Blaschke's selection theorem we have that $L_k\rightarrow L_0$ in
Hausdorff sense for some convex body $L_0\in \mathcal{K}_e$ as $k\rightarrow \infty.$ By weak convergence of  surface area measure we have that
$h_{L_k}^{1-q_k}dS_{L_k}=f_kdx$ converges weakly to $h_{L_0}^{1-p}dS_{L_0}=f_Ldx.$ By the assumption in the theorem we have $L=L_0.$
On the other hand, since $\|h_{L_k}-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\geq \delta_0,$ we have that $\|h_{L_0}-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\geq \delta_0$ which is a contradiction.

Hence, for any $\delta_1>0$ small, there exists $\epsilon_L$ such that if
$P$ is a solution of $h_K^{1-q}dS_K=fdx$ with $\|f-f_L\|_{C^\alpha(S^{n-1})}\leq \epsilon_L$ and $|q-p|\leq \epsilon_L,$  then
$\|h_P-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\leq \delta_1.$
Then, since $\|Dh_P\|_{L^\infty}, \|Dh_L\|_{L^\infty}\leq C_1$ for some constant $C_1$ depending only on $L,$ it is straightforward to check that $\|fh_P^{p-1}-f_Lh_L^{p-1}\|_{C^\alpha}\leq \delta_2,$ where $\delta_2\rightarrow 0$ as $\delta_1, \epsilon_L\rightarrow 0.$

Then,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\det (\nabla^2h_P+h_P\delta_{ij})-\det (\nabla^2h_L+h_L\delta_{ij})\\
&&=\frac{d}{dt}\int_0^1 \det[\nabla^2\big((1-t)h_L+th_P\big)+\big((1-t)h_L+th_P\big)\delta_{ij}]dt\\
&&=\int_0^1 U_t^{ij}dt (\nabla_{ij}(h_P-h_L)+(h_P-h_L)\delta_{ij})\\
&&=fh_P^{p-1}-f_Lh_L^{p-1},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $U_t^{ij}$ is the cofactor matrix of
$\nabla^2\left((1-t)h_L+th_P\right)+\big((1-t)h_L+th_P\big)\delta_{ij}.$

Since $\|h_P\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq C_2,$ for some constant $C_2$ depending only on $L,$ we have that
$1/C I\leq U_t^{ij}\leq C I$ for some positive constant $C$ depending only on $L.$
Indeed, let $\bar{v}:\mathbb{R}^n\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be the extension of $h_L$ as follows:
$$\bar{v}(y)=|y|h_L(\frac{y}{|y|}).$$ Let $\bar{u}$ be the extension of $h_P$ in the same way.
Let $v: \mathbb{R}^{n-1}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ (resp. $u$) be the restriction of $\bar{v}$ (resp. $\bar{u}$) on the hyperplane $\{x_n=-1\},$
namely, $v(z)=\sqrt{1+|z|^2}h_L(\frac{z}{\sqrt{1+|z|^2}}, \frac{-1}{\sqrt{1+|z|^2}})$ (resp. $u(z)=\sqrt{1+|z|^2}h_P(\frac{z}{\sqrt{1+|z|^2}}, \frac{-1}{\sqrt{1+|z|^2}})$,
 for $z\in \mathbb{R}^{n-1}.$
Then it is well known that, $v, u$ solve Monge-Amp\`ere equation:
$$\det D^2v=g(z)(1+|z|^2)^{-\frac{n+p}{2}}v^{p-1},\ \text{on}\ \mathbb{R}^{n-1},$$
and
$$\det D^2u=g(z)(1+|z|^2)^{-\frac{n+p}{2}}u^{p-1}, \ \text{on}\ \mathbb{R}^{n-1},$$
where $g(z)=f(\frac{z}{\sqrt{1+|z|^2}}, -\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+|z|^2}}).$
Since $\|h_P-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\leq \delta_1,$
we have that $\|u-v\|_{L^\infty(B_R)}\leq C(R)\delta_1$ for some constant $C(R)$ depending only on $R.$

 On the other hand, since $L$ is smooth and uniformly convex, we have that $v$ is a uniformly convex function,
 then $S_{R_1}[v]:=\{z\in \mathbb{R}^{n-1}: v(z)<v(0)+Dv(0)\cdot z+R_1\}$ is a compact convex set  for any $R_1>0,$
  and exhausts $\mathbb{R}^{n-1}$ as $R_1\rightarrow \infty.$
Fix any $R_1>0,$ we have that $S_{R_1}[u]$ is also a compact convex set and converges
to $S_{R_1}[v]$ in Hausdorff distance as $\delta_1\rightarrow 0.$ Therefore, for $\delta_1$ sufficiently small we can apply Caffarelli's regularity theory \cite{C90, C901} to conclude $\|v\|_{C^{2,\alpha}(S_{R_1}[u])}\leq C,$ which implies that the $C^{2,\alpha}$ norm of $h_P$ in a neighbourhood of south pole is bounded, similarly, we can restrict $\bar{u}, \bar{v}$ to
the other tangent hyperplanes of $S^{n-1}$ to get a full $C^{2,\alpha}$ estimate.

 Hence, $h_P-h_L$ satisfies a uniformly elliptic linear equation with elliptic constant depending only on $L$.
By Schauder estimate \cite{GT}, we have that $\|h_P-h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq C(\|h_P-h_L\|_{L^\infty}+\|fh_P^{p-1}-f_Lh_L^{p-1}\|_{C^\alpha})\leq C(\delta_1+\delta_2).$
Choosing $\delta_1, \delta_2, \epsilon_L$ sufficiently small, and then apply Theorem \ref{km2} we see that
$h_K^{1-q}S_K=fdx$ has unique solution provided
$\|f-f_L\|_{C^\alpha(S^{n-1})}\leq \epsilon_L$ and $|q-p|\leq \epsilon_L.$
\end{proof}

Now, we try to study what happens if the condition that ``$L$ is the only solution to $h_K^{1-p}S_K=f_Ldx$" is not assumed in  Lemma \ref{localunique}
\begin{lemma}\label{dicho}
Let $L\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}.$ Suppose $h_L\in C^{2,\alpha}(S^{n-1}).$  Denote $f_L=h_L^{1-p}\det(\nabla^2h_L+h_L\delta_{ij}).$
There exists $d_L>0$ such that if $K$ solves $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=f_L$, then either
$\|h_K-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\geq d_L$ or $K=L.$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Suppose $K$ solves $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=f_L$ and $\|h_K-h_L\|_{L^\infty}$ is sufficiently small.
Then, similar to the proof of Lemma \ref{localunique} we have $\|h_K\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq C_1$ for some constant $C_1$ depending only on $L.$
Hence, $1/C I\leq U_t^{ij}\leq C I$ for some constant  $C$ depending only on $L,$
where $U_t^{ij}$ is the cofactor matrix of $\nabla^2\big((1-t)h_L+th_K\big)+\big((1-t)h_L+th_K\big)\delta_{ij}.$
Then similar to the proof of Lemma \ref{localunique}, by Schauder estimate we have that
$\|h_K-h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\rightarrow 0$ as $\|h_K-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\rightarrow 0.$
Hence, by Lemma \ref{localunique}, we have that $K=L$ provided $\|h_K-h_L\|_{L^\infty}$ is sufficiently small.
\end{proof}

Then, we go further to show that if $f$ is sufficiently close to $f_L$ in $C^{\alpha}$ norm, then $K,$
a solution of $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=fdx,$ is either positive away from $L$ or very close to $L$ in Hausdorff distance.
\begin{lemma}\label{ac}
Let $L, f_L,d_L$ be as in the previous lemma. Then for any $\delta_1>0$ small, there exists $\epsilon_L>0$ such that
if $\|f-f_L\|_{C^\alpha}<\epsilon_L,$ $f$ is even, $|q-p|<\epsilon_L$ and $K$ solves $h_K^{1-q}dS_K=fdx,$ then
either $\|h_K-h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\geq \frac{2}{3}d_L$ or $\|h_K-h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq \delta_1.$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
First we show that for any $\delta_2>0$ small, there exists $\epsilon_L>0$ such that
if $\|f-f_L\|_{C^\alpha}<\epsilon_L,$ $|q-p|<\epsilon_L$ and $K$ solves $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=fdx,$ then
either $\|h_K-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\geq \frac{2}{3}d_L$ or $\|h_K-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\leq \delta_2.$

Suppose not, there exists a constant $\delta_2>0,$  a sequence of even positive functions $f_k\in C^\alpha(S^{n-1}),$ $q_k\in \mathbb{R},$ $P_k\in \mathcal{K}_e,$ satisfying $\|f_k-f_L\|_{C^\alpha}\rightarrow 0,\ q_k\rightarrow p,\ h_{P_k}^{1-q_k}dS_{P_k}=f_kdx$ such that
$\delta_1\leq \|h_{P_k}-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\leq \frac{2}{3}d_L.$
By Lemma \ref{c0} we see that $1/C<h_{P_k}<C$ for some positive constant $C$ depending only on $L.$
By Blaschke's selection theorem we have that up to a subsequence, $P_k$ converges to some convex body $K\in \mathcal{K}_e$ in Hausdorff distance.
Then, by weak convergence of surface area measure we have that
$h_K^{1-p}dS_K=f_Ldx.$  Since $\delta_2\leq \|h_{P_k}-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\leq \frac{2}{3}d_L,$ passing to limit we have
$\delta_2\leq \|h_{K}-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\leq \frac{2}{3}d_L.$ On the other hand, by Lemma \ref{dicho} we have
either $\|h_K-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\geq d_L$ or $K=L,$ which is a contradiction.

To go from $L^\infty$ norm to $C^{2,\alpha}$ norm we only need to apply Schauder estimate similar to the proof of
Lemma \ref{localunique}.
Indeed,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\det (\nabla^2h_K+h_K\delta_{ij})-\det (\nabla^2h_L+h_L\delta_{ij})\\
&&=\frac{d}{dt}\int_0^1 \det[\nabla^2\big((1-t)h_L+th_K\big)+\big((1-t)h_L+th_K\big)\delta_{ij}]dt\\
&&=\int_0^1 U_t^{ij}dt (\nabla_{ij}(h_K-h_L)+(h_K-h_L)\delta_{ij})\\
&&=fh_K^{q-1}-f_Lh_L^{p-1},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $U_t^{ij}$ is the cofactor matrix of $\nabla^2\big((1-t)h_K+th_P\big)+\big((1-t)h_K+th_P\big)\delta_{ij}.$

Suppose $\|h_K-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\leq \delta_2.$ Using the same argument in the proof of Lemma \ref{localunique}
we have that $\|h_K\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq C$ for some constant depending
only on $L$  provided $\delta_2$ is sufficiently small.
Therefore $\frac{1}{C_1}I<U_t^{ij}<C_1I$ for some positive constant $C_1$ depending only on $L.$
Hence, by Schauder estimate we have
$\|h_K-h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq C_2\left(\|h_K-h_L\|_{L^\infty}+\|fh_K^{q-1}-f_Lh_L^{p-1}\|_{C^\alpha}\right).$ Since $\|Dh_K\|_{L^\infty}, \|Dh_L\|_{L^\infty}\leq C$ for some constant $C$ depending only on $L$ and $\|h_K-h_L\|_{L^\infty}\leq \delta_2,$
it is straightforward to check that $\|fh_K^{q-1}-f_Lh_L^{p-1}\|_{C^\alpha}$ as
can be as small as we want provided $\epsilon_L, \delta_2$ are small enough.
Taking $\delta_2, \epsilon_L$ sufficiently small, we have the desired conclusion.
\end{proof}

Now, we can use degree theory (for instance see \cite[Section 2]{Maw}) to construct a solution of $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=fdx$ near $L,$ assuming $f$ is close to
$f_L$ in $C^\alpha$ norm.
\begin{lemma}\label{newsolution}
Let $L, f_L, d_L,\delta_1$ be as in Lemma \ref{dicho}. Then, there exists $\epsilon_2>0, \delta_3<d_L$ small, such that
if the even positive function $f$ satisfies $\|f-f_L\|_{C^\alpha}<\epsilon_2,$ then $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=fdx$ has a solution $K$ satisfying $\|h_K-h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}<\frac{1}{2}\delta_3.$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
First we linearise the equation $\det(\nabla^2h+h\delta_{ij})=fh^{p-1}$ at $h=h_L.$  Denote by $U^{ij}$ the cofactor matrix of
$\nabla^2h+h\delta_{ij}.$ The linearized equation is
$$U^{ij} (\phi_{ij}+\phi\delta_{ij})=(p-1)fh_L^{p-2}\phi=(p-1)\frac{\phi}{h_L}\det(\nabla^2h_L+h_L\delta_{ij}).$$
Denote by $M^{ij}$ the inverse matrix of $\nabla^2h_L+h_L\delta_{ij}.$ Then
$$\mathcal{L}\phi:=h_LM^{ij}(\phi_{ij}+\phi\delta_{ij})=(p-1)\phi.$$
By Fredholm alternative, we have that the spectrum of $\mathcal{L}$ is discrete. Hence, we can find a $\tilde{p}$ with
$|\tilde{p}-p|<\epsilon_2$ and $\tilde{p}\geq p$ (to be fixed later), such that
$\mathcal{L}+(1-\tilde{p})$ is invertible, namely, $L\phi+(1-\tilde{p})\phi=0$ implies $\phi=0.$

Now we construct a mapping $\mathcal{A}_t$ as follows.
Let $f_0:=h_L^{1-\tilde{p}}\det(\nabla^2h_L+h_L\delta_{ij}).$
Let $$\mathcal{W}:=\{h\in C^{2,\alpha}(S^{n-1})\big| \|h-h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}<\frac{1}{2}\delta_3, h\ \text{is even}\},$$
where $\delta_3<d_L$ is a sufficiently small constant to be determined later.

$$\mathcal{A}_t:\mathcal{W}\rightarrow \{h\in C^{2,\alpha}(S^{n-1})\big| h\ \text{is even}\}.$$
Given any $h\in \mathcal{W},$ define $\mathcal{A}_th=v,$ where $v$ is the unique even convex solution of the classical
Minkowski problem
$$\det(\nabla^2v+v\delta_{ij})=\left((1-t)f_0+tf\right)h^{(1-t)\tilde{p}+tp-1}=:f_th^{(1-t)\tilde{p}+tp-1}.$$
Note that the righthand side $f_th^{(1-t)\tilde{p}+tp-1}$ is an even function, we have
$$\int_{S^{n-1}}x_if_th^{(1-t)\tilde{p}+tp-1}dx=0,$$ which is a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of solution
to the Minkowski problem.
For $h\in \mathcal{W},$ by the definition of $f_0,$
it is straightforward to check that $\|f_th^{(1-t)\tilde{p}+tp-1}-f_0h_L^{\tilde{p}-1}\|_{L^\infty}\rightarrow 0$ as $\epsilon_2, \delta_3\rightarrow 0.$
Note that the existence of weak solution of the classical Minkowski problem was proved by Cheng and Yau \cite{CY}, and the $C^{2,\alpha}$ regularity of the weak solution when the righthand side  $f_th^{(1-t)\tilde{p}+tp-1}$ is positive
$C^{\alpha}$ follows from Caffarelli's regularity theory of Monge-Amp\`ere equation \cite{C90, C901}.

Now, since $\|f_th^{(1-t)\tilde{p}+tp-1}-f_0h_L^{\tilde{p}-1}\|_{L^\infty}\rightarrow 0$ as $\epsilon_2, \delta_3\rightarrow 0,$ we have that
$\|v-h_L\|_{L^\infty} \rightarrow 0$ as $\epsilon_2, \delta_3\rightarrow 0.$ Therefore
$\|\mathcal{A}_th\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}=\|v\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq C$ for some constant $C$ independent of $h,$ provided $\epsilon_2, \delta_3$ are small enough.
This implies that $\mathcal{A}_t$ is a compact operator.  Note also that
$(I-\mathcal{A}_t)h=0$ implies $\det(\nabla^2h+h\delta_{ij})=f_th^{(1-t)\tilde{p}+tp-1},$ with
$|(1-t)\tilde{p}+tp-p|<\epsilon_2,$ $\|f_t-f_L\|_{C^\alpha}\rightarrow 0$ as $\epsilon_2\rightarrow 0.$
Therefore by Lemma \ref{ac} (choosing $\delta_1<\frac{1}{2}\delta_3$) and choosing $\epsilon_2$ sufficiently small we have
either $\|h-h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\geq \frac{2}{3}d_L$ or $\|h-h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq \delta_1<\frac{1}{2}\delta_3.$ In particular, it means
that $0\notin(I-\mathcal{A}_t)(\partial W).$
Hence we have $\deg(I-\mathcal{A}_t)=\deg(I-\mathcal{A}_0).$

To compute $\deg(I-\mathcal{A}_0),$ first observe that since $\|f_0-f_L\|_{C^\alpha}\rightarrow 0$ as $\tilde{p}\rightarrow p,$ By Lemma \ref{ac} we have that if $h_K$ is a solution of
$\det(\nabla^2h_K+h_K\delta_{ij})=f_0h_K^{\tilde{p}-1},$
namely, $h_K^{1-\tilde{p}}dS_K=h_K^{1-\tilde{p}}dS_L,$
then either
$\|h_K-h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\geq \frac{2}{3}d_L$ or $\|h_K-h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq \delta_1$ provided
$\epsilon_2$ is sufficiently small.  If the latter holds,
 by Theorem \ref{km2} we have that $K=L,$ namely, $h_L$ is the only solution in
$\mathcal{W}.$ Hence, $\mathcal{A}_0$ has a unique fixed point $h_L$ in $\mathcal{W}.$

On the other hand, it is straightforward to check that $I-\mathcal{A}_0'$ is invertible if and only if the linearised equation of
$\det(\nabla^2h+h\delta_{ij})=\tilde{f}h^{\tilde{p}-1}$ has only trivial solution at $h=h_L,$ which is equivalent to the statement that
$\mathcal{L}+(1-\tilde{p})$ is invertible, which is assured by the choice of $\tilde{p}.$ Therefore
$\deg(I-\mathcal{A}_0)\ne 0.$ Hence $\deg(I-\mathcal{A}_1)\ne 0,$ which implies that
$\det(\nabla^2h+h\delta_{ij})=fh^{p-1}$ has a solution in $\mathcal{W}.$
\end{proof}

Now we can give the proof of Theorem \ref{main1}.
\begin{proof}
Suppose for some positive $f_1\in C^\alpha(S^{n-1}),$ the problem
$h_K^{1-p}dS_K=f_1dx$ has multiple solutions.
Let $$a:=\inf\{t\big| h_K^{1-p}dS_K=(1-t+tf_1)dx\ \text{has multiple solutions in}\ \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}\}.$$
Let $f_L:=1-a+af_1,$ then by the definition of $a$ and Lemma \ref{localunique}, we see that $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=f_Ldx$ has
multiple solutions  $L_1, L_2, \cdots.$ Then, by Lemma \ref{dicho} we see that $\|L_1-L_2\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\geq d_L$

On the other hand, by Lemma \ref{newsolution}, we have that $h_K^{1-p}dS_K=fdx$ has at least two solutions $K_1, K_2$  satisfying
 $\|h_{K_i}-h_{L}\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}<\frac{1}{2}d_L$ for $i=1, 2.$ (hence $K_1\ne K_2$)
 provided $f$ sufficiently close to $f_L$ in $C^\alpha$ norm, in particular for $ f=1-t+tf_1$ with $t<a$ and sufficiently close to $a.$ This contradicts to the definition of $a$ again.

\end{proof}

\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{main2}, \ref{main3}}
In this section we adapt the method of \cite{BLYZ}  for dealing with the planar logarithmic Minkowski inequality to establish the $L_p$ Minkowski inequality for $p\in (p_0, 1).$
\begin{lemma}\label{minprob}
Assume $V(K)=1,\ K\in\mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}, h_K\in C^{2,\alpha}(S^{n-1}).$
The problem
$$\min\left\{\int_{S^{n-1}}\left(\frac{h_L}{h_K}\right)^pdV_K\big|L\in\mathcal{K}_e, V(L)=1\right\}$$ has a minimizer $K_0.$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Let $s=\min\left\{\int_{S^{n-1}}\left(\frac{h_L}{h_K}\right)^pdV_K\big|L\in\mathcal{K}_e, V(L)=1\right\}.$
Denote $F(L)=\int_{S^{n-1}}\left(\frac{h_L}{h_K}\right)^pdV_K.$
Let $P_k$ be a minimizing sequence, namely, $F(P_k)\rightarrow s$ as $k\rightarrow \infty.$
First, we show that $\sup_k \|h_{P_k}\|_{L^\infty}<\infty.$

Suppose not, passing to a subsequence we have $R_k:=\|h_{P_k}\|_{L^\infty}\rightarrow \infty$ as $k\rightarrow \infty.$
There must exist a unit vector $e_k$, such that $R_ke_k\in P_k.$ Hence $h_{P_k}(x)\geq R_k|e_k\cdot x|.$
Since $K\in\mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}$ we have that $h_K^{-p}dV_K=gdx$ for some positive continuous function $g.$
Hence,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&F(P_k)\\
&&=\int_{S^{n-1}}\left(\frac{h_{P_k}}{h_K}\right)^pdV_K\\
&&=\int_{S^{n-1}}h_{P_k}^pgdx\\
&&\geq R_k^p\int_{S^{n-1}}|e_k\cdot x|^p\rightarrow \infty
\end{eqnarray*}
as $k\rightarrow\infty.$ This contradicts to the fact that $F(P_k)\rightarrow s$ as $k\rightarrow\infty.$

Finally, by Blaschke selection theorem, there exists a convex body $K_0\in \mathcal{K}_e$ such that
$P_k\rightarrow K_0$ in Hausdorff distance. Therefore, by the weak convergence of surface area measure we have that $F(K_0)=s,$ namely, $K_0$ is the desired minimiser.
\end{proof}

Now, we can proceed to the proof of Theorem \ref{main2}.
\begin{proof}
We only need to prove the inequality for the case when $K\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e},$ and the general case follows by approximation.

Let $K_0$ be the minimiser as in Lemma \ref{minprob}. Let
$q_t(x):=h_{K_0}(x)+tf(x),$ for any even $f\in C^0(S^{n-1}).$ Suppose $L_t$ is the Wulff shape associated
with $q_t.$ Hence, $L_t\in \mathcal{K}_e$ and $L_0=K_0.$
Since $L_0$ is the minimiser of the minimisation problem, we have that
the function
$$t\longmapsto \frac{1}{\left(V(L_t)\right)^{\frac{p}{n}}}\int_{S^{n-1}}\left(\frac{h_{L_t}}{h_K}\right)^pdV_K$$
attains minimum at $t=0.$
Since $h_{L_t}\leq q_t$ the above function is dominated by the differentiable function defined in a small neighborhood of $0$ by
$$t\longmapsto \frac{1}{\left(V(L_t)\right)^{\frac{p}{n}}}\int_{S^{n-1}}\frac{q_t^p}{h_K^p}dV_K=:G(t).$$
Since both functions have the same value at $t=0,$ the latter one attains a minimum at $t=0.$
Therefore $G'(0)=0,$ and using the fact that $V(L_0)=V(K)=1$ we have
$$\int_{S^{n-1}}fdS_{L_0}=\int_{S^{n-1}}fh_{L_0}^{p-1}h_K^{1-p}dS_K.$$
Since the equality holds for arbitrary even continuous $f,$ we have that
$$dS_{L_0}=h_{L_0}^{p-1}h_K^{1-p}dS_K.$$
Hence $h_{L_0}^{1-p}dS_{L_0}=h_K^{1-p}dS_K,$ and by Theorem \ref{main1} we have that
$L_0=K.$ Therefore we have
$$\int_{S^{n-1}}\left(\frac{h_L}{h_K}\right)^pdV_K\geq 1.$$

For the general case, we only need to replace $K, L$ by $\frac{K}{V(K)^{\frac{1}{n}}}$,
$\frac{L}{V(L)^{\frac{1}{n}}}$ respectively.
\end{proof}

The proof of Theorem \ref{main3} follows from Theorem \ref{main2} and
the fact that $L_p$-Minkowski inequality and $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski inequality are equivalent (see
\cite[Lemma 3.1]{BLYZ}.

\section{The log-minkowski problem}

To prove Theorem \ref{main4}, we recall the following important result proved by Kolesnikov and Milman.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{KM} Kolesnikov, Milman] \label{lemloc}
There exists $\epsilon_0$ small, depending only on $n$ such that if $\|h_K-1\|_{C^2}\leq \epsilon_0,$ $\|h_L-1\|_{C^2}\leq \epsilon_0,$ and $V_L=V_K$,
then $K=L.$
\end{lemma}

\begin{lemma}\label{compact}
Suppose $V_L=fd\nu,$ where $\nu$ is the standard area measure of $S^{n-1},$ and $1/C_0<f <C_0$ for some positive constant $C_0.$ Then,
$\|h_L\|_{L^\infty}<C_1$ for some constant depending only on $C_0$ and $n.$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Suppose not, then there  exists a sequence of convex body $L_k\in \mathcal{K}_e$ such that $\|h_{L_k}\|_{L^\infty}\rightarrow \infty.$
By John's Lemma, for each $k$ there exists an ellipsoid $E_k$ with principal directions $e_{k,1},\cdots, e_{k,n}$ and principal radii $r_{k,1},\cdots, r_{k,n}$
such that
\begin{equation}\label{john}
E_k\subset L_k\subset n^{3/2}E_k.
\end{equation}
Without loss of generality, we may assume $r_{k,1}\geq r_{k,2}\geq\cdots\geq r_{k,n}.$ Since $$1/C<r_{k,1}r_{k,2}\cdots r_{k,n}\approx V(L_k)=\int_{S^{n-1}} f<C$$
for some constant depending only on $C,n,$ we have that $r_{k,1}\rightarrow \infty, r_{k,n}\rightarrow 0$ as $k\rightarrow \infty.$

Passing to a subsequence we may assume
\begin{equation}\label{asym}
0\leq \lim_{k\rightarrow \infty}\frac{r_{k,i}}{r_{k,i-1}}=a_i\leq 1\ \text{for}\ i=2,\cdots, n.
\end{equation}
Define $a_0=1.$ Since  $r_{k,1}\rightarrow \infty, r_{k,n}\rightarrow 0$ we have that there exists $i\in\{1,2,\cdots, n\}$ such that $a_i=0.$
Let $s=min\{i-1:  a_i=0, 1\leq i\leq n\}.$ Now, $$r_{k,1}\approx r_{k,2}\approx\cdots\approx r_{k,s}>>r_{k,s+1}\geq\cdots \geq r_{k,n}.$$

Let $$\Omega_k:=\{x\in \partial L_k: |x\cdot e_{k,i}|\leq \frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}, i=1, 2,\cdots, s\}.$$ Denote by $G:\partial L_k\rightarrow S^{n-1}$ the Gauss map.
For any $x\in \Omega_k, 1\leq i\leq s$ by \eqref{john} we have that $$dist(x+\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}e_{k,i}, L_k)\leq C\sqrt{r_{k,s+1}^2+\cdots+r_{k,n}^2}<<r_{k,s}.$$
Hence, there exists $z\in L_k$ such that $|x+\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}e_{k,i}-z|\leq Cr_{k,s}.$
Now, since $G(x)$ is the unit outer normal of $L_k$ at $x,$ by convexity we have that
$G(x)\cdot (z-x)\leq 0.$
Hence, $$G(x)\cdot (z-x-\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}e_{k,i}+\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}e_{k,i})\leq 0$$
which leads to
$$G(x)\cdot (\frac{z-x-\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}e_{k,i}}{ \frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}}+e_{k,i})\leq 0.$$
Since the term $\frac{z-x-\frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}e_{k,i}}{ \frac{1}{2}r_{k,s}}\rightarrow 0$ as $k\rightarrow \infty,$ we have that for any small $\delta>0$ there exists $N$ such that
$G(x)\cdot e_{k,i}<\delta$ for $k>N.$ By replacing $e_{k,i}$ with $-e_{k,i}$ in the above argument, we see that
$G(x)\cdot e_{k,i}>-\delta.$ Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{small}
|G(x)\cdot e_{k,i}|<\delta\ \text{for}\ k>N, i=1,\cdots, s.
\end{equation}

Then, by \eqref{small} we have that $|G(\Omega_k)|\leq \delta.$ Hence $\int_{G(\Omega_k)}f\leq C\delta.$
On the other hand, $V_{L_k}(G(\Omega_k))\geq Cr_{k,s}^sr_{k,s+1}\cdots r_{k,n}\geq CV(K)\geq C_1$ for some positive constant $C_1,$ which contradicts
to the property that $V_{L_k}(G(\Omega_k))=\int_{G(\Omega_k)}f.$
\end{proof}

Recall that $N_\epsilon:=\{K\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}: \|h_K-1\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq \epsilon\}$ the small $C^{2,\alpha}$ neighborhood of $S^{n-1}.$
\begin{lemma}\label{close}
For any $\delta$ small, there exists $\epsilon$ small, such that if $K\in N_\epsilon, L\in \mathcal{K}_e,$ $V_L=V_K,$ then
$\|h_L-1\|_{L^\infty}\leq \delta.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose not, there exists $\delta_0>0,$ a sequence of $L_k\in \mathcal{K}_e,$ $\epsilon_k\rightarrow 0, K_k\in N_{\epsilon_k}$ such that
$V_{L_k}=V_{K_k},$ and that $\|h_{L_k}-1\|_{L^\infty}\geq \epsilon_0.$
By Lemma \ref{compact} we have that $\|h_{L_k}-1\|_{L^\infty}\leq C.$ Then, by Blaschke's selection theorem we have that $L_k\rightarrow L$ in
Hausdorff sense for some convex body $L\in \mathcal{K}_e$ as $k\rightarrow \infty.$ By weak convergence of cone volume measure we have that
$V_{L_k}$ converges weakly to $V_{L}.$ Moreover, $\|h_{L}-1\|_{L^\infty}\geq \epsilon_0.$

On the other hand, since $ K_k\in N_{\epsilon_k}$ we have that $\|h_{K_k}-1\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq \epsilon_k\rightarrow 0$ as $k\rightarrow \infty.$
Hence $V_{K_k}$ converges to $\nu$, the standard area measure of $S^{n-1}.$ Hence, $V_{L}=\nu$ and it is well known that this implies $L=S^{n-1}$ which
contradicts to the fact that  $\|h_{L}-1\|_{L^\infty}\geq \epsilon_0.$
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}\label{Schauder}
Under the assumptions of Lemma \ref{close},
we have $\|h_L-1\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq \delta$ for $\epsilon$ sufficiently small.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{close} we have that $\|h_L-1\|_{L^\infty}\leq \delta$ provided $\epsilon$ is sufficiently small.  By convexity we also have that
$\|Dh_L\|_{L^\infty}\leq C$ for some constant $C.$ Then, it is straightforward to check that $\|h_L-1\|_{C^{\alpha}}\leq C\delta^{1-\alpha}.$

Let $f=h_K\det (\nabla^2h_K+h_K\delta_{ij}).$ Since $K\in N_\epsilon,$ we have $\|f-1\|_{C^{\alpha}}\leq C\epsilon.$
Now, $h_L$ also satisfies the following Monge-Ampe\`ere type equation
\begin{equation}
\det (\nabla^2h_L+h_L\delta_{ij})=\frac{f}{h_L}.
\end{equation}
Since, $\|f-1\|_{C^{\alpha}}\leq C\epsilon$ and $\|h_L-1\|_{C^{\alpha}}\leq C\delta^{1-\alpha},$
we have that $\|\frac{f}{h_L}-1\|_{C^{\alpha}}\leq C\epsilon_1,$ where $\epsilon_1:=\epsilon+\delta^{1-\alpha}.$
First, by Schauder estimates for Monge-Ampere equation, we have that $\|h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq C.$

Then,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\det (\nabla^2h_L+h_L\delta_{ij})-1\\
&&=\frac{d}{dt}\int_0^1 \det[\nabla^2\big((1-t)+th_L\big)+\big((1-t)+th_L\big)\delta_{ij}]dt\\
&&=U^{ij} (\nabla_{ij}(h_L-1)+(h_L-1)\delta_{ij})\\
&&=\frac{f}{h_L}-1,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $U^{ij}$ is the cofactor matrix of $\nabla^2\big((1-t)+th_L\big)+\big((1-t)+th_L\big)\delta_{ij}.$
Since $\|h_L\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq C,$ we have that
$1/C I\leq U^{ij}\leq C I$ for some positive constant $C.$ Hence, $h_L-1$ satisfies a uniformly elliptic equation.

Therefore, by Schauder estimate again, we have that $\|h_L-1\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq C(\|h_L-1\|_{L^\infty}+\|\frac{f}{h_L}-1\|_{C^{\alpha}})\leq C(\delta+\epsilon_1).$

\end{proof}

{\it Proof of Theorem \ref{main4}.} The proof follows from Lemma \ref{lemloc} and Lemma \ref{Schauder} directly. \qed.

{\it Proof of Corollary \ref{main5}.} The proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 1.4 in \cite[Section 7]{BLYZ}. In particular, if $K\in N_\epsilon=\{K\in \mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}: \|h_K-1\|_{C^{2,\alpha}}\leq \epsilon\},$ we see that $V_K$ has positive continuous density, hence by \cite[Theorem 6.3]{BLYZ13} we have the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{minprob1}
Assume $V(K)=1,\ K\in\mathcal{F}^2_{+,e}, h_K\in C^{2,\alpha}(S^{n-1}).$
The problem
$$\min\left\{\int_{S^{n-1}}\log h_LdV_K\big|L\in\mathcal{K}_e, V(L)=1\right\}$$ has a minimizer $K_0\in \mathcal{K}_e.$
\end{lemma}
Then the proof of Corollary \ref{main5} can be accomplished by following the same lines of the proof of Theorem 1.4 in \cite[Section 7]{BLYZ}.
\qed.

\bigskip

\bigskip